Good evening. I'd like to call the July 23rd, 2026 Planning Commission meeting to order and ask you to stand and uh recite with us the pledge of >> allegiance. liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you so much.
>> Going to ask uh Ms. Elisten to take the role for us tonight, please. >> Tinsley >> here. Travis >> here. >> Palooa >> here. >> Zimmer >> here. >> Here. >> Thank you so much. Uh next item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes.
Do we have any changes to the June 25th planning commission minutes or the planning commission work session minutes? Seeing none, we'll let those stand. Uh, next on the agenda, item four, uh, Miss Jensen, do we have any announcements for
tonight? >> Uh, only announcement, Chair Zimmer, is that you do have a handout in front of you. This is an email that was received by staff in regard to the Palmer Crossing uh, plat that is on uh, tonight's agenda. Okay, I think we received an email as well as that
handout. So, thank you so much. Um, we now will have uh we have a series of public hearings here. There are four items. If you do wish to speak on a public hearing, you can sign up at the back of the room um or let us know uh that you'd still like to speak.
We don't have that many people here. Otherwise, we'll limit it to two minutes per person, but it looks like we're going to be okay. So, um, the first item is the amendments, uh, public hearing to consider amendments to title 10, uh, subdivisions and title 11 zoning of the
city code. And Mr. L is here from the planning company to present. >> You madam chair, members of the planning commission, Daniel L with the planning company. I'm a planning consultant working with the city of Lakeville, assisting city staff on this update of the zoning ordinance and subdivision
ordinance. Uh this is the 26th year that the city has done this annually since the ordinance was completely rewritten in 2000. And basically this is to ensure that the documents that govern land use within the city are up to date and current. Uh we also clarify any existing
provisions if there's question or confusion and then reflect changes made by uh the legislature as part of the most recent session. Um so I'll just quickly kind of highlight a number of these changes. There's 20 pages of ordinance text included in your packet,
but these are kind of the bigger topics. So, non-conforming lots or lots that don't meet the minimum requirements of lot area or lot width within uh the respective zoning district. Uh there's provisions dealing with that. There's a requirement that says if you own two adjacent lots that are non-conforming,
they have to be combined as one. Uh that somewhat disregards the right of a lot of record to have uh reasonable use. Um so under the changes lots with access to sanitary sewer if they meet the 66% of
the minimum requirements for lot area or lot width then they can proceed with a building permit otherwise variance would be necessary to proceed. Um and then lots without sanitary sewer. Uh there was some language that was conflicting within the ordinance regarding the minimum lot size to proceed which
conflicted with the non-conforming provision. So, we've simplified that to require minimum 1 acre compliance with setbacks and the ability to install a septic system to provide sewer service for those properties. Um, number of years ago, the city implemented
regulations for decks, specifically those that are more than 30 inches above grade uh in order to review how setback standards are applied to those. Uh the intent was to provide opportunity for deck while ensuring privacy to the side
and to the rear. However, as lot sizes have gotten smaller, suddenly those rear yards are smaller and uh the ability to accommodate a deck has been uh compromised under the principal building setback. So the setback is proposed to be reduced to 10 feet uh which still
leaves some reasonable yard and area for drainage and imper uh pvious surface. A second change was made. Uh we noticed in the DNR's model ordinance regulating shoreland areas, there's provisions that if there's a house that was built before 1971,
uh you can add a deck to it without variance u provided it meets certain criteria u regarding distance to the ordinary high water mark etc. Uh so this would allow uh some additions to existing homes without the need to come through for a variance process. uh off-
streetet parking. Uh just some minor changes to expand upon the requirements for motor fuel facilities because obviously uh there are a number of activities going on with those types of land uses beyond just pumping gas. And then also addressing uh auto repair uses
in 2003. The ordinance was amended to change the standard uh but the previous standard disappeared so it made all those existing uses non-conforming. So we wanted to eliminate that oversight. Uh last year the city put in place limits on the maximum number of parking
spaces that could be constructed. That proved problematic to implement uh for a number of commercial developments. So uh this was removed uh from the zoning ordinance or proposed to be. And then also eliminating the requirement for a garage stall uh when you have a
generational dwelling unit within an existing home. Uh essentially they're still required to have an off- streetet parking space, but it doesn't necessarily need to be a garage to encourage uh and provide more flexibility for that type of arrangement. Signs. Uh just some minor changes here.
Again, uh clarifying provisions related to maximum signage for multiple tenant buildings. Uh clarifying provisions related to when there's a new development, the signs that are allowed to be put up, when they're allowed to be put up, and how long they can stay. Uh and then also for religious facilities,
there are provisions allowing for dynamic display signs. Uh those were limited uh in residential districts based on lot area uh to basically allow for that that lot area standard is being removed, but there still are setback standards that keep the sign away from
adjacent homes and operational requirements that ensure it doesn't become a nuisance either for traffic or for adjacent properties. Uh animals uh city made allowance a number of years ago to allow keeping of chickens on residential properties. Uh the city
council had discussed this and asked the planning commission to review. Uh the recommendations coming forward tonight include increasing the number of allowed chickens for property to six. Um one of the complaints that the city primarily gets is questions as to whether there is a permit. Uh that probably comes up
because someone's chicken ran into the yard. So, uh, we're going to require that the chicken be kept within the coupe or run explicitly. Uh, the existing ordinance requires that the coupe be constructed of wood. U, there's obviously other weather resistant
materials that would be appropriate and so that list is expanded and then provision for some limited sale of eggs from the property. Um also as the planning commission was looking at this matter um the keeping of bees on residential properties was also amended
into the zoning ordinance to allow by conditional use permit which required property owner to come to the planning commission with their proposal and then receive approval of the city council uh to expedite that process without changing any of the standards that apply. Uh that would now be a
administrative review going forward with this amendment. There are a number of changes to the zoning districts within the city as to the allowed uses within those districts. Um, city staff noted that generational housing, the ability to have a second
dwelling unit uh within a existing single family home wasn't allowed in the downtown area, but it's allowed in every other residential single family zoning district. So, uh adding that to this uh zoning district. um making areas that are planned for future multiple family
development in downtown Lakeville um where there is an existing single family home. Basically allowing that to continue as it is until the property owners uh elect to sell for redevelopment of the site so that they're not hampered in terms of any expansion, remodeling, or reuse of the
property. Making allowances for convenience food uses within the M2 district to have drive-throughs and related signage. uh making retail sales within the O district of which there are very few sites within the city but uh currently that's by conditional use permit. This again would expedite that
process for the business owner to allow it by administrative permit and then making allowance for motor fuel facilities or convenience fuel uh within the I1 district. So those industrial areas south of County Road 70 uh that are developing with the large warehouse
uses is this is certainly complementaryary to those activities. The big topic that the planning commission uh reviewed as part of this zoning ordinance update was uh regulation of data centers. Uh obviously this is gaining a lot of attention both
in Minnesota and nationwide. Um, so the approach was to look at how uh Lakeville currently regulates this and then address how it should be regulated going forward. Uh, important to note that there aren't currently any applications in front of the city. It's always best
from a regulatory standpoint if you anticipate the use rather than react to one so that you're better prepared to address this going forward. Um, so under the current zoning ordinance, uh, data centers are a permitted use, which means they're allowed subject to the general
performance standards of the zoning ordinance. Uh, there's a site and building plan review process. Uh, but provided the development meets all the requirements in the zoning ordinance and the building code, the expectation is that it is approved uh, with little discretion on the part of the city to
review uh, potential impacts. So the most significant change here is that the data centers going forward would be uh specifically allowed as a conditional use uh which involves again the process of coming forward to the planning commission having the application
reviewed based on criteria established in the zoning ordinance to ensure that it's consistent with the city's comprehensive plan compatible with surrounding land uses and doesn't cause any negative impacts to city infrastructure or service capacity. So there is a bit more discretion at this
level. There still is the expectation if the developer proves and demonstrates that they meet those requirements that they would receive approval, but this at least allows the city a little more detailed investigation. It also allows a public process through the planning commission public hearing uh that is
held as part of that review process. Important to note also is uh currently the zoning ordinance allows data centers. What we're doing with this amendment is defining data centers as a single building that has this operation and data center campuses which would be
a multiple building the large scale type facilities that are garnering most of the attention. The way the zoning ordinance is going to be set up going forward is that data centers would be allowed use. Data centers will not be data center campuses will not be listed in any specific zoning district.
Therefore, it's prohibited. So, uh, we're therefore limiting the scale of potential data centers that could locate in Lakeville at this time through that approach. Um, so the information that if someone wants to make an application for u data center, uh, we're requiring some
additional information be provided. They need to do an energy consumption study that evaluates the, uh, facilities that would need to be constructed in relation to the data center that are within the city's regulation. and I'll touch more on that in a moment. A water use study
demonstrating uh how much water the facility will require, the ability of the city's infrastructure to accommodate it, and consistency with the city's adopted plans, including the water system plan. Noise is a significant concern with regards to data centers. Uh
so a specific noise study would be required evaluating existing noise levels. Um estimating noise generated by the facility. Once the facility if it's approved is fully operational then a second study is done to check that
initial estimate and make sure that it is within allowed levels. uh and then also the ability for the city to go back at least once a year and do compliance checks if there are concerns that circumstances have changed.
The other item related to the uh conditional use and the definition of the data centers is where they would be allowed to be located. So currently they're allowed in the office park zoning district, the general industrial district, and the limited I1 industrial district. Uh the proposed change would
be that they would only be allowed in the I1 district, which tends to be the larger scale properties and larger buildings, more on the westerly side of the County Road 70 corridor on the east side of I35. Um, but in addition to that, we've put in place a 500 foot
setback from County Road 70 to try and step those further away and make them less evident. Uh, and also move them away from the uses on the north side of 70th Street, which includes the high school and residential uses of varying types. Also, the same 500 foot setback
applies from the city's boundary along the south line. Um, that's not typically a requirement in a zoning ordinance because each city regulates their own uses independently. Um, but the concern here is that any data center use that would develop in Lakeville, potential
negative effects of that would spill over into the adjacent township and cause uh harm that's undesirable from uh both the city and the township standpoint. The other 500 foot setback requirement is obviously from any land
use that's guided by the comprehensive plan for residential uh zoned for residential use or if there's an existing residential use within that I1 district where the property hasn't been redeveloped that would also apply as well. Water use is a concern obviously when
it's used for cooling as part of these uh facilities. So the study that's required has to evaluate the impacts to the city's water sources including groundwater or surface water sources. Uh look at the existing infrastructure that's in place serving this property
that would be proposed. Uh and then also look at how the use of that water from the facility would impact the city's future needs for surrounding development and what's planned for services going forward and as part of the land use
plan. uh one of the means of limiting water use is requirement of air cooled or alternative cooling methods so that it's not dependent on a u water system. Uh one option is closed loop for example so that it's not using fresh water uh
but basically a recycling process. Noise is the other uh major concern that you read about or are become aware of with these proposed uses and it involves uh the cooling mechanisms as well as the use of generators on the site. So, uh
the proposed amendment would limit the ability to use a generator except only when there's a power outage. Uh we would also propose to expand the noise limits that are currently adopted as part of the zoning ordinance in reference to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
standards to include that second table uh on the lower end that addresses lower frequency or tones. Uh that is the most common complaint associated again with fans running or generators etc. again the uh compliance verification and then
just the way the ordinance is structured. If these if the operations cause this noise level to be exceeded for more than 10 minutes then it is in violation of the zoning ordinance and uh the city does have remedies available to it to pursue. Exterior lighting is regulated through
the zoning ordinance for all commercial and industrial uses, but these have been enhanced for data centers. Uh regarding the type of lighting that's used uh in terms of its intensity, uh a requirement for a 50% reduction in the use of nighttime lights, uh 50 foot setback
from any property line for a light fixture, and then the light is measured at 10 feet inside the property versus at the property line for most other uses. These standards really reflect the change in technology that's occurred since the existing lighting standards in
the general ordinance were adopted. Uh obviously when those were put in place, you didn't have LED lights as we do today. Uh so this may be something that eventually migrates into a more of a general standard going forward. The other uh item that comes up
frequently with data centers is electricity use. Uh for the most part, this is beyond the city's purview. Uh it's regulated at the state level by the public utilities commission and that would address anything concerning uh the capacity of the utility, any environmental effects from transmission
lines etc. Uh anything or the utility rates uh that would be uh caused by excessive use of the facility etc. Um basically the city has a very limited scope as to what it can review in terms of energy usage and that pertains to
transmission lines between that certain spectrum. uh uh defined by the zoning ordinance as an essential use and that again is done as part of a conditional use. So the intent of the energy use study that's required with the application is to demonstrate are any of
these facilities needed to serve this proposed development so that it can be evaluated at the same time. Then just some additional general standards that would apply to this use. Uh the exterior materials would be the same for uh principal and accessory
structures as applied to any other building within the uh I1 zoning district. There'd be extensive screening requirements and through the use of BMS, landscaping and fences with specified minimum height of 14 ft measured at um the nearest adjacent roadway and
property lines. And then finally, a decommissioning plan that would address how this facility could be closed down in the future, including a security uh that would be required to be posted and maintained so that uh the funds are always available to shut this down uh
when its useful life is expired. Then there's always some housekeeping items that go along with the zoning ordinance update. So, we've made some minor changes to drainage and utility easements, uh some various definitions. Uh there are exceptions in the uh zoning ordinance for certain structures to be
exempt from building heights. Those the way they are referenced was a bit outdated. So uh those have been updated uh to reflect current terminology. uh buffer yard requirements, making sure that these lots have adequate depth to provide the landscaping that's required
along major roadways and some additional shoreland areas that needed to be added to the zoning ordinance after property was annexed from adjacent township. So, city staff uh has presented basically a summary here of the ordinance that's included in your packet in our memo from
July 17th, and we'd recommend approval of these amendments as presented. >> Thank you, M. appreciate that. Um, is this a public hearing and um, you could have signed up at the back of the
room, but is there anyone that wishes to speak on uh, the ordinance changes? Can you please come forward and then state your name and address and uh, we will address questions you have through staff at the end.
>> All right. Hello, I'm Charles Banks. My address is 201153 Hollister Lane. Uh I'm a member of the Lakeville Friends of the Environment and also in a new group that we've started, the Lakeville Green
Coalition. First, I want to um thank the city and the commission for bringing forth these changes in the ordinances for data centers. That's what I'm here about tonight. Um it's been a big concern for
our our groups. We feel these are a great starting point and appreciate the opportunity to voice our concerns. In my opinion, removing data centers from light industrial to its own category and the decommissioning plan requirement are the two strongest port parts of these
new ordinances. Data centers are as said are a real big buzzword these days. Um they do come in many sizes but the ones that we're most concerned with are what's called the hypers scale data centers.
Unfortunately, verifiable information on water and power use are is hard to come by. Uh we've done a lot of research and I'm sure and we've been stymied by it and I'm sure the city has as well. And uh
but specifically in the sections of this ordinance uh section 54D 23 and 4 all ask for qualified licensed engineer to prepare a plan on different requirements for energy, water, and sound. only sound
in this ordinance has any standards established. All the rest are um what we'd like to see is some kind of standards put in place for both water and energy use. Although now listening here, the state controls more of the
energy use. Water is a finite resource. Dakota County is supplied by the Jordan aquifer. This is a shared resource already under pressure due to rapid population growth in Dakota County. The
meta data center in Rosemount and a proposed track data centers in Farmington present another draw against this resource that is yet to be fully documented. Other additional data center projects are being proposed within Dakota County and are in a holding pattern awaiting
more information and regulatory concerns. Water is not a renewable resource. We must regulate our consumption for future generations. Do our children need water or data to live?
Energy consumption is another concern. Is there enough available power within easy access? Is there a need for a substation to be built? Or will there be alternative sources used such as wind and solar? And once in operation, will the amount of consumption of energy
cause an increase in bills for the residents? Many questions with no answers at this time. The Lakeville Green Coalition and I will continue to research hypers scale data centers and
share what we find with the city with the hope that the ordinances can be updated to relevant standards that restrict the energy, water, and waste allowed. I feel it is not Lakeville's role to have a hypers scale data center just because everyone else does. Rather,
we should be looking forward to the future and attract businesses that are working on what may be possible 10 to 20 years from now. Technology is always changing and I believe Lakeville should be a leader in trying to develop the
next generation of technologies that hopefully pollute less, use less energy and water and require less space. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Banks. Is there anyone else that wishes to speak on this issue?
>> Seeing none, I'd be ready to entertain a motion. Madam Chair, >> Commissioner Travis, >> seeing as that there's no one else coming forward to speak, I recommend closing the public hearing. >> Second. >> Have a motion and a second. All those in
favor, please signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. The public hearing is now closed. Uh members of the commission, we will ask uh try to stump Mr. Lick if you have questions for him.
Commissioner Trafist is ready. >> Yes, I I I did have one, Mr. L. Um, I thought that the the uh the tests and the requirements in the data center center section were excellent. I thought they were, you know, added as a result of our working session. It's great to
see requirements for testing of water and for power and for noise. Um, I think that's important for transparency as these projects come forward. And one other thing that I think might be helpful in in the interest of
transparency would be an economic impact statement. How many jobs, average pay, range of pay? Um I I think this whole project is is an indication of learning from other communities and some of the things that have gone wrong in
communities like Rosemont, Farmington. And I think that kind of information available to the public from the beginning of the project would be would be useful, madam chair. So the city could certainly include a criteria such as that or
request information regarding that. But if you look at the criteria in the zoning ordinance, it's regulating land use uh and dealing with the type of land use guided by the comprehensive plan, compatibility with surrounding uses,
impacts to infrastructure. So that those characteristics of the business are kind of separate from a uh zoning decision versus an economic development decision. So if a business such as that is coming in and asking for financial assistance,
certainly the city asks for that to show the economic benefit of that type of activity, but from a zoning standpoint, that would be a separate matter. But it is good information to have. >> Fair enough. Thank you, Commissioner Kuza.
>> Just wanted to thank Mr. Lick once again for his fantastic work on these annual updates. Um, kind of our role as the planning commission and city staff is to create the best possible ordinances for the city council with the information we
have at a time. Um, and we do this annually, so things get updated. We have chickens in here. Um, I was around when we first allowed chickens. We revisited uh a few times looking to see if we need to
make changes. I'm sure we will revisit data centers again. Um I've been on the planning commission for a dozen years. There is not a ordinance update that does not update signs. Um there's always something new with signs for businesses. And so these, you know, this is really
kind of a city ordinances are living document. You respond to changes. you know, we're not doing oneoff exceptions for someone. If city staff notice that there's a recurring theme, um you know, new building materials, uh different
types of businesses coming in, we will update our ordinances to reflect that so that everyone kind of benefits from the same rules. I really appreciate uh this city and you know being proactive about updating our ordinances and that we have
the flexibility to make the best possible rules on land use for our city without you know the state coming in and telling us this is what you have to do or the Met Council dictating to us. Um so Mr. Lick once
again fantastic work. Thank you and city staff for putting this together and I will be supportive of these ordinance changes. Madam chair, may I follow up on Commissioner Kuz's comments? >> Yes, please. >> We're kind of at the forefront of trying
to regulate data centers at this point. As was referenced, these are popping up everywhere. Every city's trying to respond to it. The the question is at what level does it need to be regulated at this jurisdiction or should it be a state and everyone's trying to put
forward regulations based on the information that's available today. So yes, this is going to be revisited in the future uh as more information becomes available and different approaches are identified. So this is a first step to better regulate this potential land use within Lakeville uh
than is currently in place today as permitted uses. I also wanted to quickly just address the comment from the gentleman during the public hearing regarding the water usage. Um so water usage is handled under an appropriation permit from the department of natural
resources like those allocated a certain amount of water. City determines how to use that water as part of its comprehensive plan which is the umbrella document that guides all future development within the city. That document includes a forecast of future
land use that's going to develop in certain areas of the city. Upon that land use plan, then there's an engineering plan that's done called a system statement that estimates the water usage for each of these land use categories generally. Once you have
those estimates, then you can design the size of pipes that are going to be extended throughout the entire city as development progresses. So, while we don't have specific criteria in here saying you can only use this much water, that's inherent in the system plan and
in the comprehensive plan and the criteria that are in the zoning ordinance that say you must demonstrate that this use can be accommodated within the city's plan service capacity. So if something comes in and shows that it's going to need way more water than either
is allocated for an the city overall or for an individual area of the city served by a trunk water line or a well uh or it would take up too much water and not leave water resources available for the other land uses that are uh forecast to occur then that would be the
basis for the city to condition a smaller facility deny a facility from going in etc. So there are standards by which the city would evaluate each of these except for the energy usage which again is somewhat beyond our purview at
this level. Um but it is it's not explicitly stated within the ordinance but there is the backing for these standards throughout the city's uh official controls on land use. >> Once again thank you Mr. for your expertise and uh the history lesson uh
from Pam Commissioner Kuza. I would like to say good graphics that was very helpful and interesting and the two big topics data centers we did talk about chickens a lot um and on page eight and I had asked you about this we're taking
out some specific um language regarding where the chicken coupe must go but it's because it's implicit with how things are written. Is that correct? Can you >> correct elucidate? >> So there's a statement in there saying the coupe can't be closer to another
house than the house on which the coupe is located. But the setback requirements that are in place for the coupe and the run ensure that is the case that it's within basically the building envelope. The setbacks for the chicken coupe are actually more restrictive than the building setbacks. So
>> thank you so much. That does sum up the uh excitement of serving on planning commission. everything from data centers to chicken coops. So, do we have any other comments? >> Madam Chair, >> since there's no other no other
comments, I'd like to make a motion to approve the zoning ordinance amendments. So, motion to recommend to city council approval of the ordinance amendments to title 10 subdivisions and title 11 zoning of the city code.
>> Second. We have a motion and a second. Uh, Miss Escen, would you please take the role? >> Kinsley, >> I. >> Travis, >> I >> I >> And so it passes. Thank you so much, Mr.
L. Appreciate your time. Uh the second public hearing on the agenda, second item on the agenda is a conditional use permit to allow an accessory building square footage to exceed uh 1,250 square ft at 200010
Hamburg Avenue. Uh, as I understand it, um, yes, this is one, uh, is this Rod just with, uh, Pinnacle Family Homes. >> Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Okay. Excellent. Could have a little bit
from you. Then we will have a little bit from the uh, planner on this issue. Perfect. >> Before we have the public hearing. >> Okay. Um, Rod Just I'm with Pinnacle Family Homes. We are currently in the process in for a building permit um on
200010 Hamburg Avenue. Um the current homeowner there is asking us to um tear down his current home and then to build him a new home on the property. He currently has 10 acres property and um there's a larger out building on that
property some years ago. I believe the zoning was changed which made his building probably now wouldn't be passed on a normal lot. But he does have a 10acre parcel that is staying intact. So we're just asking for a conditional use to keep his out building intact.
>> Great. Thank you so much. Questions for you. >> So I'll be here. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Miss Jensen. You have to top Mr. Lic now. You know, >> I'll give it a shot. Uh, as we've said,
this is a conditional use permit public hearing for uh, accessory storage space at property 200010 Hamburg Avenue. Uh, just to give you a sense of where that is, this is the parcel here. It is
at the southeast corner of 200th Street and Hamburg. uh a number of years ago, certainly at the time the structure was built, uh best I could tell, the property was the equivalent of about an RS2 zoning. Um district standards have
changed much since the early 1980s when that was constructed. Um I did not find any uh evidence of a a cup, which tells me it likely was not needed at that time. The property may not have even been within the MUSA. Um and so it
likely allowed these larger structures. Um since that time, the the property uh with the last comp plan, last comp plan or two uh has been reszoned. It's now an RST2 district. Uh for comparison, this is a 10acre parcel. RST2 district would
allow a minimum lot size of between 7500 square feet and 9520 square feet for a corner lot. So obviously this parcel is much larger uh that than that district would allow. So that is the reason for the smaller um maximum uh accessory
structure sizes um that current homeowner as Mr. Jess said is planning to demolish the existing home on the site and reconstruct a single family home. I will it's a little tough to tell. um Hamburg here, 200th. This is
the existing structure. You can see where the existing home is. Um that will be removed, a new home constructed in in roughly the same area. Um but due to um the existing structure on the site, it
technically will be over that 1,250 square feet between the attached garage and the detached structure. Um, so that's the need for the cup. Uh, commissioners may recall at our last work session, we did potentially talk about making amendments to our accessory
structure ordinance. However, once staff started looking into it, we realized it was going to be a lot more complex and we didn't want to just uh quick put something together. So, uh I would guess in the future at some point we will see amendments to this, but for now uh the
cup is required uh for the attached garage to be constructed at this home. So staff does recommend approval of the cup with the four stipulations that are listed in your staff report and adoption of the findings of fact included as well. And I'll stand for any questions you may have.
>> Thank you so much. This is a public hearing and uh is there anyone who wishes to to speak um on this issue. >> And seeing no one, >> Madam Chair, >> Commission Travis, >> seeing as no one is coming forward to
speak, I make a motion to close the public hearing. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed? The public hearing is now closed. Uh commissioners, we can ask questions of
Mr. Just or Miss Jensen. Doesn't appear to have any questions. Um, Miss Eslson, she's new, so give me a break. Miss Escen, will you please uh call the role? Oh, wait. We need a motion. We
need a motion. Madam Chair, motion to recommend to city council approval for the conditional use permit to allow accessory structures greater than, 1250 ft square feet in the RS2 single family residential district
located at 20010 Hamburg Avenue subject to the four stipulations in the planning report dated July 16, 2026 and the findings of fact. >> Second. Now that we have a motion and a second, Miss Esson, will you take the
role, please? >> Tinsley, >> I. >> Travis, >> I. >> Kuza, >> I >> thank you so much. Your uh motion has passed. Good luck as you build the new facility. And I drove by it and it's
really a big garage and the house isn't as big. So, more power to you. Uh the next item on the agenda is a interim use public hearing to consider
the application of Ken Pitcher for an interim use permit to allow a single family dwelling in the RH CBD highdensity residential district, the central business district. Um we're going to ask Mr. Ken Pitcher to
introduce the project. or maybe not. >> Madam Chair, it appears that our applicant is not present. Um, I would recommend that we still go ahead with this. It's a pretty straightforward request. Okay. On the applicant's part,
>> we will skip over Mr. Pitcher and go straight to Miss Jensen. All right. Good evening again, uh, commissioners. Uh, this is an interim use permit request for the property at 20975 Howland Avenue. Um, you may recall
Mr. Lick noted that one of the changes that was proposed within the ordinance amendment um, was to allow uh, interim use permit for single family homes within the RHCBD district. Um, Mr. Pitcher had approached staff um with his
property that you can see here highlighted and circled in the yellow. Uh interested in doing a a small addition to the home. Um would meet all setback requirements that were required. Uh but because the property had been reszoned with the last comp plan to be a
higher density downtown district from the uh lower density uh or mixed density that it was previously. Single family homes were no longer allowed as a use within that district. Staff recognized that uh these single family homes um are
not likely to go away anytime soon. Uh they may ultimately the areas may redevelop. Uh but in the meantime, we wanted to allow those uh existing homeowners to be able to invest in their home and and do uh improvements. Uh by doing this as an interim use permit, it
does um put a a stipulation on the approval that once that home is either no longer there, the property is redeveloped, it wouldn't be allowed to go back to being a single family use. It would have to comply with the ordinance requirements. So that is the request um
for Mr. P that Mr. Pitcher is making this evening to approve an IUP. Um this would allow him to do uh that building addition ultimately to his home. And just to give you a sense, these are the 15 properties where there are single
family homes that are zoned that are HCBD district. So it is a fairly small number of parcels within the downtown area uh that would be impacted by this. Um, so as I said, staff does recommend approval of the interim use permit with
the two stipulations listed in the staff report, uh, and adoption of the findings of fact that were included within the packet. And I'll stand for any questions you may have. >> Thank you so much. Uh, this is a public hearing.
Uh, is there anyone that wishes to speak on this issue? Seeing none, I think we're ready for a motion. >> Madam chair, seeing no one come forward, I move to close the public hearing. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I.
>> I opposed. Public hearing is now closed. Do we have any questions for our fine staff? I agree it's pretty straightforward and we're fixing it in the ordinance and have had discussion on it. So, um, we
could Entertain a motion. >> Madam chair, I make a motion to recommend to city council approval of an interim use permit for the single family home at 20975 Howland Avenue subject to the two stipulations in the planning
report dated July 16th, 2026 and the findings of fact. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Miss Escen, would you take the role, please? >> Tinsley, >> I. Travis, >> I >> I
>> I >> not that Mr. Pitcher is here, but his motion passes. Very good. Thank you so much. Uh the next item uh on the agenda 5D is a public hearing to consider the
application of the Paling Family uh Companies LLC for a preliminary plat of a 24 lot, one outlot single family subdivision located at 7880 202nd Street known to be known as Palmer Crossing.
As I understand it, uh Mr. Nick Paling from PFC Builders will be here to introduce the project. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Um, first off, my name is Nick Paling. I'm one of the owners of Paling Family Homes. I'm here with Jack,
who is my brother, and then Rick Osberg, who is the engineer doing the uh, preliminary plat as well as all the engineering. Um, we're excited about this proposal of a 24 lot um, development. This is something that uh Jack and I when we started building five
years ago um have always wanted to get into and to finally have the opportunity um is something we're really passionate about. We were born and raised in Lakeville. We currently still live in Lakeville. Our wives keep giving us crap because they want us to get out of Lakeville, but we won't ever leave
Lakeville. Um so this is something that we're really excited about. Um we literally live 5 minutes away um from this uh 78802nd Street. So um we are currently building homes uh just across over in the Bears
Ridge development and our plan with this development is to build the same type of homes, same type of architecture. Uh we believe that we spend um a lot of time and effort into our architecture of our homes to help us build a good quality uh of a home. So, our plan is to continue
building those same uh style of homes that we're building over in that neighborhood. Obviously, meeting all the setbacks and stuff. So, um we'll be here for any questions and anything with the engineering or plat Rick will be able to answer and me and Jack will answer the best we can.
>> Thank you so much, Mr. Palin. >> We get to hear from Miss Goodro next. >> Good evening, chair, members of the commission. Um yes. Um so um representatives of the Palin family companies have applied for the preliminary plot. The property is at 78802
202nd Street. So it's just south of County Road 50 north of Gresham Way east of Hamburg west of Cedar Avenue. The site is 10 acres. The property is zoned RST2 single family and two family. The property is also guided low medium which allows for a
density range of three units up to five units per acre. The pulary plat however is only for 24 single family lots and one outlot to accommodate the stormwater ponding. The access is from Gresian Avenue. That um
will be a street extension from the existing Gresian Avenue. Um always plan to extend to serve this property and you can see how the loop is created um the culde-sac as well as the extension of street A. that street a there was a ghost plat included in the packet that
accommodated an additional three or four lots that would be accessible for the property to the east. Um the remaining property of that larger eastern property would be served from a different direction. So only a few more lots would ever be accommodated from that. Um but
it was always intended that this street stub would serve this property. No access is planned to county road 50, nor would it be allowed by the county and the county has jurisdiction and control over access to their county roads. All of the lots meet um well really they
exceed all the minimum requirements. So for lot width um all of the lots are um wider than the minimum requirements and they are also larger than the minimum requirements and very similar to the surrounding neighborhood. Um again, um
storm water ponding is being provided. So all of the storm water needs are accommodated on the site as required by our fairly strict storm water rules in Lakeville. Um again, we talked about the extension of the roadway. The future street a landscaping will be
accommodated as in any single family subdivision with trees provided on the lots. Um there was some trees um planned to be removed. Um, these will be replaced as required by our new tree preservation ordinance. Our forester has reviewed both the landscaping plan as
well as the tree inventory and the reforestation plan. Um, the ordinance does require a buffering um for the lots that are budding county road 50 that is being provided at the rear of those lots. The remaining requirements are buffering is being accommodated around
the pond. Um there is no required buffering for a budding single family to single family but it is required to provide the two trees per lot. Overall this is a very straightforward preliminary plat um about as straightforward as they come. It meets
all of the zoning requirements, engineering and storm rider requirements of the city and I would stand for any questions. >> Thank you so much Missing. Is there anyone that wishes to uh speak on this issue? Please come forward.
Just as the other folks, if you can identify yourself and give us your address, that would be great. Hello, my name is Jennifer Clinkner. I'm at 7947 204 Street West. Um, so my you can actually see my house on the map here.
Um, I'm not objecting. We know that this was going to be happening and we're we're 100% for it and there you guys build beautiful homes. So, I'll say that. There's just a couple of things that there is major concerns with our neighbors in the neighborhood. We have a
lot of children, a lot of small children. 204th Street, which is where I live off is right off of Hamburg there. And we have a lot of traffic that comes through. Like just yesterday, because they're redoing the pole utility lines
in Hamburg, we had a huge truck on one side, on the other side. So often you're not even going to be able to get through sometimes. Um we have a new lady that walks around the neighborhood with her husband trailing behind her going about 10 miles an hour. This happens all the
time. I'm sure you guys will probably hear about or see her somewhere. Um, so we're worried about the increased traffic because there's no access to 50 with this neighborhood. I guess we were all hoping that there would be an access point to 50 to help alleviate some of
the traffic problems that we know are just going to get 10 times worse. Um, I know I think it's 205th. They have I think the police put up um like your speed warnings because there's a lot of fast uh you got teenage drivers, you got a lot of delivery drivers, you just have
very inattentive people. We have seen way too many near misses for our kids. We're sorry. We're concerned about our kids with the increased traffic. Um another thing that last that other slide that you guys showed about the trees are the green ones. Are those
stained? >> We will have them. >> The tall ever. >> We'll ask. >> We'll talk about that later. >> Address that tree question. Sure thing. >> Okay. Um and then I'm just wondering if there was any traffic study that was done with that because uh we helped
advocate for that roundabout at 50 and in Hamburg to go in and we're really happy that that has happened. But again, there's just so much more increased traffic on 204th. Um so we just ask that you consider potentially redrawing that and having an access
point on 50 for again considering the neighborhood is again not even just my neighborhood the Lynen Ridge and I think Cedar Crossing a lot of those families come and filter up through as well. So we just ask that the council considers that too. So that's all I have.
>> Excellent. Thank you so much. >> Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this issue? Seeing uh no other speakers, we'd be willing I'd be willing to take a motion. >> Madam Chair, seeing as there's no one
else coming forward to speak, I make a motion that we close the public hearing. >> Second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor of closing the public hearing, please say I. >> I. opposed. The public hearing is now closed and if
we could have um I'm not sure Miss Goodr if you'd like to answer the questions or if we could ask Mr. Paley. >> Well, in regards to the slide keeps going away, but in regards to aggression way was always planned to be the stub street to support this development. So,
it's just it's as simple as that. I I don't have a better way of saying it. The density is 3 to five units per acre. So this could have been town homes. This is much fewer units than potentially the development could have supported um as single family. Yes, it will bring some
new traffic. Um they will come into the development go north into Gresham Way. We have no control over the access to County Road 50. It is a county jurisdiction and there is not the ability to have an access point on this roadway based on where there are other access points along County Road 50. They
control where those curb cuts are created onto their county road system. And so when developments are planned, including the development to the south, it was planned to have this roadway be connected into this development to serve this property.
And so that is why I made the comment that it's it's it's as straightforward as it can get. Um the amount of units does not warrant a traffic study. >> Madam Chair, >> Commissioner Kuza. So, um, Director Goodro, so the the roads for the
existing neighborhood of the south were built to accommodate this potential number of homes or even potentially more. >> So, it was always kind of designed in that. >> That is correct. >> Any other comment, Commissioner Cuz? >> Yeah, I just want to say I'm I'm very
much uh in support of this project. you know, this it you look at the the plaid, it it fits exactly in with the neighborhood and all the surrounding land uses. I think I always love it when we have local developers. Um they make
really great products that, you know, it's the reason that um you know, having people from here building homes for other people that want to come in and be part of this community, I think is just a really wonderful thing. Um, and I'm very happy
to support this project. I I think it looks great. Um, you know, there's always an adjustment uh when as we're building out and have new developments. Um, you know, every development in this city uh was created with,
you know, there's open land next to them. It eventually gets developed. That's how the city grows. But I I think this really fits in with with where it's going. and um I'm excited to see it built. >> Thank you so much. I will ask Mr. Paling
if you could address the question regarding the trees unless that's a question for Miss Good. Oh, >> sorry I missed that one. >> So the trees >> which ones are being removed, which ones are staying >> the red are being removed, the green are
going to be kept. and on the left and then on the le on the right hand side on the left hand side is the proposed landscaping with the addition new trees. What's called out on the left plan is more of the screening um while the other circles within each lot are the required trees per lot.
>> And does this comply with the new uh ordinance that we have regarding trees? >> Yes. And for the required reforestation? Yes. >> Excellent. Thank you. Do we have other comments or questions? >> Um, madam
>> Trafice. >> Um, not related to the merit of the project. Um, and this would be a question for Miss Good Road, not for Mr. Paling, but I I believe we're about a month in to a one-year moratorum on the building of new residential projects. So
maybe an explanation of why we're here and and the process from here would be helpful. >> Thank you. Yes. Um so the mortorium was adopted on April 21st and when the moratorum resolution was or ordinance was prepared it did exempt projects that
had submitted by that time for preliminary plot which this project was included in that. So going forward um I think there's maybe one more um that was submitted during that time period and so you may still see some residential new residential plots whereas the moratorum
then is on any new applications. We are still building. Um, as we have continued to say and tried to correct the media, um, we've already had about,300 lots that were preliminary platted or final plat stage that are available for
construction. And so that is why you're seeing construction continue. But this case and a couple other projects had submitted by the time the moratorum was enacted. And so the city council exempted those from the moratorum period. Thank you. >> Thank you so much for that
clarification. Excellent question. Commissioner Travis, looks like you have something else. >> Nope. >> That was my last question. >> Okay, >> Commissioner Kuza, >> if no one has anything else. If you're ready for a motion. >> Yes, I'm ready for a motion. I think I
agree. It fits in really nicely. Um, and how it's laid out in the plant. It's nice. Get such a pretty one that fits in with no massive growth in there. I love it. >> So, uh, Madam Chair, I motion to
recommend a city council approval of the Palmer Crossing preliminary plat subject to the four stipulations in the planning report dated July 15, 2026. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Miss Escen, if you could do the role one more time. >> Tinsley,
>> I >> With that, the uh uh to call it the Paling Crossing. It's the Palmer Crossing uh is approved and we thank you so much for your project here in Lakeville. And I think I have failed to ask the question um or answer the
question for applicants. When does this come before city council? >> Uh we are expecting all of these applications to be considered by the city council at their August 3rd meeting. >> August 3rd meeting of of uh city council
would be excellent. Um As far as other business tonight, uh the next planning commission is scheduled for August 6th and uh included in our packet was um the letter which we had all received as an email um regarding the most recent
planning commission we did or um public hearing we did and then um memorandum from Miss Jensen for potential future items. Um and we don't have anything else on the agenda. So with that I will adjourn the meeting.