Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

if you haven't signed in or signed in before you leave. Um, if you come up to visit and talk, we just need your name and your address before you. Um, first minute or first item is the minutes. We have our January 14th, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes. Does everybody have a chance to look those over? Any questions? Make a motion we approve the minutes from the January 4th, 2026 planning meeting. Second motion second. All in favor? Looks like our second item of business is the comprehensive plan review. So, and actually, uh, just as a quick point of order, um, we need to get that removed from the business section. That's going to be, um, later on in the matters for from commission.

Okay. I inadvertently didn't take that off when I built up the staff report. Okay. You want to go on to the 529 then? Uh, yes. Okay, sounds good. Okay. Okay, we're going to move on then to the second item which is 529 North Walnut Reszoning. We're going to consider recommendation for for resoning from the staff and at this time I will turn it back over to you guys. All right. Thank you. Um apparently got the packet order also a little bit out of order. So bear with me as I scroll down for just a second. I can't hear you say it. Oh. Uh is this is this any better? Yeah, there we go.

Okay. Learning the microphones. Oh, forgive me. I just apparently don't have enough caffeine in my eyes this morning. Um, so before us, we have a reasonzoning um request for 529 North Walnut uh from a commercial C3 district to an industrial district um for the purposes of um allowing a towyard within uh the property. Um the applicant is requested to reszone the property at 529 North Walnut from C3 General Commercial to I1 Industrial. Uh the property is 23,360 square ft or 0.54 acres. Uh the proposed use is for pinky toes a towy yard. Uh the business intends to store up to five impounded vehicles outdoors in a screened area with up to two vehicles stored indoors. The business operates three tow trucks and estimates an average daily traffic of five tow trucks plus a similar number of uh customer vehicles. Uh staff reviewed the proposal in relation to the property zoning designation and the permitted uses

within the district. Um for zoning a towyard land use is not specifically defined within the city zoning regulations but after review are determined to be most accurately defined in the city zoning regulations. um as a motor vehicle towing and record service. Uh land use is uh defined as establishments that provide towing services for light and heavy motor vehicles both local and long distance. Uh these establishes establishments may provide incidental services such as storage and emergency road repair services. Uh this land use is not permitted in C3 districts but is allowed by right in industrial I1 districts. Uh there are no specific use standards for motor vehicle towing or record services. Over here is um kind of a um a zoning map of of the area that they are around. Um you can see uh that the property is primarily surrounded by C3 commercial districts and industrial districts. Um to the west is DJ Engineering. So uh very very heavily uh commercial corridor there. Um lot requirements for an I1 industrial district are the same as a C3 uh commercial district. Um and those requirements are a minimum lot area of 10,000 square ft, minimum lot width of 100 ft, and a minimum lot depth of 100 ft. Uh the property has lot dimensions of 92 1/2 ft by 250 ft. Um changing from the C3 to the I1 does nothing to the underlying uh lot size. Um and this would be consistent. Um the recommendation will be based upon information available prior to public hearings. Staff recommends that the request be approved. This recommendation is based on the following findings. Uh findings of fact. The character of the immediate neighborhood. Uh the site is surrounded predominantly by industrial commercial zoning. Specifically to the

north is a mix of C3 general commercial and I1 light industrial districts. Uh to the south is a mix of C3 and I1 districts. Uh to the east is a mix of C3 and C1 commercial districts and to the west is I1 U DJ Engineering. Uh staff finds that the proposed land use fits the character of the immediate neighborhood which functions as a commercial industrial corridor. Uh in terms of consistency with the comprehensive plan, vision and character of the city of Augusta, the comprehensive plan designates the property C3 general commercial. However, the surrounding pattern of industrial development indicates the area functions as a mixed industrial commercial node. The uh comprehensive plan envisions the following guidelines for industrial uses. Uh that the districts have good access to highways. they have limited traffic to collector streets and generally are away from lower intensity uses such as local commercial and residential uses and that they have no major negative impacts to lower intensity development and that if there are um minor negative impacts that those negative impacts be mitigated. Staff finds the resoning to be generally consistent with the broader land use pattern and not materially inconsistent with comprehensive plan goals related to economic activity in compatible land use clustering. Uh the adequacy of public utilities, roadways, and other needed public services relative to anticipated impacts of the proposed use with a projected a daily traffic flow of roughly 10 vehicles per day uh both tow trucks and from the general public. Uh staff finds that the public roadways are adequate relative to the anticipated impacts of the proposed use. The limited operational scale is not expected to material materially impact traffic flow nor materially add wear and tear to the

roadways. The property is already serviced by public utilities and is not expected to require any additional city services. Suitability of the uses to which the property has been restricted under its existing zoning. Um while C3 zoning permits commercial development, the industrial nature of adjacent properties demonstrates that the site is equally suitable for industrial classification. Uh resoning promotes zoning consistency within the uh walnut corridor. Uh length of time the properties remain vacant as zoned. Uh the property has not been vacant as currently zoned. Um however uh to the best of staff's knowledge um business operations have not occurred on site for at least one year. Uh compatibility of the proposed district classification with nearby properties. Uh surrounding zoning includes C3 general commercial and I1 industrial. Uh the I1 uh requested designation is consistent with industrial zoning directly adjacent to the west and nearby properties to the north and south. the extent to which zoning amendment may detrimentally affect nearby property. Um the nearest residential zoning is approximately 800 ft from the subject property uh and those residential uh properties are buffered um from 529 North Walnut by lower inensity commercial uses. The scale of the proposed operation um approximately eight vehicle stored indoors or outdoors and two indoors is limited in intensity. Existing fencing and screening mitigate visibility impacts and no evidence uh has been presented uh demonstrating substantial adverse effect on neighboring properties. The proportionality of losses impacts to individual property owners in the immediate vicinity relative to the net public gain. Um staff have been informed that Pinky um excuse me, staff has been

informed uh by Pinky Toes that they are the only local towyard on call. uh are on a call out rotation with Augusta's public safety department. Um staff spoke with uh the APS and confirmed that Pinky Toes is the only local tow uh on the rotation. Uh other towy yards on a on rotation are located in Douglas, Rose Hill, and Witchah. Um APS stated that when a toward has to be called, officers are required to stay on site until the towyard takes possession of the vehicle. Um, you utilizing a local yard, a local towyard allows APS and its officers to save roughly two to three hours um per call out when compared to utilizing an out of town towyard. Uh, this allows officers to redirect those labor hours spent on site to more um proactive efforts. Uh staff finds that the industrial zoning promotes public welfare by supporting local towing services that assist police and fire responders, potentially reducing roadway incident, clearance times, and enhancing emergency response uh efficiency. Um public input or sentiment regarding the proposed use as voiced in the public hearing and other communications. Um staff sent out public notification letters on February 9th, 2026 and uh those that notification was posted to the city's website. Staff has not received any public comments or communications concerning the proposed resoning following the public notification process. Um the next steps from here, uh planning commission's recommendation will be forwarded to the Augusta City Council for consideration on Monday, April 6, 2026 at 7 p.m. So at this point, um I'll be available to answer any questions.

On one point you say store up to two vehicles outside impounded vehicles outdoors in a screened area with up to two vehicles. Is that correct? And then over here it says approximately eight vehicles stored outdoors and two indoors. How many vehicles to how many vehicles can be behind the screen? No. So, there are no specific use standards for this type of business. Okay.

Other than the storage of the vehicles needs to be more on a temporary rotational basis. If they were to start keeping them more permanently, um they would need to be reclassified as a salvage yard, but there are no specific use standards for number of vehicles. Um it just is more based on the definition, it's more of a temporary basis to be able to storm.

Okay. And then this is directed to whoever's gonna talk for pinkies. So I drive by there multiple times a day. Some of that screen on that fence was loose or is that something that you will keep up? I mean you that looks bad when they So you'll make sure that's always connected to the chain link. believe the same week or the week after we put the screening up. Um the whole the whole fence had come down. So we made some repairs to uh get the fence back up and we've been working on keeping the screening tied to the chain link as well.

So we're in a constant effort for that. Are you looking at something that may be more permanent and not just the I don't know what you've got on there, but doing something that you probably need to go to the That's what I was going to say. I could go up to the podium. Do your name and address. Yeah. Well, she was

Okay. Uh good morning. My name is Caleb Mroy. I'm the owner of Pinky Toes, 529 North Walnut here in Augusta. Um, so regarding the uh screening on the fence, um, like I stated, so the week following putting it up, the whole fence came down. We had the wind storms that came through. Um, apparently that was too much pressure for the fence. So, we worked on repairing the fence. We've got the fence back up. Um, and we are working on keeping that screening tied to the fence. Um, and you did ask, we are looking into other options. Um, as for the privacy screening, so they have uh you have the screening like what's on it now. Um, but they also have these uh inserts that go kind of weave in between the chain link. Um, and that's supposed to be more of a uh pass through. It's supposed to let more wind pass through and not put as much stress on the fence. So, we are exploring that option as well. Um, but I can assure you that the uh the fence will be maintained to the best of our ability and it'll be uh to where the public won't be able to reasonably see in.

So, you're already operating out of that. Is that correct? Yes, sir. And how long have you been there? Um, we've been there since I I believe our effective date was January 1st.

And when you impound a car, how long do you typically hold that car? Um, I knew that question would come up and that's that's a hard hard question to answer. Uh, we I was explaining to Sam when I spoke with him. Uh, we we keep them as as short as we reasonably can. Uh, there's it depends on the the incident or the process. So, um, if we impound a vehicle due to a driver's arrest, um, that vehicle could sit there until the driver gets out of custody, uh, things like that. So, that really just depends. Um, if it's in an accident, we we get them out as fast as we can. Uh, we notify we have notifications that were required by law to make. So, we make notifications uh as quickly as we can, whether it's by phone or by certified mail. Um, and then as the insurance process goes, they they come pick up the vehicle. Um, so far the longest that we've had a vehicle is uh one that I currently have. We've had it since January 4th. The driver was placed under arrest. I am working with the state right now to obtain the title for that vehicle. That vehicle will be gone as soon as the state grants me a title for that one.

So, if you have five, let's say you already have five impounded vehicles, what do you do now with the next impounded vehicle? Um, where do you take it? We have we have space for I mean several vehicles. Um, okay. Well, it says five. That's what I was asking. Yeah. So I he asked how many typically we would keep. Um and I it's not going to turn into a salvage yard. I don't I don't like when the vehicles are parked there, they're not doing anything for us. Um so we try and get them out as quickly as we can. Um so we have space for plenty of vehicles if the need arises. Um but they won't they won't just be sitting there. But

you said you do charge a daily tow fee on them, right? We do charge storage. They are doing something for you. if if the owner comes after them. Yes. Um but the one I've had since January 4th, um nobody's going to come after it. So that one's just going to I'll end up getting a title for it and it'll go to Salvager or somewhere similar. So you keep that locked that separate the impound area. Do you have a Do you keep that locked? Because I do the gates to get into the whole facility is not it's open.

Correct. Um, yes. So, there are technically two gates. There's a gate for the impounded vehicle side. Um, and then there's the I call it the north gate, the the gate that's right there off of Sixth Street. Um, that gate we were closing every night. Um, but we for it it was impacting our response times uh in the middle of the night. Had to unlock the gate, open the gate to get a truck out. Uh but yes, the impound area is completely locked and customers aren't permitted in the impound area uh unless they're under escort. That's an insurance requirement. You have signage out there. I can't remember if you do.

Um yes, we're working on some more permanent signage, but currently we have a a banner a fixed to the building. Uh and then out by the gate, the impound gate, we do have a no trespassing sign with our logo and phone number as well. And of course the hopping tow truck as you drive by. Caleb, is this your only location or do you have other locations? This is our only location. Yes, sir.

Anybody else have any questions for Caleb? Thank you very much. Thank you. Since we kind of opened that up, does anybody else on the audience want to come up and speak on this topic at all? You have to open up the public hearing. Do what? I guess it's been a while. He didn't do it. He didn't open the public hearing. Uh, okay. I'm going to open up the public hearing. Does anybody else want to come up and talk? Okay. Closing the public hearing. Thank you. You got to put that on there for me, Sam. I don't want to forget every time.

I will I will do better next time. Thank you. Hey, I'll make a motion for approval to um reszone the property located at 529 North Walnut from C3 General Commercial to I1 Industrial. And this is case number 2026-01. I'll second. Sorry. Before a vote, um, can you please walk through the findings of act and see if there's any discussion on staff's recommendation? Yeah, I thought we didn't we already can, but we'll Yeah,

I thought Sam already walked through those. I thought too he walked through them but a procedural um as part of procedure we need to go through and see if there's any discussion by the board as well. That way if if the cases ever end up in district court we need to have that procedure to be able to show that we walked through it. Okay. Findings of fact. Okay. I'll just go. I'll read them off. You guys have any discussion? Let me know character of the immediate neighborhood.

Perfect. Consistency with the comprehensive plan, vision, and character of the city of Augusta. Adequate public utilities, roadway, and other needed public services relative to the anticipated impact of the proposed use. Suitability of the uses to which the property has been restricted under its existing zoning. Length of time the property has remained vacant as zoned. Compatibility of the proposed district classification with nearby properties. The extent to which the zoning amendment may detrimentally affect nearby properties. the proportionality of loss/impact to individual property owners in the immediate vicinity relative to the net public gain of the community at large. Public input or sentiment regarding the proposed use as voiced in the public hearing and other communications probably entertain that. I think I can entertain that motion now.

Yes, you still have a motion and a second. All in favor? Motion carries. Thank you. Thanks. Good luck. Okay, let me get back up here.

Okay. Okay. Next item we are going to look at is 9975 Southwest Eugene conditional use permit. We are going to consider recommendations of a conditional use permit. And I'll turn it back to staff. Thank you. So before us um is a request for a conditional use permit at uh 9975 Southwest Eugene. Um the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to place two 40 foot by 8t by 9 ft storage pods on the property for permanent storage. Uh the property is generally located near the northwest corner of Santa Fe Lake Road and Highway 54 and is zoned C3. Uh the property is platted. Uh the storage containers will be 40t long, 8 ft wide, and 9 ft tall. Um the applicant proposes placing two storage containers on the property with a cover over and between the storage containers to utilize as a space to store commercial vehicles. Uh the applicant indicated that sighting may be installed on the containers to help with the aesthetic. Um and I will update that uh very quickly. Um I communicated with the applicant um after the fact and I had apparently wrote that uh note down wrong. They were considering um painting the sides and not siding. So mistake on my end. Um the applicant stated the following uh that they intend to place cover over in between the storage containers to utilize as a space to store commercial vehicles. Uh they are intending to place um I'm going to correct that say um paint onto the containers to help with the aesthetics. Uh it is their intention to replace the storage containers with a new accessory building in the future, but the anticipated time frame is undetermined. Uh the property has had issues with trespassing and theft that they believe is tied to the state of the property. uh someone had previously entered the property, disabled the electric meter, and stole some of the

old signage that sits on the property. Uh this likely occurred during daytime hours, and their hope is that the storage containers will help to clean up the property and disincentivize similar activities in the future. Uh the property is primarily used to store equipment for riser well drilling as well as perform minor repair work on the equipment um housed and stored on on site. uh business activities occur primarily away from the property and at the location of the work site. Uh the property is not intended for um office use and the business does not seek to invite the public uh onto the property. Uh the property belongs to um Gina's father, Jerry Riser. Um and the property serves as a home base for Riser well drilling. Uh Gina has been granted power of attorney for Jerry and thus is able to make the application request. Uh the power of attorney paperwork has been received by staff uh for analysis. Staff reviewed the proposal in relation to the city's uh to the property zoning designation and permitted accessory structures and uses within the district. Uh the property is located within the city's growth area and is thus subject to the city's zoning regulations. The property is identified as a major commercial district in the future land use map and meets the C3 general commercial lot requirements um which is how the property has received its C3 general uh commercial zoning designation. Uh the land use is most accurately defined as a construction contractor yard which is allowed in a C3 district with a conditional use permit. uh storage containers qualify as a storage shed or structure accessory use per 1039F of those zoning regulations. In C3 districts, the secondary land use is allowed with a conditional use permit um with that table there below for reference. Uh C3 districts between Diamond Road and Indianola Road and the planning area have setbacks of uh front

setbacks 100 feet from the highway center line. uh side five feet, rear 15 feet. Uh the surrounding pro properties are primarily commercial or vacant in nature. Um the properties to the north are primarily vacant with non-conforming rural residential designations. The property to the west is a C3 district. Uh the properties to the east are C3 and the properties to the south across Highway 54 are primarily C3 with a large um industrial use. Um, and since our zoning uh map doesn't do the the color zoning for for the growth area, um, created a a zoning map here. Uh, a little bit hard to read. Uh, but if you have questions on that, let me know. For county compatibility, uh, city staff regularly contact county staff regarding zoning actions in the city's growth area. Although the city maintains full zoning authority, efforts are made to maintain consistency between city and county zoning practices, county staff indicated that they would generally support the proposed storage containers if the property were located within the county zoning jurisdiction. Uh for authority, article 144b of the zoning regulations authorize the planning commission to recommend conditions as part of the conditional use approval process. Those conditions must follow the below stipulations when deemed appropriate. Based on findings of fact, the planning commission may stipulate conditions of approval in addition to minimum requirements. Um, this shall include conditions of approval specifically allowed by these regulations or authorized by Kansas statutes, measures that are not required for the proposed use, but required as a specific use standard or compatibility buffer for similar uses when deemed a reasonable means for mitigating negative impacts of the proposed use. for proposed changes to a zoning district boundaries only. A lesser intensity zoning district may be approved in lie of an applicant's requested zoning district. No uh such shall not trigger

any additional public notification requirements. No condition allowing deviation from a minimum requirement shall be allowed if it if such is defined as a variance per article 15 or would have an effect equal to a variance. and the city council may only require conditions approval in the circumstance and manner described below in 144 C3 or C6, excuse me. Um, for recommendation based upon the information available prior to the public hearings, planning staff recommends that the request be approved subject to the following conditions. Excuse me. Um, the storage containers shall be placed only in the location identified on the site plan submitted with the application. Any location of the containers on the property shall, excuse me, any relocation of the containers on the property shall require review and approval by city staff. Um number and size approval uh is limited to two storage containers each measuring approximately 40t in length, 8 ft in width, and 9 ft in height. Any additional containers shall require additional review and approval by the city. Covered area between containers. The cover proposed between the container shall be limited to a temporary canopy or similar structure and shall not be enclosed without review and approval by the city. The storage containers shall be maintained in good condition and free of rust, peeling paint, or visible damage. If sighting or exterior cladding is installed on the storage containers, the material shall be consistent in appearance with other structures on the property and maintained in good condition. The storage container shall be used only for storage associated with the existing commercial use of the property and shall not be used for habitation, office space, or other occupied uses. Outdoor storage of equipment and materials shall be limited to areas approved by the city and shall not expand toward US Highway 5400 beyond the location identified in the application materials. The storage

container shall be maintained a minimum of 100 ft from the center line of Highway 54400 consistent with the placement described in the application. The property shall be maintained in compliance with city nuisance and property maintenance regulations including removal of debris and abandoned materials. Uh compliance with all applicable codes. This approval is subject to compliance with all applicable zoning regulations, building codes, and fire codes. and approval of the storage containers does not authorize additional structures or expansion of commercial use beyond what currently exists on the property. Storage of hazardous or regulated materials within containers is prohibited unless authorized and in compliance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations. This recommendation is based on the following findings. For the character of the immediate neighborhood, the property to the east consists of a mix of commercial and rural residential properties with commercial properties located directly adjacent to 9975 Southwest Eugene. Properties to the north are largely vacant. Properties to the west are commercial in nature. Uh US 54 uh 400 is located directly to the south of the property. Consistency with the comp plan, vision, and character of the city of Augusta. The proposal is consistent with comprehensive plan, vision, and character of the city of Augusta. Comprehensive plan envisions this area as a major commercial land use. The existing land use of Riser well drilling aligns with this vision and is not expected to fundamentally change with the placement of two storage containers.

Accuracy of public utilities, roadways, and other needed public services relative to the anticipated impacts of the proposed use. No additional public utilities, roadways, or other public services are expected as a result of placing two storage containers on the property. Suitability of the uses to which the property has been restricted under its existing zoning. Uh the property meets the standards and intentions of a C3 district. The district is intended for moderate to heavy intensity commercial land uses and businesses having a regional market area. The storage of business equipment and materials associated with an existing commercial use is consistent with the intent of the C3 district. uh length of time the property has remained vacant as zoned. Property is currently occupied by riser well drilling and commercial business. The primary in structure has been in place since at least 1960 when the current building was erected. Um compatibility of the proposed district classification with nearby properties. No change to district classification is proposed. The existing C3 zoning designation is compatible with nearby commercially zoned properties and vacant parcels. nearby rural residential properties are separated from 9975 Southwest Eugene by either a commercial property or a vacant lot. The extent to which the zoning amendment may uh detrimentally affect nearby property. No significant adverse impacts to nearby property owners are anticipated as a result of the placement of two storage containers. Organizing materials currently stored outdoors into enclosed containers may improve overall site organization and safety. the proportionality of losses impacts to individual property owners in the immediate vicinity relative to the net public gain for the p for the community at large. It is not anticipated that any losses impacts to individual property owners in the immediate vicinity will occur as a result of the placement of two storage containers on a property. The community at large may experience a decrease in public safety concerns as

the property has fewer items left out in the open that may entice individuals to trespass and or steal. uh public input um or sentiment regarding the proposed use as voiced in the public hearing and other communications. Um as of the date of the report, staff received the following inquiries and comments in response to the public notice letters. Uh on February 23rd, a caller wanted to know how many storage containers would be placed on the property. Um when the caller was informed that the intention is for two storage containers for non-commercial use, um the caller stated that they were fine with that. Um on February 24th, a caller wanted to know what was intended to be placed in the containers. Um the caller stated they represented a board that oversaw a property that a notice was sent out to. Um caller was concerned that toxic materials would be placed in the containers. Uh once the caller was informed that the intention is to place items that are laying about on the property and containers as well as business equipment, um the caller stated that they had that they suspected that the board they report to uh would be okay with this and I have not heard any followup from from that individual sense. Um, next steps is the um, planning commission recommendation will be forwarded to the Augusta City Council for consideration on Monday, April 6, 2026 at 7 p.m. And as I scroll down here, um, here is the proposed site plan. Um, you can see the placement of the, uh, two proposed storage containers here, indicated by the red rectangles, excuse me. Um and then here is kind of a site plan that shows the distances. Um length of the nearest storage container from the property line is 100. We'll round up say

105 ft. Um some of that may differ based on which pixel pixels I clicked on as I was creating this. Um length to the edge of the highway is roughly 145 to 150 ft. And then to the center line of highway 54 is roughly 165 to 170 ft as indicated by the green line there. Uh for setback comparisons and I apologize um I had to rotate this just to make the image as large as I could. Um you can see oriented um right here again the red rectangles are indicating where the um proposed storage containers are as you follow this line um east west across um 54. You can see where other buildings are set up. Um so the storage containers will be set back significantly further than other uh buildings along there um meeting or excuse me far exceeding the um 100 ft set back from the center line public notification letter and then um just for visual reference um I I took a site visit out took some photos of of the property and again I rotated the photos to just try to make them as large as I could on the report here. Um, so I apologize for the awkward rotation. Um, so I'll kind of scroll through those. If you want to look at one in particular, let me know and I'll stop there.

Okay. At this time, I'm going to open the public hearing. You guys have any questions for staff or if anybody would like a caller that came on 224 that about this board? They sit on a board that oversees that property. Not not that property, a nearby property that received a public notice letter. Okay. I I assume it it's a nearby church, but I did not get confirmation of that. Okay.

Then I had another question on the um the conditions on number seven, outdoor storage, outdoor storage of equipment and materials should be limited to etc. I don't disagree with that, but what's that got to do with the storage containers? The cup is just an opportunity to put restrictions on the property. I mean, they're using it to store equipment, so we want to make sure it's inside if it can be inside. Obviously, their large equipment can't. Um, but you're welcome to revise any of these conditions or remove them if you don't think they're applicable.

Well, I kind question about number nine also, the maintenance, the property maintenance. Yeah. And that's a discussion for the board to have if you want to remove those from the list.

I disagree with them. I just don't know why they would connect those. So the C process is just an opportunity for us to put any restrictions on it that to mitigate any negative potential negative impacts. So there could be additional impacts. I mean they're storage containers. So I don't know if they say they're moving stuff that's currently on the property into the containers, but it could also become an issue where they're bringing more equipment and things onto the property just because they have the containers. Um, so this just gives us some authority with the CUP to also if we go out there for nuisance abatement, it can also affect their CU. But those items are probably already covered under the city nuisance anyway. Right.

Right. But they would follow a different process. They'd follow the nuisance abatement process and that would not affect the CUP itself. I was just curious why we stuck those on there. Does anybody out in the public want to come up and talk on this matter? If they do, just come up to the podium. name and address and visit.

We have done a lot already. Okay. Does the the state I mean I don't see anything like as far as like we're talking permanent storage units. Is there tie down requirements that the county has versus what we may have as a city or not? Not not that I'm aware of. like a what they're set on, you know, slabs, concrete, or anything of sort like that. Is there any things of the sort like that that we have? To the best of my knowledge, no. We don't have any requirements for tie downs, foundation, slabs, anything for storage containers.

Have any other questions before I close the public hearing? I was looking at you. Why not? You good? Okay. At this time, I'm going to close the public hearing and then we're going to go back through and we're just going to check out those findings of facts real quick if you guys don't mind. And I if you want to have a discussion as well on the recommendations that go with the CUP. Okay. Would be appropriate as well. Um, Jim, you mentioned those couple things. Is there anything you want to remove off there or you're cool with that as it's written?

Um, I I kind of hate ting her hands. Yeah. I don't know. I' I'd say I'd recommend we get rid of item seven or recommendation seven and number nine. Okay. I do too. They've been in business out there a long long time. Yes, sir. And actually, I think it looks kind of cool. I need to I'd say seven and nine to leave.

This is mainly just to protect what you have and keep it from being vandalized and stolen. Not really bring anything else in. I agree. I think seven and I would rem remind the board that a cup runs with the land as well,

not just the specific property owner. Now, if and that would there would be a lot of things that need to come into play with that like the storage containers would have to remain. If they sold, those would have to remain. If they were removed um for an extended period of time, they wouldn't be able to then bring them back and operate under the existing cup. But there is always a chance that it sells. The containers stay there. Those run with the land. So someone new could come in and use them. Now I know in the present and the near future that's probably not likely, but when we're setting these policies, we have to think beyond that. So want to throw that out there as well.

Is there ever a chance that this won't be in our growth area? Yes, there is a chance this won't be there are conversations at the county level about um changing the way that we operate the growth area. I would say like the way the agreement is written right now is that the city has authority over the zoning. Um and there is some conversations about about changing that. There would still be an opportunity for the city to provide feedback. um but but not regulate.

Correct. Yeah. And then there's also conversations that have been had at the state level as well to do away with ETJs. So there is always that chance. That's why we also like to talk to the county and see what their regulations are and compare them to ours and how we're operating and presenting these staff reports to you that are in the planning area. So we try and stay consistent with them if we feel it's appropriate. Then with that being said, if we did remove seven and nine, I don't see that in the future that would be a problem. I like that. Yeah. Okay. So, we're proposing taking out seven and nine. Yes.

One other question. If we do that and this has to go to council on April 7th, is that going to slow this down? I don't believe so. We would just that would your recommendation is what is going to the city council. So it will be exactly as you vote on it with the removing seven and nine from that list. They'll get this original staff report because we attach the minutes from this meeting. So they'll see the original staff report but in the recommendation that goes to them those items will be removed. How about down that side of the table? Anybody have any comments on the seven and n thing? good with that.

Okay. Okay. So, let's do the findings of fact and then when you do your motion, you can just do your motion to remove those and we'll go from there. Okay. Um findings of facts, character of the immediate neighborhood, adequacy of public utilities, roadways, and other needed public services relative to the anticipated impact of the proposed use. Suitability of the uses to which the property has been restricted under its existing zoning. Length of time the property has remained vacant as zoned. Compatibility of the proposed district classification with nearby properties. The extent to which the zoning amendment may detrimentally affect nearby properties. Proportionality of loss impact to individual property owners in the immediate vicinity relative to the net public gain of the community at large. Public input or sentiment regarding the proposed use as voiced in the public hearing and other communications.

I think did I miss consistency with the comprehensive? I think I did. Consistency with the comprehensive plan. Yeah, cuz it was up here. I missed it. vision and character of the city of Augusta. Thank you, sir. I know. Fact, please. I wanted to I wanted to read that last one in your voice. I was almost going to do public input and sentiment regarding the proposed use.

Thank um I'll entertain a motion. I make a motion to approve U case number 2026-02 conditional use permit to allow two storage containers at 9975 Southwest Eugene with the conditions as mentioned excluding number seven and number nine. Second. Okay, we have a motion and second. All in favor? Motion carries. Thank you for coming and going through the process. And sounds like you'll go to city council. What was that? April 7th. Uh, April 6th. April 6th. There you go. Yep.

Okay. Um, Sam, do we want to circle back to the first item that was on there? Are we still looking at that today? I was actually going to discuss that with you guys and see if you still wanted to go through that today since this has been a longer meeting already. Um, I do have PowerPoint presentation created. It is a little bit lengthier. can speedrun through if we want to. Um, we kind of threw something together just so that we could do this and figure out what would be useful for you guys to to go through um as we're reviewing that comp plan. Um, but up to you if you would like to to do that. It's 8:47, so I just want to be respectful of your time um and get your feedback on if you wanted to move forward with that item.

What are y'all thinking? Yeah, I have time. I'm here. Okay. That's kind of what I thought was just like we're all here right now. Give us the cliff notes version of it. Just wanted to read it. We didn't want to get into it and then everyone's super anxious to leave. 30 minutes here or what? Three hours. You know what? What time you got? No, we don't have to go through the whole PowerPoint. We can go through the first couple slides and just touch on what the demographics looked like in the comp plan compared to what we're seeing currently. I mean, not a whole lot has changed. Um, okay. So,

so if if there's something you want me to kind of start speedr runninging through, skipping through, we don't need to hear that. Just chime in. Let me know.

Pass. All right. That's a title slide here. Um just kind of a here's what the comp plan was designed to do. Uh it's designed to look 20 years into the future. Um envision what the environment is going to look like. Um and try to help guide our planning decisions as we go forward um through through the life of the comprehensive plan. uh population projection originally uh was envisioning by 2040 um that we would have 13,000 individuals and that by 2025 we would have roughly 11,000 individuals. Um currently uh population um as estimated by uh the quick reports for the census um estimate that uh Augusta population is roughly 9,100. So, we're not quite on target to meet those population growth expectations. Um, so the service and land use needs are going to project significantly lower than originally envisioned um back when the comp plan was created. Um if if land development um population growth starts to develop uh rapidly and quickly and suddenly um it will be because uh US 54 west of town um will have opened up and created significant demand. So something to kind of keep in mind that this can change suddenly um land use context. Um I don't know how much on this you want to go over um but essentially it breaks up the proportion of land use um by here's how much land

we have uh that's residential you know proportion of the total land um commercial industrial uh utility infrastructure uh public institutional parks open space agricultural and undeveloped um how many acres do we have in the city limits that are available for expansion. Do you know it's not that many, is it? I mean, there's not that many lots. I know that. Um, I haven't gone through and calculated the acres. I mean, it seems like there's not that much, but maybe more out there than I think.

No, there's not that much. There's that is one project that we have and I guess on our plan on our whiteboard is um to work with utilities as well, but we wanted to identify those vacant lots whether they're just like single one structure lots um and then we have the large area around the lake. Um but just to be able to go in and highlight those so we can easily see. We have made a vacant um lot registry I guess that we have internally um that our code enforcement officer helped us develop where there are where the houses have been kind of demolished and there's a vacant lot there. So we are trying to track that more more. We haven't gone through and put the acreage to it but that is something that we could do as a next step. And kind of on a separate issue, the development there on David in Ohio, is that still moving forward?

Yes. So, they have some incentives that they've been applying for through the state, some incentives and some um tax rebates. So, they had to go through that application process. We there'll be an item on the agenda um for the Monday council meeting um to move forward with our RHID which is that tax kind of increment financing um that the department of commerce offers. So they finally close on that piece of property. I am not aware. Sorry.

No. Um so as you all know um flood zones kind of limit our our growth potential as we're kind of hemmed in by uh two rivers. Um the plan envisions that any expansion west of the white water would be supported if measurable benefits will be realized. It doesn't define what those measurable benefits will be. So it's kind of open to interpretation. Um but the plan does state that there's a preference for infill type development. Um, so the Redbud Ridge development that we were just discussing would meet that or individual lot infill development is kind of what the plan states would be a a best use for us. Um, for the future land use, uh, we looked at this map a few times today. Um, the city limits largely mirrors what, um, exists today. Um, for US 54 West, it's primarily intended to be commercial, um, with residential kind of a little bit further removed north and south of those commercial districts. Um, for 54 East, um, it's largely envisioned to be agricultural with residential between Hopkins Switch and Purity Springs. Um, US77 largely, uh, envisioned to be, uh, industrial and utilities. And then North Ohio is um intended to be residential development with a couple of locations identified as potential spots for new commercial districts. Um I think these are kind of a rehashing of a lot of what we've already stated. So if you want me to go read it, I can. Um industrial essentially keep industrial by industrial. Um ideal spots would be to the southeast side of the railroad. Um keep it away from local uh local commercial and residential

properties. Um mitigate minor um negative impacts but don't allow any kind of major negative impacts. What major and minor are not defined in the plan. So a lot of that's kind of subjective as we go through and make those decisions. We just need to keep that in mind.

And I would say local commercial is more the commercial you see on Ohio. Like your general commercial is what you see on 7th and Walnut. So the local commercial is a lower intensity of commercial. So major commercial um located along highway corridors like Cammy was saying. So kind of along um 7th and Walnut um keep that kind of commercial traffic away from residential streets. So C3 next to um any kind of residential may not necessarily be an ideal pairing. Um minor negative impacts or lower intensity uses can be mitigated and again no major negative impacts. What those differences are kind of subjective and open-ended. Uh local commercial those are going to be our C1 districts. Uh so main or state street um and C2 kind of Ohio. um locate those along collector and arterial streets in the state street area. Um if we're going to put those into older established neighborhoods, minimize negative impacts from design and try to be context sensitive. Um these local commercial so the C2 uh is kind of what this is specifically speaking towards. um can serve as a buffer between uh the high intensity um excuse me the higher intensity C3 district and then lower intensity uses like residential or C1s um there again no major negative impact minor negative impacts can be mitigated uh mixed use um doesn't really have a whole lot of stated this is where we're envisioning this um we don't necessarily have a a stated this is where we want these uh types of districts to be located. Um it stated that we would like these to be uh used to revitalize centers, corridors, and employment areas

and improve access to services. Do we have an infrastructure that will support all these at this current level or no?

Within the city limits, yes. Um the infrastructure has capacity to be expanded. It's just the cost of expanding it beyond the city limits. It's not necessarily capacity issue. It's just it's yeah, it's to go a mile. You know, you're spending a million dollars on each utility. So, it's I know I'm rounding and like making it's probably not exact, but it is very expensive, especially sewer. Sewer, I would say, is the most expensive out of the utilities to expand. Um, so if we have to, you know, if there's a lot that won't get developed, but there's a lot on the other side, you still have to pay to go that mile or so. Or if we're needing to go under a river, I mean, that is going to add significant cost. It can be done. I mean, money can fix anything. Um, it's just if we're able to develop a plan that is financially feasible for us. Yeah. But I it's not necessarily a capacity issue.

High density residential um we want to locate those at intersections of arterial and or collector streets. Um if we're going to put uh these highdensity residential so um like your multifamily apartment complex uh style things um make sure that it's context sensitive. Um these types of districts can serve as a buffer between high-intensity uh use and uh lower density residential. So this would be kind of a transition between some of your commercial districts and um some of your larger uh either uh duplexes or single family uh properties. Um it's intended that they're not going to be located near um industrial or major commercial. um that manufactured home parks should be on large tracks and buffered from lower intensity residential uses. Uh lower density residential. Um it's envisioned that we're going to potentially expand north and east of town and to the northwest of Augusta Lake. Uh located in neighborhoods uh with low traffic volumes and speeds. uh buffer from industrial and major commercial uses with large open spaces, major streets or wooded areas and then create cohesive neighborhoods. Um so essentially if it's a single family envisioned environment, try to surround that as much by single family environment as we can with uh some exceptions for you know uh duplexes or potentially those slightly more intense residential uses. um gateway design. The plan envisions um for us to place development in relation to other uses and exhibit high quality design, signage, landscaping. I'm not sure how much this one is relevant. So, if you'd like, I'll just move past it.

Can we go back to the previous slide? Yes.

Um so, I think this might be where there's an opportunity to have discussion. Maybe not today. Um, but there is kind of a I don't even know what word I'm looking for. Um, the latest trend I would say is increasing housing density to be able to provide more attainable affordable housing. Um, so that's the trend that a lot of municipalities are moving towards. That's the trend that's being shared in our research documents and our peer reviews. Um so I think there is an opportunity to have that discussion. One of the items that municipalities are doing are just like looking to increase the density one notch kind of. So if you have your R1 district, you would be increasing what's allowed in R1 to R2. If you had R2, you'd be increasing density to R3. So you're not you're changing that density incrementally in each district. So, I'm just saying it might be an opportunity to have a discussion, especially the way the lots are here in Augusta is that they're long and narrow. There is an opportunity to maybe increase the density on on some of those lots in some of the areas. Um, so we can start putting together some more information to bring you, not necessarily revisions to the code yet, but just conceptually trying to have that conversation and see if that's a direction you want to move towards.

I would be more interested in having new development than trying to build with what we got. And a lot of that comes down to the financials. Um it's just cheaper um for us to do uh infill development because there's not new utility service lines that we'll have to create for it. So that's that's a lot of reason why infill is is the stated preferred preference. Yeah, I get it. It just doesn't get you.

Correct. I mean there's multiple things that need to be happening at once, right? So you have your infill development which is norm typically one or two lots that you're able to combine because you have a dilapidated structure that has been removed um for Augusta infill can also mean like this property at David in Ohio. Um, and that's an that's an example of kind of increasing that density with that PDIO that came through um where we looked at the setbacks and the lock coverage requirements and they're fitting a little bit more they're fitting more structures into that area than you would typically see in an R1. Um, so you did use that method, the PDIO method to increase density for that info lot. This would be looking at if you wanted to eventually put some wording in the regulations that allowed an increase in density without having to go through that PDO requirement. So, it would make it quicker for them to get through that planning process without having to come and do a separate PDO and get that approved. Um, cuz that is also a resoning item. So, that's why it kind of took a while to get through. The plats we can get through fairly quickly once we have them and have internally reviewed them because there's no public hearing requirements. That reszone and that PDO required a couple public hearings and a um protest period afterwards. So, we had to build those into the schedule. Yeah. And also with the new you could increase the density of new development that comes in. Um because a lot of our available land I would say is probably zoned R1 would be my guess. Um especially like around the lake and so if you wanted to

increase the density that could go in around there. We could look at some revisions to the code as well to support that and that would be new development but you'd be able to get more structures in. It's just a trend we're seeing. So I definitely want to be able to present something to you so we can have that conversation. What about like on on infill lots? Um decreasing the lot coverage. Is that something we could look at too? You know, like I know I've seen that a lot in like Andover, for example. You know, these homes are close, you know, they're close together, but they're fitting it's it's they're fitting more density, you know, into a into a smaller lot.

So, you can increase the lot coverage. I would also take a look at the policy around accessory dwelling units in the back just because we have so many lots that are really long. They have a lot of depth to them and a lot of times they are narrow. So you're already getting homes that are closer together cuz the lots and these are the old older established lots. They're narrow to begin with. So, we're already having to kind of adjust those side easements and the setbacks just because of the way it's already developed. But then they have all this space in the back. Windfield's like that that is

I mean it's basically their yard. There could be a way to put multiple units on a lot like that. When I used to appraise in Winfield, their lots are very similar older community, skinny, so they'd have a primary structure and then behind in an accessory structure that, you know, either worked for investment property or, you know, um just basically a secondary smaller house, but it did work well on these lots that are not very wide, but they're really deep.

Yes. And we see that what the excuse me the other obstacle we run into is that there's already an existing house on that lot. They do want to put an ADU in the back, but there's no way to access it because the primary structure takes up the whole front the width of the front yard. So there's no way to get back there. Um but there's ways to get around that and the regulations I you know it's it's kind of market driven too though. So if someone comes to us and wants to build something, I mean it the market is going to dictate if it's going to be successful. I mean it's the same with the parking requirements, the the ADUs on the lot, this the lot coverage. If people don't like it and don't want to invest in it, then it won't

A lot of them can't get financing for two dwellings on one lot,

right? Yeah. um more of us um development annexation um essentially just talking about city's process and desired um processes and goals if the city were to ever uh annex property. um want to have a discussion there, we can or if you'd like me to move on. And then non-development annexation, essentially just if we're going to annex um land that we intend to keep either vacant or agricultural or um you know, we we envision a new urban environment there, but it's likely to be vacant for a while. Um there really wasn't a whole lot of um noted information in this section and that's that's the last slide there.

That's all for today. Just one one question. Kuster Lane are I know I thought I've heard that in the future development that they'd really like to extend get Kuster Lane to extend north you know behind Belmont Place behind all that and get it is that but obviously that would be in something of this non-developmental annexation right because we don't own that land that's back there I didn't know if there if that's in the discussion of the future

um I've heard that discussion it's not something that's at the forefront it would be influenced by future development, right? There wouldn't necessarily be the need or ability to expand that without the development. But if developers started coming and land owners were looking for developers and that could definitely be part of that discussion that can be housing on that other side of it on Yeah, it it just it would come as part of that discussion. And so somebody said they wanted to develop it, but they wanted that extended or paved and it would be part of the negotiations for it.

That just seems to me like we've missed a big boom in the city with these subdivisions two a week for the last two years. Yeah. Knitting wise in in Augusta. population went in five years went down 175. I don't know.

Yeah. So I would say we have to look at our absorption rate as well um and what we are able to absorb. So are we attracting families to come here? A lot of that has to do with us working with the school district probably a little bit more too. I feel like the school district is an anchor that really attracts families and people to relocate to the community. So you have your recreation, your quality of life, your school district. If you look at all the other suburbs around Witchah and how they grew, it was rooted in their school district um and people moving out there. So I do think there's the opportunity. The energy is coming this way. Um, but I don't know if we've necessarily missed it. I would say a lot some of the development happening in the Witchaw metro area and in those suburbs is not the type of development that you would want. Not all development is good development. and some of those large kind of more duplex communities that are being built with hundreds of duplexes, that land is starting to get sold um because they're just not able to turn them.

What are they going to look like in 10 years? So, the development that we just approved there at um David in Ohio, I noticed they didn't get the tax credits. I I saw I don't think they like got approved for the tax credit. Are they still proceeding though as far as you know with the development? Yes, because we'll have an item on Monday on the agenda to move forward with the RHID. It's the second resolution we need to that we're required to do for the RHID. So, we are still moving forward with the project.

I just feel like sometimes it's a double-edged sword because we get a lot of grants. Josh writes a lot of grants and we get a lot of grant money because we're a small community under 10,000. Once you breach that over 10,000, I mean, that's been my understanding that you don't then you're moving up to medium size or whatever the next level is and the opportunity isn't there for as many grants. So that's and if that's what we're doing, trying to stay under 10,000 and let's say we're trying to stay under 10,000 and quit quit trying to beat the dead, you know, that's I mean that's just my opinion, Jake, and not Yeah, that's but I've heard that several times too. We have gotten a lot of I mean the utility thing that the electrical thing that just went up on under road.

Yeah. That was all grant. I mean there's just get done as a grant. Is a grant. Yeah. Yeah. I would say I'm not part of discussions like that where we're purposely trying to keep the population low. Those are not the discussions. I mean in my profession I would like to see more people moving to town. But as a resident I like our small town. I don't know where I want to be. Any other discussion points for today? I'm sorry. Make a motion we journ. Second. All in favor? All right. All right. Mean journed. Yeah. Did you ever get a hold of

You