Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Oh, there we go. Y Oh, Mark's right there, too. Oh, good. There's two of us. Oh, good. Well, we're good then. All right. This conference will now be recorded. Evening. How are you?

Good. So they had so much snow that froze.

Well, good evening. My clock says six o'clock. You'd like to call the meeting to order. Roll call, please. Martin here. Templan here. Lane here. Huggin. He's in the restroom. Okay. Milbour here. Mock here. Schultz here. Looks like all commissioners are present today. Say here really quick. Here. There we go. Item 3B, approve the planning commission agenda. Any changes or anything to update? Take a motion. Motion to approve the agenda as presented. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor? I oppose. Same sign.

Seeing none. Item 3B. Approve the minutes of the planning commission meeting held July 22nd, 2025 and August 12, 2025. Any changes, additions, or corrections to be noted? Motion. Motion to approve. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor say I. I. I. Oppose. Same sign. Item C, disclosure of conflicts of interest. Um, I've I've represented one of the applicants on the the plat on 7A and so I'm going to need to recuse myself from that.

Anybody else? on item 7D. I don't have any financial stake in it, but I'm very good friends with the people that are in this thing and I've followed it from the beginning. So, I just wanted to put that out there. Okay. Don't think that requires recusal, but I'm glad you said it. Just letting the conflict of interest thing. Yep. Anybody else? Item 3D, disclosure of outside communications. I know that uh I received an email from David to everyone in relation to item 7A I think is what that is. Anything else? Just same with

same item talk to them. Okay.

Okay. Item four, call the public. Members of the public who wish to address the planning commission regarding items not on the agenda may do so at this time. Any presentations for information purposes only. No action will be taken. And there's a 4-minute time limit. If you'd like to address the planning commission on matters not on the agenda tonight, please come to the podium. Give us your name and address. Seeing none, anyone online that okay being the case, item 5A, public hearing to consider the future land use plan update. Brad.

All right. Thank you, chairman. I did want to also add that Dave Rhodess's email will be included in the minutes. So, uh, just wanted you to be aware of that. As far as the public hearing, we've been talking about this for quite some time. We just recently went through a zoning map update. And the next thing on the agenda is before we jump into a full-blown look at our comprehensive plan is to look at the future land use plan. I'd like to do an update to that and have the planning commission study these areas. There's obvious been a lot of annexations, a lot of changes with Astra development, Panasonic and Southwest growth area plan. Johnson County has gone through their arterial road study and there are some recommendations in there that also affect Dodto has also made a recommendation on an arterial on 135th street. So there's a lot of things to consider. There's also discussion on that north south expressway to what level within dotto's boundaries we want that to occur. Then of course we've talked about the expanding area where we have sanitary sewer service and then ultimately there's been a lot of discussion over time that the planning commission is doesn't really like to see the mixed use category. We've got some large chunks of that and ultimately the land use is sort of a backup for our a lot of our future land use decisions. So when we bring you a resoning or some sort of other request, it is certainly one of those key things that we look at to help guide us for future land use decisions. And it does carry weight because it will go ultimately the recommendation from the planning commission will go to the city council and if approved or when approved they will adopt some sort of

future land use plan. They may tweak it themselves some, but it will be part of the comprehensive plan, which is part of our overall scheme for not just the residents of Dotto, but developers, anybody who's looking at Dotto wanting to do business here. We'll be looking at and trying to understand and make sure that they're kind of following along the way that the residents and planning commission and ultimately governing body want to see Dodto develop. So, I've sort of covered some of the things that uh and what you have in your packet. And let me just start with that is the items that we've annexed and they've been reszoned. So, those are shown as they are. You also have the southwest growth area plan area that's been superimposed into the the future land use plan. And then also I Mike's scrolling through a few things, but we've got the the CARA plan, the Johnson County's study of arterial roads throughout the entire county, but this is the area that we've zoomed in on for specifically around the Dodto area. We also have the zoning map that's part of this information, Astra's plan. And one thing I want to talk about Astra is we've went through that whole solar ordinance and basically everything that's south of 119th Street is now designated for solar development. And then of course, Johnson County Parks and Recreation is doing a master plan now for their property, which is in the process of being turned over to them in a step-by-step manner. But they're doing a master plan to incorporate that. It's part of what they call the Kill Creek master plan because they're looking at all these items because Kill Creek Park currently backs up to a very significant

chunk of the property that's being turned over to them. And so they're now looking at studying how to connect this sort of linear acorage that surrounds Astra development. And then of course you can see on that map there it just has a big sort of a bluish color. It says multiuse. And that's one thing our land use plan shows as well. It's it's mixed use. But do we want to dive into that a little bit more directly or just leave it at that? Because it's a green grass site there. The sky is the limit on those areas. One thing that's been pretty clear is Astra doesn't want to have residential development on their property. They're looking at higherend light industrial type uses throughout Astra development. So, I don't know that that's necessarily a consideration, but maybe we would want to put that as light industrial versus mixed use. So, there's a lot of things that are coming into play. The other thing I wanted to mention I I said earlier in the staff report is sort of the limits that we've looked at and this goes back to our previous comprehensive plan where gardener road and dotto and tha have a once again at one point there was a binding agreement but now it's been tossed out by the Kansas Supreme Court but tha and we have a understanding that tha will stop at at gardener road doesn't mean they will and that will stop at gardener road doesn't mean we will either But that's kind of the the gentleman's agreement that at this time there is a hard line with Lanexa and Shaune to the east because that is the city limit line and that's where their city limit line is. So there's no real conflict there. Of course Kansas River to the north even though we do have the Burning Tree Golf Course is within city limits in

Levvenworth County. So Mike has to turn in a uh financial statement to for Levvenworth County when we do our budget as well because we're in two counties and then also Douglas County is the western edge of the property, our study area and then south 143rd which is the southern part of Astra development. But I guess for me the the thing that we've really kind of zeroed in in on is that's the southwest growth area plan. We've talked about that at length and went through the whole long study with the consultant and have looked at those areas, but also with the addition of the sewer lines that are now along 95th Street and then of course down to uh through Astra development with the Panasonic project. the areas north of Gil or pardon me K10 along Evening Star that we show as residential. We've just reszoned annexed about 120 acres that's been reszoned to commercial. We do show some mixed use up there and some multifamily. I mean I guess those are the areas the nodes that we need to look at especially north of K10. What do we want to have happen there? What's our sort of future thoughts? A lot of the eastern side of Dodto probably won't be sewered. I mean, it's large lot, large track development. Those are a lot of things that are being talked about how to uh there's been development interest in in those tracks or those properties and keeping them, you know, one acre and above. So, I don't see that particularly changing. So with all that I guess chairman I don't know where you want to start exactly but those are all the the dynamics and you're certainly all well aware of what the dynamics are in Dodto

but now it's time to put some of those on the map and how do we want to start or do we feel like this is fairly close and just need some some tweaks around the edges? Um, well, I had one question to start. It did did we not approve a zoning change just north of Kil Creek uh road on K10 right there? That big purple square uh to Oh, the grata development right there. Yeah, that is has been zoned. So, it is but it is kind of a mixed use because it will have commercial multifamily and Yep.

single family. Well, we could parse it out like we do have in our zoning map and that's what Commissioner Schultz brought up last time with the zoning chart, but I I mean the whole tract is kind of a mixeduse location. So, that one's kind of in my mind kind of appropriate, but nonetheless, once again, those are the recommendations the planning commission gets to weigh in and would like if you'd like to see that broken out exactly or the way the zoning map reads. Okay. And that's probably where and that's where it's going to go. Yeah. Questions, comments for Brad.

I guess one other thing though is as we kind of let this soak in. There's there's a lot to think about. Um, I mean, we could start with the roadway network, some of those type issues, but at the end of the day, this map has served us pretty well over the last five years. And it does kind of mimic exactly the the comp plans that we've done for, you know, Dota did 20 years ago. The Flint development was going to be light industrial, and that's what's going to happen. Nastra was going to be part of the city doto and it was going to be light industrial with employment centers and those types of activity and now poof, here it is. It's happening. It's real and it's continuing to move forward.

It Brad it is it so on the slide before this one if you don't mind Mike the one that shows the arterial road. There you go. that we've we've talked about that for a while with Evening Star sort of um becoming a bigger roadway that connects. Is is that what Johnson County is planning at this point?

Well, Mike, you might want to you sat in on most of those studies. So, I'll let you take that one. So the primary intent of looking at the future land use map first of all for us I think is to incorporate southwest growth area plan those land use designations and the roadway corridors that are shown in there that was primary purpose but as we're doing it u we're very close to finalizing the southwest uh metro transportation plan that's in connection with the Johns County Douglas County several other jurisdictions um so the roadway elements shown C this map here is the current future. This is what's in our plan. Now, um there's some tweaking we need to do to the roadway network here on the proposed map, but mostly uh it's why we put um this figure in here. This is just kind of a corner of the overall larger county plan. But what you're seeing here is the final result of that southwest metro area plan. This is what the the group um essentially has has accepted and adopted. We had a couple a series of public meetings over the summer to kind of finalize this. So the intent of the group is now each jurisdiction are going to take that back and either work it into your own comp plan or don't. I mean it's kind of up to the policy makers in each jurisdiction. I think our intent is to work in these recommendations here. And there's a few things that don't quite line up right now. we need to line those up. But if you'll see um this this green dotted line is essentially what what I think we've contemplated to be kind of a a larger than arterial connection between Dodto and the southern parts of the county. Right. Mhm.

Um the definition here is that it's a it's a kind of a type three fourlane ultimate arterial still a surface street not necessarily a divided freeway like K10 with the interchange and stuff but a the most significant arterial street you can kind of designate that's not really a change of county's old plan dating back to the 90s showed some corridor through here and let's figure out where it goes later. This is a more precise corridor than what's shown, but I think one that uh u that that the Aster enterprise folks can agree to and and and others. So, our intent would be to incorporate this alignment as well as well as the others. There's some purple lines in here that are connectors within Astra Enterprise Park. There's another one down here toward the south end that's still kind of a a corridor we haven't really defined yet, but that's the intent to incorporate this into into this map. And it we're not quite there, but um that's the intent. Did I I can't remember what the question was. Did that

that answer I I didn't know if there was It sounds like the answer is yes. That's we're leaning towards wanting to incorporate that into our in our into our plan. Yeah, for sure. Yeah. Yeah. We want those two plans to be harmonious.

Yeah. And I guess my thinking was in showing that is is it ultimately when said we had it as an expressway that was almost like a interstate highway. Do we want something a little bit less than that? To what level of traffic movement do we think we're going to have? is it may be more like I guess if you're familiar with 71 as it goes through Kansas City, Missouri on the east. There is some stop lightss there, but it is a high-speed road divided. It's got interchanges, but you know what level do we want to have that expressway? And is do we want to build an expressway if it's going to get to 143rd Street and then stop to some other level? Well, I I think our recommendation would be to follow the recommendation of that southwest quarter, which is kind of a an ultimate arterial, not with interchanges, but with intersections and

and street light, but it could be a divided could be a type likely. I think something like K7 around like Santa Fe region somewhere in that neighborhood. Is that the right way to think about it? I think that's a little a little more um you know just think your typical Rener Boulevard south of K10 lane it's has a medium there's turn lanes but or3rd street just west of Astra entrance I mean that's pretty much well sure yeah that could be it yeah okay

and that's what and that wasn't just because you know we didn't want to shoot for the star I mean it was legitimately we there was a pretty detailed traffic model generated with ultimate future built build out scenarios of things and how freight might move and how Astron might develop and like this is our really best really good guess at what that corridor needs to be without overbuilding. That's what's in what would we recommend incorporating

with that discussion? Was there any talk that you've heard recently about going north on Evening Star to connect to I7? I've heard that several times. It's been in the discussion. I mean, yeah. I mean, it's an idea. It's a problem that needs solved, I think, but that the study did did went no further. I don't know if that was part of that also or not. Yeah, that would definitely change the dynamics going north. Sure could. Yeah.

But this, as we show, we're not showing an expressway freeway concept. That's different. You know, our existing future land use net has that yellow stripe thing. It might be something, you know, larger regional. This is kind of just a uh a serious arterial roadway. So, if I'm understanding all this correctly, we have a future land use map that's been presented here tonight. We certainly have heard from Brad we need to look at north of K10 on the west side of town west side of town that the road network isn't necessarily incorporated into this from the study. Um obviously we have some existing zoning that isn't shown on this. So this is still a work in process. Is that a fair way to

Yes. Exactly. So this is presented tonight only for discussion purposes and for purposes of having a public hearing. Correct. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I didn't expect you to get through this whole monstrosity of a discussion item in one meeting. So, we'll I mean, I would add one other thing is that I I'm not sure that the southwest corridor plan is completely reflected the work we did in this future land use map. Yeah, there there are some tweaks that need to be kind of some things I remember being a little different, but

we just need to look at it, make sure that's right. Well, I guess one thing also when you look at our our designations, we just say arterial. Do we want to add those sort of heavier duty levels and and just sort of absolutely mimic what the county's presented? I don't know why we wouldn't. What do you guys think? I think it creates clarity.

I guess because part of my thinking is that southern area is going through solar fields. I mean, they're not going to be employment centers. There's, you know, some I mean, I don't know how much traffic they'll carry through um because we know they're not going to be a lot of employees at working on the solar farm and how are you going to pay for a such a significant effort? Do they do they down? Do we want to pick one corridor? Do we have other options? because we're going to be like I said there's 119 well 119th doesn't go through but 127th 135th are talked about going through and those go right through the solar areas.

Well I I don't know why we would use a future land use map that's different than what the county's best guess is at this point. Okay. Well that's kind of what I want reaffirmed from planning commission is Yep. I agree. Okay. I guess Mike in those discussions with the county on this uh type I guess I can't read it real good the type three the heavy green is that what carnip they were defining it as under caret

yeah so I another thing this is not the carnet plant it own sele the county may take this and incorporate into the caret plan but that's another this is not the car in a plan yet. But to answer your question, um, yeah, the thick, uh, it is a type three says type three4 lanes, 150 to 200 feet rideway. That's the maximum sort of corridor they define in the southwest plan and I believe it's the maximum one on the car plan, too, but which would be quite a bit more what we have right now at uh, Evening Star Road, right? Because we don't have that.

Yeah, the Evening Yeah. Um, well, we're getting more uh Oh, at Evening Star. Yeah, well, we're acquiring uh some more on the KU's land that we didn't have before when we did Geer. That's what I was thinking. When we did Geer, we got half of it. We're acquiring the other half. So, we'll have I think it's 120 total. Okay. There. But uh but on the county's designation for type three uh they they incorporate controlled access not interchanges but you know like intersections at the quarter mile max. Exactly. Yeah.

Do we have that in our standards? And if we don't maybe that would be a good idea to We do in our um in the comp plan under the uh chapter five in the comp plan. We do talk about access control for arterial streets and we have those provision. I don't know that they exactly match the counties but we have those provisions. Yeah, might be worth looking at. I I mean I would suggest we look at that because I I think you know with it's not going to be a great hardship with if this is solar fields anyway but but it would be a good it would help this road function better to have to restrict the amount of intersections.

Agreed. Yeah. It's exactly why why we do that. So we'll add that to the list of things we need to look at. Yep. Okay, this is Pat.

Hello. I was just going to mention that um the Evening Star Road annexation of the KU ground, they're they were talking about annexing that entire parcel, but now the plan is just to annex the right of way, which is just 60 feet by 2300 square feet. Okay. Any other comments before opening it up for a public hearing?

Is there like another name on that? I know Chairman Timlin has talked about the mixed use, you know, want to clear that up a little bit. I guess I don't want to change it to a transitional zone, but do we just need to add a little more detail? Like, for example, around I guess it'd be Edertton and K10. you know, we got some commercial shown there, for example, and then we go into like a medium density residential. I mean, I know that mixed use is it's kind of like, do we need a transition zone or something a little more higher residential to transition into those more single family because we always have that, you know, whenever we get a resoning, we always have that push back.

Yep. Clearly, it would be helpful to have something something. I don't know what it would be. Yeah. But mixed juice doesn't do it. Yeah, it doesn't do it. Yep. So, is it another I I hate to say another category, but a higher I mean, we got multifamily, but is there a I hate to say higher density residential, but we need a something to transition from commercial to Yeah, we residential. We that's a great call out because we we've consistently tried to say like we won't put single family next to R3 for instance. Try not to.

Uh and then we try not to put single family next to commercial at all either. So you by definition we're corre we're creating a buffer. Yeah. I don't know what we call that but I agree with you. I think by default that's kind of that way within our subdivision regulation kind of stuff and but it might be helpful to have some visual representation on future land use other than mixed use. I would

any other questions or comments before opening up for the public hearing? Okay, I would like to open the public hearing on this item 5A, the consideration future land use plan update. Anyone who would like to address the planning commission, please come and give us your name and address and approach the podium. Hearing none, I'm assuming still no one online that might have an interest.

That appears correct. I'll close the public hearing. Matters matters back before the planning commission. I think at this point probably what we're looking for would be a motion to table. Any other considerations you want to share? That's great. But I think at this point we're not really looking to take action on this tonight. It's just So if we table this, are we going to make the changes and open up to the public hearing? Is that how that works? So I think technically we have opened the public hearing and closed the public hearing. Okay. That said, if somebody comes and wants to talk about it, my preference is always going to be let them speak, but that's going to be up to the commission. Okay.

Yeah. I was thinking this is really now before the planning commission after you've had the public hearing. So, I think that's right. Okay. So, you're going to make changes that we talked about and then we'll have another meeting to discuss it. Correct. Yes. Okay. Yeah. This will be an old old business item next meeting. Everybody good? Motion to table item 5A. Second. Move and seconded. Any further discussion? Roll call. Schultz. Yes. Meadow? Yes. Melbourne? Yes. Huggin? Yes. Lane? Templan? Yes. Martin? Yes. Motion carries. Thank you.

No item six. So item seven is new business to consider the preliminary plan for countryside farms duplexa land devco. Items 7 a b a b and c are matters that I should recuse myself. So I will step out and linda you have the cal. Okay. All right. All right.

Thank you vice chair. What you have before you is Countryside Farms 7A for Lary Plat. This is the property. It is on 95th Street south of 95th and you have before you actually will be talking about the site plan for the multifamily and then ultimately the final plat on this property. I've had several meetings and and Mike and Joe have also discussed many of these items with the applicant and they've submitted a preliminary plat included in the item is storm water traffic analysis landscape plans and uh information regarding you know the whole development itself. So the first step in the process is the preliminary plat which covers all the duplex tracks and then the two larger multifamily tracks which will be retained by the developer. So what you have before you is the preliminary plat. It does meet our lot size development. Uh we have the storm water studies. One thing we did have quite a bit of discussion on was the road network. And what we have typically required in the past is two connections for a development with 30 or more residential units. Now through the process of looking at the traffic analysis, the developer shows a 40 foot wide entrance road which is larger than what we would normally require. And so that does allow for public safety equipment and to get through. There's essentially three lanes that could get through on uh the north south main entrance road. But one thing that didn't feel comfortable with was just

showing the future development to properties that were offsite. So we wanted to have an extension on the road to the farther on the west that even though it's a future item and it is in the commercial part of the track the northern part zone C2 the southern area where we're looking at is multifamily. So, and the development it's typically you don't see them starting in the middle, but in this case, we just worked out uh because of the zoning and then the sort of nature of how this property lays and you know, sort of unknown exactly what's going to happen on 95th Street. It looks like that'll be a fairly significant arterial with commercial development likely on both sides of the road, but we don't know that for sure. And then of course the sewer lines are going through this. So it made this middle spot available for initial development. So anyway, with that we show a future det connection to 95th Street to the west, a 40 foot wide connection that will be constructed and built. And then also to the south there is a potential future connection to Lexington. And this is where Dave Rhodess's comments on the preliminary plat. He is not in favor of seeing that southern connection go through there. And this is where we've also talked about. That's the 99th Street that we've had a lot of discussion about how it will ultimately cut through and end up on Edertton Road. So, there's some things on that area to the south that are are still in play. Uh but the reason why we have that future connection to 95th is we want to show two access points ultimately that the developer controls on their property because we can't hardly force them to

put in something that they don't have ownership of. So that's why you've got the pre on the preliminary plat the the two connection points. Anyway, we've got uh 28 tracks or pardon me 29 tracks. Two of the tracks are for multifamily and then the others will be for duplexes. So, it's a fairly uh starting is is a fairly dense development, but uh they've gone through the process. It meets our standards and you do have the architectural plans that are part of the site plan itself, but we'll talk about that a little bit later. But the remaining tracks will be remain unplatted at this point. So, with that, I'll stand for any questions. They do show their u a little bit more of a detail how the parking is going to lay out uh for those, but we we'll talk about those in the site plan, but they do have all they've met the requirements or technical requirements for a preliminary plan. And the applicant is here tonight. Dave, there you are. If you'd like have any questions for Dave Anderson, he's available for that.

Brad, do you do you mind going just in a little bit more detail? Uh, I guess page eight of this is the best view that I've got of it, but I just want to make sure I understand the road connections. Maybe it's not page Yeah. Try to see, Mike, if you could scroll up to page. Yeah, that one's the one that shows. And that's the one you're talking about. Yeah, that one shows the future. Looking at it on my phone. The one that's superimposed over like the satellite. Oh, okay. I'm just trying to figure out where the south connections. Obviously, that's up for debate, but I'm just trying to figure out where we would land that.

Oh, boy. On the cover page. Okay. Oh, you can't really see it particularly well on talking about or maybe Oh, you're on the cover page. Gotcha. Sorry about that. No worries. Oh, I see that one. This. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I was just trying to figure out where where are we seeing that that the southern connection will tie in or where. So if you remember the uh I don't know if I'm gonna be able to draw on this southwest growth area plan. We spent a lot of time trying to figure out how 99 street is going to be east to west y through this because you know this kind of the south line here that this the southern tip of the subject property

touches that quarter that half section line that is 99th street and there's a drainage through there there's an existing entrance onto here um there's culverts there's flood plane to deal with we have further restrictions out at sunflower but if you remember? Oh, maybe I can draw on this. If you remember what we This is going to be bad. I'm sorry. Uh, we came up with something that looks a little bit like this. Okay.

Something like that. I know that's not the best. Um, it it it loops to the north, kind of follows sort of this property line, and then kind of stays to the north of this drainage. basically that's what's on the for 99th Street. Um and Mr. Rhodess had voiced opposition to that alignment when we were developing the the area plan and he reiterated that opposition tonight in his email um

because he he just um disagrees with the alignment sort of on on his property. This line is kind of on his property. So I think what we need to be careful of here and I think we have been careful is if this layout doesn't supersede or make impossible anything we think we want to do in 99 street. Yep. Of course cooperation with Mr. Roads this might change but I I'm confident that what we've shown here stops soon enough so we we won't mess things up or have to redo stuff. And I mean that's got it as simply but I don't know. Yeah. That was a lot better than you were making it out to be, Mike. Yeah. I I'm pretty impressed. I think there was some smoothing done.

Yeah. Okay. So, Brad is what's the phasing of this plinary plat? Is it all going to be done at one time? There's a phasing plan. There's a colorized Yeah, version potentially five phases that they're going through, but um the legend on this thing. Yeah, I Oh, I didn't see phase one. Phase one's in red, two's in blue, and three's in Okay. So, then when would that second connection to 95th Street occur? Is that Well, as you know, Cameron's our fire marshal. Yeah.

And I I think phase two will he's pretty dug in on on that. So, I'm you know, he makes that call and has to sign off on the final blats. So, that's kind of his stance. He'd like to see that in next phase. So whenever that happens, obviously it's going to take time to get infrastructure built, houses sold, and all those types of things. But that's pretty high on our radar screen is getting that second connection. Now, of course, there's a lot of things, as Mike mentioned, Dave Roads, what his ideas are and other developments, commercial developments that may happen on 95th Street. also road improvements that are going to have to be made on 95th Street that are come into play as well.

I think from a from a from from a building perspective, he's the the build the fire uh not the fire marshal, he's he's the the jurisdictional fire chief deacto.

Um and and from a building codes perspective, it does suggest that if you have more than 30 dwelling units, you have two accesses. Um it gives the the fire code official latitude to make uh determination for himself. Um and the language in the building code indicates that um you can you can have more than 30 units on a single access point as long as future roads are shown that will connect in the future. This is a judgment call. Um, so that combined with the uh the extra width on the access drive, the one they're they're the drive they're proposing as a 40 foot wide street. Uh, so there's there's extra width on the

Is that primarily just to get longer uh fire trucks through? Is that what the concern is that there would be some accident or something blocking the road that you would need emergency access through? If the road's extra wide, that concerns a little mitigated to some degree. That's so they're mitigating it by making the road wider. Yeah. And then the interpretation is we're showing future roads. So that is the future road. Yeah. And precisely the code is it's not spe specific. You know, they doesn't give you a term a time limit. Doesn't say it's got to be the next phase. Just says it has to be planned for in the future.

Wow. Okay. That's really good information for you to know. Uh and then I saw notice on the sanitary se on the south it's essentially was saying TBD is that we is that working is that sewer being built? Well um so the uh the sewer main the the sunflower sewer benefit district the main that they're constructing now I think they're pretty close to finishing that goes goes along here goes along the south property line somewhere. It's not shown on here. It crosses underneath the bridges on Lexington. I thought it was shown somewhere on the plan here. I guess I could be wrong.

Yeah, it showed the the where they want to extend it to. Okay. But that that line's essentially there now. And this will this all drains toward that direction. I mean, it's kind of why the phase line is where it is because that this part drains toward toward the south. Yep. Got it.

Any other comments, commissioners? I was just thinking prior conversations we've had about development along through here. Is this going to take place before or after improvements on 95th Street? Because one of the things I believe we talked about was before any development stuff got too far along on there, something was going to have to be done with 95th.

Yeah. So, um, as as I don't know, you might not know, we're doing a uh this thing to stop. Um we've recently completed an engineering kind of a preliminary engineering analysis on that to get uh the scope of the improvements that need to be be made and the general estimate for the for the price there. Um, I anticipate the city's going to be incorporating that into our capital improvement plan, at least the initial phases, you know, the rightway acquisition potentially, uh, getting some sort of a district in place where developments like this can fund it as development occurs can fund can fund that, but that existing residents aren't impacted by that by that mechanism. Um certainly is something that is difficult to put the burden on this one property owner to improve the whole thing. Um we could do horse trading on how much wider the street needs to be and kind of like we've sort of done on 89th Street over at for Arbor Ridge and uh but we know that the whole area is going to develop. So we know what that ultimate section is going to be. So I think um as we move through platting or this preliminary plat, we should consider a condition that you know the developer agrees to fund his share of whatever that ultimate thing is and not to protest a formation of a transportation improvement district or something of the like there. I I I think um it's clear that we're going to need substantial improvements to this stretch of history. um and the timing of them is always the trick. So you I think with with this one um the traffic load generated by this triggers the need for definitely for something. So that's kind of

that's where we are in that process. But the power lines and stuff and then the substation there that road took a pretty good hit on wear and tear. Yeah. It didn't do any favors. all the construction activity, construction on traffic for this probably isn't going to do much better, right? Building the thing. Yeah. Brad, one other question. In your conclusion, you said the applicant has completed the majority of the changes. Was that everything with the exception of asking for the will serve letter? Correct. Yeah, I did have that double sentence in there, but they have completed the the request to changes other than the utility.

Okay. Letters.

Any other questions? Good. You want to hear talk hear from Dave? Nope. any members of the public who'd like to speak. Okay? Well, then I guess I would entertain a motion.

So, well, I have a question before a motion. So, if if we were to make a motion to say approve this, um it it sounds like we've we've got everything in place to ensure that there would be a connection road uh that at least planned. We've got emergency services at least planned. Sewer is at least planned and there. So I I mean on its face it doesn't look like there's anything back to and unless you guys Yeah. I mean I I'm in agreement with staff's opinion on this. Uh

yeah, as long as it's been planned for the fire access that was my big concern. So as long as you know building codes are in line with what they have shown then yeah I mean then I'm going to make a motion to approve item 7A as submitted. Okay. Well, do we want to put that addendum down here? We'll serve letters from companies. Is that an addition put on there? We'll serve letters from utility companies. Yeah, as a condition.

Yeah, excuse me. Um, let me revise. So I make a motion we approve item 7A with uh inclusive of stacks recommendation that um that the utility companies will letters will be provided in the recommendation. Ed roll call please. Okay. Huggin yes. Lane yes. Martin yes. Melbourne. Yes. Mock. Yes. Schultz. Yes. Motion carries. Okay. Item 7B, Brad.

All right. Thank you, Vice Chair. As I've indicated, we're now talking about the multifamily areas of Countryside Farms, which there are two of them. There's a northern area and a southern area. The southern area has 16.7 units per acre which meets our requirements less than our max allowed. And then the northern area is 20 units per acre which is below the 24 units per acre is what we allowed for multifamily. So the density is less than that. The parking meets our standards at 1.5 units per for total units. And they've hit the nail on the head on both of them. hit the minimum on both of those items, but they do meet our requirements. As far as the layout, we do have the information on the I guess the different types of apartments, but there's going to be 72 72 proposed multif family units. The clubhouse will be constructed in other phases for this item. Um, one thing that also talked about is four of the units will need to be ADA accessible typea A. So, but that's something that will happen at the building per permit and level. It's not something that we need to deal with specifically, but as far as meeting all the ADA requirements, that's something that need to look at. Project will have five phases. Phase one is the duplexes and multifamily. Some of there's some of this is crossover between the preliminary plat and the final plat. But as far as the utilities, the water rural 7 will provide water to this site. Sanitary sewers under construction. Electricity as we know is very available on site. We also have trash bins that are on the properties

both the northern and southern areas. They did submit a drawing a sketch of the multif family or the trash bins themselves. But I also have the elevations for the architectural features which do meet our requirements as far as you know the mix of stone and glass and elevation changes etc. Now these actually have interestingly there's two base two lower level units that are halfway below ground. Now, as you can see, the back ends of them um well, daylight to the back, but up above there'll be steps up to a level, and then one two of the levels will be on that sort of level with the balcony, and then there'll be a staircase going up to the units up above. So, there's there's six plexes that are being proposed for this development. storm water. We've u detention areas are shown on site. A drainage study was submitted. Joe's looked at that and approved it. And as I'd mentioned, the architectural elements have all the uh stone work, the varying colors and siding types that are necessary to meet our requirements. Also, they did submit a lighting plan for the area which shows that the lighting will be contained on site. The photometric plan is in the the packet. pedestrian access, something we've talked quite a bit. There's a sidewalks throughout the site. They're also tie into the prelim the sidewalks that are on the preliminary plat. And we also have a amenity type feature and work through with the developer to put in a trail and it's going to be compacted stone. And both the north and the southern will have a a trail of compacted stone that'll kind of work their way around the detention areas. And so those are that meets our

requirement as well. Then also there's a landscape plan that is on the requirement. Interestingly, because they're starting in the middle of the buffering isn't I mean the future developments will have to buffer for the multifamily. So they don't have a as strong as buffering requirements as they might have in other instances. So that was a a interesting aspect of this development the way it's laid out. Uh, but in general, it's found the site plan meets our requirements. And with that, I'll stand for any questions you may have. And I did put the recommendation or a condition that the four type A handicap apartments need to be included with the building permit application. Any questions? So, uh we had discussed with the preliminary plat concerns on 95th Street's capacity. If we approve this site plan and the plaque gets filed, they can go for building permits, right?

Yes, they can. I mean, well, the final plat what needs. So, would this be the time a condition about working with the city on 95th improvement should be? Yeah, I think it would be to do that. Typically, we have a condition that the applicant sign an agreement not test um either a benefit district or transportation improvement district. I don't know if you need to be specific about that, but that's pretty common. We've done that in the past. Just agree not to protest a the formation of a of a district that would fund 95th Street.

Maybe I don't know. Would that be better on the final plat we could add that note on the drawing itself. Um or it doesn't matter. Well, kind of when this is this is our I mean because they're going to go get building permits after this, right? So the council won't have an opportunity. Planning commission won't have an opportunity. When you get the plat in, it's kind of just accepting easements and rights of way. Plat's a little bit more administrative kind of function. So, I would feel better if it were as long as the applicant's here and understands what uh what we're talking about. Uh I'd feel better if it was on this this Okay.

Okay. I guess the final thoughts on the next agenda. Yeah. Right. That's right. Uh, I don't really want to negotiate this here at the planning committee, but should it say will not oppose or will agree to participate? Agree not to protest. I think agree to part I mean maybe agree to participate. It's better language. I wouldn't want to hear from applicant.

Yeah. before we get too far. [Laughter]

Yeah, I we uh Commissioner Huggin, we we are putting together an incentive package. uh ask this this fits the requirements of the uh city council's incentives and we're going to ask to we'll pay the excise tax. In addition, we're going to ask to put that into the cost of our improvements on that part, but we have no opposition or your language that you said is we understand we're part of the neighborhood and 95th Street's our street. It's also the city street, but everybody uses it. There's no no problem with that condition. And well, uh, thank you.

Yeah, I think I was. Thank you, Dave.

Yeah, I like the plan. I agree with staff's comments and I agree on the benefit district participation. Is this a public hearing? No, it's not a public.

Okay. Mark, did you want to make a proposal? I would I would make a motion. Do we approve this or recommend approve? You approve.

Yeah. Yeah, I would make a motion to approve item 7B, uh, site plan for Countryside Farms as recommended by staff with the following conditions. Uh number one, four type A handicap apartments used units need to be included with building permit application. And stipulation number two, applicant will agree to participate in an improvement district for the improvement of 95th Street.

Second. Edgar, would you have roll call, please? Martin, yes. Template, yes. Huggin, yes. Milbour, yes. Mock, yes. Schultz, yes. Motion carries. Thank you. I think Roger can come back now, right? It's the final. Yeah, this is the final plat. All right. Never mind.

All right, Brad. All right. Thank you, Vice Chair. This countryside farms final plat phase one. Now, it's just the phase one part of the is being final platted, which does show the tracks and delineation of the properties themselves. So, there's actually there's 29 lots and two detention tracks on this. 27 of the lots are duplexes. Two of the lots are the multifamily that we just approved the site plan for. And then there's two detention tracks as well. There's also rightway dedication along 95th streets. An additional 30 feet that will be given to the city of Dodto. Joe's reviewed this. I've reviewed it. It meets our requirements for final plot itself. We've had the delayed improvements clause on there for construction of a sidewalk or some sort of a items like that. if the city needs to activate that. It's on the final plat itself. So with that, I'll stand for any questions you have. As said, typically the preliminary platans are the ones the planning commission gets to dig in a little bit deeper in that, but this just is a delineation of the properties themselves and the roadway uh easements and rights of way that are being dedicated to the city. Uh Brad, so with this project, the applicants proposing to build all these streets and all these public improvements in the initial phase.

Yes. Okay. and the building permits that will be applied for on lots one through 27 will not require a site plan approval by the That's correct. They're they're duplex lots and we don't require site plans for duplexes. Okay. Thank you.

Anything else? have a motion. [Music] I would move we approve Country Farms phase one final platain 29 lots and two detention tracks as presented by the staff. Second

Milbour. Yes. Mock. Yes. Schultz. Yes. Martin. Yes. Lane. Yes. Huggin. Motion carries. that I am going to have to recuse myself, folks, because I have a kiddo who has soccer and she needs to be picked up. Good luck with that. Bring her on back. Swap you out for Roger. I'll try places. See, Charles.

All right. Now, now he's He was asleep. Okay. Did you just leave the room? Not.

Okay, that leaves us at 7D. Discuss home occupations limited retail use for R1 zoning district. All right. Thank you, chair. Uh, recently the city staff received a complaint about retail sales activity on in an R1 zoning district on 89th Street. President set up. You can read the staff report. Had an accessory building and it had clothing items and things to for sale. And there's some pictures of the of the structure itself. Uh they had a party and I say party. They had an opening with some food and and people showed up. It was crowded and as you know 89th Street is a narrow county chip seal type road so it was congested and so that's what caused the complaint to be filed with the city. And I guess one thing I want to be clear, we don't drive around looking for things to pick on people, but uh when some when residents do bring concerns to our attention, we do investigate them. And when you look at our city code for home occupations, we've got a lot of information on restrictions, but and then we have this section on allowed uses and not allowed uses. This one kind of falls into a gray area because it doesn't it says secondhand retail sales are not allowed but as chairman Temple and I talked it but firsthand retail sales brand new items are could be considered allowed. So, um I think it's after our, you know, city council looked at this, um they wanted to have the planning commission weigh in on and make a recommendation on what we want to do with potential retail sales in R1 districts. Now, of course, when you think about, you know, what's going on with eBay and marketplace and things

like that, people are buying and selling stuff out of their homes all the time. So, we need to kind of come up with a way to, in my mind, create a situation where we allow people to do things, but we don't want them to be nuisances to neighbors or anything like that. Um, so I' I've talked with the mayor about that and he had some suggestions, but one things that we need to really look at is those h home occupation uses and what do we want to allow? what becomes a nuis or what level can does a nuisance occur? Because when you're looking at home retail sales, you're probably going to have them more on weekends. It's not going to be going, you know, to Walmart in evenings or things like that. It's going to be a a Saturday, Sunday type thing. Um, you know, we could probably restriction on days, things like that. But really to me it's it's the importance of what we're trying to do is to find make sure that some I we like to have our freedoms and do what we can but we don't want to like I said I keep coming back to this don't want to create a nuisance for our for our neighbors with an activity that is typically not allowed especially in an R1 district retail sales and that's why I've got to pardon me gardeners and thas information on what they allow all for home occupation uses in some ways they're a little bit nebulous too some things that you know just if somebody wants to do something I mean for instance I was you know I bought a golf cart three weeks ago and this guy works on him in his garage now he doesn't have tools or parts or anything out but you know you'd show up and that would in technically would not be allowed under our code but you know The only impact was the 10 minutes I was there to

pick it up and put it on my trailer and away I went. So, is that something we want? How deep do we want to go into these type things? And one suggestion, one thing I thought of is we do have a special use permit clause like for Ben breakfastes or VRBOs. At least with that process, you do have to notify your neighbors, have a public hearing. That could be something that we can allow for in a R1 district. If somebody chose to go that route, at least there will be some sort of information provided to the neighbors that these activities will be in place. And then also when that special use permit, uh, we can put some restrictions on that are easily or not easily, but more easily enforced by staff because we don't want to be out working on weekends. you know, clicking stopwatches and making counts on how many people are coming and going from a specific location. So, we don't want to make it cumbersome, but on the other hand, I do think there's there's some room for allowing language to let people have some retail uses out of their homes. Uh there's a lot of things that we do allow. So really, it's kind of an open-ended discussion, but it all comes back to this nuisance thing. Um, in this instance, it really was the information I've been able to gather is the most egregious thing was the parking. It just clogged up 89th Street. 89th Street is is not a wide road. It's not a good and there's no shoulders. There's it's a ditch road. So, if you're going to stop there, you're going to have to practically be almost entirely in the street. That was a nuisance. That was a problem. It was a public safety issue. So, those are the things that we need to address. So, if you know, we could require a

certain amount of parking spaces. I mean, when you look at our codes as far as retail sales, those shops need to provide off- streetet parking. It is not allowed on a public street. So, those are the types of things that I'm kind of thinking about we need to look at as far as uh or we can just say, you know, no retail sales period and uh we will go on with our code enforcement assuming that the city council would adopt a recommendation along those lines. So, with that, this is really just a discussion item to let you know this is an activity. It's happening. These are things we're going to have to deal with. Next meeting we'll be talking about goats and some of those issues. So um

I don't know why you're laughing. Um, so we've had some interesting time playh houses and and other discussions on because one thing that I do like about Dodto is that we really try to work with our residents and find ways to make things happen to and not just to keep the peace but to come up with standards. We just don't want to just steamroll people and say sorry that's the way it is. you know, tear down your structure, clean it out, and we're done with it. So, that's kind of the attitude that I've always felt that the council has presented to staff is let's try to find a solution here that isn't just heavy-handed and pushes somebody, you know, out that doesn't really want that isn't really creating a huge problem. Um, but is there a way to meet where we can have a situation where we can have something where the city staff can enforce, but also where the neighbors don't feel like they're uh being impeded upon. So, with that, I'll just, like I said, I'm just here to listen, take your comments, bring back some sort of recommendations at our next meeting. like to have a public hearing on this item. That'll be part of the process as far as

So Brad, was there complaints other than just the initial when they had their party? As far as I know, there haven't been, but that I guess that's sort of irrelevant once the complaint is in action you know, but it's not an ongoing thing that's a problem. Yes. Maybe more fundamentally though, I mean, is there any good reason why we would prohibit secondhand merchandise retail and not prohibit firstirhand merchandise retail? I mean, no, you're right. I think the only reason that was in there was probably somebody just didn't want to have a flea market type rearrangement. But the

I mean, you can't have antiques. You can't do secondhand merchandise. Southern I have an antique that's firsthand merchandise but maybe I mean it probably is worthy of looking it looks to me like the examples you gave both a gardener and a tha retail sales are not permitted period that is correct. Yeah. So the question is do we have some brilliant way that we want to suggest we allow retail sales. I mean to me this seems like a special use permit issue.

If we're going to do it then it's a special use permit and they need to be able to certify that they're not going to create a nuisance. Whatever criteria needs to happen needs to happen. If this is a a shed on six acres that they can provide parking for people off the street, maybe it's okay. But it should be a special use permit. It's probably should not be demanded by right, I would think. I would agree. I was actually at the open house when they did it. I didn't observe any parking on the street. They do have a parking area right in front that would park eight people. Yeah, it certainly seemed that if you have that sort of a thing that couldn't do a special use permit to make happen.

We did have we did have a lot of people at the grand open. We really did and um I'm thankful for that and and I'm sorry that my neighbors, you know, have a problem with that. That's it happens. It's it's not at all been anywhere close to that thing. One of my questions was how did hap Happy Valley operate? Well, Happy Valley is zoned a and because they had an agricultural use in state of Kansas is very clear, you know, they have special rights, I guess, or that we don't get to enforce.

Yeah. Agurism, all those types of things. And that's kind of how the vineyard is now operating now. They're in aggra tourism. So if they were reszoned to RA, then something like that would be allowable. Well, because he's talked about putting in a bunkin patch. Yeah. Well, yeah, but this tract is six acres and our RA with a home use needs to be 10. Okay.

So, it's really not an option. I've got a couple of questions and then maybe a comment that on five it says no person shall be engaged in such home occupation other than the person occupying such dwell. So that that tells me nobody but the person that lives there can be involved. But then it goes on to say that not more than one full-time equivalent non-resident employee. So that to me is a conflict. Maybe I'm reading that wrong. Yeah, you're right. I mean, when you look at some of these, like somebody might have a salon cutting hair, they might have an employee.

Yeah. Might have two chairs there. a home occupant gets is a stylist and and there's one employee. That's what we've allowed. I I haven't looked at it. I've always I think the and is what's the the operative word there because you can have nobody only the person occupying and one full-time employee I think is the way that's supposed to be read. Okay. It's maybe I'm reading wrong. No, I think it's it's you're absolutely right to point it out and it's probably something we ought to clean up. It's not the only place in our code we have those kinds of things.

Yeah, sure. Uh and on seven it says uh shall not exceed two additional non-resident or employee vehicles. Well, uh maybe that's there to indicate you can't have two vehicles for the uh customer and an employee. I think that was the idea. Yeah. And it doesn't say that to me. Maybe it could be clear.

Well, you know, but one thing that's different about Dodto is because we've got such a significant part of the community that has large lot tracks that they can do things now in Gardener and I've lived in Gardener since 1990. I mean, there aren't any that I could think of, you know, two, three, four, five, 10 acre tracks in Gardener that are residents could do these things. So that's why and and I'm not sure that Lanexa has much of that either. There might be a few still around but Dota has a good chunk of those. So that's why we've got to deal with some of these kind of issues where people can say you know I can get 10 parking spaces on my property kind of you like the fact that we do tend to work with the residents of the town and I don't want to become one late but ones where we're overregulated.

Well, we all live out here. We don't want to live there. Yeah.

But, you know, I I I've watched the city council meeting twice now. I went back and watched it earlier today where they were discussing this and to me it sounded like they were all pretty positive about the situation. I like the mayor's suggestion about uh having it to where it would be allowable in R1 with six acres or more. It would eliminate the possibility of it being all over town. I think he said possibly 18 plots would be, you know, susceptible to be used like this. Uh, you know, one of the other uh council members said, you know, there there is very little if any places in town to rent if you can afford them to do a little micro boutique like they've got. And most of this stuff was uh from way I was reading it was if it was out of the home itself. They've got the the

out building out building that you did a awesome job I think but there was a little issue with where it's at and he's willing to take care of whatever the city needed to do. I really like just getting a special use permit rather than

I do too. The reason I say say that, John, is because randomly picking six acres is discriminatory against the guy with five but has the ability to do it. And if we're going to allow it, let's make a process by which we can allow it. And to me, it's a special use permit that if there's complaints or whatnot, you can deal with it. And if you have unique situations, you can you can present those. I don't think it's an tremendous burden upon an applicant who wants to do that sort of thing. And I would not make a distinction between the out building and the house itself in terms of home occupation because I got a guy lives across the street from me and I know he's servicing cars over there all hours of the day. And I'm sure he's thinking, "Well, it's my out building so I can do what I want to with it." So, okay, great. But if he was a retail guy, I'd probably have a lot of problem with it. I

guess honestly, I'm a little torn on this. I mean, I started my business 10 years ago out of my house. I didn't have any clients and that's came to the house. I didn't have any employees. So then I moved downtown when I needed that. Um but then also on the flip side, I live in an R1 district, you know, third acre lot in Dodto. Essentially, if we do a special use permit, we're approving a spot zoning C2, you know, district right next to my lot. That's a possibility. letting him do it by right. Well, well, yeah. You got something.

So, it would be something like if we did a special sprint, it'd have to be tied down to like two years probably. I mean, really keep a tight, you know, leash on it. Two year like two-year renewals depending if there was any violations or Yeah. So, I'd see if I would buy a new lot in Dotto and then I didn't know about that special use permit right next door. Mhm. You know, that would be a little upset.

One thing, yeah, I I agree with that. One thing I So, this discussion doesn't apply to stuff like garage sales or lemonade stands. No, it doesn't.

I think there's a there's an exclusion for that somewhere, although I don't see it in here. So, I I did like the discussion where where the mayor was going on having it on the larger lots, but if you open it up, I'm a little nervous if you open it up to R1 any lot size because we don't want to discriminate against those people with smaller lots. You know, I think it could be a problem because just like you said, Brad, I mean, they're going to have When are you open to sell clothes? And Thursday, Friday, Saturday. Okay. Right. when I'm outside playing with my daughter and you know so I mean again I'm not picking on you I understand exactly what your concern is okay

but we are on six and a half acres and we're nowhere close to our name I can either build so I hope you the best success thank you uh but my question is I mean what do you do if you do have all those cars and you sell a lot of stuff and you make a lot of money are you going to move you gonna if I if I had a choice I would buy a location here in Dninnesota but nobody body sells anything. Yeah. They were actually looking for a place down before they did this. Paid $26 a square foot. So, if I had a choice, I would I would do that. Absolutely. And it sounds like you were able to move your business. I hope one of these days we're able to. Yeah. So,

well, part of my concern with allowing it of right would be that we'll have a peripheration of these things and I don't think we can do that. Yeah. I don't want to Yeah. allowed by right, but like a special use permit. Yeah. If we would prove that, I guess where I'm going with that is, you know, I have my house and then right next door it's I move into a new house and I'm not aware of the special use permit that is allowing somebody to sell something out of their house retailwise. So, I could look at a zoning map and say, "Oh, right next door I got C1 zoning. I don't buy that house."

Yeah. is part of the issue too that it's also a separate building and not incorporated into the house structure that's already there. that should make much difference. When I read the other cities, they were talking about it, you know, not changing the existing structure and that kind of for me it was just putting in these little buildings on everyone's lot like you know, but we as a city have said go ahead and do that. We our accessory use regulations are incredibly broad, right? We let you build whatever you want to build. I mean,

it really is. So, we'd see these pop up. I guess is that necessarily bad though because that's kind of what do I get it you know but I know but this is and I I Commissioner Milbour I do understand your concerns as well and also sign on their they can put a sign up saying so if somebody moved in they would see that if they're looking around. When they tell you you had to move the sign. We did though the sign is moved. you know on the Did you take it down or just move it? We just moved it back building. You know how to see that they've got

a business operating on there. Surely you take a look around to see what your neighbors are doing. But I guess the main reason why we have planning commission I hear you both is to regulate the districts. And again, I'm not I'm just having a discussion.

We regulate the districts. We know kind of what we're going to get ourselves into when we purchase property. Maybe I mean I I I certainly get your point about not having it be part of the zoning regulation. Someone who is buying a property may not know be aware of it because of that. But I maybe the special use permit is should be specifically tied to the applicant too. So that if they sell and somebody else moves in there, they're going to have to get a new special use permit operator. Those kinds of things. Right. But I'm talking about the next door neighbor. I understand you're talking about somebody who just comes into town. I would agree. I think it probably ought to be a short term a short-term special use permit and something that

you know we may be able to build in that the city administrator has the right to renew it for so many times or whatever else make a big deal out of it. I wouldn't have a problem with an easy renewal. Um but I I certainly don't think it should be of right. To me, the answer would be by special use permit and have whatever specific requirements are necessary and whatever the commission would think at the time. If it's, you know, six acres, it's something different than if it's one. And, you know, I don't know if we necessarily need to put criteria in, but maybe we do.

Well, and if there's two years short term, by then you're going to know whether or not you object or not. you know, lots of traffic or additional problems. Right. Right. And the only reason I bring it up because somebody I know this happened to him. A guy moved in, put opened up a lawnmowing business right beside him, and the city allowed a two-year special use permit. So now, I mean, he's operating, you know, he's got machinery and all types of stuff coming and going from his house. But the problem is, how do you stop that ball from rolling in year two if it's a problem? Well, we would have restrictions on noise and stuff.

Yeah. I mean, that's what the point of the special use permit is to put reasonable restrictions on it so that they're not interfering with the other neighbors properties. I guess, you know, we were talking about a life restrictions and stuff. The guy that fixed my lawnmowers for years, he lived in a house and residential neighborhood and which was not not appropriate, but you know, everybody was okay with it, you know, because I guess they liked him fixing their mowers. Well, that's that's permitted right here, right? So, that would be small appliance repair services. I think that probably

Yeah. I'm just the pra I'm just thinking the practical situation what the reality of it is that this happens everywhere in all cities. We're probably doing more to address it than than most the other cities who say no, you can't do it, but I'm not looking. You know, uh but I I think I don't know that I have an answer. It's just an something that popped into my head. If you allowed this as a special use with no uh objections from the immediate land owners or something along those lines because I would I would hate to set up a situation where we're discriminating against a somebody wanted a special use permit and get into trouble because we've allowed it in many locations. But

are you talking about preliminary no objections beforehand? It doesn't matter. I mean, when when the applications turned in or when it's try when somebody tries, you know, I Yeah, I think certainly they should have a voice in it. That's why this process, they can come and say what they want to say. But what if if the rule is if somebody objects you don't get it, that's a little like getting the liquor license in Kansas City, Missouri, and that turns into nothing politics. So I I don't think I'd want that.

I don't think so either because they don't know what the business is going to be. You know, they might have objected if they saw there was a lot of people, but now that there's just a minimum amount of people, they probably aren't as upset now is my guess. But in reality, we have zoning designations. So, this won't happen. I mean, we're we're trying to have appropriate uses in appropriate locations. And R1 in I'm sure in the planners uh textbook it says R1 is not where you do resident use. So, we're making we're making an exception to that

and it makes sense, but it doesn't always make sense, you know, and and I I guess my opinion would be if somebody if one of the neighbors objects to it, then should be by the book. If nobody if none of the neighbors object to it, then we can make a special condition. That's That's kind of where I'm at on it right now. Totally like the idea, but the neighbor could object to it for reasons completely contrary to any any logic. They just don't like it. Yeah. That has always happened.

Basically didn't when I was there didn't look any more congested than a very successful garage sale. Yeah. Well, if it happens every weekend, you probably wouldn't like that. You only have two of those a year, right? Supposedly, there's a reason we have that, too. There are several in town that don't buy the real chairman if I can just that. Sure. This is Patrick. Hello Patrick.

Hey. Um just thinking through this if you know we in this special use permit I could just see a a few things and I wonder if people can comment on it or thought about it. You know one if we just limit it to R1 it seems like is that fair to other people's own residential? I mean, it doesn't seem like there's anything about R1 that is best suited for this type of use. It seems I mean, I think there's good question. Wouldn't this be available to anyone that's zone residential? They could apply for a special use permit. You know, normally in our regs, we indicate, you know, uses by district. And um I just can see this if we have someone in RH or you know another residential zoning district then we're back to okay well you know making them reszone just so they can have a retail spot. So that that's just one thing I thought of also. Um, I mean, it sounds like most of the comments, it seems like you want these to be not a primary use, definitely a secondary use, secondary to the residential use, which it should be because the primary, you know, use of residential. And I just wonder given that, can you really do that on a a tiny little lot? So, I just wonder I get what you say about not being arbitrary about the minimum acreage, but it does seem like if expectation would be that there

be, you know, places to park off street, maybe screening the activity somehow from neighbors. It just seems like that's going to require, you know, more than just a tiny little lot in the city. And then lastly, I just wonder putting together regulations on how you could get a special use permit requirements. I could see if we come up with a set of requirements and the applicants can show that they meet those. We're sort of going to have our hands tied as to almost having to allow that special use permit and not not be sensitive to neighbors concerns if for whatever reason the the retail use like selling lawnmowers or you know car mechanic shop. Um so those are just some things I was thinking of just food for thought.

Thank you. Um, yeah, let me take the last point there because I think that that's Mark's point is that we probably ought to have as one of our criteria is, you know, comments from the neighbors in terms of their concerns and that's one of the things we have to consider. So on that point, this the the the point about the the size of the lots and differentiating between different kinds of zones. I don't know that that's necessary if we have as we do right now that any parking associated with the home occupation must be off streetet and shall not exceed. We have a not exceed limit. Maybe that non-exe is you know you maybe it's less varied by special use permit but we already have a requirement that if you're going to do it you have to have off- streetet parking. So that somewhat limits the smalls size lots uh from being eligible for this I would think.

I mean like they could park in the driveway. Well, but you how many can you park and drive? Yeah. I mean like two cars. I mean so that's really not that much of an unusual use. Can't park in the street. Can't park in the street. Right. Right. Well, I think I've got some information to go on and we'll take a shot at some language and bring that back to you next next meeting. Okay.

Thank you. Um, I've got one other item just because every six months I have to say this just because I it it bothers me, but I know our signed ordinance has some teeth somewhere, but we've got Taco Bell that hasn't had a shell on top of its sign for months. We've got two businesses that are along Lexington Avenue that have frames on top of them. One's the car dealer and the other one's the one that used to be the bubble creams. They're just empty brackets. And then we've had this proliferation of flag signs, including guns, guns, guns, and every other sign out there. But I mean, I I think we have some rules on these. I can't remember what they are, but is this something we need to look at again? But you I just driving down Lexon today. I was thinking to myself, what in the world?

Yeah. I was kind of wondering when that all relaxed because it seemed like seemed like overnight they just kind of popped up. Well, I know there's a proliferation of them, but I think that my recollection is that those are not permanent signs. They're temporary that you're allowed to do it for a while, but they've been there for months. Yeah, we've got separate rigs for banner signs or you can an event and you can get a, you know, uh have them up for a period of time. But yeah, these when we redid the last time we redid the sign rags, the uh flag signs really weren't that, you know, prominent. But man, they sure have. Well, must have gotten very cheap in the meantime.

I would love to. I mean, just because, like I say, every six months I do this whether I need to or not. I'm afraid we have to look at that again. I I would I would encourage us to do it because it's really surprising when you're driving down Lexington now and now the the town elms across the street have them now too and I mean there's just everybody's putting up these flag signs. Yeah, we can take a look at that. And then the uh maintenance provision on the sign uh the empty signs that you talked about there. I just remember the 66 sign that sat there broken for years. Yeah, the old Amride sign. Boy, that almost an act of Congress to get that.

That's my two cents. Anybody else want to Great, Feel free. I've got one other question. Down next to Ricaric Pacific, I've noticed it's been there all spring, there's a sign that says coming fall of 2025, covered storage. Have you seen anything about that? Well, actually where I'm meeting with the developer while Joe Bazone owns that property. Now, this is irrespective of his sign. If it's a temporary sign, it needs to can only be up for so long. But yes, we are having discussions. I was just curious whether we might have missed something. We got the cart before the horse. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Usually we hear about it. You're right.

Yeah. He's just real optimistic. Yeah, maybe. That's well that's what I was thinking is taking a lot for granted there. Okay. Anything else? I'm done. Motion. Motion we unanimously. Apparently we're journed. Thank you. this conference.