Planning Commision - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah. I know I work my way through.

I got to hit that situation.

It is 6 p.m. The October 6, 2025 session of the City of Eau Claire Plan Commission is called to order. If anyone in our audience wants to speak tonight, please complete a public hearing contact form located on the back table and give it to one of our planners at the front table. I ask that everyone turn your cell phones off or to silent mode. I will call the attendance roll. Commissioner Brewster.

Present.

Commissioner Davis?

Here.

Commissioner Erickson? Here. Commissioner Holzman?

Here.

Commissioner Leonard?

Here.

Commissioner Reed?

Here.

Commissioner Zoig? Here. And Commissioner Helgeson is here.

We do have a quorum with eight members present.

I will read our standard introductory statement for how we conduct business at our meetings during tonight's meeting. Plan Commission members will be participating in person to deliberate and take action on the agenda items before us. The Plan Commission attempts to conduct its public hearings in a relatively informal manner within the constraint that we must deal with the issues before us in an orderly and business-like fashion. we give the applicant an opportunity to speak first and then others are each permitted to speak either for or against the proposal we do request that everyone restrict their comments to the issues before us avoid unnecessary repetition and be prudent in the use of time we want to be sure that we have adequate time to deal is carefully with the last items on the agenda is with the first If you wish to view, not comment at tonight's meeting, it can be viewed through the live event link on the city's homepage under public notices and meetings. This meeting is being recorded at the same location. We move on to agenda item three. This is the open public comment period for those agenda items that do not appear on tonight's agenda as a public hearing. Item five and item six are noted as public hearings and have a specific comment period included. during the discussion of those items. Item eight is a discussion among commissioners only. Item four, our consent agenda, and item seven, which is a public discussion regarding a commercial building expansion on Lorch Avenue, are open for public comment at this time. Other than the applicants, is there anyone here wishing to give public comment on agenda items four or seven, or any other comments not related to tonight's agenda? Anyone I'd like to speak tonight on the consent agenda or the Building expansion on Lorch Avenue or any other comments, please come forward Commissioner Holzman Okay on the meeting minutes for the last meeting I am NOT listed as as having been present and I was here, okay and

That should be correct.

We'll get that down for number four. Holzman present. Thank you. Anyone wanting to be a couple of comment on items four or seven or anything else? Seeing none, we will close the public comment period and move on to agenda item number four, which is our consent agenda. And Tonight our consent agenda has five sub-items, if you got your amended agenda. Item A, the approval of our September 15th, 2025 minutes. Item B, a public utility easement release. Item C, a public utility easement from HK Development, LLC. Item D, a public utility easement from the Woodspire, LLC. And item E, a certified survey map with one lot and a right-of-way dedication. The public comment period for this item was offered during item three is now expired. The entirety of the consent agenda will be acted upon by a single vote. Are there any commission members that have questions, comments, or would like to see any of the sub items removed from the consent agenda and placed on the regular agenda? Seeing none, is there a motion to approve the consent agenda?

So moved.

I second.

We have a motion by Commissioner Brewster, second by Commissioner Reid.

Any further discussion on the consent agenda? Seeing none, I will call the vote on the consent agenda. Commissioner Brewster.

Aye.

Commissioner Davis. Aye. Commissioner Erickson. Aye. Commissioner Holzman.

Aye.

Commissioner Leonard. Aye. Commissioner Reid. Aye. Commissioner Zoig. Aye. And Commissioner Helgeson votes aye. The consent agenda is approved, eight votes to zero. We will move on to our regular agenda. Item five, or I'm sorry. uh... we uh... we're gonna include that mister holdsman was present uh... on that consent agenda item a uh... regular agenda we have a public hearing for recommendation to city council a rezoning uh... county line road in county road t and a certified survey map mister petrie

Thank you. Good evening, Chair and members of the Planning Commission and public. Agenda number five is located on the northwest side of the community, actually in Chippewa County, along Highway T and County Land Road. Gateway Industrial Park is the applicant, along with Ayers Associates. Both are present in the audience this evening. This request was annexed into the city of Eau Claire in 2020 from the town of Wheaton, but never actually got permanent zoning. The zoning map shows the industrial area to the north and to the east, and to the west would be more farmland, and to the south. Notification map showing the 300-foot buffer, also a sign on the property. It's currently vacant land. To the north, just so you're familiar, is Country Jam. And then you approved a warehouse building to the northeast. And then the city limit line, as I mentioned, is the blue line on your map. Here we have a photograph showing the existing vacant farmland. Gateway Industrial Park is requesting a rezone to allow for light industrial expansion. This is similar to other industrial land in the neighborhood. Gateway has purchased and rezoned in the past and projects come forward to the Gateway Board and then also to the Planning Commission for site plans. This is similar to the other general development plans within Gateway. There is a couple amendments that the staff has made along with Heirs Associates on behalf of the Gateway Board. The Gateway Board did move this forward and they do have a pending project in the future that would be reviewed by a site plan at a later date. The 30 acres along County Road T, if I go back to this map, there will be zone CC, commercial corridor, and that would be for commercial development, that would be approximately 30 acres. The other 44 acres is what's in front of you this evening. Also in your packet this evening is a certified survey map showing out lot one and the extension of Music Road to the south along with lot one. Out lot one would be for stormwater and dedicated to the public. and then lot one would be for future development. Staff is anticipating a different plat moving forward at a later date which would be reviewed by this commission and along with city council moving forward. The comprehensive plan notes this area is industrial and then these recommendations will go forward to the city council next week Monday and then a vote on Tuesday. In your packet this evening, as I mentioned, is the general development plan detailing permitted uses, setbacks, building design, non-building elements, and additional general development plan standards. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions this evening.

Questions for Mr. Petrie? Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Petrie. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Please come forward, state your name and address, and spell your last name.

GARRETT SCHAMBEAUX, last name Schambeau, S-H-A-M-B-E-A-U, 3433 Oakwood Hills Parkway is our office. Yeah, I'm here. We've worked closely with staff. We've worked closely with Gateway to put together what's in front of you. So I'm really just here to answer any questions you might have on it. CHRIS JERRAM, M.D.

: Questions for Mr. Schambeaux? Seeing none, thank you, sir. This item is a public hearing. If you are here to speak to this item, please approach the podium and limit your comments to three minutes. Anyone that would like to speak on item number five as part of the public hearing? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing portion, and the chair would entertain a motion on this item. So moved.

We have a motion from Commissioner Davis.

Aye. Second from Commissioner Zoig. Any further discussion on the regular agenda item five? Seeing none, I'll call the vote. Commissioner Davis. Aye. Commissioner Erickson. Aye. Commissioner Holzman. Aye. Commissioner Leonard.

Aye.

Commissioner Reed. Aye. Commissioner Zoig. Aye. And the chair votes aye. That motion passes. Oh, Commissioner Brewster, sorry. Passes eight to zero. Thank you. Sorry. We move on to... Regular agenda item six, another public hearing, rezoning at Damon in London and a site plan for multifamily apartments. Mr. Petrie.

Thank you. Number six is located on the southeast side of the community. This area has been developed over the few years. Jimmy John's and Scooter's were reviewed by site plans by this commission. Now they're looking to develop the west parcel. Currently zoned C2P and they're looking to do a multi-family project. Rocket Construction Property Mines is the applicant along with their engineer AEC. The parcel is approximately 2.51 acres in size, and the comprehensive plan does note this area as commercial, but within that commercial multifamily can be an option for development if the plan commission and council find it consistent with city codes and the surrounding neighborhood. As you can see, to the west is residential, to the south and north is commercial, and then 93 is farther to the east and Damon Street. London Road corner. Notification map showing the 300 foot buffer. Staff did receive one email about the project, more or less was about questions and access into the property. I'm not sure if that individual's here this evening, but it was not necessarily against the project. He just had some clarifying questions. You can see on the new street view, this is from Google Earth, you can see the scooters and the Jimmy Johns existing. That is a private driveway, and that's why the parcel lines go to the middle of that driveway. That was actually approved many years ago by Mayo Clinic, who was the property owner, and then they sold a few years back, but they got that approved access drive lining with South Town Drive to the south. This evening there's a rezoning request along with a site plan to move this project forward. This recommendation, again, will go through to the city council next week. The plan commission along with city council will need to review the comprehensive plan guiding for commercial development as noted in the standards in the staff report. There are some conditions that need to be met prior to moving the site plan, final site plan approved, The applicant is in the audience and can address some of the concerns. One thing that the applicant is proposing with the site plan, as you can see, it's all vacant currently. The access drive would be from the private drive. That's the only access point into the apartments. And then the floor plans and elevations are also in your packet. The applicant is proposing to exceed the 25% maximum parking. at 28%. There is limited street parking within this neighborhood, and most of the units are either studios or one bedrooms, but if the individual had, say, two individuals living in it, one of the units, and had two cars, that additional car would have space in the proposed site plan. The plan commission will need to review the standards, and more or less so, they're asking for a waiver of 3% over the maximum parking. The landscape and building design is shown on the screen too. These units are currently under construction on Arthur and Session Street. And based on the floor plans, they are very efficient units. And talking with the applicant prior to the meeting, they do fill up fast because this is where the market has gone towards. Not many developers are building these kind of units where they're smaller with no garages or attached garages or detached garages. That does lower the rent levels to a certain degree, but they also are new construction projects to the market. The green space is noted over 15% and exterior lighting will need to be submitted at a later date. As I mentioned, there is some conditions that need to be met and the plan commission can make a judgment call on those. Moving forward, all these site plans would be administratively approved with the updated code. And we have more or less so made better checklist for the applicant to submit prior to getting all the conditions. But there is some conditions noted in the letter this evening. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions this evening.

Questions for Mr. Petrie. Mr. Peach, you mentioned the checklist, because I noticed here on the condition letter there's a number of items that apparently were not submitted or left out or something. That's correct.

Yeah, so typically the Planning Commission does have some conditions. It depends on who the applicant is and the submitter. Sometimes they forget, but we would work with the applicant after this meeting to get a revised site plan as soon as possible before any building permit is issued.

Any further questions for Mr. Petrie? Commissioner Brewster.

I guess this is more of a procedural question. Oh, thank you, Chair. Is there a reason that we see this before all that stuff's been brought in? Yes. Some of the stuff on here is stuff I'd like to see, like where the... you know, the bicycle stalls are, like how they plan on, you know, fitting all the, I don't know. It just seems like some of the stuff is stuff that we should see. And so to approve it before they've included that information, at least to me, feels a bit premature.

Sure. That is up to this commission. You can ask for it to be brought back at a later date. I would keep in mind any new site plans moving forward, are gonna be staffed approved, but this is one of the last ones. There's one on next meeting as well, but this one and the next agenda item would be the last two and then there's one next month as well, but you can clarify the conditions otherwise and ask the applicant where they would be putting the lighting or bike parking or things like that.

Further questions? Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Petrie. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Please come forward. Please state your name, address, and spell your last name.

Scott Cervany with Advanced Engineering Concepts, C-E-R-V-E-N-Y. 1360 International Drive in Eau Claire is the address of our office. Yes, I'm here to obviously answer any questions that you guys might have relating to the site plan. As for the bike parking or the bicycle racks, you can see there is a significant amount of green space or open options that we have throughout the site. In addition to the green space, we're providing community areas with grill stations and those sorts of things as well. So we would propose that those bicycle racks be kind of spread out throughout the site to provide good connectivity for any pedestrian traffic that would come through.

Mr. Cerveny, I'd just like to go through the first five points on the conditions of approval letter. You asked for the parking waiver. Can you give some justification why you're asking for that waiver?

Yeah, so in experience and what we've found is, generally speaking, there does tend to be more than one person living in a unit. So they tend to have two cars. Not all of them do. But the developments we've had in the past where we've had, let's say, the exact number, we found some street parking ends up happening and stuff like that. So that's kind of the reasoning for, I guess, nearing on the higher side of the requirement.

Thank you. Number two, show the location and design of the 48 required bicycle stalls. What is your proposal on the bicycle stalls?

Yeah, so we probably, you know, there's some green space set aside up near the first building there right off of the private drive cul-de-sac. So we'd certainly put a concrete pad adjacent to that first building. And then in addition to that, you know, the 15% set aside for the green space or the kind of the green hatching that you would see, we are above the 15%. So we would propose to kind of place a few of those kind of concrete pads around the site to satisfy that requirement.

Would every building have accessibility to a bike stall?

That is correct. Yep. And the other spot I was kind of considering is right up kind of front. So we got kind of the grill station on like the lower side of the building. And then maybe the upper side, we would propose kind of a bike rack in that location as well.

Commissioner Brewster, did you have any follow up questions on the bicycles?

Yeah, I do. I like the idea of spreading it out for, obviously, convenience for the people that live in each area. I would strongly encourage you to make sure that wherever they end up, they're in well-lit areas, preferably with security coverage if you are planning on having you know, cameras for some of those areas. Just, you know, because if the bikes are going to be outside, that is still a thing that happens. People's bikes get clipped, and that's a subpar experience for people in general. I did have one other question, if I could just jump right on that. Do you have plans to have connection to London Road, like pedestrian connection? Because I'm not seeing anything... I just see it all coming from the parking thing, or from the parking, the private drive, rather. Would there be a way to run pedestrian connection, like between the buildings or something like that?

Yeah, we did kind of look at that as an option. In review of that, there is multiple overhead power poles that lie basically between the curb and the right-of-way, which is where our sidewalk would go. Um, so providing that connection all like along London road down to Damon street, um, turned out to be kind of a, I guess a very expensive option is ultimately, but you know, we have considered going with a sidewalk, um, between the buildings and then just going with a ramp across London road to provide that connectivity to the sidewalk. Um, But those are kind of the couple options we've tossed around and considered.

Yeah, because I guess I think it's highly likely that you'll end up with foot trails going through your lawn from people that eventually, and having something that's clean and maintained, especially during the winter, would be nice for the people that live there. You can figure out a way to do it.

Could you clarify that comment? Are you proposing sidewalk on London Road for the entire width of the property?

Negative. We are not showing sidewalk on London Road.

Okay. So how did you propose to get pedestrians out of the development to one of the public sidewalks?

At this point, it would be along the drive aisle entrance drive out to the cul-de-sac is currently where a pedestrian traffic would be able to come in. but we could run a sidewalk maybe along the southern building and just go out to the west and then just cross London Road with ramps on both sides.

At the intersection with Damon?

We could look at running it down to Damon. There's two overhead poles that sit right adjacent to Damon Street, and so we'd propose a crossing, but it may not be right at Damon Street.

Um, it would be kind of highly irregular to have a mid block crossing out here.

Okay. So we could look at, we could look at running it on the, on our, so typically like a public sidewalk, right, would run within the right of way. Uh, we could consider running it like on our property, um, and just avoid those polls in general. And then we could provide that connectivity to the trail system that runs east-west along Damon.

I'm going to allow Commissioner Zoig to ask a question.

So that lot you have, are you planning on making a sidewalk on London Road? Because currently there is no sidewalk on that side of London Road. It's only on Damon Street there's an actual sidewalk. The sidewalk is actually on the west side of London Road. So there's no, is that what you guys are trying to make going into Damon or to actual London?

Either or. Wherever there's a public sidewalk system.

The only sidewalk is on Damon Street for that lot. I mean, you'd have to put a crosswalk across that street, then that doesn't seem feasible. That's why I was kind of confused on what you guys were talking about. So I think it would just be a sidewalk access to Damon Street is what...

Yes. That's, that's what we could propose. Yes. We would, if we're going to propose a sidewalk to Damon street, that would be the, that would be the spot to do it. Yep. At the Southwest corner to that trail location.

Mr. Rinka, could you, could you just address this from a city engineering standpoint?

So we're kind of in this process now. Right now we are requiring sidewalk along London. It is only on the west side. There's no sidewalk on the east side. We do want to see connectivity from these units out to London. The poles you're speaking of, there is room to get between the pole and the right-of-way line, about a five-foot sidewalk. So we don't want to do some sort of a random crossing across London because of the speed, the amount of traffic on there. We would need RFBs. We don't want to get in. We want pedestrians across at the four-way stop. So we do want to see sidewalks coming from these units out to London. So we'll have to just verify the distance between those poles and right-of-way that we can get. Sure. But looking at the south side of London and Damon there, poles are at the same distance there and it fits there. but that's what we're requiring. If they didn't want sidewalk, they'd have to go through an official sidewalk deferral through Planning Commission.

So that has not been submitted. So there will be sidewalk on the east side of London?

As of now, there will be.

Does that answer your questions over here?

It does. If that's the case, and there's not going to be an opportunity for mid-block crossing, which makes sense. I mean, cars on London Road can be going pretty fast. Then, if there was a better system for funneling people down to Damon where you want them to cross, having people go all the way out to the... that private drive and then all the way around and then back up. I think what you're going to see is people running across the lawn and then crossing mid block.

My thought is like that northerly most building would be that had sidewalks going from those buildings right out to that new sidewalk that would be constructed along name and they can come down to the four way stop and crossover or however they want to get around. But that's why I think the sidewalk along London is going to be necessary. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Inka. Details on the trash enclosures. Do you have something that you will be submitting on the trash enclosures to the city? That was number four.

As far as like an architectural?

Mr. Petrie, what kind of details did you want on the trash enclosures?

Yeah, just screening materials and how they're going to screen it from the right of way. It's pretty basic.

Okay.

They've done it in the past.

Okay. And then number five is the location of the pergola on the revised site plan. Did you have a location for that pergola?

Yeah, we kind of denoted it up in the top right there. So that's kind of a pretty open area with relatively flat ground, so that would be the general location of it.

Okay. Thank you. I think this addresses the bullets in this conditions report that were kind of outstanding here. Any further questions for Mr. Cervini? Mr. Brewster?

Just a comment. We do have a housing shortage, especially for the one-bedroom and studio stuff, so thanks for being willing to take that on.

Thank you, Mr. Cervini. Again, this item is a public hearing. If you are here to speak to this item, please approach the podium and limit your comments to three minutes. Anyone that would like to speak on agenda item number six? Yes, please state your name, address, and spell your last name.

Good evening, Planning Commission. My name is Derek Treanor. Our office address is 2625 Damon Street. I work for Rocket Construction and Property Mines, our asset management company. And I just wanted to come up and say thank you for reviewing and considering our project this evening. We manage 498 residential units within the city of Eau Claire. And this is a new model of a 12 plex that we've been building. We have two that are currently under construction on Arthur and Sessions, one that is open and one that is currently being completed. The first 12-plex rented in 10 days. In 10 business days, we rented an entire 12-plex. What that says to us and our team is that this is something that the community needs desperately. So I apologize that the site land might be missing some components that you gentlemen wanted to see here tonight But I assure you we can get those cleaned up and we look forward to providing more attainable housing in the city of Eau Claire Questions for mr. Trainer Seeing none.

Thank you, sir. Thank you Anyone else that would like to speak to agenda item six in the public hearing for this item? please come forward. Seeing none, we will close the public hearing portion of this item, and the chair would entertain a motion.

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

We have a motion by Commissioner Brewster, a second by Commissioner Holzman. Any further discussion on agenda item six? the multi-family apartments. Commissioner Brewster.

Thanks. I really like this. I think it's a decent place to put it. The design looks, you know, human-scaled in a way that I think will be good for the people that live there. The only thing is that it just gives me a little bit of pause, and I think we've talked about this before too, is, like, if we're going to have parking maximums and we give everybody a variance. I mean, it's a 3% on this one, so it's like, what is that, like two spots maybe? One spot? I don't know. But like... That's the one thing I'm a little bit like. Maybe we should just, you know, if people had to park on the street and move it, maybe they would try to make do with one car and take public transit or something. I don't know. But we went through the trouble of putting those in place for a reason, and I guess that's the one thing on this that I'm inclined to say that I don't support. My preference would be to keep it at the 25% limit.

Is there an amendment to the motion?

Sure. I will move to keep the parking at the normal 25% limit.

Is there a second to that? Seconded. Motion is seconded. Let us vote on the amendment first. So the amendment is to limit the parking here to the 25% standard maximum instead of allowing the waiver to 28%. Any further discussion? Commissioner Petrie.

Who seconded?

Commissioner Leonard. Any further discussion on the amendment? Seeing none, I'll call a vote on the amendment. Commissioner Erickson.

Aye.

Commissioner Leonard. Aye. Commissioner Reed. Aye. Commissioner Zoig. No. Commissioner Helgeson votes aye. Commissioner Brewster. Aye. Commissioner Davis. Abstain. Commissioner Holzman.

No.

We have one, two, three, four, five. ayes and two nays on the amendment. The amendment passes. Now we will go back to the regular motion for approval with the constraint of the amendment that we just passed. Any further discussion on the main motion here to approve the rezoning and site plan? Seeing none, I will call. I do have a quick question. Oh, yes.

So this is approval on the condition that everything except the parking is worked through?

Yes, this is approval with the amendment that we just passed. Yes. Commissioner Holzman? Aye. Commissioner Leonard? Aye. Commissioner Reed? Aye. Commissioner Zoig. Aye. Commissioner Helgeson votes aye. Commissioner Brewster. Aye. Commissioner Davis. Abstain. Commissioner Erickson. Aye. Motion passes 7-0 with one abstention. We will move on to agenda item seven, which is a public discussion on a site plan for a commercial building expansion on Larch Avenue. Mr. Petrie.

yeah number seven is located on the south side of the community action city looking to do another expansion this property is currently two different parcels as shown on the screen there is a preliminary certified survey map in your packet to combine the two lots into one the parcel would be in question is approximately 12 acres in size advanced engineering concept is the applicant this evening again with the property owners listed uh they're looking to expand and add some new attractions to action city you can see they're taking up the vacant land and adding the parking lot and building expansion so they're just moving closer to lorch avenue and to the east as well Um, some of you may remember the last expansion that occurred, it was about seven years ago or so, and now this, uh, would move forward and start the construction this year if approved and then be done next summer. Um, the staff report goes into details about the parking and landscaping and, um, connections and number of street trees and things along those lines. This is, um, pretty much expanding the footprint of the building to allow for new attractions for Action City. The floor plan does show a variety of new things within it. The go-kart track would be relocated. They are adding the mini-golf inside along with new restrooms and expansion of offices and other attractions that the public would be able to go to, along with the building elevations as shown on the screen. Going into more detail about the proposal, they are looking to, as I mentioned, add more parking. The calculations that were provided really affect the complex but staff is okay with living the number they do have existing bicycle parking that can be relocated it's currently in the entrance way in front of the building on the existing building and then just needs to be moved to the new entrance as shown on the screen Landscaping, they do need to add a couple more trees along Fairway Drive. That is a minor condition. Grading and drainage is noted in your report, along with the traffic, public utilities. And keep in mind that Lorch Avenue is in the CIP, slated for 2029. There were some questions raised with a previous addition a few years back and now that is on the CIP project with the increased traffic of Larch Avenue and a one way in, one way out. Everyone accesses from Larch Avenue and then back to 93. The applicant is in the audience for questions as well and staff would be able to answer any questions this evening.

Questions for Mr. Petrie? Mr. Petrie, number five in the conditions report talked about pedestrian and bicycle connections. So what you're saying is the capital improvement program has plans to improve Lorch Avenue in 2029. That would include a sidewalk or trail on that north side. Would that be correct?

I would defer that to the engineer.

Mr. Rinka, could you speak to that?

Yeah, there's no plans right now drawn up, but we would just do our typical urban cross section, sidewalk, curb and gutter. Okay. Yeah. Maybe we'll get making it a wider multi-use path or something.

So the condition is provide connections from the property to the right of way. Right. Okay. Thank you.

I will ask the applicant that question, how they plan to do that.

Any further questions for Mr. Petrie? Seeing none, thank you, Mr. Petrie. Is the applicant here tonight? Please come forward. State your name, address, and spell your last name.

SCOTT CERVENY, C-E-R-V-E-N-Y, address 1360 International Drive.

Thank you. Did you want to add anything to Mr. Petrie's presentation?

No, I think he did a very nice job.

Okay. So I'll just ask you the question on a number five. How do you plan to make pedestrian connections to the right of way on large Avenue for future connection there to a trailer sidewalk?

Sure. So, you know, as you can see throughout the parking lot, we've provided basically striping for pedestrian traffic from almost every parking stall. um to the building um and that that access does include um going through those islands that head up to the main entrance there and that extends all the way to the south and what we would propose is essentially a crosswalk at that point to access that public public right away thank you sir any further questions commissioner reed um

Am I to understand that the sidewalk is being deferred for now? Is that what's happening? Or did I misread that?

It's my understanding that for the capital improvement project, we don't have the level of detail yet to talk about the sidewalk on Larch Avenue within the right-of-way. So we're just asking the applicant to provide connections to the right-of-way line so that that could be then connected to a sidewalk or trail system on Larch Avenue.

Okay, that's my question then.

Yes. Mr. Rinka.

Proper process would be sidewalk is always required in this scenario. If they don't want it, they have to request a deferral for a plan commission, which that hasn't been prepared up to tonight. We did submit a deferral. You did submit the deferral? Correct. Rebecca should have all the information on it. So then that should be voted on.

Is that in the conditions? A deferral?

Yeah, number three, approval of sidewalk.

So we will, you'll want to vote on that. Then if you want to defer it to the CIP, that's fine.

So do we have to act on that tonight, or is that something that engineering is going to?

Well, under existing code, that's typically plan commission.

Okay. Yeah. so we've got a sidewalk deferral on lorch avenue that were asked being asked to act on tonight process question yes this would be for engineering director rinka

When we redo LORCH, is it going to be torn up to the point that if they put a sidewalk in now that that will probably get torn up also?

Very likely, yeah. Process-wise, we've got to do a deferral by plan commission, but I would be comfortable in deferring that until we do the CIP and do it. Do it one time. Thank you.

Commissioner Erickson. Mr. Rinka, one more thing regarding the sidewalks deferral. It was mentioned also that it may not even be a sidewalk. It may be like a recreation trail. Yeah, it could be. So it wouldn't make sense to put a sidewalk in if what we want maybe to do in the future is a recreation trail. So I would agree with that. Thank you. Yeah.

So approval of this item would include approval of the deferral of the sidewalk at this point. Commissioner Holzman.

So one last question. How many years out is the rebuilding of reconstruction at large?

Right now, 2029. Okay.

So again, the approval of this item would include the deferral of the sidewalk. to a future date. Correct. Yes. OK.

I have a point of inquiry or information. I forget which one's inquiry and which one's information. But procedurally, could we say that once that has been established by the city, that then we would like connections to it? Is that something that we could require after the fact? Like, say, like, you know, whether we put in a sidewalk or whether it becomes a trail in 2029 when we do that, we would like connections to that for... From this property?

Yeah, I think you guys are going to do that anyway, just to provide some...

Correct, and I guess your question may be, like, at that time?

At that time, because if it's a trail, like an asphalt trail as opposed to a concrete sidewalk, maybe the way you would connect it would be different. Like, if it was a sidewalk, maybe you'd do a sidewalk. You know, if it's a trail, maybe you would have it look aesthetically similar.

I think he stated that they would need to paint a crosswalk across the last aisle. North of Lorch, and then probably put in a short stub to the right-of-way line at some point.

Yeah, and at that point we would match whatever is proposed at that time. I guess to put the striping in now, what you're asking, to put the striping in now that goes to nothing. Right, exactly.

Have it tie in seamlessly at that time.

Thank you for the clarifications. Any further questions for the applicant?

Seeing none, thank you.

This item is a public discussion and the open public comment period for this item was offered during agenda item three and is now expired. This is now a discussion amongst the commissioners. Is there a motion on this item? Commissioners Commissioner Erickson Commissioner Zoig second Any further discussion on the site plan for the commercial building expansion?

Commissioners want to make sure this is includes the deferral of the sidewalk. Yes.

Well, yes, it does. Yep It's listed in the conditions letter Any further questions? Seeing none I actually do.

This is for staff. I think if it's already. Go ahead. So my understanding is this is operating one of the last things that's going to be approved on the old zoning. Is that correct? So that doesn't have, you know, with any new parking, it wouldn't be. That's correct. So the tree requirements for parking lots and stuff is not applicable?

That's correct. All right.

Just checking.

Any further questions? I will call the vote. Commissioner Holzman. Aye. Commissioner Leonard. Aye. Commissioner Reed. Aye. Commissioner Zoig. Aye. Commissioner Helgeson votes aye. Commissioner Brewster. Aye. Commissioner Davis. Abstain. And Commissioner Erickson. Aye. This motion passes seven to zero. We move on to item number eight, future agenda items and announcements. Mr. Petrie.

Yes, your next plan commission meeting is November 3rd. We did get one submittal before October 1st that will be on the old code. And then moving forward, anything submitted will be on the new code. Thank you.

We are adjourned.

Thank you.