City Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

your order at 6 p.m. Um, start with a roll call. Steve here, Margaret here, Jane Pickin here, here. Jake here, and Alex Wilson here. Um, are there any additions to the agenda? No last part. Anyway, sorry. Um, all right. Can I have a motion to approve the agenda? So, move support. All right. Uh, uh, yes. Say hi.

Hi. I know. We're good. All right. Um, there um minutes from March 3rd. Does anyone have notes on? Good.

Alex, I have some notes that Steve gave me on several three mistakes in the just corrections that small. So, I have those. All right. Um to add them with aition. All right. Uh yeses. No, you need a motion. I move that we acceptance with the changes with the correction. Thank you. Seconded. Okay. Uh all in favor say I. I and nos.

Good. All right. Um next is All right. Any conflicts of interest on anything today? No. Awesome. Um public hearings there are none. Um, citizens wishing to address the commission on agenda items. Uh, if anyone has if anyone besides the applicant is here to comp comment on new business items or work session, now is the time. Cool. Um, all right. Old business, there is none. Okay. Um, at this time we would let new business at this time. We'd like to hear from the staff. Um,

great. This is for 01 CSD0326 and 02 SP0326 Mullen Meadows site convenue. City staff has reviewed the proposed site condominium subdivision to be named Mullen Meadows consisting of seven units located on Mlullen Avenue and have provided comments regarding the claim. Those comments were in the staff report and the land development code specifies a two-step review process. The planning commission will review site county proposal and provide a recommendation to the city commission. Then the city commission will review it. In the agenda you have the staff file reviewing on screen. The planning commission will need to review those items. And then attached to that you have the site plan review application from the outfit and their narrative regarding the site plan review items that were not in the set. Staff comments their responses to staff comments. The area map, the parcels outlined in blue. The block map, the parcels outlined in blue. Photos of the site. And then the site. Did the planning commission have any questions to staff?

I do have one question more procedural than anything I guess. Um, looking at the I don't know the code language. It says the planning commission shall consult with and receive a written response from the direct planning director of training engineers administrator um regarding the adequacy of the master deed deed restrictions utility systems and street and development layout. Yeah. So that's an amendment when we bring it to you guys because in the other part of that code and age it states that they don't start doing the master dean until after city commissioner. Okay.

So I talked to the city attorney so that supersedes. Okay. Also um unlike past condominiums that we have dealt with the utilities have all been installed ahead of time here. And I guess I'm wondering how that happened and um why there was a different procedure followed in this case. You'll have to talk to the answer that question, right? You'll have to ask the applicant on that. Okay. Because they only put in one utility, I believe, right?

Can I answer? Yeah. Just wait. Well, any more questions for me?

No, I think that's it. Hi, I am Megan Hornogen. I am the board president of Habitat for Manny Marquette County and I'm also an architect for Barry Cosen's office um here in Marquette. Um I don't know if you want me to go straight to answering his questions or if you want me to talk a little bit about the project and how it started. So, how this project started, we were obviously looking for land to build housing, and this will probably answer the question, too. And we had a parcel over on Spring Street next to the Beacon House, and they really wanted that parcel. And so, they helped us find a new parcel to build on, and that's how we ended up at Mlen Street. Um, but in our transaction to swap parcels, we told them we wanted it to be like for like, which meant the utilities had to be ready before we traded parcels. And so the medical center went through when they owned the property and got the utilities put in by Overstar. It was not habitat putting in the utilities ahead of time. It was just having a site that was ready to be swapped so that we would take ownership of this site. Um, yeah. So, we're really just trying to ball zoning um and split it into the sizes that are allowed in a mixeduse district and um some market if you have any questions. I'll be here questions. All right. Um thank you.

Uh okay. Um it's time to review. Okay. Um I guess we need a motion here to suspend rules for discussion. Also support. All right. Uh yeses vote. Yes. Sorry. I don't know how to say it yet. All in favor. All in favor. Sorry. I

uh any second. Okay. Uh yeah. Uh I don't know. Um yeah, just been a closer discussion. Okay. Um section. Okay. Section 454. So just go through each one and then All right. Um so section 54503 for condominium developments. Um I'm just going to go through each one. Uh intent and application. here. Uh, so site condominiums. Should I read the whole the whole paragraph or bring it up on the screen here?

Okay. All right. Um staff comments uh for site for B under site committee condominiums s report attached with with attachment shall be the written response uh if this is approved by the city commission city staff will be reviewing the master restrictions etc. All their items are being reviewed through this step of the process.

What? Okay, I'm I'm lost. What do I need step by step? Do we need to vote on this? No, you guys are just reviewing the

Gotcha. Um for uh letter C, there were no staff comments. Um under D several these items have been addressed where applicable and then there's more in the applicants response there are more remaining items covered uh letter E site plans for new projects a site plan has been submitted this section has been met um letter F plans for expandable or convertible projects no staff comments Letter G, design and engineering standards and required improvements for site condomin is an existing public street. The proposed sidewalk in the rideway has to meet the city standards under letter H approval and submittal requirements for master deed restrictive covenants as built surveys and sight lines and association bylaws to be furnished. Um staff comments are if this site can condominium is approved by city commission then this section must be met. Um monuments required letter I if this staff comments if the site condominium is approved by city commission then this section must be met. Um letter J compliance with federal state and local laws. Staff comments that the site common name is approved by city commission then this section must be met. K subdivision of site condominium units and condominium units staff comments are per the applicant's response to zoning general comment for there is no plan to allow for subdivision of site common units l encroachment encroachment prohibited staff of the site common by city commission section must be met um m

relocation of boundaries staff comments are If the site committee condominium is approved by city commission then this section must be met. And lastly uh letter N performance guarantee staff commentate the application applicant request to have occupancy prior to installing all required improvements section must be met at that time. And then uh relation to relationship to site plan review standards. Um under one public health safety and welfare staff comments. Uh the proposed site is for seven site commenting units that will have access to existing public streets. Um two safe and efficient transportation options. Uh staff comments are this project will be located on an existing public street. When the permits are submitted for the driveways, they will be required to meet land development code and city code at that time. Three, vehicular and pedestrian circulation staff comments. They are proposing to replace the city sidewalk that was removed during utility construction that was completed last fall 2025. Four, topography and landscaping staff comments. The existing off street parking lot was removed from the partial and the sighting was created at that time.

Answer the question is please what is it for this? If you guys have any additional comments when he's reading you should state that part of your report. Okay. Would you mind explain the process of why just like you're doing and you're looking through each item. If you have any additional comments or you have agree with any of those comments, this would now be your time for you to work on. Okay, this is not every change of zoning or anything like that. No site administrative review for which in your motion you're going to refer back. So if it's ever appealed to approve items agree with those statements, you want to change those statements or you want to state

just like right if you're trying to make changes administrative review just like when you're reviewing the variances you have to answer each one of the questions that's what you're going for now and that's completely responsible responsible city.

You're doing review and we're required. Yes. Okay.

Okay. Um I think I could just done four uh five storm water management staff comments. any impervious future service proposals will be evaluated as part of each individual zoning compliance permit for the associated structures. Um six, emergency vehicle access staff comments are police and fire department have reviewed the plans and have no comments regarding vehicle access. Seven, outdoor storage and loading and unloading areas um not applicable. Uh eight, lighting not applicable. Nine, location of building entrances not applicable. 10, nuisances. Staff comments are it is not anticipated that this development will be a nuisance to surrounding properties. And uh 11, city Marquette engineering design and construction standards notable. Um all right. Um any any comments, questions? Can I ask I now have a question for staff. Is it okay if I ask that?

Um, so this proposal or this site plan review is to develop or to allow this to be developed as a site condominium, but they're not proposing any construction. So, will we see a similar No, this is this is a site condominium request. So they're asking me instead of going through the land division process, they're going through this process creating a split in the land as site non units. Okay? So that's why you guys are reviewing it and a site interview. You're not going to see design and things like I said in there each zoning permit is going to be for buildings. So you are just reviewing a site, not a condominium. Okay.

Yeah. and that the review of the individual properties is does not rise to the level commission review it. Um and this is this process is a bit different than reszoning or special land use where you guys do have some discretion to um make well in the case of reszoning a recommendation that city commission is going to take into consideration a public hearing. This isn't a public hearing. This is quite a different process and a lot of it is spelled out by state law. So we're largely following the state law parameters for we do this.

It it seems like without you know since that's the type of request that this is and it's not like construction proposal a lot of the things were not applicable or don't require a ton of review. So Yeah. Would anybody like to make a motion?

I realizing the utilities are not really a part of this, but I still have a few questions about utilities and the way they are. put in the I'm wondering whether they have been accepted as public utilities by the city at this point because they're not shown on your clock map with the with the public utilities. Um I don't know how often they would amend that yet. they may be in process of adding all new

and some of what was shown there does not seem to meet the city standards for val locations um and for looping rather than creating long dead ends. Um I'm not sure if it's just not shown or and it was completed or if it's shown as as constructed there. It's hard to tell from the drawing we have. Um, looks like the apps may have some information on that.

Yeah. And I guess so what I know is that North Country um surveying and engineering had the drawings um drawn up for the utilities and it went to the city market public works department for approval and their comments were incorporated and it was permitted work the utilities and the rightways and the only comments that the city had was that we had to create that easement so that we could keep the water line far enough away from the sanitary line and so we have a I think it's 25 ft easement on the front of our property now that allows the city utilities to come to our property.

Just one more question and um most of the habitat homes that I'm familiar with are they're typically built without a basement slab homes. Um but this places the water man very close to your front building line. manufacturer determines the front building line in some cases. Um, and that's, you know, high pressure water maintenance pressures in that area, I believe, are over 90 PSI and has the potential to do some major structural damage. It's that close to the buildings right there. Just wondering if there's any specific measures being taken or that's being considered in the design.

Yeah. Um and so the front corner of the house is like as you can see the lots get a lot larger as we go um south of the page. Um but the setback that's what runs in the city and the easement are above the city line and the water line will be at least 10 ft from that beginning of the home line and then we know where we set those houses completely determined. Obviously like Andrea said we're not pulling permits to build houses we're asking to split into a lot. So that will be determined. Thank you. Any other questions?

Yeah. Um Dave Andrea you said staff recommends the following condition of approval that an amendmented plan is submitted to staff comments. Correct. So that's something you put in motion. Yes. Any other questions? Would anyone like to make a motion?

I'll make a motion. Uh after review of the site plan and the supplemental documentation dated 42624 and the staff report for 02- SPR-03-26 and 01-csd3-26. The planning commission finds substantial compliance with the city of Marquette land development code section 54.1405 and section 54503 and hereby recommends that the city commission approve 02-P3-26 and 01-csd3-26 with the following conditions. uh that an amended plan is submitted to meet the SA comments.

I just have one correction in my memo that the date wasn't updated to instead of 426 24 should be February 1726. Thank you. There's my motion. Seconded. All right. Uh all in favor say I. I. No. Awesome. 770 7. All right. Okay. Um, yes.

Next thing. Uh, oh yeah, we have a presentation for the climate action plan. You want me to introduce myself?

Okay. So, hi, my name is Anna Tley. Um I am a rural leadership fellowship student. I'm in the third cohort of that and I'm also an MPA student going to be I'm doing my bachelor's right now in political science. So yeah um this is my project that I was given. So it's a climate action plan with the city of Marquette. What is a climate action plan? A climate action plan is a strategy document that sets goals and outlines a set of initiatives that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This is a lot of text on the slide. I know using a greenhouse gas emissions as the base. A cap defines greenhouse gas reductions targets and provides a framework for achieving them. It identifies priority actions and facilitates coordination across departments. It supports effective action over time by establishing methods for assessing progress and adjusting the local strategy. So what is a greenhouse gas emissions inventory? It calculates, quantifies or assesses municipal or community associated emissions and our sources. They're an accounting of the carbon pollution that results from certain activities and processes that support municipal functions. We are going to be doing a government operations greenhouse gas emission inventory. So what will this include? A target goal of 2025 to 2050 to match the climate action resolution of 2050. There's going to be an emphasis on previous and aligning actions that the city has done. Um there's going to be some community input through a steering committee, a public survey, and public engagement opportunities. So, it's going to have an executive summary of climate action and climate change in Marquette, a greenhouse gas emissions inventory. It's going to have seven focus areas with objectives and actions, and then at the bottom, it's going to have a matrix with goals along cost effectiveness.

So those seven focus areas are going to be buildings and energy, transportation, water and wastewater, waste and recycling, natural resources, public health, and then climate economy. And then some examples of this, um, one that shows off the beautiful, uh, efforts previously done by a city was done by Sterling Heights. One that shows off ways that you can reduce greenhouse gas emissions was done by White Fish. And then kind of an explanation of what climate economy is and what an objective would be to show the focus area is is that climate economy by

Thank you. You guys have any questions? I can answer them. Questions? Not so much a question, just a comment. The city has the past uh done several energy efficiency improvement projects with Johnson Controls. Yes. And I presume that the records will uh be a major source of your Yes. Historical information.

Yes. Um the Johnson Controls is part of it and then I'm using a lot of I'm having all the uh lovely city employees find like the drive times and the gas data and the natural gas bills and all the bills. So yeah, the Johnson Controls contract is um one of the efforts that you guys have done for the building section, but it's not like what I'm using for the emissions inventory if that's what you're asking. Okay. I just felt it be a good resource.

Yeah. Oh, yeah. I read it. That's that's the latest. There were several prior to that as well. Yeah. Is there do you have any kind of a preliminary or hopeful timeline for completing the court?

So my fellowship lasts this until December of this year. So my running shining hope is that this project and this plan will be done have a draft done by December and that it can be adopted by the city commission thereafter. Um my plan is to hopefully have this all done by December. Um, what do you envision as the community input opportunities list? Yes. Survey public engagement. What do you see that playing out as?

So, the survey is going to be I just actually did it recently. It's going to be like 30 questionsish about um what do you think is the most important thing in Marquette asking what services do you use? what services would you use? So, that's one engagement opportunity. We're gonna have a steering committee that's kind of non-denous, so I'm not going to speak too much on that. Um, then we're going to have some sort of stakeholder sessions or some sort of open houses for people to come to and give their opinions to. I would also like to go to where people are um go to people's like a game or something or like you know pick up time after school to get people's opinions go to where people are but um I do plan on encouraging and talking to people of the public because this is a community plan and this is for everyone and it's not my opinions at all. I think it should be what we all think and what we all want. So yeah,

thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Looking forward to the Of course. Um

I just want to point out one thing. Um so one of the things Anna has discovered was the planning commission when we adopted land development code had protection section subsection of article 8 which did some would have accomplished some tree protection had it not been kind of um badly constructed and had some fatal flaws and was shortly after we adopted it was repealed. Um, and we I I can fill you all in on more of that later. But one of the things I'm hoping we can do through this process is adopt some kind of a canopy standard for the city single tree canopy standard that will then somehow make its way into our LDC. um and into the uh the city's tree ordinance for street trees and public lands trees and maybe create a public land bank on city land. Um, and that that's something that I think there's been enough turnover on the PC that not many of you remember this, but a couple years ago we were when Sarah Middle was the chair, we were she was very eager for us to get to that place. And um one of the things I I learned at a state the state planning conference a couple years ago, maybe a year and a half ago, was that no communities in Michigan had made progress on a legally defensible tree protection code. Um it's

very problematic. Um, so, uh, canopy standards seems to be like the most likely way we can kind of get at that. And, um, so I just that's kind of an update on where we're at like that. It it's been a long process to or learning process to try to get back to where we can do some kind of actual tree protection through our city ordinances. It'll be in the natural resources section.

Are there I'm just curious. Are there any um for having the true city USA designation or is that Yes, I see the signs. Are there any requirements? I'm sure requirements C might know, but planting requirements I think are probably Yeah, I don't know off the top of my head, but I know that we've gotten it for like four years long time. I don't know who submits it if it's the arborist or who does it because I know Sean Hobs does that my green communities application but I don't

was originally started uh in the parks department but um as things as duties changed it's a responsibility of the parks or the public parks department and the arborist division to uh to maintain that the national Arbor Day Association standards require a tree committee of some sort. We used to have a standing tree committee as well as city commissions. Those duties eventually got holded into the public advisory board and now um I think either this commission or the city commission is listed as the qualifying tree board. It's basically to resolve any disputes over trees.

I'm glad I got an answer. I don't know what happened with that.

And you also have to have um budget depend upon the um it's dependent upon population. It's been a long time since I did it now, but um so much per for per population and you have to u do certain level of tree planting as well. I think it's either to match your removals or to meet a certain standard. If you check uh check national harbor association treat USA program that's

thank you um commission um and one more question for you sorry um in terms of the scope of the project are I think I probably know the answer but just to confirm are you just looking at like specifically city activities or will it do you expect it to branch into is it allowed to branch into like our zoning and like how our zoning can be more climate resilient.

It's so it's mostly based off of what is all based off of like the city. It's not so much based off of um like we can't really tell the hospital what to do. We can't really tell Northern Michigan what to do. They're under different jurisdiction. the school district is under different jurisdiction, but um I can put recommendations into the plan that say can update the land development code or update zoning codes. Um those can be recommendations. I can't necessarily go willy-nilly and just wave my magic wand. Um, but putting like the words of this group needs to do this or this committee needs to do that like pro it's going to be in there just

great. So in that way it can extend to you know be an action plan that's not just not just governing or not just recommending internal operations but kind of it will

extending outward community. there's going to be actions that are for government like for the mun like us and then for the community um and like recommendations like oh you should encourage you know the MVLP energy programs or encourage um city composting uh not great old city side composting but different things like that would be for the community.

Great. I think to um just keep expectations realistic, it is going to be mainly about city operations and what the city can effect just like the county plan for the county. Um but um that's also just based off of jurisdiction and legality law. Yeah. And really the scope of what we can manage

and reasonably expect to accomplish. I'm still trying to uh figure out which buildings need to be included for the submissions inventory because it's it's just confusing of like, oh, does this building need to be included? But we're figuring it out. Great. Thank you. Yeah.

All right. All right. Uh citizens wishing to address the commission on agenda items. All right. Uh correspondence, reports, minutes, no other importance. No trainings, no. And that takes us to item A. Work session on reports ordinances development.

Right. These are the next sets that we have. So the first one is to fix languages. We have received clarification questions regarding the accessory dwelling units. So one of it is to add this language for maximum yard coverage. However, any detached accessory structure component of the ADU and any attached features such as exterior stairs, decks or landings must comply with section 54705 for accessory structures. And then any remaining portion of the detach that is not converted to an ADU must also comply with that section. You guys have any questions about that?

I'm hoping one day we'll be done with this. But I mean I get it this new and people are asking questions and we're just trying to make clarification for them. The next is that interior stairs serving the ADU shall be counted towards the ADU area. Any questions on that? That's just once. It's obviously taking up square footage in two floors, but you're only going to count it once, correct? Oh, correct. Y

Okay, that was it for the ADU. Did you guys have any issues with those amendments for clarification? Okay. Then the next is to we went through the discussion and we saw that there wasn't a through lot drawing and in order to create the through lot I was looking at that and we really should update the other drawing. So for yard terms, we updated this to show that the right of way line isn't always up. It's not normally up to the street. You have some kind of distance. So people have to understand they don't want up to the street. So we're just kindifying that. Then on the yards of a corner lot, I'm amending that to match, you know, what we have above and then again showing the the right ofway area and how that works, but also how a corner lot works, say with front yards and rear yards and side yards and things like that because it it's not shown like it was above drawing. And then to show how a through lot works. So, we're proposing to add this new one and I gave you the through lot definition below to see what we're going to do here because uh I believe previously they had some amendments for the residential limited animal keeping and we were talking about things like that and we realized there wasn't that. Did you guys have any questions regarding those diagrams? Um, on the proposed for the corner lot, we've got a sideyard and a rear yard.

Could those not also be flipped? Uh, yep. If they have the room to live, so it's whatever is going to benefit them. And in this instance, this would benefit them because they could have room with a garage, right? And then on the through lot, um, it's a front yard on both sides. Correct. How does a through lot provide parking with a driveway and then drive the front yard just like just to they can have it would allow for have a driveway off the bottom street or on the top street. So you can have one garages.

In that regard, they get a bonus compared to most people. Okay. Anyone else? I have a question about that the through lot. So if they wanted to fence that they the it would be require because there's no backyard. If you had kids then what happens with the fencing and that you would have to meet the fence guidelines for those yards. So it' have to be a 4 foot or open construction open construction on on one of those if you're making it into a back if you're putting in the front yard and you have to do the open construction. So they can be a one inch big one inch opening

but they still could do that.

Yeah, they the only time that you do the six foot on the lot is when you're in in that rear yard area. They don't have the Okay, the next one is in the form base code, the MDW section. We had questions regarding the following definitions and we're proposing updates for clarification regarding the buildable area. this adding on that the build of area does not include any portion of the site located behind the parking set by line that is designed or utilized as open area and then adding into the open area for purposes of this definition open area does not include portions of a site that are not intended to be accessible to occupants due to placement of parking landscaping or other functional constraints. Then for the parking setback line adding that a line plane indicated on the regulating plan extending generally vertically and parallel to the RBL that establishes the minimum distance behind the RBL where parking may be located. The parking set line only applies to portions of the lot where parking is physically feasible or intentionally designed where a building occupies the RV or where site conditions make parking possible or not intended. parking setback that line does not apply and then parking may be placed anywhere behind this line except for otherwise limited by MDW district. Did you guys have any questions about

the next are Daves? Yeah, well, I'll just say that a lot of what we just went over for the parking set over there in there, you're going to see a lot more of that on site plan in actually it'll help you understand a little bit better how it's applied

because this stuff is pretty you don't even working with this code is um even when you work with it some of this um these were actually pretty important uh changes especially the park and setback line because if we didn't change that the open area requirements for property are in question whether or not you can have an open area and meet the standards for having open places where um otherwise you might think this is you're required as parking reserve for parking. Um anyway, the um the sections that uh are in the handout that I gave you that have been added to the agenda since it was published are just dealing with the special all article 14 procedure stuff and standards for start with the 1403 special land use review. Um, so a lot of this is clarification and um, when this was written, whoever wrote it didn't have Grammarly on their computer, wasn't using a program that helped you uh, write good sentences and clear sentences. So, um, I have that and I going through some of this, I'm finding, you know, some of this language is, um, I mean, this was on the list. Okay, this this was on our list. Um I had it on my list of things annotations to go over the special land use review site plan review standards and reszoning and reszoning did the conditional resoning agreement which is in here. That was a legal problem that we had to kind of

wrap our arms around. We'll clean that up. But um so these are changes that um with this these standards there's 14 standards for site plan review. I realized in the past going through these that there was some redundancy in these standards and part of it is the way it's written and then um the one thing I found that was definitely I thought could be uh one standard that could be totally removed is that uh number 12 and that's because in article or in section nine um and I can go through these one by one. But um yeah, I I'm sure some of you have realized the same thing when we go through these. So um you guys haven't had a chance to see these. So I would totally understand if you want to come back to this at some point after you've had a chance to read through these, but um I'm seeing what I I'm kind of looking for what I need to explain because on the first page. I don't think there's anything I really need to explain. Those are all kind of clarifications. Um, in number four, just kind of thought it was appropriate to add a statement about storm water absorption and we're talking about what the purposes for landscaping. Um, and then skip down the number of persons in it from employees just kind of way that was written. didn't um really you know it just kind of seemed a little too vague of the same persons or employees. Um so clarify that a little

I thought the vehicular and pedestrian circulation section needed to be uh a little more specific about about um what it's saying. Um, so instead of saying negatively impact traffic flow, I thought um it it's there's a lot more to it than impairing efficient traffic flows and intersection safety um and access to property. It didn't mention access um and it didn't specify early this applies to public areas and private areas and or private areas. Um private rightway areas and specifically private roads, driveways and sidewalks. Um skipping down to number nine. This is one

question. You got two paragraphs underneath.

Oh yes, I point that out. So I was going to skip right over that. So in nine the I the first part of it where I have the highlighting is this is the normal way we do this when we hand off a recommended change is we underline those things that are new and um highlight them and then line three. So this is what that looks like when all that's done to an existing paragraph. The paragraph below it's the original paragraph. The paragraph below that is the clean version of the new paragraph, the proposed new paragraph. So,

well, if you take everything in here, you take out the stuff we're suggesting you this is the original

delete. This is language. I'm just trying to make it a little easier to read that paragraph because there's a lot of changes being suggested by those strikethroughs and the new underline. So changing it to say anticipated estimated vehicular and pedestrian traffic volumes and patterns as well as vehicular turning movements do not impair traffic flows, intersection safety, sight distances, access to properties and general safety of all users of public driveway areas andor private roads, driveways and sidewalks. Did you do that to any other sections in this?

Well, in the next when we get to the next section I did, but just if we want to finish this section, that's the only one in this this section. Um I I didn't think it was maybe number nine is a little little challenging that way too, but um I thought it was a little more manageable. So number nine deals with physical characteristics of the site and and nuisances associated. Um so did number 12. And these are the two where I thought number 12 can be totally eliminated by moving a little bit of that information into the bottom of section 9. So with the changes to nine, it would read the current and proposed physical characteristics of the site such as size area. when it just says such as area for a person that's not thinking mathematically they think well what what are we talking about with the area so I thought it was important to um put the size thing in there so people think well the area is a geometric kind of concept not just a you know what's this place kind of a concept uh drainage topography open space landscaping and access to streets will meet the development proposed will meet the requirements of this ordinance and all other city standards. The use and development proposal shall be considered by its potential impacts upon the natural environment and natural resources on and around the site and there is the potential and that there is the potential for reasonable anticipated expansion of the use without nuisances to neighboring properties. um that part that last sentence is out of section 12. Um, which

basically I I thought that's the only useful part of number 12 because the first part of it is really saying the same thing as um the first sentence of chap of number nine saying that there's, you know, adequate size. this parcel's adequate size to accommodate what wants to be what's proposed to be done there and that you know there's enough room to prevent the nuisances that might occur. So, any questions on that? Okay. Um, and then just adding nuisance factors to number 11, nuisance to that because it's it's talking about nuisances. It's not talking about any other environmental factors. Um, and then just a couple little additions there with the emphasizing community master plan. Um there's places in this code where it just says master plan. Um there's going to be plenty of others where we could make those changes at some point, but um we're dealing with this section. I thought it's important to make that that distinction because the city has at least three or four different do you have decel included in your noise? because we

that could come up to play when we talk about some of the development that we're going to look at in the future. Yeah. Um because we put that in in another community that and that kind of saved us having a decibel level because they were able to measure that that would exceed it. So that would preclude having that development there. Yeah, that might be something you want to think about. I don't know. Well, I I do think we addressed decel levels in certain other parts of the code. As long as you got it someplace. Yeah. And that was one of the recommendations for the data center.

Right. That's exactly what I was thinking about those type of uses. But I do think we have that in um the industrial in part of that. Uh I know that that was a big deal when the BLP built the new energy center. right street and they actually had to go back and retrofit the original bill to deal with neighbor complaints but they were required to do what's in the zipline review standards um

as long as commission can require um studies noise studies that kind of thing and they were they did provide an initial noise study on a particular project um but the residents were not happy with the results and went back and get some retrofitting for noise. I just didn't see it there and I just wanted to make sure it was someplace within our plan. Okay. Uh I'll move on to the next section.

Okay. So on the uh zoning word ordinance amendment procedures. So that first section that's all lined through is the original text which I've instead of Oh, I got a 10 and 11 there. That's supposed to be one and a two. Sorry. We'll we'll fix that. Um I'm pretty sure it's one and two. It's not um No, it would be one and two.

Yep. So you know this says the city commission, planning commission, property owner may at any time originate petition to amend the change of or change zoning district boundaries pursuant to the authority established blah blah blah and then changes to the Texas ordinance may be proposed by the city commission planning commission or any interested party or organization. Um they can do that by application city commission planning um and So it says there's two different things there, but it's hard to sus that out when you're just looking at that paragraph. So wanted to put those in two sections so that you know what's in the section. This section deals with the reszoning or changes to the zoning map and changes to the text of the land development code. Just to make that a little clear, um that there are two different things being dealt with in this section. And um the standards for those things um don't they're not separated into those two sections. They're they deal with them as you go through. Um you'll see you know in when you get to the later part of this uh like starting in section seven section seven here it starts with if a resoning is requested. So um otherwise the standards apply to both um tax amendments and zoning map changes requested. Um but so the first standard is just minor grammatical thing. Um again the

section E header is minor grammatical section one community plan mentioned that before. Um, in section two, we're eliminating the term zoning ordinance and installing land development code. The term zoning ordinance is in here, like I said, all over the place in this code, but we're dealing with this section. I think it's good to get rid of the term zoning ordinance. Uh, the term zoning is going to be with us forever probably when we're dealing with this type of a code. Um but um we no longer officially have a zoning ordinance. We have land. So um going down to item five. This is another one where I just line through the entire section to make it easier to look at the changes um being proposed. Um and that would say conditions have changed. So, um, one of the things to consider, conditions have changed since the land development code was adopted. An error in the LDC justifies the amendments. Um, our attorney looked at these proposed changes and one of her comments was, um, none of these standards should really be asking a question. And um the way that was written, it was asking a question saying since the ordinance was adopted, was there a change um or were there errors? So um this just rewritten so that there's it's not asking a question. Um, in the exclusionary zoning section number six,

um, a lot of people don't know what exclusionary zoning is. Um, and I I would expect that, you know, somebody coming in off the street to understand what that is and they should be able to understand it if we're using the tourism code. So it's just an explanation that basically helps this helps you understand the context that an exclusionary zoning situation would create or foster economic or racial segregation of some kind. That's a term going back to the 1950s when red lining creating um areas of the city where only people who were going to get mortgages um based on their color mainly could live. So but that was considered exclusionary um exclusionary practice. And there are still probably I know Shver Hills covenants until recently still mentioned that properties in there couldn't be sold to negros. Um so exclusionary zoning was real. Um so anyway, this just explaining that a little more. Um going down to our number eight. um just kind of revising that the term impacts on the environment. Say environmental impacts is really change there. Um number nine, um adding new to the term construction on the site I thought was an important small addition because that's really what we're talking about in this section. We're not talking about old construction. Um in terms of will the construction meet the dimensional requirements for regulations? Um because you know in terms of um

amending a zoning district and that's what this is where it starts off with the term if reszoning is requested. You're not going to deny a resoning uh on the basis of the existing buildings not meeting in general. This probably not going to happen that the zone the planning commission is going to recommend and deny it based on them not being able to meet the standards if there's no real issues with that besides the fact that they don't meet the standards. Um and your upcoming uh well you you've already yeah you it's it's coming to the the city commission but may resign that that had setbacks but nobody on the deal with setbacks but a problem to you know rise the level recommending water. So, just clarifying that. Um, in number 10, I I this not necessarily something that we have to have in there, but I just thought including a plan development plan unit development district. Um, because sometimes people don't think about as a zoning district, but it totally is a zoning district. If you approve one, it becomes its own zoning district. in number 11. Um, this is really talking about conditional reasoning. You know, when I think about how this was has been in the code for a long time, I'm not sure what the original intent of this was because conditional resoning wasn't uh an option in the city until we adopted the LBC. And um this

I I think this might have been in the code before the conditional resing was something the state law changed. So then able to adopt it. Yeah. But this didn't it said you it says in the beginning if resistant to allow for specific use that's really only the case if it's a conditional resoning. So I thought it it makes sense to call it out. um in 12. Yeah, it just seems the wording there is still funny. Okay, zoning was requested to allow for a specific use. Oh, it's got Okay,

but this is about a text amendment which you'd be asking for a specific use in the text amendment. It wouldn't be a conditional saying it's preferable to a text amendment. Well, is I mean it starts with if a reason is requested to allow for a specific use would a text amendment be more appropriate meaning the reasoning because they want this use it wouldn't be conditional resoning they may say I want to go from mixed use to general commercial if general commercial allows for marijuana uses for example

reszoning is considered more than amending the list in that current zoning Yeah. Yeah. So I think Yeah.

Okay. So in uh 12 um instead of saying requested reszoning, I thought it was more appropriate to say the new zoning district because that's what we're talking about would not be an isolated or that was zone in the vicinity. Um, I went back to one of those documents that we used for we used it in the case for Mary about um, spot zoning and it does not use the term neighborhood in there. I kind of thought the term neighborhood was could be, you know, I thought the term vicinity was a little more appropriate because we're not always talking about neighborhood. We're talking about some part of the city. People don't think of the corner of Washington and clown as a neighborhood. Exactly. The next section is um the specifically dealing with the reszoning of conditions or conditional res. Um and the big thing here was we've been having problems with every one of these cases with the applicant needing to submit the re or the applicant actually submitting the resoning agreement at the time of application planning commission because it says in here um so the conditions attached to resoning shall be set forth by submitting a conditional resing agreement listing the proposed conditions and then it goes on past where I have the highlight um it shall be considered to be fully approved not considered to be fully approved until the agreement is approved and failure to provide it within 90 days uh

period identified above will terminate the request. Um, and nothing in here said you have to submit this to the planning commission when you apply. And so people weren't doing that. And it was we had made a interpretation basically that you could submit this to the city commission when you go to the city commission. it had to be submitted um by the time the city commission makes a decision on it. Um and that really wasn't satisfactory because it this is in here for planning commission review and it's not a difficult thing to prepare this document. You basically just have to follow these steps below and you know it's it's relatively simple. It's something you can do on one sheet of paper. Basically, this agreement, if if you have to go to the second side of the sheet of paper, fine. But it's not going to be two sheets of paper to to do this agreement because you basically just have to state what's in each one of these things. I acknowledge is basically what you have to say for each of these items. And then, you know, some of them are a bit different, but again, the the city attorney uh reviewed these proposed changes and um thought that they were fine. Um and one thing I want to point out, you can't see it here as we go. I I don't know that um item B is the one. So, this is This is what it said in item J and in what it says in item J currently

current code that is the current code when you get to item J it says what's in item B. I I just I thought it was a lot more appropriate that we put that up at the top of this of these statements because it's more important um for somebody to see this and understand it before they get too far in this process. that um this is an attachment that has to be included with your application. Um again to reemphasize that whole thing, we we need this as part of your application and planning commission needs to see it and make a recommendation based on on all of this information including that. Um, and so that's what is in this dark text that you probably can't read or read it under item the current item J. Um, and so when you get to item J, that was what was item K moved up to J. So Dave,

are you saying that a conditional reszoning plan is required? Yeah, it's always been required. It's only required if they want if they're submitting for development. Okay. Because B doesn't say it's required. It says main container.

Yeah. It's up to them if they want to do that, if they want to go that far. So for instance, if somebody submitted a conditional reasoning with a plan, that is the only use that they're applying for that building and whatnot and they can't make changes. So it it really doesn't approve them to do that and it would limit them. They wouldn't have all the the uses that they might be asking for normally. or they may think this will this will work in my favor to show the commission the commissions what these what I'm planning um you know when we had the reszoning for the the request to reszone the property on Division Street for a self storage area he thought maybe it'll help if I show these but

if you show it that's all you can do you're That's reszoning for. So if he did that, that those plans are what you would do. The other problem is then we we'd have to do site plan review at that time too because those plans are what the city's agreeing on. So if they change because we're looking at it and you're not even meeting site plan review, that's an issue as well.

I mean I see that you have some of that language. I'm wondering if you do that we have to do an administrative review over something. I'm sorry. Are we just going over changes and coming back?

I believe um Dave was saying since we're just kind of going over it over it tonight since you just sent it um and you guys haven't had a chance to review it. Any other comments on that? That seems like the only part of this that you guys are on.

I I'm think that it might require a review by you guys. Um, you know, so one thing the attorney, our attorney wasn't hung up on that, but it is a good point that, you know, I think I need to I I think we should talk with her a little bit more about this because I'm not convinced that if they show us a plan that they can't change it, but I think they would have to come back to one bias to make sure

we'd have to read the state law on this. I know when I went into the first initial training of this, it said if you do the conditional reasoning where you're just not going the zoning district, you're doing with the plan that basically is your site review. You're asking for this. This is the only use all of this is what you're doing at that one shot. Okay. So we'll ask

I would ask the attorney whether or not that then could be changed without coming back or again I kind of looking at number one where we're adding after trying to add this last then this doesn't make as much sense either after it here. I think that needs to be number two. Okay. So, we'll we'll uh we'll be back with this session.

Um, commission and staff. Well, actually, I have a question for you. Mr. Ger brought up a good question and had me thinking when I was showing you guys the um the drawings and the corner lot that it could be switched. Do you want me to show both ways of how that can be applied for that lot? That way if somebody says, "Okay, what would it look like here?" And what would it look like in that instance if we switch the rear and side or would text it? Basically, the the reason I wanted it to clear up because I'm even getting questions from staff about it.

I'm thinking drawing might be even more confusing. switching it saying this could be the rear yard or you can switch and this could be the side rear yard and that's how it's applied. I think that actually would not well that's where I think text would be pretty simple understandable. Could you do it by just saying rear or side yard? No, because that will change the rear yard set back lines and the yard set. True. Oh yeah. And it changes how things are applied. So visually it makes more sense to give both not text,

but the deed is going to give the the address to that property and even that might be a restriction that you can't just switch. Doesn't it does say the address you can look at it, but it still is up to the applicant on how they apply the yards as long as both either way they're doing it is going to meet those requirements for the rear yard. So if you have enough room to make the other one a rear yard, you can do that. if you wish and we can show that in a drawing and I'm thinking maybe we should do that. So a I'll bring you guys something else on they choose they really can't go back either usually it gets locked in by development

because they may choose they may have built it just the minimum side at 5t and then that could be but in this instance they could switch there's enough room there so we could have it drawn both ways and I think that would save because like I said I've had staff come and ask me questions maybe just visually be better after Jake asked that question.

Yes, I think what would help there is the one, yes, having both the visuals just make it easier for anybody looking at it and two actually stating what requirements are for stating it's a backyard versus the side yard front yard. That might help to clarify so people can actually see which layout applies to them. It's your setback for your zoning district. So when you're looking at your zoning district and then you're determining that then where your home is built that determines it and that might be best set in that location. So um anything else? Okay. Uh commission and staff comments start commissioner

thank you. Just a question on square footage of those houses that are going in and that habitat. Do they have any idea how big the structures are going to be? Yeah, they have a they have a layout of what they are planning to build. They don't have it to where it's at right now. No, but I just wondered what kind of size they were looking at. We don't know. We've just been reviewing officially decide how many doing lots and they're pretty moderate size. I think they're going to be pretty moderateiz homes

like 12,500 square feet. probably something that one one of the comments I made when we had a meeting with them was how the lots are tapered from north to south. They get bigger um bigger on the south end. Um and they want to put all the homes at the same level from like how many feet they are from the front setback. And one of the things um I recommended that they look at and do is not do that because some of the properties on the very north end the backyards are so small if they were doing that that they won't be able to have room for any accessories

or with a small house you're going to want shed. Most people want or at least a yard if there's children. I mean that's that was my that there's not a lot of not a lot of area back there. Okay. Thank you. Back to Commissioner Lori. I was just think that Habitat has four adjacent homes they constructed on Union Street near the west end of Union Street. And you could pretty much get an idea that I think they have a pretty limited pattern boat that they went from. See there?

No comment. No comment. I actually had two questions. One, I'm curious um I haven't seen any use of um flowcharts. I'm curious if that would be beneficial in a lot of these documents that we're going through when it comes to having processes that might be easier for the person to read through. Um just a follow question on that one. What did you say? Process closure for a lot of the the steps and processes that we have that are right now written. Um not sure where they be. Oh, you're asking for

Yeah, I do have flowcharts for staff. Oh, we have our operation procedures now, but you're asking for it to be written. Yeah, a lot of this that we're doing that sounds like that might be beneficial for people to see. Um that is in our guide to development which some we have but it's on our website to development that's the process it's like a 25page manual for anybody that's wondering what development is process we talk to what departments are involved it's all the applications You can actually find

Yeah. One of the things I guess we continue to make this document vigorous with all these changes trying to clarify things that's kind of antithetical to what we really want as a simple document but we end up having to explain stuff the more stuff you have to deal with.

Sure. I think it comes more for when you have a clear layout and then I think because a lot of this conversation I heard was wait so when do you have to go do this like period moment so just question if that would be something that was looking into and then also you mentioned that you're using the grammarly so I'm expecting or questioning if we're going to have a lot more of these types of reviews with a lot of grammar changes and and if so if it's possible that I These systems have things like comments. So it sounds like you had a lot of explanation for a lot of the changes if it might be beneficial for efficiency of our meetings. You're not having to explain every step along the way during meeting if like the comments use would be beneficial when it's being sent out for us to review.

I don't think that we have a lot more of those because I like these changes. Yeah. I don't know. I I I I think I I like your idea. Um I'm confused. So you said the comments. So the comments you were getting from people for the changes. Yeah. Oh, so in green that's why I have the reason. Well, yes. Yes. But there's a lot here that we just went over tonight that were, you know, changes in a word or something. We're giving you an explanation of Well, I'm showing the full changes on number eight, but below it, the old paragraph, below that.

I see what you're saying. um comments on our end in here telling you these systems have the comment capability now

it would be just a matter of time almost I have two questions Um, were we going to do some kind of a um land development code rewarding on fencing for repairs in the front? This is that'll be at your next one. We haven't had a chance. These were in the works prior to that. So, we're just trying to get

Okay. And has there been anything at all about um uh doing some work on zoning for data centers or any response from the city manager to our letter that um we sent out there? No. Any action on that? So there's been no response. Has Lancing has Lancing voted on that moratorum that they were looking at for a year that that was in the works also a moratorum on any further development for those types of structures in the state.

I don't think I got out of that legislature. Okay. I don't know. It was just a bill that was introduced. It was a bill that was introduced for a one-year moratorum. Yeah. I don't think that's gone. No. Yes. It's still been It's still at that level of review. Okay. Is the email.

Uh I have no comment. So, uh I think we're going to try to wrap up the LC amendments in April. I expect we'll have revisions to go over the recommendations of the next two weeks. And then for me, I just did training today on the land development act amendments and it will require amendments with the code. There's no way possible knowing all the stuff and discussions that need that will be in the Senate amendments. But it is interesting um the changes that the state has made to allow for more divisions of unladded properties. So, we'll have more for that later, but just let you guys know.

Oh, one other thing, you did find out based on Steve's comment about the uh um specifying for um cast iron tactile domes on the curb rails. Uh but the the city has started doing that already. found they read the minutes from our engineering department. We're already started doing that last year. So, good observations. All right. Uh with that the meeting is adjourned at 7:25.