Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

And we're going to open first hearing at 6 o'clock. This is a public hearing for the reszoning the property located

properting property from a single family dwelling district R1 to two family dwelling district R2 multif family dwelling R3 and we're opening that at 6:12 this time public comments on this hearing 712 West Mason. Um, so this is my neighborhood and uh as a duplex development, no issues as uh with the R3. I'm a little curious um I know that a lot of this neighborhood was zoned down to R2 and R1 a couple years ago. Um, I would I less care about this this specific lot than some other lots that were zoned down from R3 to R2. I would hope that going forward to keep things that are that were zoned down to R2 R2. I made my own purchasing decision based on that. Um but also um just to bring to attention, both 8th Street and Mason Street are both extremely narrow and if this much traffic is going to be going down either or both of them, that's going to be a significant issue. Not unworkable, but would need work. And um also that intersection in particular is a little bit blind coming up from coming up 8th Street. So that's another aspect to the technical how that intersection would look with a road going on on the other side. So it um I've noticed it was dark and now there's a light. So I don't know if it was just a repair that was done there that helped that situation, but 8th Street in general because the way the hill lies can be

very dark. So again, just general traffic stuff would be of concern to me. Good. Is there anybody else that would like to speak? Yeah, you come up. You mind coming up? Thank you. How you guys get into the bank back there beside me on the north side? Who's building? You at this time, you just need to state your concerns. Just wondering how he's getting in there. They'll they'll be able to address that later.

Okay. Other gentleman lives on the north side of me. If you put a rope in there, it's all going water's going to run down there against you. We a lot of water problem. And I don't want a house back there crime. I've lived there since 89. Long time. And uh since he owns that, why have why hasn't the city made him mow that? That's fire hazard. Grass is that tall. Why hasn't city code enforcement forced their code? Well, I can't really we can't speak on that.

I mean, now we got rain, but all summer for the last couple months, it's been so dry. I mean, all somebody had to throw a cigarette out. We had heck fire. That's not something that this group here deals with. That's something you need to call the city. You would have to call the city and talk to that. Yeah, they need them force it because I guarantee anybody else up there had grass over there, they've been writing a a warning. Yeah. Best thing I can say is is go ahead and call the city and bring that up with them. Unfortunately, this this group here has no authority there. And uh like I said, I live there since 89. I don't want nothing back there. I don't want the crime. Okay.

Yeah. And I'm sure everybody else out there feels the same. Okay. Thank you for your comment, sir. Go ahead and come on out there.

My name is Terry Sickler. I live at 807 West. Uh my property backs up to on the south side of the property. What I would propose is that they put up a fence so that nobody can access my property on that uh plot. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? My name is Michael. I have I live at 205 South 8 Street. Uh in terms of like the zoning between two and three, what's the difference between those two? Duplexes versus multif family. Two would be duplexes, three would be multif family.

And like in terms of height, would a multif family be two, three stories?

Yes, we can't. We don't know what they're proposing at this time, but our code would not allow you to go over two and a half stories. So, I would have no problem with two, but three just seems excessive for back there, especially with everything else that's around that. I think two would be absolutely fine with me. I mean, obviously his piece property, understand want to build something different on there. I I would I mean, just personal opinion, which may not have anything to do with it. I'd rather just have a single family house back there. I think it would make more sense with everything around there. Um, especially with the access that's already been mentioned, that sort of stuff. But uh three seems excessive for where that piece of property is. Two I think would make a lot more sense. Just my personal opinion on it. Thank you. Appreciate it.

My name's Beth with that bus mason and I'm concerned some with the traffic. Our roads already crazy. If we had a 60 mph speed limit, it'd be fine. But it's constant. and all the uh city equipment even. I mean like old pickups, dump trucks, those guys will drive 40 mph down through there. We've got all the tankers going up to the water plants, you know, and there's there's kids on that street, so that's a concern. We're putting four units, correct, up there, which is putting 10 families According to the drawing, there's four units. Two four plex, two three plaques. On the right up, it's showing five units. And I know this is just a proposal now, but if we got five in right and four in drawing, what are we going to end up with? 10. That property is making up two residential houses. We went through this five, six, seven years ago. We changed the zoning up there so it would just be R1 to stop all the rental property from coming up there in residential neighborhoods. People that own their homes don't want to see devalue anymore from rental property going in up there. And I mean it'll it'll drop the price of the place 30 to $50,000 depending on what's going in. And that's my life of get my home.

We've got problems with water life panel. You go to many people up there. What's water going to be like? The sewers were questionable a few years back when they was scoping everything and they kind of pushed that through and said they'll do for now. They they replaced down on East Main or Mason, but that doesn't touch our many more families going to do up the top end. Have we got green space? Is there some place kids are going to play? Look at the drum. It's all pavement. There's parking and there's a drive to get in and out. What else have we got? There might be, you know, edging to put flower pots around. We've got to watch this stuff. We don't want to get the residential run over by all this commercial. Somebody coming in want to put up. There's plenty of spaces around town you can skirt out on the edges and build get reszone. We're not in the middle of you know residential single family dwelling homes and he could put a couple houses up there and sell get his money back out of the lot. But the rental I'm against big time and I think the city should be because like I said it's a the way I see it if this goes through it's partiality thing. You're giving all your cares to this one man and you're not listening to most of the community. That's to it

and that's about all I've got to say. Thank you. So, thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak?

Steve Lockart, one of North Well Street. My question is this not spot zoning. We outlawed several years ago said that we wouldn't be doing spot zoning and I think this clearly is spot zoning. So maybe we should look at that before we go too much further into the ways of I was part of the board alderman whenever they did the reszoning and I remember the hassle that we had to go through to get it to R1 get it out of R2. I had the same issue with my own property. I was want to make it R1 instead of R2 and R3 and I had to fight to keep it. So I hope that the people on this side of town will fight to make sure that it's not zoning.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. question for you off the open. What is uh so what was our current percentage on rentals in town now since we had a moratorium on rentals for how many years? Anybody know? At least five, six. Yeah, at least.

And what do we know right now? Because when I first got a real estate license in 2016, we nobody could buy a lot to build on a rental on. Nobody could buy anything. And in less than what, two years, we've added probably 20 to 30 rentals off Johnson or at least families living there. You've got duplexes going up on Dryen if we're zoned correctly. You've got multi or single family going up, which I assume has helped our numbers, but that's changed a lot. I live on Dryen, excuse me. I live on a street two up from where this the entrance is for this place. He's got about 50 foot of entrance to get in there. I don't know how wide our roads are, but I would think right there just to come into that property get to get to the back, you've got less than 10 foot on each side of the evenings to get a road back through those houses. I wasn't aware that this was even I thought that it was going to be multif family and multiple units. I was under the pressure maybe this was a duplex which I maybe would be okay with if you guys change down into a single family, one side one side duplex, not multiple units. You have a his property is right behind mine straight sloped. If Terry Sickler back there is not planning on selling his property, he still only have one ride away to get in there and he's but he's almost lane locked where he's trying to go. So I I'd be really hesitant if I change the zoning and let a lot of people back. That's just my two sense.

Thank you. Anybody else would like to speak?

I'm gonna second all these. I'm at 805 Dryden. My name's Jan. Um the slope is steep. Traffic is the roads are steep. It's on the top of the hill. You want a back slide of the hill. It's a great sliding hill for the kids. You want to build houses there, that would be fine. But the where the space it's located at, I've walked that property just walking through the waist high weeds to chase my dog. And um it's You could put single houses back there. Single family houses back there. Maybe a duplex or a couple, but multifamily homes, there's not enough room. Not enough room. Not for the amount of people, a traffic, water, sewer, all the things that brought up. I'm going to second all my neighbors opinions on all these things. We all in agreement said we're okay with building something, but not multif multif family for sure. Thank you. Thank you. would like to come up and speak. All right, let's see here. I'm going to close this at 6:15. All right, our second hearing. Open public hearing at 6:15 amending codes of ordinances chapter 50 outdoor wood boilers prohibit the installation of new outdoor wood boilers while allowing units to continue as nonforming uses within the city's limits public use. At this time I ask for any public comments. Would anybody like to come up to speak on that?

Steveart 106 North Wales. According to the Odessa paper, I'm the only one that has a wood boiler in the city limits of Odessa. So, first of all, I've been discriminated against by being called out as that person on Wall Street. I think that I could have been addressed another way besides through the local newspaper. My second thought is that I've had my boiler since October 2009. So, I'm protected by the state statute and by the House of Representatives to be able to keep my boiler. And that's why this new ordinance is allowing me to keep the boiler. It's because they really can't stop me and make me take it out. Plus, I have a city permit when I put it in. So, I've been fully approved by it. I don't know why we're having this issue. Maybe one of you all can tell me why after since 2009. Why is it become an issue? Why why am I being attacked for having wood heat to heat my home? That's my primary source of heating my house. I heat water and pump it in through a pump through radiators throughout my house and it goes back out and recirculates, reheat, and comes back in again. My gas bill last month was 58. I have a credit of over $500

with the gas energy or the spire gas right now because of my use of the heat source that I have. Otherwise, I'd be paying $350 a month to heat my story in a half house. I don't have a problem with them trying to ban them, but what I have a problem with is that they're saying that I can't upgrade it to a more efficiency boiler if I decide to do that. So, my prayer would be that you guys would not restrict me from being able to upgrade my boiler. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, sir. Come on up. Um, state representative Mike McGee. um talked to Glenn Kmar about this or past state representative that was in and we went over this and and went over the state tax statues of what what would be appropriate what's not appropriate in today's in Missouri anywhere today and we couldn't find anything that would that would not be appropriate for that wood stove to be here especially if he had the permit before he had it put in which I understand he did when he when he installed that it would it would be disappointing to think that people all over Missouri or all over Lafayette County or even in town here that have wood stoves, maybe not outside, but maybe they're heating their house with wood that all of a sudden that statute would change or that all of a sudden people would say, "Hey, I've got a wood burning fireplace or you know just say all of a sudden want to just burn outside Burns wood and all of a sudden you want to change that. That'd be very disappointing. And I and I hope that the the council would look at that and just say, you know, I I realize that maybe somebody has some issues and they they they have a trouble breathing or something and air quality. And uh my wife works for Department of Natural Resources, the DNR. She's been here 11 years, Belita McGee. And we went over the statutes with DNR of what would what would be appropriate, what wouldn't be appropriate. And my neighbor across the street from me is the air quality person for Lafayette County for the Department of Natural Resource. And I've discussed this with him and he'd be glad to come up and and visit with all air quality. But there's no reason for this for him not to be able to have a word spelled his house with wood. And that's what I'm

here to pass on is that is that there might be somebody that's got some health issues and that maybe the air is blowing that way and something. And I'm sad for that. And I hope that they can get some kind of help and and and uh and I know Steve would do with what he could, you know, to try to make a difference if somebody else will go to the neighbors. That's kind of guy he is. But to come out to say he had the permit, he put it in and now all of a sudden we're going to change those rules and take that away from him. That would be sad. Be very disappointing. So thank you all for hearing what I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Go.

Is there anybody else would like to speak? All right. Seeing none, I'll close this hearing at 6:21.

Don't have any hold. going to move on to our new business which is the reasonzoning at the property of Ace Street and Nathan. At this time I'm going to ask for any stat.

So Jason Weatherman is a property owner requesting uh the reszoning of the property at 83. I did want to remind everybody that this is just a reszone request. Um this is not uh the preliminary the process for the preliminary plat would have to move forward and final plat. So this is just a resoning request. He is requesting um that uh it reszones to the multifamily that is R3 from the R1. We have any questions?

The only other thing was the acres. The the lot we have 1.5 acres. The lot is.96 acres. Just for clarity from your staff report.

Sure. Uh, so I bought I bought this lot from a family friend um because he couldn't maintain it and didn't have any plans to build on it anytime soon. Um, my kids go to Odessa schools. I live in Bates City. Um, I have a big barno out uh by the church uh the Jehovah's Witness Church out off 40. So um we're not trying to devalue anybody's properties. Um, it's not going to be an out ofstate owner that is owning these rental property, so to speak. Um, we're actually to we are trying to add rental property to Odessa because one of the main complaints we see on um the Odessa community page is is trying to find affordable rentals um and nice rentals that aren't run down. And you know, you got people that are within trailers that are almost uninhabitable. Um, and uh, you know, these newer generations, they just don't want to own properties. They want to take care of properties. Um, so we're proposing this so that it we're actually adding value to the neighborhood. Um these are going to be um more craftsman style looking um duplexes and or triplexes um that will fit in with the style of Odessa. Um and uh you know we're going to do a private road that goes on back um past the setbacks so we're not invading on anybody's stuff. Um and we are going to have foliage and all that fun stuff with it. So, uh, we're not proposing a big, um, you know, rental, um, fiasco. It's just a few rental properties that we will be putting in there and we will be maintaining them ourselves. Um, I run a business called I Build Casey. We do

custom homes and stuff for uh, a lot of different people. We build custom barnos, etc. So, um, we would be maintaining the properties ourselves um, and making sure that uh, you know, we're adding to the to the neighborhood. We're not trying to devalue anybody's property. Thank you.

I just want to add to the concept drawing that's in there is just a conceptual drawing that was provided by the applicant um just to give you guys a visual understanding of what they were um looking to do. But that that concept drawing has not gone through engineers, hasn't gone through our city code. you know, we would need to make sure that all the setbacks are met and and all the requirements that our code would require have been uh followed which is done through the plan review process and um which would be after this. So that was just there for concept for your better understanding

and we're not proposing anything about two stories just so you guys know Have any questions on this? Sean, what what did you say the property size? N6 acres.

If I imagining the right location, it connects to Maine right there. Yeah, it would be if ma if Mason Street continued past 8th Street, it'll connect right to Maine right there. That really dangerous inter. That's Maine. This is Mason. Yeah. Yes.

Anybody want to speak in favor of records? Anyone want to speak in opposition of the project? There any discussion by the board? I do have concerns about this project. Um, I worry about one of the drainage going down that hill and I really do worry about where this is located and the people's houses off the side. That's a lot of traffic to have right right by your house. So I personally would want that. So I do worry about that. So

I think we changed it to R1 for a reason because that's what was in the area. We also at that time I know we had concerns about water and and sewer and how those problems been dealt with. Um, we haven't gotten to the like pre-application meeting of this for because no plans have been provided. Um, once we get construction plans, we sit down with all of our departments and make sure that um, everything's sufficient. But as far as I'm aware of, there are no concerns of capacity. I'm trying to make sure that I'm imagining. So, if you go down eight, it connects to Nate, right? because I'm trying to imagine if you Okay,

so it's a Maine Mason Dryen. Okay,

but if we're going that way because if I remember there's you go past this little thing. There's a couple of duplexes down there that set off of Maine and it looks up the hill because there used to be two little horses because I live over in this area and I can imagine with the Hill project being a lot of traffic and if that connects to 40 main I just I think that there's a reason this is zoned R1. So, I have a lot of concerns about water running because I can tell you there are no sewers or there's only ditches down at the bottom of that hill. So, and if that's all concrete, that water is going to go rushing down towards that.

That's exactly right.

So, I have a lot of concerns about residence. So just from a drainage standpoint to let you know there would be no difference in the amount of pavement whether or not it's single to homes or multif family just to let you know because there has to be a road to get back there. So and and the adequate green space that the city wants for a multifamily versus a single family there would still be the same amount of grass. So no matter what, whether it's a single family home, it's still going to take up the same amount of footprint really because a single family home, I can build a ranch and I can take up 3,000 square feet on the ground level versus a duplex where I have 1500 ft on one level, 1500 ft on the other. You're not saving anything.

Yeah. But in a house, you wouldn't be having all that asphalt for all the parking for all them duplexes and everything else. When a house driveway down the road, there's no parking lot. It's just a driveway. just just such a he's the two class now have their own drive single driveway and I still have play you talking a lot more concrete lot more asphalt a lot more water moving yeah because I mean you know if I built single families and I decide to build something in four car garage the same amount of concrete I guess we just have to agree to disagree I guess

well no I mean it's just a fact of coming from the builder I mean I can build a I I mean, right now my barno has 5,000 ft of concrete outside of of it just for my equipment to sit on. I mean, it's considered a single family. So, that's all. There's no bigger footprint. They're a little more irresponsible just because sewage alone is a footprint on the city. And if you have six to eight families there instead of one home, you have a lot more sewage footprint. And I hate to know how old the sewer line is up to the hill in a lot of the places because I have a feeling part of them have never been replaced or it's been a long time. I mean no less a footprint because a lot stays the same. I sure but I mean the way you do drainage for multiple units is different. How much sewage is coming out there is different. That's still a footprint that is being made. I'd have to agree a little bit Steve that this is spot zoning because it is surrounded by the

Can you say that? Say that again. What keeps us from being spot because it is surrounded by our lens from what I see. No, I was

using the same if we could. Can we make sure that questions and stuff come up and and speak and all that up here so we can all hear please?

Do you have some other questions back there, sir? He's he's talking about, you know, using the same footprint for a single resident as he is on this. He's got two three plexes which you got six families and then you've got twolex which gives you total of 10 right families up there. If you've got a couple R1s, how many people are you going to have in single family versus 10 families? I'm still concerned with the sewer, water pressure, all that kind of stuff.

Well, and at that like she was just saying at that point, if it was if the zoning was changed and they were going to carry on, they would have to bring their plan and then the city could do a study to make sure that they could support those houses. If they couldn't, it wouldn't be allowed. Yeah. That's because I think just cramming that much from from this little drawing, it looks like it's all road parking space and like green space is what 20 foot in the rear, 10 foot on the side. Again, this this is just a concept, right?

This hasn't gone through all of our coding and everything like that that would have to happen, right? Well, I knew it was probably a concept because it says live this show forward, you know. So, it's like tweeting one more in there is really going to, you know, cause havoc. And like I said, traffic and the kids, that's another main concern cuz I've seen little neighbors girl run out in the street after her ball more times than one

with a mile high cart down the road. you put that much more traffic on there, it's not good. You know, it's not good. And I don't care. The parents try to keep her in the backyard, but a little kid that's, you know, six, seven years old, they're going to wander out front every now and then. They're going to have that bicycle, you know, roll out of the driveway into the street. You can do all you can do watch a kid. the drivers should watch, but they don't. And Mason Street, up on that end, we get a lot of traffic. Nobody, it seems like nobody wants to go up Dryden or Main Street, either one. They all come up Mason and then turn off north or south there and then they'll go on up around the hill or over the hill. And I don't understand that. But we can't since they redid the road. I mean, it's a racetrack and it's just it's ridiculous. And we can't get any police presence. I've been down and talked to the chief more than once and you can't you can't get a a patrol car might go through twice a month, you know, and down at Fifth Street where the stop signs are

with the schools going on. And that's not got anything to do with this, but I'm just saying that much more traffic. I've almost got hit by school buses running the stop sign. I've almost got, you know, it's just it's crazy the traffic already and now we're adding 10 more families with two to three cars a piece. It's just, you know, it's we're overcrowded and like I said a few years back, we went through all this crap to get changed from R2 to R1. We saw we got that and now we're slipping slipping back and starting to spot. I thought spot zoning was illegal in the state. I'm not sure. I'm just more looking on it, but there's a lot of cases where spot zoning is illegal and we might need to check in on some of that, too. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes sir. Lockart six Northwest. My question is going to be a retention pond. You're going to have to have more room. But if you don't put a retention pond in there to catch that water, it's going to be going somewhere down somebody's street or somebody's basement or somewhere. Yes. But that would be determined. Retention pond is a requirement. that would be determined during the plan review process with our engineers.

Um I mean arguably the entire section of that area is R1. So turning it to R3 is quite a bit of a jump. I mean, we I as far as I'm aware, we do not have anything in our ordinance against spot zone zoning, but it would be a frowned upon practice to to start doing. So, that's kind of where your guys's, you know, conversation amongst yourself comes into play. Um, I mean, there's other areas of town where we do have maybe R1 next to R3 or we have, you know, the ability to have R1 next to R2. That's that's something that's in inevitable to an extent. But um the area that area from 8th to you know 8th main Dryen and Dryen curves around is all consistently R1 today. Now the east side of 8th Street is R2. There's no R3 anywhere in that area. I don't know if you guys have your planning maps with you, but

ask you just on the table here. It's good.

You Chris, you want me to try to hold it up? So if you're looking this this is the square area. So this is where the property would be if everyone can see. So the darker yellow is R2. Light yellow is R1. R3 is like this really dark color of yellow. So that is the closest R3 which is the hill. Um and then the next closest R3 would be on the east side of Dyer Park. And then there is no other R3 on this side of the railroad tracks that I'm seeing. So we have R3 here next to Dyer Park and a little bit um on the west side of Dyer Park with the hill property and then there is no other R3 on this side of the tracks. Everyone see that? You want to take a look at it? Get closer to it. ground. So what we're thinking about traffic flow that connects the 40. Well, that's going to be a lot of

Well, no, because it's connecting right here. Yeah, but I mean they're going to go this way because why go back to

way in Mason short side? Yeah. facing everything from Indonesia. Another concern of mine, oh man, 78 West Mor is if we pass this, there's a acre and a half there to put all these units there. Right behind my property, well, right to the west of me, the 710 West Mason, which is a 50ft drive that goes back 180 ft and then it opens into a little over an acre. Are we going to turn that on or two? Are we going to put units back behind my house? They tried that years back and that's why this all got changed to R1 because they was refusing to let people spot zone and that's why I said we fought this years back. I should have brought the letter from the city down. I didn't think to do it, but uh it just seems kind of redundant to me to to do all that fighting within the last 10 years to get it changed to R1 to let people come in and start putting, you know, we're going to R1 this acre, we're going to R1 that or R2 and three this, you know, two and three acres instead of keeping it just single family dwellings. was like we went through all the trouble to get a change several years back. I know we've got all new people on the board here and nobody probably

pardon I not do I remember when things

do you remember when all that went through and it's ahead of you and we thought like I said we got it changed now on down east there is some R2 because we've got the trailer part we've got some apartments and you know duplexes down there we couldn't change that back to R1 because you that got built in while it was on R2, too. But they was trying to keep the people that owned homes in town instead of selling and leaving town because, you know, property values dropping so quick with all this change. And I don't care who comes in and says, "Well, I'm not going to do like this guy." Once the places are five to 10 years old, they're going to be lapidated. there's not going to be upkeep they need and there's going to be undesirable people living in them guaranteed.

I don't know that we can project a future like that and know that for sure. I've seen that quite a bit. No, but um a lot of it depends on the landlords and so I don't think we can just say well I won't push it off on him then but like I said I've seen that in a lot of towns and I just don't want my neighborhood I've got to the age I can't move out. I'm unable to and like I said, I've worked 50 years to get what I've got now and I'm satisfied with it and I hate to I won't say what I want to say. I'll just put it like that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks.

Any further discussion of the commission? At this time I'll ask for a motion.

Anybody want to make a motion? So we can motion. Sorry. Okay. Can I get a second? What did you for the reasonzoning? for a vote of the reszoning of R3 or R2 or what? Yeah, it's R the applicant applied for R3 in our zoning of the size on an R3. Um like the size of the parcel. The size of the parcel. Yes. No, not necessarily.

Yeah. what it's zoned as then makes the regulations of how it can be built from then on. Um, they're going to change this to R3. Can we do a motion to disotion to pass it hard to get through one to two or three? One to three. They'll be

but we need to vote on it. So you can second the motion then we can I'll second the motion to vote on second. All right call vote or show of hands. So everybody in favor? Yeah. Say raise your hand if you're in favor. In favor to approve from R1 to R3 the reszone. No. No. No. We're at approve. Raise your hand. Not approved. Yeah. Don't know if it needs to be noted, but I What? What did we say? I have to honestly.

Okay. All right.

All right. Did not. So then this will go to the board of aldermen for for their approval without your recommendation of approval.

Yes. Barbara ising the code ordinances chapter 50 B. Out of the oven boilers prohibit the installation of new outdoor wood boilers while allowing existing units to continue as non-performing uses within the city of Odessa. Okay, at this time I ask for staff comments.

Um I don't have um a lot of plans have survived here. The board of aldermen has discussed this at previous meetings. It's been quite a few months now since they last discussed um the approval of this, but it came about from um elected officials receiving complaints of the uh nuisance of the air quality um odor and so on and so forth. Um so we looked at different ordinances or how we could uh amend ordinances to protect uh those who are negatively affected by wood boilers. Um so it was the board's after discussion with the board they didn't want to u we realize there's a lot of regulations that things circle around wood boilers and boilers in general when it comes to EPA federal regulations state regulations. So, it was the the board at the time's decision to um direct staff to create coordinates that would eliminate or how does it work? See here? Um it would prohibit the installation of new boilers moving forward, but with trying to minimize the impact to those who already have them. Um, at this time there is a section in the code that requires um, if you do have one to report that to the city. Um, at this time we don't know who or how many residents of Odessa have these schoolers. This is all wrote about basically for quality of air

from a nuisance perspective. So this is only from a nuisance perspective, not a legal one because I think like who would be to tell somebody how they get their homes, right? Exactly. It's then it's from the nation's perspective of it adding to smell and the smoke lingering in the area that what's the difference between that fireplace that's burning as far as

um mostly the stack height. So there's no stack height requirements for boilers where with a fireplace it would be above rooftops. So we that's kind of where our conversation started like how can we um add different stairs like increase the stack height and do different things like that to make it more accommodating and that's where we got into some very uh very detailed EPA regulations and things like that. So it was the board's direction to move towards prohibiting them in the future as opposed to the EPA.

I'm sorry. So you said you got into EPA. So what what was their conflict or what what was the just that they have like specific regulations where you have to register and um follow their guidelines on those wood boilers. Um I don't know the exact details of what each regulation is. I just know that there's extensive regulation at the federal level. So raising the stack would solve the problem. there no longer be discussion or a problem about and that problem just raise it up the same height as ch um I I don't know if it would or not

that be the solution anybody during the winter when the low pressure comes in you know what goes to the ground it doesn't matter if that boilser back time. A lot of the times when I burn wood in my place until I got hurt I could 30 years and I'll guarantee every time you got a load come in which most of the winter that smoke rolling down on top of the house to the ground and you smell

that's true. I just feel like doing a leaf band is like an extreme. Seems like there should be an easier way to do this without telling people you can't use full heat. I'm also curious to see like what our city lawyer would say about this as well. Um, and then also like I kind of have to agree to if somebody already has one and we're saying you can't have one. I already have one. It can't. But you can't replace. Yeah,

you can repair and improve it, but you cannot take it out. Well, eventually I just think that's a little

I say if you want to improve it or put a better one or more efficiently in, I think we do that. I don't see problem with that. I mean, that would be everybody's satisfaction to that. And I can see like the city wanting to know about it by saying, you know, special, you know, like, hey, like if you got one, let us know so we know where they're at. But I do I agree like if you have one should be able to maintain it and replace it nature like what what would be the code

just take them to Yeah. No, it' be a code enforcement issue at that point. Yeah. Which again like because you can't.

That's no problem. I think we need to dive into this one more than to just say no, you can't have these anymore. You're right. Life can't have it after, you know, needs to be replaced. I think you need to do finding out what exactly needs to be fixed. Yep. No problem. And we can can make sure that your comments are communicated with the board of alderman.

Yeah. I think you need to like really do need to break this down more because I mean I even see it says it's not even just wood. There's also fields. So I mean we're not just we're talking about outdoor wood here. I mean, I think that's where we should break down like both side us. Yeah. I think we should really kind of define that a little bit. Yeah. I think there's a lawful study decision. Yes, sir.

Sitting there thinking about it. I just trying to think if anyone in this room has ever spelled wood smoke that didn't come from their house. And if there's anyone here could say that good smoke from a neighbor or somebody at the next block or somebody two streets older wherever it might be next door has it hasn't had that happens in their life you know this child here maybe that just doesn't doesn't seem like that is possible in America or even in a small town or even out the country that hasn't happened so it is going to happen again in the future no matter what to change their orders to somebody's going to smell some snow from some fireplace somebody. So kind of sounds like uh we need to do a motion to basically kind of table this

sure further discussion and information before we make a vote on a yes or no. You can do that or you can motion to not have do what we did last time and it it go to the board without your recommendation. That's the alternative.

Yeah. So to table this for now [Music]

okay everybody favor any opposed passes. So, now we're gonna go on to our workshop.

Okay. If I want the opposition there, Hello. Is that back.

I've only put like just go I felt it pop on. Well, it's starting to get a little bit, which I'm excited about. Yeah, me too. I just don't like what comes, you know. Two months from now. Oh, yeah. I get to work. I like the little snow. I guess I guess

there you go. about driving. I don't have to do that anymore. Work from home. Yeah. Well, I have a really hybrid work schedule. So, it's like I can work there. It's You could You could have my name. I'd rather you do it. How you been doing?

You really wanted

that one. I think I put together wrong. I think they put they put it together backwards.

We always joke about who ends up with that chair. Yeah, I said that when it was but

you take care. Yeah, good. Hey, how you doing?

I think Watch your show. You got these snacks from Crispy, too. Want these cookies? Brownie or cookie? You want that?

You want a brownie? I think he said brownie. Which one you want? You're being so good. There are more. Christy made them for her birthday. [Music] Are we ready?

Right. back to it.

Okay. [Music] Yep. Thank you. Excuse me. Can you guys step out so we can continue on with our meeting? Thank you. Have a great night. Appreciate you.

Okay, so we've got two two handouts in front of you. So what the one that has your stuff on it is so I took the liberty of going through our existing code and making a use table out of it. So that's what you see here. Um so I went through like for example single family dwelling the first one that's permitted in R1. So then it's also permitted in R2, R3, C1, C2, C3, I1, I2. And I did that all the way through all of the juices agonizingly, including frozen food blocker and just the most random ones, toy store, things like that. So

you still have a toy store here. Probably at one point. No, there was I worked there. There was some funny ones I thought were in here. So anyway, so for every use that's listed in our code, I've went ahead and constructed the use table and what it would look like if we had a use table. So you did work. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. This is what we have today,

not necessarily what we think makes sense. So, um you can see so like on our on our um zoning code for residential. Residential has single family um with attached and detached buildings, home occupation, daycare, personal garden. So, all of those are permitted in R1. And then under R1, it goes into these oneoff ones that don't really make sense in my opinion for residential, but it's got municipal use, plant nursery with no building. Um, general purpose farmer garden, golf course, private club can but not conducted for profit, public and private school, church. I mean they do make sense but um I was just kind of a little bit caught off guard to see those listed under residential one but they are there but condition with conditional approval of the planning and zoning commission. So you can see that first or second column R1 you've got 1 2 3 4 five things that are permitted then the rest is not is permitted or permitted conditionally and then you go down to two family dwelling you can see that's not permitted in Nagger R1 but it is permitted in R2 and up. So, same for uh multifamily dwelling. Um that's permitted in R3 and up. And then the um kind of goes on. The only thing that really starts to change is then when you get into your commercial use, you can see it's a little bit more black and white. When you get into commercial, there's less conditionally approved sections. So there's um you know antique

shop through it continues on for a couple pages for commercial. So the C1 starts with letter A and ends with triple G. So all those are not permitted in R1, R2 or R3 then they would be permitted in C1 and so on and so forth. Um, so this I just thought this would be helpful to have this and be able to visually understand our own current code while we're looking at these other cities and and communities. Awesome. Just a little tidbit. But I think we we la we last left off with modeling studio and body painting.

So we'll pick back up with office general general office space. Um, that's on the third page of the other stuff completely filled out.

And I didn't get everything we did last month. I did not I hadn't got that uploaded into this document yet. So next time I'll have both of those upgraded into um this this document for us so we can make it look like we're at least getting somewhere. But u for now we'll start with office general. So um this would just be general office spaces. Um nothing else associated. So uh where do we where would we put office spaces? I would generally I would jump to C1.

Yeah, definitely not.

For a minute and see one like a home office like if somebody just accounts out as a phone number that kind of thing. Yeah, it wouldn't fall it would fall under R1 single family and then home occupancy. So, but could that fall into like the R3 category where we talked about where or is that going to be the PUB where it's like it could be like a giant apartment complex but then there might be office based on search. So, would that be where it could potentially be P? So, that would be a P. Okay. C1, C2, C3.

Really? Yeah. I was going to ask too though, like where would like a home office fall? Yeah, that would anything within the home we're not able to regulate through zoning. So, it just be the home would be zoned single family or whatever. I see one all the way up to its Yeah.

Okay. Next one. Um outdoor display of store outdoor display storage or sale of merchandise on C1, C2, C3, I1, I2 property used as residential. I don't know what that one is really trying to say. What does that mean? Yeah.

Be like an outdoor holiday display kind of like the one up off of I7. It's saying merchandise from my understanding was used as residential. Let's just skip that one. Okay. Parking lot. Commercial parking lot. So this would not be a building and a parking lot. This would be if the parcel is a parking

lot use parks and recreation. I think there's maybe good ways to separate municipal buildings, municipal uses into one category instead of breaking them up, but we'll continue on with this just so we have it. So, parks and recreation, I have the definitions with me. Parks and Recreation. It's a new subdivision. Is that green space? Is that

No, this is like a parks and w building, right? It's like a maintenance shed or another. Yeah, I can kind of like the 77 acres that's proposed by parks partners for the parks. Let's see what it fits in here. There's this. How do you This isn't like building. Well, that would have to the 77 acres rules. Yeah. Um, this is lying to you.

Defined as a park, playground or community facility owned by or under the control of a public agency or property owners association that provides opportunities for active or passive recreational activities. A park, playground, or calming facility owned by or under the control of a So, it's it's a catchall for everything parks in my opinion. a park, a playground or a community facility owned privately or publicly. So I think it's kind of the catch all for all park related anything. So how do you have that in here in the way you in our current one?

Well, we have municipal use public building or utility and then we have I just went through all of these today, but they're kind of a blur. I think it just is all currently falling under municipal use. Watch. There's a recreational center on our current code. That would be it. Municipal you municipal building or recreational centers. Recreation center would be more like your specific center kind of thing like the community building.

I think this is kind of broke down in a weird way too. Yeah. Archery range indoor and outdoor amusement center indoor billard hall or video arcade or that's farm simple in space but that's what they're goes on country club is there I think it would go what do you guys think we need to split it up city owned and non city owned or I don't know how you do that though.

Yeah, because you could have what would you just list off? You said um like house or something like that. So it could be associated with the neighborhood club house country club down here on the other side. Um, you're right. It was private group that had an ar to be able to tell them where they could or they couldn't but it

maybe it's one of those that could be it could be C's and they're not C's. whatever we're talking about. Uh oh, yeah. Conditional seats in some of the residential and then maybe in commercial. I don't know. I feel like this is a hard one cuz like we looked around like the encompasses. So much it needs to be upon a review. You know, it has to be looked at. It can't just be one certain place because some of it will one place but it won't work in another

but if you look down below that so you've got parks and bread but then you got wreck entertainment indoor wreck entertainment outdoor recreation why there was just in that as well and if so then I mean a park can go to residential area but like an hour.

Well, the other thing I'm thinking of is like if someone puts in a large subdivision, they're required to put in a park for our own ordinance. So, we're not going to like reszone just that area necessarily. It would remain all residential. So, just the park isn't pulled out as a spot. So

that's true. There like recreational or youth recreational sports is becoming more and more privatized. So there could be like a huge ball field put in or something like that too. Lexington also has it broken down with like golf course and they also have shooting range in this but I say we have shooting range separate so okay let's do conditional we don't comfortable with that

you know that's pretty much going to be under review could be a you know way to be beauty reviable.

Are you saying conditional all the way to high? Okay. Post office.

I say C1

and this would just be US postage. This would for the sorting and distribution of US mail because I don't we don't want to give the post office the liberty to do whatever and then we've got Amazon coming in and they're like well I'm distributing mail as well and then we just let Amazon into neighborhood or something. Yeah. So to me this is just the post office for US mail. you know, you know, so you definitely don't

want that, you know, and uh I don't know when I think of US mail, I think we're a little Yeah. deal. But then if you really get into it, remember the old what they got downtown now the whole building under their upcoming plans. They're supposed to be taking their little basically putting little versions of that in every county. So I mean we definitely don't want that. So maybe commercial down review for that way if it is just a little thing they could go into a neighborhood of some kind. Yeah,

but I think that I almost think it would be safer to do conditional across the board because if you say permitted in residential, then the big one could go in residential. No, that's why I'm saying that would be conditional. Oh, down would be I gota partial down and then the thing be

conditional. conditional conditional and then uh permitted in C1 and up. Okay. So, recreation/entertainment indoors. Now, these I personally I think these are a little bit more towards your private industry type of thing. So this says a use offering recreation, entertainment or games of skill to the public for a fee charge and that is wholly wholly enclosed in wholly enclosed in a building. Typical uses include bowling alleys, indoor theaters, bingo parlors, pool halls, billiard parlors, and video game paces. Those were all shut down.

Yeah. Yeah. So that would be like a main event type space or Yeah. Or it could just be a movie theater or just a bowling alley. Main events kind of

I mean that's that would make sense to me. Yeah, we definitely want that.

Will you do the same thing for outdoor? Yep. A use offering recreation, entertainment, or games of skill to the public for a seer charge wherein any portion of the activity takes place in the open. Typical uses include archery ranges, batting bases, golf driving ranges, um, drive-in theaters, and miniature fall courses. The archery ranges would have to be something separate. You think so? I think can it go under here? I think that needs to be broken down. I mean, you wouldn't want a shooting range. No.

And like down by the school or like a downtown. Yeah. And I just think that don't want to put anything that I mean like there's already enough figure out on the park, right? Like how many kids trip over a stair, fall down the slide, just, you know, playing sports. You don't want to add that additional shooting range and archery in the same category.

You'd have to have uh something special anyways, would you? Because you don't you can't legally you can't shoot a baby gun at you, can you? or above. So the within the current definitions we do have I'm guessing it's not like I mean what you did with air like sharp arrows I guess

have to quit shooting rabbits squirrels in your neighborhood. So we thought shooting I think shooting range and archery could go under the same category or same zone and then or saying you score zone do what we have shooting later we do yeah shooting range it's on the next page okay um shooting range outdoor it's oh I see it but I mean I think you bring up kind of another point though like we couldn't uh when you brought in drive-in theater we couldn't put that in probably zone or commercial lot one behind the space and two like if someone came in with a giant screen that may block someone else's business.

But you have to be sensitive with space cuz like for example the property that was on the agenda tonight and one right behind it is like 3 acres all are one. So it's I think we think residential is smaller lots when in reality all smaller lots start as big lots and then get broken down. So that 3 acre one in the middle of right behind A Street is R1 and someone could say I would like to put a drive-in theater there. People are going to probably be upset about that. Yeah. I have three acres up here that's Darwin.

I was worried about putting a drive in theater in a small commercial area. Even expect a drive in being here. Hey, I mean someone put something there.

So, everybody defines their zones a little bit differently, but one thing that I know they do in Columbia is the difference between C1, C2, 3, C, C3 is specifically how much traffic is built to it. So, like a gas station is a C2. um a you know really little office is a C1 uh something bigger like a mall in the C3. So those are some things that might help which because a drive-in theater is by nature going to have a whole lot. Very valid point. Yeah.

I feel like we need to break that down more. Where are we at now? actly or smell anything outdoor. I like we can break down

so much. I think kind of the thought in my mind behind this is to almost root a little more but on certain things where we because it seems like we're we're wanting to break down an awful lot which is good in some areas but I think we really need to not go down because there's a happy median between having toy store candy store every single or possible listed in like retail, right? I mean, not not

No, you're No, I get what you're saying. I'm just thinking like I'm trying to just imagine my head would stop clicking as like a drive-in theater is very different than like I don't know what I would compare it to, but you know what I have to say? I get you. Yeah. So, it's like I could see doing like Yeah. like do like a conditional C1 and then permit it. I don't know. I'm just thinking about wise, right? Well, like I said, the a lot of traffic obviously. Yeah.

But then of course, I sit here and think that's drive-in theaters are almost a thing of the past. I mean, we've lost everyone we met. No, amphitheater. That would be something that have a lot of traffic. It might be something that would come in. Well, there's supposed to be anyone out in the new park. Arguably, I would say that recreation entertainment outdoor should be is questionable on C1

and should maybe be at least C2 or greater because of that traffic component. No matter what, if it's batting cages or a mini golf course, there's going to be busier times. Saturday is going to be crazy. And there's going to be Think about what was that? Paradise Park or whatever out summit. It's not there anymore. They used to have the bag gauges and the mini Yeah, mini golf and all that stuff. It got pretty congested over there. And that's good size road over there, too. So is it conditional C1 or is it just not permitted?

It could be a conditional, you know, but we need to look at obviously where it's going, traffic amounts, what's going in, you know, size of our street there, what's around it, if it can handle that kind of inflow. I don't think someone out. So, I think having a conditional would give them that opportunity and then permit it the rest of the way.

Next question would be should it go all the way up to I2 because I think just as we protect our we we we tend to protect R1, R2, R3, we tend to protect C1 a little bit. I do think I too should be restricted to a certain extent because just my gut tells me, okay, we have, you know, we don't have a lot of outdoor entertainment options. Outdoor entertainment options are going to bring in people from more than just Odessa. So, if we did have a mini golf course, would we want it next to a manufacturing plant?

Right. I mean, we want to I wouldn't want a bunch of kids around that. You're going to have truck traffic, you know? It'd be like uh putting a mini golf course or something like that next to our manufacturing plant that my company has up in Flat City. There's too much traffic. Kids can get hurt. Oh, yeah. Kids are so curious, too. Exactly. They see all the things. Next thing you know, we're down to rooftop. Yeah. So, I think protect I2 and keep it out, but maybe I1 for light industrial. Are we saying not permitted or conditionally permitted in R2?

Not per and same goes for the indoor recreation. Yeah, I think that Okay. All right. Next one says recreation vehicle.

How you going to do that? I want somebody to put a racetrack in a sprint car or something. Lot of noise and all that. I mean, I don't know. We're going to do that. So, recreational vehicle sales and service says a use engaged in the retail sales of recreational vehicles from the premises along with incidental services or maintenance activities within completely enclosed buildings and in outdoor areas used intended to be used for storage of recreational vehicles displayed for sale. So I'm thinking like RVs, four-wheelers, powers sports in general for the SA sale of those. And then the one above is recreational vehicle park. So that would be like

or that be like K Ross or Yeah, that's how I put it. But it could

I think there was a find it there was like a mobile home. Not mobile home. Maybe it was under our code. Under our code we had a second. Wait for not find any give us a I thought it said like Oh, it might be a typo, but ours says hotel or mo motor hotel.

Oh, that's kind of So, I took motor hotel as like an RV park. No, what's a motor hotel then? That they used to call them like motor up, you know, the kind you pull up to. They would call them motors. Oh, up to the drive. Yeah, just think of cars, you know, cars. The little Disney Pixar movie car. Radiator Springs. Radiator Springs. Oh, I got you. Motor.

Okay. Um, so recreation vehicle park. What do we decide? We're still talking about it. Yeah. I don't know ourselves. Definition of what that is. I think historically they meant an RV park. They say if they say recreational vehicle, what do you mean?

Historically, they're not thinking about ATVs. You need some [Laughter] not what we did. You've seen that before. Okay. So, sorry. Did should we split this into vehicle recreational riding park? I think that should be a whole different category. I think this is this is actually talking about an RV park like across the high. Okay, that makes sense.

I think the other was outdoor entertainment. True. And I will and I'm looking at Lexington's they actually have their RV park listed as outdoor whatever one we just went through. Okay. The parks and open space. They have RV park in the Oh, we're definitely not doing nothing else. Yeah. Where should that go? Mhm. Are you talking about selling RVs or are you talking about um parking them parking them like the RV park? Yeah. Long-term storage.

We're living in a lot of people living. Yeah. When people are living in Okay. And I guess there's not we don't have I don't know that we have the ability to or if there even is a difference between long-term staying and not long-term stay. We wouldn't have any regulation over that. Have we done trade park? H trailer park we did that last we did. Oh no, that was mobile home sales. Probably went over that last time.

You kind of forgot. Maybe it should go into like either agricultural or industrial somewhere outside of town where you had more space, not commercial probably because we'd have to also have it's actually an R3, but if you were going to open it up today, I don't know that we did go through mobile home development. That's what it's listed under here. It's mobile home development, which would be a I think a part that's actually on the first page.

I think you saved that one. Yeah, I think we were going to come back at it. The park is at least if it's in a park, it's allowed like Yeah. Oh, the addition of Yeah. Are we allowed to add mobile home parks or are they cut off? Don't know the answer to that.

We'd have to look that up. I don't know the answer if there's more can be added or not. mobile home parks. I know that if a mobile home is added to the city, it has to be in a park. Can't be added to just single family lot. All right, we'll just come back to it. So, I think we could do recreational vehicle sales then. We've got both RV park and RV sales. So, RV park, where do we want that? Um, it's probably have to go C3 on. Say again from that traffic perspective,

you're going to want them to be able to easily come in and easily get out. Yeah. If the city sold reservoir, that'd be a good place for an RV park. How where would that fall or how would that fall into the It would just depend on who whoever purchases it, what they would reszone it as and what they would would plan to do with it. It's not just city that Oh, it's not. No, it's not. What did you just say? The reservoir is not in city limit. That's what I thought.

Yeah, but it's owned by the city of Odessa. It's just not annexed. organic sausage. Sell to who? For fries.

How deep is your problem? I was I'm trying to keep our anyway. So [Music] bring it up. Very source. Okay. Do we How much longer do we want to go? We We spend a little bit more time on start. Yeah. Exactly.

I tried I've been trying to do an hour and a half. So before I was going till 8:30 we have that's what I'm asking. Whatever you guys want. Should we just finish these two and then call it good? Yep. Let's do that. Okay. So RV park I have written down in C3. permitted in C3 C3 where else

I was interested that way in case like a farmer's like I want to buy land but see then I think states they would have to resone at that point uh well I mean if property comes in as originally so they would really need to reszone to something else instead of just keeping it as at A is another one where you really got to protect it and keep it. So like today, if you go to the very last page, a is the most restrictive. It only allows you to do a

I mean I guess then like what are we considering? Is there a number of how many would need to be res like part three there and that's good, but you get the fourth and we would need to res. No, it should be resoneed. I mean, if you're letting people stay on your property. Yeah. If the because that's when you got to come in with all the other condition just all kinds of

Okay. So, um RV park not permitted from up to C2 C3 it's permitted I1 I2 for an RV park. not too myitionally based off what's around it. Yeah. Same thing. You're not going to want people staying sleeping next to whatever their manufacturing. Yeah.

Okay. So, recreational vehicle sales to me, going back to that traffic thing, you definitely would want C3 highway. Um, it's about the same thing that we did. Yeah, I think the same. Okay. All right. Um, so I added shooting range and archery. So, where would we put that? You wrote that on the next one. Well, I just wrote it in on my note underneath recreational vehicle sales and services. Oh, because you're next. Yeah, it's on the next page, but that's shooting range out. Outdoor. So, we may just need to like cross out the outdoor and just put shooting archery range.

Well, and does shooting is shooting and archery allowed under recreation and entertainment indoor because that's less of a nuisance if it's in an enclosed building. Now, say we had like a Frontier Justice come in or what is that? Outdoor ministries. They have in Grove, they have an indoor archery range. Do they? Yeah. Archery for indoor archery. Indoor archery for me there's not I don't see the nuisance associated because there's not a sound issue. indoor firearm

jump over here outside that building. I think Oh, shooting and archery um could go under the indoor but then outdoor shooting range and outdoor archery. Should those be categorized different than outdoor recreational sports? I think you need to be I mean I think you should separate archery range from tribute reach. Okay.

Because I mean there is a slight health component used to work in bassro years ago. There is a anyone that's working near the shoot indoor shooting range there's a lead concern. Um, so I mean there is a slight help like we wouldn't want to build indoor shooting range checks or something. Yeah, it just needs to be well that I mean there's safety anyway.

So like you just got to that's the only thing I'm about is like maybe like when you need the space for it certain elements. So, while we're on the topic, I'm going to jump down to the next page and let's go ahead and boss um feeding ranges outdoor while we're on it. What do we think? Where could a outdoor shooting range go? I would still think that would have to be conditional because you can't shoot into the city of Odessa.

True. Where where we put it?

I wouldn't think this would fall into it. It's an actual shooting range and it's indoors and regulated. That's different than shooting your gun off outside. Yeah. And I don't think that we we wouldn't be prepared or have anything to be able to further regulate what they're doing with their business. Like today, we don't have anything that would say you have to have, you know, bulletproof walls 20 in thick or whatever it is. We I don't even we're not qualified in all reality to be able to but during the plan review process

that I think building code probably regulates that. I don't know the building code like the back of my hand, but I would assume that there's somewhere within the 2012 building code that would say just like fireproof walls and things like that like my assumption would be that during plan review, during building plan review, those things would be like accounted for to ensure the safety of the public, which is the purpose of building code. I mean, they're going to tell you just like with the other ones, you know, you can't shoot a 50 BMG out there, right?

Not rated for that. Yeah. Okay. Um, I say we're going range. Yep. I think it's probably E3 I1 even into I2 because I mean hey if you're after shooting nobody's going to care you're next to whatever agree they have a big issue about a shooting range recently with the with the police department and it would have been an industrial is that our next element wasn't not leaps out. Closer than most pelo closer than some people were. Yeah.

Um it would but it would wasn't in city limits. So it would have been city limit stopped. Don't go that far. Yeah, that's right. It wasn't but it's out by industrial main because it was or golden belt. It was south of Golden Bell. Yeah, that's right. like about a mile out of town probably anyway nor there it's not happened. Yeah. Okay. I'm just trying to look and see if there was any state of Missouri regulation specifically around indoor shooting range GBT failed me.

Gosh darn it. Okay. Well, I think we uh we'll go to that next section next time. I'm going to try to clean it up a little bit more for you. I spent a a lot more time on this current one than anticipated. So, I'll get this cleaned up and get it looking more like this so we can have a compare contrast of what we're building versus what we have. We're just keep chugging along. Is there something that you know the city's going to grow you know whenever they annex is there anything that says yep you should have this percentage for new business and this need that kind of stuff.

Yeah. So that taps into our comprehensive plan and I don't know if that would have been like with his binder and stuff would that have been in there comprehensive plan. Yeah the 2002. So our last comprehensive plan that we have will have it's from 2002. Yeah.

So it's dated but the purpose of the comprehensive plan is to take those things into consideration. Look at how much of this do we have? How much of this do we have? Where are we wanting to go? What are our goals? And then there's also a future land use map. So we still have that. It's still active. and it takes like the perimeter of our city limits and puts like like for example the um north outer row that's all not in the most that's not in city limits today um if it got annex in it would annex in as a and the applicant would need to reszone but our future land use map shows that all as C3 highway so the future land use map it it solidifies instead of us guessing or be like oh okay as they come in as things are annexed in. Well, you know, what should we do? Do we actually want residential on this northwest corner of town or do we want industrial commercial? It solidifies that. So, we have it. It's just from 2002. So, our next goal or goal in the next, it's actually in the strategic plan to update the comprehensive plan. So, from 2025 to 2030, it's not a quick and easy process. It's a It's a deep dive and a very heavy load on you guys, but it's fun. It's a lot of fun. It will be fun. We'll make it fun.

Pizza party. [Music] So, it's fun.

But that's exactly what you're saying is is the purpose of a comprehensive plan. And ours is old and outdated. It still exists. It's still active. But in reality, we should have an updated one. And then every everything that comes across your agenda, you're checking with the the that it conforms with our comprehensive plan because you do all this work to create the plan to help us think through the next 20 years. So then everything that comes across your your board then should align with that comprehensive plan. So we'll get there. We've got a lot of things to do. We'll get them. One more thing.

What's one thing? And then then I'm gonna go home. Oh, okay. In the paper a couple weeks ago, they're talking about the county zoning and the and I don't have any clue what I'm talking about, but Bitcoin mining that there's two locations in the county and one of them's the Does that we need to have I mean, yeah, I think that's valid. Yeah, I think we should. I think we should. We It's not every It's not every day that we get to go through our zoning and look at our zoning. So, there's Would you say not that it's a blight of America?

These types of things come across. I mean, in five years, 10 years, it's not going to be Bitcoin mining and it's going to be something else. We don't even know what it's called yet. So, they they come at they come up and we address them as they come up. But if something's coming up while we're looking at zoning, we should probably add it. I think we should put on there. Yeah. I mean, Oracle, like the giant Oracle sites that house all the data centers. Yeah. Data centers. Yeah.

A lot of space. Since we voted this down and they couldn't go to R2, R3 at that time, then can he can he decide to do something else to try to change it? I mean, I don't know. I guess the only thing you can do is go residential. Now, he goes to the alderman without our recommendation and they have the ability. Okay, that's true. That's the answer. And then if then if that were to not pass, then he would need to reconsider a different plan that involves single family. All right. Very good. Thank you.

So if the board of Bman were to go against our vision and give him the green light to do that, it still has to come back to us once everything is laid out for a preliminary plan. Yes. in the same thing and then we could sit there and be like that's where you guys could do some um add some conditional things like you know make sure there's a fence or whatever maybe one so we went through that discuss with Marty just what you just said about they come back with one plan and we got to approve that then they got actually came up with it what they're going to do and how they're going to do it and all this now we get it two or three times.

Yeah. Yeah. So they haven't done any platting or anything. It's all just one big parcel right now because there was no water hookups or anything. No, they'd have to put in all the all the infrastructure, all that would have to be dedicated over to the city once they're done. That'd be a lot of tearing up a lot of people's property getting that through there because that means all that would have to go right there between those houses. And it did go in the easements. Yeah. Yeah. But I mean, they still have to go right. Yeah. And it is it is only f it's Yeah. It's not very wide. Like

when you go if you drive by that property like we're talking like there is literally a sign there. It's one of those like signs with the arrows going this way so you don't drive forward and like it basically takes up that whole area. It's tiny. One of my thoughts for it to matter at this point because they're not there. But was getting the fire trucks. Yeah. I think we should maybe end the meeting and then Yep. We can go home. I Oh, make a motion. Oh, yeah. Uh, so our next meeting October 16th, remember we're starting at six o'clock now.

I thought it was always going to be the 33rd of the month. Six o'clock and it's always going to be the third Thursday of the month. Is that right? That's correct. I thought that's what that said. I read. Yes. Yeah, it is the third Thursday of the month. Right. Yes. You said the date and this wonder of the month, not necessarily a date. Got no this is interesting. Okay. Uh any other business? If nobody motion to end the meeting at 7:55. Hey, I like it. Got a second. Wait a second. All right. Cool. All in favor? I All right. Let's go on.