Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

The broadcast is now starting. All attendees are in listenon mode.

Is he on? He's on now. Yeah. Yeah, he's able to unmute. Hey, Justin, the sound check here. Can you hear us? Okay, I see you're on the very good. We can hear you, too. This is This is a victory. Thank you. Yeah, Justin, you can mute and unmute yourself as you wish. Yeah. Okay.

All right. I guess able doesn't know.

Let me get him. Okay. What else?

[laughter]

heels.

[laughter]

How you doing tonight, sir? I'm good. How are you? That's trash. Sorry. Sorry. Well, good evening. My clock says six o'clock. I [clears throat] think our clock there just stopped.

Maybe Apple time is a little different. Maybe. I don't know. There we go. Good evening. Welcome to Planning Commission. Uh, like to call this meeting to order. Roll call, please. Martin, here. Templain here. Lane, here. Huggin. Mock here. Schultz here. No here. U miss Commissioner Huggin is absent. Thank you. Item 3A, approve the planning commission agenda. Any changes or modifications to be made at this time? Motion. Motion to approve. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor say I. I. I. Oppose. Same sign.

Seeing none, agenda is approved. Item 3B, approve the minutes of the planning commission meeting held on October 28th, 2025. Any changes, additions, or corrections to be made? Motions. Make a motion acceptance as presented. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor say I. I. Oppose. Same sign. Minutes have been approved. Item 3 C, disclosure of conflicts of interest. Anything to disclose with respect to a conflict of interest on matters on the agenda tonight? Justin, you good?

Good. I've had several discussions with people. Well, don't jump the gun because item 3D is disclosure of outside communications. There we go. [clears throat] I have had several discussions with people. Tell us. Uh, we are where are we? Uh, 5A. Okay. And I've also had discussions on 5A and 5B. Okay. Anyone else? Uh, we had email communications from Noel Noel Wiltong

um regarding the Cedar Creek item. And then I got a call from Steve Bolan just asking about the uh agurism sign. Anything else to disclose? Okay. Item four, call to the public. Members of the public who wish to address the planning commission regarding items not on the agenda may do so at this time. Any presentations forformational purposes only, no action will be taken. There's a 4-minute time limit. If you'd like to address the planning commission on matters not on the agenda tonight, please approach the podium. Give us your name and address. Seeing no one leap up anything, anyone online?

No sir. I will close the call to the public. Brings us to item 5A, a reszoning of a resounding tract on Cedar Creek from RA to RO. Brad.

All right. Thank you, chairman. Uh, what you have before you is resigning from a 80 acre tract approximately or approximately 80 acres. It's along Cedar Creek Road and at the intersection of 88th Street. Trent Teiger GTI Group is the applicant and Todd Allen Brand Renaissance Engineering is also working on this project with us. They're both in the audience tonight. if you'd like to ask them to speak on this matter as well. I will go through the staff report. As I mentioned, it is an 80 acre tract that is being considered for resoning. It's currently rural agriculture which allows 10 acre lots as a minimum. The applicant is requesting a change to rural suburban which allows for smaller lots there. At this point, some preliminary information we've got shows about 19 units on the 80 acres. So, around a little over four acres per per potential tract for this property. But the first item at hand is just the reasonzoning request and then we will obviously get into the details at subsequent meetings depending on how the resoning uh is received by the planning commission also the city council. Anyway, I will go through the staff report. As you can see the on page two, the tract under consideration is you can see it's a lot of mixture of R1, Ror, and rural agriculture. It's a very low density area within the city of Dodto. And then of course the next page shows the aerial photo of the location itself. Um, as Cedar Creek meanders around this property, there is several areas of this property within the floodway and flood

plane. It mostly hugs the area of of Cedar Creek itself. However, I would say maybe 20% of it is within that floodway flood flood plane area. It's surprising. I thought there'd be more, but when you do go to Ames, it does show up as uh not as as as extensive as you might think. So, with that, the review of the zoning compatibility factors, character of the neighborhood, surrounding land use includes agriculture west of Cedar Creek and large lot, rural houses to the east of Cedar Creek. believe the zoning change is appropriate to this area as there are a lot of R1 and RO residential uses surrounding this property. Also believe it's consistent with the proposed zoning and the land use plan. Has the property been restricted under its existing zoning? No, it is not. It's been farm ground for as long as we can remember. Um but once again with the rural agriculture designation we have a minimum of 10 acre lot size for tracks with that zoning designation the extent in the which there's a need in the community for the proposed zoning. There's no particular need for large lot residential tracks but this part of the eastern area of Dodto is set up and designed for that way. We have no imminent plans or near plans or even long-term plans to extend sanitary sewer utilities out to this way. And so it's probably best and most likely use is to continue with the large lot residential development on the east side. Water one is or utilities as I mentioned. Um EverG is serving this area with electricity. Atmos gas is also available.

uh the water service is water one is a service provider do have concerns about their ability to provide a water service that's not an area we're particularly familiar with. It's not something safe staff maintains and they will we will require a a water serve letter when we get to the preliminary plat discussion if we get to that point. Uh this proposed use will require septic systems which is consistent with what city code says is necessary or why we have this rural um suburban subdivision. It is for large lot tracks that don't have the ability to attach to the u citymaintained sept or wastewater system. Believe there will be minor impacts to the street network. 19 houses potentially is not a great deal of traffic volume. Also, Cedar Creek Road has been overlaid. It's been improved significantly just recently. The environmental impacts, don't really see any from the RA to the RORO. As far as environmental impacts, once again, the storm water is a concern has been raised to me by several residents. As far as the flood plane and any kind of issues that may uh arise from flooding, we did have a fairly significant event last summer and actually both exit points I mean areas of Cedar Creek and 95th Street were inundated by water so the residents couldn't get out for a period of time. So that is there is some concern there. uh but don't believe that the resoning is necessarily an issue that will affect those types of issues. We'll that's the next step. We always talk about site planning preliminary plats that's a ne next step in the process. We're just focusing on the reasonzoning itself. Economic impact not have a significant impact but certainly

additional uh residences and property values will increase from just vacant farm ground. don't see any particularly detrimental effect and as I mentioned the storm water and potential flooding is something that people are concerned about nearby it is in a low area while I had mentioned much of the property is outside the flood plane there is some significant portions that are inside that and so it is something that Joe and I have talked about talked with the applicant about so we'reware aware of the issues surrounding Cedar Creek as I mentioned earlier in my presentation comprehensive plan. The land use plan is this is consistent with what do the stood has shown for this area and it uh will continue as that we've just reviewed and updated the future land use plan and really didn't have and really this body has not really talked about the eastern part of Dodto being anything other than large lot residential. So the recommendation of professional staff is consistent with the future land use plan. We're recommend approval of this resoning request. And at this point, Mr. Chairman, I'll stand for any questions. And I did mention the applicant is available as tonight as well.

Thank you, Brad. Uh for the benefit of everyone here tonight, the way this process works is the staff gives a report. They ran through the factors that are required under Golden versus Oak Park. It's a case that we have to analyze all zoning changes under. Those are the factors that he came from. The matter now turns to the planning commission to ask questions with regard to the report and then we'll have a public hearing on this at which point if you want to speak on this certainly to the extent that you can phrase your comments in the context of what we're looking at in terms of the golden criteria which is what we're required by law to look at that's very helpful. So those things that Brad talked about, if your comments can dovetail with those, those are going to be most effective. Um, one other thing to just kind of give context to this that whatever the the planning commission [clears throat] decides with regard to a zoning matter is it are we're charged with doing making a decision based on the public benefit. That's not necessarily your specific benefit or what's in your backyard. It's overall, which is why these criteria are written the way they are. So to the extent that you have comments that are broadly applicable to the community, those are most likely going to be more effective. So with that preface, I'd open it up to Brad for questions. Anything you guys want to ask?

Um, so I'm trying to understand. So RORO, I'm I'm reading our our code on RORO right now. My question is relates to you said this is going to be serviced by septic. Correct. So that's going to require larger lots, but the the the I thought I heard you say that the reason why we're considering the tract is to allow for smaller lots. But isn't that kind of counterintuitive when you're when you're requiring septic? Well, we do have a oneacre minimum for septic systems. And so what we're trying to do, what the applicant wants to do is because of under the RA, rural zoning, our minimum required lot size is 10 acres.

Got it. And so he wants to get more houses in there. Okay. I have a question about the water. I know it's water one, but we've already we had a new line put in several years ago, 2 in line. And I know if we are putting water in our pool or watering our landscaping outside. We can't run an appliance inside because the water pressure is so low. So, I have some real concerns about adding more houses onto that when we can't take care of what we've got now.

Yeah, that's understood. And then that's why I'd mentioned the part about the preliminary plat is those are the issues we get into at that point. We don't require will serve letters or the ability for the utility providers to give us that information until there's a preliminary plat or a site plan. This is just as chairman has pointed out several times. We're just talking about the the land use itself. Well, I would disagree then when it's you've got a finding is positive because I don't think that's positive. Other questions for Brad? The one I had, he asked about or answered about the flood planes. Yeah,

that was the main one I had. Yeah. [clears throat] Okay. Well, then Brad, I'll open this up to the public for comment. Thanks, Brad. Any member of the public would like to address these questions, please approach the pundit. Give us your name and address for the record, please. Please. Oh, we're both neighbors. Why don't you go ahead?

All right. And I'm not going to lie, kind of wrote up a little thing. It may not be dovetail on everything exactly, but my name is Susan Lewis, and I live with my parents, John and Darlene Hackworth. I'm here to speak for them, represent them. Um, they have lived on Cedar Creek since 1972 and their home sits directly upstream the land under consideration tonight. I grew up there, lived there now and probably will live there the rest of my life. Um, [clears throat] the land was annexed about roughly 10 20 years ago from the city from and it's remained rural agricultural. The the proposal now to reszone it residential to suburban. I appreciate the idea of the large lights. I mean, we didn't have any um we always knew that would likely be built out at some point in time, but um I want to make sure and I don't oppose the growth at all. We don't and but I want to make sure that it's done responsibly. The developers stated on social media that the homes would not have be directly in the flood plane, but it's important, but it's not really the whole story. Flood risk is not only about where the house sits. It is that it sits inside a mapped flood plane. The plane the planes themselves change over time. rainfall pattern shift upstream and downstream development alters the runoff creeks erode and silt. We experienced a whole heck of a lot of erosion this this past year and we've been flooded in our home up to nearly the first level twice back in the '9s before that I think is over 100 years since that area had flooded. Um but it continues to be a huge risk and um sorry a lot of ohms here you know what was considered safe 10 or 20 years ago when that was mapped isn't necessarily the reality today. So um it's

it's about how fill roads impervious surfaces change runoff reduce the flood plane storage and the potential to push water back upstream. my parents home and others on the creek um could be impacted if safeguards are not required and must be think beyond this one project. Multiple reasonzonings with without coordinated storm water planning will risk compound the risk across the watershed. Responsible development means that they need to require hydra I'm going to say it wrong hydraologic studies retention basins sized for future storms repairarian buffers with the native grasses and subdivisionwide storm water controls. The larger lots are a good start, but safeguards must be built into the approval process to ensure the accountability. So, um, to keep the creek safe, to protect the upstream and downstream properties, and to prevent this resoning from increasing the flood risk for existing families. My parents, as I mentioned, have lived on the creek for over 50 years. They've seen the floods, and I get emotional every time I have gone through this part because I've experienced the floods. They've seen the growth. They've seen what happens when water is not respected. And tonight, I ask that if this goes on and moves forward from rural agriculture to residential suburban, it does so responsibly and so that DInnesota can grow while protecting its families, its environment, and its small town identity. [snorts] Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

[clears throat] Roseberweger. Um, do you want my address to please 9160 Cedar Creek Road

and we live just south of the Hackworth and we've been there 26 years and fortunately we have not had to go through flooding. Um but in July we came very very close and um and so um we saw where the waters did not follow the flood plane. They just did their own thing and and um and so really the entire well the roadways were blocked um just right south of our property and then on 95th Street. And so um you know we had the police and fire department come out there and there was a period of time where um if there was a medical emergency I mean there there was not any access. So that was a big concern. Now the area you guys are talking about is actually north of there but it's still on Cedar Creek Road. And um and you know I just want to just to say to really even though on paper it might say the flood plane is only 20%. But in reality that can change and you can't really go by what's on paper. And so I also want to agree with um her that you know you really we really need to look into um how to harness that that water. Um, I also, you know, I did the magazine, but I did an article about the floodwaters and both Kill Creek and Cedar Creek. The closer they got to Kansas River, I mean, it was like a I mean, the highest level of rapids that happened and it was really um, you know, [laughter] if anybody was going to try to take a kayak in that or something, that was just dangerous. And I had never seen both of those river creeks rivers um well they turned into raging rivers and so um so the creek actually

um you know it's widened through the years and then it also butts up to Cedar Creek and so there's places where Cedar Creek Road um there's a drop off and and I love the black top and the lines but then there's some places where those lines it drops and so you know It's kind of um you know we're out in the country which we know that um but you know bringing new people in the area you know they might not be aware of that and so um so in addition to the flooding um with Cedar Creek Road there's an intersection from 83rd going on to Cedar Creek Road which I know um has always been a kind of a hazardous area because there's a hill and um making that left turn is is um can be dangerous. And I've everybody who turns, you always look behind you because not everybody sees that there's a turn. And so I would like to suggest having some type of a blinking light um like caution that a turn is coming up. Um because if you do add more houses and then there's a church also on the corner that may build down the road and you know right now it's just one or two cars turning but then in the future if you have five or you know eight cars turning that's going to back up and and it's just as a accident you know accidents waiting to happen and so I would also say to have an extended turn lane then and I know you know you guys are looking into um widening that and I do have to say that through the years I've been there um there have been different cases where you know there's been dangerous areas and the city has put in curbs and the um alongside and so I've appreciated that. Um but some of these areas there isn't even any place to put those those things

in there. Um so so I just you know wanted to um you know really there's some things that need to be addressed um with the road safety and the water safety with the flooding um because you know as we were even building outside of that area you know all that rain it it just affects everything and it's not just even our street. So it really is a much broader um base, you know, just along where both Cedar Creek and Kill Creek both, you know, all of those areas in the community. And so um so yes, so um that is my comments and thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. [clears throat] Nobody else.

You're up. Good evening. My name is Dave Dunford. I live at 8895 Cedar Creek Road and uh did a a drop in visit with Mr. Weisenberger last week or two weeks ago and he was very helpful about the information associated with this project. Um, I had several questions. One of them is how does it affect me? One of them is how's it going to affect the growth of the city? And towards that end had some questions for the engineers if they're here. I assume they've engineer. Have you done any soils work out there? Check soils.

I'm an engineer. You want one? Go ahead. Well, not if I don't have to. So, this this this actually is for public comment. Yes. If you have some specific questions, we can try to get those addressed. But, uh, had some questions about the makeup of the soil, specifically uh, its ability to handle sewage for a septic system. Well, were you able to tell or have you analyzed it to an extent to where you can Yeah. Are we being addressed this? Yeah. So, I appreciate the question. We'll give them an opportunity to give you a response. If you just give us your your comments now,

we'll come up later on. Oh, that's great. Very good. Thank you. Um, a concern I have, of course, is will the lot size that has been offered or uh discussed really continue through? Uh, and the concern of course is that it does, but we don't have no no qualification, no requirement that it is. Is there any way that that can be bound to uh the process that's in process tonight or in progress tonight? I don't know that. So your question is are they required to build like 4acre lot? Right. Yeah. Okay.

Uh and uh the nature of the construction don't know what that's going to be like if that's going to be uh multif family single family. Can you tell me from the code? The code would not permit multif family in this zone. Very good. Uh access to this 80acre area. Is it just off the one street? We have not seen a site plan on that. That will be something that's going to come out when they actually put together their development. Gotcha. That could be a big consideration. Sure. Absolutely. That could be a big consideration to this group. Will there be a public hearing or public input about that? Absolutely. As it unfolds. Very good.

And I also was concerned about the water. uh looked on the county maps and they assigned this all as an AE designation and which is 0.0 feet. I have no idea what that means. I'm formerly the emergency management director for the city of Lanexa many years ago. So I was just curious about that. There is FEMA panel reference and my question is how accurate would it be to are we working with a real current document on the FEMA description of the the wershed? So part of any site plan that goes through the city has a requirement that they do storm water retention and storm water analysis and so that will all be part of that and

that's not necessarily relevant to the zoning question we have before. understand that doesn't affect me because I'm upstream so to speak up on the hill. So I was just curious the city must have satisfy itself that that's going to be well built and uh I think that's all. Thank you very much. So there's my question. Thank you.

Hello everyone. My name is Hannah Wilfong. I live in the white box straight across the street from the plot that we're discussing. Um, I'm new to this kind of meeting and I will try to follow the guidelines. I emailed you today. Thank you for the email back. I was nervous to come here but brought my family for backup. Anywh who, I am a third generation wilt fong living on a 10acre spot. It is three plots of land. Um, one of which is zoned RO which is being used as a comparison for the purpose of this exercise. For the public record, my comments would be that I will watch this construction. I will live in this construction. I have a small new family and I took on more land than I know how to handle just so that we could keep it in our family. Um I'm not opposed to growth, but I really want to echo the thoughts that were shared with us this evening from the Hackworth Lewis family. if um if development is to occur, it has to be done so responsibly because the charm of Dodto is really really reflected on Cedar Creek Road. So, we have to take good care of whatever occurs there. I also want to make the comment that I recently had the privilege of replacing a septic out there and it sucks bad. Um, so I I also have the privilege of having a partner who works from home full-time and Wi-Fi sucks bad. high winds, no buried lines. Um, these are things that would not be appealing to those families who could afford nice, nice homes on 4acre lots. I look forward to the beauty of adding property value, but I am very concerned about the changing sunset view that I have on my porch. Um, I love an engineer. Welcome. But, uh, I'm nervous about this and I will be following this closely. Again, for the record, my name is Hannah Wilfong. I can be reached right there at that house. Drive up the driveway. Knock on the door. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. [clears throat]

I came all the way up here from Georgia, so I had to say something. Um, we live down on the bottom of the white. Sorry. Did you get your name for the record? Oh, my name Bill Hackworth. John's son.

Thank you. And I used to live here for 20 years and I made loops and ate at the ice cream place here if anybody remembers. But um anyway, so just just to recall some of my ancient history is when the plaza flooded, we got flooded. That was supposedly a 500y year flood plane and that was 8 foot in the basement. And my dad's house, I helped build it, um is on a railroad bed. I don't know if you know the Santa Fe Trail goes through there, but it was there was a railroad bed there and we're up in the air and I've seen a lot of that underwater, including that big land. They used to have corn and soybean and they used to put waste out there to feed it. So, I don't know where it all went, but anyway, I haven't really lived here for 20 years, but I can tell you it's flooded last year. My sister's scared to death is coming up again. So to codify it, uh, my dad's septic lateral field was underwater. It gets underwater way too often. Luckily, I put big six foot ones and 200 ft long and really deep because we did a percolation test. And I'm a licensed plumber, believe it or not. Uh, as well as a retired engineer. So I stopped digging. Um anyway, so water obviously big concern and even though it's downstream from that guy, you keep putting traffic in downstream and moves up and there we go. It'll be in his backyard. uh you know if it's just uncontrolled and that's what's happened. They've developed irresponsibly upstream and the all that runoff water you know cuz off the roofs off our cement off their parking lots goes into the creek and it comes up here because it's got no place to go. So water is like the hugest concern but the other is you know but just experience it again Cedar Creek Hill I don't know how many

people lived here in the winter time. Cedar Creek Hill as hell. Uh anyway, and that that damn the road there, I pulled plenty of people out of that hole that went off the cliff. I pulled a guy's bumper off once. He wasn't mad at me. He was glad to get his car out of the hole. [laughter] But uh anyway, something will have to be done with that intersection if you got god knows how many more people. But we're really glad it was a multif family thing to it. Um anyway, so the scenery, the septic tank underwater, you know, at least we put our tank up on the railroad bed with the house, but the lateral fields are underwater. So, you know, those aren't clean if you ever flush them out. So, that goes into the water and whoever's drinking that I don't I don't know if we go get it out of the call. Anyway, so more codified stuff. Uh and I sure the county do they govern the septic percolacus test? these guys what they're going to do. Okay. And how often your lateral field can can it even be underwater? But I mean, you know, and I really don't trust the flood plane maps. Twice 200 in my 20 years. Twice 500year flood. So, you know, can you trust that crap? It needs re rethought. Um, anything else? Well, someone wanted a blinking light. I'd say traffic light and level it out and do a whole bunch of construction on that intersection where you got to pop out on the middle of the hill where people are sliding down and sliding up and sliding in. That's all.

Thank you, sir. Thank you, [clears throat] gave us the slip. [laughter] If there's someone on behalf of the applicant who would like to address some of the things they heard, feel free to approach approach the podium. [clears throat]

Todd Allenbrand, 102 Abby Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas. That's Renaissance Infrastructures address. Um, first I'd like to thank the commissioners for having us case come forward. And I appreciate the comments from the gallery. It's really helpful. But, um, I mean, there's a couple things to address. One thing I think everybody, the big theme is the flood plane area. Oh, and I'm here with another gentleman from our office, Andy Gabbert, and the developers, Brad Tinton, Brad Tiger. Um, is the flood plane. So, we have to meet city code. And not only do we have to meet city code, but we have to meet federal code when we do this stuff. So when we design these items and the streets and the potential house sites, we'll make sure, you know, based on good engineering practices that we meet those requirements and and that staff approves them. They'll review them. Um, that's probably the biggest issue. And you know, the probably the other issue is talk people talking about areas where flood planes are. I don't know where all these people live. you know, I don't know if these houses that they live in are actually in the flood plane potentially. You know, I'm not sure or adjacent to it and I don't know their elevation, so it's hard to speak on that, but um you know, we really think this is going to be a good designed development for the city and for the community. You know, our lots and are probably probably average about four acres. You know, there'll be nothing under three and some over closer to five. in some places. Um I think the other issue that came up was utilities. We've had some conversation with water one and we haven't got into like the meat of the design, but we will most likely have to extend a 12-in line down Cedar Creek Road and bring service in to the development. So, we've had all those conversations and they're comfortable with thinking they can, you know, meet

the demand for the houses and stuff. So, I don't know if there's any other questions that need to be addressed. I know the gentleman talked about the soils report. Brad and Trent, we laid out some points for them and they did their own soil testing. So, I'm not 100% sure what they came up with their soil soil testing. And if you are interested to know, I mean, they can probably pop up. One of them can jump up and address the comment if it's that important. Really, a lot of these comments seem like they would come later on addressing specifically. That's true. So, it's kind of hard to get into addressing them without you guys seeing a plan in front of you. So, I understand your position, right, and where you're at on that. Thank you. All right. So, if there's anything else or if anything comes up. Okay.

If they drop bring that line down, will they put in a fire hydrant, too, because there's no fire hydrants? Well, we have to we have to meet fire code. So, we have to have fire hydrants in the subdivision that meet the current fire code. So, most likely I mean, I don't know. Water one designs that and we don't design the water lines for it, but I would assume they'll bring the 12-in down and where they turn to come into the development, they'll most likely drop a fire hydrant at that that T that T or 90° bend, whatever they do. So, okay.

Thank you. Anyone else like to address the planning commission on this issue? Well, seeing no further comment, I'll close the public hearing. The matters before the planning commission questions, comments? The only thing I had was the deal with the flood plane, which they've kind of addressed that the the narrow road. I don't know what can be done about that. I know they just repaved it

was up at the top of the hill where they're mostly talking turning off 83rd Street that drop down across from the smoke shop. Yeah, that's precarious. Yeah, but it sounds like we've got things to talk about when we talk about a site plan because you're going to have to have traffic study. You're going to have to do your water retention just like we do it for any other subdivision in in the city. Um, all of those are very good points as far as whether they can actually perk the soil. That's going to be subject to the building permit and whether the city's going to permit that. So it for what the questions before us really aren't those. Yep. Right.

Obviously the flooding in the area is of interest. It's important and whatever happens here the the point should be that we're going to take whatever steps we can to mitigate that this is going to make things worse. But that didn't fix the problem. Sounds like you got a problem. That's a different issue. And so we probably do need to address that as a city. And it sounds like Brad mentioned at least that there's some talk about trying to address some of that. Um, as far as the the the criteria of the report, I obviously Linda, you identified one that you disagreed with Brad's finding.

Are there any other comments about the findings that you you take issue with? Justin, you've been too quiet tonight. What do you got? Well, yeah. Uh oh. Oh, why would he freeze now? I'm sorry, Justin. You kind of froze. You kind of froze on us. Maybe you give us another shot at what you're saying. I think so. [laughter]

No. Yeah, you're in and out. Uh, Justin, you're in and out a little bit on us. Try turning your video off. It'll uh pull pull some bandwidth back. Oh, I hope I didn't. Justin, can you still hear us? Yeah, I we can hear you now. Sorry about that.

I I think professional opinion on this. I think this is the right spot for the subdivision to hold comprehensive plan and follow the future land use. So I would be uh in support of this quest. Thank you Justin. So the question I suppose is you know obviously it's agricultural use right now. Um are there appropriate uses for this property? which they've been asked for is this large lot residential rural subdivision. I'm guessing none of us think this is right for a BIES. Nope. Or it's probably not right for an apartment complex. Nope. Nope.

It's probably not right for single family subdivisions of a quarter acre because we don't have sewer. Right. Right. So [clears throat] the question is, is this appropriate use for this particular tract? Not that they can build it. But still got to go through the process and you know make sure that it doesn't cause any other problems. But as a land use, is this appropriate? Yeah, I don't have a problem with it. Someone would like to make a motion.

Um yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we approve item 5A as written. um reszoning um the tract uh from RA to R O for today's in today's agenda. Motion made second. Seconded. Any further discussion? Not at this point. If we get that 12 inch line put in, it would help a lot. Well, that's going to be a topic for another day.

No, but it's hard for me to vote in favor of something if it's if I disagree with something. Okay. Well, you have the right to vote no. I realize that. Move [laughter] and second. A roll call, please. Melbourne, yes. Um, Mock, yes. Yes. Schultz, yes. Martin, yes. Templan, yes. Blaine, no. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you all for coming. And this wasn't the end of it. You'll hear more about this convers this conversation is going to continue. The site plan's the really important piece. So, when that comes up, I'm sure you'll

just pay attention to when it comes through and we'll we'll we'll definitely keep our eyes on it. Thank you. Moving to item 5B, a public hearing to to discuss the occupation home occupations limited retial zoning district. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I did want to say that we do also for the residents here, we do have a requirement for preliminary plats that the nearby homeowners are notified as well. It's not a public hearing, but they are notified and allowed an opportunity to attend the meeting.

Thank you. So with that, we are now hopefully on the home stretch for our potential home occupation retail uses. We've had two meetings on this item and we've gone through several iterations of discussions on sizes of lot uh site planning, ADA requirements, off streetet parking requirements, a lot of things. and Patrick and I and and and Mike and Joe have worked on trying to thread the needle with this and also with presenting and getting input from the planning commission and the potential affected property owner and I do believe we've gotten to that point. Uh I don't know that that there is much for to rehash at this uh point in time, but you do have a uh proposed retail conditions that that Patrick's worked on pretty hard recently as far as trying to get the exact language and in place that allows this types of use with fairly significant restrictions in a process of a special use permit that require the planning commission to look at all these items and then also do have the statement in there that the planning commission may require some additional measures um to help with a potential accessory building use on site. So, with that, I will open this up for any questions or comments you may have. But, um, I do think we've

really studied this one pretty well and came up with a solution that will work for uh, city staff's opinion and also from input from the planning commission. Uh, and and also, Mr. Chairman, I mean, this is something the city council brought to us, so they will be have a keen interest on on the recommendation as well. Thank you, Brad. I I have a quick question before you get too far into this. So, the email you sent is for a new subp paragraph five under article 10, section 4. Is that right? Correct. Yes.

So, page four of the report has items one, two, three, and four. Five would be the one that's added to that on the time limit. Yes, Patrick. Oh, where is Well, sorry. The time limit is already addressed in our regath. [clears throat]

Okay. So, five is actually its own section underneath. Okay. I got All right. I'm following you now. Okay. I didn't know where that went. So is that clear to the rest of the commission? So the did you get the email? Okay. So the email has a modification to the section immediately following section four that we were looking at th this email. Roger. Yeah, I think so. Okay. I'm following [clears throat] now. Did you get it? I got it. Okay. So the the text amendment that's in front of us is as per the report modified by the emails. Correct. Yes.

Okay. So any questions for Brad before we start or we this is a matter for public hearing. We good? Okay. Thank you, Brad. At this point, I'd like to open the public hearing on item 5B, the text amendment to permit home occupations, limited retail use, and residential zoning districts. Any member of the public you'd like to address this issue, please approach the podium. Give us your name and address. I assume there's nobody online other than Justin.

Let me just check. Nope, that's correct. Okay, with that, I'd like to close the public hearing. The matter is now before the plan. Questions, comments, concerns.

I think we've got cash done pretty well. Y been through it a few times now. I don't I don't want to over complicate anything, but I I do have one question. Is there any sort of consideration we should take with the fire department in terms of fire suppression if it's going to be a commercial facility with public in it?

I guess I my thinking is that would be part of our our site plan review when we get into all those issues. It'll also be something that our building official will look at if a a hydrant is needed, but we have limited the size to 300 square ft. So, it's really the accessory building is probably never going to be as important as the house that's nearby. And we do have adequate water lines mains in these areas that serve at least the Dotto side. I can't speak for we do have water one and also water 7 that serves portions of dotto but but uh I feel very confident in our ability to serve

me this is a special use permit right so if there's someone who's going to come with a particular use and they're going to stuff it full of cotton bales that they're retailing out of there that we're worried about a spark we probably ought to be concerned about it well I'm I'm putting my [clears throat] work hat on and when I go for a CFO I got to meet egress lighting fire suppression, so on and so forth in order to do that. So, I didn't know if we needed to put anything in there from a language perspective, which I'm fine if we leave it out because it is a special use permit. I just thought I would ask it's it's it's going to be a daunting proposition to the extent that we have people of 5 acre lots who want to start opening retail businesses, right? We're going to ru the day we did this.

Yep. But I'm guessing there's not a huge demand for that, but I could be wrong. Okay, you're right. You're right to ask the question though. It's actually absolutely right. we do our due diligence. It it is the right question because you are talking about it compared to other retail operations and so we certainly required ADA requirements. You know, we city building codes, right? That's kind of the references we have to that. So,

I would just feel comfortable that we put some verbiage in there that says we will address things in the site plan or something. I don't know if that's appropriate, but at least it's a reminder to ourselves in the future. So, under 2A, it's got includes indication of compliance with ADA and building. Okay. Do we need more than that? I mean, we can we can always suggest adding more to it. Well, would city building codes address that though? It's hardress. So, I think we're covered there. Just on a personal note, with the years that I spent on the fire department going through things similar to this, I've been in the building and I don't see anything that would be any kind of conflict in there. Okay. Well, right.

[clears throat] Can Justin still hear us? Are you there?

First off, I want to thank staff for all the hard work on this. They've done a lot of research on it, the whole team. So, I do want to say thank you for that. Also, just for being open to listen to the citizens and have an open mind to even bring this forward. So, I do want to thank staff for that. However, I I still uh this is the third meeting to talk about this. I still can't come around on this request. Um I I just don't think having this type of retail sales in residential areas is appropriate. I've I've looked through the comprehensive plan. There's no mention of any type of retail sales um you know within the comprehensive plan. So unfortunately I I can't support this X amendment as presented.

Thanks Justin. Any other comments further discussion motions? When we say city building codes, just making sure I'm clear on this that we're talking about a nonresidential building code. I know. I think it's pretty vague. So, I'm not quite sure what city building codes mean. I think it's a good question.

Well, when we go through all these sight lines, there isn't going to be an occupancy permit issued. I mean, that's a separate in process that our building official staff goes through and looks at all these types of things. and and knowing our group the way I do, they they do flag things and and they're not bashful about telling someone this just isn't going to work. So, in order to have a business license, you would have to have a CFO. Uh well, we don't have business license in Dotto, but you would have to have a occupancy permit before they could move in. Okay.

The occupancy permit is going to be issued for the residents and this is an use under special use permit. It's a good question of what standards are they going to be held to when we talk about city building codes? My understanding is it' be right now it's 2018 building code. That's what would be applied to these structures as they are any accessory building for residential for residential use. Now, this one's got a higher and greater use than just, you know, putting your classic cars in, but uh certainly with the occupancy of Can we specify the building code then? Perhaps this is Brad's problem in my book.

Well, if you want, we can add that language. If you want to just make a motion that allows staff to reference building code and cite the specific codes that would come into play, we can certainly do that. You might want to because you get another application, you're not going to, you know, I I hate to have you just twisting because we left it vague. So if you need some more support, put it in here now. I think's got a good point. I will however echo what Justin said. I thank you for spending so much time on this, but I I do want to make sure we get it right. Yeah. Well, we're [laughter]

we are in the get it right business. We we do our best. I know that we've talked about some interesting issues from time to time. Patrick, um I just wanted to clarify. I don't I mean this is considered a home occupation, so I don't think we would be applying commercial building. I don't think you would either. That's what begged the question. [laughter] It would still be residential building. Although there may you guys could put any requirements on it.

Well, that's why I would ask Brad to think about if you get an application like this, what are you going to want to apply? And if there are certain elements of the commercial code you want to apply to this or reset retail code, you probably ought to make them applicable. I don't know how that works. I I just get worried about emergency egress paths and um exit lighting and all the things that you're required to meet to get a CFO in a business. Um we don't address any of that in here. And I think we leave ourselves a little bit in a gray area that I'd like to not be so gray with, especially with safety. Well, I guess I could certainly say I could get with Cameron and we can come up with some specific.

Even if it's basic language, I think it would be fine. I think you'd have something to hang your hat on, Brad. I mean, you know, you gota have something to say it's got to be more than just the residential code because you're bringing people in. Okay. Well, I'll talk to the camera. We could complete the public hearing and then we could have a final Yeah. I mean, our December meeting is only three weeks away. So, so I guess theoretically what we're talking about is tableabling it, bring it back here. We've had the public hearing, you know, one more time for approval in December to make sure that you've got I don't The public hearing is tonight. I mean, if you want to extend the public hearing, we can do that. Or I've already closed the public hearing, so

or or maybe you could make a motion in sufficient detail to allow staff to make a a minor adjustment before it goes to the council. can do that. [clears throat] Not to extend the issue for anyone who might be wanting to operate such a you guys tell me. But the motion that I would make that that staff would add verbiage in that would address emergency exit lighting, emergency exit exit signage um and some some verbiage related to fire suppression. And I think that would at least address basic life safety requirements for a business. I think it's so small. I don't I'm not worried about the lighting so much. I just want an egress. If that door's locked, some other way to get out of that building. Yeah. And again, I'm just going by what I

a checklist that I've gone through a dozen times. Um Yeah. So, if we have something to address exit in the event of a power loss, that would be great. And if we have something to address a fire in the event of a fire, I think that would probably cover our bases. Okay. Sorry, my weekend. that type of language. Okay. Just so I'm clear, not hearing everything, but is this motion to move it to city council or just to update it and revote on it in December?

My preference would be to table it and bring it back in December to have a good look at whatever it is you come up with. I just think we ought to It's an issue I think you ought to deal with. But that's me. The idea though I think Justin was can we just give enough specific direction to let him take it on to council and that was I think what Charlie was trying to do. Yeah. I I mean I can try but I I would feel more comfortable with your suggestion as well. Well make go either way. I think beating a dead horse before the planning commission. I will

split the flag and do what I'm told. [laughter] I would just assume vote and get it done. Let the staff work out the minute details. They're still operational though. It's not a deal. Yeah. And this is setting the standard for not just this particular way. It has to do with a particular use within the city. It is going to be on our books and somebody else is going to be able to use this. So, we do kind of do it right if we can. I understand what you're saying. Been dragging on and we appreciate you guys coming and but

Hey, I do have a question if you don't mind. Um, we are uh we are operating. Yes. But I am very much limiting, you know, any advertisement that we're doing out of respect for everybody here. I absolutely do not want to step on any toes. I'm to the point now we're right around Christmas. I mean, I need start advertising and I respect everything you're doing. I I absolutely respect the staff who has done everything they can to to get this push through. But I mean, am I free to go ahead and advertise like I should be advertising? Um because it's it's really kind of I don't know that first six months in this commission has never given you any direction as to what you can or cannot do

as far as your so I don't think we can give you any opinion on that either. Okay. I just don't want to disrespect anybody by I understand doing some of that. We are really close to Christmas and to I'll echo what Roger's saying to to the point of what we're discussing here. It's not so much that you are in violation or not in violation of anything. What we're trying to make sure is that we get it right for the future because in five years somebody's going to come up and apply for this and we're going to forget why it's on the books. I understand that part. Absolutely. So So appreciate the comment. Yeah.

Okay. What's your pleasure? One of two ways. You can move to table. You can move to approve with specific instructions. What do you want to do? Or you can move to deny, which Justin may want to do. I I got one question before we make a motion. Would Patrick would you I mean are you comfortable making some like helping me draft a motion to put this together real quick and to where it would be sticky enough where we'd feel comfortable with it or should we table it? I mean, my I think my preference would be to do your motion, but just say life safety issues or keep it a little bit vague so that um I just think depending on the application we get. Um

the rest of it would be basically under special use permit conditions, right? And I just worry if for example lighting or just some of the You mentioned that they're clearly not needed or applicable. Is this language going to require that when everybody agrees it's not really warranted? Can we say fire safety, Patrick? Yeah, that's what I'm just leave it a little bit vague that way. So, I let me suggest.

Okay, what do you got? We modify section 2A after city building codes. Add and to address life safety issues in the discretion of city staff. Period. And then start the next sentence with 300 square feet maximum structure size shall be permitted. something like that. As long do we all agree that life safety is inclusive of egress? As long as we're all in agreement that that

can't think of anything more important is life safety than egress. Okay. Then I'm then I then I'm good with what you wrote.

Okay. Um I didn't write exactly what you wrote. So do you um you need me to do it again? So it' be 2A at the end of after city building codes it would be and to address life safety issues in the discretion of city staff. Period. Then the next sentence would be 300 square foot maximum structure size shall be permitted. It's kind of do two different ideas.

So I'm going to ask a question here. If um city staff determines that an egress an additional egress is not needed, is that going to override code? No. The code that's going to be applied is the residential code. Okay. So, the question is because you're using a retail use, are there additional things that need to be done? Right. and we're basically giving instruction to staff to come up with there's something else you believe is appropriate for life safety issues then put it on there right and then it's going to come before us and if we've got complaints about it we're going to do the special use permit

right dog pony show and we'll be able to see that but at least here we're giving some specific direction that in addition to just city building codes for residential you need to consider life safety issues right yeah because you're going to have public in your in the space so yeah yeah okay does that address yes thank Thank you. So, I'd like to make a motion that we approve item 5B with the specified conditions. [clears throat] As Roger stated, and I won't be able to repeat uh as eloquently uh after item 2A. Um, as Edgar recorded, I second that.

And with the modification of Patrick's email. And with the modifications of Patrick's email, I still second that. Second still stands. Any further discussion? Roll call. Martin, yes. Templan, yes. Lane, yes. Schultz, yes. Mock, yes. Milbour,

what' you say? What was that? I think you said that's [laughter] done that one. Motion carries. We needed to have that on the record though. Thank you, sir. Yep. I'm with you. Okay. Item 5C. And I think we ought to just get Larry to come up here and sit right next to me because you've been here. [laughter]

All right, chairman. These are as like the previous two items are something we've talked about quite a bit recently and once again we've used our city attorney quite well on this. He's earned his keep on going through and and coming up with language that once again is one of these situations where they're kind of oneoffs. We want to allow Kevin and Steve to stay, but uh also we have a desire to enforce our livestock regulations and keep those uh animals on the larger tracks within DInnesota, which is what the intent of our ordinance is. Of course, this is a situation that uh you know, the goats were fine, nobody had a problem with them, and we did get a complaint. So, our codes department has to act on it and we're trying to find once again how to thread the needle and allow this situation to with some parameters to continue. But, uh, what we came up with is in your staff report, the one thing that did change is now the application deadline will be December 30th. So, we keep bumping that back as we keep continuing meetings along these lines, but I don't know if there's a whole lot more that we can add at this point. But, uh, I'll stand for any questions you may have.

Questions for Brad? [snorts] Um, I thought we said we were not going to requ them dehorn. All goats must be dehorned. I thought we said we were Yeah, we're removing that. That's yeah, that's going to be eliminated. So the text have to be neutered, but that they don't have to be

correct. Just want to make sure that was clarified. Am I not reading that correctly? Yeah, I may have not highlighted that section, but um pretty clear in my mind that the staff agrees that this section should be eliminated regardless of what planning commission's ultimate recommendation is. The report says that the dehorning and neutering require Yeah, I guess we did talk about removing the neutering. So, so the dehorning is the one you're recommending require that be required. Yes. that. So with that modification, your proposal then stands as written.

Questions about that? All right, this is a public hearing. I'll now open this to members of the public. Anyone would like to address the planning commission regarding this item, please feel free to approach the podium. Give us your name and address. I'll just note for the record that Larry is here. So, we got that.

Nobody online. Nobody online. I will now close the public hearing. The matters before the planning commission. Any further comments, suggestions, criticisms? Accolades, motions. I think it's okay. [laughter] I make a motion to accept what modification remove. Yeah, the neutering is still going to remain. Correct. Yes. Correct. I'll second that. Moved and seconded. Further discussion. Roll call. Schultz. Yes. Mock. Yes. Milurn. Yes. Lane. Yes.

Templan. Yes. Martin, yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you for your patience. [clears throat] Item 5D, billboard for a tourism along K10 Highway.

All right. Thank you, chairman. This is also a council request that we look at the agurism use and the billboard for the winery. Once again, our city code does not allow for billboards. However, in this instance, we have a fletchling business that's just moved to Dodto. Um, they felt like, you know, that they needed some sort of additional representation to help people get to their their spot. They are in a fairly obscure area along 95th Street. And I don't believe they're in the area that was flooding or blocked off from the flood. Maybe they were, but once again, it's a very windy kind of narrow road. And if you're not familiar with the soda, you probably wouldn't think there would be a winery down that down that way. So Mr. Hoff put up a billboard which our code staff immediately flagged is whoops, can't do that. Um, and then of course, uh, talking with council and mayor, they asked that the planning commission look at a way to [sighs] once again thread the needle and come up with a way that this can be a something that we can feel comfortable allowing, but not something that we feel like is going to proliferate up and down K10 highway. So we came up with some considerations as far as uh must be an aggra tourism business must be on land at a joins K10 did have some height restrictions. Now these are I did get better information from from George Hoff on the size of his sign. It was a little bit bigger than he initially told me. I actually had him go out and measure and give me those dimensions. So it's 10 ft above ground. It's 12t wide. 8 ft for the actual height of the sign itself. So a coverage area of 96 square ft. Once again staff's

opinions I don't think there are many situations within Dodto that this would be applicable as far as an aggra tourism business. So they do have to have that certificate in hand before the the sign would be allowed or and in this case he's had that agurism certificate for before he came to Dodto. So, we do believe that I guess in support of a new business in town and something that's uh helping the the brewery downtown offer more ser or goods and services that this would be a benefit to Dninnesota. We are trying to diversify our base, diversify things that residents would find interesting in Dotto and and help people stay and feel like it's a wholesome community that has different outlets for activities. And that's kind of the direction that the council has given myself and Mike to look at these items and Patrick's came up with uh some suggested language that helps fit within the city code a little bit better, more clarity. And so with that, I'll stand for any questions that you may have. Questions for Brad? Like to open this up for the public hearing. Thank you, Brad. Anyone would like to address the planning commission regarding this item 5D, please approach the podium. Give us your name and address. Anyone online, Mike?

No, sir. With that, I'll close the public hearing the matters before the planning commission. Um, the only question I have is we did bring up lighting at one time and I don't see that addressed on here. You brought that up last time. Do you have anything else on that? Yeah, the only thing about the lighting, at least with Mr. Off was concerned, is he doesn't have any electricity over there. Um, he didn't feel like it was necessary. So, we just kind of said we don't we're good. and he was happy with just being able to keep his sign. So,

your thought is if it's not in here, they won't be able to light. Correct. Yes. Well, sorry. Um I thought the consens last meeting was we didn't want to allow illuminated meaning like flashing sign, but I thought the thought was a single light to light it up was fine. Correct. But it's not addressed in here at all. So that's why I was wondering. Well, I think they I don't know that our code has anything. So the section that we're adding here, this subsection F is under the agricultural exceptions exemptions.

It's basically saying you're getting one on the sign. These are the only requirements. kind of do anything else you want. So there again, we're opening it up for somebody else to come up with the sign that we have to address this now or address it later. So Patrick, you're saying that non-electric essentially means that it's not self-illuminated. And so if if a person wanted to shine a spotlight on it, that would be acceptable. That was my understanding. Okay. non electronic message. So meaning your message can't be electronic,

right? But yeah, I I assume that if someone wanted to light up the sign, they could. Is it your belief that they would be subject to the signed ordinance generally even with this? So this would exclude the any compliance with any other sign ordinance. Right. This is a free one because even George, he called me and said, "Well, I kind of need another another one near my ent everything else you got to comply with the sign regulations but you get this kind of free okay so this is the one freebie if he wants to do anything else he's got to go through the sign

that address the issue [laughter] it's your goal. Well, I I just want to see if he comes up and pops a light up there, whether he puts some finds some little solo dood to hang up there to light it. Nobody's going to complain about it and we're not going to get caught in the middle of something. So, that's a good point. I I don't think there's anything we're going to be able to do to prevent that. Okay. As long as it's a non- electronic message sign.

Okay. Good then. Other comments, questions, motions. Make a motion to approve item 5D as written with the section five exemptions. Uh, starting with the letter F per the email, I believe. Is that correct? So I think this is for the for the staff report. I don't think the email has to do with this. I think it's just the red letter. Okay.

Well, I had tweaked it and what you see here on the screen, this is what we're asking to be. Oh, added. Yeah. Okay. So, consistent with the email. Consistent with the email. Yeah. Thanks. I'll second that. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Roll call. Lane, yes. Templan, yes. Martin, yes. Schultz, yes. Mock, yes. Milbour, [clears throat] yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. That concludes the public hearing. Does anybody need a environment break? You good? I'm good. Okay. Moving then to item 7B. to consider a site plan for the Merc campus. Is that 7 A or 7 B? 7 A. Did I say 7B? Yeah, I'm just jumping ahead. 7 A. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That's and we cover a lot of range of stuff here at planning commission. We're goats [laughter] and talking about a multi-billion dollar expansion at Merc. So, we're all on the same agenda. Anyway, what you have before you is Merc is planning to construct three additional buildings at their location on 91st Street, a material management building, drug production, and a utility building. They do have a couple smaller out buildings, a guard house, and a security building. So, with that process, we have to go through a site evaluation as far as how it fits within our our building code. I will point out that Merc has met with us on several occasions as far as this information and want to make sure that they uh get it right and have smooth sailing through the planning commission. They've been good corporate citizens and they've really gone out of their way in many in many instances as far as uh helping us uh get the information to us in a in a timely manner. If you look at the overall site plan itself, I mean it's a large campus, so it does look fairly complicated in this situation. The the area that's going to be expanded is to the west at the I guess the souththeast corner of 80, pardon me, Sunflower Road and 91st Street. And they're going to have a a building up front and then parking in between. And then the other buildings towards the rear. One [snorts] of the big concerns that we had staff had was the fire access to these locations. It's a, you know, there's a lot of moving parts in these buildings themselves and making sure that fire trucks and apparatus can get close enough to a building to have any kind of ability to fight fires was really important. So, we did have them

add several access roads, additional hydrants around the building. So you can tell that there's ultimately about 171,000 additional square feet of building space. And like I said, as you know, Merc does a lot of high-end, high production, high secretive, very difficult kind of testing on their facility. We just want to make sure that if something does happen that we have the access to the locations to help people and also uh put out any kind of event that may happen. One thing also that u as far as moving on more of the technical things of the what we look at just for the site plan is you know sidewalks, landscaping, traffic access, all those things. You remember the city actually extended 91st Street about five or six years ago. So that went through the Sunflower Sunflower Road was improved. still chips seal south of 91st Street, but once again it is a hard surface. And then of course 87th Street was also improved and overlay and that was actually a project that the city coordinated with Merc as far as a a special benefit district to get that improvement done. And also there's a trail along 87th Street as well. So there's a sidewalk on 91st, there's a sidewalk on 87th. Uh we also have plans from the park board to continue the sunflower trail farther south to 87. So we're going to ultimately connect all these areas through this uh potential development. So we did have uh one thing I also wanted to point out to you is the contractor [clears throat] trailers. That was another sort of issue that that staff talked about. Um, and it really kind of came up is because Panasonic is under construction and there's just

there's a trailer city out there right on the corner of Astra and now Energy Way and we felt like we kind of and maybe even if we talked about it early on, we probably still would might have ended up having the trailer city there. But because it's taken years and years and it's just not something we really want to have desirable, we looked at as far as something prominent up front. And then we're talking with Merc, they're very uh cooperative. They put that their trailer area behind the main buildings and also it's about 1,000 ft each direction. So there's it's really not going to be as particularly visible. Yeah, you'll see it. but they also have uh on their own accord lined their whole campus with trees that were something that was not requested or required by the city. In addition to that, they do have their landscaping plan that's in the staff report as well, which which meets our requirements. So, they've once again, they're a good corporate citizen. They've gone above and beyond in many ways what we'd expect a development to do. As far as the utilities, city of Denot's providing water, sewer, Everg is doing the electric. Atmas Gas is out there. They've included a storm water detention. There's a storm water letter in your packet. Phototric plan is in the staff report. So, we've got everything that we feel like they they just met it. In some ways, it makes it easier for us and staff where we're not having to nitpick or we feel like something's being hidden or something isn't quite right. You know, check the code for the parking. They've exceeded that amount as far as what we would require for a manufacturing or production facility. So, there's ample parking. Uh they've also have EV spots, plenty of ADA accessibility, ADA stalls, and then also visitor parking. So they have exceeded

our code requirement for auto parking. As far as I mentioned the landscaping, they do have interior landscaping in addition to the street trees that go around the site. And also I would just say that they they you know they I've seen them out watering many times. So um they didn't just plant them and you know good luck. they've they've maintained them well and the ones that have not survived, have been replaced. And not because of a code letter, but just because it's important to them that the trees are in their are growing and alive as far as as well as they're supposed to be. Also wanted to mention that the parking islands and entrances have also been properly landscaped. There's only going to be one sign that's been proposed. You can kind of see it off on the the main entrance. Uh it's just the mark animals health typical sign that's uh you see on there they're building now. So um there is no additional sign require requests with this site plan. And you can see also the uh applicant has read our code and looked at, you know, beefed up the main entrances, the corners as far as the visible areas. And I think they've done a good job as far as the architectural features for this building and and trying to maintain a campus kind of look with with a fairly high-end scientific technical type facility. So with that, I will stand for any questions you may have. Nobody's chomping at the bit. So, this is the first time I've seen this one. So, I'm trying to get my head around exactly how this works operationally. The two entrances on the 91st Street are both new curb cuts. Correct.

Yes. Correct. Okay. So, there's fencing I see that that has a gate over on the far west side on the east side. Okay. There's a proposed double gate over there. So, everybody's got a park out here outside the gates towards the street. Correct. I'm just kind of curious. I normally don't see these site plans where you have parking so far away from the buildings. Yeah. So, I'm gathering they did that because they wanted the security have all cars be away from the buildings.

Let me get to a plan that's a little more clear, I think. So, there's a [clears throat] there's a fence around the parking lot itself, but then there's also another fence between the parking lot and the building itself. Yeah, that top looks like that's a fence, right? Yeah, this is a fence here and it comes around here. Uh, and then there's also a fence here as well. Okay. So, you you come into the site, no fence, but then to get to get in here, there's there's a guard. Is there a guard shack here or just

Yeah, that's the guard shack is not there. The guard shack is there and then there's a It looks like that's supposed to be an exit gate. At least that's what it's called out on something else. So, I'm guessing they don't want you to come in there, but you can get out there. The visitor parking is that little strip up to the north. Yeah. To the left. Right. Yeah. Correct. There's no gate or anything that goes to that other than you can't get into the building unless you go through the guard check. The guard check is here. Correct. Mhm.

What was the logic having the parking so far away from the buildings? They explain it to you. On one of these, they show future office building here, do they not?

Future office. It's kind of different. We don't know. It's a little It's It is. Yeah. So, future office. Okay. So, they've got plans to have something else built there eventually. Looks like it. Yeah. Okay. Makes more sense. Now, if um somebody has I I'm gathering they're not allowing any vehicular traffic other than the truck dock for the other buildings to the north because there's no parking up there for anybody. Correct. Yeah.

Do you feel like there should be a couple of parking spots just in case you needed somebody that needed something up there, they could at least have a place to stop? I guess it's an internal road. They can stop on the road, but just see the little odd. There's no parking up there at all. Anybody? Yeah.

Parking places. The landscaping crew that's going to be cutting the yard. I guess have to go through the gate. I just seems a little odd that there aren't any parking spaces around. They certainly paid enough money for this. I'm assuming they thought about all this. They probably have an answer to that question. I just thought it was a little weird. I don't.

Okay. I mean, I certainly can ask, chairman, but I guess my thinking is that's they're trying to segregate uses. That's where they want the the trucks and the landscaping crew is going to have to make other arrangements and where they park and get their equipment. [clears throat]

Yeah. I mean, obviously there's access because you guys have fought to get roads all the [clears throat] way around it. So, you got if you got to get an ambulance in there, you can get somebody in there. So, of the general layout, which I don't think it's this one you're looking at, but there's it looks like there's a parking area then that's going to be at the north. So, there's a Yeah, this [clears throat] one's showing the contractor parking. This is what Brad was talking about during the construction.

This is just for the construction. It's not going to be permanent. Yeah. So, it's temporary. It'll go away after the construction. And the construction entrance under this thing is going to come off 87th Street, you think? Um, more than likely or possibly. Yeah. Um, is that clear exactly how um the staging is going to work? I'm not sure. Yeah, we didn't quite get into those types of issues, but they do have access from 91st and 87th to that contractor area, which we felt was more than adequate as far as getting people to that location. I'm just thinking get trucks on 87th Street may be somewhat of a challenge. The truck traffic will come up 91st Street.

Yeah, I would think they're going to come up 91st, wouldn't it? Yes, the truck traffic will they'll come up 91st Street. So there won't be construction entrances off the 87th Street. Yeah. Their their main entrance that that would be east entrance would be the entrance their trucks come in for their construction equipment. Their workers will use 87th Street to access the trailers. Okay. There is access on 87th Street to the campus. Yeah. But you've got to make the hairpin turn on Penner and go by all the school children crossing over and that's not a great road [snorts] to have construction traffic.

Yeah. Well, we we we've talked with them. So during when they bring in their heavy equipment on 91st Street, they'll stage it so that it during school sessions, it will not come during school hours. So they'll stage it so that it comes after uh school starts so that we don't have that conflict. Well, I'm just thinking the shift change when they're getting off and everybody hops in their truck and drives down 87th Street. That's going to be kind of impressive, too. Is there a way you can route that over to Sunflower and have them come down 91st or I mean, that's something that we can definitely talk with them about. Keep it away from those neighborhoods over there. Their their traffic impact study only mentioned uh going on 91st Street. Y and that was for trucks and the workers.

Yeah. Well, the plan obviously looks to me like they're coming in off 87. Yeah. Because there's no tie over here to Sunflower Road, right? Correct. There's no tie to Sunflower Road. It's still early enough they can address that. Well, it's probably worth thinking about in terms of getting at least some commitment from them as to where they're going to have their trucks go. We can definitely have that conversation with them. I'm really not trying to pour vinegar all over this thing. I I'm just I'm just thinking of the poor people in timber trails. It's like, you know what, they're going to have truck going by there.

Yeah. Well, they've been they've been very conscious about timing and and so we can we can have that conversation with them. Okay.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions? I I don't know if it's in our code anywhere or if it matters, but I was I was trying to figure out where the fire hydrants were at. And then related to the question of no parking, like I don't know if that matters a lot or doesn't matter at all, but um if your if your plan is to not have parking for vehicles, then you might end up with vehicles in the uh easement access ways for the fire hydrants. And I was trying to figure out where those hydrants were. So, if you look at the utility plan,

and I did look at it and it calls out two. There's like Well, there's like nine that I counted on there. Oh, there. Yeah. There's a ton. So, I don't know if if we care about that or don't care about that. I just was trying to um what I was spending the last eight minutes doing, staring at my phone [laughter] was trying to count fire. I think that's where they said the building they were proposing might put in later is right up there. Yeah. Well, the fires are along the road, but Yeah. Yeah. There there's a lot. I don't I don't know if it matters or not. There sometimes you'll just stripe the the curb uh with a red uh stripe to say no parking or whatever. That's the only reason why I thought about it. Yeah. Well, you're right. Then internally that's the only place to park is going to be on those roads.

Yeah. I just I don't know if you want to include it in the site plan to have like the curb striped so you're very clear about where the trucks need to get to if there's an a fire safety event. You mean like market for a fire lane? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

So, the site plan that's before us tonight is for our approval. Correct. This does not go back to city council. That's correct. Yeah. I hate to delay approval of this for these kinds of issues, but it does seem like it's kind of worth talking about. Well, I guess one thing, chairman, is we do have that meeting on the 16th, so give Joe and myself a little bit of time. I don't know that timing there. Does that cause a problem for the applicant or I don't know that they I mean, obviously they they want to start, but Okay. Well,

yeah. To my knowledge, I don't I they want to break ground in the spring. There's a lot they can do. They can do massive mass grading, some utility stuff without the site plan approved. I I can't imagine three weeks is going to Well, yeah, if we're not inconveniencing them, I' I'd kind of like to address those issues as well as anything else anybody has worried about, but maybe a motion to table. Make a motion that we this site plan until the next meeting. Moved and seconded. Anything else we want to add to the list or any other comments? So, mostly it was construction traffic uh sequencing and routing.

Yeah. Uh the fire hydrant issue, internal parking. Internal parking. Yeah. Fire lane on internal roads, especially if there's no internal parking. And then traffic flow for construction is kind of the ones that I picked up. Yep. Yeah. So sort of three bullet points. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Any more than that and it's too much, right? I want to go four. Three is enough. The limit. We're not goats anymore. Okay. There's a motion pending then. Uh roll call. Lane. Yes. Templan. Yes. Martin. Yes. Milurn. Yes. Mock. Yes. Schultz. Yes. Motion carries.

Thank you. That leaves us with item 7B that I almost jumped ahead on. So, my apologies. You just You were so excited to get to the carriage houses again. Was really excited about it. I I thought we were finished with the carriage houses, but it's back. I was so confused. Apparently, back in 2017 when [clears throat] uh building number six was planted, there was a survey error that has now somehow been found. and with the county. I was not on the planning commission in 2017. [laughter]

So, you this is back before the planning commission with the the correction and I actually don't know where the correction is. They just said take it to the planning commission and prove it as is because the county and the surveyor of record are happy with what's being presented to the planning commission. Uh, one thing that's interesting about this plat is because the internal lots have already been sold. That's why the signature page for the owners is a second page and so they've got to get all the internal owners to sign in addition to the uh original developers of the carriage houses. So with that um staff recommends approval of the document final plat number 16 as presented. If it keeps on giving, Clark [laughter] over good now because your name's going on.

Oh, yeah. Right. So, um, yeah, maybe the only thing I could pick up is maybe the the strange little pieshaped piece on the corner of building six. Maybe that was that drew the line wrong the first time. I don't know. I couldn't tell what they changed and I really don't particularly care that they're good with it and the countyy's okay with it. That's what I'm thinking. It works for me. Discussion, questions, motion. Motion to approve item 7B as stated by staff. Second. Moved and seconded. Any further discussion? Roll call. Schultz. Yes.

Maddock. Yes. Milbour. Yes. Lane. Yes. Templan. Yes. Markin. Yes. Motion carries. I believe that concludes our agenda. Our next meeting is on the 16th. Happy holidays. Brad. Thank you for the uh back and forth on everything tonight. Yeah. Motion to adjurnn. I just it was coming, you know. Second. Lot to talk about. We're Well, you never know what we're going to talk about here. So, I read a thing that we're entertaining a a motion for a nuclear plant. Hang on now. [laughter]

Let's not I knew that was now. I just thought [laughter] we already approved it. Yeah. Yeah. Right. Yeah. It was item seven. We missed it.

No, sir. Um Yeah. So, uh, a Evergy and this the state of Kansas, um, and a company called Terrap Power have a memorandum of understanding to explore the possibility of citing a next generation nuclear facility somewhere in every service territory in Kansas. a number of communities um um you know down by Wolf Creek that community uh submitted interest Hutcherson did a number of other communities submitted uh letters of interest um you know in support of the facility in their fac in their communities um and the department of commerce um looking at the landscape in eastern Kansas I identified Dotto as um you know could could be the company could be very interested in it because uh the load is here and Everg has massive investments in the area already. Uh so they wanted to see if Dodto might be uh willing to submit a letter uh just expressing um interest in learning more about the potential and that's really the letters short and to the point um doesn't commit the city uh to doing anything other than exploring and being still involved in the conversation. So um it really is a pretty interesting technology if you you know just read up on what they're doing. Um, it it's it's not your father's nuclear plant. It's the the the factors of

I read the Facebook post. I figured I would ask. Okay. You should know. Yeah. Somebody was asking [laughter] why the hell we approved a nuclear plant. Yeah. John, it's in your backyard, isn't it? Yeah. But we didn't approve any idea on the timeline of what that like what their process looks like? Uh, it's hard to say. um you know it'll be a yearslong process at least to kind of select and and it might be that they choose not to do a project in Kansas that's does that impact any of the solar stuff that we're looking at still or is that

again there there's been no site you know selected you know the one I mean the tie in there is that Dotto does have an interest in ever increasing their power capacity because we have you know plans for for other advanced manufacturing and power users uh we've also at least tacidly indicated support for alternative energy sources and solar regs that we've kind of um you know that we that we adopted here was thrown down our throats. Is that what you mean? No, that's not at all. [laughter] So I mean at any rate

glad you like this everybody's going to get an eye pill down the uh the mail. [laughter] have a question about the lighting at Panasonic coming eastbound on Old10 Highway building and they've got several places where they've got these huge flood lights pointed towards