Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

there. Nice. Teresa, I'd like to call this meeting to order. Okay. Chairman Steve Dyer here. Mark Zolinski here. Brian Heel here. Kyle Cook here. Todd McConnell? Yes. Thank you, Teresa. Public comments on items not on the agenda. Did you get any slips today? I did not not seeing any slips. We're uh let's go ahead and temporary use permit 480 West Construction Stockton Street application. I think for this one, let's start with the staff report. Sounds good. I don't think there's an applicant here either.

Okay. Um I'll just jump right in. Uh the planning or the staff report starts on page 9 to 45 of your uh the pack review. Um, some of you may recall, I don't think the board totally turned it over since 2023. Um, this temporary use application was previously or a similar use was previously approved on this site in 2023. And so, um, as you as you know, and if not, I'll simply do a reminder. Uh, these temporary uses were introduced into the code for this specific use in that property. Um, and so this will be the second time it's been utilized. And essentially, it's to support off-site construction. So there'll be like vehicles, uh, equipment, materials, things like that stored on the property on a temporary basis. That's why you haven't seen any like concrete, asphalt, anything like that go down. The the requirements of the code do not allow for any permanent kind of ground cover things like that to be placed such as asphalt or concrete, things like that. Uh, the entire goal is to return the site after use to its original condition. Um, so that being said, as I went through the code, there are a series of criteria in the code, um, that are in the review for this on page 10 and 11 of 45 in your packet. Um, I didn't see anything that stuck out to me as a as a red flag or, you know, uh, that sort of thing that that would preclude this site from being used as a temporary layown yard. Um that said, as you move down to the condition or the conclusion part of the staff report on page 11, I do have a recommended condition in there that upon completion or expiration of a temporary use certificate. The site shall be returned to the original condition. This includes removal of all fencing, temporary structures and equipment and materials from the site. That should I'd like to include that condition. That should go without saying, hence the term temporary use, but I always like having that in there just as a little protection for the city. One other thing that I would like to recommend that you all consider as a condition is that uh at the city

council meeting last I guess that was um it was brought up that during the last temporary use permit there were routine problems with the they used temporary fencing like the type you can set up for an event things like that and although I think the applicant tried several times or repeatedly to get the fence to stay upright they just were never successful. So, um, one of the or I guess two things with that. The one part is that the fencing kept falling over. The second part is that the fencing did not go around the entirety of the area where, uh, materials were stored. So, I would recommend in addition to the condition that I have in the staff report that you all consider including a condition that requires at least um the posts themselves for the fencing to be set into the ground so that we don't have the same issue of falling over every other day every time the breeze blows. Um, and also I would uh would recommend that a condition be included that that fencing has to go around the entirety of of the area that is being used for for that storage. Not necessarily the property boundary because the property boundary has a lot of trees, vegetation, things like that. I wouldn't want to necessarily require clearing, but the area is clearly marked out on a site plan that they intend to use. And I think that the fencing for that should be at least around the entirety of that designated area. Uh, so with that, you all have a little bit to consider, but I'm happy to answer or try to answer any questions that you have.

I appreciate you saying that because that's one of the things I was going to bring up is the last time that was used, heavy winds blew the stuff over and as much as they tried to upright it, it fell over. Yeah. I know that several people that I talked to before I planning and zoning were had mentioned that that was not good to be able to see that. Yeah. And I was glad it was brought up to city council. That's the one unfortunate piece about me not being in town every day. I didn't get to experience that, but I do understand that that is frustrating kind of driving by there and it just it looks almost worse knocked over than us standing up sort of thing. So, totally understand that. Yeah, I know that was a good note by Miss Shook when she pointed that out. It definitely needs to be added in my opinion as conditional use. So, the post that you're mentioning, I'm sorry.

No, go ahead. the post that you're mentioning, are you are are those going would those be removed after that would be that part of the conditional? Correct. Yeah. So, they would have to be removed and I understand that kind of is a little bit counterintuitive of of setting posts into the ground knowing that you're going to take them out in 6 months, but in this case, we have a documented issue with trying to use temporary fencing. So, I think in this case, it's appropriate. And I've been uh talking to Mr. Sheridan as well. I think we're going to draft some minor revisions to this specific temporary use to require that sort of I'll use the word permanent in quotes because it won't be permanent but some way to a fix fencing to the ground so it doesn't blow over for these sorts of be my question. Do we need to call it out specifically to say semi-permanent? So

So that that will be coming in the future. That just is not applicable for

Okay. On that note, no applicant here yet, right? Um on that note, why does this fence need to be all the way around? Is there an issue with theft? Is it safety concerns for kids? It's more or le I think part of it was that was also brought up at the council meeting last week along with the fencing falling over. I think it was a combination of would the fencing have stood up better if it was around the entirety of the site and the code technically says that fencing must be provided around the entire the area used. I'm not sure why that wasn't the case last time but I think just to be overtly clear this time having a condition that it has to go all the way around just sets the stage and has clear expectations for the applicant and for the

I like that. The only reason I like it more is for safety of kids. Like the fact is there's a neighborhood there. Absolutely. Another concern I have is a lot of people don't like it there that I talked to in town. They just And I'm not saying that that's our decision. Um but the fact is that there's still some stuff from the last time there was a gut group there that hasn't been restored to its original state. And how do we ensure that it will

I mean in terms of like what mechanism the city can use it will be and I don't know currently just because of the staffing at the city currently but generally that would be something where a site inspector or someone would go out after that use was was wrapped up and they would say okay this looks good but you guys need to come back in and you need to like there's a pile of trash over here there's gravel still over here you guys need to come and get that off site and basically it would be an inspect infection. Typically, what my experience is after the use wraps up and everything is removed, the city would go out and inspect that site and say, "Yeah, looks good." Or, "No, you all need to come back and do whatever to to rectify that." Yeah.

If it would be helpful, we've actually hired a zoning inspector, code enforcement officer. So, that'll be somewhat available to Super helpful. Yeah, super helpful. Is his name Trevor? No, it's actually another Jeff. It's another Jeff. I offered it to him, but he wouldn't take it. Okay. Okay. Couldn't afford him. Um, any other discussion points from the board? Um, is this applicant normally here? Is this an applicant that has applied before in the past? Do they No, uh, they I did notify them. I sent them an email, but I never got a response back. So, I'm I'm not really sure why. Um, they started occupying the site before they were aware that they needed this. So, we're kind of behind the curve on That's what I was going to ask.

They've been there for a little bit cuz it's already there. But they they went along with the permit. They filled everything out. They know that it's going through this process. They've already paid their fees. So now we're just kind of going through. Right. They did put work into the permit. I would point that out. Sure. Uh you had a point, Mark, or No, it got answered. Is there an end date? Did I see that somewhere? July. Through July 2026. It says not to exceed six months. Yeah. So really we're September I think well I mean proposed duration is through July 2026 and

okay since um trying to think how to say this succinctly since the since the operator of that site has already established the use. I don't feel like you have to give them a full 6 months from this date. You can certainly have the next you could put a condition there that the use that the temporary use permit expires on the date that's listed in the application if that's what they say. I think that's their word. Yeah, I think it absolutely should. The last thing I have is any concern from the last time there was here with damage to our road. I don't remember there being any but that would fall under condition back to how it was. Yeah.

Well, I'm trying to think on that cuz I don't know because that's US62. I don't know what jurisdiction the city has over that to be honest. State did they say like if it's heavy use equipment going in and out or just they I mean I'm sure there'll be something. This is definitely heavy equipment trucks and other heavy thing pavement greater. Oh jeez. What's it doing? Are we allowed to ask it or no? You think you're allowed to ask whatever you want. What's it doing? What are they doing? We don't know. I don't know. They just applied for a temporary lay down yard is what they So I assume it's something construction related. Whether it's Last time it was pipeline construction. some constru on that site. We don't know if it's on that site. We don't know if it's offite. It's off site. Yeah. Right.

Yeah. Just for background that the temporary use is fairly new. It was introduced in 201 someone was wanting to use it. The city did not have the mechanism to allow it. So we we drafted the code language to allow it on a temporary basis. That's what the city. Do we is there some I mean is this always going to be like a construction temp site though in the future? Someone's just like you know they posted on some board hey if you need construction site in Johnstown I'm posting do we do we want that is for sale for sale it's been for sale for a long time. Yeah I remember they tried to build something there when I moved here 18 years ago and that failed miserably or whatever it was almost immediately. So

sounds like it's pretty profitable use as a temporary site. That's what that's what say. Do we want a permanent temporary site? Because it sounds like it's just turning a profit and if we I don't have a problem approving this, but like is it always going to be just a temporary site? As long as there's growth, there's going to be a need for a site like that. Now, whether you want to allow it at that location is up to you. Yeah. But there's going to be a need, probably a greater need for those kinds of sites in the area. And so that that is a great question. I think you know, hear the application, take action on it as you see fit this evening. But in the back of your head, that is something to keep in mind is are there maybe better locations in the city for this type of use? Understanding that long-term with the grow the growth that's coming, these sort of places will likely be needed, but that doesn't mean it always has to be.

That's what I want to avoid is it's always being just a temporary That's why I want to make sure it's cleaned up this time. So, I like the fact that we hired somebody and then a site inspection visit at the end. Yeah. Yeah. Is there stone? I don't think that happens. Stone down there right now. Just a few big ones. I don't think they're so things we talked about. We want fencing post in the ground. Uh end date is what's on the application. Uh site inspector visit at the end. Uh yeah, I never also the fencing goes all the way around, right? I think that was the um and then there was something else in your conclusion. Did we cover that one? Just that um after the temporary use certificate is expired or over the site that you return. Yeah. So I think that falls under site inspection inspection visit. Yeah.

Yeah. If they damage road, that's on us or state. It's on the state, I guess. I proving that they did the damage is going to be very, very difficult. There's so much heavy equipment being moved around in the area already. So, you'd have to have pictures of the road before whatever vehicle went on there and then pictures right after to prove that was the vehicle that did it. It's it's a common problem, but it's almost impossible to police. Gotcha. And if they're 3 months into it, it's already happened. Yeah. in three months until we haven't seen any damage yet. So,

we also have somebody who's applying for an application. I just wanted to say that out loud like that's good. Um I I'm in fa I'm likely to be in favor of this with these conditions. I would like to us the board to keep in the back of their mind like in the future it's not our property that we're renting out or we can't really control other people's property but if kind of think about in the future where could these locations be it's right in the city people don't like it but also people are nosy like to see the progress so yeah well I think everyone's going to say oh something's going to happen nope just a temporary site

yeah so we could build in new Albany so the thing we have to be careful of too is we grant it before so if we just all grant because people don't like don't like it and they can come back at us and just cuz you don't like it doesn't mean that well yeah someone's not going to like it no matter where we would put it right I mean the reality of it is and like you said we don't own the property so we can't say what they do with it when we can but I mean I think cities typically zone areas for lay down sites or is yes in my experience often times it's in it's in more industrial oriented areas yes but but it's not uncommon to have those especially in so let's think about that. Yeah.

The growth you all are about to experience or are experiencing, I think it probably is warranted. If not, it'll just happen illegally on various sides. So, for future decisions in that site, we can pay attention to the traffic issues because people are turning left and right out of there. Yeah, that's a busy intersection. If that's an issue, we can pay attention to that for next time. I'm not saying it is. I'm not coming to a conclusion. But traffic is traffic and left turns hold people down. Would it make sense to add a provision about traffic control? some type of a flagger or someone to be on site. My only concern with that is how do you all how do you enforce it? Absolutely. Same thing. Same thing. But put it in there so we can prove they didn't. That's I mean Yeah, sure.

Well, I know. I'm just I'm throwing it out that as an option because if that starts backing up traffic there, too. I mean, I'm assuming you can only fit like five cars in that spot max, right? It's not a huge on that lot. I mean, if it's just a lot more bigger than I think it is. I would like a solution, right? the area that's right next to here. Yeah, that's why it's a big area. So, they've got a lot now. It's a big area. The people who are showing up are showing up. There's trees on some, but even that's probably acuring the height times. Okay. We'll just have to monitor. I think you said monitor it. Yeah. I mean, it's just something to pay attention to. We're already halfway through April.

Yeah. And then they've been fine. Yeah. Okay. Any other discussion from the board? Good. I'd like to make a motion to approve application 3. What is it? 33126. No, that's not it. Temporary use permit. 480 West Kash. 480 West Kaka Street. Um what is it called with the with the conditions? With the conditions. Thank you. That they put fencing completely around it and they put the post in the ground. Uh the end date is what's on the application and that the the city conducts a site inspection visit to ensure that it's returned to its original use.

Condition original condition condition and I think not used condition. We don't have the original condition. So it's going to have to be the zoning guy is going to have to take or whoever is going to take a stab at it. It looks decent. I I'm confident that our city I think I think back to is just ground. Yeah. No trash, no gravel, nothing left, you know. So, it's organic material. Just organic material. Okay. That's that was always the goal with that with timber use. Yeah. So, there's a motion out there. Okay. Go right ahead. Yeah. Go ahead. No, I'll second. All right. Steve Dyer. Yes. Kyle Cook. Yes. Todd McConnell. Yes.

Brian Heel. Yes. Markinski. Yes. Um now, thank you. Before moving on, I would like to Kyle, do you have something you would like to add? Um are would you be okay looking into I guess where we might zone for something like that in the future? Yeah. I mean, I can provide some thoughts on it. Yeah. Um yeah, because I want to look through the plane development zoning district. not I mean most of those sites I think are spoken for down there but I feel like that's where a lot of the construction energy generally is and so um but I want to take a look through that code to see what uses are allowed yeah maybe there's not a better spot but

but I think that'd be great and then if there's a site identified if the city could reach out if there just hey if next time someone comes with this we can be like hey there's also this location we're not trying to take business away from somebody but the and if you open it up in a whole different zoning district I think right I forget what the zoning is on that property, but it's like a commercial district, but I think if you were to do a similar or temporary use in your industrial district, that would open up a pretty wide variety of properties really that could I like that. And I think they um Yeah, they could do it on their own property as a um Well, that's on their own property.

Why did I say that out loud? Um application 33126 conditional use. So, now we're on to this one. 11546 Johnstown Udica Road drivethru. We have an applicant here for that. I think we'd like to start with them.

Hi there. Hello Bean with Bean Architects. Um first of all, Theresa and Trevor have been fantastic to work with. You're lucky to have them. Agreed. They've been a huge help throughout the process. This is the first of three applications that we'll have before you. Uh we need to get through conditional use to see if we can carry that forward to our certificate of it certificate of appropriateness and zoning certificate. Um and it's just a portion of the upcoming work that we're presenting uh that you'll see tonight. So, uh, do I need to give the overall run through or?

Yeah, they have the, uh, images in their packet of kind of the grand scheme. Great. Yeah, if you could just summarize it.

Sure. So back in I think it was 2008ish uh Skilen uh zoned reszone this property brought before uh the board then uh a development for uh the Kroger an inlined retail strip that was attached to the Kroger a second inline retail that was coming at an angle off the south end of that uh as well as a a pad that we're talking about tonight that sat that sat between that second inline retail and some outlots that front Jakton. Um the portion of retail that that was to be attached to the Kroger and the piece between the second retail and out lots uh fronting Kashakton were never built. Uh since that time, the properties sold obviously at least once, maybe multiple times and uh we have a representative from uh current uh owners here tonight as well as the devel development team if you need for them to answer any questions. Um, but that island piece, uh, which has a small retail building, we don't know exactly what it's going to be, initially contemplated a a drive-thru of of some sort. Um, and there were actually drive-thrus shown on the ends of each of the inline retail pieces behind. Um, since then, the the drive-thru that was constructed uh at the end of the second inline retail, which would be directly behind the piece we're talking about now, has been filled in, and the restaurant that occupies the endcap using that for outdoor cooler freezer, I believe, and additional patio space. And in the future, uh, as part of one of our other two applications, the inline, um, that would be attached to

the Kroger, which also had a drive-thru initially contemplated, would not. Um, we're we're planning on on taking those those inline retail shops, restaurants, uh, to the south and having a patio at the end there. So, out of three originally proposed drive-throughs, this would be the only one that we're looking to carry forward at this time. Um, the difference being, uh, the drive-thru that was presented back in '08, I believe it was, uh, didn't have as much of a stacking queuing lane. It was just a a short drive-thru that ran down the from west to east along the south edge of that building. Yep.

We've revised the shape of that building to make it shallower so that we could wrap our stacking around the back. Uh when I say back away from Kashakton, which is depending upon the user, if they have a menu board and speaker post and all that, it would be behind. Um anyway you look at it. However, since this building sits behind the outlots, you know, it's it's fairly well obscured from uh from the shockton by way of the chase that's there and the uh natural veget education that uh is along the south. So, um that's it in a nutshell and I can answer any questions you may have.

Well, thank you for such a nice application. I um I think you explained it very well. I really enjoyed the fact that you you brought up that you originally wanted three, now there's only going to be one. I think that's completely reasonable, saying that out loud. And any questions for him? Again, this is this is just for the conditional use for the drive-thru. That's all we're deciding on. So, on property. Yep. Just a reminder that no questions from you. I mean, do we know what restaurant? I mean, we don't. Maybe I mean that's that's the only question I have.

We don't and we would anticipate this building being a multi-tenant building. Two or three smaller users probably uh the the drive-thru pigs traditionally wouldn't want a location like this behind a chase. So it'll be a smaller, you know, what would it be? Smoothie type shop or something. I don't know. Yeah. Is it a um and then the design review board has to go over everything. We don't have to worry about any of that stuff. Right. Right. Correct. Everything that they've given with ren renderings is consistent. What's our deal? I don't think we have anything there. Yeah. I really appreciate that put that in the back. What's the uh timeline for construction on these?

Good question. I I'm Greg Gallas. I'm with Galasad Development. We've been retained by the owners of the center represented here by Craig Goodwin, which is Filillmore. Um, we would anticipate, depending upon leasing activity, the possibility of getting in the ground before the end of this year. Okay.

And and then a sort of a six-month construction time frame, delivering space in the spring would be what we're hoping for. Uh, depending upon activity, the worst case would be starting right now, a year from now. The idea would be to build this small piece and the inline together scale from construction. Yeah, I know it's been marketed for a while. That's why I'm asking.

Well, it is uh but it is now being marketed for the first time really ever uh with as you I think see uh with all the sort of elevations that Carter did and actual lease outlines of you know it was sort of a hodgepodge before we're finally sort of getting our arms around a a more organized approach to the thing and actually we expect there to be a fair amount of activity pretty soon. Okay. So, is there an expectation to be able to release those areas before the build starts or is that uh we'll start building it and then they'll come?

I wish. No, no, we we'll have to have a movie. So, I guess about 70 or 80% committed before we before we get permission from the owners to come out of the ground. Okay. For sure. For sure. My 13-year-old helps me prepare for meetings and he said he would like a BB bop. that would be. So, anything you can do that crazy, we have one motion on the table for the restaurant. Do we have a second? That's a dad joke. You had a meeting. You are the king. We could do that, but okay. Any other questions for the applicant on that?

So, I have a question for us. So are the types of tenants that would go in there is that something that would come before us to approve or not or is that up to As long as there it's in the in the approved use. No. Okay. I just I wanted to clarify that we don't have to worry about parking like in the parking lot here a little bit staff reporting. Yes. Maybe that's what I go there to park. Yeah,

these are a little bit scenarios like this are a little bit unusual because obviously most of that site came out of the ground in 2008 and and had the standards of 2008 applied to it. I don't think the zoning standards or like site development standards have changed all that much since then, but sites like this generally they're developed like all the parking for that entire retail center was built. Okay. So, in my in my in past experience, when centers like this go to start filling in, it really parking is pretty much a non-issue just because it's normally way overbuilt on the front end and as it fills in, it just kind of uses the rest of that capacity. Um, there will be some small changes right around exactly where the building is, but it's I don't think there's any loss of parking. No, there's actually gain a couple. Yeah.

There we go. Really? I guess Trevor, why don't you not Yeah, if you want to keep going. Yeah,

sure. So, um I'm not going to go through the staff report in detail. Um this is a very straightforward request because as was mentioned, this is just for the drive-thru portion of the site. And so, in reviewing the code and the criteria that are in uh chapter 1131.03, I didn't see anything that that stuck out as a well, let's hold on for a minute. Um as Mr. being pointed out. I think that, you know, a this is behind a bunch of other facilities that already have drive-throughs. It's also further back off of Kosakin Street. Things that I generally look for from a planning standpoint when I'm reviewing something like this is what happens when the drive-through is full. Can can sight still function? Can cars get around? Um, you know, is it back is there potential to back up out into a public street? I don't see any it would have to be a major backup in this case for that to happen, you know. So, in that in that case, I think as far as location of the drive-thru goes, it's probably about as good as it's going to get. You know, it's back off the street, it's screened back on other buildings, um things like that. So, I I didn't see any major red flags

and it's already in the code to provide screening where buildings won't. So, I mean, we don't need to worry about that with lights hidden. No, exactly. And um as part of the zoning certificate, the applicant did provide an fully updated landscape plan. There will be, I think, about 20 more trees on site than there are today. Some of those will be in the parking lot and in revised islands. So overall, yes, I think there uh the direction that it's heading is will be above and beyond what is there today in terms of landscaping and screening in that. Cool. How about the fence that's all over? It's like blown to pieces that's over there. Is that your responsibility or is that Kroger? The fence. The white fence that's over there. There's a fence on the What is it? The what side of the property is that? I don't know if that's what he asked. It's on

I don't know without pulling the survey. I give you an answer. Yeah, it's on part of it like where the car wash was proposed behind the gas station. Oh, that's if you're looking at Kroger to the right, but I don't know if Kro I don't know if it's Kroger's responsibility or if it's because it really just abuts that section. I don't have the answer to that. Again, I'd have to pull the information and get it for you. Be happy to do that. Okay. Yeah, this is it's in pieces everywhere right now. This is the Kroger path. It's ours. We fix it. Yeah, we'll fix it. The Kroger path. It's beyond their expansion area. We would get the attention.

Yeah. I think technically it only touches the part that Kroger doesn't own over there, which is behind. Is it this one? Yeah. Oh, so even and then there's residential homes. The residency. I was just going to say brought up. Well, I wanted some some other alternatives that don't blow apart in a windstorm every time would be perfect. Is any of the construction in here going to take into account the pond? There's a large pond that's just on the other side of where it looks like this is designed right

to be able to shield that off or do anything. I'm not suggesting putting a fence up. If it is, it is. I'm not suggesting that, but just any of the the landscaping, the trees and shrubs, things because there's from where this is, there's a pond that's right in the back of where the driving area is right now. Retention basin. Yeah. So, just wondering if there's anything to be able to help shield that off or block it off. I'm not sure if I'm using the right words or not, but just to separate What's the concern about separating the pond from the drive aisle there? Is that just asking if there if if any of the landscaping is will be in? It looks like it's going to be in between. There's guardrailing up along

and there's a guardrail that's there right now. So, just wondering correct. Thank you for reminding me of that. I appreciate that. Um any consideration for that? Is that going to is that something to be removed for this? It's still going to stay that'll stay there. They shouldn't even They won't even be touching that. Yeah, they're really just taking the grass out there and taking replacing grass. Fairly steep. There is steep slope there. They're really not changing roads or anything. It's There's a grass pad there and a grass pad next to Kroger. So, really, they're just filling out the grass pad. That's Thank you for reminding me about that. I forgot that was there. Yeah. Yeah. We can't stop anything that goes in there if we approve suggest things though, right? like this.

Well, yeah. I just I I I look out for our local coffee shops. Something like ceramics we could put in there. Pottery figurines. Don't go back to that, please. Chicken joints be in there. Um, anything else from the city? No, just any additional questions. And I'll make a motion to approve application 3-31-26, conditional use 11546 Johnston Utica Road. And I, Steve Dyer will second it. She always asks you second. All right. Kyle Cook. Yes. McConnell. Yes. Yes. Markinski. Yes. Yes.

And this is two weeks. Yeah. You'll come for your COA for the design review board. Nice to meet you. Yeah. You're welcome. Other business. I'll email that over. Thank you, gentlemen. Action item number five, ladies and gentlemen. Other business. You might not be here. I won't be here at the next meeting and I may or may not be here. There may be three. We will have three of us. We still have Corum though with three, right? As long as I can walk after doing half marathon. I'll be okay. Okay. Well, if you don't get along, let us know. Mark me into the But they're coming back next. Is that when for another

They're going to be back in two weeks for design review board. Review. Okay. Okay. Granville Mill will be here for their drive area to the parking lot. You remember that? Y they'll be here for you next time. Which just FYI on that one. You won't see a report from me on that. I think at this point you all are more familiar with Milling than I am. I from my absence being out for a while. So u I I don't have any objection or anything like that. No, we've seen it once. Council's seen it already, too. So it's that's Yeah. So I just like to reiterate we talked about in the meeting. I I've heard a lot of people from the city say they don't want that storage unit there, but it's kind of the lay down site.

The lay down site. Yeah. So, I think that's I'm I'm kind of excited to have something on hand to present to other people. Like I've these meetings come up, I talk about things with people and a lot of people are just like all up against it. Uses like this are always challenging and I think when it was my recollection from when it originally was brought up and we drafted the code to to amend it to allow those sorts of things was I think the initi the first project like I said was for a pipeline. So there wasn't really any one area on a site that they could lay things down. I have a little bit different of opinion of like an actual construction site. If you got a 50acre site you're developing you should be able through staging and that sort of thing to figure out how to store your stuff on site. Yeah. Yes.

I felt a little differently. Like I said, if it's an infrastructure or road project where you know you might need a piece of equipment 5 miles from where you store it sort of thing, that's a little different in my opinion. But I certainly think this is something that you all are going to continue to be concerned about. We change the code based on an application that was a request that was made. If it ultimately ends up that the public opinion is that we don't really want that stuff here, you can certainly change the code back. You don't have to continue allowing that. Yeah. But I'd like to get the public in here, not just telling me.

No, and I totally understand that. Yeah. So, I mean, if it's something that, and this is not uncommon with any zoning zoning issue, like you change your code to allow use and all of a sudden it's like, maybe that wasn't the best decision that we made. You change your code either back or you adjust it to make sure that it is what you want. So, I think this is just part of that natural process working its way through. Do we have any other locations in the city that would also qualify for a staging area? There are other there would be other sites in that zoning district that it could be applied to, but I don't I don't know of any specific like actual sites themselves. That would be one of the issues. You've got to have a site that can go somewhere. Well, sure. And an owner that's And even that even that's not going to be a site if they sell it. No.

You know, so it's more so I guess what Steve was talking about is do we want to zone for it in an area that's so highly congested with traffic? I mean, that is legit. You are stop and go on that road. And um yeah, it's the last place I'd want it, but especially the wind slick when it's icy on that hill. So yes, if you if you come up with some ideas, we can discuss it as a team and then once if that annexation port part goes through on what is it 100 some odd acres down 62, then that's a perfect site for it because it's much closer to the development that this is probably being used for anyways. Right. And if they're going to wide Yeah. And then it's again it's the case that they started and then we're backtracking. So

yeah. And that's tough. I mean that that's a good point. I will say that's kind of happened both times on that site which kind of you know adds insult to injury. But I will say it this was just people testing their boundaries. It's No, I don't No one ever told me I can't have a laid on the yard. I'll just do it. Well and to that point too, I also think that if an application is put in, no matter how well done, applicant should also be here so that we can discuss. Um cuz I I I would more I'm more likely to say I don't want it or no if you're not here. Um but since they're already there and I'm not going to go kick them out. Um or you know that's that's a lot of work on the city. This will also come to council because it requires council approval. So I can stress to them again that you would like them to.

Yeah. Um, I appreciate that. The um on if we code if we put it in the code to be in one location, can we remove it as well from this then? Oh, sure. Now, I don't know that that would that will not automatically revoke that temporary use permit. Well, right. Not this not this. I'm not talking about for now. But yes, you could do it you could do an amendment where you're saying, okay, we agree that we that we want this use in the city, but we want it in this district, not the district it's currently in. And in one ordinance, you can strike where it is currently happening. It's probably what's working. Yeah. I mean, because as as long as it will take to change the code, it'll probably be a lay down site for three other companies before then. So, it's all right. That's right. Yeah.

Any other business hearing? None. I'll make a motion to adjourn. I'll second. All in favor? I got it.