Planning Commission

AGENDA Planning Commission September 2, 2021, 7:00PM Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. AUGUST 5, 2021 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW a. SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A NEW OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL FACILITY – TWO SCENARIOS (4FRONT TECHNOLOGY AND OFFICE CAMPUS/ HIGHPOINTE INDUSTRIAL PARK) 6. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS a. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT UPDATE 7. ADJOURNMENT The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be held October 7, 7:00PM, Council Chambers  REGULAR MEETING OAKDALE PLANNING COMMISSION August 5, 2021 The Oakdale Planning Commission held a meeting on Thursday, August 5, 2021 at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota. The meeting began at 7:00 PM with the Pledge of Allegiance. CALL OF ROLL On a call of roll, the following were present: Chair: Emily Milles Commissioners: Yaya Diatta, Vice Chair Bob Boullianne Christopher Campbell Dallas Pierson Lee Stolarski Tom Willenbring Also Present: Emily Shively, City Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PIERSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 1, 2021, AS PRESENTED. 6 Ayes Chair Milles abstained as she was absent last meeting. JULY 1, 2021 Minutes accepted as presented. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING a. GREENWAY STATION BUS RAPID TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT i. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENT ii. ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENT Planner Shively presented a Comprehensive Plan Text and Zoning Ordinance Text and Map Amendment in detail and explained that the items on the agenda were all related to implementation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Both items related to the areas around the two planned Transit Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2021 Page Two Stations on the Gold Line Bus Rapid Transit line – one at Greenway Avenue North and Hudson Blvd North and one at Helmo Avenue North south of 3rd Street North. Ms. Shively noted that in anticipation of these new transit facilities the City undertook a planning process to look at land use and circulation in the station areas with the goal of enhancing the vitality of the area, fostering transit ridership through transit-supportive land uses, and creating more safe and pleasant pedestrian and bicycle connections in the neighborhoods and to the transit stations. The outcome of those planning process were the Greenway Station Area Plan and the Helmo Station Area Plan. Planner Shively stated that in order to accomplish the goals in the plan, the City uses various tools. The first is the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan contained the goals and policies that would address current and emerging issues in the City over the next 10 to 20 years. Ms. Shively explained that the Helmo Station Small Area Plan was incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan as an appendix. The same was intended for the Greenway Station Small Area Plan. The Comprehensive Plan also applied the specific goals and policies articulated in the Small Area plan to particular parcels. For the Greenway Station Area, there were five parcels where this would apply. Planner Shively stated the next tool was the Zoning Ordinance which helped implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan by setting the framework for permitted uses and performance standards. The Zoning Ordinance for the Greenway Station Area was very similar to what was in place for the Helmo Station Area. Like the Comprehensive Plan, the new zoning district would be applied to those five parcels. Ms. Shively shared that even though the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance was proposed to change for those parcels, existing businesses may remain for as long as they wish. However, if a change in use or redevelopment was proposed, the new standards would apply. To summarize, Planner Shively clarified that these policy changes start with the planning process to consider the opportunities and constraints in the area and set the goals. Then, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to incorporate those goals and policies into the City’s plan. After that, the zoning ordinance was put in place with the uses and standards to realize the vision for the area and redevelopment on specific parcels in the station area was compatible with adjacent land uses and created a safe, vibrant station environment that fostered transit ridership. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Ms. Shively shared that regarding these subject properties, there were no changes on the parcels regarding values or taxes, which was determined by the County Assessor. She explained that if redevelopment were to occur, then there may be a change in the taxes to reflect that new development. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Planner Shively noted that any of these property owners could sell for redevelopment that would be compatible with the new plans. She Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2021 Page Three further clarified that these businesses would operate under the current Zoning Ordinances under the current use, until the use changes or the business sells for redevelopment. In response to a question from Commissioner Diatta, Ms. Shively explained that the pre-existing business would be legally non-conforming or grandfathered in. She further shared that a State Statute that carried forward to our local ordinances stated, any use in existence when rules change was allowed to continue. The property owner could rebuild the building, put new siding on or redo the parking lot. The property owner could not expand or change the use or the new rules would apply. Ms. Shively shared that if the property became vacant for more than one year, then the use changed, and the new rules would apply. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Planner Shively explained first the Comprehensive Plan needed to be changed and then the zoning needed to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In response to a question from Commissioner Diatta, Ms. Shively shared that the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning should match, and ideally changes should happen at the same time, or one follows immediately after the other. In response to a question from Commissioner Willenbring, Planner Shively noted that Oakdale Zoning Ordinances are very specific with commercial uses. She mentioned that a business may appeal those ordinances to the City Council. Chair Milles opened the Public Hearing and asked if there were any speakers. Attorney Mr. John Worrell, representing property owner, Joe McKasy, 6740 Hudson Boulevard asked the Planning Commission to oppose the zoning changes. Mr. Al Stroschein, 19 Greenway Avenue North, opposes the proposed project. In response to a question from Mrs. Beth Stroschein, 19 Greenway Avenue North, Ms. Shively identified the number of parcels in the project area. Business owner Mr. David Olson, Low Voltage Integrators, Inc., at 6592 Hudson Boulevard, opposes the proposed project. Business owner Mr. James Alberg, 2.25 acre parcel adjacent to United Rentals, stated his support for the proposed project. Ms. Chris Johnson, 6719 1st St N., opposes the proposed project. Jeanette Hadd, 6703 1st St N., opposes proposed project. Chair Milles asked if there were any others who wished to speak. Hearing none, she closed the Public Hearing. She asked if the Commissioners had any other questions. Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2021 Page Four Commissioner Pierson shared with the group that the Planning Commission was an advisory group and all decisions were made at the City Council. Vice Chair Diatta shared that he appreciated all those that voiced their opinions. In response to a question from Commissioner Stolarski, Ms. Shively explained once the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance changes, it is in place until another action was taken by the City Council to make another change. She further stated that changes occur when a new condition in an area leads to that change, for example a brand new transit line that would be coming through the area. Ms. Shively shared that one of the main focuses of the Greenway Station Bus Rapid Transit Oriented Development, is on connections to the transit station and also throughout the neighborhood as currently there are no sidewalks in the area. Placing this land use piece into the Comprehensive Plan sets the intention of the City Council to make those investments with the goal of improving safety and comfort for bicyclists and pedestrians throughout the neighborhood. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Planner Shively noted that if a new developer asked for a rezoning of their property, it would need to accomplish the goals in the Greenway Station Area Plan. Commissioner Campbell answered some of the questions asked by earlier speakers. He shared that currently if the proposed project was approved as is, there would be 85 – 210 multi-family units built in the entire four acre site, the maximum height of the buildings is four stories or 40 feet, and the setback from the rear of the property line would be 30 to 40 feet. Commissioner Campbell shared that he would be approving the Comprehensive Plan Text and Map Amendment and would be opposing the Zoning Ordinance Text and Map Amendment. In response to a question from Commissioner Willenbring, Planner Shively stated that if the land is not rezoned, there is no restriction to the Bus Rapid Transit (BRC) line. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Planner Shively explained that the Comprehensive Plan sets the intent for the area. The zoning should be in alignment with that intent. If someone came in and requested a zoning change, the request would need to be consistent with the Comprehensive plan. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Planner Shively shared that the height of the Bethesda project at the Helmo Station Plan area was limited to three stories. Commissioner Pierson shared that he would propose the City Council consider what was done with the Helmo Station and perhaps limit the Greenway Station Plan area to a three story building. In response to a question from Commissioner Boullianne, Planner Shively stated the Commissioners may vote to approve the Comprehensive Plan piece and deny the Zoning Ordinance piece. In response to a question from Commissioner Willenbring, Planner Shively explained the types of uses for this area which is close to the freeway, were typically commercial or multi-family uses. Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2021 Page Five In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Planner Shively stated the multi-family parking is guided at 1.5 spaces per unit maximum, for this proposed project. This is the City’s standard for Multi-Family buildings with very good transit access. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Planner Shively shared the City wanted to make these transit areas a walkable area, and not car centric. Commissioner Campbell noted that a 1.5 parking space allotment is common. In response to a question from Commissioner Boullianne, Planner Shively explained for the Greenway Station Bus area, the Comprehensive Plan would need to be amended for the Economic Development Authority to fund the proposed project, if it were deemed appropriate in the future. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Planner Shively shared how to make specific recommendations to the City Council. In response to a question from Mr. Stroschein, Ms. Shively explained this area is very close to the freeways and there would be great access. This area would also be very close to transit that would run all day. There was further discussion among the Commissioners. COMMISSIONER PIERSON MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOULLIANNE, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF AN AMENMDMENT TO THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADD APPENDIX F, GREENWAY STATION SMALL AREA PLAN. 7 AYES 0 NAYS Motion passes. COMMISSIONER PIERSON MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO REGUIDE THE SUBJECT PARCELS TO GREENWAY STATION RAPID TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT. 7 AYES 0 NAYS Motion passes. Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2021 Page Six COMMISSIONER PIERSON MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT TO ADD SECTION 25-120 AND APPENDIX D GREENWAY STATION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. 7 AYES 0 NAYS Motion passes. COMMISSIONER PIERSON MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PARCELS TO GREENWAY STATION PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. 0 AYES 7 NAYS Motion fails. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW a. HELMO STATION REDEVELOPMENT PLAN: CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Planner Shively presented a detailed explanation of the Planning Commission’s role in affirming the finding that the Helmo Station Redevelopment Project Area and Redevelopment Plan was consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, and to pass a resolution to that effect. Ms. Shively explained that the Helmo Station Area had the tools of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance in place, and as development occurs, the City has other tools to help implement the goals for the neighborhood. She shared that by establishing the Helmo Station Redevelopment Project Area and Redevelopment Plan, it met these goals. Planner Shively explained that just like the zoning ordinance, the plan must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Shively stated the Helmo Station Redevelopment Plan was found in the Comprehensive Plan as the Helmo Station Small Area Plan, and further explained that the Economic Development Authority (EDA) of the City is the body that would determine when to utilize additional tools, including financial assistance to implement the goals and policies in the plan for development and redevelopment. In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Planner Shively stated that this would establish the Redevelopment Plan Area and the Project Area and it was within the area that financial tools such as TIF (Tax Increment Financing) could be utilized if the EDA made that determination. In response to a question from Commissioner Pierson, Planner Shively shared that by putting the District and Project Area into place now allows for those financial tools to be utilized. Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2021 Page Seven In response to a question from Commissioner Campbell, Ms. Shively explained that anywhere in the Project Area the EDA could use those tools, such as TIF. In response to a question from Commissioner Boullianne, Ms. Shively shared that within the Project Area, utilizing the Redevelopment Tools available would be consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. COMMISSIONER BOULLIANNE MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER STOLARSKI, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2021XX CONCERNING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR HELMO STATION REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT OF THE EDA AND THE CITY OF OAKDALE. 7 AYES 0 NAYS Motion passes. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS a. PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT UPDATE Planner Shively shared HOM Furniture had started construction. She also shared the Animal Emergency Referral Center of Minnesota would start construction soon. She noted that there will be a Planning Commission meeting on September 2, 2021. Commissioner Boullianne announced that he has resigned the Planning Commission effective August 31, 2021 and has submitted his application for the Economic Development Commission. In response to a question from Commissioner Stolarski, Planner Shively confirmed that the Big Thrill Factory was no longer in business in Oakdale. ADJOURMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY COMMISSIONER WILLENBRING, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER PIERSON, TO ADJOURN THE AUGUST 5, 2021 MEETING OF THE OAKDALE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 8:18 PM. 7 AYES 0 NAYS Motion passes. Respectfully submitted, Jackie Knutson Recording Secretary  PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT To: Oakdale Planning Commission Date: September 2, 2021 Applicant: Larson Family Real Estate LLLP Location: 4Front Office and Industrial Area – Co.Rd. 14 and Highpoint Drive Request(s): Site Plan Review – Single-building and Two-building Scenarios Prepared/Presented: Emily Shively, City Planner INTRODUCTION The 4Front Technology and Office Campus encompasses 122 acres located on County Road 14, abutting the Willowbrooke neighborhood to the north, and running from I-694 on the west to Ideal Avenue North on the east. The four buildings on the campus comprise a total of approximately 550,000 square feet and house a number of office and research and development companies. There are nearly 65 acres remaining to be developed – approximately 50 acres in the west expansion area and 15 acres in the east expansion area (see Attachment A). A Planned Unit Development zoning ordinance amendment was approved in June 2021 (Ord.872) to permit additional uses on a portion of the west expansion area of the 4Front Technology and Office Campus to facilitate up to 310,000 square feet of new construction (see Attachment B). In order to provide flexibility while recruiting tenants for this area, the developer is proposing two site plan scenarios on Parcel A in the northwest corner of the site adjacent to I-694. The project will need preliminary and final plat approval for the scenario that proceeds to development. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION The subject property is guided Business Campus which allows for corporate offices, light manufacturing, and office uses. ZONING DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS The subject property is zoned 3M/Imation Planned Unit Development. Permitted uses are offices, research and development, light manufacturing, and office-showroom/office-warehouse as defined in Ord.872. The designations of the surrounding property are displayed in the table below: Orientation Comprehensive Plan Zoning District Existing Use Willowbrooke Planned Unit North Mixed Residential Vacant Development 3M/Imation Planned Unit South Business Campus Vacant Development 3M/Imation Planned Unit 4Front Office and Technology East Business Campus Development Campus West N/A N/A I-694 ANALYSIS Site plan review considers the relationship between the plan elements and conditions both on and off the property to ensure conformance with the comprehensive plan, zoning code and design standards (see 1 Attachments C-G). The property is subject to the performance standards in the I-O Industrial Office zoning district and the Design Standards in Sec.25-175. SCENARIO 1 – SINGLE BUILDING (1) Setbacks and Height: The building and parking meet the setback requirements. The proposed building complies with the clear height maximum. (2) Access, Circulation, and Parking: Access to the site will be from two points – the existing signalized intersection at Highpoint Drive North and County Road 14 and a new access across from Hemingway Avenue North at County Road 14. The new access point will allow trucks to enter, but only passenger vehicles may exit from the proposed new access point. Trucks must leave the site via the existing signalized intersection in order to allow for sufficient acceleration time, particularly for westbound trucks. Vehicle parking is provided on the north, west, and south sides of the building with truck parking along the eastern side of the site. (3) Exterior Building Materials: The building exteriors will be finished with glass and precast concrete in shades of gray. (4) Trash Handling: Trash and recycling are handled within the building. (5) Landscape Plan: Tree plantings will be located along the northern property line abutting the Willowbrooke neighborhood park, along the perimeter of the site, along the north, east and south facades of the building and in the area between the site and the existing 4Front campus (6) Site Lighting: Proposed site lighting is in conformance with the code. (7) Signage: Proposed signage includes a monument sign on the west side of the site abutting I-694. (8) Grading and Utilities: The City Engineer/Public Works Director has found that the grading and utility plans meet city standards. (9) Other Regulatory Review: The Building Official has done a preliminary review of the plans and does not have any comments or concerns at this time. The Fire Chief has also reviewed the plans and has no comments or concerns. The development will require a stormwater management permit from the Valley Branch Watershed District. SCENARIO 2 – TWO BUILDINGS (1) Setbacks and Height: The building and parking meet the setback requirements. The proposed building complies with the clear height maximum. (2) Access, Circulation, and Parking: Access to the site will be from two points – the existing signalized intersection at Highpoint Drive North and County Road 14 and a new access across from Hemingway Avenue North at County Road 14. The new access point will allow trucks to enter, but only passenger vehicles may exit from the proposed new access point. Trucks must leave the site via the existing signalized intersection in order to allow for sufficient acceleration time, particularly for westbound trucks. Vehicle parking for the north building is provided on the east, north, and west sides of the building with loading docks along the south side of the building. Vehicle parking for the south building is provided along the west and south sides of the building with loading docks and truck parking along the east side of the site. 2 (3) Exterior Building Materials: The building exteriors will be finished with glass and precast concrete in shades of gray. (4) Trash Handling: Trash and recycling are handled within the buildings. (5) Landscape Plan: New tree plantings will be installed along the north edge of the site adjacent to the Willowbrooke neighborhood park as well as along the perimeter of the buildings and around the stormwater pond. (6) Site Lighting: Proposed site lighting is in conformance with the code. (7) Signage: Proposed signage includes a monument sign on the west side of the site abutting I-694. (8) Grading and Utilities: The City Engineer/Public Works Director has found that the grading and utility plans meet city standards. (9) Other Regulatory Review: The Building Official has done a preliminary review of the plans and does not have any comments or concerns at this time. The Fire Chief has also reviewed the plans and has no comments or concerns. The development will require a stormwater management permit from the Valley Branch Watershed District. 60-DAY RULE Application Complete: July 6, 2021 60-Day Review Deadline: September 4, 2021 Extension Granted To: November 3, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting: September 2, 2021 Expected City Council Action: September 14, 2021 ROLE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION The role of the Planning Commission is to review the site plans as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance requirements and provide a recommendation to the City Council. RECOMMENDATION Staff has determined that the site plans are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff recommends approval of the requests. MOTIONS Motion to recommend approval of the site plan for a single-building scenario at the 4Front Office and Industrial Area, subject to conditions. Motion to recommend approval of the site plan for a two-building scenario at the 4Front Office and Industrial Area, subject to conditions. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Location Map Attachment B: Ord. 872 Attachment C: Site and Landscape Plan – Scenario 1: Single Building Attachment D: Building Elevations – Scenario 1: Single Building Attachment E: Site and Landscape Plan – Scenario 2: Two Buildings 3 Attachment F: Building Elevations – Scenario 2: Two Buildings Attachment G: Building Material Palette Attachment H: Draft City Council Resolution – Site Plan – Scenario 1: Single Building Attachment I: Draft City Council Resolution – Site Plan – Scenario 2: Two Buildings 4 ATTACHMENT A – LOCATION MAP ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT C – SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLAN: SINGLE-BUILDING SCENARIO ATTACHMENT D – BUILDING ELEVATIONS: SINGLE-BUILDING SCNEARIO ATTACHMENT D – BUILDING ELEVATIONS: SINGLE-BUILDING SCNEARIO ATTACHMENT E – SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLAN: TWO-BUILDING SCENARIO ATTACHMENT F – BUILDING ELEVATIONS: TWO-BUILDING SCENARIO, SOUTH BUILDING ATTACHMENT F – BUILDING ELEVATIONS: TWO-BUILDING SCENARIO, SOUTH BUILDING ATTACHMENT F – BUILDING ELEVATIONS: TWO-BUILDING SCENARIO, NORTH BUILDING ATTACHMENT G – BUILDING MATERIAL PALETTE ATTACHMENT H CITY OF OAKDALE RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SITE PLAN FOR THE HIGHPOINTE INDUSTRIAL PARK (4FRONT OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL AREA) SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Oakdale held on Tuesday, September 14, 2021, at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota, with the following members present: Mayor Paul Reinke; Councilmembers Jake Ingebrigtson, Susan Olson, Colleen Swedberg, and Kevin Zabel and the following members absent: None, the Oakdale City Council resolved: WHEREAS, Larson Family Real Estate, LLC requested Site Plan approval for Highpointe Industrial Park (Legal Description: Outlot A, Oakdale Farm Second Addition), and WHEREAS, the Site Plan consists of a single building, surface parking for vehicles and trucks, and stormwater management areas, and WHEREAS, the Site Plan (revisions dated 08-18-2021) has been found to be consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for parcels zoned 3M/Imation Planned Unit Development as amended via Ord. 872, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Oakdale hereby approves the Site Plan for Highpointe Industrial Park, subject to the following condition: 1. Approval by the City Council of a Preliminary and Final Plat for the single-building scenario. Voting in Favor: Voting Against: Resolution duly seconded and passed this 14th day of September, 2021. _______________________________ Paul Reinke, Mayor ______________________________ Susan Barry, City Clerk ATTACHMENT I CITY OF OAKDALE RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SITE PLAN FOR THE HIGHPOINTE INDUSTRIAL PARK (4FRONT OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL AREA) SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS At a meeting of the City Council of the City of Oakdale held on Tuesday, September 14, 2021, at Oakdale City Hall, 1584 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota, with the following members present: Mayor Paul Reinke; Councilmembers Jake Ingebrigtson, Susan Olson, Colleen Swedberg, and Kevin Zabel and the following members absent: None, the Oakdale City Council resolved: WHEREAS, Larson Family Real Estate, LLC requested Site Plan approval for Highpointe Industrial Park (Legal Description: Outlot A, Oakdale Farm Second Addition), and WHEREAS, the Site Plan consists of two buildings with associated surface parking for vehicles and trucks, and stormwater management areas, and WHEREAS, the Site Plan (revisions dated 08-18-2021) has been found to be consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for parcels zoned 3M/Imation Planned Unit Development as amended via Ord. 872, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council of the City of Oakdale hereby approves the Site Plan for Highpointe Industrial Park, subject to the following condition: 1. Approval by the City Council of a Preliminary and Final Plat for the two-building scenario. Voting in Favor: Voting Against: Resolution duly seconded and passed this 14th day of September, 2021. _______________________________ Paul Reinke, Mayor ______________________________ Susan Barry, City Clerk