Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good morning. I will call the June 2nd, 2026 Norfolk Planning Commission meeting to order. Inform the public about the Open Meetings Act in the northwest corner of the building and ask for a roll.

Waite. Here. Sock. Simonson. Here. Hupke. Here. Hoffert.

Here.

Geyer. Here. Griffith. Here. Keech. Here. Hohenfeldt.

Here. I ask for approval of the full agenda. Move to approve.

I'll second.

Please vote.

All commission members present voting in the affirmative. Motion carries.

Consideration of the approval of the minutes of the May 19, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. So moved. We still need a second.

I'll second.

Please vote. Commission members present voting in the affirmative motion carries Me too I will open up the public hearing at the request of Kyle and Caitlin brow to consider a conditional use permit for an oversized accessory building on property addressed as 601 at North 25th Street Anyone here like to speak on behalf please and then if you would sign in perfect

Do you guys want plans for what we're working on?

Yeah, just tell us about it for now.

Okay. I guess if you're looking at the map here, there's a small detached garage already. We're just going to attach it directly to the south, southeast side of that. Just extend it down the driveway a little bit. Plan is to be 48 by 55 with 18-foot ceilings. There'll be... One large garage for any, you know, needs for, you know, like an RV or boat or whatnot. And then another small garage door for vehicles or storage or whatnot. So the roof will connect. Siding will be matched. Brick will be matched.

So all aesthetically conforming.

Yep. If you're going to do it, you do it right.

Thank you.

Yeah.

We appreciate that. And you said to the southeast?

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah, I just extended along the driveway there a little bit. The current one's 30 by 40 for reference.

And you're going to what?

We're going to add 48 by 55. Yeah, 48 by 55. Okay.

Val, is there anything that would trigger under a building permit? Far as he's going to the southeast everything's good there Yeah, as long as they maintain the standard setbacks.

It looks like they have plenty of space before they hit their their side yard setback if they're essentially doubling that And they already have a sidewalk in the front along 25th Street, so they wouldn't have to do that and

Any other questions? Thank you, sir. Yep. Just hang on. Let me close the public hearing here in just a second, then you'll be able to roll out. Anyone else like to speak on behalf of this? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Open for discussion. Is there any specific conditions that we would need?

We normally put the complete total square footage. So 48 by 55 is the end, or that's what you're adding on? That's what we're adding. Okay, so that would be 2640. And you said you looks like there's already a 1200. So 2640 and 1200. So you're 3840. So almost 4000 square feet then. Okay.

Do you want to just cap it at the four? Or cap it at 39?

Yeah, 39. Give them a little play one way or the other. Okay. Does that sound good? Okay.

No Livable area do we need to include that?

Yeah residential And no commercial business out of it or anything like that those are kind of our standard things that we put in oversized accessory because I People tend to get a little carried away sometimes when they get something big and they're like, oh, but I could do this that I never thought of before.

Hearing that the ceiling height was going to be 18 feet, I assume the roof peak will be much higher than the surrounding structure. Yeah, I think it's like 30.

So you can go up to a max 35 in residential. So as long as it's under that. Got two feet to spare.

Looks good. It's a large lot. Certainly appropriate for the size of the lot, I'd say.

There's no further discussion. I'll make a motion to consider to have city staff prepare a conditional use permit for discussion and action at the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting for an oversized accessory structure on property addressed to 601 North 25th Street.

Second. Motion to second.

All commission members present voting in the affirmative. Motion carries.

Thank you.

Now you're good. Okay.

Thanks.

Yeah, thanks, everyone.

We'll open up the public hearing at the request of Porter Pit LLC to consider a conditional use permit for concrete crushing and material stockpiling on property addressed as 2300 South Victory Road. Anyone like to speak on behalf? Sure.

I'm Jeff Porter, representing Porter Pit LLC. We've been operating in this spot since 2014. We have a concrete crushing operation set up there. We have a scale. We have various aggregates that we also We use for, in conjunction with Cape Porter Construction, we do store and stockpile, but we also do sell retail to the public out of that area. But our primary concern here is the concrete crushing operation. We do have a stationary crusher set up there. We also have an auxiliary crusher set up, which is a portable concrete crusher that we've acquired in the interim. They don't run at the same time. One is basically there, so if one goes down, we can continue to operate. We do have, as per the original conditional use permit, we have off the end of the scale, it's paved clear out to Victory Road. So that's probably, including the scale and the approaches, you're probably 100 foot of paved surface before we get to Victory Road. So basically we just want to continue to operate as we have in the past. I guess that's, is there, do you have any questions for me based upon that? Basically we just want to do what we've been doing, no changes really.

Your hours of operation won't change? No, no.

We were talking about this earlier, but it's kind of hard to tell from map view. You have a fence around part of the property or all of the property?

We have fence around, basically there's three sides that are fenced. There is no back fence that backs up. It kind of backs up to, well, it's farmland slash, now it's a gravel quarrying operation that's going on back there. No, we don't have a fence on that side. We do have a substantial fence across the front and then down part one side. And then it's, because that's like a six foot tall chain link around there. And then it's like a woven wire going back, but it's not as tall. It's more of an ag fence from that way back. But we do have on three sides.

And is that according to the previous site plan that is attached to this old permit? I'm sure it is. Okay. I just wanted to make sure, you know, condition two, there shall be chain link fencing and landscaping as per the site plan. So I just wanted to make sure that...

It's as it was... It is maintained as it was. It hasn't changed? No. It exists as it did exist to fulfill the... Okay.

Um... Condition number four, with no stockpiling of materials from the driveway to the north property line.

Okay, yeah, we did have a little bit of overrun. There is none there presently. Okay. We did have some overrun there. Different materials, we did run out of a little bit of room, so we did have a limestone stockpile there for a short period of time. It's not there now.

It appears the original site plan may have trees along that north side. There's black dots on it, I assume. No trees to be planted?

I'll have to apologize, I was not, I wasn't involved with the original when it first went in. I know there was talk originally of screening that area. One problem with screening that between the road and the product is we do kind of like visibility for the public to see what products we do have. So a true screening would be detrimental to what we're trying to do as far as allowing what we have available to be seen from the road.

I see right here it just says like 20 feet of landscaping along that front part.

Okay.

Now how far out of the city limits is this?

so you're over here city limits would be this yellow line so half mile something like that i just want to be able to shore up the permit as best we can so they're not we're not either setting them up to fail or you know, it's not doable, whatever the case may be, I guess.

Right. And previously those trees, they weren't necessarily there for screening purposes, but the code went in in 02 that said that a new use, even industrial, you had to have that 10 feet of green space with Trees, one for every 500 square feet, so that's probably why the trees were there. They can be shade trees, so you can trim them up so people driving down the street can still see through into there and through the chain link fence. And if they die, then they need to be put back So that's just kind of standard code, which is why I'm sure that it was there 10, 11 years ago.

Another thing we haven't talked about yet, you're in the floodplain management area, except for a little circle. Have you applied for all the... or have all the permits for that and everything being in the floodplain area?

I do not know.

Okay.

I guess not. No, I didn't know we had a floodplain spot of floodplain in there.

Okay. It was essentially at that's where it's all, it's all that circle, right? Val and, or it's all that except for the circle.

Yeah. So all the blue is in the regulated hundred year floodplain. And I went looking for a floodplain permit. to see if you guys did it when you first did this. I cannot find a floodplain permit, so we're gonna need to work with you to get that up to code.

Okay, was that in place in 14 or did that come along? It was and it just didn't.

Yeah, it got missed somewhere along the way. And we didn't get dinged on it in the 15 audit because you probably, just started it because what they do when they do our audit is they look at current and then previous aerials to see what changed in the floodplain. So we need to get this taken care of the paperwork and kind of how you're going to operate because we will get dinged on this next time we, we get an audit. Um, so if we can work with that, um, that's definitely something we need to stay in good standing with FEMA so that we get disaster relief and that sort of thing. So I'm not quite sure. It'll probably, you're gonna need a surveyor to kind of come out and see where the floodplain elevation is and how high you're stacking stuff. Because when things come, when water comes through, We don't want your stockpiles to be washed down the way and whether they can be removed or if they're high enough, like one foot above that base flood elevation. So if you can bring in dirt, bring stuff up wherever you're stockpiling things. So that's just kind of heads up that we will kind of need to work on that with you. We can have some time. but that will definitely be something in the cup to maintain that floodplain good standing.

We just want to make sure that we're setting you up for success. I know 10 years ago you may not have been involved, so you weren't privy to some of this. Certainly didn't know about that part of it. I just want to be clear with all of that before we... you know, move forward and get you set up for another, you know, another 10 years. And we want to be in compliance. Yeah.

Is there anything you want to see changed on this at all? Um, I, I don't, I don't guess. I mean, it's what, what we were operating and as we were operating, we want to continue to do the same thing that we were doing before.

Other than that, Val, is there anything else that was of concern?

I don't believe so. We can probably attach the old site plan just for the landscaping and screening just to maintain that, and then we can attach your new site plan that you provided us. The various materials, is that stockpiling? Yeah. So we probably need to change number four then because it said, I believe, no stockpiling north of the entry road, right?

Okay, yeah, which I think in our interpretation was out closer to the, between the existing buildings and the victory road, obviously for what visibility and for what the property looks like. What's being done? I'm sure that was the interpretation that was used before, the reason that things were stockpiled there, north.

Okay. So we probably need to put a little more language into that then.

Yeah, if we could amend it so that at least back there we can, where it's back away from the road.

This is about halfway through the property to the west there. I'm sure, because last time why it was in place was because there was nothing there, and so just to prevent the wind blowing and a lot of dirt or something like that, I don't know. But now there's a business there, so it doesn't really matter.

Yeah.

As I remember, I was on the Planning Commission in 2015, and it was to try to keep operations as far to the south to prevent dust from drifting north.

You're saying at this point it's not necessarily needed at this point because there's a business to the north?

Yeah, I don't believe we've had any complaints about drift to the north.

Not that I've received recently, no.

Any other questions for Mr. Porter? Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to speak on behalf of? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and open for discussion. So the surfacing is still good. That's not any of concern. And then talked about adding some language to the fourth condition.

I'm okay leaving that a little vague.

Do we need to add it, or can we just stretch that?

I think we...

I think adding language that it will not encroach any further north than it currently is would be good to prevent them from doing it right up to the property line on the north.

Is that just to the east of the shop office area that number four is referring to?

think that's the language we need to add is to keep it you know if we if we drew a line from the shop straight north and straight east that's what we're talking about right yeah or the scale i guess in this case so north and west of the shop is fine but north and east is what we're trying to prevent or am i mistaken that's what it looks like to me

I mean, the last 10 years, have we had any problems out there though?

I haven't gotten complaints that I can recall since I've been here. So yeah, we can amend number four to essentially say no stockpiling north and east of the last scale house or something like that.

Does that fit what you're trying to do, Mr. Porter? Yes. Okay.

And did you want to add, make sure the floodplain permit is specifically in the cup with that language?

Yeah, we can do that.

There's no other discussion, I take a motion.

Well, just do you want it for another 10 years? What do you want it for?

Yeah, I think 10 is fine. Okay. 10 good with you? Yeah.

Very good. I'll make a motion to consider to have city staff prepare a conditional use permit for discussion and action at the next regularly scheduled planning commission meeting for a concrete crushing and material stockpiling on property addressed as 2300 South Victory Road.

Second. Motion to second. Please vote. All commission members present voting in the affirmative motion carries Thank you any other open topics or concerns Seeing none, I'll take a motion to adjourn so moved Thank you all.