Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, game over. I'm still hoping for my big junior high. Yeah. Seventh grade. 20 to six. Okay. It's nice.

That's a good idea. So, East 11th,

East 11th and North. Okay. That's yours. Seems about right.

Does he use this phone? I started the way Maryland was doing. It's probably not that far right from being accurate. All right, we're going to get the September 23rd, 2025 city planning commission meeting called to order here. Item number one is roll call. Davies McHune here. Matthews here. Bane here, Budge here, Jet here, Forbes here, WHL here, and Van Bella. Quorum is present.

Current copy of the Open Meetings Act of the State of Nebraska is posted on that wall back there. You're free to refer to it at any time. I think there's also an agenda or two over there if you'd like to follow along and keep score. I know some people like to keep score. Oh, hi. Hi. Sorry, I'm late. I uh talk to him slow. It's all right. Uh item number two, approve minutes from the August 26, 2025 meeting. I trust you've all read them intently.

Would make a motion to approve the minutes. Second. Motion by Bane, seconded by Jet to approve the minutes as presented. Any discussion on that matter? Not shall please. We'll see if this thing.

We didn't. That's all right. Yes. All right. And the minutes are passed. Item number three, file number AM25-006. discussion. Consider action on updates to the North Plat City Code of Ordinances section 76.22 regarding parking and storing of RVs and other recreational vehicles. Judy.

Okay. And you should have all received a copy of the proposed regulations. Um those items underlined in red if yours is in color or just underlined are what they we are discussing about um the possibility of adding. And this is based off of um discussions that we've had at previous meetings. Um I'm going to go ahead and let the city attorney take over at that point if he has anything additional to add. Um not necessarily. Um we tried to sat down and looked at this and tried to make what adjustments we thought would be appropriate to address some concerns that have arisen. Um, one issue uh that we could look at further um and I think it's kind of intentionally vague although it has caused some issues for the police department which is some of the feedback that we got from the police department was the definition of a hard surface pad that we don't have further definition for that. Um so again in my mind it's kind of intentional and not defined. But you could go different direction with that too.

Um, one of the other things that I wanted to point out too is on that I got a couple of phone calls about today. It would be E um two where it says um subject to all existing setback requirements in a particular zone where it's located. And this is talking about the sideyard. And I think that's going to cause some issues requiring a sideyard setback. And I can give you an example if you want me to pull it up on the uh computer screen, but there's a couple areas in town where people have already poured concrete pads. Um they have their existing pad, there's a concrete pad to the side and they've placed their um RVs for storage in that location. So, if we put this in, that's not going to allow them to put that there any longer because they can't meet that setback. And they've done it for years, never had a complaint, and it's a neighborhood where there's probably six or eight of them right in that area that have done that. Poured a concrete pad, put that there, and so it's existing. So, this may end up causing a hardship if we require them to have a sideyard setback. And like I said, I can pull it up on GIS if you want to look and see what it looks like. But

the other thing I'm hearing is the slide out

retraction in this new one. Any slides shall remain fully retracted while it's parked or stored. And people want to have it in their driveway and have their slide outs out for whatever reason. And I feel if if it's within the setback, the slide out can be out. On the street, I don't think it should be out at all except for cleaning and maintenance. But if it's in a driveway with reasonable meets a setback, I think the slide should be able to be out or even in I got calls and people have a lot beside their house and park it on their lot beside the house and they were upset. Why can't I have my slide deployed in on my own property?

Right. It's on their property. It's within their property. It's within the setback. the slide wouldn't matter if it's in or out.

Yeah. And I got I've gotten calls I got a call today um from a resident on the north side who actually parks his right on the lot line to avoid having to see the mess in in the neighbor's yard and sent me pictures to back it up. So, we'll we'll probably chase that down. Um so, I I think there's a lot to think about on this. Um it says discuss and consider action, but u as I kind of talked through this and and um thought through this a little bit, I kind of wonder if it doesn't make sense to let this simmer, read this, let it simmer for a month, come back, do a public hearing, and and take some input from the community and

re revisit the comments and wording of some of the stuff. Yeah. Have there been complaints about the slides in some of these yards? I think it was more just when we were looking at discussing this the last time and I think if I go back to the minutes I think some of us talked about Yeah. I think some of us talked about putting the slides in because you know sometimes when they're in a slideyard if you have the slides out you know you're almost up against your neighbor's home in some instances. You know what a slide deployed width is. They range from three to four foot. Check with three feet. We're worried about three feet. Number two.

Generally speaking, no, that is the largest slide. That's what he said. Is that right? So the way the the way the ordinance reads right now, are they allowed basically to pour pad right up to the lot line and park it right on the lot line or do they have to meet setback without this change without changes? Yes. The way it's written today? Yeah. I you can pour I mean the city of North Plat would allow you to pour a cement pad up to the point of your property because because it's not a vertical structure. It's within your property. So, yeah.

So, the setbacks don't necessarily apply to that because it's not any type of a vertical structure. And then you can pull your right now without saying you can't be in the sideyard if it's the sideyard. The way it was intended when it was first written was if you had it attached to your or part of your current driveway, then you could park it in the side. Yes. So like but on fences we won't allow a front yard fence any higher than five feet any higher than three in the 25 foot setback. Yes. In a front yard. In a front yard. Right. Yes.

And then on a if you're building an ancillary structure on the side of your home as long as but that's a anywhere from a three to six foot setback depending on zoning. Yes. And that can be up to 20 feet tall. Is that correct? Probably. I'd have to check the code for sure. I think it is 20 feet because then if you go any higher than that, then your setback is greater and I think it's actually 5 to seven feet on a sideyard. Okay.

But I'd have to look at that code. I'm not exactly sure how tall you can go without increasing the set. So the the argument is in my mind, okay, well, if you're going to if you're going to limit a fence to three feet. Now, we've got a situation where you're pouring a pad up to the side of the side of a lot line and you're parking a what how tall are these some of these things? 15, 17. Yeah. So, I mean there there's there's some inconsistencies between and just all stuff I want everybody to think about in the in the course of the next 30 days before and have some discussion here about it too.

Back when this first came proposed, it was to not allow people to live in an RV on the property and it states that you can't do that. Now, we're adding layers and layers to this. Just you can't live in an RV. Simple as that. It's not We don't want that. Yeah, I I think that's fairly clear here. A question on the fence. Um question though, the fence can be five feet up to the front of the up to the front of the house, right? Okay.

There's a setback. So typically it's 25 foot front yard setback. So in that 25 foot area it has to go down to three feet. I just wanted to clarify on that. And then depending if you're Yeah. safety reasons and depending if you're on a corner lot sometimes you have to do a corner cuts for a clear vision zone to be able to see around. I was hearing it wrong.

What other kind of questions do you have for Bill or Judy on this? Would it be smart to address it with um permitted uses or uh conditional uses? Um you know, if you if you have a solid pad on this in your side yard and you uh do not encroach on your neighbor, can you put your slides out and leave them there? Uh the fine encroach Well, cross the line. Yeah. If you're up So, you'd let them go up to the lot line with a slide out.

Yeah. And not meet the setbacks. That's a question, right? Would you permit that with an RV? Because an RV is a movable thing and all that kind. I have one of those across the street from they have the five he he built the five foot fence. He poured his lot and he put his his uh RV in there and it works slick and he loves it and it's all good. He finally moved because he was he well he moved Omaha but he was really pissed that we were talking about taking that away from Yeah.

And I would suspect there would be a fair number of people that would would be on both sides of this issue. I know there's some folks in on one side here and I know there's probably some folks on the other side here. So these well like we discussed there's people that did it on purpose and it's not like going to be grandfathered in. You know, I put this pad here and I've done it for five years. The city allowed me to put this pad here for this and there's now you're changing. They've expended resources to do that and it's been legal and they've followed the rules and it's not like we can grandfather them in. Right.

Well, I think the enforcement is is a challenge. Is it just when they get a complaint? Is that when the enforcement occurs? Because most deal is not being there's RVs parked all over town in the front of the houses and they don't, you know, they might move on a weekend, but they're back and they're they're there and it's that's not being enforced. So, we just another layer of uninforced ordinance. basically basically

okay she wasn't Yeah, but there are some areas in town if you guys want to drive around. I know um one of the calls that I got was the Sequoia area um on Sequoia Drive. There's a number of these that have the concrete pad right beside the existing and they're RVs are right there in the sideyard setback. Oh my gosh, that just sounds so radical and unamerican. So they're they're in the setback, so they don't need the setback. Well, if you if you change this So if you change this that says um subject to all existing setbacks, that would that would eliminate those, right?

That would basically say you can't do that because you can't meet a seven foot setback if it's an improvement. Yep. Okay. That's the way I read it. Yeah. Like it used to there's a bunch of these out there. Yep. But what if there's a fence? You know, well, there's guidelines for there's guidelines for that. And maybe I mean, I don't know, just throwing ideas out there. Maybe you say you have to have a privacy fence and then you can put it there. Picture of a situation where Cole was in People didn't like it.

Told him to he had to put a fence up. You put a fence up, but it's a mural of the boat. [Music] But you do open a can of worms then. I mean, because some boats can be pretty big and you know, and so then is that the next Yeah. Somebody gonna park a I've seen a sailboat. Well, sail sailboat parked down on Fifth Street over down by the Lutheran Church on like Fifth and Willow. That's got to be 25 ft tall and places. I don't know what the right answer is on this. So, my recommendations live in an RV.

Yeah. Unless unless any this is this is on the agenda to discuss and consider action on updates. So you could you could Bill, what are our options here? We could table it. We could Yeah. Well, there hasn't been a motion made yet. So I mean we um could make a motion in favor against. Somebody could make a motion table. So nobody's made any kind of a motion yet. So all the options are out there.

I don't know that I'd feel comfortable with advancing this without a public hearing. I think we would want to take public input. it wasn't on the agenda as a public hearing. I think it was meant more or less, correct me if I'm wrong, for discussion among our group tonight and then see what feedback we would give to these folks uh between now and if any feedback if you want to see this back on the next meeting, which is why I think we're getting the public comments personally, right? So, we'll give them an opportunity to come and give us their comment. I'd make a motion to table.

I would second that. There's a motion on the floor to table this motion by Mchuan, seconded by Bane to table. What What would be your Well, what would be your desire? Does everybody want to see this come back next month? Right. The fact that we table it, what happens to it when it comes back? Do you want it come back as a public hearing to take public comment? Yeah, I think come back. Okay. I'll amend my motion to include a for public hearing next month. Okay. That make sense to you, Michelle? I will second. We're going to

we're going to table this pending action or we'll bring this back next month in the form of a public hearing so we can take public comment and u we'll move on with it after that. That make sense to everybody? We wanted time I think here tonight to digest what's been going on. and say anybody that um wants to make suggested edits or anything like that, you know, this was just the information that we felt that Judy and I felt was brought to us. So that's what we put together. Not going to hurt my feelings if nobody likes it or if everybody likes it, I get paid the same no matter.

Yeah, if you're making edits then, you know, does that change with the public hearing discussion? Not necessarily. Yeah, we'll put it out in advance and so um I feel like every everybody that would want to comment is going to have an opportunity to see it in advance. Okay.

So if we want to make changes, there's there's nothing that prevents anybody from suggesting changes before the next meeting um when it would come back assuming that the motion passes. Um and so I'm just saying if anybody wants to talk to Judy or I beforehand, you're always more than so and we can see what you know there's the possibility I could say that you know a suggested change wouldn't be appropriate so those types of things I'm just saying you're welcome to to bring any of your ideas to Judy and I we're always happy to talk appreciate your work on this these are never fun so okay there is a motion and a second on the on the uh floor to table this uh until the October meeting which would include a public hearing ing when it comes back. Any more discussion on that matter? Not Michelle, please. And this item has been tabled. We will bring this back in October. We'll have a public hearing. You'll all have an opportunity to give us your input at that time and we'll see where this goes. Okay.

Appreciate everybody coming. I assume a lot of people are here for this tonight. It seemed It's usually kind of bare around here. Okay. Item number four, file number SU25-017. Discussion, consider action on application by the Lincoln County Community Development Corporation for preliminary and final approval of LCCDC subdivision located at 1117 through 1121 East 11th Street in an R2 dwelling district on property described as lots 9, 10, 11, and 12, block 21, Flynn's edition to Northplat Lincoln County, Nebraska. Judy.

Okay. And you should have all received a copy of the preliminary and the final plat for um LCCDC subdivision. Um the subdivision will consolidate four existing lots into two lots with a shared utility and access easement running north and south from the alley to East 11th Street. The lots will have or the lots do have access to city utilities and planning staff has no objection to the subdivision. Um the intent just because I know this, the intent is for LCCDC to um demolish the existing structure that is on um I believe previous lot nine and then in the future as grant funding is available to um build two forplexes I believe

one on each lot. Okay. Real just little housekeeping item. Uh Mr. Mchuan informed me premeating that he is on the board of the development corporation will be abstaining from this action along with all input. So any discussion on this matter? My only discussion is they're both named lot one block one the second page. Yep. Block two block one on the second page. Okay. Got it corrected on the secondage. And then putting one on each lot. Yes. So, yeah, that's their intent. When that gets done, they are a nonprofit organization, so it may take some time.

Any more discussion on this one? Not. There's a proposed motion there. I move to make a recommendation to approve file number SU25-017 preliminary and final approval of LCCDC subdivision. Second. Motion by Matthew, seconded by Bane to approve as presented. Any more discussion on this? Not please. And the motion passes 70 with one abstension. Um record reflect that Mr. Mchuan has abstained.

This will go on to the city council meeting on October 7th, I believe is the meeting date. Okay. Okay. Item number five is a public hearing file number CU25- Z005 discuss and consider action on application by the city of North Plat Lessor and Industrial Tower West LLC LEI for a conditional use permit to expand the footprint of an existing communication tower located at 4 in the 4,000 block of West Front Street in an I2 heavy industrial district on property described as lot one municipal subdivision Lincoln County, Nebraska. Judy.

Okay. You should all have received a copy of the review comments. Attached to that is a letter from Industrial Tower West and then um two site plans and then a location map showing you the area of the existing site. The applicant is requesting to expand the tower site approximately 075 acres to accommodate a gener a generator addition and two additional equipment shelters. The expansion will not result in adverse impacts on neighboring properties and there will be no effect regarding traffic or parking. Site activity will be limited to routine maintenance visits. Um planning staff has no objections to the conditional use application. The property is currently and has been used as a long-term tower site. The project is simply increasing the tower compound and should not be a detriment to the surrounding property owners as the use will not change. Um the applicant is in the audience. if you have any questions. Otherwise, I will be happy to help where I can.

Okie dokie. This is a public hearing. Uh we have two of these tonight. Um and so the following rules I'm going to read will apply to both. So pay attention because I don't want to read them twice. Uh planning commission values your input, wants to hear from the audience during public hearings. Anybody wishing to speak must first be recognized by the chair. Once recognized, please approach the podium, state your name and address. Please keep your comments as brief as possible. Repetitive and excessively long testimony may be ended at the discretion of the chair, which makes the chair grouchy. And with that, the public hearing is now open. Anybody want to talk on this one? Come on up. Name and address, please.

I'm Teresa Swagert. I'm with Industrial Tower West, and my address um for business is 1224 West Plat Avenue in Fort Morgan, Colorado.

Very good. Go ahead. So, this like Judy was saying, explain kind of what we're looking for. Um, with power outages sometimes that are happening, we're trying to replace or put on our sites all new generators um for backup just to help with the connectivity and ongoing, you know, performance of our service. And then we have had a couple of um companies and I don't know exactly which ones have reached out to us to do some collocation but we do want to put up some new shelters a couple new shelters to be able to accommodate that. So it would also benefit the area for you know other carriers other than just for any questions.

Thank you. What'd you do with Rehaw? Oh he's still around. Give him the night off. Did you? He's still They they've been uh training me, so we'll tell him. I'm getting my toes wet. I will. Thanks. Anybody else want to testify on this one? Going once. Going twice. Make a motion we close public hearing. Second.

Motion by Bane, second by Muan to close the public hearing. Any discussion on that motion? Not. Michelle, please. And the public hearing is now closed. We're to talk about this one up here now. Okay. Uh questions, comments, fairly straightforward. Judy, there's a So, there's a bunch of factual findings here. Whoever makes the motions got agreed to all five of those. Yes, that is correct.

And um any additional would the city recommend any additional conditions? Um they've been there for quite a while with no issues. So I don't see anything. Okay. But they didn't have a propane tank so close to a residential area before. Um sorry. I think there is an there's an existing propane tank there. Is there? Yeah, I believe so. Yeah, come on up and answer that if you would. There is an existing tank on the drawing.

Yes, and it's on the other side. This one is um a little bit closer to the residential, but it is actually more it's like 300 feet from the nearest backyard of a residence.

Thank you. Yeah.

Other questions.

There's a motion there. Somebody' like to read it. Somebody's got to do it. I move that we find the request for a conditional use permit to expand the footprint of an existing communication tower site located in the 4,000 block of West Front Street meets the minimum standard stated in the North Plac code of ordinance ordinances section 156.322 and approve and grant the conditional use permit requested with all the conditions with the conditions that all elements of the application are complied with based on the following actual findings. One, the you shall conform to all applicable ordinances, laws, and regulations of any governmental jurisdiction. Number two, the you shall have adequate water, sewer, and drainage facilities. Number three, ingress and egress shall be so designated as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. Number four, the use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. And number five, the use shall be in harmony with the character of the area and the most appropriate use of land.

Second. Motion by Matthew, seconded by Bane to make a make a recommendation to approve the conditional use permit to the city council. Any more discussion on this matter? Sh. And the motion is approved. This will go to city council October 7th public hearing again. Okay. All right.

You bet. Items number six and seven are related. So I'm going to read them both in. Uh they both have public hearings attached to them and so we'll do this public hearing simultaneously on these. Um, item number six is a public hearing file number AM25- Z007. discussion. Consider action on application by Lewis and Diane Herrick to amend the North Comprehensive Plan 2011 future land use map amending certain land from agricultural vacant to commercial on property located at 4684 and 4602 Rodeo Road and described as part of the southeast uh excuse me part of the south half northeast quarter of section 25 township 14 north range 30 west of the six prime Lincoln County Nebraska. Item number seven is also a public hearing. File number Z25- Z007 discuss and consider action on an application by Lewis and Diane Herrick to reszone certain lands from an A1 transitional agricultural district to a B2 highway commercial district on property located at 4684 and 4602 rodeo road and described as part of the south half northeast quarter of section 25 township 14 north range 30 west to the six prime radium Lincoln County Nebraska Judy.

Okay. Okay. And you should have received a copy of the review comments and um the future land use map showing the amendment. And then also you should have received a copy of the review comments for the zoning. Um a letter from the applicant and then two different site plans. One is kind of an aerial to show you the existing buildings and then the other one the area that's proposed to be reszoned. In order to reszone a property, it's the duty of the planning commission to ensure that the resoning is in conformance with the current comprehensive plan. The request for the amendment has been submitted in conjunction with the resoning and the applicants are requesting the amendment to allow the change in zone. Planning staff has no objections to the amendment. The property is currently being used as both commercial and residential. It is a budding commercial, industrial and agricultural properties and amending the land use to allow this property to develop as a commercial property should not be a detriment to the surrounding areas. Um the applicant is requesting this zone change to allow the property that contains two residential structures and that's the property nearest to um Highway 30 Rodeo Road um to be split for possible sale in the future. each residential site would be split into two separate 2acre parcels and one larger vacant 8 acre parcel. Um and then additionally, since we were doing this anyway, the um RV park is a better fit zoned as commercial than it is as agricultural. So, we just thought that we would do that all at the same time. Um if you have any questions, I will be glad to answer. And the applicant is in the audience, too. And you will see a subdivision if this is reszoned come through probably next month.

Okie dokie. Public hearing time. It is now open. Um, anyone want to talk? And again, we're talking about both these things which are more or less the same thing. So, anybody want to talk on this, going once, going twice. Make a motion we close the public hearing. Is there a second? Motion by Bane, seconded by Forbes to close the public hearing. You did do that, right? Okay. Any more discussion on that? Not shall, please. And the public hearing is now closed. All right. We'll talk about these up here. These are more or less commercial sites the way it sits.

And then it goes to B2, but then there's residential in there. So then that comes up next. Yeah. Well, no.

So the amendment, we have to do the amendment to the land use which would allow it. So we've got the land use because right now the land use is showing it as agricultural vacant. So in order to reszone it to commercial, we have to amend that land use which is action number one. Um if you amend that to commercial, then you can reszone the property. Now this was a little bit tough when I was talking to the owner about how to do this because there are two residential properties on site. one to kind of the west of the property that abuts or I call it north because it's on the north side of the paper but it's actually west um right along Highway 30 there's a residential structure and then if you look towards then the east there's another residential structure well what Mr. Heric is wanting to do is to um subdivide that into three separate lots. The house on the west, the house on the east, and then a larger lot in the center. In order to do that, our regulations do not allow um lot sizes of less than 10 acres if you're egg. So, you have to reszone it to something. So, in discussions with Mr. Heric, you know, peacemealing that into two residential lots and one commercial lot was going to be kind of

that's That was going to be my question.

Yeah. So, um, when I talked to him originally, the north lot, he is looking to sell those two residential properties. Um, the one that's on the east or towards the bottom of the paper. Um, there's a gentleman that's currently renting there that does have a trucking company. So, if he were to buy that, I could see it being zoned commercial would actually work better than having it zoned residential. Now, the one to the north, you know, you don't know what somebody's going to do. So, I just felt at the time the best way to do that, especially since it's right along Highway 30, is just zone it all residential or commercial. And then if somebody were to come in and try to buy it and have maybe an issue with that commercial zoning versus a residential, maybe we could look at it at that time to possibly do some kind of a transitional commercial transitional business transitional or something like that that would allow the residential. Now the residential can stay there as it is as a grandfather.

It would be a non-conforming. Yeah. Basically a non-conforming use. So, somebody can occupy it as a residential. It's no problem, even though it's zone commercial. Um, but in that area, I could see somebody possibly buying the residential structure and adding a garage for some sort of a business, right? You know, that's ideal sites out there for somebody who wanted to do a homebased business or something of that nature with access to the highway.

Yeah. I mean, this is a good thing to be going the route of commercial. I mean, that's what you want is a community be growing. Um, you know, and too it's just like so as we're planning or preparing for future roads or whatever in this area, you know, what do we need to be thinking about? Just go through my mind. But did I explain it enough? Yes. Perfect. Understand that was my thing is that that the two residentials will be non-conforming. Yeah. And then it wouldn't make I don't know if you're going to split two acres to two acres. You can't just put in R2 and R2 and B2 around it.

You could, but it's really I mean being that area, I just felt that it was so much a better fit to be commercial than it is residential. But it may turn out that they're going to be residential and maybe somebody will buy that whole thing from him, the eight acres and make it all residential. But it just being right up against the highway, it's more conducive to a commercial property in my opinion. Is the residential use permitted in the commercial?

It it would be permitted as a non-conforming right now, which means that it would be allowed to stay. And if um an act of God came in and the tornado came in, it would be allowed to be rebuilt, but they couldn't expand on the residential. So, if they want to do an addition, that wouldn't be allowed in a commercial. They'd have to reszone it. And just to clarify, looking at the colored um feet here, the view works sheet. Yep. You're talking about residential down in the lower right hand corner. 54095. No, it's up. It's still on that 0054055 area, but it's in that corner. You can kind of see a couple of buildings there. That's the old Is that the old drive-in theater?

Yes. Yes, that's what I thought. So it's it's right here. Okay. Okay. So the just so I understand the RB part is part of this. Yeah. We just decided since he owns all of it to just go ahead and change that to B2 also since he was going through the process. But it would not be split. It would remain as its own lot. So that um the parcel ID the 0054055.00 would be split into three.

A residential um towards the west, a residential towards the east, and then in the center would be another. But we're sorry, we're zoning it all commercial, but it would be three different parcels where the residential structure is. But that that action is not being taken up tonight. No, it will be subdivided at a later date because right now it's all egg and you can't subdivide egg into smaller than 10 acre lots. Why not just two?

Possibly. He has plans to do different things with that. He may retain it and put storage units on it. Um through the discussions with him, I don't think that he had decided 100% what he wanted to do with that for sure. Really the probably. Yeah, I agree with that. Okay, any more discussion? So, we have to take these up to uh in item number six first and item number seven. Um and so there is a proposed motion on item number six there if somebody wants to read it. If you have no more discussion,

I move to make a recommendation to approve file number AM25-00007, an amendment to the city of North Pot, feature land use map, amending certain land from agricultural/vacant to commercial on property located at 4684 and 4602 Rodeo Road. Second motion by Jet, seconded by Forbes to approve or make a recommendation to approve. Any more discussion on that? Not and the uh planning commission recommends to the council to approve

and this will go to the city council for a public hearing again on October 7th. Okay. So then on to item number seven uh which is the actual resoning. Any more discussion on that matter? If not, there is a proposed motion there. Recommendation to approve file number 257 district located at 4684. Second

motion by forms Forbes seconded by Mchuan to approve. Any more discussion on that matter? Not

all right. Planning commission recommends approval to the council on both matters. This will go to the council October 7th at 5:30 with for public hearing. There you go. Good luck. Item number eight, discussion of upcoming joint planning commission work session.

Okay, so I put this on the agenda. So, um, as you may or may not know, I do, um, planning for both the city and the county. So, I have a county planning commission also. Um, and I have decided that, um, we can all use a little bit of education in our lives when it comes to what it means to be a planning commissioner and and making decisions and those sorts of things. So, I have asked um Dave Patac and Chad Nabid to come out. Um Chad Nabidi is the regional um planning director for uh city of Grand Island and Hall County. And then Dave Patak is a land use attorney that's been in the field of land use planning for probably since before I was born. And he also has served as a city administrator, a city attorney, and um they do speaking, they do a lot of speaking events, and one of them they speak at the Nebraska Planning and Zoning Association. and they do this they do this um session called planning 101 and so I've asked them to come out and do a um planning 101 session and I've scheduled it for a night of the county planning commission which is October 14th I believe I believe that's the

printed right here on the Oh right here um and so the county is going to have their meeting at 5:30 and then we'll have these guys come at 6. And so I'm going to advertise it so that anybody who is involved in planning, wants to know more about planning, you guys, if you want to come and um hear their presentation, um probably at six o'clock, pretty close to six o'clock. Will you send us a formal?

Yes, I will definitely send it to you. I just wanted to kind of get it out there ahead of time so you guys can put that on your schedule because it's not your regularly scheduled evening. And so I mean it's very beneficial. Um they will have a little presentation and then they will allow you to have ask some questions and their planning 101 session talks a lot about um what your responsibilities are um when you can get overreaching as a planning commission um what to do with conditional uses, what to do with um zoning amendments, all those different kinds of things. So um I've taken that session, they do the same session every year. I've been going to Nebraska Planning and Zoning Association for 25 years. I've set in on this session probably six or seven times and I always learn something new every time. So, it's very good and they're very well educated individuals. So,

perfect. Yep. And they probably won't always agree with what um our city attorney says and I'm sure he doesn't always agree with them, but uh it's nice to have that conversation. How long? I would say we're going to allocate two hours. Um, but again, if you can come and see part of it and you leave, that's fine. But I think any education is good. There be a refreshment. I will bring you cookies or something. I promise I will do that. I can't I can't I can't I can't bring pizza for everybody because I don't know how many people will be there, but um I'll bring you something. Emily will make homemade cookie.

You said you were going to bring some. I'll be judged. I'm just Yeah, Walmart makes good homemade cookies. Item number nine, old business. While we're on cookies, off cookies. Item number nine, old business. I've got nothing. Any new business? If not, we are adjourned.