Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. I'll now call our meeting to order. Our first agenda item this evening is open forum. Open forum is an opportunity for anyone who wishes to address the commission on an item that is not on the agenda tonight and not planned for a uh a future agenda of the planning commission. Is there anyone in the audience tonight who wishes to address in this open forum context you're welcome to do if you are if not um we'll move on to adopting the final agenda. Commissioners our next item is to adopt the final agenda. May I please have a motion to adopt the agenda for this evening's meeting? Make a motion to adopt the final meeting agenda as submitted for tonight's meeting.

Thank you, Commissioner Croft. Is there a second? I'll second. We have a second. Uh all those in favor? I. Any opposed? Thank you. The motion carries. Um our first item tonight is item 4.1, select the chair and vice chair for 2026. I'll now turn the meeting over to our city planner, Brian McCann, for a brief overview of the responsibilities of this role uh and the nomination process.

Thank you, chair and commissioners. Uh very first item that we have to do in our plan commission year is nominations for our chair and vice chair. Uh so just highlighting the general responsibilities. Uh current chair as you know and Eric uh Ree as our vice chair. You also know that the responsibilities include running the meetings um area in your case if the uh chair is absent. Also making informed and independent decisions and review of our zoning code. Also being a community representative of the city of Victoria. So going to community events and recognizing uh that some members of the community might approach you and recognize you as a plane commissioner and being to answer uh questions related to your duties or city activities. Uh the chair and vice chair are also expected to go to city council and provide endyear reports and the uh yearly work plans and then also attending as many meetings as possible. Per our attendance policy, you can only miss a third of the regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year. Uh so please keep that in mind. And then as we look towards our 2050 comprehensive plan, which will be starting this year, making sure you're able to attend public engagement events for that process and then also potentially serving on a technical advisory committee or a TAC. So, I did reach out to the planning commission before tonight's meeting and gauge interest on those who would like the chair or vice chair roles. I received three responses including our current chair and our current vice chair. Uh so, thank you to all three of you for expressing interest in doing that those roles. Um and then just highlighting the process to try to make it a little bit smoother compared to prior years. Uh giving you a breakdown of how this works. So, um, one of you

would provide a nomination for those three individuals I put up on the screen or someone else if you think someone else would serve better in that role. Um, if we only have one nomination, we will proceed immediately to that vote and um, move on to the vice chair. And then if we have more than one nomination, we'll have to do roll call votes for each nomination and whoever has the most uh, votes wins that role. And then we'll do that same process for the vice chair. So, uh, that's really it. If you guys want to proceed with nominations, feel free. Do we have enough people to nominate on the if everybody um because you can't vote for yourself, right?

I don't see why not. Oh, okay. Never mind. All right. Yeah, we making sure. And um, chair and commissioners, I guess I should highlight, too. Uh, we only have one missing commissioner tonight, so maybe don't nominate him since he's not here. Well, that would be fun.

Well, that would be kind of fun, actually. But no, we won't do that. So, um, if I could just add to what Brian said, first of all, this is an improvement over last year's process, which I thought was kind of backwards. Uh, and so, thank you for that, Brian. Uh I said to to Brian when he asked that I would be happy to continue serving as chair, but I'm also happy to yield uh to either of these gentlemen who have expressed interest in serving as the chair of the uh of the commission. So with that, I will open the floor for any nominations. Uh, I guess I'll start with uh I'm I'll say I nominate Eric Ree for um the chair and maybe just change it out, but definitely still having you as second.

Okay. Um a a procedure question, Brian. Are we allow should we nominate others if we wish to do that as well? Yes. Uh first we should get a second from the commission on that nomination. Is there anyone that would like to second the nomination for Eric Griez chair? Sure, happy to second that. Great. Okay. And then if we have any additional nominations, I would nominate Commissioner Sakura as well. Okay. Is there a second? I'll second that. Very good.

Okay. So, now the fun part. We have two nominations uh for chair. We have Eric Ree and Joe. Uh, no, sorry. Joe nominated Ben. So, Eric and Ben are the two nominations that we have. We will start with Eric since he was nominated first. We have to go through a roll call vote for each. So, I will just move down the line here. If you would like to confirm your vote, say I. If you would like to not vote for Eric Green as chair, say nay. Um, Commissioner Crepe, I I I I

I'm gonna say nay because I'm I nominated Ben. Uh, nay. Nay. Nay. Okay, great. And then we will move on to Ben. So, um, same thing here. Uh, Commissioner Craig Nate. Um, I'll say I I'll say I I I I I Okay, great. I only had one nay for uh Commissioner Sakura. So, he will be our new chair. All right. Great. And then moving on to vice chair. Do we have any nominations for vice chair?

I would nominate Commissioner Quint or Quint Quint Re. Okay, great. Any other Can I get a second on that nomination for second? Great. Any other nominations for vice chair? Okay, great. Um, so only one nomination there. If you all would like to vote for Eric Ree as our vice chair, say I. I. I. I. Great. There we go. That's easy.

All right. Very good. Um, so now that that's Should we pause for just a moment and do a a shuffle so that we can have our new uh commissioner take over? Very good. All right, why don't we just swap chairs? Do we need to do that? Okay, I'll give you I'll give you the description. Can you just continue or No, go ahead. Yeah, go ahead.

Okay, item 4.2. too. We'll turn the meeting over now to Commissioner Eric. Okay. All right. Item 4.2, uh, introduction of the new planning commissioners. Um, turn it over to our new commissioners to give them an opportunity to introduce themselves. We'll begin with Commissioner Claude. Hey, uh, I'm Tony Claude. I live on, uh, Narcissus Street. I just applied to be a commissioner here because I thought it'd be fun. So I I like city planning. It's just fun to think about. So that's me.

Thank you and thanks for serving. And our um alternate Mr. Kripe. Yeah. Thank you. I'm William Kre. I moved to Victoria in October on Halloween over in the Lakeridge neighborhood all the way from Chanhasson where I was a commissioner on the environmental commission in Chanhassen. I'm pleased to be an alternate on the planning commission here in Victoria. Stand your toes because they move fast. So, good to have you. Thank you.

Thank you both and welcome to the planning commission. So, we will move on to item 4.3 um which is the approval of the planning commission meetings meeting minutes of March 17, 2026. May I have a motion to approve the minutes? Motion. Okay. I'll second motion made by uh Commissioner and seconded by Commissioner Ree. All those in favor? Any opposed?

Thank you. Moving on. Uh the public hearing for the Shores of Marsh Lake second edition. Our next item for discussion tonight is item 4.4 and it's to consider this preliminary platin associated application for the Shores of Marsh Lake second edition. This item does include a public hearing and after staff presentation, I'll give the applicant an opportunity to speak and then I'll open the public hearing for those in the chambers this evening that wish to speak on the request. Anyone who does wish to speak will be allowed three minutes and then I'll kindly ask the next individual to speak until everyone has had an opportunity. Then I'll ask our planning commission for a motion to close a public hearing. Please note that the planning commission and city staff will not engage in back and forth discussion during the public hearing. and I'll turn it over to city planner Brian McCann for the staff presentation.

Thank you, chair and commissioners. We have a preliminary plat in front of us for the shores of Marsh Lake second edition. They are at the middle step of the development process here where we get the more detailed applications and plans and the major. If they receive approval from the city council on Monday's meeting after your recommendation tonight, they would then work on developing the final plat and submit that for consideration. So this is a six lot single family residential development that is being proposed. They have five applications tonight for consideration. The first one is the preliminary plat. They're also requesting reszoning to plan unit development or PUD. Uh with that, a summary publication of the ordinance will be posted uh in the newspaper with city council approval. Um then there is a comprehensive plan amendment to amend our growth phasing map and our 2040 comprehensive plan. They also have requested easement vacations and an early grading agreement to start grading the site between preliminary and final plat approvals. So for the location and existing conditions, the entire area consists of four parcels. One of those being uh the larger parcel outlined here with my cursor. They also have two small outlots from the shores of Marsh Lake first edition as well as one of the lots that was within the shores of Marsh Lake first edition. All in total, the area is about 41.76 acres, but only 5.37 of that will actually be the project area noted here with my cursor. Uh the property itself is intersected by County Road 43. It's south of Marsh Lake Road here. And that intersection with 43, it's west of the existing shores of Marsh Lake neighborhood and it is north of Marsh Lake. Uh, as I mentioned, they're

proposing five new single family homes and they're doing lot line adjustments on this lot that was previously platted. So, here is the preliminary plat that was submitted. You can see they're extending Lakeside Drive into a full public culde-sac here with two lots on the north, four lots on the south. Uh they also are showing three separate outlots. Uh outlot A here would be for storm water and wetland preservation. Outlot B would be open space for the development and outlot C is anticipated to be future right of way for uh the future County Road 43 project. So uh their second request outside the preliminary plat this evening is for the resoning. We received notification today from the office of administrative hearings that the annexation was approved. So this area is now officially within Victoria. With that, it automatically receives a agricultural zoning classification. So they are asking to reszone this property uh from agricultural to plan unit development or PUD. And that PUD is overlay. So that R1 low density residential would be uh what's going over which is our typical single family residential district. So uh with the plan unit development process you should all uh have provided input on the acceptability of it at sketch plat which the city council did as well. uh here at preliminary plat. We're really finalizing the details as we're going to build that into their uh ordinance and then typically their final ordinance is adopted at final plat. But this one's a little bit unique since they will be matching the PUD that's already next door. Staff feel pretty confident that we can just move forward with PUD ordinance at this point. So with that, uh here are the deviations that are presented with the ordinance.

Uh all of these match what was approved generally with the shores of Marsh Lake first edition. Uh two notable differences here. Uh the 30foot rear setback that meets our current code standard, but the PUD uh with the first edition was actually increased to 50 ft. Um all the houses are still over 150 ft from Marsh Lakes ordinary high water line but uh this provision was included just to provide a greater setback from the rear lot lines for the homes. And then secondly all of the lots have a 5,000 square ft uh maximum impervious within that development. They are requesting 6,000 square ft for lot one because of its shape. they have a larger driveway. Um, so they need additional imperous surface to accommodate that increased driveway length. So I mentioned they needed a comprehensive plan amendment. This is currently within our 2031 to 2040 range. This lighter purple here and then the slightly darker purple is our current decade 2021 to 2030. And then up here is our infill development decade. You know, 2011 to 2020. Uh previous developments have gone through that. So what they're proposing to do here is basically take this 5.3 acres and bring this into the slightly darker color. We did run this by the city engineer. They did not anticipate any major increases in utility capacity by doing this. Um, so staff really does not have any major concerns about this proposed amendment. And then for the Shoreland Overlay District, the entire property is within 1,000 ft of Marsh Lake. Uh, with that, there are some increased uh, standards

per the DNR that they would have to follow. So, I laid down below here, typically there's a 25% impervious. as part of their PUD, they're asking to uh base that on a square footage and slightly increase that amount. Secondly, uh the minimum square footage allowed is 20,000 square ft. They're proposing uh slightly over half of that, 10,550. Once again, that would match the PUD that was approved for the neighborhood to the east. And then a minimum 65 foot lot width where 125 feet per the shoreland ordinance is allowed. And as I mentioned, they're still meeting that ordinary high water line se

and ask a question while you're on that topic. Yes. How does the impervious uh square footage translate to percentages? Uh, I did some math in the background and it comes out to about roughly 30 to 33% depending on the lot. Um, just for that one lot that we need the 6,000 for that one would be the the 33 that would be the higher end. Okay. Thank you.

Yep. And then as part of this, we did provide this development plan to the DNR area hydraologists. They provided initial comments requesting uh tier analysis. So evaluating the allowed density based on how far away the houses are from the lake for this project. They asked to actually see this for the entire development including the first phase which isn't very typical honestly. Um but the developer did generate that and provide it to us and it shows that it would actually allow a maximum of 94 units out here between all of the houses here. they're only um about half that 48 units uh proposed between both phases. So after that updated tier analysis was provided to the DNR, they did not have any concerns or comments on the proposed development. Then for landscaping and tree preservation uh for open space they have a minimum requirement of 50%. They have 54% proposed. As code, they are required to provide three trees per single family property. As you can see, each one has three or more, especially as you get up towards the proposed buffer area, uh trying to shield the area from County Road 43 and Marsh Lake Road, uh due to that potential future transportation project at that intersection. Uh they also have boulevard trees every 45 ft. uh the tree types and spacing meet all of our requirements and then they are only proposing 10% of existing trees on the site. Uh they provide an extensive buffer uh even though they technically do not have a mitigation requirement, but staff did acknowledge in the report that they had removed some trees while this property was still within Carver County's jurisdiction and they did not have a permit removal

requirement for that. So, just some additional background on that. Then for streets, parking and pedestrian connections, they are proposing uh a sidewalk that would terminate in front of lot one, block one here. They are also showing a 28 foot wide public street which per our ordinance allows parking on both sides. As part of this, our fire department also requested an emergency access because uh they are meeting that threshold of 30 homes on a deadend street. So, they are including that as part of their proposal. We are working with Carver County on that right now to get that approved. We're just waiting for their final rubber stamp on that. Um, and then for their parking requirements, each single family home needs to have a twocar garage. Based on the existing neighborhood and the renderings that were provided to staff in their narrative, we believe those homes will meet this requirement. Then for parkland dedication, we are only counting five units. The reason we're counting five instead of six is because we cannot count park dedication on a lot that's already been platted. So that first lot uh that was within the shores of Marsh Lake first edition, we can't count that twice. So we're only looking at five lots here or about 24,500 in park dedication. There is a private park existing within that neighborhood right now. So we are anticipating the fee in lie of land for this uh additional 65 homes. So, wetlands, storm water management, and utilities. It's subject to the MCWD's rules and regulations, but they are providing wetlands, buffers, and storm water ponding within city-owned outlots. They're also proposing to extend utilities from Lakeside Drive up to the future county road right ofway that we anticipate with that outlot C

that I noted at the beginning. And then also, they have that early grading agreement, which is just a formality truly. Uh we get that pretty often from developers when they want to get started right away. So uh last thing that we had is uh they are requesting easement vacations. So they had easements established within outlots FG and lot one through the shores of Marsh Lake first edition plat. Since they're changing the lot lines and moving some things around for the homes, all of those have to go and be reestablished in this plat. So that is the intent for the easement vacations. With that, we did post this in uh the March 26th and April 2nd editions of the Wakoneia Patriot. Per statute, we have to post this in two consecutive newspaper publications. We also mailed this to property owners within 350 ft of the proposed development boundaries. and it was posted online and at city hall at the time of writing this and still up to now I've not received any comments from the public on this. And then just to highlight again for those in the audience who are curious about this development if the planning commission makes a recommendation this evening, it would go to our city council at their regular meeting on Monday, April 13th right here beginning at 6:30 p.m. Uh the public is welcome to attend, but comments will likely not be taken. There's a public hearing tonight, so this is really your opportunity to get up and speak on the development. And then here are the suggested conditions of approval if the plan commission decides they want to recommend approval to the city council. Uh the four items here are the atypical ones that I always try to highlight for you guys. Most of these have to do with providing uh their financial obligations and executing the early grading

agreement so that they can get started right after preliminary plat approval and then also that it's contingent on the metropolitan council's approval of the comprehensive plan amendment. So with that I have a sample motion for you on the screen. Staff can stand for questions and the applicant is in the audience this evening. Great. Thank you. the applicant. Does the applicant wish to speak,

John Sonic with Charles K Company.

U so in keeping with the neighborhood that we have going and that we're just looking to finalist off. Originally, we were planning on doing it uh but the land owner um had to get the land taken out of a trust and so that took the three years that it took. Otherwise, this would have been done in the very beginning when it was originally platted uh almost five years ago now and that. So, we're just finishing things up now that they've gotten their trust undone and and we're able to separate. looking to finish up the whole neighborhood and have the whole area done and landscaped and a great spot for Victoria.

Great. Any questions? Not out the gate. Thank you. We'll now uh open the public hearing. Is there anyone in the chambers this evening who would like to comment on this item? Yes. Please come up and give your name.

Evening. My name is Stephan Wetzel. Um just a couple questions. Um the setback from the high water mark of the swamp supposedly. Um I read something it was like 135 and you recommending 150. Did every line or is it going to be 150? Chair and commissioners. It is 150 or more. Correct. Yep. 150 minimum. Okay. The other thing is are these lots going to be allowed water access? No. We like the rest. They won't be allowed to access the lot. Correct. All right. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Watson. Anyone else in the chamber wishing to uh speak on this item? Going once, going twice, three times. Hearing no additional public input. Commissioners, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. Second. I have a motion in a second. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? Thank you. Motion carries. The public hearing is closed. I'll now open the floor to the planning commission to discuss. Commissioners questions or comments, please. Ryan, can you just clarify this is just for that one chunk of the larger because it's all one lot, right? Correct. Um, going back to my first slide here, uh, this is just a very small segment of the overall 40ome acres that are out here.

So, when and if the developer decides to develop the rest of that um, lot, they'll have to come back for another PUD for the rest of it. chair and commissioners. Uh that's correct. Uh the remaining area is actually going to be retained by the current property owner out there. Um so the developer is developing this small piece of that property and purchasing that land from the property owner. Um my understanding is that property owner does not have any interest to develop at this time.

Thanks for clarifying, Brian. go back to the motion. So, I make a motion to approve the request for the shores of Marshall Lake, second edition with the whatever the pending things are that you you listed. Staff recommendations. Thank you, Mr. I'll second that. We got a motion and a second. All uh all in favor? I opposed.

Chair, just for clarification, who made the motion on that? Thank you. Thank you. We'll move on. Item 4.5, the public hearing, Hotel Victoria. Our next item for discussion tonight is to consider a preliminary platin associated application for Hotel Victoria. Uh this item does include a public hearing and the public hearing process is the same for this item as was the last and so I will turn it over to city planner Brian McCann for the staff presentation. Thank you, chair and commissioners. Um, everyone be prepared for a pretty similar presentation here. This is also a preliminary plat proposal. So, we took a look at the detailed plans that were submitted and this is the step where the major entitlements are granted. Now, the plan commission just for clarification is a recommending body. This will go to the city council on Monday, April 13th for final consideration. So, plan commission will make a recommendation tonight. City council makes the final decision on Monday. So with that, they did submit five applications for preliminary plat conditional use permits to allow a hotel use in our central business district as well as commercial uses within our shoreland overlay district and a building over 50 feet in height within the central business district. They're also requesting a shoreland variance to increase the maximum impervious from 80% to 88.3% for the project. They also requested site plan and building materials review and are seeking right-of-way vacations for the project. So, the location existing area uh right now it is just one parcel at 7929 Victoria Drive uh which currently has the Winchester and Rye restaurant in the space to the south

green space to the north where the proposed hotel would go. The site is surrounded by streets on all sides. As you can see, they have Stiger Lake Lane to the north, Ry's Way to the east, Tower Boulevard to the south, and Victoria Drive and Stiger Lake Lane intersection to the west. It's also in close proximity to the Lake Minnetonka Regional Trail and within 1,000 ft of Stiger Lake. As it stands right now, the property is approximately 50% impervious. So, here is a rendering of the proposed hotel. It consists of 46 uh units within the boutique hotel with various amenities such as a covered parking garage uh which has capacity to fit up to 41 vehicles as well as a fitness center, a lobby with a breakfast bar and multiple meeting rooms and spaces. Uh they do have some proposed modifications to our existing on street parking on Stiger Lake Lane and Ry's Way for the project. Overall, it's proposed to be five stories, approximately 57 feet tall at its tallest point uh with the lowest grade. Uh for reference, this is the view facing north, facing towards uh Stiger Lake. So, this would be the tallest point here consisting of those five stories. And then on the back end adjacent to Winchester and Ry would be closer to four stories or about 48 ft in height. So this was the plat that was submitted. They are proposing two uh lots. The first lot would contain the hotel site and the second lot would contain Winchester and Rye which you can see the building outlined here on lot two for that. They are also a propos excuse me uh proposing a single outlot here in the southeast corner which would be provided

to the city uh since it contains public rightway and parking areas. So here are some additional renderings of the project. Uh this would be the view facing Stiger Lake. Like I mentioned this is the view if you were in standing on Tower Boulevard in front of Winchester and Ry. And then these are the east and west elevations of the project as well. So this property is currently zoned central business district uh in our zoning map right now and down and guided for downtown mixed use in our 2040 comprehensive plan. A commercial use of a hotel is a permitted use within both of those districts. So we don't have any problems there. Uh but hotels and building heights over 50 feet are a conditional use within our zoning code. So they need conditional use permit approvals for those two items. Uh I mentioned it's up to about 57 feet at the tallest point which you can see at the bottom level P1 here measuring about 91 ft and then up to uh 148 ft. That's just elevation points. Uh so what we do is we measure the difference between those. That comes out to about 57 feet there. Uh and when we look at conditional uses, we have to evaluate specific criteria within our zoning code. So we have to confirm that's consistent with our comp plan, which it is. Uh that they are adequately providing for health and safety, complying with our all of our other requirements, that we have uh the public infrastructure available here to service this building. So, sewer and water, which we know we do, uh, screening and landscaping, that they're meeting those requirements and that they are meeting our elevated central business district design standards, as well as meeting the

zoning and traffic regulations. So, as I mentioned at the beginning, this is within 1,000 ft of Siger Lake, so it falls within our shoreland overlay district with review by the DNR. uh we did provide this to them uh including the proposal to increase the maximum impervious from 80% to 88.3%. Uh the applicant and city staff met with the DNR to talk about this and the measures that they are doing to capture and treat that additional storm water and our DNR area hydraologist did not have any concerns or comments on this proposal. uh but we do still need a commercial uh use or a conditional use permit for a commercial use within our shoreland overlay district for this as well. So that's where that third cup request comes in. Now when we're looking at variances, you all know that we have to evaluate it based on uh three questions within our state statute. Uh first is the request a reasonable use of the property. Secondly, if uh is the problem unique to the land and not created by the land owner? And then lastly, if granted, uh does the use alter the essential character of the locality? The applicant did provide a narrative highlighting um their criteria for all three of these items which I've listed in the presentation for you here. It's also available in the case online if you need to reference it. But uh these were the three points that justify their variance consideration. So for building materials uh majority of the building consists of a green glazed brick as well as metal trim, siding and roofing for the building. Uh they are also complying with our design standards within the central business district including facade modulations uh

including balconies for I believe 40 or more of the rooms within the building as well as a flat roof and some distinct ground floor windows with an awning over the entrance. They also provided lighting and signage plans showing the building illumination and how uh it won't create light pollution, but it will um create sufficient lighting for anyone hoping to enter or exit the hotel in the evenings. They're also proposing total signage of about 85 square ft, which is compliant with our signage code. They could go up to 160 square ft, but they're uh reducing that down to about half. So then for landscaping and tree preservation, they are exempt from open space and minimum planting requirements because they're within the central business district, but they do have to provide boulevard trees every 35 ft. Uh due to the downtown urban environment and spacing, sidewalk parking requirements on such a confined site, it's pretty difficult for them to do that. So they've provided what they can. Um but plane commission city council should consider if we want to um require additional boulevard trees or uh contributions to the city's tree fund to replace uh any trees within our boulevards throughout the city or alternatively uh other plantings in our downtown area where it might be more appropriate. Um and then they are showing foundation plantings where practical around the building highlighted uh in front of parking spaces near their garage entrance and on their uh street corner here. And then um they are proposing 100% significant tree removal for the property. They need to do that to build the hotel. So that falls into a 22in caliber requirement for replacement.

That's where we again go back to uh should we consider additional plantings somewhere else downtown or contributions to our tree fund or requiring that they meet that 22 caliber inch replacement somewhere within the project area. Then streets parking and drive aisles they are expanding Ry's way here to 20 ft on the north end. You might recall we had a project a couple months ago that is expanding Ry's way to 20 ft towards the south here. So now this whole stretch will be 20 ft which is great for access because that is still a two-way road. Um and then hotels require one space per room po per per our parking language in the zoning code. uh they require some additional space if they're adding a a lounge or condo area, which they're not with this proposal. So, their requirement is 46 parking stalls. They are showing 41 spaces within that valet garage service as I mentioned. Um but they are modifying parking on Stiger Lake Lane and Randy's Way uh for their project. So, they're showing two parallel stalls here. If you recall, right now there are six angled stalls on Stiger Lake Lane here. This uh idea that was presented to the planning commission for 1600 Arboritum Boulevard uh to provide some additional parking for the project and for downtown in general. Um so we did note that as a condition of approval for the plan commission this evening uh to help with their parking numbers. And then for pedestrian connections, they do have a eight foot wide sidewalk shown throughout uh the development and um some areas to the north and the west, but they are also showing a private stairs and sidewalk entrance on the east

side of the building. Uh with that, we would just need a maintenance agreement. It's not wide enough for our um public works staff to get their equipment through there to clear out that area. So the responsibility to clear that area would be on the hotel for that. But uh overall the Lake Mitankka Regional Trails nearby for people to use for additional pedestrian connections as well. So the sidewalk that's there now goes away. Uh there actually is not a sidewalk there. There's not. Okay. Is there a sidewalk on the other side of the street?

Correct. Yep. Moving on to park dedication. Per our code, commercial projects less than an acre in size are exempt from park dedication. So, they will not be providing any land or feed dedication with this project, but they are close by to some of our great park amenities already. So, it's not necessarily needed here. Then for wetlands, storm management, and utilities, they're subject to the MCWD's rules. Uh we don't anticipate any impacts to wetlands here given the site conditions. Uh but they are proposing some storage tanks and additional uh best management practices for storm water rate and control which our area hydraologists reviewed and was comfortable with for that increase in impervious. They're also showing connections to our sanitary sewer and our uh water to Victoria Drive here. And then the last thing they had was proposing right-of-way vacations. There are a couple small areas of right ofway uh on or adjacent to this property that they're proposing to vacate to facilitate their project. Uh the city doesn't need these areas if the hotel is going in. So we are acceptable to the proposed vacation requests. Uh but we would retain this area to the southeast that I mentioned as an outlot uh for dedication to the city to retain the parking and um sidewalk in that area. Then for a neighborhood meeting was held on March 31st. I did attend that and listen to uh comments from attendees. They stated general support for the project. I didn't hear many if any negative comments about the project. Um people were supportive of it bringing additional business to our downtown area. We also don't have a hotel within

the city right now, so it's definitely a needed service. Uh they did have questions regarding the construction staging and timing, what types amenities are within the hotel and the anticipated guest counts throughout the year. So uh really high level, generally supportive, not too many concerns with it. And then with this, we did um post the public hearing twice for this as well in accordance with state statute. Anything involving right ofway or easement vacations, we have to do two consecutive publications in the newspaper. We also mailed to property owners within 350 ft posted online and at city hall. Um this says seven here. I believe I am now up to 12 written comments expressing support for this project. I did email them all to the planning commission as they came in throughout the day today and yesterday. Uh so if you check your emails, uh you should have received all those and I will be including them with the city council packet for Monday's meeting as well.

Any comments received to the contrary, Brian? None.

And then um same as the last item for the members of the audience, this will be going to city council on Monday, April 13th, if the plan commission makes a recommendation tonight. public may attend but this is your time to speak if you have any comments during the public hearing. With that I have some suggested conditions of approval if that is what the planning commission chooses to recommend. Uh the first five items here are your atypical requirements. The first one being uh the allowance for that maximum impervious increase up to 88.3% outlining what the conditional use permit approvals are for those three items that I mentioned throughout the presentation that they have to provide a staging plan um to the satisfaction of the city before they can submit for final plat. They're developing on a lot that is surrounded by streets on all sides. So it is a very sensitive area. So, we want to make sure it's constructed appropriately. And then that interim parking at 1600 Arboritum Boulevard that I mentioned to meet their parking requirements. And then for the maintenance agreement on that east side with the private entrance and stairs, we need to execute that as well. Otherwise, the rest of our conditions are pretty boilerplate. complying with city's review memos, entering into a development agreement, providing letter of credit, um complying with city attorney's plat opinion and then submitting the final plat within two years of preliminary plat approval. So with that, I have a sample motion for you on the screen this evening. I can answer any questions and the applicant is in the audience as well.

Thank you, Brian. Would the applicant like to speak?

Hi, Mary. 7929 Steer Lake Lane with the Winchester and Rye property. I just want to thank you for reviewing this hotel. Uh we are very excited about it. We think it's going to offer a lot of wonderful new uh wallets to the town of Victoria to help those small businesses that we want to retain and uh we want them to thrive and be successful. Uh we're excited that uh we do have 1,600 Arboratum Boulevard, the spots that we plan on creating. They are interim and they are actually what we will be using to stage all of our construction. So we want to make sure that we aren't taking up spots in the downtown when we're doing construction. And if we have any overflow of the hotel, we would um be able to park them there. But that is an interim parking. And uh when you have a big project like this in a tight area to be able to have a large area to be able to put all your construction workers I think is really important for it to go smooth for the city. Um you know I would just want to thank you guys for all of your work and for all of the residents that have come before us today for uh Bill and Shelley Olsen. Bill Olsson is with the watershed district and he's come today. And uh also the area businesses are here and uh property owners and I want to thank them as well. Uh just lastly, we did our neighborhood meetings. Uh we had um really a lot of excitement. I didn't have any negative comments which I was surprised. Um we did we hosted two large meetings. uh one with the Steiger Lake uh condominium group and then one with the area downtown business group. Um we have also been out networking with the neighbors of the different uh areas in Victoria and we've really had a lot of positive feedback. Uh people are excited about having a place for their families

to come and stay when they come into town. Uh the businesses are excited for having a place to be able to host some meetings and areawide event places like Bavaria Downs are excited to have a fantastic signature hotel in downtown Victoria. So with that, I want to thank you and um I look forward to the public hearing. Thank you. Thank you. Uh now we'll open the public hearing. So if there's anybody in the chambers this evening wishing to comment on this item, now's the time. Yeah, please. Break the ice.

Kick it off.

Um, Terry Hartman representing downtown property owners, four different properties, and our address is 1750 Tower Boulevard. Just a a a quick note that I our four properties surround this hotel. We think it's an excellent project. We think it's it's it's good as Mary alluded to and really didn't come into the to the agenda report that this is a economic driver that we need in downtown. It's not a part of the your normal analysis, but it's something that you should consider as you're thinking about this that this kind of is a cross marketing and a co-eny for the rest of the businesses in downtown. super important right now because things are a little fragile with the highway construction and and parking issues and other issues where uh the the existing tenants downtown need this additional economic development. So, we're in favor of it. We think it's a great project. Uh I would add one thing to the to the discussion a little bit is I know your role is not tax increment financing. Uh but because this is the public hearing and it's the only uh opportunity to speak as this project moves forward. We believe that there's been a lot of discussion about expanding the downtown tax increment financing district to hopefully provide funds for parking capacity increases, public parking capacity increases and we think it's an excellent opportunity to do that and it can't be missed before this project moves forward.

I think most of you may be aware of that. So, thank you I have one quick question if I may. U you're right. This is not a forum for TIFF discussions and we don't have any authority over that anyway. Uh one question for you. Um Miss Mson mentioned that the lot at 1600 Arboretum Boulevard is to be used on an interim basis for parking during the project. What is the plan for after the project is completed? Are you planning to use that land for parking? I don't own that property. You don't own it. It was not the I'm sorry I misunderstood that. Mayor, you can maybe address. Okay. So, we don't we don't know. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. We have the purchase agreement on that property. We are the owners. Okay. Your company?

Yes. Okay. And and is your plan to donate that land or use it for parking? No, no, no, no, no, no, no. We just spent a lot of money to purchase that land. No. That's not the intention. The intention is that we will have that land available for construction parking and for interim parking and that uh so that when the project happens there's a space to be able to park all those contractors. Got it. And then in your packet you will see that we lay out a future development plan for that site and all the pictures and illustrations are in your packet. So the parking goes away when the project is completed.

Yes. the parking we we we plan on having some if you look at your project you'll see we plan on having some public parking that will be able to facilitate anything that we need you know u for the project and I do believe if Brian could address this but I do believe that the parking we do meet the current parking per Brian's report even without that space is that not correct Brian

um chair and commissioners for additional clarification yes they do still have two stalls on Stiger Lake Lane um in addition to their 41 underground stalls and then 16 stalls adjacent to the site. So 18 plus 41 they do have 49 spots available. Now granted that's being shared with the Winchester and Ry building. So on a on a plainly technical on paper sense, yes, they are meeting their parking requirements, but after they're taking 10 stalls away, there's there's a reduction there that should be considered.

Town 1772, there's a reduction, but that's the way the whole downtown has been designed. Correct. Correct. So the Ganon project, the every property in the downtown is under the same rule. I just want you to clarify that. Yes. So, we're not doing anything different. We're not taking spots away. We meet our numbers. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Tom. Any uh other uh public comment?

Hi, I'm Kimberly Reeves. I'm a resident. My husband and I live at 8439 Cray Lake Court and we own a condo for uh Steven's mother at 1776 Tiger Lake. So, I was able to attend the meeting on Monday and on Tuesday of last week where we heard about the hotel. Um, I have a background in hotel and restaurant management. I graduated from Cornell University and spent probably 20 well probably like 10 years working in pricing um and in special events. And so Mary was as able to answer very clearly uh questions about how to fill the hotel like which types of occupancy in terms of business versus leisure travelers. So there was a lot of thought that was put into that. There was a lot of thought that was put into the um the the business partnerships with businesses during the week and on the weekend. So what I was listening for is how could the hotel be filled? And I think that it was very thoughtful in terms of how they looked at that in terms of how they looked at the event space as well. I currently work in residential real estate and having a vibrant downtown is very important to the new buyers that are coming into the area. So for this project, it was very encouraging to me and my current work to be able to um hear what's being invested into the city, which then also translates to new um buyers coming in. And as you all know, we have a pretty high price point here. So, seeing the investment in downtown in terms of the restaurant and the hotel and new um new people coming in to spend money and support the businesses as well is very encouraging. So, thank you for your time. This was all emailed um earlier this evening. So, if you have any questions, I'm happy to follow up on that, too. Thank you.

Thank you. Who else is willing to get up and say a few words? Hello, planning commission. I'm Gina Holman. I am here with my husband, David. We're local residents 8510 Alageney Grove Boulevard and we have sent emails to all of you and council. Very grateful for Brian. Uh we attended the local meetings here. I think that this hotel is going to be a huge asset for Victoria. Um email sent to you. I was director of liquor operations for the city of Weisetta for 20 years and it took us nine years to build hotel landing and parking garage. So I feel your pain and very grateful to all the residents here that really understand how this is going to be an asset for downtown Victoria. I'm also a founding part partner at J Carver Distillery and president in our tourism out in Wakonia. We have a lot of people that are coming in across Minnesota and particularly across the country and when they call they ask our team members where do we stay and it's about a 15 mile uh access to find hotels for them to really visit this space. So, as it's been said, when people come in and I think that a lot of work has been done to see other communities around our state that do a really great job with agurism. So, when you're looking at

Hastings and Stillwater and Excelsier and Wisetta, people that have done the hard work, it's not easy. So, your job is difficult. So, thank you. What does happen is we get people in with wallets. And as a small business owner, we need wallets.

And especially with construction, we need wallets. So, when people are willing to come here and open up the billfold and find a place with great restaurants, this lovely location, we've got the amenities of nature, we've got lakes, and we've got trails and we've got all of the amenities that people are striving for and craving. This is a great project. So, thank you for your leadership. Thank you for the hard work. And we are just asking you to take this to the next level and say yes because there are a many many small businesses and residents in this town that really are asking for a yes to this project. So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any others wishing to speak on this item tonight? One last call. Okay. Thank you for all the comments. Hearing no additional uh commissioners, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? Make a motion to close the public hearing. Thank you, Erin. Can I get a second? Thank you. We have a a motion and a second. All those in favor? I opposed. Thank you. Uh motion carries and the public hearing is closed. I'll now open the floor to the planning commission to discuss commissioners questions or comments.

Brian, can you clarify one thing? Is the lot being split or is it still going to maintain one lot with two buildings? Uh chair and commissioner, good question. It will be two separate lots. So lot one will have the hotel, lot two will have Winchester and Ry because it's currently one, correct? Yep. Okay. Thanks. Just a quick question in in terms of the trees and some form of dedication if we're not able to do it on site. What have the discussions been about that? And is there the developer amendable to that idea?

Uh chair and commissioners, that's a good question. I'll look to the applicant and their team. We haven't been able to fully flesh that out yet. They have a couple options available to them, but I don't know if they have a preference on that. There's four small trees on the site. Is that right? They're they're extremely small. Uh there aren't any large trees on the site. And so, um we can certainly put the, you know, if we need to put them into the downtown, that's where we'd like it to go. Yeah, that's that was kind of the idea that I was I mean it was presented so I wanted anything to enhance the downtown is part of our focus and mission. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. I have a couple comments and questions. Uh first of all, a boutique hotel sounds like a pretty good idea.

It looks like a beautiful structure. I have no basis for knowing whether or not it's a good business deal, but that's not my uh that's not my role. Uh I I trust that the local business folks find it valuable and that's that's of utility. Um one issue that I have or concern that I have is parking. Um the loss of 10 spaces in a town like Victoria is a big deal. Um that we heard that the spots on our Breedom Boulevard are interrum spots. Uh and I think this begs for a longer term solution uh for parking. I drove along tonight uh to look um at the site again and I noticed that there were no open sites around Winchester and Ry up on Tower Boulevard all the way down and around. So, it was it was full. Uh and here we are on a Tuesday evening. I can't imagine what it's going to be like in the summer. So, parking is is a critical issue. Um second, uh the height of the building is a concern for me. Um um I I may be misremembering, but I I thought I asked during sketch plot review if um if the building height could be around 50 feet maximum. Um because we asked that question of the Monarch developers and we've asked other developers as well and that's become a standard. It is it is in fact the standard and I thought that was the plan. Um so I have a concern about setting a precedent for other development above 50 ft in the central business district. I think we all like the quaint charm of Victoria and uh certainly don't welcome taller uh buildings.

Can we really quickly on that? I was curious, Brian, do you happen to know from like the elevation standpoint? Because I know I recognize that that 58 is from the lowest point and it's at a slant. So, it's kind of skewed. But the total elevation of that building, how does it compare to the rest of the buildings downtown? Is it at higher lower than the rest of the current buildings?

Chair and commissioners, that's a good question. I know the tallest building from the lowest elevation in our downtown district is the Roars building. Uh that one actually received approvals for 65 ft. Um I believe uh Victoria Flats at the lowest grade to the highest point is right around 5760 feet as well. So, those are probably the two tallest buildings uh existing and foreseen in our downtown.

Yeah. And I guess like versus just the height of the building, I'm thinking more of like if I were go to go up to I don't remember what the elevation number is, but I'm just going to say it's 1,000 ft. If it's at 1,000 ft and this uh apartment building is at 1,000, where are the other ones? Are the other ones also like that the apartment building here or the condo building here, the roars? Are those at a thousand? Are they above? Are they lower? Like that's kind of what I think would help us approve or or like consider this more seriously of like are all of a sudden this is going to stick out like a sore thumb because it's way higher or is it like within a foot or two?

Chair commissioner that's a good question. Uh they provided a model with the sketch plat review if you might recall showing the actual measured grades of everything. Um at Winchester and Ry it will match the grades and heights of the Ganon project of the Victoria flat. So it all it'll all be a cohesive height. It won't stand out significantly. Not above Winchester and Right. Correct. Well, it'll be above Winchester. Yeah. Maybe I can go back to the rendering and if their architect is available to any questions. Is it not going to be higher than this right here? Is it higher than Victoria Flats or about the same? I think it's the same. Okay.

Correct. And and this is the the front end of the building. So the the property slopes down, right? So it looks large, but the building height is going to be consistent on the hill. I mean, overall, it sounds like a great attribute to the city um for a lot of reasons. And I I understand like we talked about that but it is more of the

the altitude on the back side of the build. That's what roars I thought was like the furthest is on the north side of the building but aesthetically across the city it's very be flat across very flat.

Yeah. The last concern I have is around the practical difficulties test for the variance. As you know, we don't generally like variances uh because they create exceptions which become the rule over time. And as as we all know, the the situation, the standard is that the problem has to be unique to the land and not created by the land owner. And in this project, it seems to me that the issue is not the land itself, but the project. Um the site is clearly buildable at a lower coverage. So the hardship is really created by the project, not so much by the land itself. So um I I think it's important for the city to to work with the city attorney to look into that because I I do think that is that is an issue and if someone were to challenge that we should we should know what the answer is. But and I know it's it's the standard is not economic. The standard is not whether the building is desirable. The question is whether the site creates a unique hardship that makes it unusable. Uh and I don't think that's the case. I think it's really the project size uh that creates the impervious standard which is almost 20% above the impervious limit. So um that's my comment on that.

Chair, planning commission members, my name is Matt Pavoc, civil engineer on the project. um just to address that concern. I think uh with the variance for the hard cover, we are making up for that with enhanced storm water management on the site that that compensates for that additional impervious service, which is the spirit of the reason for the pvious surface is storm water runoff. So, uh we do have designed a system that is equivalent in runoff to a site that were would have been purious. So, we're trying to make up for it. No, I read that in the packet. Thanks.

Additional comments. Gang, as a new commissioner, I have uh two quick questions. Um, first regarding the parking, I read that it was covered. I'm assuming that is underground. Yes. Yeah. Second, is that uh dedicated hotel patronon parking or is that hotel and Winchester and Ry parking? Chair and commissioner or do we know do we care?

We do know it is a valet service only for hotel guests. So the net do I understand correctly that the net loss or gain of parking is correct from a tally count but not from an accessibility count. Is that correct? Correct. Yep. Thank you. That's it.

Any other comments? No further discussion. Um got ask for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve um the head's a little cloudy still with the cold, but um I approve the the motion um to request from the Hotel Victoria with the conditions that were outlined by the staff recommendations. I second the motion to recommend the city council approve the request for the Hotel Victoria with staff comments. Okay, with a motion and a second. All those in favor? I any opposed?

Yes. Okay. Motion carries. Thank you. Moving on. Our final item tonight for discussion is item 4.6, which is the approval of 2026 planning commission annual work plan and year-end review. Um, it's going to be exciting. Are you sure? Thank you. We will uh have Brian McCann, city planner. Go ahead and take it from here, Brian. Thank you, chair. I'll just give it a second to have it clear out. You managed to get a few to stick around.

Yeah, riveting. Great. So, uh yes, just highlighting the work that the planning commission did last year. We had a very productive year as always. Uh we completed our review of ordinances re relevant to our central business district but not just there uh our entire zoning code. So thank you all for your work on the zoning code overhaul. We are still uh finalizing dates to get that fully approved with a public hearing by city council. So keep your eyes out for that in the future. That may be coming back soon. Um, and then also your support in our priority areas set by city council being our downtown west developments area and south growth with the first project down there being the quick trip site. And then looking at our 2026 year and what staff have prepared as recommendations for your work plan. You can add modify any of these things as you'd like during the discussion tonight or you can approve them as is. That's entirely up to you. Uh but your role would be to continue continue conducting public hearings and providing recommendations to the city council on various land use applications and requests. Uh continuing support of the zoning code overhaul. Like I said, we're not done with that yet. We're almost to the finish line, but continuing to evaluate ordinances as they come in, if staff have any additional adjustments during that process. Also moni monitoring the housing legislation that's currently going around. At our last meeting, I mentioned the uh missing middle housing legislation is making the rounds again. So, just being aware of that and reading and up to date on that or any other planning news or related articles that may affect the city of Victoria. And then also being involved in our 2050 comprehensive plan cycle. That's going to be a big one this year

and next year as we start developing our 2050 plan. I believe it's set to kick off in May. So, uh, be aware of future notifications for that. Also, attending training opportunities. Sometimes I'll send you guys, uh, things from the League of Minnesota Cities or other, uh, free or cheap opportunities that might be of interest to you and your roles as planning commissioners and then continuing to support the downtown west development and the south growth area as our commercial areas expand within the city. So with that, those are our recommended work plan items, but I will leave it up to you if you want to do anything else with that. We need a motion or what?

Comments. Just comments or questions for Brian on it. None. Uh no more discussion. Then there's no uh other discussion items this evening. So we can move on to the miscellaneous section of the agenda. Chair, I think we actually do need a motion on that. My apologies on the chair script there. Move that we adopt the 2026 commission work plan as presented. Second having a motion a second. All in favor? I I opposed. Now we can move on to the miscellaneous section of the agenda. Staff, any reports?

Yeah, I mentioned at our last meeting uh they will be doing some tech upgrades in the council chambers here. So, our next meeting scheduled for April 21st is cancelled. Our next meeting will be the first meeting in May. I can't remember the exact date off the top of my head, but you should be able to find it. First Tuesday in May. Uh, other than that, we have some new artwork in the chambers this evening. If you want to fill out those little slips of paper and return them to me to say which one is your favorite so our city clerk can count the votes, that would be great. Nothing else from staff. Thank you. I would just comment. I've got one plan commissioner. Anybody got any items?

I have one. Jen, are you able to comment on what's going into the old Victoria House or any progress updates? Okay. Um, commissioners, no, I cannot at the moment, but there is a restaurant tour that's working very, very hard to get it open. Um, there's just not a date set quite yet, so stay tuned. Are you able to share a date on blue agave? Um, they are thinking May. Thank you. Sorry. Any others? Do we know anything about the grading that's going on in the south district of the city? Is there any potentially something good coming in other than Quick Trip?

Chair and commissioners, uh, that's a good question. That was one of those early grading agreements that you guys don't typically see. Those usually go straight to council. Uh the property owner requested to massgrade the site to get those more marketable for future commercial users, but there's no one at the door yet that I'm aware of, unfortunately.

Thank you. My only comment is there's a ton of talk about parking downtown and the city council, if you watched the last meeting I went to, it had a full presentation on our parking situation in Victoria and what we can do about it and what we may or may not be able to do about it, but there's definitely some things we can do about it. Um, so it's just a matter of if our city council and mayor what they decide to do and we can be part of that. uh if we reach out to them and staff and get the the lowdown on what's what's possible. So I think we there is some history too with for example tonight was mentioned the shared parking Brian and how that works. I think that's a pretty complicated big Excel document that I've seen before, but takes refreshing every time, but it's worthwhile to understand because in the situation when there are shared parking spots, there's it's part of how this downtown got to be what it is. So, it's all I had. Anybody else? Anything else?

I believe there's a I thought I saw online a um is there a survey about it? There is a survey. So just getting community members input and sharing with your neighbors and you know us continuing to be liaison with our neighborhoods. Yep. Good point. Great. No more items on the evening uh agenda. So could I get a motion to adjurnn? Motion to adjurnn. Thank you. A second. All those in favor? I. Well done. Thank you. We're adjourned.