Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

16th. And could we have the roll call, please?

Chairman McPherson here. Mayor Larky here. Council Member Pryan here. Commissioner Christensen here. Commissioner Crate here. Commissioner McDonough here. Commissioner Ruggles. Commissioner Shutt here. Commissioner Walton here.

OK, thank you. Several items of business this evening will include some consideration for a public hearing as part of the consideration. But first item we have at this point would be the review and approval of our minutes from the May 5th Planning Commission. Those have been distributed to everyone. Hopefully you've had a chance to look those over. Are there any corrections or changes that need to be made? And if not, I would entertain a motion to accept as prepared for us. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes from May 5th, 2026. Second it. All right. Motion is second. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. So under new business this evening, our first item is the presentation of PROJ 26-006. This is a request from Freedom Flex for approval of a rezoning from C2 general commercial to M1 light industrial and approval of a preliminary development plan and special use permit for a 13,750 square foot flex space major space and 50,000 square foot of many warehouses space in an M1 light industrial zoning district located on a 5.04 plus or minus acres at the southwest corner of East 171st Street and 58 Highway and South Prospect Avenue. And this item was originally on our agenda for April 21st. It was continued until our May 5th meeting, and it was continued at that point again. So we will be holding a public hearing for this, but we'll hear from our city planner, Ms. Fernandez, concerning the details.

Great, thank you. Oh, there's feedback.

That's awesome.

An application was filed for a rezoning for C2 general commercial to M1 light industrial and a preliminary development plan and special use permit to develop a 13,750 square foot commercial flex space and 50,000 square foot mini warehouse flex space units. at the southwest corner of East 171st Street and South Prospect Avenue. The property is bound by Simcoe and is across the street from the West Belton neighborhood. Currently, the site is mostly zoned light industrial with a commercially zoned strip along Prospect Avenue. The Freedom Flex Spaces proposes the development of a modern flex space designed to accommodate small businesses, contractors, and entrepreneurs. The project will consist of two primary building types that provide a mix of flexible commercial and industrial units intended to support a wide range of business operations. A longer list of potential uses or tenants is also in the packet if you wish to look at that. It's right after the narrative. A 100-foot deep C2 zoning strip or general commercial zone strip is on the frontage of this property currently and was designated in a rezoning in the mid-2000s. That strip is not wide enough to provide a sufficient depth for a standalone commercial development. Staff believes that the intent of the strip was to provide uses and site design that are compatible with residential on the east side or the West Belton neighborhood. And staff believes that the proposed development plan meets the intent by providing a storefront oriented design for the flex space building or the commercial flex space on that side. The M1 zoning district permits the development of a commercial flex space major and a mini warehouse space with a special use permit. Mini warehouse in this case is generally what we use for storage classifications. So it merely allows the option to use one of these spaces for storage. The proposed site plan and parking meets all UDC standards and there are no modifications requested based on the site plan. The site plan indicates that the 13,750 square foot commercial flex space is proposed to be oriented towards South Prospect Avenue to the east and the 50,000 square foot mini warehouse buildings are proposed to be at the rear of the property to the west. The proposed development includes approximately 50 mini warehouse flex space units and 10 commercial flex spaces on the front. The parking and access for the site is proposed to utilize the existing Simcoe Drive to the south and the two main points of access for both the parking lot and drive aisles would utilize Simcoe Drive. And Simcoe Drive is already platted as a shared access easement for both of the properties. The parking lot provides all required spaces for both uses while the drive aisles offer flexible loading and unloading space for the many warehouse units. The required sidewalk connection from the commercial building on the front of the site to the new alignment of South Prospect Avenue has also been provided. There's a sidewalk crossing here and this right of way shown here is where the new alignment of South Prospect Avenue would go in the future. Moving to the landscape plan. The site plan provides all required landscaping for the development, including street trees, parking lot screening, entry landscaping, and all of the required detention landscaping. The proposed detention area is located on the far west side of the site, and that meets all stormwater requirements, and that's this area back here. The commercial flex space is proposed a 10-unit flex space building on the east side of the site, which includes storefronts facing Prospect Avenue that include a mix of architectural metals, a masonry wainscot, and wooden accents. The rear of these units include overhead doors that face internally in a continuation of the architectural metal panels and masonry. This also meets all UDC requirements having the doors facing internally. And then the mini warehouse flex spaces provides, they do not include storefronts, but rather overhead doors and an entry door, all facing internally into the site, similar with architectural metal panels and the masonry wainscot that wraps the entirety of the building with more on the street-facing sides, north and south. So that meets all of our UDC standards as well. Based on the proposed development here with Freedom Flex Spaces, it meets all city standards and requirements in the UDC. The proposed use and site plan complies with the comprehensive plan, future land use plan, applicable site development standards, and is consistent with adjacent development properties. Staff believes that this proposed development will help fill a need in Belton for more flexible working environments for small local businesses and is consistent with the future land use map and adjacent land uses. We did receive an email in opposition to this project and that's listed in the back of your packet. With that, staff recommends approval of this project as presented with the three listed conditions in the staff report. I'm here for questions as well as the applicant.

Is there anything additional that the applicant would like to share? uh, with us before we open it for public hearing, we will open it. So you, if anyone has, uh, any comments that they would like to address, we'll be able to take those at that time, but we'll hear from the applicant first.

Uh, Jeff Bart's with own, um, represent the applicant. Uh, one comment that we wanted to make is some clarification on the condition number two, which is no outdoor storage. Uh, we just wanted to make sure that's clarified of no like material or supply storage. A lot of these contractors that are likely to rent these units, uh, typically have maybe a trailer and we have some space in the very back next to the detention basin that if they need to be able to park a trailer, we want to make sure that they have that no material, no loose material is intended to be stored.

Okay. I'll direct that back to staff. That's something that has been agreed to, is that correct?

That's acceptable, yes.

That is acceptable, okay. All right, thank you. Just for a point of clarification, this was zoned a number of years ago. Correct. The zoning assignment. Was the flex space an option at that time? I was thinking that flex space came along since then and so technically this probably would have qualified, it sounds like, if the space was not big enough at the front, this probably would have been zoned a little bit differently had this been an option at that time, is that correct?

Yes, flex space has recently been added to our land use table. So flex space was not historically part of our code. And our code still outside of our UDC update does not fully address flex space very well. So mini warehouse is just kind of the most intensive use that would allow all of the uses that they're potentially looking at here. And that's purely just to allow storage in some of those units. The intent here isn't to only do storage, it's for a flexible working environment, workspace. So that's kind of how it got classified in this case. But the historically zoned C2 portion was very small and would have a hard time fitting any sort of modern-day commercial development in there. But the property has majorly been M1 light industrial.

Thank you. I will ask, are there any... Before we open for the public, any comments or questions from the Commission?

I got one question. The right-of-way, that large right-of-way up front, was that originally that way when this was plotted? I guess I'm trying to figure out why they only did such a small sliver of C2. Did they take that after? Did we take that?

That was included when Simcoe was proposed back, I believe it was 2004. And when Simcoe did the plat, that right away was dedicated at that time with the rezoning. So the rezoning was always just the 100-foot deep strip. It was not 212, and then we dedicated 112 of that. All right.

Anyone else from commission at this point? More opportunity for questions. So we will go ahead and call to session the public hearing on this. And we'd ask if there is anyone that would like to speak either in favor or in opposition to this proposal. If you'll come to the podium, state your name for the record. And need an address as well for the secretary. Thank you. State your name and address. We'll ask, is there anyone here that would like to speak in favor or in opposition?

Darren Campbell, 410 West Sunrise Drive. I'm in opposition of it. We've got enough storage and crap around here. all of North Scott could be redone and made it look nicer and put those storage and those businesses out front. Let's do that. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else in favor or in opposition? Let's go one more time. Seeing none. We will close our public hearing. and bring it back to the commissioners. Any additional questions or comments from anyone on the commission?

For the warehouse, the storage area, could anybody rent that or do you have to be a business to rent those? So could I walk up and do it for my household storage?

I am not privy to their lease agreement, but yes, under our use table. Sure. Let's have the applicant answer that.

You're good.

Hi, I'm Patrick Meismer. I'm the one who's wanting to develop the project. No, it would be open for private storage. Have you heard of the contract? You've heard of contractor type garages. What do they call them? Man cave type, man condo or whatever. Put your RV in there. That's what we're wanting to see. And as far as storage when we originally approached the city my thought was to put in a mini storage slash contractor garages and the city is the one um, who, uh, um, you know, and kind of enlightened me to the flex space use that has come around. It is for, it is going to be for maybe a bakery. Um, you know, TJ's cafe down here. So they don't make all, I'm guessing they don't make all the pies in there. They have a place where they take them and they make them and stuff. Um, it may be for a training facility and the garage on the back, you may open it up and, just give them some ventilation through the unit. So no, it'll be absolutely open to more uses. And since I've purchased the property, I don't know if the local residents have noticed, but we've kept it maintained, cut the grass. A little bit of plastic comes from Simcoe, no big deal. So it'll be a nice property. As I even mentioned to the architect, he's like, are you sure you want to put some wood features on the outside, some beams and stuff like that? I said, yeah, absolutely. It's going to be more to maintain it. We're going to put a nice property there.

I have a follow-up for you. Don't go too far, Patrick. Would you allow hazardous chemicals to be stored there?

Oh, my gosh. that's more of a fire marshal. I was going to back that up with the city's spot. You know what? You're hitting me on something that I'm, you know, I'm not seeing that. All right. Give me an example of what kind of a business would be storing, uh,

there's all kinds of businesses that store things that could be caustic and hazardous to people that live right across the street. So sure.

And I'm like, wouldn't they have to get like a, an occupancy permit from the city?

I'm going to back it up with the city people. Can they store anything hazardous there? Even if they say yes.

No, and we included that as a condition in the staff report related to number three. And building and fire codes, these would be built to a certain building and fire code and hazardous material storage is its own separate use group that we would not entertain at this location.

Yeah, we're really not looking to have it be whenever you see, you know, several mechanic shops there and like I said, you know, a bunch of... parts of cars and vehicles out there. It's not going to be like that. I, I come from a property management background and anyone who knows me knows that. Yeah. Uh, I go, I think I'd like to think I go above and beyond to maintain my stuff. Okay. I just thought I'd bring it. No, no, no. Yeah. You hit me. I kind of, yeah. Anything.

Yes, since this is just the preliminary development plan, we'll be able to drill down more into those details with the final development plan where we can talk about the sprinklers and the firewall situation for all the units, which would help determine the unit mix. Gotcha.

Thank you.

I would like to just mention what, uh, and, and, uh, the planner did mention that there was a email that we've received and just to acknowledge something that was stated in there. And part of the opposition was proposed warehouse and flux-based development is the way that they stated it. I think, unfortunately, we have become kind of gun-shy whenever we hear the word warehouse. We think of these massive warehouses that are along the highway. Those have been developed. That is not at all, as I looked at the plan, what I saw with this. This is more just like the little garage sites for storage and not a massive warehouse like what we are sometimes immediately causing our mind to go to when we hear that. So I do want to just address, that was one of the concerns that was in that letter, and I just wanted to make sure that if there is anyone that is concerned that they're gonna have another one of these big warehouses like what they see out on 49 or down a little further south, on 49, that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about something that would be more of a single level. A lot of the things that I saw, it looked like maybe the, we were well below all of the maximum standards as far as the height, so it's not gonna be a tall building or anything like that. So just for any that might be a little concerned that that's what they're gonna be looking at, I just wanted to go ahead and make that observation as well from information we have received. Any other from the commissioners? Comments, questions? Are you guys okay with this? I would entertain a motion if there's no other discussion.

I'll make a motion to recommend approval of the preliminary development plan rezoning and special use permit for Freedom Plug Space as presented.

Second. All right, we do have a motion and a second. And just a point of clarification, can we handle both of these in one vote or do we need to do two separate votes, one for the rezoning? and then one for the special use permit.

Since the special use permit is standalone, I would do two different motions. I would have one for the rezoning and the preliminary development plan because that's a standalone request.

So I retract my motion and make a new motion to recommend approval of preliminary development plan and rezoning for Freedom Pluck space as presented. Second.

Second. Retracted and resecond? Yes. Okay. Exactly. All right. Any final discussion? Seeing none, could we have the roll call, please?

Commissioner Christensen? No. Commissioner Schutt?

Aye.

Councilmember Bryan?

Aye.

Commissioner Creight?

No.

Commissioner McDonough?

Aye.

Commissioner Walton? Aye.

Aye, I guess.

Mayor Larkey?

Yes.

Chairman McPherson?

Aye.

Okay. So now we have passed that. We would entertain a motion for the special use permit that would allow for the mini warehouse space.

I make a motion to approve the special use permit for Freedom Flux space as presented. Second.

Okay. Motion is second. Any comments? Seeing none, could we have the roll call, please?

Council Member Pryan?

Aye.

Chairman McPherson?

Aye.

Commissioner McDonough?

Aye.

Commissioner Christensen?

No.

Commissioner Crate?

No.

Commissioner Walton?

Aye.

Commissioner Shutt?

Aye.

Mayor Larkey? Yes.

All right. Thank you. We will move now to our next item of business, which is the presentation of PROJ 26-017. This is a request from Commodities USA LLC to allow an auto repair minor land use in a C2 general commercial zoning district on a 0.38 plus or minus acre property at 116,000 square feet. Wilbur Parish Circle. And we'll ask our planner, Ms. Fernandez, to present that for us.

Thank you. An application was filed for a special use permit to operate a minor auto repair business in a C2 general zoning district, general commercial zoning district. The property is located near the southeast corner of North Scott Avenue and Wilbur Parish Circle at 116 Wilbur Parish Circle. The property is bound by other commercial industrial properties. Commodities previously was located on Bellaray Place and would like to relocate their business to this location. The address was previously occupied by Happy Lemon Tree Company, which was a construction sales and service business and no improvements or changes are proposed on the site currently. The C2 zoning district permits auto repair or minor auto repair with a special use permit. 116 Wool Repair Circle is the westernmost unit in this building shown in the site plan here with one overhead door and a gated parking lot. The site plan indicates that the five spaces on the west side of the parking lot would be used for cars in rotation, and the remaining three spaces would be used for employee and customer parking. One of these eight spaces is required to be designated as an ADA space. The site currently does not have an ADA space on site, which would be required to meet all ADA standards. The proposed plan meets all UDC standards outside of that requested ADA space on the property. Staff believes that this proposal is another positive project on the North Scott Corridor since the modifications to the overlay. This small local business wishes to stay in Belton and offers training and mentoring opportunities in vehicle repair. Staff recommends approval of this application with the four conditions listed in the staff report. I'm here for any questions and so is the applicant.

All right, thank you. We will ask the applicant, is there any additional information that you would like to share with the council? If you'll come to the podium, I think. Again, state your name and address for the record, please.

Hi, Melanie Curry, 116 Wilbur Parish. I just wanted to say, I know there are a lot of automotive businesses already in Belton, but this is really just, we are scaling down to be more of a training and consulting facility, but still assisting our current customer base. So we do want to still offer them a space where they can come get minor and light car work. So there will be no heavy duty operation, no engine overhauls, transmissions and things like that. It's all very lightweight work. And then we would liaison with other automotive businesses in Belton to outsource those types of jobs.

All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Again, we'll do the same. We will have a public hearing on this, but I will ask if there's any questions or comments from any of the commissioners before we do that.

this is going to be me explaining. I don't understand this map. So where exactly on that layout is this building going to go or this business going to go? Is it the vacant bay that I see?

Um, we're at the office space. Okay. And so the vacant spots are where vehicles will be parked.

I can probably scroll back. I know this is hard to see. But this is the footprint of the entire building. And then this is the second unit in that building. And then this highlighted more colorful part is their unit in this building. It's a multi-tenant building. And this is their one bay door here. And then this dotted line here is a gated parking lot.

So it's to the back part of that property? Okay.

Yep. And then this is their current driveway here. So this driveway comes into this parking lot, and this is where they're proposing to have their in-rotation cars, and then these are their kind of accessory parking spaces.

And I think I will add where the mailbox is is where the street. That's Wilbur Parish. That's the street.

So that is the front. So the mailbox is on the same side of the street as the business?

Correct.

Okay. Thank you.

Again, just a point of clarification for me. The definition for the vehicle repair minor indicates, you know, does not involve body work or painting and the other items that you mentioned. My question is, is the painting part of the auto part And if so, is that connected or is that a separate business that is not included in what we are considering at this point?

That is a separate business. That is an adjoining tenant space. And it's not auto painting either.

Okay. Just thought that could create some questions for others when they looked at that and saw the painting there. Yeah, I can see that, yeah. That was what I understood.

That's the next door neighbor.

Okay. Okay. All right, any other questions or comments before we open this up for public?

So that would be a space that would be permanently occupied where it's not for customer parking.

Commissioner, can you turn your mic on, please?

Paul is actually the owner of this building and he uses parking on this.

Um, Oh, so the owner just parks his trailer there and these other four parking spots.

Yes.

Okay. All right. I guess.

Okay. All right. Anyone else from commission? If not, we will call into session public hearing. for the special use permit. And again, we'll ask if there's anyone here that would like to speak in favor or... Excuse me. I've not been talking much lately. Getting all choked up? In opposition or in favor of the request for special use permit? If you'll just, again, come to the podium, state your name and address for the record. Appreciate it.

Hello, everybody. My name is Emily Perez. I'm one of the owners over at Cox Air Systems. We are located at 127 Wilbur Parish. We are in the cul-de-sac that they are requesting to be able to park. We've been having multiple issues for several years with this situation. Basically, we are an industrial sheet metal shop, so we have semis at materials all throughout the day and it's creating a traffic backup on North Scott when the semis have to back up and it's creating people having to weave around it's creating a safety hazard and honestly the area that they are pointing to it's really more of a driveway it's not a parking lot and it just feels like poor judgment to have a auto body repair company not have a parking lot and all of us neighbors including our neighbors who are also an industrial company, we all provide a large parking lot for our customers and employees to use. So it's just creating a whole lot of problems for something that just seems like poor planning.

That's all I have to say. Thank you.

All right. Anyone else would like to speak in favor or in opposition at this point? We'll ask one more time while we have the public session open. Anyone else to speak? We will close the public hearing then. And I am going to ask staff, is this issue something that the city is aware of? Is it something that is being worked on? Has it been worked on? Are there any discussions in how that can be handled?

Yeah, so council did approve no on-street parking in Wilbur Parish Circle. Do you remember what date that was, the council meeting?

I believe that was either the last meeting or one of the meetings in May for a second reading, and that removes parking on the cul-de-sac. So there still is on-street parking on the part that's not on the cul-de-sac out to North Scott, although it's fairly limited because there's a number of driveways and fire hydrants there. But most of the cul-de-sac will be signed no parking. The signs may not be up yet, but those will be installed soon.

Based on the limited amount of on-street parking on this side of the street, there wouldn't be much opportunity for on-street parking anyway with the mailboxes and the driveways on that side. With the council voting to put no parking on the cul-de-sac, I believe that issue would be resolved.

I have something to say. I'm getting older, but I swear We also did one side of the street so they couldn't block the stop sign, basically.

Yes, there is one strip, and I forget the distance, but one strip on the west side of Wilbur Parish as well to allow view out onto North Scott.

Right, for safety reasons.

Correct.

And of course, no one would park in front of a mailbox.

Of course not.

Do we have any idea number of cars that would be there on a daily basis with the business? Because I guess I'm thinking you said possibly some training or something like that. Does that mean that it's going to fluctuate or are we talking just very limited number of people that would be coming in?

It would be a limited number. It's appointment only. So customers are not allowed to just randomly drop their vehicles off.

Were you aware of the new parking situation on the street? Yes. Okay. I didn't want to drop a bombshell.

All right. Any other questions, comments from anyone on the commission? I see that.

Hi. With the training and all that, the people that come in that are doing the training, I'm assuming they're students, are they going to get some credit for this?

Do you know what the plan is on that yet? Not the plan on that yet. That's in the works. But we're looking to partner with Belton High School and in the community schools and young people in the neighborhood for them to have the opportunity to learn how to fix on vehicles. So as far as when we say training, it's not like it's 50 people coming in and training. It will be, again, scheduled and limited since we know our spacing and parking is limited. But even ourselves as a staff and our employees, we do not park on the street either.

So with the people that are coming and the students coming to learn, where did they park at?

They could park. So if we knew training was coming, we would make sure that there weren't any customer vehicles out there. So really that's for customer pickup. So we're servicing no more than three cars at a time.

And as I understand, you're already in Belton on Belray Place and we're wanting to keep you here. And you're wanting to stay here. I think that's the most important thing is the fact that you're wanting to keep your business here in Belton. So appreciate that. Any other comments, questions? Lord would entertain a motion on the special use permit.

I'll make a motion to permit the special use permit on project J26-017 as presented. Second.

All right. Thank you. Motion second. Any final comments? Seeing none, could we have the roll call, please?

This is a motion to approve it?

This is approving the special use permit. Yes. To allow the business to go in there. Okay. Thanks for the clarification. Yeah.

Commissioner Crate?

Aye.

Commissioner Christensen? Yes. Mayor Larkey?

Yes.

Chairman McPherson?

Aye.

Council Member Bryan?

Aye.

Commissioner Schutt?

Aye.

Commissioner McDonough?

Aye.

Commissioner Walton?

Aye. All right, thank you. Move on to our next item, which is the presentation of PROJ 26-008, Request from Community Development Staff for the Vacation of undeveloped portions of the final plat of Spanish Villa lots, 128 to 212, including rights of way and easements on 22.67 plus or minus acres located south of Mill Street and west of Lacey Lane. And we will have our community development director present that.

Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. Before this evening is a request to vacate the undeveloped portion of the Spanish Villa subdivisions, which includes lots 128 through 212. This subject property covers a little under 23 acres. and was plotted back in the 1970s and was never developed. In 2021, the city acquired the property for regional detention as part of the overall Hargis Gardens and subdivisions to the south for regional stormwater improvements. Approximately the west half of the property was turned into a detention facility. And so the request is to vacate this subdivision plat which would include all the right right-of-ways lot lines easements and Eventually the second item on the agenda after this is to replant that into two tracks staff did reach out to all the utility companies and And we worked with utility companies on making sure that some of their existing easements are protected. Specifically, they have utilized the back of the lots on the north side of Sunrise and the lots on the west side of Lacey for utility easements. And so those items have been addressed and incorporated into the final plat or the replat of this that will be coming forward on the second item tonight. So, with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Any questions from the commissioners before we go to our public hearing on this one? All right. Seeing none, we will call into session our public hearing for the vacation of this plat. Is there anyone here that would like to speak in favor or in opposition. Again, same rules we've had all along.

Yeah, my name is Ken Straw. I live at 400 Mill Street. I've got 400 feet of Mill Street. My lot is 400 feet wide, 300 feet deep. I bought the old Huffman House back in 15. I've seen your plans here. Are you guys planning on just knocking down all of the trees and... like clear-cutting that and building a neighborhood across the street for me?

So the replat, which is the second item, is essentially we've already removed...

I've seen what you did there, and that really helps the flooding issues.

So that will be retained by the city for long-term stormwater retention. And then Tract B, there's approximately 12 acres there. that will still be owned by the city. Eventually the plan is to put that out for an RFP or request for proposals. So there's no proposals now? There's no proposals now. It would be a private developer that the city would eventually work with on that. But our intent as part of that is to try to preserve as many trees as possible around the perimeter of the site. and particularly along Mill Street since there's already kind of a low line area.

There's a big creek there.

Yeah, so we're probably not even going to develop up to Mill Street.

If you leave my view alone, I don't care what you do behind the creek, okay?

So yeah, I don't anticipate anything along Mill Street being disturbed as part of any future development. Okay, great. Great to hear.

I'm not opposed then if they're going to leave my trees.

The main focus with this tonight is to preserve that detention to get that detention in a track by itself so we can maintain it. Right now, that detention center has lots plotted on it, so the main thing here is to get that detention into one track. and then we can do something in the future.

Well, I'm like the highway. Since I got the widest strip of land there, I kill over 100 mice in my house every year because I come out of that woods. I had a mother skunk build a nest underneath my sunroom and had six babies that I watched walk around my yard last summer. All kinds of deer. If somebody does develop that, I hope they do have a plan for when they... do clear-cut all that, they're going to dislocate a lot of wildlife. Because I've lived there for 11, 12 years. And as far as I know, the people I bought the house from, the Huffmans, they owned it since the 50s. They built it in the 50s. And they said it's always been a wooded area like that. So it's been like that for forever. It used to be a lake, a long, long time. They told me that. There was a pond right across the street.

We have policies against clear-cutting. And so whenever the RFP does go out, preserving existing trees would be a number one priority here. And if developed, we doubt there's going to be more than that. 10, 20 homes that would be built here.

Very small.

That's way more than what the ground is able to take now after the detention.

Because there's still a lot of water.

Correct. The development would be very small, if anything.

We are still in our public hearing on this. Anyone else?

Elizabeth Peterson, I live at 501 West Sunrise Drive. I've lived there for 36 years. I built my house there. And I just want to make sure you guys are, what you're saying is what I'm understanding, that you're not gonna rip out that whole area back there and put in an apartment complex. Don't want that. Nobody wants that.

No, like I said, we're putting it into two tracks. Track A is for all the detention work that we did for all the flooding issues that we fixed. And then track B will be for single family residential life. If somebody wants to do it. We haven't put it out yet, but we're just, like I said, separating off the detention area so we can keep that.

The dead end street right there at Sunrise Drive, off of Volley, Volley and Sunrise, that's where they built the reservoir there. Now, you're talking about the track from the house that starts at the end of that reservoir that goes back towards Lacey and back up to Mill. Can you see this? think that's what you're talking about here's valley right here right so i live right here okay at five five oh one okay okay this reservoir is right here all that track to land there it goes back to mill street so this is the proposed track for detention that we're proposing now okay so these houses that are on sunrise going up this direction that are on the back side of the street here that backs up against that wooded area. Is this gonna be, you're saying that it'll probably be family homes?

Yeah, the property is zoned single family.

There won't be that many of them?

Yeah, when we put out a request proposal, our intent is to specifically try to conserve as much of the natural landscaping that's in there.

Because what the gentleman said before is true.

When that reservoir was taken out, was put in there, it did displace a lot of the animals already because, I mean, we had fox and we still have deer in the middle of the night come up. We don't want a big lighted area. Just with putting in the big high school that they did with all those big lights, Where I live, I can still see those floodlights when they have the football games. And even with the grown trees that we have now, we can still see that and hear the noise. We don't need the added traffic because the roads aren't built for that. We already have problems with the schools and the parents parking along streets that are saying, don't park on this side of the road, but yet they're all the way up to the stop sign on Lacey, all the way up to Mill Street. And it does cause traffic problems.

It would be a small number of homes, and any development plan that is submitted once we receive one would go through the planning approval process.

I mean, I'm okay with it as long as we don't get a big apartment. We don't need any more of that. It's not zoned for that.

We've got enough of that here.

Thank you. You're welcome.

Director, maybe I could ask.

ask you to just explain a little bit for the ones that are here and those watching what the platting process is. Because this was platted back in the 70s. And I believe in the packet there is a picture of what was actually platted. And so if they can understand maybe what we are doing as far as changing this plat, I think maybe that could help.

Yeah, so legally this is what is currently on the books for this property. So it's over 100, I believe it's around 100 lots, 90 to 100 lots that are platted. Obviously the city came in, acquired this. We've taken off a decent amount of about half of it for the detention area. but technically the remainder of this still exists. It would have to be modified to develop that. Some of these streets would have to be cul-de-sac to make that work and obviously some of these lots along Mill Street wouldn't work anyway because of the ditch that's there. And so we felt like it is the best path forward is to just remove this entirely. That way there's no question as to this cannot be developed here and replant it as this. Track day is what the city has determined to be the extent of the detention area that's already been developed. Track B is the remainder, which is about 12 and a half acres, and this is the portion that the city could potentially declare as excess, and then we would put it out for a request for proposals and work with private developers to bring a project forward that is in character with the surrounding neighborhood and also preserving the natural features of the site to the best it's possible.

Appreciate it.

Yes. Aaron Campbell, 410 West Sunrise Drive. So my big question is you're going to go in and build on track B eventually. How far up to my gate are you wanting to come? Because I watched the detention center or the pond go in, and you guys literally went right back to there on that.

I'm not entirely sure which lot is yours there, but anything that's along track B, somebody could go up to the property line there. But again, we would try to work with a developer on trying to preserve the trees along that perimeter. That's where also the utilities already have easements there. That's why we preserve their easements along those properties. So there's already access there for Evergy and any other utilities that may have lines on the rear of the properties.

So what was the plan for this property before you guys purchased it from Mr. Thompson a few years ago?

It was this. It was privately owned.

You would have never built on private property.

We wouldn't have, but we specifically acquired it for the detention. But prior to the city acquiring it, this is the plan that was approved. The previous owner could have sold it to somebody other than the city and developed that project.

So if you were to develop it, where would all the kids go to school at? Hillcrest still? What are you going to do to manage that traffic that you guys can't manage as it is?

I don't know that they would go to Hillcrest because the Hillcrest is the steam school. So that draws from all over the city.

Mill Creek, right there by the same. We'd still have the same congestion, but more.

Mill Creek or probably Cambridge if they're not in the steam school. It would go to Mill Creek, 5th and 6th, and then Cambridge.

Well, I bought my house, this house in 05. I've lived in Belton since 1989. I'm in complete opposition of this, just so everybody knows. I don't want anybody building. I bought that house for that view. That's the only reason why I moved out. If not, I mean, that's what we're going to do. I'll just sell and move out to the country. But I'm in complete opposition. You guys don't have the resources to do it. You don't have the planning for the kids. You don't have sidewalks for them to walk. I mean, it's already over congestion now. So there's no way that that can handle all that. more houses back there.

One thing I would mention, city is not doing anything. All they want to do is they want to remove this plan that has all of the individual lots to build all of those houses, those 100 houses in that area. That's the way it is on the record right now. Anybody could come in, buy that property and they could build those houses and the city would not have a say.

Yeah, they could. There's a reason why they haven't.

But what the city is wanting to do is they're wanting to take that. They own the property now. With the replant, what it's going to say is we're no longer going to support putting those houses in there. We're going to set this aside for a detention center. We're going to set this aside for possible future development. The city does not develop anything. The city does not build anything as far as homes. They sell it to a developer. The developer has to then plan and work with the city to get approval and zoning for what they want to do. And so at this point, all the city's wanting to do is say, We want to get rid of this old plan from the 70s and we want to have two spots. That's all we're discussing tonight. We're not discussing anything future because there is nothing on the table at this point. That's all we're discussing is whether or not to replant this.

I'm in opposition just so we know.

Not to my one voice matter. All right. Anyone else? would like to speak in favor or in opposition.

Hi, my name's Kevin Adams. I live at 408 Lacey Lane. From what I understand, the plot B is going to be directly up against my backyard. Now, I've heard you say that maybe 10 houses or whatever, but I haven't heard anything about it being set in stone. We're making assumptions here. and then I'm supposed to approve this ahead of time, and then before I know it, I'm going to have houses directly behind my house, which I bought this house because of those woods, and I bought the house because of the wildlife. That's the main reason why I moved to this town, because I wanted to be close to the city, but still have a little bit of the country or whatever it may be. What I'm having a hard time understanding, though, is how can we... ask this community to approve something that we don't even know what's going in yet?

Approving this is just going to put it into two tracks. Track A, which is the detention. No, I understand that. Track B is whatever's left. Now, in the future, the city may decide to put it out for a proposal for someone to develop that. that that would all be done in the future. None of that is done today.

The only thing... No, I understand that, but what I'd like to do is get ahead of that. I understand. And so I would recommend that we vote this down. That way we don't have to worry about that in the long run. Because the one before had all those plots. I don't see anything that says that down the line, when this goes up for development, that track B isn't going to turn into 50 houses. We've talked about the roads. I can't get out of my house at 4 o'clock every day because of the lineups.

Okay, I am going to have to ask that we do limit discussion to what we're talking about, which is the tracks, not future, because we have no control over the future. And tonight, that's all we're talking about.

Okay, I understand that. What I'm trying to say is I want to get ahead of this. I understand that you're asking for two tracks. And I'm against the two tracks. So that's all I'm saying.

I had this happen in my backyard. several years ago where we had trees, we have animals, we still have deer in my backyard eating my garden. I'd love to get rid of them. And we've built new houses and still can't get rid of them. I'm still mad. But anyway, I get what you're saying. And the problem, I'll tell you, this is what I've been told and have heard for years from all, not just in Belton, from all sorts of sources, the only thing that's guaranteed is change. And if you buy someplace because of the way it is now, the only thing that's going to be guaranteed is it's going to change at some point.

Well, that's not necessarily true. I mean, you're basically trying to say that no matter what you do, you will be at the mercy of somebody else down the line. And that's not why I bought the house. I'm with that guy. Like, if this gets approved or goes in, then I'm selling, so.

The only thing I can tell you is if we vote this down tonight, you could end up with 100 houses in your backyard tomorrow. And how is that? Because that's what's already on the books. We're trying to get rid of that so that the plan is there's nothing that will be in your backyard tomorrow.

That's what we're voting on. You're minimizing what will be in my backyard, not just putting nothing. You just said that track B will have houses in it.

All we are discussing tonight is whether we leave the plat with 100 houses or whether we go to a plat that has no houses. That's all we are discussing this evening. That's the only thing that is on the table.

So you're willing to say that track B will never have houses?

So if I could just interject real quick and maybe just give a little bit of background on what a plat is. So on this previous plot, you see all these lots, right? Which is where you would typically build a single family home. These are all plotted for homes, right, on this previous one that's currently on the property. And then we have the new plat that we have here which isn't plotted for any homes currently. So this is what we're proposing now to hold it with no development proposed until an RFP is put out and a developer submits their ideas for the property. So if a developer is selected through the RFP process, they would have to replat again to actually put homes on the property. So you would see this again in this exact same meeting, again, showing what the developer would like to do. Correct.

have a say in, right? You're right now giving your... But it's still up to you guys.

Correct. They are appointed to the Planning Commission, but they're also here listening to you all and your concerns. And I think not to speak for them, but we all very much care about the community that we work for.

That's all I got to say. Thank you.

And I did just want to make clear that we are discussing strictly that one item this evening. We're not projecting what if. I mean, Disney could come and buy it and put it in Disneyland out there. We don't know what could happen tomorrow. But as of right now, all we are looking at is do we want to leave it planted with all those lots or do we want to make it just basically one empty lot and then somebody would have to come up with a plan to go into that at that point.

Yes? Angelica Campbell. I live at 410 West Sunrise Drive. My question is when you guys say detention center, you guys are actually talking about the water reservoir, correct?

Yes.

Okay, so with the prior picture that you guys had where all those houses were is basically null and void anyways because you already put in the water reservoir, correct? I mean, it's back there, right?

Correct.

Correct.

But someone still could purchase the property and build up to the detention with this plan here that's plotted. That's why we want to get...

Right, but the Tract A is already said and done. It's already there.

Correct.

So really it's just Tract B.

There is no Tract B on this, and someone could purchase it from the city and do as much of this as there outside of Tract... what would have been Tract A if we did it.

Right, but what I'm saying is track day is already, it's null and void because the water reservoir is already there, correct?

Correct, 100% correct.

So then really it's plat B we're talking about here because unless you're going to fill that and then cause flooding again for all the people on West Sunrise.

Can I try? We're trying to make track day official though. We all know it's there. We know the detention center's there. We are putting it in the books that it's there permanently.

I figured you guys would have already done that to begin with considering you put in the water reservoir. Sounds like you kind of were coming in the back side of that one.

We're just trying to get stuff done.

Good to know. With the plot B, what is 10, 12 houses really going to do?

It's 10 or 12 more than we have in Belton now.

We are already overpopulated and everybody here knows that. I mean, let's be honest.

We got a dire need for houses.

We don't have a dire need for houses. You guys just threw up all these apartment complexes. I mean, seriously, there's no dire need for houses. Belton, I'll be honest with you, it was better as a smaller town. It seems to me that you guys are trying to keep up with Lee's Summit and all those areas, which it's whatever. But the traffic is outrageous. The crime is outrageous. It doesn't matter. Ten more houses. What are ten more houses really going to do?

Okay, let's bring it to order, okay? I'm sorry, but we're going to bring it to order or we'll close the public hearing, okay? This is not a town hall, and we do ask that you follow the rules. If you don't know what they are, they are listed on the agenda for you so you can tell exactly what is accepted.

I do have a list of speakers. I have one more question. You guys say you want to break this into the two, make it legal now because you've already broken it down into the two.

Didn't say it was illegal. We own the land.

Well, you bought the property from Thompson. I personally know this person because they built my house. Now, so they tracked all of these to develop these houses and they never did. Thank goodness. But so what you want to do now is keep the reservoir, what it is, even though you guys already own all of this property, the city of Belton owns all of this cause you bought it all from him. So now you want to, okay, make it right on paper that you guys have already got your track day with reservoir. So now you want your track B legally on paper. That's all you're trying to do. So that you can then sell that track B to whoever wants to come in and develop it. Potentially.

And that will require another public hearing.

When we can get up here and say, no, we don't want it.

You could say no right now, and there's the possibility that 100 houses will go in if this goes.

Right. I don't want the 100 houses. I'd rather not even have the 11.

And you could always buy that track B. Sure. And then no one will move in there.

Just as long as you don't sell that until after I'm dead.

I understand. I hope that's a long time.

I just want to ask one more. What does it matter if we change how it's zoned or plotted or whatever? If it's plotted for 100 and you guys are only going to put 12 in it, what's it matter?

We're not putting anything in it. We're putting zero in it.

Eventually maybe sell it so somebody else can put 12 in it. But if it's already plotted for those homes, why wouldn't you guys make the money and put all the 12 homes in it and let people build and generate some money instead of having townhomes and apartments?

Do you know how much money it takes to develop?

I know how much money I pay in city taxes.

It takes an awful lot for a developer and that's why sometimes areas are hard to get developed is because it takes an awful lot to get that done.

Patricia Brooks at 303 Lacey Court. I have a question because I'm confused too. We have two plots near the end of Lacey Lane and Mill Street. So will you all be redeveloping that too?

Is that up here in the corner?

It's right on the corner. There's two plots there, or tracks there.

Yeah, that's part of what would be part of track B.

I think, too, the reason why we're kind of confused with all this, too, because we're of the age, we need visuals, better visuals, where you can actually see the project at hand. So I think that's where a lot of the confusion is, too. And that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you. I do got a question.

Bar 306 Lacey Lane. I'm adamantly opposed to this because I would rather see a protection put in place for the wildlife that is there.

Okay.

I didn't hear you. Sorry. Did I not speak loud enough?

The mic's too low to hear. Oh, I'm so sorry.

You've got to speak into it. There you go.

That's better.

I would much rather see some way that the city takes what is going to be possibly plot B there, the track B, and protect that. It is a thriving ecosystem. Armadillos, barred owls, everything. If you want to put any sort of the, sorry, I'm recovering from sinus surgery. If you want to put any sort of road through any of that, The first three easement places for a roadway all has barred owl nests. The wildlife is wonderful back there, and we've lost a lot of forestry area around Belton. I think it would be important for the city to find a way to protect this. Thank you. Sir, sir, I think she needs your name. She didn't get it. Rukia Barr, 306 Lacey Lane. My apologies.

All right, anyone else like to speak in favor or in opposition?

Yeah, my name is Ryan Fuller. I live at 308 Lacey Lane. I'm a new homeowner, right? So I don't have a bunch of say as these people do. But I would definitely say some things on like the wildlife. I mean, there's deer there that just had babies. They're running around. And also another mention, you were talking about how you don't want to talk about what ifs, right? I work in construction. You always want to think about what ifs so you don't have to spend more money in the future. That traffic that's on Lacey Lane, I can't even pull into my driveway whenever I get home. That's how it is. Kids walking in my grass, which I don't care. That's the safest route for them. But you also have other kids that are walking down the street. I mean, I don't know, my girlfriend would probably be pissed off if I said this, but once she found out and got the thing in the mail about this, the track B, she literally cried because she was like, this is the main reason why we wanted this house, and like all the wildlife that's back there. The other night, we just saw like five owls flying around. My dogs flipped out, obviously, but... Like, that's what we really want. We look out our back window. We always see fireflies lighting up like it's a galaxy back there. I mean, seriously, it's just like the what-ifs. You just got to think about those, sir, and that's how it is.

Okay. Anything else? No, I mean, thanks. Thanks. Anyone else? All right, we'll ask one more time. Any additional comments, pro or in opposition? Then we will close the public hearing and we'll leave it open for the... Let me just clarify one thing as to maybe what or how it was taken. What I am saying is as a committee or a commission this evening, we have one thing that we are to do, and that is to look at what is in front of us, and that is to take a look at the current planning, Do we want to leave it as it is? Or do we want to change it and plat it as is being presented by staff? That's the only thing that we really have the option of doing today. When I say that we can't look at the future and go into what-ifs, we can't go into what-ifs because we don't know what developer may have an interest and want to come in and develop that in the future. We don't know what developer may want to come in and put a nature reserve there. I mean, what was it, about two to three years ago that all of a sudden the city was given a large amount of property to develop the arboretum? Nobody knew that. That was a what if. Nobody knew that was coming. And yet that's in the works and being developed. So that's what I'm talking about with what ifs. If there is a piece of property, it's up to the owner to decide what they want to do with that. A lot of owners are going to invest by buying that property and they want to get a profit and so they're going to try and develop homes or they're going to try and develop a business or whatever. And that's what they're in the process and what they are doing and why they're doing it. So we don't know who or what when it comes to those types of things. So those are the what ifs that I'm talking about. So at this point, I think what I heard from almost every one of you is that you don't want to have all these homes in your backyard in track B, but you want us to vote it down. But the only way to stop the possibility of a developer coming in as it is right now on the books and putting all those homes in is if we don't accept this change. So believe it or not, we're trying to look out for the citizens For those of you that live close to it, we're not trying to come in and say, oh, we don't care that it's going to be in your backyard. That's not the point at all. What we're trying to say is this has to be done on the books a certain way and we need to get rid of this bad plan from 50 years ago and bring it up to date so that something else can be done and it can be developed At some point, they're going to have to come in and re-plat anyway. And so that's basically what this is allowing us to do is to clear that space. And then in the future, we'll see where it goes from there. But it would definitely be back before the commission, before any kind of decision would be made. There would have to be a president or someone would have to express interest They'd have to work with the city, and then it would be announced in the paper, letters, and you all would be notified before anything would come any further. So that's all we're doing this evening. We're not saying we're going to do this so that we can come in and build 12 houses or build 24 houses or anything. All we're saying is we want to clear that so that they can start with a fresh slate as to how that property can be developed. Any other comments from commission? Questions, comments?

Yeah.

So I just want to say that I think was it Ronnie, was that your name? Yeah. Yeah, your voice counts. If you're in the city, your voice counts. You have just as much say as these people do. I just heard that and it hurt my heart. I just got to say, all your voices count here. I'm listening to every single one of you. I know we all are. From Commissioner Craig down, we're doing this for free. We don't do this for anything because we just want to do something for the city. We want to help the city. We don't have any say in this. That's why we have public hearings. And I thank everyone that came out. I don't care what you said. I don't care what position you're on. I 100% love the fact that we have people that come out and say what their concerns are in a place where I don't even live. I'm off of North Cleveland Avenue. I'm nowhere near this. I also understand the concern about Belton being different. I was born in Belton in 1980. I grew up on Richmond Avenue. That place had five houses on it whenever I was born. It doesn't look anything like it did now. I understand that as well. I'm not trying to discount anything that's being said here. And as much as it's plans versus what ifs, I get the what ifs. I understand your concerns on that. And I'm torn on this whole thing because I understand the want to keep that the way it is, to keep the wilderness, keep the wildlife, because there's a lot of places, not just here, but all through this state, that's just being torn up and torn out for development. And I know it's heartbreaking. I know people buy land just for that. And just like the process is, if this were to get approved tonight, we'd be back. If there was a developer, which there's no solid timeline on that. That's my what if. There's no timeline. There could be, you know, three years from now, it could be 20 years. No one knows. But if you were to come back in here, if this passes tonight, you were to come back in here, and you, everyone, pretty much everyone that lives there has been here tonight. If you all came back here again and said, we don't want this, I'd vote it down in a heartbeat. Because that's your backyard, not mine. I'm relying on every one of you to come give me your point of view. So again, we all know what the vote is here. But I understand where you guys are coming from. And I just appreciate you all being here. Thanks.

I have two comments. No one loves trees more than these two people on the board here. And that is a fact. If you see the new development, they count all those trees and shrubs, and they make sure they're put in because they want that wildlife and the trees to be put part of Belton. And we're just a recommending body at this point. And so I'm telling you right now, I'm going to vote in favor of this, because it is taking away half of what could be. And I know you're upset about it. I didn't understand this five years ago before I was elected on this board. But what we're doing is saving half of it from ever being houses. And then we'll readdress it if somebody wants to put a bid in. And maybe it'll go up for public auction. And you can buy the land behind you. I would love to do that. I can't afford the land behind me. I've been told it's $60,000 an acre. Because I want to keep the trees behind my house. And they're talking about building houses behind me now. So I just want you to know why I'm voting yes. It's to make a bad situation better. And I know it's not perfect for you people, and I do feel for you. But you will get another public meeting should anyone want to develop this. That's all.

Yeah, I just want to simplify it a little bit, because how it sits now Anybody can come in and build on it and we don't have to have a conversation. No conversation has to be had. By doing this, this makes it where if somebody wants to buy it and somebody wants to develop it, a conversation has to happen. You guys have to come if you want and we have to vote to allow them to build on that. Right now they don't have to. So this benefits The community. Because now we're putting it where someone, it has to be voted if somebody wants to build on it. Right now there doesn't, has to be. So this is a good thing. In my opinion. This is so much better because now if somebody wants to build, they have to notify you. And we have to have a conversation about it. And that's when you want to share with everybody what you want and what you don't want. Right now it's not set up that way. Somebody can come build it back there tomorrow and there's nothing any of us can do. So that's just my two cents to make it a little easier.

I'll just kind of echo that. I live on Hargis Lake and if you all know Hargis Lake, you know, there's part of the reason we bought that house was because it has a lake behind there. There's no way it's ever going to get built. So believe me, I understand the desire to keep green because I hate to see all the trees being cut down. in this town in this state in the united states i agree with commissioner christiansen this actually is protecting you guys for now because it's taking the ability for a developer to come in and buy the land and start developing today because in cass county that plan for 100 homes still exists if we wipe that off the books they have to come come back to a public hearing i want you guys to come out and speak i've spoken at public hearings with city council before it's important that everybody has a say. So I view this as a protection for the people that live on Mill Street. I know it doesn't feel that way right now, but we will have to go through the process to have a developer come and say, hey, I want to build homes there. So for now, anyway, it's protecting that green space for you guys.

All right.

Any other...

Comments?

Appreciate. As the other commissioners have stated, we do appreciate all of you and your input. It has not fallen on deaf ears. The thing that I also appreciate is the fact that the other commissioners have also made it clear This is the proper, don't feel if this gets voted through this evening that your voice was not heard and it doesn't work. It's just in this particular case, we maybe felt that we needed to vote one way. But we definitely would love for you to come back if this does come back around again. And I have a feeling you'd see a totally different outcome at that point. So, OK, any other comments or questions? If not, would entertain a motion for the final plat. Let's see, I'm sorry, the vacation of that plat.

I'll make a motion to approve the vacation of plat for PROJ 26-008. Second.

All right. Do we have a motion and a second? Call one more time for any final comments. Seeing none, could we have the roll call, please?

Commissioner Walton?

Aye.

Commissioner Schutt?

Aye.

Mayor Larkey?

Yes.

Council Member Bryan?

Aye.

Commissioner Christensen? Yes. Commissioner Crate? Aye. Commissioner McDonough? Aye. Chairman McPherson.

CHRIS RODGERS. Aye. And so basically, just to clarify in case anyone was unclear what the motion was and what it did, we will register the plat that you see on the screen. with the county. No, we just vacated the whole plan. Oh, we just vacated. I'm sorry. The next item is what you're talking about. That's what I was looking. Mine only says, oh, okay. That's why I got confused. That's why I was confused on that. So to clarify, we just vacated this. We just vacated that. So that means that that other from the 70s is gone. Yep. And that has been vacated. All right, presentation of PROJ 26-009, request from community development staff for approval of a final plat for Mill Valley, a two-track subdivision on 22.67 plus or minus acres located south of Mill Street and west of Lacey Lane. And director, anything additional that you have to present at this point?

Don't have anything additional to add than what was discussed with the vacation plan.

We'll remember how everybody votes.

It's also on TV.

Okay. So any comments, questions on the motion to approve the final plat? Otherwise, we would entertain a motion.

I make a motion to approve the final plat for presentation of PROJ 26-009 as presented. Second.

All right. We have a motion and a second. One last call for any comments. Seeing none, could we have the roll call, please?

Mayor Larkey?

Yes.

Commissioner McDonough? Chairman McPherson?

Aye.

Commissioner Creight? Aye. Commissioner Walton?

Aye.

Councilmember Prientz?

Aye.

Commissioner Christensen? Yes. Commissioner Schucht?

Nay. All right. Next item. Is there an update, Director, on the Unified Development Code?

Yes, we did receive last week the last two chapters that we are currently reviewing with the city attorneys. So we are hoping to have a full fully reviewed draft by staff and the city attorneys by the first week of July. And then the consultant multi-studio will be making revisions to the drafts and hopefully we'll have a draft that has been revised by then that we will be able to release publicly for review and comment. We'll also have some presentations to kind of get into a little bit more of the details. with Planning Commission and Council on the major changes in the draft development code, changes to processes and procedures, changes to development standards, zoning standards, those types of things. So those will be some things that will be coming later in the summer.

Okay. And any other items for report other than our upcoming meeting dates?

I just wanted to add something on that last item. Since Matt and I are key staff on working on the RFPs for development, If it's your guys' direction, and I think I would recommend this direction of just approaching that RFP as environmentally sensitive as possible, I think would be the best outcome there. And we on the staff side are going to make that a goal on that RFP to be as sensitive and as compact in design and not disturb anything that doesn't need to be disturbed, and that'll be goals in that RFP and requirements. So we'll make sure that we approach it with a community in mind if we ever do put out an RFP.

All right, appreciate that. And I think, you know, that I think is what I heard more than anything. And through the years, that has been the thing that I have heard. in different roles. But that has been what I've heard, is that we do not want to lose our view. We don't want to lose the environment that we have around us. And that's important. And I get that. I lost mine, and I had nothing I could do about it. I jokingly talk about the deer, but that was just because they ate my garden. That was the only reason I hated the deer. Other than that? And they were doing it year after year. But they still come around. And I still haven't shot any of them. So we'll put up with it as long as they keep coming. I put out a camera and take pictures of them. There's something neat about being in a community, in a city, and still having that touch with nature that is important. And I get that.

Yeah, and related to kind of what Jenna just said, kind of backing up to the UDC update, one of the development types that are in that draft is what's called a conservation subdivision, which specifically is designed to develop neighborhoods with kind of ringed areas around the perimeter that are basically natural preserves. So those are things that we are thinking about of better ways of preserving some of the natural amenities that we have in the community while still being able to grow and develop the city. Great. And then the only other thing I have is we do have a couple of upcoming meeting dates on the calendar there. We have Tuesday, July 7th, which we do have agenda items for that. So please put that on your calendar. And then also Tuesday, July 21st.

All right. Very good. Quick question for Matt on the convenience store gas station on County Line and North Scott. Yes. Is there some kind of problems there or is there some kind of timeframe somebody has to meet?

They do have an active building permit. There are some things that they were dealing with with some other agencies outside of the city that they had to address and they are currently working on some changes there to address that.

Do you have time frames for them? Do they have time frames? Nobody's been there for a long time.

Yeah, they have told us that they were going to start several weeks ago. So I think they might still be working on a few things. I know they were waiting for fuel tanks to be delivered. That's one of the first things that they were going to get in the ground first.

Those got delivered, though, right?

I don't know if they ever did. I don't think I ever saw them out there.

The holes are there.

Yeah, so it has gotten off to a slow start, but hopefully we'll see that resume.

Do they have a perimeter set for timeframes to meet? Is a city set up timeframes?

We do have, for a permit, it's good for six months without extensions. Once they have an inspection, it's extended for another six months, so they're still within that six-month timeframe right now.

Okay, thanks. Any other items this evening?

Motion to adjourn.

Second. All those in favor of adjourning say aye. Aye. Any opposed?