Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the August 20th meeting of the Des Moines City Planning and Zoning Commission. I will start by reading our rules and procedures. The Planning and Zoning Commission is generally an advisory body to the City Council. The City Council will hold a public hearing and make the final decision on all matters before the Commission other than site plans and subdivision plots unless denials or conditional approvals thereof are appealed. The applicant will be given 10 minutes to present the request. Proponents and then opponents from the public are then allowed to speak in that order with each speaker allowed a maximum of five minutes. The applicant is then allowed five minutes for rebuttal. The hearing will then be closed and the commission will discuss and vote on the issue. All comments are to be germane to the item under consideration and speakers are to maintain a courteous manner. items listed on the consent portion of the agenda will not be individually discussed and will be considered for approval in accordance with the recommendation in the staff report unless an individual present or a member of the Commission requests that the item be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately under the public hearing agenda. Let's start with approval of the meet the minutes from our last meeting. Would anyone like to make a motion?

I'll move approval.

Thank you. All in favor, please raise your right hand. Any passes? Okay, minutes are approved. And I will go through the consent agenda. Excuse me consent agenda first. Item number one is a request from 3820 Grand Avenue LLC and 3826 Grand Avenue LLC represented by Mike Simonson for review and approval of a preliminary plat brownstones at Chamberlain Place on 0.73 acres of property in the vicinity of 3820 and 3826 Grand Avenue LLC. to allow for subdivision of the property for a row home development with six lots. Is anyone in the audience here tonight who would like this item moved to the public hearing agenda and discussed? Anyone on the commission? Okay, item number one will stay on consent. Item number two is a request from Iowa Plumbing Solutions Corp. for the following regarding property located at 2100 East Army Post Road. Determination as to whether the requested rezoning is in conformance with Plan DSM. Amend Plan DSM to revise the future land use classification of the property from medium density residential within a neighborhood node to business park within a neighborhood node. And to rezone the property from NX2 neighborhood mixed district to EX mixed use district to allow development of an industrial service light use. Would anyone in the audience tonight like this item move to the public hearing agenda and discussed? Anyone on the commission? Okay. Item number two will also stay on consent. Could we have a motion to move the consent agenda? Thank you. All in favor, please raise your right hand. And any passes? Thank you. And that brings us to our public hearing item. This is a request from Tiger Knight represented by Barry Nelson for the following regarding two parcels located in the vicinity of 1210 Army Post Road. determination as to whether the requested rezone is in conformance with plan DSM and rezone the property from limited MX3 mixed use district to CX mixed use district to allow a warehouse use in a portion of the existing building. And Sriyoshi will present for the city.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Sriyoshi Chakraborty planning staff. Item number three is a rezoning request for property at 1210 and 1220 Army Post Road. The request is to rezone the property from limited MX3 to CX district to allow a warehouse use for a portion of the existing building on the subject property. This is the subject property under consideration. It includes two parcels, which is on Army Post Road. This is in a segment of Army Post Road between Southwest 14th and Southwest 9th Street. It's primarily a commercial corridor. The zoning along the corridor is RX1 and includes primarily retail, RESTAURANTS AND OTHER SMALLER COMMERCIAL USES. THERE IS RESIDENTIAL USES FOR THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE AREA. HOWEVER, ALONG THE ARMY POST CORRIDOR ITSELF, IT'S MOSTLY COMMERCIAL USES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ZONED A LIMITED MX3 DISTRICT, WHICH MEANS THAT THERE ARE CURRENTLY ZONING CONDITIONS THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. I have some pictures here. This is the property in question. There is an existing metal building, an accessory building, and a paved surface parking lot. As you can see, this is the Army Post Road corridor. This is an older picture, but it gives you a better idea of the site. And then some more current pictures of the parking lot and the building. Here's a close up and looking south from the parking lot. So I'm going to go through the zoning history for the subject property. You may have seen in your staff report, staff provided a summary of some of the, zoning and enforcement related actions that pertain to this particular property. The applicant has previously tried to rezone the property for a variety of uses, and I'm going to just briefly summarize for your information some of the things that have occurred. So just chronologically, to give you context, in 2017, the city council denied a request to rezone the subject property to M1 light industrial use to allow the applicant to use the building for a variety of uses, which included warehouse, bowling pin refurbishing, and automobile painting use. Following that, the... In, let's go back here, 2019, the subject property was rezoned from C2 to RX1, and that was part of the citywide rezoning process that occurred. As you may have seen in the map that I showed you earlier, Most of the uses that are along Army Post in that particular area are zoned RX1 because of the nature of the uses that are along that corridor and therefore this property was zoned RX1 mixed use district as well. Following that in 2020, the city council rezoned the property from RX1 to a limited MX3 mixed use district. And this was to allow the applicant to retain a lawn care business with no outdoor storage. However, at that time, the council did impose zoning conditions on this subject property and those are listed right here as I'm highlighting them. So these are currently the zoning conditions that are applicable to the subject property. So they are still in existence for this particular property. Following that, the applicant again tried to rezone the property in 2022. At that time, the request was to amend the zoning conditions to allow a particular use that's currently within the vehicle sales and service maintenance minor. And so the specific request was to allow a detailing and upholstery business. which is under the vehicle sales and service repair minor category. So the applicant was requesting to add that particular use to the list of requirements. or I should maybe say that was trying to request that use, which was currently prohibited because it was under one of the uses that was explicitly prohibited on the subject property. So at that time, the Planning Commission did recommend approval of that request. In other words, the Plan and Zoning Commission did recommend that the existing zoning conditions stay with the exception of the upholstery and detailing business that was requested. City Council, however, overwrote that decision and denied that request at that time. Following that, the applicant sought a use variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment to allow that particular use, auto detailing and auto upholstery use, which was again denied by the Zoning Board of Adjustment. There's also some recent enforcement history as it relates to the subject property that's outlined here. And there's been notice of violation sent to the applicant in 2024 regarding violation of Chapter 134 and Chapter 135. for uses that are explicitly prohibited, which are under the vehicle sales and maintenance and repair major category, which is not allowed by right in the MX-3 district. There were additional violations related to outdoor storage, which is, again, not permitted, as well as Violations including site plan. The site was not in compliance with an approved site plan, which included improvements to the parking lot relating to landscaping, striping, etc. The most recent, in July of 2026, the zoning inspector issued a notice to the property for noncompliance with the court order, again, for violation of the city municipal code, including, you can see the list of bullet points here, pertaining primarily to the uses and violation of noncompliance. being in compliance with the approved site plan. And therefore the notice was issued to notify the applicant of the city's intention to abate these violations unless those following issues were addressed. So that was just a somewhat quick summary. And with that, I will move on to staff rationale and staff recommendation. Again, to remind you, the request at this time from the applicant is to allow a specific use that is not allowed in the MX3 district. The applicant is proposing to use a portion of the building STORAGE OF FILES AND SO THAT WOULD IN OUR CODE, THAT WOULD FALL UNDER THE STORAGE DISTRIBUTION AND WHOLESALING WAREHOUSE USE TYPE AND THAT WOULD SPECIFICALLY BE ALLOWED IN THE CX DISTRICT. STAFF IS SUPPORTIVE OF THIS SPECIFIC USE THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED. HOWEVER, WE DO THINK THAT THE ZONING CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IN PLACE ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SHOULD CONTINUE TO EXIST. AND THEREFORE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING REZONING FROM THE LIMITED MX3 TO A LIMITED CX MIXED USE DISTRICT SUBJECT to the, again, the same conditions that have been in place on the subject property with the addition of the vehicle maintenance and repair major, which is which is a use that is allowed by right in the CX district. So just to clarify, MX3 district is very similar to CX district in terms of the uses that are allowed, but there are a few uses that are allowed by right in the CX district that are more intense. And the vehicle maintenance repair major is one of those which allows more intense uses in that category, including body work for auto repair and painting and that kind of thing. So staff is recommending approval of the limited CX district subject to these zoning conditions. The applicant conducted a neighborhood meeting as required for rezoning and this is a brief summary of what occurred during the meeting. And we received a couple comment cards. Both of them are in support of the requested rezoning and this is the consent map. So with that, if you have any questions, I'll be happy to take them at this time.

I have a question. Oh, that was long. I have a question. Um, can you go back to the zoning conditions? I just wanted to clarify that in a CX district are all of the uses stated they're allowed by right so these conditions are needed to limit that?

Um, I believe that a lot of these conditions are allowed by right in both MX3 as well as CX district. These conditions, as you saw, have been in place on the subject property for a while and that it came into existence when the property was zoned to a limited MX3 district. So in order for these uses to be prohibited, there would need to be a zoning condition too.

do not allow those just to clarify that the bar and alcohol cells are conditional uses i know i'm pretty sure that the bar isn't the alcohol cells would be as well but just technically there's a little difference between permitted by right and conditional conditionally you still have to go to the zone bar adjustment okay thank you

Shoroshi, can you go back to the map? You had said they got two parcels, but it looks like I saw three.

Or they got four?

No, they have two parcels. So this is, if you can see my cursor, this is 1220 Army Post Road, and this is 1210 Army Post Road. So it's these two parcels.

So the other 2 properties that they own by the same entity is not included in this.

That's correct they're not included at this time.

As far as the permit uses that are allowed within the CX is is that that it doesn't include out excuse me out their storage. I know it's been a problem with this property in the past.

There would be some of those uses allow outdoor storage as accessory use in CX in general. I don't know. Can you pull up the conditions again? Yeah. Johnny, I think that's a good point. I mean, one thing that is different from CX and that maybe we overlooked is that CX allows large format retail. I don't believe MX3 does, which large format retail is allowed out accessory outdoor storage. I know. So it might be worth the commission's effort to just add that as a specific prohibition. If that's something you're inclined to, I mean, um, I mean, you could rely on the definition of large format retail. I don't know that this building is large enough to qualify to be classified that use. There's a minimum square footage as part of that definition. But it's certainly, if that's something that, looking at the definition, 40,000 square feet is the minimum size for being called large format retail. where you would have some allowance for outdoor storage. But again, it wouldn't hurt if the commission was inclined to add another zoning condition that is prohibited. Outdoor storage is a Period.

Well, and city staff, if you recall the landscaping business, that was part of that proposal because they wanted to keep some trucks outside. And I don't recall what we did back then as far as the outdoor storage, but I thought it was a piece of contention.

Yeah, the trucks are fine. It's the trailers and equipment. And I know from talking to the applicant, which he'll have his shot here, I know that the lawn care business, I believe he's struggled with them, with their trailers, and that's what's been the issue.

Any other questions? Sorry. When you talk about the portion of the building being warehouse, The allowable use will apply to the entire building regardless, right? So if that portion of the building is warehouse and then the other businesses go out of business or whatever, the use will be allowed everywhere, right?

That's good.

Thank you.

Any other questions for staff? Thank you. Applicant? Please come forward, state your name and address for our record, sign in when you're done, and you have up to 10 minutes.

Hello, my name is Barry Nelson. I live at 1205 West Street, which is the property directly south of the building, 50315. I made some bullet points here, and... So bear with me while I didn't write it verbatim. I'm going to look at my bullet points and talk. So when the building was originally built, it was designed and built as a C2 or commercial property, commercial highway, because Army Post Road was Highway 5, I believe, back then. And it was under legacy C2 zoning, highway-oriented, auto-centric commercial businesses with outdoor operational needs. When the city downsized the property during its rezoning after I bought the building, and by the way, I was never notified. All of a sudden, I found out it was zoned residential. So of course I had my original vision for the building. I had rented a space in a multi-use, uh, building up in Urbandale by homemakers. And so when this building came on the market or I discovered it, I wanted to do the same thing. I wanted to buy it and turn it into three to five units. There are three to 6,000 square feet for smaller service businesses. I want to cater to service businesses like plumbing or lawn care or, um, I have a martial arts place that's looking at renting. So I had rented space at Urbandale and it worked really well. And I thought this is great. After COVID, office space is kind of dead because everyone's working from home. Retail's kind of dead because of Amazon, Walmart, online, TikTok, Facebook. So I don't want it to be retail. I don't want it to be office. I want it to be ideally for service businesses, an overhead door, an entrance door. You can store some stuff. You can do some floor remodeling, whatever. So, I'm not asking the city to introduce a massive new commercial disruption to this neighborhood. I am asking the city to correct a regulatory mispatch because when I had to claw back, the city suggested MX3. However, the classic MX3 are buildings that hug the street and their parking is behind or on the sides. Classic CX that goes with C2 is where the parking lot is in front of the building, between the street and the building, and the building is set back. So at the time, I actually had a city official, and don't ask me for the exact name, I was dealing with three or four different people after they zoned it residential. I said, well, can you explain this MX-3 to me better? And they said, to be honest, we don't understand it yet ourselves. So I agreed to MX-3 with some limitations, thinking I could get it all rented and do fine. And I have tried that now for years. As Sureshi put down, WHATEVER YEAR THEY TOOK IT TO MX3. IT'S NOT WORKING. I'VE HAD TO EVICT FOUR TENANTS THAT I THOUGHT WERE FINE. I DIDN'T REALIZE MINOR AUTO REPAIR, UPHOLSTERY AND AUTO DETAILING WAS NOT IN THERE. SO I HAD TO EVICT THEM. I HAD TO EVICT A GUY THAT SAID HE WAS GOING TO STORE HIS OWN CARS IN THERE AND THEN BY RIGHTS HE WAS DOING AUTO BODY WORK AND I DON'T GO CHECK THE BUILDING EVERY DAY. BUT WE GOT HIM OUT OF THERE BECAUSE THAT IS ILLEGAL AND I DON'T WANT AUTO BODY. I would like to have auto repair, which by rights goes with C2 and CX. So I think CX, in support of this request tonight, does fit the traditional size nature of the property better than MX3. MX3, I just can't get it rented. I've had it listed since November. My realtors had over 30 tenants that want to rent. None of them qualify. Over 25 of them are auto repair minor, which is breaks and... You know, minor stuff. And in that is auto upholstery and auto detailing. So none of that's allowed right now. So in Chapter 135, the design standards for MX3 corridor assume a modern main street walkability model. Again, the buildings hug the sidewalk. This building again, C2. It's a classic C2 layout. The reason we're here tonight specifically is I have a prominent law firm in town. It's now the biggest law firm in Iowa. They want to rent 3,000 square feet to store documents. They're currently in over 4,000. They want to purge and get down to 3,000 and rent from me with a five-year lease at full price. Document storage is not allowed under MX-3. And this is a 16,000-square-foot building. It's 15,000-footprint, and there's 1,000 in the back and a mezzanine. That back space is my space. I store equipment and stuff in there. So the lawn care tenant, there's been a lot of discussion about the outdoor storage. So I looked up some of that. Technically, outdoor storage definition is junk and gravel and materials, but not commercial trailers. That's considered more commercial vehicles because they're licensed and used every day. So my lawn care guy's been here four or five years. It's been a constant struggle, as Jason knows. He's got to have those trailers every morning. They load them up and they take off, and they're gone all day, and they come back and they unload the lawnmowers. They will not put the trucks outside because they get the catalytic converters cut off. So with CX, it does allow... or it's easier to allow, I guess, is what I've researched. I did more research this time instead of coming up here and saying, okay, I'll take MX3. My research is saying that it's easier to do trailers and still, I'm willing to say no outdoor storage for pallets or loads of rock, or he does dump some salt on there and then moves it in the building. But Without those trailers, he's going to leave or I'm going to have to evict him because I'm tired of dealing with it. Jimmy calls me and says the trailer. I know, Jimmy. I'll tell him again. I'll tell him again. But I can't hold a gun to his head and say you've got to move these trailers. So with the CX, I would be willing to, I want to say, can the trailers or commercial vehicles be out there? Stuff they use every day. As long as we, and I've got to say, look, you got no junk, nothing else out here but trailers. He is not willing to put his pickups outside and the trailers in because there's theft. It's a safety concern for people under there with sawzalls in the middle of the night trying to cut stuff off their vehicles. Their vehicles are really nice trucks and they're vandalism targets. So that's what I would like for that. But my main goal tonight is to get to CX so that I can store some documents for a law firm for five years. would like to get auto repair back. Over 25 auto repair places have wanted to rent. And if there's that much demand, helps the consumer, lower auto repair costs. Has anybody had to have their car fixed lately? It's insane. So I still don't understand why by right that's included. So again, main goal, CX, like to get the attorney firm in. Jason recommend maybe coming back later at another time and going for some trailer storage or auto repair back, but I'm planting the seed tonight. And so I'll do it any way that you want. With the site plan issues, Strictly, my property taxes have quadrupled from $500 a month to $2,000 a month. I can't get it rented. I'm negative cash flowing. If this doesn't go through, I'm going to sell the building probably for about half of what it's really worth. I just can't get it rented, can't make it cash flow. It's just a broken business model at this point, and I don't want to deal with it anymore at my age. So, any questions?

When you get cited for the violations for the trailers or whatever, are those called in by your neighbors?

They're telling me that they are a complaint-based system. I keep saying, who's complaining so I can go talk to them? And they won't tell me. They say, we can't tell you that because it could be conflicts, I suppose. But I can have a conflict with my neighbor over the fence. So they're saying there's complaints, but I don't know who it's coming to a head though. I mean, the tenancies are going to move or I'm gonna have to evict him or, I mean, the trailers are all utility trailers. They do have one commercial truck that hauls some other equipment. They have a dump trailer, but if this was allowed and the trailers were allowed, I would force them, tell them, look, we're going to be okay with the city if you put your dump trailer down in the loading dock area, because then it's down four feet and it's less visible from the street. And that's on the west end there, that little white jet. That's a four-foot high loading dock, and so the trailer could go down in there. I've spent half a million dollars on this building since I bought it. And the site plan repairs... Our 60,000, the city's basically forcing me to put brick on the front, a decorative fence out front. That's all goes with MX3. So I've bought all the materials. I'm doing the work. I could spend another 30,000 and pay someone to do it. It'd be done in a couple of weeks, but I know how to do all this, but I don't have the time. So I'm working on it as fast as I can. Hope to have it all done before winter. So I've talked to Jimmy about that. The brick are out front. The fence is mostly up. I have to knock out parking lot to put in grass. We still have a little more to knock out and pour, but we're well underway with everything. I have to put a new privacy fence in the back. I purchased about half of that and put up some of it. So I'm willing to comply with everything that the city wants, but I need some relief on who I can rent to and what those tenants can do within reason.

Other questions for the applicant?

So reading the staff recommendations, it sounds like you're not in agreement with those. If there's a recommendation for the any commercial use to commence after the certificate of occupancy is issued, that means that the site has to be in compliance with the site plan, correct?

Right. That's probably the problem is that hasn't happened in the last, I don't know, five, six years.

We've been modifying it over time, though. We even modified it some last fall with Jillian. So we keep modifying it because that site plan was made for an event center and calls for a $200,000 sprinkler system. Well, that guy walked away. So I don't want the sprinkler system anymore.

Yeah. The sprinkler system is a building code thing. It's not part of the site plan, but yeah, we have worked with you. We've reduced some of the building materials and landscaping where it made sense to.

I agree. Um, Sureshi pointed out that they're still recommending excluding, uh, vehicle maintenance repair major. She didn't mention that minor is still in there too.

So she was just trying to clarify that these conditions are exactly what's there today, but we, because CX brings in new uses that we did have to add in order. It'd be, um, it wouldn't make sense to prohibit the minor, but then allow the major so that we've added it.

And at one point I was denied for the auto repair and auto upholstery and detailing. And then I was approved. So when another tenant called in, they said, Oh, you're approved for that. So I don't know what happened there. Somebody made a mistake and approved me when I thought I had officially been unapproved. So I don't even know where that stands officially right now.

Okay, any further questions?

So with this attorney law firm tenant, your building will be full? Excuse me? Will your building be full if you get this law firm tenant?

I only have the lawn care tenant right now. My building's the front. 12,000 has only got 3,000 rented. I got 75% unrented. And I've been trying and trying and trying.

But you're willing to come back for the repair minor and vehicle major?

Yeah, I don't want to hold up CX tonight, which will exclude the attorney firm. Yeah. So are you saying that if they would approve CX tonight, that I still can't rent to the attorney firm until the site plan's done?

There's just, yeah, they're recommending body. So the recommendation is going to go on to city council. So the council will make the ultimately make the actual decision. So if the staff recommendation, you know, the zoning conditions that exist today say that you should have had the site brought up in the conformance already before he occupied the building, we're just carrying forward that language. So I think you're making you'd have to sort that out. We don't. I mean, some of the things you've talked about tonight are really between you and enforcement staff. It's not really for us to get in the middle of. But what we can take care of is the zoning and your site plan and and how what kind of. agreements you enforcement agreements you iron out with it that you know other department that's between you and them okay so it's possible that you know they try to be flexible where they can yeah he told me as long as i keep making progress and i said i will keep making progress i want it done i want it i want this off my back okay any other questions for the applicant

Okay, thank you.

I have someone that wants to speak.

Yep. Would you like to speak in favor of this item? Okay, please state your name and address for our records and you have up to five minutes. Sign in when you're done.

My name is Mark Harding, and my address for office purposes is 1217 Army Post Road, directly across the street from this location. I have been on Army Post since 1974. I bought 1221 Army Post 50 years ago, and then after that, I bought 1217 and 1219 Army Post, which at that time was a gas station. and had been that way for many, many, many years. We went ahead, leveled it, built the building that we've now been in for, since February of 1981. So we're well aware of what this neighborhood's like, the fact that there are a number of car lots along the way, that there's other kinds of commercial activities taking place, And we've been able to see, since they're directly across the road from us, we strongly support them going ahead. They're good people. I'll tell you, they're not clients, but they are good people, and they're trying to do what they can to go ahead and make the neighborhood be a good neighborhood. I've met them through the course of this, not beforehand, but during the course of this, and we would strongly support. They're trying to do a good job with the property there. They're doing a good job for the neighborhood, and the neighborhood is continuing to evolve, and I think continuing to get better. Of course, Army Post is... really been building up over the years to more and more commercial activities on Army Post and switching away from the residential that it was over the years. So I would strongly support here. And any questions from anybody here? I've loved being on Army Post Road for, well, since 1974. who've had my office there. So thank you.

Thank you. Please do sign in on that sheet. There should be a white sheet there. Thank you.

I usually don't cut.

Okay, there's no one else in the audience. So I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and open it up to the commission for discussion and motions.

I'll say that I think he makes a good case for the staff recommendation. I'm going to support it.

There's one question earlier about are there duplicates here? Do we want to try and remove the duplicates in this if they're already not allowed in the area we're approving or just leave the list as it is?

I would just leave the list as is. I mean, I don't know if there's necessarily duplicates.

Things that would be already not allowed already, so why state it's not allowed in the list if it's already not allowed in the area? Like what?

Which one?

I don't know. I mean, that was the question that was asked earlier, and we said we didn't know if there weren't any. Do we want to actually remove them if there are?

Oh, yeah. I believe these are all permitted uses. What I was getting at is that the bar and alcohol cells technically are conditional uses, not permitted by right, but this would prevent them from being able to go to the Board of Adjustment to ask for conditional approval. So I do believe all of these uses are allowed in CX, so I would go ahead and leave the list as is.

I have a question just out of curiosity with respect to the site plan. Do any of the site plan requirements change with this rezone?

I don't believe so. You know, the building types, there are, you know, like Differences in the different districts and as to what building type you can use but the code has pre-existing building language in it and which he's already you know That's you know, we don't expect you know, like he's already benefiting from that so that's not gonna change I can't think of anything that would Concern me. I think we could still work with the existing site plan. I

Okay. Any other discussion or does anyone want to make a motion here?

I have a question for staff regarding the definition of outdoor storage. If we're talking about trailers and those are fine, But what about materials and others do those need to be explicitly called out or is that part of the definition.

I want to clarify that that you know that applicant shared what his interpretation is that that's I don't believe that's what our zoning enforcement staff's interpretation is that those trailers are permitted. The CX zoning district does not allow outdoor storage except for when it's accessory to large format retail, which looking at the size of his property, I mean, that's much, you know, 40,000 square feet is... these parcels together. I think Bert was sending me a message that they're in the 50s, so less than 60,000. The building that's there today is 15,000. The large format retail, that's like Home Depot, Walmart, where there's some level of outdoor storage. That's what that is envisioned. CX isn't you know, really, you know, um, what he was talking about early on is, you know, you know, it's like, Oh, uh, the types of uses and the things he'd like to be able to do this building. That's really industrial. That's really, I won maybe EX even EX, um, which is our business park. Sony district has limitations on outdoor storage. Um, so bringing this back full circle here. Sorry about that. But, uh, There's nothing that CX is doing that's adding an allowance for outdoor storage that doesn't exist today just because the large format retail is not likely to ever be built here without the whole site being cleared and additional land being acquired.

Does that make sense? So are there trailers complying with the current zoning? I don't believe so.

I believe they've been noticed for having trailers outside. That's part of the issue, and that's not going to go away with CX. That was where I was going in my long-winded spiel. What he really wants is I-1 zoning, but that's not going to happen here. And actually, if you go back through the history of the zoning history, before the citywide rezoning, he'd requested M1, which was the old code's version of I1.

I tend to think that CX was appropriate for the

for the location, you know, the direction you drive up and down Army Post, and you can see where it's headed.

It's headed this direction, and we need to encourage that, I think. And I would move staff and the prohibited uses.

Thank you. Any discussion on that motion? All in favor, please raise your right hand. Okay, that's unanimous. Motion passes. Thank you. Are there any director's reports or committee reports?

No, thank you.

Okay, thanks.