All right, we'll call the meeting to order. On behalf of the planning commission, like to welcome our residents and viewers to this regular meeting of May 12th, 2026. On tonight's agenda, we have two public hearings and one discussion item. Before we open the public hearings, we have one
housekeeping item. That would be the minutes from our April 14th, 2026 regular meeting. Are there any additions or corrections to those minutes? >> If not, is there a motion? >> A motion. >> Have a motion for approval. Is there a second? >> Second. Motion and second. All in favor
say I. >> I. >> I. >> Minutes are approved. With that, then we'll open up both public hearings at this time. We'll take them in order as shown on the agenda. Uh the first uh public hearing is a request for a conditional use permit to install a rooftop solar array at the Farmington
Library. The address is 5083rd Street. The applicant is Dakota County. And Jared, you're going to take this? >> Yes, I will. Thank you, chair, planning commission members. Um, as the chair just stated, uh, the request before you tonight is for a conditioning use permit to install a 131 kilowatt rooftop solar
array, um, on the roof at Farmington at the Farmington Library at 5083rd Street. Uh, the applicant is Mckin Street Industries. Um, and the property owner is Dakota County. Uh, this property is zoned B2 downtown business. Uh, solar
energy systems are conditional use within this district. Uh this property is guided for uh public semi-public in the 2040 comp plan and the current use um is a public library. Uh the surrounding uses are single family houses to the south uh here Farmington City Hall to the north and then
commercial properties to the east and west. Um, according to the narrative for the CUP, uh, the purpose of the proposed rooftop solar array is to offset 92% of the electricity usage at the library, um, and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and utility costs for the
county. So, here's the layout um, of the proposed rooftop solar array. Um, as I mentioned, 131 kilowatts. Um, this will be oriented to the south. Um, as you can see, it's kind of split into two sections, um, with an access aisle down
the middle. Um, this roof is, uh, flat, so, and with a height of 15 ft. Um, and these panels, um, at their max tilt would be less than 2 feet. Uh, so there are no height concerns here. Um, the proposed array will connect into existing utility infrastructure um, on
the northwest corner of the building. Uh, there are really no other major site impacts um, for this proposed um, rooftop solar array. Here's kind of a rendering showing what it looked from an aerial view to the south. As you can see, the panels are oriented to the south with that access
aisle down the middle as well. At the bottom there, you can kind of see a side view of how the the fixed panels would look um lying flat on the roof there. Um as mentioned in your packet, there are six cup requirements or approval criteria uh that staff looks at um with
these projects. Um staff strongly believes that this project meets all six of um these approval criteria and the action requested for you guys tonight is to approve the requested conditional use permit um with the following condition is that all necessary building permits
are obtained and we do have a representative from McKinstry and Dakota County with us um for any questions. >> All right, thank you Jared. Nice job. As Jared mentioned, we have Mr. Lexfold, Mr. Wagner representing the applicant. Do you have anything to add to the staff
report? Do you have make any comments? >> If you do, can you come up to the podium, please? Thank you. >> Daniel Wagner with McKinstry. I do not have any comments at this time. >> All right. Thank you. >> Um Mike Waxfield with Dakota County. I do not have any comments, but can stand for questions.
>> Would you two stand there, please, and wait? There might be I know there'll be some from the commission, but we'll see if there's any from anybody in the audience. Are there any questions or comments regarding this conditional use permit? All right, you guys are lucky. We'll come back. Uh, Commissioner Berg,
>> no, I really don't have any questions. I think this is a a great idea and a great use of of some existing space. So, looking forward to it. >> Commissioner Ellis, >> um, what other Dakota County buildings have you done this? What other
>> U Mr. Chair? I don't know how to address you guys. Mr. Chair, >> it don't matter. >> Commissioner, um, so we have currently Dakota County has this at >> our Empire campus, which is a combination of seven different sites on our Empire Maintenance facility. We've got a ground mount system at the
Administration and Judicial Center, the Government Center campus in Hastings. It's right outside my office window. >> Yep. >> We've got two car ports, one at the Robert Trail Library in Rosemont, and another one, >> okay, >> at the three car ports then, Galaxy Library, Western Service Center in West St. hall as well as the Northern Service
Center. >> So, just kind of doing it with all Takakota County buildings. >> We're doing it with as many buildings as we can make it make financial sense on. So, we've got the original seven systems at Empire. We did four with Mckinry last time and we're doing five this time. So, >> yeah. No, I think I think it's a I agree
with Andy. I think it's a great idea. What's your timing once you get the building permit? How long does this take? >> I will defer to Dan, but I believe the plan is to have the panels in place by the end of the year. >> Okay. I don't know if it'll be operational by then. We have to >> That was my next question. >> Excel's timing to get into their queue
to get that going, but likely first quarter >> of 2027. >> 27. Okay. >> Yeah, that sometimes I can uh drag on a little bit um on the utility level. Uh so it will be installed this year >> um but fully interconnected with Excel
may take a month or two. >> Okay. So early 2027, right? That is >> our goal. >> Cool. Thank you, >> Commissioner Rutherford. >> No, I think it's a uh I think it's a fantastic idea as well. The only thing I would uh seek clarification on maybe is
and I don't know anything about uh the solar panels themselves or how reflective they are. There are taller buildings near this site. So, is is glare going to be an issue? >> So, actually the orientation that they are facing is south.
>> Yep. So they are at about a 10 degree um pitch and there is a parapit wall um and we've got it set back away from the parapit wall. So any potential glare would um would be at an angle that would be more upward. >> Okay.
>> Than horizontal towards any trees or houses or anything like that. So >> awesome. Excellent. Thank you. >> Gary, you sound like an engineer. Those were my questions, too. I I do have a couple questions and and they really come into and maybe you gentlemen know about it. If not, I know we have the the library manager here
that she can do it, but um will the library be closed for any of the construction during the duration of that? >> No. >> Okay. And then I know she gets a lot of uh guests during the day. Some are young, some are old, but what kind of
safety measures are you going to put in place so that things don't happen to anybody that may be walking in. >> I can I can take that. So, the staging area, what we'll place in an area that's away from any patrons um going in and
out of the building. Um and it will be fenced off as well. Um we make sure that the material is not affected or anything like that during construction. Um but yeah, the the install um the only thing would be turning turning the power off
and back on for a short period of time, but that'll be um after hours or coordinated with the library staff. So, >> okay, as long as she's comfortable with it, and I know I spoke with her earlier and she's all in favor of this. So, go ahead. Um I just had that. Again, the
library is a great place, you know, and I just want to make sure our residents are aware you uh Lisa asked about when do you plan to start this? So, our residents may be aware of that. >> Yeah. So, I I think the the timing on this one. Um I don't have it. We've got
a few going. Um I believe that this one was within the first probably two months, but I can't I don't have the schedule in front of me. I don't remember the dates exactly, but we'll communicate that through our library partners and we'll probably have some sort of social media post when they start. >> All right.
>> Mainly to kick off, hey, this project's coming. Here's what you can anticipate for both this as well as our other four. >> Just wanted to give you a heads up. Our community days are the end of June. So, um, and whether that that may be a good time to be doing it or maybe a bad time, I don't know, but just a heads up.
>> Yeah. >> So, listen to her. Okay. All right. Thank you. I'll give you residents one more chance. Any comments or questions regarding the cup? I see none. With that, I'd look for a motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved.
>> Have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion. Second. Call the role, please. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Front of the commission then is a conditional use permit to install a ripoff solar array at the Farmington Library. And this is a commission decision. This does not go on anywhere
beyond the commission. So, is there a motion? >> Motion to approve. >> Have a motion for approval. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion, a second. Any more discussion? >> If not, call the roll, please. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you out there. All right. >> All right. We'll move into our second public hearing. And that's the reasoning of properties from MUCI which is mixeduse commercial industrial to I which is industrial um number of
properties are really at the intersection of highway 50 and Pilotab Road. Tony you going to take this? >> I am. Thank you Mr. Chair. Commission members. Uh yes. The city is seeking to reszone uh five parcels or portions thereof of land adjacent to Pilot Knob
Road from mixeduse commercial industrial MUCI to industrial. Uh the map on the left shows the uh parcels in question. Um and then the corresponding zoning map is on the uh right.
The five parcels uh include uh P ID14-360-29 uh- 016 owned by Pilot Knob Properties, P14-258-52-00-3 owned by P MKR Real Estate LLC and P or P14-0250057-011
1 essentially the western half owned by Santa Cruz Holdings LLC P14-63190000-10 the eastern 1/3 owned by Debbie Family Limited Partnership and then lastly P14-2600-90 excuse me-10
uh the southeast corner of that uh overall property propert. So it's a portion of that property owned by the Devany family limited partnership. Uh these properties or portions of these properties as I had mentioned are currently zoned mixeduse commercial
industrial. Uh three of the five parcels are currently splitzoned. So that means uh not all of the parcel is of the same zoning classification. Uh and it's split between mixeduse commercial industrial and industrial.
Uh the two parcels that are entirely zoned MUCR MUCI are located at the northeast intersection of Pilot Knob Road and County Road 50. Uh they are owned by Pilot Knob Properties and P MKR Real Estate LLC. Uh so basically just
south of the RNL Trucking Company. Uh in 2024, two parcels in this area were reszoned from MUCI to Industrial. uh that was part of the RNL carriers uh expansion. Uh the five parcels that are currently
zoned MUCR MUCI are either surrounded by or adjacent to properties that are currently zoned industrial. Split zoning of the parcels does create some unintended challenges uh for development of these parcels um i.e. allowed uses are not they're not
identical uh per uh zoning classifications. Reszoning would allow for easier development of these parcels while allowing uses that are consistent with the existing adjacent industrial uses. The city's not looking to do this as
part of any specific project. Um we have been talking about this off and on internally um with the amount of um industrial land that is surrounding there. uh there's just a handful of parcels in that area that are MUCI and have been that
designation for quite some time. Um we just feel that it it makes sense to make this change and to do it now. Um part of the impetus is due to the site plan that we will actually be reviewing later this meeting as well that kind of teetered us
over the edge to to at least look at this now. So uh the the pro uh the properties proposed to be resone are guided mixeduse commercial industrial within the 2040 comprehensive plan. Uh the mixeduse commercial industrial guidance
allows for integration of commercial and industrial uses which are compatible with each other. Uh at this time staff is com comfortable leaving this guidance in place um until we look at the 2050 update as it does contemplate industrial uses. Um do want to mention that Miss Acriman
who is here um we have traded correspondence and as of right now she is not in favor of the reszone. So just want to make you aware of that. The action requested this evening is to recommend approval of the resoning of the following parcels from mixeduse
commercial industrial MUCI to industrial um or I and forward that recommendation under the city council for those five properties that are listed and that I had mentioned previously. >> Don't read the numbers again. Okay, Tony. Thank you. >> I don't want to put anybody through that again.
>> All right. Anything else, Tony? >> Nothing as of right now. >> All right. Thank you. Uh this is a public hearing. Um does anybody want to speak on this reszone? >> Just please state your name, please. >> Brian Arian. >> Okay, Brian.
>> Uh our big thing is more or less being limited with the current property. Uh this is great for the undeveloped stuff on the western side of Pilot Knob property that doesn't have anything. Uh
we're looking at it as on the eastern side of Pilot Knob. We already have established buildings and current tenants previous different arrays of warehouses to office building. One was
an accounting firm for over 25 years. So we do have the mixed use. Um that accounting office for 25 plus years is never going to be a factory. Uh
>> I do want to mention that office uses are a permitted use in that zone. Yeah, just more or less. We also have warehouse uh landscaper storage comparing apples to apples and sort of our our property was that the mixeduse
industrial actually allowed us to have more tenants in those particular properties. Uh we're just requesting us be taken off the five the you know the land the devies any of
the other people that have land that can develop it and make it exactly to code of the industrial new city requirements. Perfect. Uh you know these buildings were built by FEI I think back in the
80s. Uh, you know, we try to maintain them the best we can, make them presentable, uh, get on any of our tenants that, uh, are making a mess and, you know, obviously we've been around Farmington forever and want to stay that
way, but also don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot by flipping to industrial. And now we don't have that was mixed use. Um, from the information we got from Tony, it looked like we could have
a micro brewery, a small micro brewery, a distillery. It had like six alcohol options and then a couple conditional use cannabis ones where the mixed use was child care center. Okay. Well, the
one building's got a bunch of offices in it that could potentially be, you know, it just felt more realistic tenant options for us versus a brewery, a tap house, a cannabis dispensary, whatever.
Uh, you know, we're not trying to crush anybody else's dreams on these other four parcels that are undeveloped. Have at it. Great. Absolutely. Uh we just look at this point. Uh we're not for sure what's going to be requested. If it
is changed over to industrial uh from the information we did receive, we'd have to put some type of barrier in. Don't know if that's just pertaining to the new development on the undeveloped sections or if we're grandfathered in
and you know it's just a change in title. But I guess right I guess right now it works. Uh yeah, screening, fencing. Um it's in like the first paragraph of the industrial. So
>> okay, well said, Brian. Okay, thank you. Just for reference now. >> Yeah, appreciate. >> And these would be the these are the two pieces of property right on the southeast corner that you refer to as M MUCI. Totally. >> Yes. >> And are they one and two on your list?
>> They are. Yes, they are. >> Properties. >> Yes. So there these >> are MKR >> parcels right here >> two. Yeah. Okay. >> Yep. >> Thank you, Brian. I appreciate it. Anybody else have comments, questions? If not, we'll come back.
>> All right. I'm Barb Backerman and Brian did a good job speaking for me, but one of my big concerns is the screening and any fencing required because that would be a major expense to us. And we are also concerned about the change of use. That building out there is a nice
professional building and can be used for probably a lot of different things that I'm concerned might not be allowed. Maybe commercial things that would be allowed, but might not be allowed under industrial. So again, they're buildings that have been there a long time and we try to take good care of them and update them and and get our permits and do
everything we're supposed to do, but um at this point in time, I'm not totally sold on this change to industrial for our our parcel there. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Barb. >> Seeing none, we'll come back to you if you think of something else. We'll start with Commissioner Berg.
Um Tony, I guess one question I had is I know that the acrimans have asked about some use on that property at least twice since I've been on the commission and we've unfortunately had to say nope, not right now.
So that's that's part of the question I want to talk through is does this help them out and what they want to use their property for? Does is that sort of the the driver behind the decision to move to industrial or why were why were those two parcels selected?
>> Um well they're part of the ones that are listed as MUCI still in that area. Um so we were looking at the entire area not just focusing on their one parcel.
>> Right. Um, >> so as far as because I know in the past we've had some questions around automotive repair, >> correct? >> Does moving to industrial change that? >> It does not. >> It does not. Okay. >> Does not. >> That was one of my big questions. Okay.
Um, for the other three parcels, is there specific I know we're going to talk about one of them later on. Are there other specific uses that have you've been approached about already >> or is this simply more looking holistically >> wide holistic? Okay.
>> Yep. >> Um yeah. Uh I'll stop there for now and might come back later. D Commissioner Rutherford. I had the same question regarding the uh automotive repair major from uh I think
it was the February meeting. So that still would not be if this were reszoned to industrial that still would not be a permitted use correct. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Um I had another question. It escapes me right now. I will uh I'll jump back in
when uh when it comes back to me. If you think of a Gary, just let us know. Commissioner Ellis, >> Tony, just to um clarify some of the points that Brian was making. Buildings in use currently, would they be a legacy use? >> They're a grandfathered. >> So that would be So they
>> and mostly actually the ones that are there fall into the industrial, >> right? So they so they fall into it any >> right. And we would not be requiring additional, >> right? But if a tenant left, for example, it would be the same use because a it fits within this new zoning
and b it's a legacy. So that it would even if the tenant changes because it's the same owner, >> correct? >> If they sold, would that be true? >> It it is true. Now, if use let's say there's a grand legal grandfathered non-conforming use that's there, right?
>> Let's say that use goes away and then it lapse lapses for a year. >> Okay? Then that grandfathered use goes away. >> Goes away. Okay. But it kind that use kind of it runs with the land. >> It runs with the land. >> Okay. >> Correct. >> Those were my questions.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Can I ask one quick question? >> Mr. Berg, >> going back to the the automotive heavy question. What zoning would permit that? Just out of curiosity. Uh basically our uh we do allow a auto repair major in
the B2 as a conditional use and the B3. >> Okay. >> As conditional. >> Sorry, I didn't mean to put you on the spot, Tony. I was just curious because I know that's come up a couple times. >> Council a handful of years ago made a decision to really limit where
the auto related uses could go. Um that was a very specific request at that time. So >> was it was a combination staff, commission, and council that all agreed we were getting inundated
>> and uh it just got to be too broad and so we needed to narrow the scope of it. >> Okay, that was part of my question just historically. I didn't know how we landed on that. That's what it was. Okay, thank you. >> Anything else? Gary, do you think of yours?
I did have one clarification that uh and maybe it was just uh I understand it but the the partial >> uh reszones. Yeah. The split zones um that's being done because the remaining parts of the ones that you seek to
reszone are already zoned as industrial. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So it creates issues if let's say one of those parcels wants to develop. How do you put a building that may cross over between two zoning districts that the uses don't mesh?
>> And so if this uh if this are if this were to be completely reszoned the way you're requesting it, it creates basically one large contiguous >> industrial >> industrial park area. >> Okay. >> Tony, all the property owners were
notified. >> They were. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. And I suspect that's why Miss Acriman's here. Um, so, so why is the city the applicant? >> Um, again, the city has made a decision
or decided internally that we wanted to um look at this area um and initiate the change ourselves. >> Okay. Is this the process that should or could go through the comp plan amendment that we're currently just undertaking
and be part of that and then we could get buy in from staff and commission and counsel? >> Certain I >> certainly could. Um what and it if the the planning commission is uncomfortable with this at this time I understand
that. And one of the things that I may request is that maybe if we just look at the one parcel that we're looking at the the site plan for and maybe just reszoning that one at this time and then leaving the rest as part of that 2050
update and um zoning code amendment update. >> That's a great idea, Tony. I was going to talk on the same area because here we have >> two property owners that have taken time out of their busy night that their property and they don't want it.
>> Absolutely. >> So I I have a hard time agreeing to reszone their property when they're serious saying we're happy with what we're at. Maybe we'll consider it in the future, but not at this date. So >> I guess I would agree with Tony and and
for future discussion tonight still I'd like to just talk about and Tony can you reference what P number this would be? >> It would be uh P14-02500-57-011. >> Okay. So number three >> Santa Cruz >> number three that's easier for me to remember Matt. Sorry. >> Sorry.
>> So is the commissioner comfortable with that idea? I mean, I know we have a different recommendation, but it came from staff to to modify this. I'm I'm okay with that. That's where I would have went anyway. >> Yeah, I think that's I think that's a fair compromise, and it's consistent
with what we said at the February meeting. >> It is. >> Yeah. >> And we have, as Commissioner Berg mentioned, we have a discussion on the property that we're look number three anyway, just right after this. So, I'm okay with that. We have a use rather than just uh an uncertainty.
Uh, Lisa, are you comfortable with it? >> Yes. >> Andy? Yeah, that may I feel much better. Staff is comfortable with this. >> Absolutely. >> Barb, how about you? And Brian, you're okay with that? >> All right. I think that's the route we're going to go then, Tony. >> Perfect. >> All right. So, let's get our uh plan
down. So, we're looking now just to modify this. It' be um P number three. I'm just going to refer to Tony and you can do the rest. Um, the rest of my questions then aren't necessary to ask even because it really delves into the necessity of doing it.
Um, so is there anything else from the commission before we close a public hearing? Is there anything else from our residents before we close a public hearing? If not, then I'd look for a motion to close a public hearing. >> So moved. >> Have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion and second to close a public
hearing. Call the role, please. >> Ellis, >> yes. >> Rutherford, >> yes. Berg. >> Yes. >> Rody. >> Yes. >> In front of the commission then is a recommendation to our city council on the reszoning of one parcel. Um and Tony, this is from mixed use still to industrial. Correct.
>> Correct. >> And it would be PUD reference as number three. Tony will include the B number. >> Absolutely. >> And the owner and all that. I don't see any exceptions. So with that, I'd look for a motion recommendation to our city council.
>> Motion. We have a motion to a favorable recommendation to our city council. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Motion and second. Any more discussion? If not, call the role, please. >> Rutherford. >> Yes. >> Herd? >> Yes. >> Rody? >> Yes. >> Ellis? >> All right. Thank you. And thank you for
coming tonight. All right. We'll move into our discussion item. This is a site plan for I'm going to screw this up. Is it Onyx Strategic Partners? >> It is. >> Is it correct? >> All right. Hey, show. How you doing? Thank you for coming. Tony, you going to take this also?
>> I am. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commission members. >> Yes. Onyx Strategic Partners is seeking site plan approval for property located at north at the northeast intersection of 28th Street West and Pilot Knob Road. The property is owned by Santa Cruz
Holdings LLC. The site consists of one parcel totaling just over 26 acres. Uh the site plan contemplates splitting the parcel into two lots. Uh the western lot would be approximately 18 acres and the eastern lot 8 acres. Uh these acreages do
include the right ofway for 28th Street West uh which is located on the south side of the parcel. Uh the property will have to be platted and rightway dedicated uh for 20th Street. Uh the existing constructed portion of the street is currently contained within a
roadway easement that was granted a number of years ago. Uh there are two sets of plans included in your packet. The first is a what's titled the master plan and the second is a phase one plan. The master plan is a set of conceptual layout for what the
site could look like under fully uh developed conditions. Uh this set is for reference only and is not anticipated to be built out at this current time. The phase one set is for the installation of storm water management systems and
grading work. Uh phase one gets the site basically to what is called pad ready. Uh future developer will have to install the sanitary sewer, water and storm sewer within the site. uh there may need to be minor grading adjustments uh to accommodate the actual
building and site layout. Uh minor adjustments to the site plan can be approved administratively. However, anything that staff would deem as a substantial deviation from what you see this evening um would require additional approval from this this board.
Uh description of the uh parcels uh the western lot as I'm calling it is the 18 acres uh parcel. It shows an approximately 74,000 square foot building footprint uh with off- streetet parking in the front totaling about 54
stalls. Semi-truck docking and parking is in the rear and that uh accommodates 52 stalls. Uh drive aisles are shown on both the western and eastern side of the building uh which leads back to that docking/semit parking area.
I do want to mention that the ultimate use of the building has not been determined. um parking counts uh may need to be adjusted based on the use that uh ultimately occupies the property. Uh there are two accesses for
uh the lot. One near the center of the lot and the second uh towards the eastern side of the lot. There are three storm water facilities uh to be constructed on this particular lot. two infiltration basins towards the southern side adjacent to uh the right ofway and
a bofiltration basin towards the middle of the lot uh behind the building. Uh this is the master plan for the first site uh showing the building with the parking up front and the uh semi-truck docking parking in the rear with the
accesses and the ponding uh shown as well. uh and this is the phase one that basically shows the pad for the building along with grading and uh the storm water uh facilities. The second lot or the eastern lot is
again approximately 8 acres. Uh this shows a 53,000 square foot building uh off street parking in the front again similar to the first one uh with 19 stalls. Uh there is again semi-truck docking and parking in the rear uh which accounts for 13 stalls.
drive aisles are on both the western east side of the building leading back to that docking/ semi-truck parking area. Uh similar to the first one again alternate use of the building not identified so the parking counts may need to be adjusted again similar to the
first site. Uh two accesses are for this uh lot as well. One near the west side and one near the east side of the lot. And two storm water facilities will be constructed on this lot. uh infiltration basin towards the southern side and that
uh bofiltration basin towards the middle of the lot uh behind the building. Again, this is a uh picture of the master plan for the uh second eastern lot uh showing the building parking access and the uh
storm water facilities. And then this is again the phase one plan that talks through the grading storm water plan and uh building pad. As far as zoning is concerned, um currently the parcel is splitzoned as we
previously discussed with the western 553 ft being zoned mixeduse commercial industrial and the eastern 765 ft zone industrial. Um we went through the zoning piece already or the reszoning uh the minimum
and required setback and lot coverage requirements and this is specifically for the industrial provided that again this gets reszoned as such a front yard setback of 50 ft sideyard of 25 rear yard of 25 maximum lock coverage and
that is building coverages uh is 35%. uh the proposed buildings as shown in your packet um uh would exceed those minimum setbacks and the lot coverage would be below that uh 35% threshold.
Uh depending on ultimate uses of the property. Um there may need to be conditional use permits that be uh required. um if and when it gets to that point that would come back through this planning commission for review um and a
uh determination on that use. So uh building elevations uh were not prepared as part of this package as again the end user has not been identified and ultimate design of the building could likely impact what that building would look like.
Um do want to mention that section 10517B3 uh does state the exterior walls of buildings be constructed of one or more of uh the following materials uh and must receive approval of the city. Uh that would be one brick, two stone,
three concrete masonry block. Um alternate materials uh can be utilized uh per code. uh alternate alternate exterior surface materials of pre-engineered metal may be substituted in amount not to exceed 50% of the
exterior wall surface area of each building and pre-engineered metal shall only be installed on the upper half of the building. Uh so the the new buildings would have to conform to these exterior requirements. As far as landscaping, there's a
landscaping plan included within your packet. Uh this was reviewed by the natural resources specialist for the city. Uh the plan will have to be revised to remove Lynen autumn blaze maple and Sierra Sienna Glenn Maple trees uh from that planting schedule. Um
appropriate substitutes uh include northern catalpa swap white oak and London plain tree. Uh the plan does not identify any trees that might be removed due to on-site construction. Uh the natural resource specialist has uh
recommended that a tree preservation plan be submitted and approved prior to commencing work on site engineering. The engineering department has reviewed the site plan and provided comments to the applicant. Uh they're currently working through uh those comments. A lot of it deals with um
easements uh utility work, things like that. Um so they're actively working through that. Um, approval of the site plan should be contingent upon satisfaction of those engineering comments. The action requested this evening is to
approve the site plan for phase one subject to the following conditions. Uh, the reasonzoning of the western 553 ft of the property from mixed use commercial industrial to industrial. Two, satisfaction of all engineering comments related to grading and utilities. Three, platting of the
property into two buildable lots. for submitt and approval of a tree preservation plan. >> All right. Thank you, Tony. Uh with us tonight as representatives, I think it's Miss Hulan and and uh Kevin.
>> Thank you for having us. >> You're welcome. Anything to add to the staff report or do you have your own uh report to give? We we do not have a presentation to give but here to answer any questions. Um in reviewing and thank you so much for that great presentation and reviewing what
you put together. Um one thing I want to note is what we did was prepare a site plan and all of the base work to basically create a target for how much developable building we could create on the site. Um we've had some users interested in developing a larger single
building on it. We've had people interested in developing a few smaller buildings kind of owner user style buildings. So, what we represented here is what we thought reasonably fit, bearing in mind not needing to have variances, setbacks, things like that to consider, hey, what could a larger and a
midsize building look like? Knowing that from a brokerage standpoint, that's been the interest we've gotten so far. Um, representing the owner here today, we're just wanting to convert and be able to do this site work to get it pad ready because at this point, the market is that we can't really represent and sell
these sites without getting it there, being ready for folks to get ready and go through this project. You very well might see me back then in a few months with a pro with a project related to one of these purchasers. Another company we own is representing these sites from a brokerage standpoint. Our brokers are
very involved in this community. We love these South Suburbs. We love Farmington. Um so we have a lot of those styles of users um in hand that we've just been working with. So you might see us come back and I'd be happy to answer some questions on the kinds of folks who've been interested, but we do not have a a purchasing party now. what I need to do
is do the work to get prepared to uh be able to sell that to them. Um the only other thing I wanted to note in the presentation, um and this might be something that we just expected to go through specific to a project is every user we've talked to so far has wanted a pre-cast building. I just want to note
that that wasn't in the list of materials accepted, but likely something you guys do accept in a variance in some form or another. Um, so I do know that folks have been wanting to build nicer buildings, um, owner user style buildings, some multi-tenant industrial style buildings, um, so far.
>> All right. Thank you. You must have seen my list of questions because you answered most of them. >> Oh, good. I >> I do have a question though and I think you answered it, but can you just explain to the commission and also the residents that are watching what is your role specifically? >> Yeah, this project. So Onyx Strategic
Partners, we're a developer and a general contractor on this project. We're representing the private family who owns this site. So they've hired us. We're the developer on the project. Um working through all of this with you, but also overseeing architects, engineers, and at the end of the day,
most likely our trade partners in the fields. This, as you can see, if you look at the site plan, will be an import site. Um so we'll be bringing some soils in, reworking some soils, obviously doing that storm water work, landscape work, things like that. Um, so you'll likely see me all the way through construction execution here as well. Um,
getting those sites ready and, you know, either handing it off to someone who's going to develop it themselves through it or or seeing you through the next phase. >> Okay. And we'll have future questions or I will at least when we get back. But we'll start then um discussion item. But but Barb, you're close. You got any
questions or comments? None. Okay. We'll start then with Commissioner Ellis. >> So you're um marketing the property. Yes, ma'am. A separate company called Obsidian Group, but they are my business partners are representing the sites uh for the owner from a brokerage
standpoint. Um but at this point, you know, just kind of marketing it as a potential for this until we get through this process. >> And you've had interest from users. >> Yes. Yes, ma'am. We've got had interest from some owner users and some folks who have been developing in the broader region for consideration for another uh
project similar to what they've been doing in adjacent cities. >> Okay. And so in in terms of the site plan and getting everything getting your pad ready, all that sort of thing, what's the timing on that? Are you waiting until you have someone lined up? No. >> We'd like to move through that expeditiously if expeditiously if
possible. Um so most likely, you know, work through um we've talked about an integrated permit process, satisfying any concerns the city may have, and landing on the scope they'd like for pad ready. >> So you'd have all the grading utilities, all those issues. You'd have the tree preservation plan. All of those.
>> Yes, that'd be required, I believe, to get through that. I want to note the utilities right now are in the streets. We weren't planning to necessarily bring them in. >> That's what it looks like. And you and you still have to bring in storm water, sewer. >> We will bring in we'll have to do storm water. We'll be putting in the systems and connecting that generally, right? Um
but bringing in water service, um further utilities from the street because the specific projects may want it in a specific location, etc. We'll leave that for that. >> We'll wait until the And that may or may not be you doing it. >> Correct. Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. Um,
those are my questions right now. Thanks, >> Commissioner Rutherford. >> I think you've all done a very nice job of explaining everything. Um, I do have one question maybe for Tony. Um, I am no natural resources specialist,
nor am I an arborist. Um, I love me some autumn blaze maple and some of the other trees on there that are very recognizable and I don't recognize anything we're replacing them with. I assume that's partially due to the >> disease and things >> disease and diversifying our our tree
stockings. >> Exactly what it is. >> Very good. >> That's all I >> All of us planted them on blaze maples and if they ever get a disease and they're all gonna be gone, too. So, anything else, Gary? Commissioner Berg, >> Gary stole my tree question, so I'm going to skip that one. Um Tony, the
question I had about the site plan is around the access to 208, >> noting that there you mentioned there are going to be two access points 28th. Any access to pilot knob planned at this point? >> No. >> No. any access to that's a county road.
So, it would require um access approval through the county um as part of a plat that will have to go through uh their plat commission. >> And as of right now, no, there's no plan to tie into piling up. >> Okay. Um so then that's great. The other
question, two access roads, could that be changed in the future? Say to your point, if we ended up with more than the two buildings, is two access points going to be enough? um depending on what happens with the site. >> Thank you so much for asking that
question. If you know in some scenario where say we had multiple 35,000 foot owner user which is kind of a target size we see often you could foresee us coming back and asking for the appropriate curb cuts um just to make sure you know we have enough entrances
to get folks onto their sites, things like that. Right now we don't foresee you know more than two two owners you know buying these sites in the future. And I want to note, we've been guiding anyone interested in the sites that the city doesn't really support exploring a cut onto um the adjacent county road as
well. That doesn't mean that someone who buys it in the future doesn't come back in their own right doing the thing, but we've been guiding all uh interested parties that that's not really an option. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. No, that's great. Just knowing the traffic on that road, I was curious what the plan was there. So, okay. Yeah. No,
I I like the plan here. I uh I definitely think I'd be in favor of it. Thank you. Kevin, I got to ask you a question, man. >> All right, I'm here for you. >> I noticed there's a lot of ponding and in infiltration for it. I'm just I know
that's a wetter area. I think there's the a branch just to the north of the property, right? >> Correct. Yep. >> Why so many? I mean, can they be consolidated or don't you want to consolidate them? >> Yeah. So, trying to take advantage a little bit on the south side. Um, as you're aware with loading docks, there's a 4ft grade differential usually on the
back side where the trucks park. Um, so we're taking advantage of the grade kind of from the 208 on the south is higher and then kind of stepping down towards the um, drainage to the north where the flood plane and kind of the wetlands are on the very north side of the site. Um, one of the challenges we ran into infiltration is usually the best way to
get storm water management or or to meet the storm water management requirements. Um, but there's high groundwater table at the site. So, we tried to get a lot of the site to drain south to the three infiltration basins that you see on the south side of the site to get as much of the good treatment as you can. And then,
um, unfortunately with the loading ducks and again with a grade differential, we took the water from the the loading dock area and drain those north to the filtration basins then which again still provide treatment and are adequate to get the storm water management requirements met, but um they're just a slightly different system than the
infiltration basins. So >> yeah, I just and I know they're two lots, but you know, I mean, the two separate ponds in the back and all that. I just I knew we had a reason for an engineer here for you, so thank you. >> No, no, no problem. >> The other questions might be for you, Jesse. Um, and you and if the answer is
you can't say, that's fine, too. But you talked about the owners. Can you disclose who owns the property? Um, you know, I can disclose the LLC listed in in what we've submitted today, which I think pretty much you can look up and see listed parties, but it's a private
family that purchased it. Um, initially intending to develop it for a separate business they owned. Um, due to the state of the broader federal government, a number of the incentives they intended to use just really went away. Um, so they watched it more broadly to see if some would come back incentivizing that development. I mean, they're very
pleased, honestly, working with the city of Farmington. We've had an exceptional process working with the planning team here. Everyone was very positive having purchased the site um but just not being ready to move forward with the development now with those incentives gone. So instead now they do want us to go through reszoning it um towards that
industrial use. Um and since we own a brokerage, we've been able to note that as well. There's a number of other folks who'd like to come build a building, develop a project here in Farmington. So we'd like to free the site up for those users. >> Okay. I just was talking to Tony earlier and in another career I actually I
talked to the probably a couple previous property owners there and about the property for a different use but okay um and you answer what your role is um and this is unique because you're making them ready
um what do you anticipate the uses being I mean yeah you hear Tony said >> you may come back to a future commission and ask for a conditional use permit And actually I would just note that'd likely be an enduser right as a developer builder. Sometimes you know whomever purchases the site might have
us go through this process for them you know lead it from a development and build perspective. Um but they would come to you for conditional use permit then for whatever their intended use was if it needed additional review and approval. Um so the kinds of folks that have been interested are you know more industrial style users who want an owner
user style building. Um, so building that 35,000 square foot, maybe some of that's office, maybe some of that's professional services internal, um, but also some working component to that building as well. And we've also had folks who've been developing other industrial buildings nearby, um, that
are targeting, you know, smaller users, kind of where America goes to work, um, buildings like that. And so they've been looking at it as well for their concepts and and you can imagine because they've been doing it all around the Twin Cities here. Um, so it's folks that are are looking at purchasing other properties
in in Farmington. So, a lot of, you know, the people already investing here and then folks who've been trying to grow their business and are seeing it as a great opportunity to to get a headquarters perhaps in the area. >> Okay. And is, and I could ask Lisa this because I know she's familiar with it.
Is this a common process nowadays? >> Yeah. To get a site pad ready? Yeah. Especially because for an owner, for a lot of these users interested in a site, if it's not what they call pad, you know, we're saying pad ready, but for them shovel ready, they can't move forward. So, they're looking at a lot of them, I need to get this done through a
period of time and get it built. And this extra entitlement process they see as risk and something they don't know how to manage. Um, where for this private family or for me, this is what I do for a living. Um, we get it through a process, get it entitled and clear for them, get it done as far as the major work on the site. um which for this is a
decent import and rework site so it's a decent job but then be able to sell it for a market rate to a user who can step right in and move through a process and and not need all that extra expertise >> agree Lisa >> I do and so just and you had Jesse you had said you don't have anybody no one's
under contract but typically that would be conditions precedented in a contract right but you don't have any purchasers you've talking to people but you're not under contract >> correct and a number of them are interested where they basically said they'd like to go under contract once we've gone through Right. Once you've gotten it all entitled, >> we don't want to misrepresent anything
as well while this is the appropriate next step to ensure we're in alignment with the city and and planning commission. >> Thank you, Lisa. Tony, can you remind the commission the last piece of property that we had a something similar like this >> as far as we've done it as a a site ready? >> Yeah.
>> Um >> it's been few and far between. >> Typically, we've had a end user who is >> Yeah. >> goes through that process. >> Yeah. Um, but I have heard this happen in other communities. It just hasn't necessarily occurred here.
>> And I'm fine with it. It's just it's um something that that I haven't personally seen if I at least that I can remember seeing for a while at all, maybe ever. So that's why I got the questions. And some of you might think, well, that, you know, pretty simple questions, but that
just because I knew I could have just asked Lisa before the meeting, but I didn't. So she's into that. So I really don't have any problem with it. I just my you're sticking your neck out a little bit, I'd say, which is is your business. I'm fine with that. It's just my
question would be is what if you come back to a future commission for a CUP and they say not here. This isn't something we anticipate there. The city staff says that to you first. That's that's who's going to say it to you first, not the commission. What do you do then? You go to another buyer.
>> Yeah, absolutely, sir. So I mean we you know the market we look at this as market feedback. So we know there's a gap to get this to being something we can represent and sell and that industrial sites sell for X you know per acre per square foot of developable um
site. So we know that and we're working against that data to know that it's a good choice to move through this process to then be able to sell it to an end user who would yes then have the risk to go through that process with you. Okay. Um but for us, we're just banking on um and and making decisions from that data
level and and representing sites around as well. >> Yeah, it's a good community and and it's a good commission. So I I don't anticipate anything. I just got to ask you that because >> Yeah, I mean it's unique to me. Um and
Tony, you listed the um require building requirements and you agree to all those, right? I heard something about tip ups. So, but you're okay with what the building requirements and I go back, this goes back 25 years where we had some long discussions with some of the
uh uh owners in there about why they had to do this and all that, but we we pretty much hung on to the building requirements in the industrial park. You're okay with those >> generally? And I do want to also note that a lot of these users and being a general contractor myself right now um
pre-cast concrete buildings are great energy efficient often very attractive. We can often meet your design requirements with additional detailing things like that. So a lot of these owner users and what we're doing in surrounding cities are pre-cast and industrial because it's high quality and
actually you know meets a developable budget. So I expect you might see that and what we've been representing with the former user for example was with additional detailing glass on the corner um looking at other you know details to ornament the building. I don't know if you want to
>> and I do want to mention that the the concrete does include placed uh in place tilt up and pre-cast. >> Okay, great. So then I don't have any issues with your requirements. Yeah, no no issues with that. >> No, you mentioned it and I go okay, maybe she's taking >> No, as long as that's included um we're
good. Yep. And I would expect any user would be working in and around that. Um, in fact, I find you flexible and that you allow some metal building as a component of the building. >> We're approving if we do, we're approving the site plan with you here, not somebody else. That's why I'm asking you these questions because you're going to be the one responsible. And the next
question I was going to ask is, would you agree if this was approved, you would you agree to the four contingencies that are listed in the staff report? >> Um, yes. I just want to note that the platting would happen with the concurrent projects because right now we don't want to draw a sight line between the two sites. Just noting what if
someone wants to build a 100,000 square foot building and that leaves us with a 10,000 foot pad. You would see us then come you know us or an end user come draw that line in the >> move the property line I >> Yes. So we will of course plat at the appropriate time but we don't intend to right now if that's acceptable.
>> Yeah. The platting is typically needed prior to actual building of the building. Okay. As long as that's clear. I just want to make sure and you agree that >> that's why I always like to answer back to >> Okay. But you do agree to the four continues that explanation. >> Yes, sir. Yes. >> All right. Very good.
>> Anything else from the commission? Any other questions? Any other comments? >> Anything else from the applicant? >> Um, no. I mean, in relative to the engineering comments, is there anything we wanted to respond to? I think in advance we reviewed them and thought they were all, you know, typical questions, um, appropriate answers that
we could give. Um, so we appreciate And I actually just want to voice a note of gratitude working with the staff in the city and this planning commission process has been exceptional and we really respect this process and are are glad to be here presenting this to you. >> All right. So then in front of the
commission then is a site plan for phase one with the four conditions which the applicant agreed to. Um Tony, I'm going to reference this as what what parcel? Uh
>> what would you what would you like to reference it as? >> Um as the the uh P one. >> Okay. The P that Tonyy's going not going to read to us. >> Right. >> All right. P ID number. All right. That's in front of the commission. Is there a motion? >> Motion. >> We have a motion. Is there a second?
>> Second. >> Motion a second. And anymore.