Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Do roll call for backup school. Brian Venma here. Christine Buff here. Monica Mchu here. Marita Keys here. Andra Gerla here. Tom Stewart yes. Mike Burke here. Then everybody had a chance to uh look at the March 10th, 2025 meeting minutes. Do you have any discussion or corrections? I'll move to approve. Second motion to approve and second. All in favor say I. I. Anybody opposed? Okay. Okay. We'll move on to Laura's presentation. Good evening, Laura. Whoa, we can't hear you. Now we can't hear you. No, I really can't hear you. There you go. Oh, you were doing turnabouts as fair play. But let me share my screen with um okay [Music] here do that and Laura can you see my I cannot

marriage should be good. Yes, I can see it now. Okay. Okay. So, for the this evening's work session, we're going to look at all of the zoning district chapters. This is a review of the A1 agricultural district. We've made some changes on that as we've worked through the residential, commercial, and the two industrial districts. And I've just I keep the schedule there so you kind of see how we're doing. We can go on to the first uh chapter, the A1. Lori, what I what I did, Could you go back just a second, please? Lori, each of the districts has a cover letter. I'm using that to try to make it easier to uh break up the the packet for you and kind of give you a summary. So, this is what we'll use as our separator at this point. Hopefully, this works. Uh, as I mentioned, you see you've seen this particular district before. We've made some changes. Um, but it also includes pretty much the template that you'll see on the other districts. Okay, Lori. Thanks. We can go to the next page, which starts the red line. So, anything that's in red that you remember, this is something that's being revised. Um, if it's being moved from somewhere else, we try to leave it in that uh black font. So, the big changes for all of the districts are these kind of tables that list the uses and the required parking and the regulations. And Lori, you can just slowly scroll through this. If people have any questions, we can pause and take a look at anything that anyone has a question on. Or Lori, I know you have some

comments and questions, too. So, make sure we stop where you if you have any. Yeah, I threw all of mine on the um the clean on the clean. Do you want me to address some here on the red or do you want me to wait? No, I think it'll might be easier on the clean. Okay, that's it's up it's up to you. that I prefer wait till there. So if you want to go to the next page then the next one basically that was just trying to put all of those uses into a table. Um we then we then did the same thing with the accessory uses as we did principal. And then when we come to special exceptions, we've tried to organize these in an outline format. We've also trying to make sure that as we go from district to district, the language is the same. So Lori, you can you can uh go through this. I think the only one with a real change is going to be on page seven, which is the draft, first draft of the cell phones. So Lori and I have been working on this. There's still probably going to be some more information, but for right now, we've got a set of requirements that Lori Lory's worked on. And we're kind of borrowing things from the new wind ordinance in terms of item number letter F, discontinuation, cap, catastrophic failure, and decommissioning regulations. We can pause here if you want to go into the cell phone tow our language in more detail or we can address that

separately. We can do that. Um but hang on, I just got to make sure I'm on the right spot. Um because that's number 10. So, um, some of the things that I had, um, pulled off, um, one of the things too I'm not sure we need to be so concerned with is the on the cell phone towers, um, is the five miles of the um, of a fire station. So, we might change that. Um just part of the reason is we um historically that's never been a concern and I don't know why you know I know there's other things that would be but cell tower um and communications towers I don't believe that we probably need number B in there. Um what what's the commission? Um do you guys think we should strike that or can strike that or it's gonna I'm I'm using the clean version. Um you guys on page version. I'm not matching up here. Yeah. Why don't Why don't we wait till we get to that Lori because I'm having trouble too. Let's go ahead and walk through it. We go to the next page then. Okay. I'm I'm good with that word. Okay, we can go ahead to the next page. You've seen these before. The next one we we still this is pretty much the same. The development regulations were still working on this table. Um the signs we're also still working

on. We had some questions last month. We're still working on those. So that that pretty much um is the red version. Lord, if we want to go into the next page, it'll start clean version and then if you want to take us through your questions here. Okay. So, you can see the table she's set up for the district as far as um parking spaces and um those type of requirements and then where you find the definition of each of each thing. Um and then when we get down to um I I have one quick question. Yes, ma'am. um on the table for elder group home, family group home. Why do we only do a half parking space per dwelling unit? Typically, the residents do not drive. Only the caretaker or on-site manager will have a vehicle. Would we want to require one space per dwelling unit? Then I I understand the reason for the half space, but why would we not want to require one? You can you can if you want it. Typically, these don't have a lot of parking, but if you feel better having one space per unit, that's easy to do. an elder group home also cons an assisted living facility where some of those people still drive. Would that be covered under the elder care group home? I don't think so. These tend to be small and located within neighborhoods and act like a

single family home. assisted living, we would have a much larger we would have a larger facility with more staff and would definitely need a different parking ratio. Um, that's not specified. Maybe for an example that be like one of the d houses. Yes. Well, yeah. I'm figuring the elder care is basically a nursing home where people aren't driving, but everything else is Yeah, both of these both of these the elder home elder group home and the family group home are specifically in the Iowa code to be treated as a single family dwelling. So, we would we would want to look at allowing assisted living or nursing care facilities as a separate use so that we wouldn't get into conflict with the way the state law says we need to deal with these. These are typically a small number of residents with one or more living caretakers, administrators um for the residents. I guess I get that. But if you're having kennel and writing stable and every other thing known to man with parking ratios, why something like that's not in there? Why something like what's not in there? assisted living facility or where I mean I know a lot of those people they have garage units or they have like you know condo units as well as apartments. Here's why we're in A1 last the the ordinance currently tries to be very careful about the

number of units in the residential dwellings in this district. If we want to allow for those types of uses, I highly recommend we look at residential zoning and not agricultural. Do we have any in the county other than the DAC home, the count the old county home? Do we have any other of these residential or um elder family group homes that are in the county? The only one I'm going to know of the big one is going to be the old county home. And as far as the regular dad houses, what we call most of those I can't think of any better world. They're all within city limits. Yeah. So the only place that would be, you know, and it's set up more nursing home style. I don't Is there a better word for that these days? Um, but is the county home the county home set up more like that? Like nursing home style. Um, yeah. And there's certain things that aren't here. It's part of it is okay. We worked on the comprehensive plan together and part of that was to keep um growth in one spot or close to services. I mean, as a rule, they're not going to put a nursing home five miles away or 10 miles away from the from an ambulance garage, you know, as a rule. Now, the death or excuse me, the county homes been there for decades. Right. Right. No. Why? But I know and I understand that because I mean like the old county homes, most of them were on farm grounds and most of them I mean I remember years ago growing up the county home the residents actually did all of the field work and raised all of their own food. So they were very

self-sufficient. So my question is they've got to be on two acres anyway um for like the elder group home and family group home. Is that something we want to allow in A1? I think you might have to allow it wherever you allow a single family dwelling under state law. That's why it's there. I don't see it really being an issue because I don't see them expanding outside city limits, but who knows? Is that also Is that also why the schools aren't in there too like under A1? Are there any schools in Jackson County? No, but it is allowable use currently in Wish I had my old paper the shadow paste paper in front of me so I could Okay, I I'm just I'm asking the question. I'm just I'm trying to I'm trying to make sure that we're transparent and complying with Iowa code. And these are two that these two uses are ones that need to be treated the same as a single family dwelling. So I'm trying to make sure that they're in districts that allow single family dwellings. Well, that's what kind of that's what kind of I understand that with the single family dwelling and that that's what kind of sparks the parking per unit. If we're in an A area, they've got to be two acres. Shouldn't we allow the same parking for

those homes that we're mandating for the single family dwellings? Well, the reason that we could certainly do that, but one of the things we're also trying to do is to minimize the amount of required parking because it tends to be an imperous surface impacts and which can impact storm water runoff. So, not requiring the expense of building more parking, trying to minimize that was part of the goal of trying to reorganize the parking requirements so that we hopefully are not making people build more than they need, but we can certainly change that to one per dwelling unit. It's very simple to do. It's fine. Are we creating the extra cost and extra um um you know overhead cost for cost for construction if we do that too? Maybe a little bit but maybe they'd want to have the pave surface for additional use like they could use it for something when it wasn't used as parking. I don't I think that that jump from a half to one is probably not significant. So that'll go under. What do you guys want to do? Do you guys want to keep it half? Do you guys want to vote on it? What's What's your pleasure? I fine with leaving it in half. Well, that just means that's the minimum. It doesn't mean it can't have more. Yeah. Right. You're right. And if it she's saying that it should match the state, who would the state override the county if somebody questioned it? We're not being more restrictive. We're being less

restrictive. We're allowing them more and not take any away. I mean, if we do went to one, are you requiring one then? No. Well, depends on what you guys want to require. But I mean if we change it to one then this is saying we're requiring one. So we are making it more resource. It's much more and the cost will just get passed on down to the care of the people in the home. I also believe we should just leave that. That's fine. I just I was just questioning I just asked. Sure. I'm not going to discuss. Well, then while we're discussing, if you guys are ready to move from that one, um Laura, one of the questions I questioned was um on the elementary and secondary um schools, one and a half spaces per employee. Um there's I'm sure there's a rationale behind that, but I was trying to figure it out. Okay. So the numbers that you see here are based on studies that are done across the country by transportation engineers who really get into this kind of stuff. And so I did research on this and this is the typical um gen typically what these types of schools will generate in terms of the number of parking required or the need for a drop off for students or something like that. You can see when you get into the secondary school, we have spaces for employees, but we also have spaces for students. And I think the 1.5 again I have I could pull I can get

back to you with the the specific research on on educational institutions to give you more background if you need it. Average across the country or is this average of rural areas or or what? The information will be will tell us based on individual uses that were studied where their locations are. I can certainly provide you at the next meeting the information for educational institutions. I did the study a year ago and I don't remember I don't remember all the details different for but I'm happy to share that information with you and you can decide then yeah it would be different I mean I guess the research I'm asking about is that does it differentiate between a place like Jackson County which is largely rural and a like de mo a metro area if the study includ included the study will give us a description of basically where the facilities were and I can I'll be happy to share that information with you. They won't always name whether it's a city or not. They might say urban, suburban or rural, a little more general, but I can certainly get you that information. that that would kind of be important because there's different there's there's different requirements for schools in Poke County than what there would be in Jackson County. Well, yeah, we don't we don't want to lose sight of the fact that we're talking A1 here and you wouldn't have A1 zoning in a in a bigger city. No, you would. Okay. Can we move on from that one? Okay.

Okay. Then the rest goes on for the cemetery, fairgrounds, public campground, recreation, kennels, logging, storage, um rail worlds, public utilities, and um and this is something new for us, Laura, too. The um Oh, excuse me. Yeah. Well, the assessor use structures, that's not new, but um the tables are good. Okay. um where where I started having questions or concerns and I found I saw the language somewhere else and um maybe it's just because we were using other language. Um, so when we get down to the special exception uses and structures, do you want to do you want to flip to that on the uh screen for me if you wouldn't mind so I know I follow where you're at. Okay, gotcha. Thank you. Thank you. You know how you got to prompt me to turn my page here. Um, but under D, um, agriculture and this is where it starts. It's it's in several pages throughout the ordinance. Um so number one a um the business produces no offensive noise, vibration, smoke, dust, odor, heat flare or other electrical interference or electrical interference detectable within the limits of the nearest dwelling. That's different language than we we've used to you we've used in the past. and it's the nearest dwelling. If something, let's say the nearest dwelling is to the south and we have prevailing north winds, the nearest dwelling might not be the one that's

getting the the bulk of the effects. Okay, so let me let me stop you right there. That sentence is the only condition on a services in A1 right now. What you just read is existing language. So are you thinking there's language in a different district that I should be looking at? Oh, detective within the limits of the nearest dwelling. I got my old paper one now. Um, well, I just I just went back to the red line version. That was the only thing. That's the only existing requirement right now. Um, um, if you don't if you don't like it, just like we can reward it. Okay. And well, we've been talking so much about um about setbacks and about um maybe I'm just over, you know, getting over into it because of all the other stuff we've been dealing with. So remember, we have a we have tables now for your setbacks that include special exceptions, which is why you're not seeing that necessarily in here. Right? If it either was if you wanted to have it set back from these, we could that would be a good this would be a good spot to put it well as in that table. Let's let's just move past it right now and see where we end up. Yeah, I don't Okay, might be over overdoing this because of all the other um things that have been crammed in my head from No, if you take a look, Lori, there's the sentence in 2A. Same language. Yeah, I know. I got it highlighted all the way down. Okay, so that's your existing

language. Doesn't mean we have to keep it though. So, no worries. Yeah, decide what you want. We'll go for it right now and um I'm gonna think about it and you guys if you want to think about what we need to do. So, here's my here's my concern with this and and you've got an egg business. So, I mean, we've got some small tractor repair places. Um, no offensive noise. All right. So, that's a that's very objective. Yeah. Or subject, sorry. Subjective. Yes. Yes. Yes. The the grammar people take care of me. Um, [Laughter] grammar police are on the job. That's right. I'm happy for that. So, I mean, that concerns me there. Um, and I think our setbacks, the more I think about it, those should help us. Um, and I'm going to give us a real life example. Um, we have a case coming before the board of adjustment next month. It was a um, agricultural equipment repair shop. And I stress the word agricultural, but um, the nearest neighbors were literally 150 ft away. And the board of adjustment granted the the special exception for a repair shop that grinds welds 5 pounds beads. And the the one neighbor's house is literally closer to the shop than the

homeowner or the property owner's house is. So I think a lot of it is when we're granting those special exceptions, we're more c God, say it for me. Thank you. Of those things. Aware then, you know, maybe we were in the past. So maybe some of these things will be, you know, this this language probably isn't as bad as what we think because of our awareness about making sure we establish better setbacks from neighboring properties. So, why don't we go to Why don't you move down one page? I agree this language is really subjective and I would hate to be the one having to figure it out at the board meeting. If you go to the next page, that'd be page four. There's a if you look at commercial feed lots, there's language that talks about separation. So that's certainly easier for the staff person, the board of the board of adjustment member, and the applicant to know what's wanted. That other language that we've been discussing, that doesn't that doesn't really make it clear. So I agree that you're on you're on the right track to try and make this more clear. Just one that's just one example. Um the next one, mining has, you know, distances and things like that. So maybe that's something that we want to explore and bring back or you want to pick something now and we'll make the change. With commercial feed lots though, there's also DNR regulations and we just I'm aware of that. I'm just using their language as an example. Okay. Um the next one is 50 feet. So 500 feet,

whatever. Yeah. I want to be careful of those too. Um because we might be putting um restrictions that are going to be punitive for no good reason. Well, yeah. I mean, and it is a special exception. So, the board of college special exception uses. So, the board of adjustment would be setting up conditions if they needed them. There should be setting up conditions if they need them. Like mining and extracting, how many of the quaries are sitting right on the roads? I mean in Jackson County most of them I mean so yeah that one kind of but that's it says the extraction site though yeah but how many of them are I mean I'd say some of this is that it might have depended on when they were starting that quy our excavation operation. But now going forward, this would be something you could also this is going to apply to the new ones. Those others would be grandfathered and and I understand that, but I Well, the other thing is this has been your we could look and see how long this has been in the existing ordinance, too. Um because your ordinance dates back it's 76. I don't know Lori if you have a copy of that but I have not the 76 but it wasn't updated very very much. [Music] Um, mining extraction of minerals and raw materials, including necessary processing equipment, provided that the extraction site shall be located at

least 50 ft from any property line or public right away and no closer 500T to any school. So, I'm wondering on the clean version if I should be somehow highlighting for you. I hate to do this. It's supposed to be clean, but you know, we're we're we're looking right now at existing language. Um, yeah, all of these almost none of that is new. The separations are all existing and I understand that, but we're going through this right now. Does this mean that, you know, it's been in place for 40 years? Is this really what we want to continue to have? Well, my question to you would be what are the what are the problem properties? Are any of these are they in any of these categories over time? Not in my experience. Because if if there are problems, the language is probably okay and the regulations are probably working. what it's changed. So, it's a good conversation to have. But I would definitely say or if you're getting complaints about any of these things, that would be something that would be really important for the commission to know. And I know you try to you're a lot of what we're doing is in response to complaints that you've you've noted. So um if you guys can I move back to page three. So under the bulk station um I'm going to go ahead and go back here on this too. So, um, a number D, the underground

storage tank shall be located no closer to any proper line than the greatest depth to the bottom of such tanks. I was looking for that language in our hole. Um but I guess my question that I added here is how deep are those tanks and um do they meet our standard setbacks? So I don't know how deep is a um an underground storage tank. Are they 12 feet deep, 15 feet deep in the bottom of it? So, I'm I'm trying to I don't know if this language is appropriate um or if it means anything or you know what I mean. What what could it affect what's the DNR regulations now on underground storage? I don't know. This underground language is from your M2 district. I I can't tell you how it compares to DNR, but we could check we can check into that. I think we do because I think we really should look to see what the state has out there. I don't I don't know what the what the laws are because most of this is going to be regulated already by the DNR. Isn't Isn't the VNR who does the underground permitting for hazardous material? They do. Yep. So, I guess I get it that this has been in for a long time, but we also need to look at what current rags are that the DNR might not be accurate at all. The

current putting it in here. It is our it is our old language. Yeah, it is our own language. So, we need to be looking at it now and determine whether or not all right is this really is this valid? Does the state have something else out there? Is it completely updated? Sure, we can do that. Is if DNR does have something different than this, is there any reason we couldn't make it slightly more restrictive than the DNR regulations or do you have to stick with that? I don't think we can make it any more restrictive because we can't be more restrictive. You can't you can't make it less restrictive. Yeah. I didn't think we could make it more restrictive. No, you can't make something less restrictive than the state. You can make it more restrictive. I think it's unless unless the state overrides you like I feed lots. then counties can't do something more restrictive for an example. Yeah, I don't think we can do more. Our best bet may be to simply refer to the Iowa DNR standards and not and then this language remains adaptable to whatever those regulations are at the state level. That sounds good. The other thing is um then we know ex who's enforcing it and it's not the zoning administrator, it's the Iowa DNR. That might be a good solution to some of these is to just reference compliance with those state requirements and then keep it simpler. I agree. Not try and figure it out. Well, should we Why were you at the whale if um you know the state's already

doing some of that and you know if it may be well there's been a lot of since the 1970s there's been a lot of underground gas storage that has been taken care of and removed and this language was done before that and so we need I mean we need to look at what quote modern day regul ations are out there. Okay, that's a great idea. All right. Okay, Lori, what else do you have for us? Now, we get to the cell towers on page six is where my notes start. Um, Oops. Okay, gotcha. All right. So, um there's page five, page six, um under D, um where it's talking about the ADLS, the aircraft detection lighting system may be provided unless prohibited by FFA FAA regulations. Um we need to change that word to shall. Do you guys agree with that? Yes, I would agree with that because that's that's going to match that and it makes sense. Um and yeah, for new and this would be for new um new towers, you guys. I don't think we wanted to. I don't even know if we'd be able to. Um yeah, we can't go that direction, right? Well, some of them replace equipment periodically. I get phone calls about do we need a permit? We're just replacing antenna, replacing coax. And for um our standard answer to that is as long as they're not

changing the height, increase increasing the footprint or changing the height, we don't require um any permits. But um you know unless we'd want to make them add air I don't know if we can even Laura can we make them add aircraft protection lighting if they're upgrading a lighting system. U not if they're prohibited by the Federal Aviation Administration. You can't usurp the federal ranks. I know. But our thing is we're we want Yeah, because we're adding We'd want them to have to have the ADLS. Yeah, I think you can do that. And then you've got your provision in there. The FAA says no, then okay. The FAA said no. Yeah. What you said, you want to make a you want it to ch may shall goes to shall that. Got it. Needs to go to shall um I believe that's your call you guys. Yeah, but I just found it and was like, "Yeah, it makes sense." Okay. Um, good. Then can we how do how would we add language to say um um not get it to word it to where it's not just for new construction, but for any um upgrading also to include upgrades. We would almost have to do like any major upgrades because I mean a small upgrade. What are we I mean what are we going to look at? Well, you're getting subjective again, right? Well, I mean it's a cell tower. You know what they upgrade? They upgrade the antennas, the coax, and they probably upgrade lighting. There's not a whole lot to the right to those towers. So, if they are going to upgrade, I think what we want to do is is go to Iowa code and see what they

say before we try to figure that out for ourselves because they do They have language in that Iowa cell sighting act and I think that's where we should we should look before we try to come up with it today. That question could be answered by that code. I think all right. Um, all right. And this comes the next one, Laura, comes back to some of my other questions about nonconformities. Um, but actually, this is probably just something you need to talk to me about. Um, you guys, I have trouble wrapping my head around non-conformities, legal non-conformities um versus um illegal um on something. So, this is probably just more of a a toutelage for me because I was looking at number um number um 14 is where um down here. Laura And what was your I'm sorry I missed the question in there, Lori. There wasn't one other than I had trouble wrapping my head around um around some of that. So I think we just need to set your zoning administrator straight on those non-conforming uses. Oh boy. Yeah, those are fun. Those are fun. I know they are. That's why I need help wrapping my head around some of them. Um, the next one, number 15, I made a note on the multi multif family

dwelling including the residential condominiums provided that and it says here such units above hard surface road. I really would recommend us changing that to such units are accessed by hard surface road. um put in terms of access instead of a button. Okay. Yeah. Access by hard service road. And I can give you guys a real life example of this without mentioning names, but there there is one along a gravel road um out in my side of the county. Um the back of the property abuts hard surface road. The access is what probably about a half a mile of gravel and they converted a two-story farmhouse into a five unit five family dwelling unit. Do we really care whether they're on a gravel or paved road? Well, seriously, the I think the major issue with um any kind of multif family dwelling, any kind of increase in density that I can determine from your code is that you're really worried about um being able to provide them with services from um emergency medical staff, fire department, sheriff if they're So, the the idea is there there could be a lot of people in danger in this unit and we can't get there. So, I think that's what's leading to some of these conditions and also why it's a special exception because the idea it's back to like that assisted living where there's a lot of people in a structure. The county land use policy is really like let's let's see those in the cities. That's our preference if they're going to happen in the county. That's why I think there's

some of these um conditions being being part of the the language currently and that's just part of our this this does mirror old language. I I've worked with one like this. I I get it. But if somebody wants to convert their property, which we've got one that is converted into a two apartment, no, it's not on gravel. It's on the old Highway 61. So, it's still kind of sort of paved. Um, and that's fine. That's already we're already working to make that something that's easily done. It's when it gets into the multifamily dwelling that I think the concerns start because you've got multiple families. Okay. But it's okay for a farm. So, it's okay for a farm family to be out in the middle of nowhere and have further access than it is for a dwelling with four families in it. Five in this one. Okay. Five in this one. I Well, it could be um in the case of this, you could have as many as eight as opposed to one. And the farms, remember, those dwellings are exempt from zoning. So, that's And I know the answer is the answer is yes because they're exempt. But these aren't these are special exceptions, higher density in areas that you're really you're you're really wanting to be maintained as much as possible for egg. And I think the the whole um emergency response is driving some of this um concern when you get to multif family dwellings. Does that does that help? Not I mean not really because it puts more

restrictions on a property owner. Well, this is a property in A1 and I my understanding from your land use policy is if you want to do a multif family dwelling, put it in a R1, put it in a residential district or a commercial district, not an A1 district. So, if you would rather see us promote this, we could move this language and make sure there's a district that I think they're allowed in the commercial district. I think the thing to remember, well, this is my perception and you guys can tell me I'm off base. My my the way I un my understanding your policy is there's a reason most of your counties zoned A1 agricultural because most of your county is used for agricultural purposes, right? But we allow we allow two acre parcels. Okay. But well, let me finish that. The distinction is if we're going to have people living there on the farms, we're not going to regulate them. If we're going to have people living there in single family homes, they've got to be on at least 2 acres. The thing that the things that are in this special exception are things that the that the preference would be is a garden center, a multif family home, or a multif family dwelling. those kinds of uses would be in a zone designed for them in places where those zones are as opposed to A1. So that's why there's conditions and that's why there are special exception. That's my read of this. I could be wrong. That's how I that's how I understand.

So if you have rural area and an egg area farmhouse you turned into a family home or multif family home five families why is that still taxed at the same way as a farmhouse because it's actually valued differently um if you look at the um the Iowa Department of Revenues appraisal manual I've I've seen it before Um it does break down for multifamily dwellings. Um they call them two, three, four, five family conversions. And so what it does is it takes in consideration extra plumbing that you're going to have for each kitchen sink. It takes in the um extra HVAC. It takes in the I'm gonna have another word. I can't say you guys. The extra frustration. Frustration. Not frustration. The extra doors. and widows the ingress administration. Thank you. So it takes in that consideration. Now there's $2 words. But yeah, so it takes into that. So yes, the Iowa Department of Revenue does take in consideration when they're valuing those type of properties and higher value creates higher taxes. Yeah. So, not that I've answered any questions for the assessor's office, but I know how that works. Yeah, it's complicated. There's zoning, there's taxing classifications. Um, there's conversions of what looks like residential and commercial properties and agricultural zoning. Yeah, I I hear where you're coming from. I'm just I'm just trying to relay the way I'm seeing it. If I'm off base, be back on base, I guess. Um, so

that's that's just how I'm reading this ordinance from the my perspective. So, um, we can certainly do things to make it whatever you, however you want it, and multiple family dwellings to be a more uh, readily available option. We could do that. That's that's the time to do it. I don't think we want to do anything that's going to conflict against the comprehensive plan. Whatever the comprehensive plan says, I mean, we got to kind of follow that. I I don't like the um you must access by a paved road because I I guess I just don't like it. I mean, let's face it, there's not that many paved roads on A1 in A1 with a big old farmhouse that wants to convert it. I guess this is a good question to ask Lori of our EMT, fire department, and sheriff department if they have any concerns. Maybe they were the ones that kind of suggested this language way back when. Maybe it makes a difference to them now. Maybe it doesn't. They're um they aren't I can tell you where this came from. This came from question was raised by my board of adjustment when they heard this case. Oh, okay. So, this is existing language. Um yeah, the existing language. It's just that the only, you know, suggestion that was made was being assessed accessed um by her service road, but it doesn't need to be. Um but a bud a butt would normally mean it

touches or that you're getting there from that hard surface road. Yeah. And um um and then two, like where this one is, um there's not a lot of houses on this road. There's two on um a stretch of gravel that's probably total at least a mile, but it's not a high priority gravel road for maintenance or snow removal. Um, it does meet, you know, it is within five miles of a normal travel route to a fire station though, but it's not. Um, I look at my house that's on a dead end road and guess where the water access is on the other side of that level C road. Oh, sure. Oh, yeah. So, you have to travel eight miles to get to the water source if we were to have a fire. Yeah. So, I mean, this is totally up to you guys. I mean, um, want to make that change. It's just I actually read this, you guys, and went through and made made marks just so that we could discuss things that maybe I I'd seen questioned or challenged by others. But by all means, it can stay exactly the way it is. Or you can strike the language all together. Monica Mike say yeah I was going to ask doesn't make it doesn't make any difference whether you're on a railroad or the fire department used to go down railroads doesn't make any difference to me and if the snow ain't plowed they'll get the snow plow the guy coming to the president shot from other creek but yeah so it can today. What What do you guys want? Just leave it as it was originally. I don't I don't see any problem with leaving it, but I mean I I I understand

the accessible part. I understand that. But I really don't understand why if it abs it why you wouldn't put a driveway in to be accessed to the you might not be able to because this if it's a state highway they may not allow well I guess that's or you might not be able to because there's it's a rocky outcrop and and there could be a creek and a yeah there is a one pretty sticky about very yeah so This one did you say the total back of the property is on the paved road but the actual driveway to the house is a mile about a half mile from gravel. Yeah. Yeah. So um but at the same time we don't have to make any language changes to that or you can strike the whole number a that's some of the choices you know you guys would have to do since I accidentally opened the can of worms here. Well in this case he met the requirement but he did not meet what it was intended to be correct. So he I mean it's a loophole but he met the requirement because the property does. So do if you were to change it would you say the dwell the driveway to the dwelling has to have access? My my wording was um such units um are accessed or shall be accessed by hard service drug shall have access to from yeah to or from heart service access. So, but you know it's you know but at the same time probably a good thing we did have that loophole for the fact we happened to have the project

done before we ever got the board of adjustment. So, but just examples, real world examples that I can throw out there. Um, but so I mean we we're spend a lot of time on one little thing. So what do you guys want to do? Do you want to leave it at is as is? Do you want to strike a all together or do you want to make other language changes to it? I move that we strike it. A second. Okay, we have a a motion and a second to strike the word the whole letter A. Correct. Is that what you're saying? More items. Are there any 15B? Yep. What What are Oh, I wouldn't touch B. I mean, excuse me. There's more. Let me see what the others are. The leading A. Will it affect the otherbody else? It will not. The other one's the the fire protection. um no more than five miles um by normal travel routes from the nearest fire station. And also, just so you know, with that being with that left in, it leaves us able to use that language elsewhere where we may find it important to use. By leaving it, by leaving it in. Yes. By leaving it in, it allows us um it it allows us it shows a presence precedence that we have used this language and and still use that language for this and we can use it in other parts of the organs. If we don't strike it though, wouldn't that the A or the B? The A the A that's up to

you guys. That has nothing to do with that has nothing to do with B. So right now the motion and second was to strike letter A under number 15 multiple family dwelling. Correct. Okay. Got it. And we had a second. We're okay. Yes. Yes, we do, Laura. Okay. So when you're saying if we take out a that could be a problem with something else. No sir, we were talking about Bal A will not. A is A is fine. Any more discussion on this? Ready to vote. All in favor of the motions signify by saying I. I. Anybody opposed? Pass. Okay. Now bring up any more suggestions you guys that I've seen. So am I laid back? [Music] Um okay. So we're still in A1. Um, I'm going to go ahead and go to page eight. Um, you guys, um, Laura, did you want to talk about what's highlighted in yellow, the seasonal resorts and the barn exempt uses? Um, well, these these are um I think these might be ones, Lori, that you and I could talk about. Oh, sure. for more administrative. What's it what's it all

look like? I think the commission's time. Okay. All right. On that. Um. All right. So, if we go to page nine, this is Sorry, guys. Um, it's kind of hiding the top, but it's um for the signs. Um, and we're still working on this, Laura. had a question last month and we still don't I still don't think we have quite everything worked out yet on that. So that's why it says under review at the bottom of page eight. So the language didn't change folks because we're still looking into it. There were some questions about along highways and stuff like that for the directional sites. We're still we're researching. All right. So, all right, we're at the end of that. Okay. Any other questions on A1? Okay. So, um if you I'd like to go ahead and use this letter as kind of a again starting off here. So, one of the things that um we we talked about at the beginning of this process was trying to come with come up with uh alternative regulations for residential areas that were that were created before there was zoning. And so, we had talked about doing a whole separate district. And then Lori, Becca, and I said, "How about if we try this first? How about if we use the same one district, the R1 residential district because we're dealing primarily with single family this point and let's see if we can come up with alternative regulations within that district. Um that way nobody has to get reszoned and we have regulations that give us some flexibility. So that's

that's what we did. The uh things that we looked at were two things. one, we had done research a couple years ago on Leisure Lake in that area and then Lori and Becca took a look at cases that came before the board of adjustment dealing with um setbacks and what were they for res what part of that res of the residential um regulations were many what were the characteristics. So we use that kind of research. So Lori, if we want to go to the second page of this um letter. So most of the information that we gathered, we gathered during that study of the Leisure Lake Property Owners Association study. And so what we were looking at there is that's a very particular um area. It's got a property owners association. Not all of these areas do, although some do. It's also really a mi a mix of residential and recreational uses focused in around the lake and allowing for accessory structures and campers and trailers and things. And so we're really trying we really trying to work on um we were ways to accommodate the way that subdivision that community was set up. One of the things we did is the first chart, smaller one, was well, what happens when we apply our current regulations that we use for the R1 district to these folks uh in Leisure Lakes. And so the there are the like the three types. They have a well and septic or they're on a community water and sewer or they're just seasonal. And

these requirements were um then just basically looking at the size of the lot, how many of those properties could comply? Well, you can see if they have to have a well and septic and 20,000 square feet, twothirds of them almost don't. So if we have community well and sewer and they do have it I think in Leisure Lake then 12,000 square foot a little more than a third can are are not able to meet it. So based on that we also then if you look at the next chart I'm sorry does someone have a question? Yeah so these are what do not qualify correct? So 65.2% 2% do not qualify with the 20,000 square foot and um Okay, so it's a number of parcels. Okay, I understand this now. Sorry, I was reading it. That's okay. That's okay. So, yeah, this is this says how many aren't up to that m aren't up to that minimum and so twothirds aren't. So then the the chart with the colors is something else that was in that report. And so we're looking at we're looking at comparing also the other part of development regulations, not just the size of the lot, which is a big deal, but also things that we were going to talk about earlier about setbacks. And so what we what we have done is we've kind of looked at how these play out in Leisure Lake area and then the analysis that the staff did from the board of adjustment. And so that's going to play out in the district that we're going to regulation revision that we're

suggesting. So Lauri, if you want to, we can move into that red line version. Um, this is it's I know it's going to be really it's hard to read. I don't know if it's even Well, I don't know if we want to jump to the clean one or not. Um, that's up to you. Um, let's go to page two on or what? Yeah, page two. So here's an example where we had that we had that standard form of a table that shows the principal uses, their parking and regulations. And then you see we drop down here right in the in this in the mi middle of the page trying to come up with alternative uses um for properties that were platted before the zoning ordinance came into effect. And we do the same thing when you go through the accessory uses. If you go to the next page, Lori, the accessory uses again, they have we have a subset for those for the [Music] Woni. And then let's see the special exceptions are coming up and those are those actually um we didn't really make a lot of changes in those. So you can go through that show that page Lori be page four. Yeah because it starts here. The special exception uses and structures is bottom of page three. Yep. And then goes on to page four and then

five. And then we start again. Here's our here's our development regulation. So we we separated these into two tables. So this first table is this is for those properties that were platted after we had zoning. And so um we have a set of regulations that um apply. And then if you go to the next page, Lori, page six. Now we created a second table. This is for alternative regulations for those lots that existed before there was a zoning ordinance. And so some of the same characteristics and um requirements are in there, but we also have some other options. Same with accessory. if you want to move to page seven and also for special exceptions. Um we also are trying to be pretty flexible in this district. There were already um options for flexibility. Um there's an idea of an average front yard setback or average front setback. Um there's um there's a special side setback in certain cases. And then Lori and I worked on trying to come up with a setback for off-street parking that would um also provide some flexibility. The idea with this one is you need at least a 20 foot setback to park a vehicle, but a lot of the properties are

only 10 ft from the property line. So if we want to go to page eight, Lori, we can look at some drawings that try to explain that. So for the average setback, that's that first diagram. Basically, you're looking at what's in the area, what and just making a comparison of what would normally be required, what's existing, and then what's the average of that. So, not very sophisticated math, but gives flexibility and avoids going to the board for a special exception. the diagram below. This is the one trying to deal with the fact that we really need 20 ft for a vehicle, but you could have your home or your garage 10 foot away if you had some options. So, one is a a sidefacing garage or side loading. Um, another is where garage is in front. It's still side loading, but there's enough still enough space and kind of a four court kind of a space where you can pull in and have 20 foot. If we go to Yep. Can I interrupt just a second? Can you show me in the um the development regs um diagram where we're asking for that 20 foot driveway? It's from the rightway. Where is it at in my diagram? Because I was looking through here. Um, you know where I I know you're you're telling us. So, number four,

number four under notes, page seven. Okay. The fine print. Got it. Okay. And we know it can be tricky because um sometimes the property line is the back of the curb or back of the back of the sidewalk and sometimes it's not. It's somewhere else. Um and then we're dealing with a rideway line. So I think Lori, you and I discussed using rightway. Yes. because in most the areas that we're talking there is no curb, there is no sidewalk. Um it is always going to be behind the right away or um Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So, if we go to the next page, just have a question. Yeah, I got a question. And so in Leisure Lake, the roads I can't remember how it's plotted. I'm trying to think too. Do the roads actually I mean they're private roads. Are there actually rightaway markers or um or have it has it been surveyed? That's kind of scary. If I remember correctly, the what's there for this? I mean, is the rightway clearly marked? I'm trying to think. I I mean, I'm It's been a while since I've been down that way. And so, we're trying to do this from the rightway. How do we identify that in an area like Leisure Lake?

Whenever there's questions, if they don't know where the pins are, they need to know either by locating, you know, right one that's a property away, doing the straight line, finding theirs, or getting it repinned. Um, they know, have these plots all been surveyed at one time? These Leisure Lake was surveyed out over probably a what, 10, 15 year period? I'm not sure. um 60s and 70s. It is. But they have been surveyed. Oh, absolutely. They're all surveyed lots. They're all legally They all have their own legal description. That's what I Yeah, we have Schwinkers 1, two, three, four, five. We have unit one, unit two, unit three, and they all have lots in blocks. I couldn't remember on that and that's what I didn't Okay. Yeah. And one of the other caveats of of Leisure Lake, um, well, the lots are there's a lot of one of the one of them the lots are on top of lots being small. The lots that back the lake, here's the road, here's the house, right? And um, one of the cases we have next week is a front yard setback for a garage. And so that's that's one. And we did look at the when Laura I don't even remember the number I I want to think about um well over 50% of all of our cases were on small lots and then Leisure Lake of course leads up you know the the count for the small lot board of adjustment cases. Um but and then too we we the board of adjustment would take into consideration, okay, here's a garage. Where are you going to park? So they were trying to make sure there is some

place to park where that vehicle is not in the rightway when they park. Okay. And um I I like the work that Laura put into um to show examples of um especially on um on page eight. That that's a real good real good example. Um you want to go to page eight so they can see what you're talking There you go. Yeah. On Yeah. Mine's I'm in my Excuse me. I'm in my um um here. This is actually Oh, that's that's what um because I didn't print off the bread. Sorry. I saw this and I said, "Oh, this looks like Leisure Lake." Yeah, this is this is a representation of how, you know, some of the ways they might be able to get that 20 foot driveway. um you know, they might only have a 10-ft front yard setback, but if they can do a um a side entry, um garage in another route um in it, it works. And two, um another thing here on your actual pl page eight on the red line where um lower loris showing the average front setbacks. That's a really good example and we have a lot of that um where that's going to come useful out in dressers. So these are these are some of the ways we're trying to um accommodate the existing development that was created before the ordinance. Um the the rest of it is just the signs. Oh, and there's some special requirements too. Um, so kind of the meat and potatoes of this one, if you

will, is are you comfortable with us leaving everything in one district and providing flexible regulations for for those alternative small um small lot subdivisions and communities? Are you okay with us leaving it all in one district as opposed to creating a whole new one? Does silence mean? Yes. If so, we're good. Um, I know we talked I know there's work to be done on signs. Um, Oh, okay. Yeah, we can to that. But number seven, directional signs may be um placed in the required front yards. Other permitted signs shall be located at least 20 feet from a lot line and not more than five feet from the main building. We're not limiting them from being on the building. Correct. No, I just wanted to confirm that. I don't think so because it didn't spell it out. Okay. Wouldn't that be something in the homeowners association that they got there? Well, but this also covers not just leader lake. This is all our one. Okay. And so you what we you want to make sure it's clear that Yeah. that they can also have

wall-mounted signs. Yeah. That's, you know, cuz it's like the the lady that has her little big hair, you know, at the basement level or the other lady that does um um does hair, you know, the little sign pointing to go down to the back um the back of the house um to the beauty shop because that's where people go in um just Yeah. Gotcha. Thank you. and that carry on into the other districts too, please. Yeah, thank you. If that's okay with the commission. Okay. Sorry. I'm just finding holes and trying to plug them. Yeah, that's good. We want to make sure that we're we are very clear so people understand their options and we understand what it is we're and that's been a challenge. It is it is always a challenge. Okay. Um can we talk about can you go into detail on number two for us please Laura down here more than one principal structure on the line. This is part one. Yeah. Where whose idea was this? Was this mine? Must be. It's red. Oh, this is my this is my this is the one I struggle with, Lori, like you do with non-conforming. Um, does this come come back um does this have something to do with Leisure Lake because it's before zoning ordinance, right? What were we trying to address

here? I don't know. Was it some attempt to eat the AUDs? No, I don't think so. All right. I bet this is something we were trying to do for leisure. I'm going to have to go back and reread that report. Sorry about that. I know. I'm trying to think an example for leisure. And um Oh, yeah. Um I can't I can't I don't know why that one's there. which suggests maybe it shouldn't be, but I better double check. There might have been something up at a big question mark and yeah. Okay. For some reason, I'm think I'm thinking Leisure Link, but I can't recall why. Okay. Can't think of an example. um either but there might be something in that report. Okay. Did we want to take a look at the clean version? See if there's anything that stands out for some questions for you after I looked at that. Um okay. Okay. when we get to the district standards and um okay accessory dwelling units is does this side setback um um is that from Iowa code because our brothers our other setbacks on some of those lots are going to be um they're they're 10-ft side setbacks So when I saw this 20 um 20 foot set back here, I was thinking it should be should reflect 10. And then

down here with this this one also, I was thinking that should also reflect 10 for the fact it's still R1. Is there something I'm missing? No, I'm not sure why it's 25. Unless Unless I have to go back. I'll have to go back and check. That might have been in the special exception conditions. I'll have to check. Okay. Because it's this one that's 20 and this one that's 20. And then Yeah. So, so railroad yards are required to have a 25 foot setback under the special exception. What was the second one that you said? The accessory uses and structures. Um, I think I'm not I'm not convinced that the 20 is supposed to be there. I my mind went straight to 10 unless there's something I'm missing. And then the same with this one down here. No, that makes sense. I'm not sure even why the side street side isn't the same as well. I don't know where that one came up. I have to look at that one. Okay, let's see. That's page page five. The Yeah, because the Didn't we drop? Yeah, because we dropped the sideyards down to 25 and the the old one was was 30, you guys. And we've seen so many corner setbacks come to us with the board of adjustment that that aren't reasonable. and the the most the

ones I can really think of are in Leicia Lake um that just I know and it doesn't fit the rest of R1 zoning and it's kind of disappointing that even going back as far as 1976 they didn't recognize that Leisure Lake is different is different Kurt is different um and you know Cheney dags are different but Lori this is for lots that were created after the zoning district. So, table one, I agree, the numbers for the accessory and special exception need to fall in line with the principle. Um, but table two on on page six is where we're dealing with those regulations. If you want to visit with the with the commission about that, I'll make the changes. I'll work with you on table one. Yeah, that like a bunch of I don't know where I got those numbers to be honest. We'll go back and look at them. Yeah. And represent them to the commission next time. So So when we get to um if we're looking at table are we going to look at Can we look at table are we on table two? Table one. Okay. Table two. So, um, this is this is trying to do what Lori was saying, try to acknowledge what's going on with the way places like Dressers and Leisure Lake are developed. One of the things I wanted to draw your attention to is in the middle under the allowed accessory uses and structures. We tackle the idea of the attached or detached private garage that we talked about earlier where where there there can be this balancing act between side facing or or whatever it might be. So that the setback is 20

feet, but it could be 10 feet if you have a 20 foot driveway. And so that's what this section where the um distances are in italics, that's what those are trying to call attention to. And when you go down to the top of page seven, Lori, there are those instruct those notes for um the same the the same thing applies whether it's a new subdivision or older. we have these um these options. Um but I'm also trying to link things into the table too because um I think just the more ways we can kind of help people look for things in more than one place and make sure they're confirming it, it just really to me it helps as an administrator. So that's kind of how this clean this cleaned up version looks. Um, I really like the idea and hopefully your commissioners are um supportive of this. The idea that create of creating the regulations in the existing district means no one has to have their property reszoned. Nothing changes for them except oh hey the regulations are more flexible. Um, my experience in 30 years is not many people want to have their property reszone when they didn't initiate it. So, this avoids that angst for folks. Okay, I'm off my platform now. All right. And we'll still we'll look at those signs and the the other issues there. Are we ready to move on to the next one? The

C1. So in this one, um, basically what we try to do, same template, but we also try to introduce opportunity for more types of commercial uses. And so as we move through the red line version, if you want to start there, Lori, um, we're starting to do that. was trying to use the simplified parking requirements. We get to page two, you can see we have we've we've introduced some more uses. H3 this continues. The idea being that we if we're going to provide an opportunity for these uses, but we're going to provide it in a commercial zone. It's got the purpose and intent of it is quite different from residential or agricultural. So, we felt comfortable recommending options for more uses, which all still, you know, they they tend to um tend to be pretty similar in terms of their um parking demands. If you want to go to page five, we have accessory uses in this U district that there are um kind of these are kind of rewarded just a little bit. Um talk about the upper story dwellings, but we're basically keeping the same language, just kind of rewarding them a little bit. And actually, they don't even have to be upper story. That where it could go. Um, yeah, I guess some of them are um, yeah,

just built within the Yeah, I thought about that today. I thought, man, that would have actually um, se district um, hang on. I I have notes, but mind you, I'm using the clean. Um yeah, and I had um on the upper story, I also had um a note about [Music] um attached dwelling unit also. Okay. Okay. Okay. So now we're in the special exceptions. Um we've talked about the cell power regulations already. So we kind of covered that in A1 and we're going to make the regulations consistent at this point. That's the intent. We could go to page eight. And so here we have we've introduced some regulations for dwellings. We'll get we'll strike that word upper story, make it attached or whatever it the case might be that's appropriate. But um again this is now this is now opening this district up to um office and commercial uses as well as um mixed residential office commercial and providing development regulations step back that sort of thing for them. Um signs really didn't have a lot of changes [Music] there. I don't

think Do we want to move to the clean version, Lori, to go through your questions? I covered mine already. You did? Okay. Commissioner, have any questions? Okay. Why don't we move on then to the M1? So the M1 is your limited industrial district. Um and we can start I think with the red line. biggest difference between between this and M2 is it tends to make sure everything is inside a building or screened um and it so it's um it's also a little a little bit of everything you know a little warehousing wholesale storage so what we've done is um again just kind of try to cons use those general more uh general uses. Um, update the parking a bit. Um, if you want to go to page two, this is a good example of just really consolidating that list of uses into that general category of vehicle sales, service, repair, agricultural sales, service, and supply, building materials, lumber yard, go to page the next page. Um um one of the things that Lori and Lori's been looking at is um logging. If you recall, we we had logging suggested as a A1 use for

storage only because there's already logging there in places but it's tends to be only storage and our thought was be something that would be allowable in one. This does not include a sawmill or any kind of operations just the storage of the logs. And actually, now that you you touched on that for the the log storage in A1, um were we leaning towards only logs stored on the property where it was logged um instead of moving it to other property that's within? No, that's not how that's not how I recall our conversation ending. Okay. cuz um um you know storing it where it was logged until you know they're going to use it to me is one thing but hauling it to a a site um because I can think of um well the ones we looked at were places where that was happening though this exact same that that's what was happening the ones you showed me in A1 and a whole bunch of logs and different areas of yeah this is that was how that was how I understood the conversation because that's what's already there I guess it don't really matter um you know it is A1 and it's not um hang on here can that be principal use right it is a principal use good Okay. All right. Never mind. But as Lori said, we don't want any uh

we don't want the production end of this storing logs. Um that can be handled. Um there's no noise of equipment and that sort of thing. Maybe for trucking coming in and moving things around, but that's intermittent. So we thought this was a a good option for M1 also. And then if you want to when you're ready, Laura, if you want to move on to the red line for accessory uses, [Music] um kind of made this one that consistent with other districts. um special exceptions they're again we've got the cell tower which we've already talked about wind energy which you have already dealt with. Um so temporary uses are pretty simil they're pretty much the same. I'm on what page are you on? Six. on page seven's the temporary uses and then we start to get into the development regulations for M1 and um that goes on to page eight again very similar to the C1 wanted to we've got the principal uses accessory uses special exceptions and then anything dealing with a dwelling kind of try to take care of all those [Music] So, and then the sign regulations, I think I didn't have it. I don't think we had any changes in those at this point, but maybe you have some. Okay. And then in um second section, the

next section, the special requirements. Um I did I basically I just suggested headings for these three areas just to kind of to me it makes it a little easier for people to focus in on what it is we're trying to say. So really not a lot of change there. Just headings. So, if we're okay with um one, we can move into the clean version of it. Laura, you have any anything for us here? I don't. Okay. I just I've got one question on the special requirements for the issuance of the permits in December. Um on page 10 on one, do we want that for the um the facilities including sewage lagoons were needed or adequate for the proposed development? Shouldn't that be our sanitary administrator that they have to be provided that instead of the zoning administrator? Yeah, we could change that to the In fact, it's not really necessary because of letter B, we can shorten that up. Yeah, good point. And and truthfully, if they're talking um water treatment plans, be DNR and not support the lagoons and such facilities, that's still in state. Yeah. Okay, great. We're good. Thank you. Okay. Do we want to just move through the clean version of this then and head into M2? Think I heard [Music] Mary was.

So, so M2 is your general industrial district. A lot of times you will hear the term heavy industrial. So these are these are uses that are when you think of pretty pretty substantial industrial uses that's what this M2 district is for. So Lori if you want to start off with us in the in the red line. So the very first you know very first hint of this is um it's right there in that intent. These are heavy manufacturing uses. um you want to make sure we're uh mitigating any impacts they have to the surrounding uses, present and future. And so so you when you look at this list of uses um you know some of them can have some pretty um they make a lot of noise, they might dust and so forth. So that's what's this district is intended to to deal with. Um and if you want to go to the next page, Lori. So given that this is where um we're recommending that when you have the logging operation that has the production end of it as well as the storage really M2 is where we feel it should be and I think luckily that's where it happens to be currently and so um this is a this is a it's a short table but it's because it's the list the uses are in broad categories So, we're okay with that. We can move to accessory uses. Um, pretty similar here to um two and then we move into special exceptions. So when we get when we move into this on page

four, here is where there is a laundry list of the types of manufacturing and processing operations that even if you're an M2, we want the board of adjustment to be able to have a hearing and um get people's reaction to these at a specific location. And then they're just followed by some really other heavyduty things, solid waste facilities, junkyards, um, bunk bulk storage. Um, and so that's that's where these are placed. Um, we're trying to keep the regulations for the bulk storage the same in M1 and M2. You'll see that on page five. cell towers again and um we've already looked at that so we could we can skip that. Um and we've talked about mining so we can address that in in in terms of solar energy. You might have noticed we had accessory uh uses for solar just as um either building mounted um but everything consumer scale. Nothing in here is dealing with anything that's utility scale for solar. Temporary uses same as M1. Development regulations come up next on page seven. Again, same format as C1 and M1 trying to deal with that range of possible uses providing the setback height requirements. Not really much on signs that were suggested.

And then when we get into the special requirements, um, we can make those same changes here. The language is pretty close to the same on page 10. [Music] want to go to We can keep going, Lori, into the clean version if you want. And did you have any questions for us on M2? No, we're doing good with that. Thank you. Hey, and I believe that is the last one. We are all done. 99 pages of fascinating fascinating regulations. Okay. Wonderful job. Lots of good discussion. Thank you all so much for doing this. Thank you, Laura. Thanks, Laura. Thanks, Laura. And will Yes, ma'am. We will. Thank you. I had back and put you on the calendar. Okay. Thanks. Bye. Bye. Bye. All right. So, yeah. Sorry, we're gonna take a couple minute break here. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Unless you're going to tell me that we're going to be done in five minutes. Well, probably not, but close. Well, we're done with all

We got to tie cancer.

Okay. Okay. So, the next the next thing on the agenda is the introduction of the data processing center ordinance. Correct. Yes. So, we're just going to introd introduce that. We're not really going to have any discussion. I can kind of run through a few things with you. Um, and here's what I'm going to do. I kind of used the the wind ordinance as as a template. However, there was things as I got going through it, Mike, we talked a little bit um before, but I'm like um if there's things you guys want added, we'll add it back in. But I took out the things that I'm like is inert or doesn't really apply to the data processing facilities. So as you're going down through it, we have a purpose and please read through this you guys. And um I don't have this online yet. What and the reason I don't is because I wanted to give you guys the opportunity to look at it first. We've had almost three hours of public comment over the last past two meetings and we kind of know the direction that the public is wanting this to go and we want to make sure that give us the opportunity to look at it first before we get um beat up real bad on it. So, well, we don't have to put the draft out there, right? I know that. Um I the demand response load I'm not sure we can even I see you've got in there that we that's red may not need the language but to be perfectly honest I don't think we can control that at all because that's

not we're a zoning for land use and the demand response has nothing to do with land. Okay. And um Okay. So we can um I I don't know how much discussion the way we had the the agenda written. This is more of an introduction. So I don't know how how far we can stray. Monica just Yeah. I mean I just I that's just something that I'm recommending because that that that's that is outside the scope of this board. Okay. So, do you guys want to, you know, we'll we'll hit some of the highlights and then um if you guys want to make a list of things that we need to discuss for the next meeting, I think that's the best way and not have the discussion now since we really didn't have it in the agenda other than unless we come up with something like that. So, you don't waste your time. We can waste your time looking it up when we don't. So, you guys all agree we don't want that in there. We can discuss. We cannot take any action on this. I'm gonna So, I'm gonna leave it for right now. We'll discuss it if that's what you're telling me. Don't waste your time looking it up. Yeah. Got it. Ah, got it. So, um, there was a few things I took out of the just removed completely out of the wind ordinance because I didn't think and I'm just going to go through those. I took out the EMI, the electromagnetic interference. I took out um FAA because we're not building anything that's tall, right? took out meteorological towers, non-commercial wex, took out public lands, um, rotor diameter, sensitive areas,

shadow flicker, total height of a wex, a tower, took out transmission line, and there's one other thing I want to make sure I took out, and I removed And um and then as we got going on, we also took out the words like wind turbine um visual resources because we're not looking at the same type of thing. We're looking at something that looks like a normal building. We're not looking at something that's two, three, four, five, six feet in the air. So those were um were probably not pertinent to to that. Um when it comes to section three, the sighting um um I was speaking with another zoning administrator last week and um there's a thing called an overlay district. So if your base district for that area, I'm going to use an example is A1 and you do an overlay of an M1 or an M2. So that district takes on the M2, but my understanding is it's for this use and this use only. And when that use ceases, that zoning class, that zoning district resorts back to this A1. So, we had a very similar uh request. It's been quite a while ago. In fact, we were over in that room over there and Tom and I disagree. No,

no. Because I think if you're changing I my opinion is that if you're going to change the zoning from A1 to M2 for a particular business. We don't restrict it to just that business. So that business ceases and somebody else comes in. Oh, I remember this. Yeah. Remember this? Yeah. And and we've reverted it back to A1. So it's only for that business. My concern with that is who is going to remember to maintain and watch that. So um a business comes in, it's empty, it stays there for 60 years, you're gone. Who's gonna who's going to know we're all gone. Who's going to know that this is supposed to revert back? Okay. So that's my concern with doing an overlay. Okay. Because that has been brought in the past. There's Tom and I disagree on this. Okay. Had you guys talked with a previous administrator about an overlay district? We didn't speak about that specifically. No. So, let's we don't have to we don't have to discuss this in in depth right now. We don't have to reitigate where because where I'm going to go with this. This is what some of the big boy counties use now and even some of the smaller counties use for their renewable energy. So they have a renewable energy wind turbine solar um overlay district. So they're overlaying that that commercial or that M1 use on top of their um on top of their A1 and then it res when it's not used. And the thing is with these data and this is specific to the data processing, not anywhere else in the ordinance. If you guys decide to roll

with it, if I get the right language, it would be specific to that. And keep in mind, so what we're hearing about these data processing facilities, it sounds like they're limited. Five years, 10 years. I mean, I'm hoping one of you guys is to be on the commission then. No, but you know, I I get it. I personally do not like that. Okay. And and Tom's got a different opinion. He did he did five years ago or seven years ago. And then keep in mind then so but we didn't talk overly districts specifically but it's very similar. So it it is I mean I I agree. Um, however, what what some of the issues is perpetuity is, you know, if we know and you know, they're they're moved out, they're not there. I mean, the assessor, if we have a good dialogue with the assessor on some of this stuff, they would know because they would have notes. They don't care about zoning. However, if we talked to them and had notes and GIS had notes when that seized, that would keep that property from staying in M1 because when this is done, you don't want necessarily a welding shop coming in in that M1 or M2 property if that's what it's zoned. Why not? Well, that it's it's a different beast. Well, what you'd want to do is you'd want them to apply for their own zoning. Absolutely. Go through their own process so that they had to, you know, they had to prove themselves too, not just move in and drop into a spot because this would keep that A1 until that use was done. I mean, I'm I sound like I'm trying to sell you guys on it. I'm just trying to show that

there's probably some merits to it. Um and and plus it would save having to bring it back to the um the board of adept, excuse me, the zoning commission to get a reszoning back to A1. It would be a smooth brush stroke. Um just going back and review it without doing the neighborhood notification. Um, and I you probably wouldn't have to do the it would be in the agenda, but it wouldn't, you know, it wouldn't spell out as much as our normal public hearing. We don't do this for any other business right now. Correct. No. None. And it is a concept that I've heard of and I I I'm aware of it. Yeah. Sure. Absolutely. Right. And uh I was actually had to sit down with um Clinton County last week and we were talking and he was talking about um um renewables and then I was talking about some other counties that do their renewables. I did reach out to KO base camp today, so county zoning um officials to see if anybody else was using an overlay district for this type of operation. And so far I haven't heard an affirmative. So nobody I mean it's not saying that we couldn't. It's not saying it's wrong not to. What it is saying is that this is still a new enough industry that you know people might not have jumped on the bandwagon and saw how it would fit this type of industry like it does the the renewables. I have a couple questions. So, when you said you took out the height, um, just because this one came in and said it was only going to be the storage

container, what if somebody else came in and said they wanted a double-decker? I mean, what would our height be for a structure? It would be whatever that zoning district is. Okay. So, if the zoning district's 35, that's what that height structure would be. If the zoning district is 50 feet, that is what that structure would be. Yeah. So for agricultural what would it be? Agricultural is 35. 35. Industrial is um 50. I mean it takes a lot of height to get 50 feet. Silos. Dinosaurs. They don't build them anymore hardly. Yeah. But it takes a lot of height. Yeah. Yeah. But at the same time, um, you know, that's egg exempt. But I mean, I a 50 foot one of these. Um, I've never seen one. These are I I you know, you don't know what the future's going to bring, but I don't see these things getting more than two stories, right? Because they got to work on them and they got to, you know, they got to pull those little computers out when they break and it would still fit our other zoning districts. Now I checked out the height because we're not looking at 400T tower 400T structures like you would be a wind turbine the way our ordinance is written. So and we're not looking at viewshed you know as far as you know when we're talking scenic byways or anything like that because it looks just like a normal structure. I my fear was if we kept that in it was going to be punitive and we've already seen what happens when you're punitive the state wants to take everything over. So I think if we can find a nice balance with this, you know, maybe we'll we will, you know, run the risk of or eliminate some of the risk of the state wanting to come in and take over governing these two. The other thing with computers is, I mean, think of

what's happened in the last 100 years with computers. Look at how big they were. I mean, I remember by 12 being a big computer and now we're looking at terabytes and a tenth of the size. Yeah. But we're I don't think we're going to use the 50 whatever we put structure at all, but we're going to get something bigger than storage containers because these data this is vague data set. Yeah. But there's so many different kinds using that technology. So well that and and that brings the point I was going to make up is you know our language there on data processing is really kind of you know there's at this time there's two things you you do in data processing and that's you know you do the Bitcoin which is what we're talking about and then you do the Google the data the true data processing that is a 24hour load and they don't want to shut off and they're a big building. I don't see that coming to Jackson County anyway. That's what you see out in De Moine, Chicago, the big cities. So, we maybe want to and you have it right here to the appropriate language. We might want to tighten up the description of that. Okay. And we're still building. Anyone has any to share. Um I have some other counties that I've looked at and then they run the gamut and well for example well and that was part of what you were saying that um demands response load. Yeah. That's why I was I had it in there as a possibility because what you were talking about with the other the other AI is 247. Yeah. And it can cause an issue with the grid. But the other the other thing when we're talking about data centers and things like that right after

911 so the um uh what's the military base in Illinois um well the Savannah Army Depot they had igloos out there and as after 911 their plan was to install servers in there to be able to do data backups for places and so I mean that there's all sorts of data centers that are out there. Okay. Yeah. So, that is something that we need to look at. We can we can add like five different kinds and address all of them if you think we need to. probably something you have to address like pretty regularly as well as they pop up, right? Because I we have to take those into consideration, but I'm not sure that we need to that we need to identify each type. I think and if we do a general the collection uh of computer data um something kind of vague with that. But you know, we've got to be careful. How detailed do we want to get into business? I think that I think the key thing Sorry, go ahead. No, then you get loopholes. It appears like very specific. I think the key distinction that we we can and should make is between interruptible load that can be shut off and the load that is required to stay on 247 isn't that response that was that you were saying about but I mean you know that's not that's not part of the land use and so I don't think we

can talk about or regulate whether it is a continuous load or an interruptible load. Well, no, we're we're we're not going to make that decision here because that's that that does have to do with land use. Yeah, I I get that. Okay. I guess what I guess what I'm saying when you say data processing and you know a lot of pe you know people get confused between the the Googles you know that and and the Bitcoin thing and so what I'm saying is is you know we need to clean that up a little bit so we're clear you know that we're talking about Bitcoin interruptible load you know kind of a a situation. I don't think we want to get that detailed with it. I I mean I really have to settle that tonight. You're we don't we don't but it was one but go ahead read through it. Um you know read through it. Um if you want to send me your comments ahead of time I'd welcome that and I can compile them and go through them um you know all together. Um, one thing I want you to think about, if you would please, we have decibel levels at a property. Remember, these aren't I mean, they're not buy they're not sitting on 40 acres of property. They're smi sitting on small lots because they have to be right by these substations. So, I know we we might have to steer ourselves away when we're thinking about this about sound of the property line and focus on more the dwelling and where where it is because when they're only, you know, 50 feet or 100 ft from a property line, they're going to have to be buying

40 or 80 acres or whatever and but they still got to be by that substation, which they're not going to get away from that substation. Um, so we might need to be focusing on the the decibel level and do a setback from a property or from a dwelling. But I would maybe think twice about or how you'd want to word doing a a property line setback of a structure. Um, and maybe look at the decibel level to the nearest dwelling and a setback from the nearest dwelling. They're gonna they're going to try to get away as cheap as possible and there is technology to reduce some there's ways around it. Yes. Well, mitigation is what we talked about with wind. Yeah. And that's one thing too. Um there was one county that specifically says you have to have water cooled. Well, guess what? There's better technologies out there, but they just limit themselves with water cooled. So, you know, they um that's where I'd say probably the focus is your your setback from your dwelling neighboring dwelling and from your um your decel level at at the nearest dwelling and um that should balance it out. And but yeah, the one county that I read theirs and it's like water cooled. like really you're there's a better technology but you've already shut yourself into that corner. Um so but just um can I make a recommendation on this as well? This is a draft document and does not have to be released according to Iowa public laws.

So, I think if we can all look at this and come back next meeting with recommendations and let's not make sure this doesn't get out to the public yet because this is really a very first draft. This is not what we're going to come up with. No. So, if I would So, people please do not release this. It's I mean it's a rough draft. It's a very rough draft. We don't want to let people think this is what it's going to look like in the end because we know it's not. And that's and like I said, we've heard almost three hours worth of concerns and um we should be able to address, you know, those concerns and re like I said, read through this, rip it apart. If you need a digital copy, let me know. I was going to say, can you send us Yeah. Could you Yeah. Could you just email it out? But um you know we've covered bonding, decommissioning. Um we have um signage, waste disposal, electrical codes and standards, setbacks, property lines, rightways, um safety. We have covered in um um fire pressure. And another thing, remember I was talking about that five miles that from the nearest fire station by normal route that's in here, too. Okay. So, um well, right now I can't find it, but I know it's in here. And if you don't find it, let me know because I should have It should be there. Um so, but I I think that five miles is a good standard. Um, and we got to remember we're all volunteer. We have I mean we're not, you know, we're not Clintons or Debukes where we have um

paid, you know, paid, but the fire suppression and that five miles that should provide some adequate um adequate protection. Okay, I found it. Safety E number safety number eight. E is where our um um fire suppression is and five miles is indeed up number eight. Can I ask a question going back to the overlay? Yeah. So for example, they told us you know these Bitcoin things are only going to last like you said maybe five or 10 years or whatever. Would we ever anybody ever go in those buildings and look and see what they're doing with those at the end of the five or the 10 years if they never changed the outside footprint of that building? But changed the total business inside. Would we ever know that? No. We need to know if it's considered if it's considered an animal because No, but if they change it to a total different business, you would probably How would we know? I'm just asking. Okay. I've been in one of the I've been in those containers. I've been in those pods. I don't know what you can do with it. Turn into a chicken house. I don't know. I mean, with computers, they could they could do a different set. They could do a different business, but but it would still be a data related. Yeah. I mean, if it's not if you're We're not going in there. It still be. But at the same time, if they had computers in there when I went in there today and I go in there in five years and they got computers in there, but are we going to go in there? I'm just asking is that checks that? Nobody. Okay. But at the same time, there are

pugs. You're you're so limited to that. Um, in our minds, but but if you walk in and there's more computers, it's just another data mining or data processing center. If they don't talk to us, we don't know. And we don't have do we have the right we wouldn't have the right to go in there and look. Um we could add well no we wouldn't. Um you could add language. Um that's they ceased that actual business. Okay. So here I'm going to run something by So um you have a business that's and I'm just going off the wall here because I can make it work. um that sells ice cream. Okay. And now they got a new person that's in there. Now they're selling ice cream and tacos. Did they change their business? No. But I'm saying, okay, they have this. What if they turn it into selling firearms? Um there is there is anything you can do. Well, it doesn't meet the zoning. for one. We don't know that. Um I have a feeling in this county if there is anything inappropriate, we can put restrictions on that. Well, no, I that's why I'm just I'm just asking. I don't know how these work and that's why I'm just asking. Yeah. And it's I mean if if you Sander I don't have the pictures. I don't Do we have that on here at all? The old picture last month's pictures. No. Um, I see what you're saying is if they completely but if they completely if they completely change their business and they null and void the right you're asking that if they if they change their business completely away from data mining they null and void their zoning.

There's no more computers in there at all. Yeah. And Yeah. And but it's an M2. What business falls into an M2? Anything that's under the M2 they can do? It's not M2. That's why we we raised the the possibility of an overlay district. Yeah, that's and and this is again we're going to relitigate this tonight and we're not going to we're not going to go there because you and I are going to disagree on this. Let's be in here for two hours and 20 minutes. I move to a jour because we have other I know I know that. Okay, we're done with this. Yes, sir. We are done with this. Next thing on the agenda is items from the public. You have anything? You're pretty well. I I was just going to say, you know, want to commend you guys on doing your all the all the information that you're gathering and stuff on this data mining. You know, we're the homeowners that are going to be affected here. So, personally, you know, you talk about setbacks and decel levels. My fear on the decibel level is going to be I say the decel level who's going to police that let's say whatever the decel level is who's going to please that and once that center is up and running there's no change in that you know it's not there there is something in our ordinance our draft that would address that and there's a there's um it's the same language we use for the the found um the noise engineer to to do a study and and and review that on a on a on a regular basis. I think it was a threeyear term three-ear term. I don't want to take up too much your time. Okay. I would like to see

personally we would like to see know they will talk about too 1500 feet you know 1500 feet to the nearest dwelling from something like that. I would say that that's what I'd like to see. I mean, 1320 feet to be a quarter mile, you know, and 1,000 ft was brought up, but I'd like to see [Music] 1500. That's just that's hard to answer. Everything especially with the test. I guess that's important. Very important. But I guess it depends on Yeah. I don't know. I did. Yeah. The amount of noise. Yeah. I just have to hope it would be like that. Who knows? Like Brian said, they're going to get try and get by with the cheap. They're going to try and get by with the cheapest thing that they can get in there, you know. Well, Charlie White already said that in the supervisor being correct that they tried to come through with the cheapest level, but these pods would cost $300,000 more, $60,000 more. Depending on what they went with, it would be approximately $300,000 more for them. So, you know that they were trying to get by already. the teeth that's been here. Don't let too by respect. Yes. I mean, it's like basically anybody's building it. You know, we all try to, you know, we want we want these certain things, but again, you're going to try to do it for the most economical way you can do it.

That's part of your business. Yeah. And that's part right. So, you know, again, I think the noise decimal would be your big your big concern for your neighboring residents. Absolutely. You know, and hopefully that'll be addressed, you know, like the full standard 50 decimal, you know, um ours might even be less. Well, I'm I'm saying I I don't think that's a good good deal because, you know, as reports of us who all live in the country live in the country because we like the peace of quiet. If I wanted to live with noise, I would have moved to that. That's our whole deal. You know, we we don't have we don't have any noise right. I got a question. Has there had been any further interest in Jackson County after last month? Um, not not further, but I know there was additional that was staffed up. There was um three other sites that were being considered um not all necessarily by um ARM, but there was another company that was um shown interest beforehand. Okay. But okay, that's that's enough. Yeah. Okay. One great question about the decel level. Is there been any computer modeling or anything where we know what the different sound mitigation measures like the water cooling I know thing with the air. Do we know? I don't anything about that. I don't know anything about that. Um although from what we're hearing um not to be puny but from what we're hearing um the um the alcohol cool is supposed to be

the quietest that's quieter than the water. I was just curious like you know why they why they drilled well at first and then made that water before. Yeah, you're talking the one there. Um um market at where there's a facility at Ferguson. The one that I actually address. Yeah, that's they drill a well there. That one's water. Is that our Yeah, the county requested. Pardon me. Did the county request it? No. To the best of my knowledge. They're experimenting with different technologies. Yeah. Well, you know, and you know, some of it too, they're probably there's a learning curve. I mean, I'm guessing um of course they want to get by the cheapest way possible, but then you learn that that's not the best way possible, especially when you're going to be close to houses. So, you change your game. And I it looks like they're they're learning from the mistakes and they're changing their game. Yeah. To be, you know, to be more accepted. Yeah. And that's why they're talking about putting it inside a building rather than, you know, in pods and which would meet the same requirements as an A1 building, you know. So, but anyway, that's I think last month sent a pretty clear message on, you know, to the industry uh local industry where Jackson County sits. So, you know, that's that's something something. Yeah. Oh, and if I can um if you guys are done, I was just going to bring something else to them. Thank you. Thank you all for doing the

job. Um the one thing too, and I I kind of had um knowledge of this beforehand. Um Tom down in Clinton County had not um had not did not know about data processing facilities in data mining, Bitcoin mining. Um he was one of those counties where they just made an made application and was very vague about what they were doing and it made it sound like it was part of the utilities. Um Tom issued a permit and it has since been revoked. He got it to the um now he got a moratorum in place, got it put in front of the board of supervisors, they revoked that permit. So, um but and we know there's other counties, same thing. And I even had one zoning administrator. It's like, why didn't they catch you? Why how did you know? Well, because we have that other company that had reached out to us last July. Otherwise, we could have been in the same situation. And that's what that's what reason this Tom tried to make it very clear from the outset that Makova Valley Elect was simply the electric provider. We were not in partnership at all with them. Right. So, but anyway, um they had that situation taken care of down there. um they got in front of it. Um it, you know, it had to get to the board of supervisors to um but Tom got it to them so this could happen. But um there's been other counties that have been blindsided just because they didn't know the language. But we were fortunate. I'm glad we weren't one of those counties because we could have been if it hadn't been for that first company that um

reached out to us. No, it was No, sir. It was not. Yeah. But they they were just taking care of business the way they took care of business. And they didn't lie. They didn't tell any mistruth. They just made it work for them. Um and optimize the grid. When you said that, you know, these aren't they aren't using big tracks of land. Did you hear Charlie say they have one that's 400 acres in Wisconsin? Oh, so they are Okay. I didn't hear that. Okay. But um that might have been the night you were too homesick. Yes. Um so but that's Yeah, we're talking apples and oranges with the scale that they were talking. I know. But again, I'm just saying we don't know that they when she she said they're only small. You don't know that they could get their foot anywhere. They only they only can get as big as there's power available, right? It's kind of like the people that were concerned about wind turbines coming up everywhere. Well, got to be close to some place to connect to. Um, you know, so they don't just pop up anywhere just like these were probably small potatoes. So, I can read Mike. Mike says we got another We'll go on to the next item, other business. Nothing for you. Nothing for you? No. Next meeting. Well, I might um No, I better not because I have a supervisor sitting here and I haven't given her notice yet. So, never mind. I could wait. No, I'm kidding. But, uh um they're going to get my notice tomorrow. Okay. How long? Um August 1st. August 1. You can't accept it.

You must revoke somebody off the payroll when she can stay working. So, next meeting May 19th. Yes, sir. Yep. And I know we're going to have a case and we will run our case um up front um before any of our other um ordinance stuff. Yeah. Oh, as long as it's acceptable to the commission. Sorry. Anybody want to move for adjournment? So moved. Second. All in favor? I oppose. Thank you all. Now I can tell you