City Council - Regular Meeting

So, you know, which is why I was saying. I'm the one who's going to do that. You're right. It was central development. It's no longer us. It's like it goes in one shot. I'll get it right there. I mean, of course, 30 minutes. Yeah, you're having.

I'm having some technical difficulties. Give me a second here. You guys ready?

You guys ready?

OK. Everybody's ready except for me. Go ahead and go. Go ahead. Okay. We're going to go ahead and call. City Council regular business meeting to order. This is Thursday, September 3rd, 2026, 6.01 p.m. Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Borjan? Here. Browns? Poole? Minerty? Here. Porter?

Here. Mayor Phillips? I'm here as well. We do have a form, so we'll move on. Item number two is a pledge of allegiance. Will you please rise and say the pledge of allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States

All right. Item number three is approval of the agenda. We are going to move item six E to the regular agenda. Would anybody like to move any of the other consent agenda items to the regular agenda? Hearing none, can I get a motion to approve the agenda as amended? Second. Motion by Mikey, seconded by Borjan. All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, same. That motion carries. Item four is proclamations. We don't have any of those today. So item five, welcome to yes and public comment. Thank you for being here tonight, Art. You're the only one, really? There's quite a few of them, I know. There is quite a few online. Good deal. If you'd like to comment on any non-agenda item, now would be the time. We'll give you a three-minute time limit. Realize that we can't take action on these tonight since they aren't on the agenda, and that would be a violation of open meetings law. If you'd like to comment on any item in the consent agenda, now would also be the time. Anybody want to talk? Hearing none, we'll go ahead and move on. Item six is consent agenda. Can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda? Motion. Second. Motion by Borjan, seconded by Porter. Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke? Yes. Porter? Yes.

That motion carries. Item 6E is a resolution to approve an emergency plumbing repairs to the city-state bank. Norwalk Fieldhouse. Staff would like to change the resolution to state an amount not to exceed $25,000 instead of $15,000. So we've experienced some sewer hiccups within the fieldhouse. Staff has isolated the problem but needs to do further research to find the appropriate solution. Initially, we thought the expense would be $15,000 for installation of additional cleanouts, allowing televising the sewer lines. However, after further inspection and discussion with contractors, we believe the expense could be higher. Staff is asking for consent to spend up to $25,000. Funds will come from our reserves. Please note that this project involves installation of cleanouts to help with further maintenance, but also to help us further isolate the sewer problem so that we can determine the best solution for it. This means there will likely be a future budget expense of additional repairs. Staff is also researching contractor responsibilities for the sewer lines. We will have more information after this work is complete. Jim, do you have anything to add?

Well, I guess I would add that since that was written, we did some more work today on it. And I think there's a good chance that there could be still a warranty claim left on that if we can establish who's at fault on it. Of course, anything like that, you have trouble doing that. But I'm at least optimistic that we can make a colorable claim to get some warranty work still done on that. I think also... talking to Gary Lamer just in the last half an hour over this issue. He did get another more favorable bid on the work that you're considering tonight. So even though I think we still want to do the not to exceed number, I think we're fairly optimistic that we're going to be coming in quite a bit below that number.

All right. How long is the building?

Six. Six. Two years since our soft, well, two and a half years since our soft opening, basically.

Was it November of 2020?

It was July of 2024 when we had the soft opening, and then November was when we were full operational. So we're under two years of regular operations.

Not long enough.

Yeah. Well, there's a, apparently there's a low point in the drain, in the drain line. And when the field house is really busy, It's not as much of an issue, but you've got plenty of water shooting through there. When it's not as busy and only have a couple toilet flushes every once in a while, it allows for items being flushed to accumulate in that low spot. And I think, talking to Gary, he thinks that that's kind of where the clog and the backups may be being caused. And without the appropriate cleanouts to reach that area, he's had a lot of trouble. a lot of trouble looking to see exactly what it is and being able to easily clean that out. Another thing, not to speak for Chris, but the short-term thing is to figure out a fix where we can keep this at least limping along if it recurs again through the busy season, which is basketball, winter, everything like that, so that it doesn't have to be shut down for major repairs, but probably next year sometime we're going to see some major repairs come through on it.

Are they getting it?

Yes.

Did he talk about at one point investing in it?

We do have a jetter, yeah. The brand new jetter is getting a workout apparently.

Is that what we've been using?

Yes, we have also called in a contractor for one incident and then we have a new camera too that we've been using to get in there.

I would say the next time we build a big facility and we build it with the cleanups

HAB-Masyn Moyer- Experiences and are there, there are a lot of 90 degrees magazine there. HAB-Masyn Moyer- Maybe some of those.

HAB-Masyn Moyer- Yeah, but I assume it stinks from or does it back up. HAB-Masyn Moyer- We fed it back. HAB-Masyn Moyer- How far out is HAB-Masyn Moyer- It's within the building.

So it's not outside, but we think we've isolated it to an area between the lobby in the restrooms, but that's the area we can't get to to see

That must be better if it was in the ground outside.

The other repairs are going to, as I understand, break through the polished concrete. It's going to be a major repair.

Stinks, literally.

Yep.

I make a motion. Second.

Okay. So I got a motion by Meineke. seconded by Borjan. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Meineke? Yes. Porter? Yes. Borjan?

Yes. That motion carries. Item 7 is hold a new business for consideration, discussion, and possible action. Item A is public hearing on a proposed amendment to the Norwalk Code of Ordinances by adding and enacting a new section to Chapter 104 to establish the Dunn-Trunk Sewer Service Area Benefited Sewer District. and to adopt connection fees therein. So we'll open up public hearing at 6.09 p.m. So we are now significantly complete with the Southwest sewer interceptor and the truck sewer from the interceptor to the Dunn industrial area. Our next step is to set up the benefited sewer district to help pay for the sewers by establishing connection fees. Tony, I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you, Mayor. Our agenda statement for this item gives a good summary here and stuff. So this is the public hearing and ordinance necessary to establish our next Benefited Sewer District. The area shown on the map there, it's about 120 acres. You can see there's a gap at the north end of that up to Delaware Street. That's actually sort of our Delaware Street sewer and the Delaware Street Benefited Sewer serviced everything south of that on what is and what was the Dunn property there. That's the name. The total cost, we were able to have some cost efficiencies in the construction of this project construction of the North River Interceptor project. So the total cost of the project, including engineering, was about $482,000. Serves about 120.64 acres. So based on that cost per gross acre, comes out to about $3,995 per acre rounded. with annual increase of about $100 per acre. So usually you look at the CPI indices, that's been about 3.5% over the last 12 months. That increase of about $100 per acre is about 2.5%. And then if you look at the map, the area to the west of there that's not included, it will actually be covered by the next two sewers that are currently under design. So this will kind of fill in that gap there And it's our standard process for recovering the cost of these major sewer facilities. So I'll try to answer any questions that anybody has.

The yellow line going straight north, that's what's going to be put in?

That's what is in, and that's the sewer that services this area, yeah.

And then the red up to the north, what is that already in then?

The red to the south of that is the North River Interceptor sewer that it connects to. And if there's a sewer, is there something that's shown?

That's an existing sewer that goes down to a holding tank? The red line that's within the holding tank?

Yes. So the red sewer that's along Madison there is an existing collector sewer that was completed as part of site information there. And, yeah, so we already have one lot that actually will connect to this sewer. We couldn't allow it to connect yet because the sewer project hasn't been accepted. It still hasn't been accepted today, but it's time to move the benefit sewer district process forward. And we've got to do three readings on this ordinance. And we're hopeful that North River Sewer, as well as this trunk sewer that's part of that project, will be able to accept that in the next coming weeks.

Okay. Okay. My only thought was that a hundred bucks is a little white. It is. I just think about it. 150. That's swatting flies, but he's swatting up flies. It becomes real.

It is. So, I mean, what I've done in the past in these districts is try to be conservative in that we want to, we want to try to make sure we stay out of that inflation rate, you know? And so the reality is, you know, the, the faster these, these sewer service areas develop, the, the, the more, the faster and, and, uh, the more we're going to collect, you know, we'll get closer to collecting 100% of the cost of this infrastructure because the long, you know, the more time that goes by and if we don't have an adequate inflation rate, then, you know, we might miss out on some of that.

The council does have the authority to say what they think is reasonable, though.

Yeah. So if you wanted to go to 150, you could make that proposal? I think I should address it anyway, just

kind of use the same process in most of our sewer districts so if we did go to 150 that that rate might be a little bit higher than our other districts so again trying to kind of stay consistent or in the future we might be more consistent having those go to 150 yeah so at any time we can look at that we can look at the uh the fee schedules for all of our districts and so we'll have so we'll add this district to our overall map so the other districts And so we can evaluate that and increase that rate increase at any, you know, at any council can do that at any time for all of our district.

I just think it's wrong. It's obviously around three and a half percent. Right.

It is. So if you want to do that, do that at the next time when we're talking about the ordinance.

Yeah. Okay.

Lindsay, have we received any oral or written comments on this?

We have not.

Do we have any public comment? Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing at 6.14 p.m. Item 7B is the first reading of an ordinance adding and enacting a new section to Chapter 104 to establish a duntruck sewer service area benefited sewer district and to adopt connection fees therein. So we just had a public hearing on this. Tony, you got anything else? Nothing else. All right. Any questions, comments from council? Do you want to make a motion to change that to a minute?

I think it's better.

Okay. Any discussion? Do you have a second? I'll second. Okay. So I got a motion from Meineke to change the feed to 150. Second from Borjan. Lindsay, would you call a roll on that?

Council Member Porter? Yes. Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke? Yes.

All right. That motion carries. Any other discussion or questions from council on this item?

Can I get a motion? Then do we, like, we'll review them all at some point then? That would be a good idea. A table, like, we ask for that later or whatever during the meeting.

Yeah. Yeah.

Okay.

Okay. Can I get a motion to approve the first reading as amended?

I guess one thing I should say is with three members here tonight, With all the resolutions and ordinances tonight, so it applies to every one of them, it's going to take three positive votes to pass. So all the members that are present will have to vote in a positive manner to pass each of these items.

And this is the first of three readings for an ordinance.

Yes.

So that means that if there's further changes or further consideration, that can come up at a second or third reading as well.

Yeah. All right.

So, did I get a motion to approve the amendment? Yes. Yeah. Okay. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you please call roll?

I did, right? We're still on the sewer district ordinance?

Yeah. Okay. I thought we just did the amended to amend the amount to.

Oh, and now you want to separate. Okay.

Yes.

So I'm going to need clarification then on who's making a motion second on the ordinance. I have them.

I don't think I got to that point. So Kelsey and Andy did. Okay.

Okay.

So Porter and Borjan for first and second on. the motion to approve the amended first reading.

Okay, got it.

Gotcha.

Sorry. Council Member Porter? Yes. Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke? Yes.

All right, that motion carries. Item 7C is public hearing regarding the proposed amendment to establish a showroom retail use classification with the C2 Community Commercial Zoning District. So we'll open up public hearing at 6.17 p.m. So as Norlock grows, we have the opportunity to get new and different kinds of businesses to open up in town that we'd probably like to have in town. However, sometimes our zoning is restrictive enough that it wouldn't allow those types of businesses to come in, even if we'd like them to. So on August 8th, Council sent this to the Planning and Zoning Commission for discussion, and they approved this zoning amendment with a 30% retail space provision. Luke, I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you. So this proposed amendment, it stems from some regulatory gaps that we identified when we were doing some enforcement of the zoning code and then subsequent review of proposed business plans for the property at 1711 Sunset. So currently in the zoning ordinance, any commercial use in the C2 district, and really all of our commercial districts, have a maximum of 25% of the principal commercial floor area can be used for incidental storage. So storage related to the use in the building. As we were reviewing that new business plan and reviewing this, we often looked through all of our zoning use types to try and find like things, right? And what we discovered during this is we feel like there's a certain set of uses that are permitted in our retail categories for C2 that would struggle with that 25% cap. So that'd be things such as furniture stores, flooring stores, appliance and paint stores, and then, strangely, our zoning code calls out hot tub sales very specifically. Don't know why. So to address this, we put together this idea of a showroom retail use classification in the C2 district and a lot of criteria related to that. um so this would allow a business to utilize up to 70 percent of its gross floor area for indoor storage um a caveat being that we would want that identified as a group m of mercantile occupancy in the building code um that is a space that uh you would anticipate the public to be able to go into so it would have a little bit higher standard of threshold first life safety issues and building code issues than a traditional storage occupancy that like a warehouse might have. We also put that we wanted the gross, 30% of the gross air floor area to be that public showroom for the retail. So where the retail components happening in a flooring store where all your samples are at and those things and an appliance store where, you know, appliances are able to be looked at and all of that, but not where the products, actually stored. We included that we wanted to mandate retail, active retail operations. A big part of that is wanting to make sure that retail is occurring there, that there's not like a ghost warehouse happening or something. So some regulations requiring at least 40 hours over five days of actual open time. requiring all inventory on site to be available for sale and customer inspection in that space. And then we wanted to go one step farther even and establish, we currently have warehousing and that's an industrial use. We wanted to add that if you're doing e-commerce fulfillment, you're strictly shipping and distributing stuff that was sold online for your business, that that would be an industrial use. So that wouldn't be something that we would have in the commercial zone. So we want to make that clear distinction as we get into some of these things. We did have a meeting with, so when we developed this, we kind of recognized it from the enforcement and business plans from 1711. And then we went out and we wrote something that made sense for us looking at everything, right? This wasn't a, hey, we're targeting it at a specific business. We did hold a meeting with the property owner of 1711 Sunset, Mr. Blake Schultz, to discuss where we landed on it and what we were proposing to you all. And under his current layout, his storefront represents 17% of the total 14,500 square foot facility that he would use for the business that he's proposed. So he represented us at meeting that 30% showroom threshold would require him to alter his established tenant space that he's been working on and reconfiguring those interior walls. So for him, he requested the city consider options that would, for his case, not require him to make those physical alterations. So that would be, we don't want to tend to set something at 17%. We would probably drop it down to 15%. So in that situation, that recommendation would have to be to reduce it to 15%. I do feel like that's a pretty substantial change. So if that is something Council wanted to investigate and look at further, I think it'd be prudent that the P&Z take a second look at that and have a discussion. I know the size of the space was one of the discussions that they had at their meeting. So I think you'd want to have it remanded back to them. What's that?

What would be common for something?

The 25% storage we have is a pretty common just commercial threshold. You do see certain metro areas didn't have anything. So it's kind of a pick or choose thing. If you look at like West Des Moines, they have furniture and appliance stores that there's nothing. You just go there and look at the stuff, right? Like you're not actually getting your product from that thing. They're warehousing it from somewhere else. So they don't have anything that would allow that type of user. You've got Clive, which does. You know, they've got along Hickman, they've got, there's in Elmerdale as well, all kinds of large buildings that function as a showroom and storage. The best example of that is Homemakers, right? I mean, huge storeroom, but also huge fulfillment part of that. So it's really just... what type of thing you would want. I think as the lines start to blur with storage, online sales, and retail sales. I don't know that there's any business that exists anymore that doesn't need to do a bit of all of that. I mean, if we were to have Target come to town to some of these online sale things and stuff, they do fulfillment out of their store. So is them pulling something off of the retail shelf and shipping it to you, how does that work with our storage thing? So I do think that there's a little bit of a – we're missing some things maybe with how we address storage and things in our code that might become tricky later on if we really wanted to be letter of the law exactly where we're at with our 25% threshold.

There's also, though, other zoning classifications within the city that could accommodate things like that.

That is correct, yeah.

So we're talking about this specific zoning classification right now, but there are other ones that would accommodate some of that.

Why you the places that do have 25 percent, why are 25 percent exists? The reason for that is wanting to encourage that economic activity. Right. The idea of people coming to a space, that agglomeration effect of people being around an area and going there to get a haircut after they get their groceries or what have you. So those are the reasons why. It's why within this ordinance, we wanted to put some thresholds on the retail size on the amount of hours opening. Because there is a situation where a business that operates like that can move a lot of people to a space and provide that same effect. But we definitely want to be careful that we don't just say you can do warehousing in our commercial district because I definitely want it.

Luke, I have a couple of questions. So like we follow international building codes. But zoning supersedes that, right? So because this is a C2 district, that's what would define how much.

I mean, they're separate, but.

But they kind of like overlay each other, so to say, right? Yeah. But then my other question is like, how is storage defined? So if you think about, like I always use my paint store example, right? There's plenty of place where they're just storing stuff. And they probably also have like a place where they're doing work that's not retail, right? Like where they're mixing paint, where they're doing these things. And I would consider that like, an active work area? Sure. Is that storage?

So what we tried to do when we define things, and thank you for bringing this up because I glossed over it when I was running through everything. When we're defining the authorized public access area, which is what we would call storage in this situation. It can be locked down and held back from people, but we still want customers to be able to go back in there in it. We define that as any part of the facility where customer access is generally restricted for safety or operational reasons, but where customers can be escorted or granted access to view stock, select materials, or coordinate pickup. So having that generally restricted space, like that's where that would occur. Like you could still have your paint mixing station back in that public access area and restrict it from people.

So that would count as part of that 70%. That's interesting because to me it feels like Some businesses need a larger space to do that type of stuff, but they're not storing product. And so it almost feels like it should be broken down into multiple things.

It definitely could be broken down. When you read the ordinance, the mandatory is the 30% gross floor area dedicated for the showroom, right? Yeah. The remaining 70%, we don't care if it's 50% storage and 20% mixing or, you know, 10% office. It's just the exact standard, the hard standard is 30% showroom area. So the rest of it, they can do whatever they want with. But up to, if they wanted nothing else there, it could be 70% of the storage.

I've got a question on the showroom detail standards. Is the building maintains a unified group M work and feel structure? I can see. Is that... Yeah, that's a building code term.

We usually don't try to pull building code terminology into zoning because they do get wonky. But in this case, from a life safety standpoint for the stuff that Fire Marshal Cross deals with, that our building code officials deal with, that's a space that... they anticipate the general public to be able to go into. And because of that, there's more attention to the way that it's laid out, the ingress and egress out of it. I'm assuming the sprinkler is probably right, Jeremy. emergency lighting you know just so that was our one of our hooks back to hey this is a place where people should be it's not a place that's just warehousing stuff and so NutraSport would be an example here in town of that correct they're building though there's two very different feels to the different spaces you can go into NutraSport the whole space is permitted as mercantile so

clarify one thing for me. So you say 25% is for incidental storage. That's back room. And then the other 75% in our current zoning is retail space.

That's correct.

Okay. So if this doesn't pass, then Mr. Schultz has to provide 75% retail space.

Correct.

Okay. I just,

We will be back in the drawing board.

Back in the drawing. Okay. And then my only other question, the 30% was just a number we came up with, right?

Right. I mean... There is not a building standard, you know, some federal standard or federal law that says that. So, yeah.

Yeah. And I didn't really even find anything to be definitively this is what it is beyond... looking at some buildings and doing a quick math in my head. This one's 40%. This one's 50%. This one's 20%. And just landing on something that seemed like a reasonable number that in most situations would leave you with a decently substantial retail space that you feel like would be used appropriately.

I don't know. to the business, but the building, or which one is it?

It would be to the business. So like if a building, especially in Mr. Schultz's building situation, that 14,000 feet, that's not the entire building. He's got some other bays that he wants to break out for different users or to lease. So that 14,000, if I drew it on a map, it actually kind of is a little wonky, but it's like one corner of the building and then the main part of the old grocery store.

You've got three or four businesses in there that, you know, And that still doesn't call the percentages are based upon each unit.

So, for instance, we might have one area of the bill that showroom retail. So they'd have to have 30% minimum showroom where it would be full-time consumer access and everything like that. And the rest of that area, 70% could be the storage. Well, the unit right next door under different walls with a different entrance could be back to this limitation of 25% storage because they aren't a showroom retail business. They might just be, you know, they could be, I don't even know what, a bar or an office or something like that where... each individual unit and each individual business determines the storage area but those two spaces would have to what you said walled off and have separate interests yeah they'd have to be distinct businesses yeah but i think you see a lot of these whether it's that percentage amount that was There isn't any regulation on that. The hours, there isn't any regulation on that. Everything was just a goal that we don't have somebody that buys a building that's a commercial building in a commercial area and turns it into a warehouse. Because that affects everybody else that's invested around that block. As far as traffic and stuff like that.

So trying to work with Blake as a resident and as a business owner, how much more space, I don't know the exact square footage and all that other stuff, how much more space does he need to, the difference between the 17% and the 30% is how many square feet that he's having. I can do math quick. Oh, you're right. I had those all at one point. Is the building 18,000 square feet, Blake? 24. So it's going to be like, 5,000 more square feet or something like that.

Well, it's going to be, he's at 17% right now of 14.5. So he'll need 13% more. So whatever 13% of 14.5, which is what I was just doing. So 1,800 square feet. And that would take, the current space is right around 2010. these are very round numbers, so it's not exact, but 2,500 square feet plus 1,800, you know, that gets you up to a total of 4,300.

Like a 40 by 45 room, basically. Right, right.

Lindsay, have we received any oral or written comments on this? We have not. Okay.

I have a question.

Sure, go for it.

I'd be curious, just thinking about this, if Holly's team has like any opinions like if would something like this inhibit maybe businesses that we want to bring to town or have plans to try to bring to town I haven't heard she certainly has been involved with the discussions when we discussed it and she's online too oh she is well then I'll let her talk about it I'll

Yeah, thanks, Jim. So with the size of that building, you know, I think we all want, you know, like a mini Target and some of those types of retail spaces. But realistically speaking, the types of interest we have for a building of that size and type is really more light, light industrial warehouse distribution. So I think the most important thing for us, for Norwalk, is that we have good quality businesses. They're contributing to our tax base significantly. They're, you know, sales tax. There's all these benefits that come from a business, even if they are majority warehouse distribution, online sales. It's still business for Norwalk. They're still contributors. We're always going to be that type of a suburban community where we don't have a ton of walk-in traditional purchase a product retail type businesses. type businesses. We'll eventually get there, but look how long it took Waukee to get that type of industry. So we'll get there eventually, but I think for the most part, if we have quality businesses... contributing to the community. It's still a traffic driver in that area. And quite honestly, it's not a business's responsibility to create traffic for another business. You know what I mean? I think it's a great thing if they can. They can contribute to each other in that sense. But it's really no individual business's responsibility for another business. So I think it's good. I think we need to help our businesses any way that we can so they can be successful. They reinvest in the community. They can grow and expand. You guys probably assumed I would feel that way. So there you go.

Yes. A more pointed question along those lines though, is, is this, is this 70 30 ratio potentially in other parts of town where this, would this inhibit any other businesses that we would like to come to town from coming to these other, not necessarily this building specifically that we're talking about, right? Cause this is for everything's owned this in all of town. Not just that building. I guess that was my question was, is this going to, I guess, cripple Norwalk from being able to accommodate businesses that we have on our radar in any way?

I don't think so. Not that that's in the hopper that we're working on.

I would speculate, and one of the reasons why I kind of keyed into those five is I think with the current 25% restriction, that's probably more of a hurdle over somebody coming through than changing to allow more stuff to happen, right?

Set me straight. You look like somebody who's bigger. It's kind of what you want. It's a negotiation. PUD. Yeah.

PUD would be under our current zoning if we had homemakers wanting to open their Warren County branch down here and put it on sunset. We'd have to do something with a PUD because our code would say you can't do 20%. And that's traditionally how we would do it. This was not.

Do we have any public comment? All right. Hearing none, we'll go ahead and close public hearing at 638. Item 70, it's first reading of an ordinance amending the official zoning map of the City of Norwalk, Iowa by amending Chapter 175A, general provisions, and Chapter 175B, district regulations regarding showroom retail and e-commerce fulfillment uses. So we just had a public hearing on this. Luke, anything else?

I have one more question. So then could someone ask for a variance to this or not?

No. I mean, you can always ask for a variance, but it wouldn't be variance. It wouldn't meet the standards of granting a traditional zoning variance.

Why not?

Because variances, to grant a variance, you have to have some sort of hardship that you don't create. So for instance, by erecting a wall in a certain place, And you do that. You can't suddenly create a hardship. It'd be like saying, you know, you build a house that encompasses the whole of your yard and suddenly you want to put a pool in the back that would encroach onto something. I mean, that's not variance material because you created that issue yourself. So it's got to be something unique about the lot or something.

Yeah, say variances tend to be related to spatially on the lot when there's something unique about that shape of property or topography or something that does it. It's variances are a hard test to get over. In this scenario, like as Jim said, anybody has the ability to ask the Board of Adjustment for a variance and we will take it forward. in a situation like this i would strongly recommend not doing that because i don't want somebody to waste their application fee on doing that on something that i know we would recommend to not do and i pretty positive the board would would also see it that way i think the hard thing for me right is we have a business owner that wants to put in something that would be valuable for the community right i think the sports card thing next to our our baseball facility people will go there right and use that facility

But how flexible do we do it? That's my, like, we came up 30% kind of like this, right? Others are 25, others are whoever, right? And so, like, it's a partnership deal, I think, for me, right? So.

I view it as, yeah, I have the expectation. I don't know what's going to be next to me. If I don't put it there, and I was going to put my business there, and I go, hey, this could be about anything. Comes right down to it. Next, my neighbors. Yeah. This is a c2 zoning from everybody that came in there investments. are Trying to change the game. Archie and give them a little bit, but it's still PC to and and expectation would be Be put up to the street walls of it would be to think that you're going to have a story which I can't guarantee but it can be it has should be a c2 that has people coming into that store to free traffic quite frankly i think that's why they have zonings like that right so i think different options that the council has is when you pass it as is understanding that uh without further

without further construction or changes, material changes to the building, the original use that we were looking at on this couldn't be accommodated. We've been told by the owner that that just doesn't work for him. But also, ideally, you don't make ordinance changes to serve a single individual. You do what's good for the community. If we wanted to, the council wants to consider reducing that 30%, because that's what you would do is you'd change that 30% down to like 15%. It is a substantial enough change. I think you do need to send it back down to P&Z and let them give some input on it. Because you're supposed to review these type of things and make recommendations on it. And that's a pretty material change. It's not changing a word or anything. you know, make a little change on it. So you do that. So I think the options are either is voted down, do nothing on it. You could send it back to P&Z for further consideration. Or you could pass it as it is with 30% and say, well, you know, there are ways that the owner can accommodate that. He just doesn't, you know, doesn't want to, doesn't want to do that for financial or other reasons.

You know, it's like we're trying to negotiate for a living. I think that's what this feels like to me is a halfway point that's better for a business owner like in this situation than what we have now. But maybe not quite where they want it.

I kind of think we already did our part. Right.

I definitely wouldn't want to lower this percentage and then regret it later when we have all these businesses popping up that are taking up a lot of our land, but not doing all the economic development priorities that Holly was talking about earlier. I regret that.

One, I think, Andy, you mentioned variances, and that's not necessarily the route you can go. the code does and it goes through BOA, our code even in certain instances has a condition where the BOA can authorize a different size of something. So the most common one we have is the BOA can let a building be taller than what our height restriction is under certain situations. So there are a couple extra tools if If you were trying to find a way to give a conditional change to a specific space, there are other tools we could add to that. It's just not, the variance just isn't the right avenue.

I don't know if I understand you, I guess. Like I get, right? But like in the old instance.

Like a garage is maximum height is 15. In certain districts like our rural estates district, you can go ask our board of adjustment to have a 25 foot tall garage because you have a RV, right? And the board of adjustment will look at that specific request for that property. We'll do a public hearing, we'll notify neighbors, get input from them, and then they'll make a decision on if that person gets to have a special condition that everyone else doesn't. And so they'll take into all those factors in consideration and approve it or deny it. But that's not you guys making that decision, that's the Board of Adjustment.

Any other questions? Anybody want to make a motion to approve the first reading or to send it back to B and Z with a different percentage?

Okay.

I got a motion to approve. Anybody want to second it? Hearing none, that motion fails. Item fails, right?

So what happens then, right?

He's got to build 75% retail space then.

All right. By not having a second on it, it just dies for lack of a second. So that means that it's the same as a no vote on the ordinance. It doesn't get sent anywhere. It's just done.

Well, I'll second that then. We need to offer this kind of space, and it's up to Blake, I guess, to figure out if he can comply with the 30%. Okay. Right.

You good with that? I'm okay with that. Okay. So motion by Porter, seconded by Borjan. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke?

Yes.

Porter? Yes.

All right. That motion carries. Okay. Item 7E is public hearing regarding the proposed zoning amendment to establish regulations on 3.5 acres of Hughes-Century Crossing PUD land. Use parcel E. So we'll open up public hearing at 6.47 PM. So this area is behind NutriSport by the new water tower. This is to rezone that 3.5 acres to allow for R3 medium density residential. Luke?

Yes. So parcel E of the Hughes-Century Crossing PUD we kind of identified in the title as unclassified. It's technically identified as four different uses. And the PUD says that before a development project proceeds, we should do a definitive zoning for that spot of parcel E so that we lock it in as townhomes or commercial instead of it being able to be everything. So the owner of all that, the owner of NutriSupport, Grant McConaughey, has brought us a request to do townhomes north of the NutraSport off of that extension of East 17th. That would be one of those uses that we identified as medium to high density residential, kind of a dense single family product, commercial or industrial in this area. So this would create a cutout of parcel E to be R3 to allow for that townhome project to proceed.

Lince, have you received any oral or written comments?

We have not.

Any public comment? Hearing none, we'll close public hearing at 6.48 p.m. Item 7F, first reading of an of informants amending the official zoning map of the city of Norwalk, Iowa, while amending the Hughes Century Crossing plan unit development land use parcel E allowing 3.5 acres north of 1601 Chatham Avenue. Those uses as allowed as permitted in the R3 district. So we just had a public hearing on this. Luke, anything else?

Nothing else.

Discussion, questions from the council? I have a motion. I have a motion by Meineke to approve first reading. Anybody want to second? Second. All right. Seconded by Borjan. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Meineke? Yes. Porter? Yes. Borjan?

Yes. All right. Motion carries. Item 7G is a resolution accepting infrastructure and approving the final plat of Holland Point Plat 5. Infrastructure for Plat 5 is finished, and it's time for council to accept it into the city. Tony, Wayne, is everything built out correctly?

Thank you, Mayor. We had our walkthrough on... On this flat on August 25th, about a week and a half ago, all the public infrastructure looked great, just a few minor cleanup items that were listed on their punch list. We have my letter recommending acceptance of the public improvements and release of final plan upon receipt of acquired documentation. Any questions?

Any discussion or questions from council? Or any public comment? Hearing none, can I get a motion to approve the resolution? Motion by Meineke, seconded by Porter. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you please call the roll?

Council Member Porter? Yes. Or John?

Yes.

Meineke?

Yes. All right. Motion carries. Item 7H is resolution initiating a zoning amendment referring the proposal to the Norwalk Planning and Zoning Commission and setting a public hearing regarding the proposal to amend the R1 district to add apiculture, which is beekeeping, as an accessory use. This is to send zoning amendment language to Planning and Zoning in regards to allowing beekeeping in residential areas in Norwalk. It's only to send P&Z for review, and they'll send it back to us. Luke, I'll turn it over to you.

Yep. So apiculture, who knew? Beekeeping is currently only allowed in our ag district. Over the years, and probably more frequently as time has gone on, we've gotten requests for how can you do beekeeping in town? Is it allowed? Especially, I think, as people have identified their desire to support pollination and pollinators on their property, not just from the plants themselves, but also the bees that do the pollinating. um and so right now we don't allow that on a residential property um it is a thing that is somewhat common that that folks allow in neighborhoods um and can be done pretty safely i've got a list of things that we would require as as uh if we allowed the beekeeping to happen like where does it have to be and fencing and all this stuff so there would be requirements for it um but this would kind of start the process and uh we'd bring something back to you that made sense I don't think lot size was one that I had seen. A lot of them have to do with its location on the property and then a big thing is fencing and basically what you want to do is have the bees fly up high enough that then they fly straight out. And so if they have to go up over a fence, they'll stay up six feet off the ground or eight feet off the ground and go to where they're going before they get down and then fly back.

Is there like a setback requirement?

There probably will be. I can't recall all of the details right at this moment, but yeah, all of those things.

Yeah, former gym owners too. They go up two to three feet. So that's their foraging area. Yeah, I know.

Well, I don't know if we need to discuss it now, but years ago I had one in my backyard. Well, that was before I got stung, but the zoning ordinance never prohibited bees. And then they changed them out. They changed some definitions there through apiculture. So I set up a beehive out of my backyard. Then suddenly it's like, oh, geez, I can't have that in there. So I got it out of town. But the one season I was in there, you didn't even know I was back there. It's just other than people coming and thanking me because their gardens did the best ever. But now I'm allergic to them and I can't take them. I'm not going to take care of them anymore because I swell a lot.

I turned out to be allergic to them, so I got to have them. But you're right. I had them down below a dam. And I could watch the bees come in, and they would take that height, and then they kept straight down. They wouldn't come in and go with the lay of the land. They kept it up high and just went straight down. It's kind of cool to watch it.

I ask because lots are getting smaller.

Yeah. And I'm allergic, too.

All right.

Motion.

Okay. Got a motion. Okay. Got a second. Thank you for the discussion. Motion by Borjan, seconded by Meineke. Lindsay, would you please call roll?

Council Member Borjan? Yes. Meineke?

Yes. Porter?

Yes.

All right. Motion carries. Item 7i is resolution initiating a zoning amendment referring the proposal to the Norwalk Planning and Zoning Commission and sending a public hearing regarding the proposal to correct the zoning ordinance to properly classify tattoo studios in the C2 zoning district. So this is to send The zoning amendment language to the Planning and Zoning Commission to correct classification from C3 to C2 for Tattoo Studio. That was originally proposed and approved by Council. The C2 part was, it just got... And they're incorrect.

We had an error typo in the chapter number that dropped into the C3 district instead of the C2 district. So even fixing a minor typo of one letter requires a full rezoning process.

All right. uh any public well uh okay so i got a motion for meineke is seconded by porter lindsay would you please follow council member meineke yes porter yes or john yes all right motion carries item 7j is resolution approving a site plan amendment for shadow creeks estates townhomes platform so shadow creeks estates is located just south of beardsley west of the bridge uh they would like to change the elevations for the southernmost townhomes in that plat luke i'll turn it over to you

Yep. So they were approved. All the townhome units that are out there right now are the same. They were approved for those as part of the original site plan. They'd like to do a minor amendment change to the facades of these. You can see the digital renderings there. They're still fully compliant with our zoning code and architectural requirements for townhomes. I think they're moving some patio space on them and changing some material and roof pitch. So nothing real substantial.

Any discussion or questions from council?

Is the green space required in front? Because that usually ends up being the shittiest grass. Could that just be rocked?

Oh, the space between the driveways?

Yeah.

I think it could probably be whatever they want, because that's fronting out onto a private drive. We have open space rules for a home and how much driveway and hard surface there can be between the public street and the front of your house, but I don't believe we have anything for a townhome situation like that.

I don't want it to be all concrete, personally, but... If there was something about they have to have grass, that would seem silly, but it doesn't sound like there is.

Right. I think it's just whatever they want to put there.

Anything else? I get a motion to approve the resolution. Second. Seconded by Borjan. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Leslie, would you please call the roll?

Council Member Porter? Yes. Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke? Yes.

All right, motion carries. Item 7K is the final reading of the ordinance submitting Chapter 66 of the Norwalk Code to establish a vehicle weight restriction on Southwest 28th Street. So this ordinance is for an embargo on 28th Street that will cause the road to be used more like a normal residential street because all but one user on that road is residential, and the non-residential user is Echo Valley Country Club, and they have indicated that they have no objections to the embargo. Wayne, do you have anything?

Nothing specific on this ordinance. I will tell you, our clerk reached out to Mr. Cordom. He's gotten all this stuff out of there, so we shouldn't have any issues. They've started. Our staff did some tree clearing and grading. The contractor started work today on the 2080 agreement project we had discussed previously. Looks good out there. Looks real good.

Discussion or questions from council or public influence? I just want to say I appreciate staff. That's an added step. I feel like a good courtesy to stay informed, even though we're not required to send out those notices. I think that was just a good branch.

Are there any? So we talked probably two times ago about Warren County's city of Des Moines, like, are we going to come together and try to figure this out? Like, I know that's separate than this, but like, it feels like that's a necessary step that we need to take.

I believe Warren County is talking about how the road is divided. Yeah, Warren County has indicated they are taking steps to be removed from ownership of the road.

Is that what we want? We want Des Moines to take it. Oh, yeah, right. But so then it leaves it with us and them, right? And so are we going to take a step to have a conversation with Des Moines?

I think Warren County is in a pretty decent arguing position to make Des Moines take it because of their annexation. We already annexed out to the center of the road. I mean, we can ask Des Moines, but there isn't, I think, a legal mechanism in which we can force Des Moines because usually annexations go to the center of the road. Yeah, okay.

Any other questions or public input?

Motion.

Second. Okay, motion by Borja, seconded by Meineke. Any further discussion? Lindsay, would you call the roll?

Council Member Horjohn?

Yes.

Meineke?

Yes. Porter?

Yes.

All right. Motion carries. Item 7L is final reading of an ordinance amending the Norwalk Code to amend Section 55. There's a whole bunch of sections there. Since it's agreed, I'm not going to read them all.

These are just a lot of corrections to our ordinances.

Jim, anything to add?

No.

All right. Any discussion or questions from council or public input? Motion. Second. Okay, motion by Meineke, seconded by Porter. Lindsay, would you call roll?

Council Member Meineke? Yes. Porter? Yes. Or John?

Yes. All right, motion carries. Item eight, future agenda items. So the purpose of this item is for council to give direction to staff by way of motion to have items placed on future agendas. It's not for the discussion of the merits of the subject matter, to get it on an agenda so that we can openly talk about the subject matter. Any future gen is for tonight. What did we talk about? Sorry.

Benefited districts. What's that? Benefited districts. Cooler and water benefited districts.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay.

Connection fees of sewer.

Oh, yes. And to review all of the old connection fees and to update.

Yep.

All right. Water too, Andy, or just sewer?

We might as well talk about water and sewer, right? Water and sewer. Yeah.

If I... recall correctly, the emphasis was on that annual increase. Yeah.

Yeah, the base district fees are established based on our costs. So that wouldn't change just as those annual increases that are really these options to change.

All right. I got a motion. Anybody want to second it? Second. Okay. Motion by Borjan to put connection fees for water and sewer The increase is into a future agenda, seconded by Meineke. Lindsay, would you call the roll?

Council Member Porter? Yes. Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke?

Yes. All right. Motion carries. Anything else?

Mayor, if I may, I had an email come through a little after a public comment of someone wanting me to read an email for a public comment. Are you okay with that, or do you want me to wait until next time?

Okay.

Public comment. Like the subject public comment.

Okay. Probably next time.

Next time?

Okay.

Can do.

Anything else?

I don't know if this is anything we need to add to the agenda, but I'm curious how many, I've been thinking about this for a while, how many more townhomes need I don't know if there's research to be done or study or something. I know I wish Councilman Brown was here because I know he's pretty passionate about higher density housing, more affordable housing. I just feel like there's a lot of townhomes. I'm just gonna put that out in the universe. Okay.

Well, at one point, we talked about like apartments around Norwalk Central. And is it just like, are we going to have specific areas, zones for these types of things? Right? I don't know if that all kind of, and then how many we have of each, right? Like, I think Ed brought up some percentages at one meeting, right? Yeah.

I'm just teetering on this line of like, our townhomes, the new affordable entry level housing in Norwalk, right? That we're dealing with here?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Definitively, yes.

So we're just trying to figure out like, how much more we can, I just don't want a bunch of homes sitting vacant for a period of time, because sometimes they can be hard to sell.

I've got some percentages historically. I've got some data we can go over and actually have a discussion with some other development directors around the metro about that topic today.

So maybe I'd make a motion to have us review or do we want to set percentages? Do we want to establish areas where we want these or percentages for areas to kind of look at our use plan?

So yeah, I think if we frame it around the comprehensive plan and the land use plan and land use planning to show and bring up our current land use plan to show where apartments are and where the higher density stuff is. And we can talk about percentages.

We can talk percentages. We can take a review of where things would currently be allowed from a zoning standpoint and from our land use plan. And yeah.

I think that would be a good way to review. in a council meeting. So, yes. That's a motion. I'll take back yours as a second.

Is that a board session or is that a discussion in council?

Discussion in council meeting.

I will get that preferred.

All right. We'll end it with a call roll.

Council Member Borjan?

Yes.

Meineke?

Yes. Porter? Yes. All right. Motion carries. Anything else?

I'll add to the vote. All right.

Item nine is council partners staff updates. I'd like to remind everybody that this portion of the meeting is much less formal. You may hear some back and forth banner and general joking around. We believe this can build camaraderie and cohesiveness between staff and council.

Luke? Mayor, this is for you. This is probably something I could tell you in the hallway, but it's good for others to recognize. I've been hearing around the metro little bits and pieces of people that are appreciative of the information that you specifically have been putting out on some of your data center educational efforts. So just wanted to say thank you for doing that, not just for me, but from what I'm hearing from others.

Yeah, I'm kind of lagged off, but I'm ready to gear up again. Anything else?

No.

George? Nothing. Andy? Nothing.

Wendy? You got an email for me about Uncoastal Social. Thank you, George. He's going to speak on your behalf, Mayor, or as Mayor Pro Tem, I should say. Andy, I've got yours. If you want to go, maybe just let me know by tomorrow if you haven't already so I can get you a ticket. And then that's all.

All right. Thank you.

Jean? Nothing tonight.

All right. Carissa? Nothing tonight. Holly? Nothing. Okay. Chief?

Yes, we finished August still 20% ahead of last year in police reports. That trend continues. And very interesting information I learned today. Well, we had a recruitment process for police officer applicants. And we ended up with 46 applicants, which is way more than we traditionally get and the most we've had in quite a while. And today I had lunch with several other chiefs in the Metro and The Des Moines administration told me that they had to extend their application process because at the end of it, they only had 16. So that's a good sign for Norwalk in our position in the community and what people think about us as a government and an organization. So thank you for your support in allowing us to be able to provide that. Awesome. Yep.

Thank you. Tony.

John Potter, Founders water main project along Elm Street is going well perspective, the water main is in tested and service a replacement that first phase. John Potter, will happen next week updating the school district every week on that project as well, and water tower project will resume construction on 14. Great Thank you.

John Potter, Mr fireworks nothing tonight all right wait nothing very.

Just a couple things. Today we had a quarterly service for leaders. So Meredith Jinx from 6585 Consulting came and spoke to us about coaching that elevates performance. It was another great session. And then that session was rounded out by our EFR, our EAP. provider so employee and family resources team and also just sort of reviewed those the free benefits that the city provides just to keep the leaders, you know, so they have that in the forefront when they have issues with their employees or they see employees struggling that they can share that information and and some other resources. So there's a great session. And then I want to make sure that you all know that you are invited to the annual tailgate. We have a tailgate every year, the Friday before the Iowa-Iowa State game. It's at Public Works. Hopefully you saw the invite in the newsletter. But yeah, it's next Friday at 11 o'clock out at Public Works. If you want to come, bring something to share. That's all I got.

What time's the game? Anybody know what time the game is? The Iowa-Iowa State game.

I guess I don't.

All right, I'm probably going to be in the air flying back home. Luke?

Nothing this evening.

All right, Kelsey?

Two weeks ago, I did a tour. I can't remember if I said this last week. I don't think I did. I did a tour with a group of women in government in the metro of the waterworks facility. Super interesting. learned a lot came in with probably more questions um so gonna dig into those now that i'm feeling better but um yeah i got to see some of the nitrate removal process and facility got to see where the 93 flood markers came up yeah um it was really eye-opening and we got to go in like the lab where they do a lot of their testing and uh He had a whole presentation for us. It was very interesting.

All right. The only thing I have is community chat is next Saturday, but it's going to be canceled since I'm not going to be here. I'm out of town, so we'll cancel community chat. That's all I have. I will entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion.

Second.

Motion.