Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Do it. Wow, that's exciting. This is exciting day today. Chairman Steve Dyer here. Kyle Cook here. Mark Zenthuski here. Tom McConnell here. Ryan He here. All right, roll call's done. Public comments on items that are not on the agenda. Did you get any slips today, Miss Teresa? I did not. I'm not seeing any hands or anybody stand up. Um, let's go ahead and skip to number five or Yeah, I don't have any new materials for you for the table application. So, for the wall mural. So, we'll just keep it tabled. Do we got to make a motion for that? No.

Okay. Section 1159, light manufacturing. Uh this draft was just drawn by council and sent back to us. So do we have Yeah. If the city has any recommendations or anything based on what council stated.

So I'll try to give some background and uh Kyle, I think you were in attendance, so if I miss anything, please uh please fill in the blanks. But um the application to to do the text amendment went to council. Uh they had a couple readings and we had some public participation from the property owners which they are here with us tonight. Um and they were articulating concerns and conveying those concerns to council. uh council at that time uh said that they would uh re-evaluate it uh and re-evaluating uh was moving it back to the planning and zoning commission to again hear uh the concerns of the property owners rel related to the areas that are not being um I guess opened up for the increased permitted uses um within the Commerce Boulevard drive area. And um so with that said um

so if I can clarify so like was that instructed from city council? What's that that what you just said all those things like so basically they want us to review to just what were the instructions from city council?

So they didn't really give necessarily like instruction of you should do this, change this, change that. It was merely a hey uh let's let's dive back into it. Let's allow for the property owners to articulate some of those concerns and then see if there is a way forward um and modifying it, keeping it the same. Is it is it possible to alleviate all the concerns associated with it? Really, they didn't articulate specifically. I think they were just saying, "Hey, this isn't our realm. Let's go back to zoning." and uh that's probably a better platform to have the the the dialogue between the property owners and and the city and see if you can flesh out some of the the nuances that may or may not exist. And so Trevor um was at the last meeting. Um the applicant, not applicants, I'm sorry, the property owners were in attendance at the last meeting. uh ran a little long, but we were able to get you guys in for public comment and they were able to convey some of those concerns to Trevor so that he could produce the memo that uh that you guys have before you tonight. And just for some clarification, Trevor looks a lot different tonight. He does.

This is Chris. Um some of you may or may not have met Chris before. Uh Chris is with NKSK and uh Trevor uh has found uh moved on to uh to new opportunities elsewhere. So, his last day was last Friday. He did do the report and the evaluation uh for us, but Chris will be filling in in hisstead and also Yonko uh maybe filling in uh as well uh while while we kind of figure things out. Excited to have you, Chris. Thanks for joining us. We're going to miss Trevor, though. He was a he was a good dude. Yeah. No, thanks, Sean. That's that's pretty much

the summary of it. I mean, there was not real clear direction from council, but what we heard from the property owners was like Sean said, the opening it up more to the uses that we were putting in here. And to those that weren't a part of the original conversation when we looked at this, the whole point of light manufacturing obviously is to bring in more income to the city, you know, and when we looked at the old um code, it had quite a few outdated purposes and didn't really have a lot of offering to people that would want to do business here. And putting that in there just removes red tape. You know, if we allow it already, then they don't have to worry about it. and they're like, "Yes, we want to be there cuz it's already allowed." Um, the one thing that we did see that we missed was opening it up for Endeavor Court to be included in there because that's already in light manufacturing. Uh, but right now the way it's worded is it restricts the current businesses from growing in that area if they would like to expand. And then also sportsman club should be added so that the whole light manufacturing can be an opportunity for developers and manufacturing to come in. So, council sent it back for us to discuss adding Endeavor Court and Sportsman Club to the code so that light manufacturing can be opened up to more possibilities.

Does that mean we just reszone it from whatever it is today? No, it's currently zoned that way. It's just we just add those two roads to the code. It It's just not mentioned. Am I wording that right, Sean? Yeah, I think the the request from the applicants is to add sportsman club and endeavor court um to these changes

to these changes because the way the code is the way the proposed amendment is written right now. Um the increased permitted uses really only applies to Commerce Boulevard I believe 62. Um so they have been given additional entitlements um for commerce and 62 and the applicant or not applicant sorry I keep referring to you as the applicant the property owner um would like to see those uses expanded to to endeavor as well as sportsman's club. Um and I think Kyle articulated it well. it uh removes any of the red tape that could be associated with uh with the uh permitted uses within that within that district. So,

and so it doesn't change the code. It just allows the usage in the in those streets that are already there. Yes. Can we pull up a map while we Everybody's asking. Is there a reason that Endeavor Court needs to be included because access to commerce? Yeah. It was written in what we were what we were sent said sportsman club, but I don't see it now on this copy. Anyone can find it. I don't think we did have sportsman club in the original. We didn't No, we did not have sportsman club on there before.

And Endeavor Court needs to be added so that the usages around it can be expanded too if they want to. says the following may be developed two parcels acres and larger than have front edge level on US62 Commerce Boulevard and Greenscape but I don't see that on what we got today. So do we have is what we were sent different than what we got today and should I just ignore what we were sent is what I'm asking. I don't know. I'm sorry. It's on Ryan. It's on uh four of nine. The first red line. Uh the first red line. So it Yeah, we I think we need to pull it up cuz I don't have a lot of questions.

I'm going to pull up the map. So I have this I have the same comment that that Kyle had also. So Endeavor Court is at the end of Commerce. So you can only turn left if you're coming off Commerce, but it's kind of a dead end street. Um but as far as the map is concerned, at least the map that I look at, there's other streets is that are light manufacturing also. They're labeled as that. Track Street, I think for street, those areas. Um, so if we're going to list streets in there, then I think that the different streets are available right now. But then my question also becomes what happens when if there's expansions in different roads.

Yeah, I was thinking streets when we don't have streets anywhere else. That was what threw me off. So that's so that's that's what my second question becomes is do we have to list streets? So, we're listing the streets, I think, is the residential area that butts up against track. And when we were originally looking at it, we were also trying to limit the types of manufacturing that was going to come in and butt directly up against our downtown residential. So, if we back up further, Sean, if you're available, the the district is very old, right? Remembering correctly? Started the light manufacturing district and it it intermixes with residential with me, but it was on the south end of that district. Took a while to get Yeah. Let me pull it up here.

We're going to pull up a map and it's going to clarify this. But it was labeled that way years ago. Can't change it. You don't want that. Yeah. So to answer your question, Steve, some of the light manufacturing has has been in existence there for quite some time. Is that I'm not sorry. We'll get that was the reason. Yeah, he went to that. No, because it was labeled that years ago and now residential moved in. It's kind of like we're only applying it to streets now instead of the whole district because we can we have residential homes. We don't we don't think those neighbors want business right next.

But in this light manufacturing district up to the northern part this map cleared up. That's why we're labeling streets is because there's no somebody could buy residents that will be affected like the ones on. So, so if we label the streets, it keeps those residential areas from being affected. Okay. So, get your map. Um, Brian, did you did you catch that? The whole point of why we started labeling streets was to protect the area like in Track Street and that side of Okay. Sorry. I say cuz you Yeah, we we were all three a part of the original discussion on that. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. They they they wanted to restrict the the increased use um along Track Street. I think Ford Street has some there. Um, so that was the thought process there. The the restriction on the Commerce Boulevard and the 62 side and not bringing in Sportsman's Club as well as Endeavor Court um really related around the the uh potential for increased traffic. Um, as the 3762 intersection is uh is problematic as it is. I think there was a concern that uh that increasing different types of employment, not knowing what type of employment could exist, uh that could have unintended consequences and uh and potentially potentially um create a larger problem at that particular intersection. So, um, that was, I think, the the reasoning for allowing Commerce and Endeavor, cuz obviously they're not surrounded by residential, allowing those those kind of build out, if you will, um, areas to have some additional um, entitlements, but then I believe Trevor uh, and articulated that in his report, Sportsman's Club and Endeavor Corp uh, would unlock a large amount of land uh, with additional entitlements and uh, those additional entitlements could have different types of manufacturing uh or job employment centers that would potentially again potentially produce um either employment traffic or um logistical traffic related to whatever industry that they're a part of, whether that be truck traffic or van traffic or box truck traffic, who knows?

And to that point, like what Trevor also said, so would residential. Yep. So now we're basically deciding the risk of opening it up the area the the traffic risk basically is that I think that is that the assump is that Trevor's report that is what he articulated and I'll let Chris weigh in on on that. I don't want to put words in Trevor's mouth, but that was I'm trying to find the specific part of the report, but if Chris wants to add anything or inform us of what his thoughts may be, certainly able to do so.

I just I think the proximity of um support from club to the exit probably is the biggest concern from a traffic point of view and just um what needs to happen there. Traffic's going to grow. Um, but as development happens, what the impact is going to be to the intersection there? Um, if traffic gets on Sportsman Club, then it's probably um it will be across from residential. Uh, but it'll have that intersection if traffic goes down. Sorry, Chris. Didn't you need me to pull it up? Robert's Road

Commerce. they have um we're adding more traffic on commerce. I I think that's the question. You all are here on a regular basis and kind of know what the existing situation is. Uh it's just whether and to what extent that's a concern. Can I ask questions? Certainly. All right. So, I'm going to point out So, we're talking about like this whole land mass here, but we're I'm assuming you all own this, right? Okay. What's the problem? I don't understand. I'm missing the point of what I'm like I understand increased traffic coming through. But if you own this is it not LLM already? No, it's resial.

It's residential. No, it's zoned like manufacturing, but the the potential changes that Trevor and the board worked through the last time would allow for additional entitlements within that same zoning district to occur here. It would not allow for those same entitlements to occur. Oh, so we just missed two roads. That's it. We missed. But why would if it's And the only reason the only reason we added roads, Brian, was because we were trying to limit the the growth and light manufacturing on the other side that is directly south. South. Yeah. That's directly in behind residential that's already there

because the question is is that is this park you said that's LM? Yes. For some reason today this Ford Street which is but someone could still come in and Yes. but not to the uses that we're adding to it. So, we're we're increasing the amount of uses that's in the code today. Okay? And we did that to allow for more opportunities to come in. And in doing so, we also didn't want to impact the other area of light manufacturing. So, we listed roads and there that was the easiest way to do it instead of splitting it into two different before listed roads. Yeah. Our original proposal was listed. Oh, the previous one that we approve.

Yeah. But this we're only thing we're doing today. Only thing I was going to make a motion of was to say add Endeavor Court and add Sportsman Club. Okay.

The problem and I guess and I'll vote obviously how you will. If we add Endeavor Court, there's one call out in here for paint and powder coating manufacturing. That has to be uh no closer than 100 ft from any property line of budding and adjacent residential use. Just paint. Right. So they could technically put something else on that property that's south of Endeavor Court that also has a lot of water, standing water sitting on it, which will then impact all of Conquer Crossing probably heavily because that plot goes all the way along the back side of Conquer Crossing whereas everything else currently has access there. I guess it is. I think Atrium owns all the way back there. They would be the only ones who would potentially be affected in the future for that unless we said if they had access on because we call out and not or frontage because there's no frontage for Commerce Boulevard. Their parking lot connects to it. So unless they expanded that particular building and considered it all one building all the way back. That's just my concern with Endeavor.

All right. So I'm a little confused. Can you summarize that? So you're concerned that if Endeavor is included that the water's going to be So it's kind of a two-part piece because it's whoever owns I want to say it's Atrium that owns all of those. I think they do. It's it's kind of a two-parter. If we technically include Endeavor, they can put a building right up against everybody's houses right there where technically both of those pe bodies of water are sitting in the picture or on the map, right? So all of those people in conquered will have a building sitting in their backyard if we don't then limit everything to have 100 ft from an an abuing residential property because we only call it out in paint powder coating manufacturing.

That's a good point. It's not a bad point. What about um installing like hills and mountains and stuff? Well, that then you're dealing with the water. Yeah, that that's all going to be okay. But but I noticed some stuff like that's not in the code either. We would just say 15 ft unless it's blah blah blah blah. Had a bunch of questions on that too. But I thought I thought there was code that there has to be separation there. You can put mounds, you can put plants, you can use those as as borders. Separation. you can, but it's not called out specifically from what I was reading. Um, and it may it may not be in this specific code, but I know that there's something else that I've read

I think I I think I read that called out that you have to be able to use that.

So, how close can you build a building? Like there's always rear setbacks no less than 25 ft. So you're referring to like this section here I'm assuming because these are the houses here. So they could go all the way over to the property line basically 20 I mean this is rear setbacks 25 ft to your point rear side. We could add a part of that then that also protects that side and that side only when it comes to the it's almost like we have to put a well we don't have to we're doing it for the powder. We're doing it for the paint and powder. So if you wanted to add a stipulation and we're already doing it for something like that, you can do it for that side of the court too.

But here's what I was on that exact thing. It says a rear setback shall not be required of structures whose rear walls fireproofing contains windows, no windows, no doors or openings. So that to me is a really big problem then for them cuz then it's all the way on their property. Yeah. So in section I don't know how to read this 11594 subsection 4 it says a rear setback shall not be required on structures whose rear wall is fireproof and contains no windows doors or openings except that of a real set setback of 40 ft is required in such a little so that's actually that any residential lot so it's 40t 40 ft okay so then it's not 25 ft anymore

but the But there's but there doesn't have to be any natural boundaries. It's just 40 ft. Correct. So then how wide even is that plot? I have no Can you tell on there how wide that plot is? Where I'm uh the Endeavor South of Endeavor Court. It's probably if if the road is 40 ft. I would You're talking right here to here? What's the width between this here and this here? Yep. Yeah. I'll get you a measurement. Like Yeah. That there and that there. Yeah. If I if I were to guess, that's 100 yards. No, here to here. From the Yeah. From the court to the back of their property. Yeah. 364 ft.

Here's this piece. They could. Yeah. I mean, they could technically have building consolidated between the public. They could put a building with 50 ft. A minimum of 25. I mean, where else are you going to put the water that's there? I mean, that's in there. I don't know if that's even worth That's what I was talking. Is that a natural pond? Do we protect natural ponds at all? Answer Brian's question. Yeah, this through the state through the state. Like there's water requirements they have to for every piece that they take up, they have to replace. Does that also creep that goes through there too? Yeah, it looks like it. So I don't think there going to be a whole lot of building.

Brian, to your call out on the uh aesthetics. So page seven of nine under DOIC requirements in the light manufacturing zoning district landscaping may be consolidated between the building and public right ofway which may not be between the building and a house that you're referring to but yeah it's abuing to a non light manufacturing zone property shall provide a minimum 25 ft landscape buffer that includes canopy trees and understory vegetation will create a visual screen a minimum of six. So that applies here then. Okay. So that it's a building 40 ft and then 25 ft worth of landscaping or mounding. Okay. So you got that distance. Yeah. Okay.

Thank you. Yeah. Good call out, Tom. And I guess it's just water displacement at that point. So then what about my percentage? Should we talk about that? No, I think that's that is something we have to bring up too because it's one of the subsections that's in there. Uh I hate to do another call out there. Sorry.

But the um ancillary use. So page five of nine number 13. Retail wholesale of products manufactured on site as ancillary use to the primary manufacturing use. I know we put that in there, but I don't think there's any way to enforce it for the city. I've seen other cities looking up other codes. They do square footage like 15% of the square footage of the building can only be dedicated to retail to prevent having shopping. Yeah. What's that? What page are you on? I'm sorry. Page five of nine. Question. Yeah. Number 13.

There's no way to enforce the the secondary use to ancillary. I had to look that word up. So they would need to submit uh in their application um anytime um someone wants to do a permit for either a um zoning permit. Oh, let me back up. So there is u conformity um force

compliance. So they would need to submit for for their particular industry and in that they would have to identify sections uh of the use of the building of the building. So you you would be able to catch it at that level. Now if they changed it unbeknownst to us and started to increase something along those lines that would certainly be uh harder to regulate but on the onset whenever they first submit an application uh it could be tracked and identified as far as ancillary versus do you see this being an issue for the city and for you or for the primary and the ancillary? No. No.

Um it's it's pretty customary. So, okay. Whenever they submit, it's usually pretty easy to regulate. Now, if they start to switch that, um that's obviously harder to know that something's been done in the background, but usually with manufacturing companies, they're they're pretty locked in whenever they submit a plan. Um generally so I'm catching up but just so background I mean lots of manufacturers want to have some kind of display area sales area right so it's okay to sell some certain things but what you don't want to have in industrial area is have it turn into a retail job that's in other places so this is saying the retail component of any kind of use here needs to be smaller than the the main usage

yeah and what I'm saying is this wording is good enough that will qualify and we enforce it like we don't need to set a square footage or I mean you you can you can say x% of the I get Yeah, I know we can't like but this is standard. Oh yeah, the board's going to the one that worded it so I would trust Yeah. Okay. It's pretty typical. Okay. I didn't know call out. Yeah. Yeah. Well, does it have enough teeth to be enforceable?

Yeah. Chris, one of the things that you just said about being a small sale area, craft brewery, craft distillery may have a tasting area. So, if they're going to open up to small brewery, but they're going to have that and have people come in and have drinks on site. Is that what you're is would that be considering as a small sale area that you're referring to?

Yes. Yes. This is all great discussion. The the answer is yes. I think you want to limit that tasting area to I mean you can say less than half or less than 40 or less than 30. The issue is I mean why you're it's good you're doing this um you know some of the uses are popping up and becoming very popular and getting a lot of people to to come and you know that could be a great thing uh for a community. um but they bring traffic uh different peaks and potentially different volumes. So if you had a brewery and then you end up with you know 60,000 square ft of tasting area for big events um you need a pretty big parking lot and suddenly you're talking about cars coming and going at a pretty big at a retail level kind of shopping center. So those are the kind of considerations. Maybe that's all right. Uh but you need to be thinking about what that impact would be.

Now they would have to apply for other I mean they would have to have a license to sell the alcohol there too, right? Liquor license. Yeah, you'd have to have a liquor license. So we would regulate that. 25,000 was it? We call it on here that facility should be 25,000 ft or less total including tasting areas and any outdoor area designated. So realistically you're not going to have a very big area no matter what. I mean, your brewing process takes up a good portion of 25,000 square feet. It's good. All right. Thank you. Now, on to the sports book club endeavor for um like to make a motion to add. Do I need to make a motion for that or question? Yeah, I don't think I'm done yet.

Oh, you got to go. No, go ahead. No, you go. You'll probably answer that question. No, I I just one of the things I think about like this is is there an intent to have drives to individual businesses happen on Sportsman Club or is intent to get a road off of sportsman club that then has individual business you know uses off of it because I think that's important distinction if if it was one big user one drive fine if it's a number of smaller users do you want a bunch of individual curb cuts on sportsman or do you want those going to decide that road has one access point?

Yeah. And so that's what I'm think one of the calls was like I saw the curb cuts and it said no curb cuts shall be 120 ft except blah blah blah. Um no curb cut access drive 35. The fewer curb cuts the better. So yeah, that's that's exactly what I was wondering because 120 ft is not a very far space. And if you've ever been in Newark and driven down 21st Street, that was a disaster. So, so you would recommend then if we did something like that, you would limit the amount of curb cuts on if we added sportsman club. We have it on there on page seven of nine. But is that is 120? I don't know. I don't I I personally don't care, but that's my opinion. Yeah, I do. I

No, it's it's a I like one curb cut and then you have an access right behind it. I Yeah, you could do more curve cuts you have. What's what's it say on seven out of nine or what you say? There's a minimum distance between curb cuts of 120 ft except that each lot is permitted permitted a minimum of one curb cut. No curb cut or access drive shall be more than 35 ft in width not including necessary turning radi to accommodate truck movements. If you say one curve cut on sportsman club for this this set of uses, then you're saying they're going to have to be some coordination on how they access.

Is 35 ft like a standard two-lane or is there I don't I don't know I don't know what the relation with roads 35 ft would be. Yeah, it depends on the trucks using it. I'd have to look. I mean 35 is a decent size but they do come bigger. The issue here is the town sportsman club and what type of road sportsman club it is. It's not big. We've done that. It's not a right. So you probably do 35. You probably do brought it up right. Yeah. Sportsman club own sportsman club as a city. Is that part of our It's not applicant. So we didn't have to anybody. So do we even have the right to answer put that sportsman club in our writing? Okay. Because that's what we were told to do. That is what we're told to do.

Um can I ask the the property owners off sportsman's club? I know you guys are here. You spoke last meeting in January. What the thought what your thoughts were? Yeah. Or remind me cuz I was look I was trying to Well, that we were tasked to talk to the public. So the public would like to come say their names and speak into the microphone.

I can help shed some light on that. So I'm not a property owner. I'm my name is Justin Fox. I represent Rodney Johnson. uh we have been watching this process from from afar now for several years. So uh we you know one I think that you guys have identified exactly what our concerns are which is we're very appreciative to see is that this expanded this expansion of the uses is certainly something that we would like to see but the exclusion of sportsman's club road effectively exclude us from that. So, I I don't know if I can, you know, answer those questions or I I can try to answer your questions that you might have, but our intention or our hope is that this text as drafted is used to apply to those Sportsman's Club Road properties. Certainly.

So, so you are wanting Sportsman's Club included or you are not wanting Sportsman's Club included? We are wanting it included. Included. Okay. Absolutely. So, in in the section where it it discusses these additional uses applying to prop, you know, property that has frontage on and access to 62 Commerce Boulevard, we would certainly want to see Sportsman Club Road included in that list.

And so, I think that's what Kyle mentioned. I was also thinking the same thing of if you're going to if you're going to list roads in here, let's list the roads. If we don't want to concern the roads, we should take the roads out because light manufacturing already has certain roads already included. So if we're including them, then let's include all the roads that we need to, including Endeavor, whichever other roads. But yeah, and and I think there was some intention from the historical conversations to exclude certain light manufacturing property. We uh I mean if I if I could have you know one request or one revision it would be very simply to include sportsman club and to to me endeavor seemed as if it should be on that. That's that's not really why we're we're here. We're not the applicant but we're here to engage sportsman's club being included on that list is absolutely our hope and our desire from you guys.

Does that also piggyback off of future plans for that property? I mean what's the current use now for that? So the current use is light manufacturing and it's been light manufacturing since 2014. I mean like the actual use because there's not there's no manufacturing buildings on it currently. Correct. No, it's farmland. Farmland. So currently it's being farmed on. That's right. Okay. So then to be included in there would be because you have plans to sell it off at some point.

Abs. I mean to be included in there it it creates a broaden opportunity for development potential on that property. Yes. What's stopping today? Just be Why if sportsman's cup's not listed? What is it stopping? These new these new these new conditions that we're adding. But can't they come to us and we would approve something anyways? Right. But it removes the red tape from people that do want to come in here. That was the whole point of opening it up because if you add the condition already in there, then they don't have to come and talk to us. and it takes away it keeps staff they're not having to be bugged by it and stuff like that too. Okay. Um

and the the light manufacturing text as drafted is is really limiting and difficult to work with. So as as people review that text it's you know it's it's something that we have thought needed updated and and we've we've you know been engaged with the city and that's what Justin Chris have been doing then for us right because you they're the ones that wrote this basically right. Okay. Yeah. And so this is instead of just there's now a lot more options. Yeah, you I don't know if you saw the original, did you? Yeah. Question. Why did we take out baked goods and candy? Why is that? I don't remember why, but we we decided we talked about it for I don't remember either way. You guys talked about it. I'll try.

Well, with that note, now if we expand that area, we're going to have Can the road handle it? Can sportsman club intersection, what's going to happen to that? the people who live there and the homes down there. Is that is that does taking on that risk benefit our community more than disrupting the streets? What's the plan with 37 362? What's happening there? There's like 1,500 plants like there is no plan. There is no plan. We have those roads today. we have to pay for that in the future expansion of 3762 or so we being the city kind of a sidebar there was a presentation do we have any more questions for no I'm sorry thank you

thank you for clarifying I'll dive into that delicately um there was a presentation provided about a month ago on some improvements that will be made in 37 and 62

related to some radius some additional turn lanes um to increase the traffic flow in that particular area, but there's not going to be like additional lanes being added. Um, right now there's been no outer belt or bypass identified. That's part of the study and the scope that they're doing at a very very high level. Um, so uh what you see there now uh will probably function better with the improvements that uh American Structure Point and the T uh have put forth. But um yeah, certainly something to consider. Okay. And so as then my next question is I think this is what Steve's leaning into then talking

if they were to if some you guys would if you pass on the property in 20 30 40 years as Brian you've always told me what's that going to look like right um what's our traffic going to look like and a traffic study has to be done but who does the traffic study we don't pay for it the the business it's called I didn't hear anything over 20,000 square feet and it calls out this but the business owner has to do it so it's they they have to pay someone to do it not us right so it's in their benefit to find someone who resides them. But then also, do we not recommend who they can use or do what do you mean like do it on spring break? Like No, no. I mean like I mean like I I I'm going to be facitious about this, right? But I own the land and I can say, "Hey, I know Bob who owns a traffic study company. Bob, make this look good for me."

So I think ideally the city would have an engineer on call and so for those kind of things, the city's engineer would review their engineering. Okay. Okay. Did not know how any of this worked. Checks and balances. Yeah, you can request a traffic study. Um, and I'll let Chris, you've been through this more often than I have. Uh, what what all is entailed, what restrictions you can place depending on the traffic studies outcomes. Let Chris

kind of the the key thing with traffic studies um is it's about the impact of the use. Uh, lots of times communities are like, well, the conditions were bad there already, so we need these improvements. And the reality is you can't burden a proposal to fix the background stuff, fix what they're creating. Um, and so that's really the thing. So often what you'll see traffic studies say are some kinds of, uh, traffic control improvements depending on some thresholds across um, access points, uh, things like a center turn lane on a two-lane road. You know, like, okay, you're going to be adding enough traffic here. We need to put third lane in for turns, front left turns on that road, that kind of stuff.

Okay. Then what I know that village council then said or village city council, so sorry. Uh in the in the letter to us, it said uh you know, compare it to what the long-term plan was. So, and make sure it aligns with that. Does something not align with the long-term plan of what we submitted previously? Where are you at? Sorry. I'm sorry. On the Hold on, man. What What letter are you referring? I missed that you guys to us, right? Uh, it aligned. This is This is from Find Kyle Cook. No, I say I didn't sign it. Oh, I thought it was from the commission. No, this is from Trevor. Oh, yeah. Okay. Yeah, that was from Trevor. Yeah, that was I say when you said city, it was like I don't remember a letter from the city. All right. I love this. Well,

it would be funny. We might correct him very quickly if I'm wrong here, but his the comprehensive plan was one that potentially called out his property for residential instead. I believe that is correct. I can't remember if it was both parcels or one parcel, but I believe you're right, Mark. And like we can't force someone to resone either. So us saying, "Hey, we want to do it. This is what we're thinking." They've got the ultimate say. So yeah, there's not really an impact there, but I'm just calling out cuz that's a different step. Okay, show this expand the properties. Okay, that's probably what Turbo was referring to.

Brilliant. Back to your curb cuts. Yeah, I love the idea of limiting curb cuts because I mean you got just all the people who live on that road and live down that road who come to town having 10 dangerous four different tractor trailers trying to pull in at the same time. What what is it what is typical in something like that? So just like you have commerce drive, that whole idea is you're getting one street with one access point and you're having the internal development go to that one street with one access point onto the public network onto the main network.

Do we do back to my previous question do we know how wide you don't know this probably how wide that intersection is there going onto 62 from commerce? The reason I'm asking that is sizewise the 35 ft that's listed in here. If we only only put a 35 foot cut on sportsman's club into whatever may be there company already has it. Is that big enough for the because right now going on to commerce I've been on and on and off of there. There's a there's extra turn lane to get onto there if you're coming out of out of the out of the city center. both of them and then to come out of it the limit

it's it's extra wide so allowing large trucks be able to come in and out of there maybe the 35 ft isn't yeah you could you could say as approved by the city or something like that so it could be reviewed okay I mean ideally we take Endeavor court and loop it around and connect to sportsman's club so then it's one road all the way through there and there's only one curb cut say that right that's going to be up to the developer I mean you ask for that. I wouldn't. Yeah, I would say here you can say you want to see one on sportsman club and I think ideally then say staff relay is that our goal is to have a interconnected road network.

You certainly requested um splits uh as long as they meet the requirement of light manufacturing as far as lot splits goes. Um any lot split would have to abut a public rightway. So depending on how they wanted to to facilitate that, they could add additional roads in order to to gain some. But I think to Chris's point along sportsman's club, that whole front part, I mean, you could split those off into sections in accordance with your light manufacturing district and then have potential curb cuts. I don't know that the city would be able to to restrict that um because it's not identified and otherwise in our code. So,

and we're only considering the part that's within city limit. That's within city limits. Do we talk to Monroe about what they're doing now? Because I'm assuming you just looking at it, you guys own all the property even past the city, too. I do. We own the 80 acres past. And I actually have a house there that abund the u so I'm one of the neighbors. So Okay. I actually own the house that abund So if you could if you're going to talk, could you come up to the microphone, state your name and then Well, he asked a question. Yeah, I know. I know. I appreciate it. I know. I throwing you under the bus. We do appreciate you raising your hand. That was very school of you.

Very school. I try but I do own the 80 acres that are next to it and and the whole rationale was I actually I think initiated all of this. So over a year ago, probably about a year and a half ago, I think it was in December because what was happening was every time someone in the industrial park wanted to to do something like tech for example is building a new building there on sportsman club, right? So they had to come to the zoning, they had to come and get an amendment because they didn't meet the the requirements of zoning, right? So what we were trying to do is to clean it up because every time someone in the the old industrial park wanted to do something, you'd have to come to the to the city and and ask for uh permission to do it. So that's what we were trying to do. And you know, I'm a I'm I own industrial properties. I'm actually a manufacturer. So I have three factories and I own various industrial properties. So that's why I bought it for years ago. I was looking at actually putting facilities there. Right. So, back before Sean, you know, we had, you know, you know, we talked to the planning and and they were all for it because everybody wanted to bring industrial jobs to Johntown. So, you know, that was the intent was to try to clean it up. We personally, I don't have any intent to do anything. My family is going to build homes on that 80 acres that's next to it. So, you know, but we're trying to clean it up because we're trying to be consistent with everyone within the the district that we have,

I guess. So, that's all we're trying to do. To your I guess an educated guess in the stretch of land that we're talking about is one curb cut what you would typically see. I think you're probably looking at maybe two. Yeah. You know, is what you're probably cuz there's a lot of road frontage. I don't know how many All that property has tremendous road frontage. like

you know you you can ride by there and everything across there's a golf course there's all there's a housing development across from the property that we have there's all kinds of stuff because we own the 80 acres that's next to it right so it was just a one large farm at one time and then the farmer decided years ago that he would split it up and sell it for residential well what ended up happening was I bought all the lots because my kids want to live on sportsman club

but what we're trying to do, I think, from an industrial point of view, is just clean it up. We have no, they may be in a position than we are. You know, we're that second lot, right? So, nothing's going to happen to us for that second lot for I don't think for an extended period of time because you've got to go all the way to that second lot. And at one time, there's been all kinds of different plans. At one time, Rodney can tell you, they were talking about putting a road actually in between the the property line. I think was on his property line, but right between those that 60 acres that he has and the 67 acres I have, at one time they were talking about putting a road. So, so with different councils and different groups, they they had different proposals over the years, right? And we've lived through all of this because we've owned this property for many, many years, right? And you know,

we're just trying to get it cleaned up. So, that's all we're asking. So, we appreciate your time. Yeah. Appreciate it. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. So the concern is just traffic then at this point, right? Am I missing something? Yeah, I think so. Traffic and yeah, you you're going to have traffic either way. Whether you put residential there, you put residential there every night. Well, yeah, you're going to have a lot a lot of traffic then. And there's no comprehensive plan from our friends at the state of what they're doing. Clearly. Clearly. Um Okay. Is there any other comments from the public? How about in the back? No. Hearing? None. Okay.

Any other discussion points from the board? Questions? What happens next? We just send this to council and they get they have to then approve it. We're going to have to make a motion on this. We make a motion to recommend to council that they approve the addition of I don't think I couldn't remember if I was a part of the sending it back. I don't think I was. So, now we're still have two two roads that we're talking about, right? We have Endeavor and Sportsman Club. Yeah. Did we want to double check that those are the only two that we want to include? Those are the only two that are there right now. We can be open to inclusion if other roads come in that area. But are you talking about flipping over to the southside?

No, because it's different. It's on 62 as well anyways. So we we covered all of 62. I think that when we first talked about it, we had included everything that we thought was necessary. We just missed Endeavor and so I just wanted to triple check to ensure we can that way you know that those finicky people on council tech was Yeah. What's that? So that way those finicky people that are on council don't come and say you guys missed another alley. Yeah, there was one person. Maybe we need to have them back up here just to clear. So we sent them this to this to council before and it was decent except for the fact that we just missed a couple of roads. Is that what I'm understanding? Well, we didn't we didn't The applicants were there.

They asked us to revisit the community. Yeah. Based on what the community asked. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's what I'm saying. Yeah. I think that was the biggest piece though had those You guys did all this before I got here and I'm like that's a lot of questions. No, but it was good. It was good. Yeah. To go through it. Think we did it like how many months? We take out bakery. I'm still Why did we take out candy? We'll answer that. We'll answer that in a minute. There's confectionaries or something. Oh, there we go. Okay. All right. All right. All right. All right. So, now now we're at a without any of the comments, we're at a decision point. Does anybody have a motion? So, what's the motion though?

I'd like to make a motion to approve this to council with the addition of Endeavor Court and Sportsman Club. Is that worded correctly? I'm not sure. I just have a question. Maybe Chris can help. I have a Sean. So the the section that's restricting that is the restriction is 115902 curb cuts G call out. So following uses may be developed on parcels 2 acres or larger that have frontage on and access from US62 Commerce Boulevard or Greenscapes Court. Yes. just want to add the two make an amendment to section G

and the curve cuts. Yeah, we want to add to section G sportsman's club in Endeavor Court three because there's already a curb cut there on sportsman's club for tire. What where do we want to just remove the language? H4 not in section G cuz that's where this is that's where it's restricting it's where the streets there I don't think I want to remove the language right here

but then the curb cut piece we have to there's already a curb cut on tech tire I mean they already have one entrance and exit technically have two they have both of them they have they have the two curve cuts so you guys can do whatever you want you Cap traffic going in just there. Yeah, there we have two. We're good at our jobs. I need advice from Chris when you're done with that project. Yeah, I mean the curb cuts. Yeah, I'm with you. We need advice. This is Tech Tire is has a business office on Sportsman Club and there's two curb cuts already into their parking lot exist.

Yes. Right. Uh, and those curb cuts are pedestrian traffic like it's just it's normal vehicles. The trucks are coming down commerce, right? Yeah. So, I guess let me Yeah, it's probably limiting to some kind of total number of curb cuts on. So, you just make four if that's three or Yeah. Is that reasonable? But we we have the the 120 foot call out on here too. So, like that how many feet? It's not. But how many feet are is that? That's I guess my question. How many How many feet is that?

How many curb cuts do we have in that whole area? We have two properties that are in question basically, right? Let's call it what it is. There's two properties that are there. How long is it from end to end? And then that'll tell us how many curve cuts we're gonna be. But I think what he was talking about was two curb cuts for longer. But I think Tech actually has another curb cut cuz they're doing an addition. Yeah. I think the city actually approved another curb cut which is very close to their existing curb cuts which is not what you really want. I would I would recommend that that's not what you really want,

but that's what's been approved because again, there's you're just approving things on a case by case basis and no one's giving it a lot of thought. So, city Johnstown City Council has already approved that. That's correct. So, we can't do anything about that. So, we can decide on the for where they're building the addition. They had to go while this whole process has occurred, they wanted to do an expansion. So they had to approve uh you know go before council and go before everyone for permission for this expansion. And with that expansion I believe there's another curb cut there. At least that's what they're doing it for that dirt road. Yeah. Yeah. So

well I are you thinking that the curb cuts on the other side of 9711? No they where they're doing their expansion if you go by there. Um I don't know. Is that dirt road? It's dirt right now but I think that that's going to be a curb cut. They're using that as a curb cut currently. Do you see? I see what you're talking about. I just didn't know that that was going to become a permanent road. I don't know. See this here? I don't know. It looks like it's designed to be a permanent road. So, I don't know if there's anything to stop them from that because it looks like to me there's three. I Ryan, were you a part of any of that conversation? Not to call you out from the crowd. Sean, do you know of any of them as far as Oh, okay. I could check. It might

that must be I know when I saw the layout for what they were doing Adrian is tech I didn't see two different companies I didn't see that that was going to be a permanent road on the layout but it doesn't mean that they didn't change it yeah I would have to check that was working there is on the corner of commerce oh my batteryy's dead we never construction you've got I think it's construction work and not sounds like it's a construction entrance because I don't remember ever

per month. I need a I need a gavvel. I don't think council does curb cuts. We do

and that's why I was asking Chris Wait a second. council. Yes. All right. Chris has a comment to make.

Well, it is your view to restrict the number of curb cuts as part of a zoning. Um I think if you were, you know, this this is an old zoning. If you were doing it today, you probably would have restricted some of the curb cuts on 62. Um as traffic has gotten increased. I guess I would just think about what's kind of one of two ways. what's kind of the the number of curb cuts that make sense based on existing parcels and try to limit it. Um or if you want to say there's got to be some street connection. Um I mean you can you can we can think about some wording but I guess I can work on it for you just want some direction on what you're all thinking but but my advice would be to try to limit number of curb cuts. I mean, every individual property that exists today technically allowed access, but um so you're you're probably at that number, but things are getting subdivided or otherwise. Uh, so I think you want to see things either come under a subdivision process that that create something or limit the number of curb cuts to what you've got parcels you've got today just to keep stuff from continuing to

Could you say something like two additional curb cuts to the to the existing parcels? Like basically the existing parcels are grandfathered and you know just say two two additional curb cuts. We'd have to probably be specific because uh this is zoning. So you got you know Yeah, that's Should we have that rewritten then? It mean before we submit to council. Should we ask for that to be rewritten and we review this again? Because we're not comfortable with what it is. It sounds like would that question would that be two per existing property owner or two for the two period the collective area? Is it four or is it two? Two more. I follow you.

Well, in realistic like that doesn't mean anybody else does. Wouldn't one business need two? I'm used to that. Me, too. And in and out. Yeah, that's technically two. Correct. Yeah. It's a good point. So then you you're calling that we could have two businesses on Sportsman's Club if we're going to have four, right? Because they're going to have an in and out. So two two per existing parcel. But then if you go if we word it that way and you split the parcels into 30 parcels then now I've got 60 curve cuts

per existing parcel. So there's the two existing parcels. If each parcel is given two curb cuts that's restrictive but it also provides eress and egress for each parcel as they sit right now. That's not bad. That's only four over 2400 ft or something you measured, right? 2,800. Yeah. That would be fine wording if you want to limit the curb cuts. Yeah. But do we need to do that again not just for this road? Like do we need to do something holistically for the city now as we update our Well, right now we're just talking about Okay. Right where we are. All right. Is that something we're willing to decide today or do we need to wait until we get it rewritten? Yeah.

I mean, how can we make it that it's that specific for those two parcels? Do they have numbers of the bar? Like is it Well, you mean Yeah, we do. Zero Sportsman's Club. It should be that parcel or whatever. What happens if they change it? Then the parcel number is going to change. Yeah. Seems very specific, Chris. Yeah. Let me think on that. I think let me take a shot at something and send it back unless there's an urgent address. I don't I don't I don't think there's anything think there's anything urgent, but I think this that part is important to the board. So I think if we just call out the specific addresses, they both they both have addresses. see what Chris recommends and

thoughts. Is your motion denied? I get the motion wrong anyway. So the language aroundclusion we just Yeah, that's what we'd have to do to wait. So are we all good with the conversation at this point before them were just thrown out? what before a motion is put in place. Honestly, it's just discussion really at this point. It's not an actual I mean I mean do we even say do we even have to make a motion? I don't think we make

No, it was just back to planning and zoning by council for consideration. So Well, this is a first. This is it's always different here. So, all right. So, um so we're just going to make a recommendation back to to city council. No. Is that correct? Something to recommend back. If you're not sure and there's still edits to be made, I would just table it. Keep it on. You can either table the discussion and or just leave it and it'll go back on the next agenda. So, just ignore it. I was going to take your direction and try to write some language and then for the next meeting just update it for next. I think that's a great idea. So, if we want to make it official and just table it. So it comes back up on the next meeting.

That's fine. Do it. Okay. I will make a motion to table item number five. Item number five, section 1159, light manufacturing. And I will second that. Thank you, Chris. Mark, was that you that made the motion? Yes, it was Mark. It was Steve. He spelled his last name. Excitedly, he passed it. Mark Zolinski. Yes. Todd McConnell. Yes. Ryan Heel. Yes. Dyer. Yes. Kyle Cook. Yes. Okay. Other business. Hearing none. I'll make a motion to adjourn. I'll second. All in favor?

I. I. I. Captain.