City Council - Regular Meeting

59. Do you have 6 o'clock on your phone? Yes, sir. Okay, it is 6:00 and we are going to bring our March 23rd, 2026 city council meeting to order and we will begin with roll call. Sad here. Savage here. D'vorak here. Hill. Otis here. Item number three, approval of agenda. I'll ask for a motion and a second, please. So moved. Second. Roll call. D'vorak. Yes. Hill. Yes. Otis. Yes. Sirad. Yes. Savage. Yes.

Item number four, public hearing a public hearing on proposed plans, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for regional park phase 1 project. So, it's time to close the regular meeting and open that public hearing on the proposed plan, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of costs for the regional park phase 1 project. Susan, when was the notice published? March 12th, 2026. Have we had any written comments received for or against the proposed plans?

No, sir. At this time, I would like to request staff to provide a report. Evening, honorable mayor, city council, Jason Len with Snider and Associates. Uh, appreciate you allowing me here this evening. Um, before you, this action item is to approve and accept the plans and specifications for Pulk City Regional Park phase 1. Um, this is plan is very similar to what we saw at the earlier presentation to this council and I would be happy to answer any questions on those if there are any. Thank you, Jason. Any questions from council? [clears throat] Oh, I thought you were getting ready to ask a question. This is on

on a this is on a U public hearing a um and we'll move on to the motions next. Nothing of Jason then. Okay. Is uh there anyone present then who wishes to be heard for or against the proposed plan, specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for regional park phase 1 project. Seeing or hearing none, I then need a motion to close the public hearing and reopen the regular meeting. So moved. Second. And roll call. Savage.

Yes. D'vorak, yes. Hill, yes. Otis, yes. Serette, yes. All right, then. Moving on to one and two. 4 A1 and two. I need a motion to approve resolution approving the plans, specifications, and form of contract for regional park phase 1. Do I have a motion and a second? So move. Second. And roll call. So, [clears throat] real quick, any Yeah.

from the last plan that we saw, um any are there any changes to uh any of the plans meaning from the uh previous version? Uh these are very similar. There have been uh you know detailed plan changes to provide more detail for uh specifications and constructibility. But from an overall no, there have not been major changes. Okay. All right, then. Moving on to roll call. D'Vorak, yes. Hill, yes. Otis, yes. Sir Chad, yes. Savage, yes.

We will move on to item 4 A2, resolution awarding contract for regional park phase 1. Um, I would need a motion to approve that resolution awarding the contract for regional park phase one. Before we do that, on that [clears throat] Okay.

I I'd like to get some guidance. So, um, I do have some cons. I look, we've gone through a lot with the park and myself more than a lot of people, although I know there are a lot of people that are looking forward to getting [clears throat] started on this. Um, but I I do have some concerns about the responsibility of the bidder. I know they they're low. Um, I I [clears throat] give them a fair opportunity um to go through that. I don't know if now is the time to do that or it would be best. And again, this is just speaking for myself, so others need to weigh in on on how how to proceed, but I I would like to initiate rather than approving the contract tonight. I'd like to initiate a post bid evaluation of the biders. So before we jump to that, a question for legal on how do do we not take action and direct staff to go that direction or what's the best?

I'm sorry. Well, I go ahead. Um, you can defer action from tonight's meeting. Um, although you need to, um, the publication then would work. You can simply defer the matter for further consideration. If there is going to be consideration of a rejection of the bid or reconsideration of the bid, you would need to allow the bidder to um offer their own evidence in support of their bid. Y um that can either happen tonight or if you defer the matter it can happen at another um but that does need to happen. Okay. Okay. And you and your action was to do what again? Just so we know.

Why don't we get other people to weigh in and then we can [clears throat] revisit the specific action because that that's just my viewpoint. I don't want to sully how others think about this. I just want to I I did want to get some insight into how to from a parliamentary procedure standpoint and how to move forward. [snorts] Okay. Council members, do you have any comments on this on uh item two, a resolution awarding contract for regional park phase one?

I'm going to agree with Rob. I believe uh due diligence wise the the scope of the project the uh how long we've been at this to just provide some additional insight would not be a a bad it would be some behoove us not to to ensure that uh we're spending money wisely and that we're uh doing right by the uh the taxpayers. I'm in full agreement with that. And I think it also behooves us to give the contractor the fair shake to actually present what they've got to say about their responsibility. Anyone else from council? All right, then let's ask um

Well, I mean, we've got some folks here. If if that's what we're going to do. We're going to turn it over to the um contractor. That's what you meant, right? Yeah. Or Yeah. Anyone else? So um anyone wish to speak on this topic? Yes sir. I'm the owner of the Will you come to the microphone please and and state your name and address? Sure. Uh Russ Karu. I'm the owner of Graphite Construction Group. I live in Ankeny. Well in Ankeny. [clears throat]

Okay. Um, yeah. I I guess did you guys have specific questions about us as the contractor or did I I don't really understand. I guess I could start with uh Snyder mentioned that they've worked with you in on past projects in Ankeny, Indianola, Atlantic, and Camp Dodge. Can you just speak to what those projects are?

Yeah. Um, can everyone hear me? Okay. Yep. Cool. Um so with Snyder we had recently worked on a park project uh in the city of Ankeny uh last year it finished up um Water Crest Park uh project turned over I don't know of any [clears throat] issues we got our retainage on it finished out fine um [snorts] we completed a large uh athletics project is what I would call it and Atlantic with them back in [clears throat] 2021, I believe. And that included two artificial turf football fields, um a baseball, brand new baseball, softball fields, um concession stands, and then a very large site grading package that went school district.

Yes. Okay. Um, [snorts] Camp Dodge. We've done a number of projects in Camp Dodge, probably 20 over the last 25 years we've been in business. Um, we've completed uh, let's see, three [sighs and gasps] new buildings in the LA or sorry, additions in the last 3 years. Um, we've completed a shooting range project. I think that's the one that we did with them. um which was kind of crazy. It was like this big site and then they have all these pop-up targets that you had to do special wiring for um and um kind of build these like deconstructed buildings that way they could do as an urban assault course. So then like the you know military guys could go through and practice on that and you'd have these pop targets that would pop up in them. So we've done that. Um, Snider's [snorts] been on a number of other projects for us. Um, [clears throat] as a vendor under the architect, I guess would be what I would say. But yeah, I mean, we've, as a company, we've completed over $834 million worth of work. Um, 212 projects have either are active right now or have been completed by us. average project size, if I take that over, uh, it comes out to about $3.7 million worth of work. Um, athletic projects like this are something we do a lot of. Uh, we've built, uh, new, uh, football fields for KFAC schools, uh, new baseball fields. Actually, we just did one. Oh, that's what I forgot. Sorry. The project for Camp Dodge last year that we did with Snyder was a softball field. So, we completed that last year. Uh, retainage is supposed to

get paid, I think, next week. So, not a huge project. I think it was like $300,000, but it was pretty straightforward. Completed on time, no issues. Um, but we've done a lot of athletic projects. Your guys' project is the second third [clears throat]

uh softball or not softball [snorts] uh soccer complex that we've worked on. Uh Vision Soccer Academy in Walke. We built their original facility back in like 2012, 2014, something like that. And then uh in 2021, we went and turned the whole thing into artificial turf. So that was nine different soccer fields. Uh we built a concession stand for it and then we put artificial turf on the football field for the middle school there also. So um then we built pretty much every school that we ever build has a practice field on it. So that has some degree of laser grading similar to what your guys' project has. Um let's see other athletic projects that we've done recently. We built softball field for artificial [snorts] turf softball field for Southeast Pole schools. Uh Walke schools, we built a brand new softball, tore out their old baseball and softball fields and put new softball and baseball fields for them with new concession stands. Um Southeast Pulks football field, the big one that's over there off of University, we built that uh in 22. So, this style of project fits us very well. Um, we're a general contractor, but we also self-perform quite a bit. Grading, concrete, um, some site utilities, uh, landscaping, seating, retaining walls. We also do steel erection, uh, metal stud framing, and carpentry. So pretty much everything in your project is in our wheelhouse, which is why we've been targeting the project for when did you tell us about Charlie?

Last year.

Last year. About a year ago. We knew about your guys' project and like I said, I I live about 10 minutes that way. So for us, it's a [snorts] pretty close town. Uh we built the P&M building uh right there on the main strip in off of the mileong bridge. So we've worked in Pulk City before. So for us it was kind of a close fits our mold and we've got a lot of people that are passionate about outside grading and stuff like that. One of my product managers, Brad here, that's his background. It's all Brad's done for about 15 years for us or 15 years, 10 years for us. So we we do a lot of this type of work and really like it.

That's good to know. I I'm curious um [clears throat] how many of your projects have involved litigation? Um I think 3% when I average it out. Okay. So what's the count? Um [clears throat] I believe there's 17 lawsuits we've had. Okay. Off the cuff. So you can understand why that might be a red flag for us, right? I can understand concerns. Sure.

Yeah. Um, I can tell you, you know, most of the lawsuits are stem from subcontractors that we had that didn't perform for us. Um, [clears throat] you know, I made bad decisions in hiring them, which is why we've changed our model. Uh, and saw perform more. We started doing that around 2020 when there was cos don't have people a lot of people went out of business. So we started changing our model then to start self-performing more to control our projects better and to have better outcomes. Um but but you did reference using subs on this. Yes, we will plan to do that.

Yeah, we will have subcontractors. Yes, the grading on the project will be by us. Um the [snorts] concrete actually will be freedom flat work here. We'll be doing most of it. Um we'll be doing a small portion. Uh the seating like I mentioned will be us. Steel erection will be us. the building structures pretty much will be us. The retaining wall will be us. So that gives us a large degree of control. The uh utility contractor on the project is actually a guy who used to work for us, started his own company. Um and so I don't know 5 years ago. So he's going to self perform or he's going to perform the utility work and then we'll have a subcontractor do the field work itself um to comply with the specifications.

So to follow up on Rob's comment uh how many of those past litigation issues involved not completing work on time? Um, we've had three. Um, two of them are still um active lawsuits right now. Um, [clears throat] but yeah, we we've had a couple. There's a lot of ins and outs and details and stuff like that. And if you want me to go into it, I suppose I can. And beyond that, can you talk about any of them that you've had, any additional projects you've had where liquidated damages have been assessed? Um, let's see. We had one project with the city of De Moines in which it was in summer of 21. We couldn't get uh specialty casework materials and so the project was delayed because of that. Um, and that one involve liquidated damages. Um, so would it be fair to ask, um, because Rob had mentioned doing a post bidder, you know, I don't I don't want to necessarily have, uh, us, this isn't a congressional hearing, right? I mean, I I don't want to have to you to air things that have gone on that you've had control over, haven't, you know, whatever the case may be. I don't I don't feel that's fair to you necessarily. Uh that's my thoughts. Um Chelsea or whoever would be able to guide us in the post bid evaluation, you know, if if we could

have some time to ask a set of questions and just have a conversation. um not necessarily out in the middle of everybody, if you will. Just out of respect. Um I that's kind of my direction, I guess, is to be able to do that. Yeah, that makes sense. I I have one question that doesn't relate to that. Uh this upcoming construction season in the spring and summer, how many active projects will you guys be working on? um [clears throat] through the duration of this project, we'll have we we have like four that finish up between now and [clears throat] August.

Um but those are all buildings mainly. We don't really have anything that's civil heavy like this. So this is going to be for us the main project that our grading crews and our our self-perform crews will be on is this excuse me this project. So for us it was a major priority and our number reflects that. Is that pretty typical year to year that number?

Um no it depends. Uh like 2021 we put in place 105 104 million sorry. And so we had about 45 active projects at that point. Um we have anywhere from let's say 15 active projects this year. It's been a little slower. So we've finished a lot of stuff and then haven't onboarded a lot of stuff. Okay. Anything else?

Um so one more thing for me if if [clears throat] we're going to go down which I think is a good idea that the post bid evaluation process one we need the first time I'm doing this. So, definitely going to need some guidance on on how that works. But, um, I also want to make sure that of the three bids, I think there were some I don't know how to I I want to be able to to make apples to apples comparisons to the three that that we have uh including alternates or or some of these divisions. I was just having a hard time sussing through that. So, in parallel with the post bid evaluation to assess responsibility, I don't know if that's a staff thing to then try and get the the bids uh apples to apples or if that's not appropriate at this stage yet. So, I know that was a very convoluted question and I apologize, but um hopefully some of that made sense.

Speak to that. So if you look at your bid tab, the biggest bid would be the base apples to apples comparison between the three. Um so when [clears throat] sorry when I look at the totals it's total construction cost division two that line. So the re the only reason there's divisions was for separating seventh street the park and the trail. We kind of built those divisions. There should be a total on there and maybe Jason can speak a little more closely to this about what the maximum [cough] line is that we're looking at but the the comparisons in each place are apples to apples. Okay.

Cuz all all three biders would have reacted to and provided bids for the same item. [clears throat] Yeah. So, so there is a total base bid construction cost on the last page which summates the three divisions for the total base bid construction cost and then the bid alternate was for an additional roof canopy on a shade canopy on the building structure and then that is total of alternate one is listed separately. Okay. So, uh, to reiterate what Travis had said, yep, all these these line item quantities should be apples to apples.

Division 3 total. Uh, so the division 3 total is for the trail. So, if you're looking at that, there's a $150,972 amount under the current low bid. Yep. Underneath that thick black line, there is a total base bid construction cost of $5,70,973.50. Okay. That is the total of all divisions together not including the alternate and then the alternate is a separate line item at the bottom that says total add alternate number one. [snorts] So if you accept the base bid and the ad alternate it would be those two items added together for the total comp. [clears throat]

Okay. Thank you. Yes, Chelsea. anything. What I'm hearing from uh the elected officials is that you would like for city staff to complete a post bid evaluation of the biders. And my recommendation would be that the city council table this matter to a future meeting so that we can work on that evaluation. Okay. So, we would need a motion to do that. Yes. You said defer. Motion defer or take. Okay. So, I'll make a motion to defer. I'm going to go with the lawyer. Uh, a resolution uh awarding contract for a regional park phase one.

Second. And I have roll call. Otis. Yes. Sirette. Yes. Savage. Yes. D'vorak. Yes. No. [clears throat] Okay. Great. Um, thank you, Mr. Karu, for your comments here at the podium. Uh, moving on to item number five then, public comments. This is the time and place for comments for any item other than those that are a public hearing. Did anyone provide cards? Uh, Susan? Yes, sir. Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to speak during the public comment section?

Hearing none, we'll move on to item number six, which is consent items. I'll ask for a motion and a second to approve the consent items. Please move and a second. Uh and a sec. Okay. Roll call. Otis. Yes. Sir Chad. Yes. Savage. Yes. D'vorah. Yes. Hill. Yes sir. All right. Moving on to item number seven, which is business item. We have a lot of business items tonight. Business item A, West Ridge Road commercial plant run. Travis, uh, you're gonna and the developer is here also,

correct? Um, so the way we'll do this is, so I there's three resolutions for the council's consideration tonight. I'll give presentations for everything and then the developer wishes to discuss um, a particular topic related to those items with you. Um, so I'll turn it over to him after my presentation. Um, so for council's consideration tonight, as Steve mentioned, is an amended preliminary plat for the West Bridge Road commercial plat one subdivision as well as the final plat for that same subdivision and then a site plan for lot 2 contained within that final plat. So the amended preliminary plat um would is following the originally approved preliminary plot from March 19th of 2025. The original preliminary plat was intended to provide the developer with the opportunity to uh perform grading work on this property at 1401 West Bridge Road and provide a more shovel ready um commercial pad site um for marketing and for sale. [laughter] Um the propo proposed amended preliminary plan includes the establishment of three commercial lots. Um the zone the current zoning of the property does not include any restrictions um against the allowable principal uses of the C2 district. Um the pro proposed amended preliminary plan includes um each commercial property providing an individual privately maintained detention basin on their property. As part of this preliminary plan, a traffic impact study was completed where no public improvements were recommended. Um, the only recommendation we make to staff as part of that traffic impact study is to monitor the traffic operations at the Parker and West Bridge Road intersection to see if there's any um, signal timing adjustments that need to be made following construction of this site. Um, one thing worth noting is the amended preliminary plot includes notes. The final plot also includes notes that each

um, use as proposed in the tenant spaces within this property or the individual um, southernmost lot would be evaluated at the time of a building permit and compared to the traffic impact study uses that were assumed as part of the traffic impact study. If those uses are deemed to be equal to or lesser than those assumed as part of the traffic impact study, no additional action would be needed. Um but a higher intensity use, we would recommend update of that traffic impact study be the responsibility of the um person who's triggering that need. Um approval of that um amended preliminary plan would be subject to city council's comments if any. um payment of the Parker Boulevard construction assessment prior to the final plat being for the subdivision being released for recording and then as I mentioned all proposed uses being evaluated at the time of the building permit. Um as part uh the next one would be the final plat um it's the first and only phase of subdivision for this property. Again it's split it proposes splitting the single entity into three commercial lots for the purpose of developing two lots. um as proposed street strip retail with the southernmost lot being a standalone um user single user. Um as mentioned each lot would have its own private storm water management facility. Um no public improvements were recommended as part of the traffic impact study. And then we again reiterate um the need to evaluate those uses as tenants um occupy these spaces. Um as part of the final plat there's notes that state as part of the site plan. Should a sidewalk be non-conforming whether that be by slope or width, it will be removed and replaced as part of the site plan process. Um and then the final plan and preliminary plat show inclusion of a 10-ft trail along West Bridge Road. That

is the topic which the developer wishes to um discuss with you tonight. Um commercial lots do not require any um parkland dedication. Um Travis, real quick, are you still on the final plat or are you on the site plan? I'm on the final plat.

Okay, thanks. Yeah. Yeah. Um as part of the final plan approval, um that approval would be um subject to city council's approval of the amended preliminary prior to the final plan. Um final review and approval of the legal documents and easement documents by the city attorney. Um provision of those final signed legal documents for execution by the city. Approval of a trail deferral agreement that defines the schedule for construction of the Pulk City Junction phase 6 trail. um prior to a site plan being approved or a building permit for a site plan within this final plat. Again, payment on a Parker Boulevard construction assessment before the final plat's released for recording and then each future use being evaluated um at the time of building permits. Um, I guess at this point, um, it is worth noting that at their February planning and zoning commission meeting, the commission discussed the trail deferral agreement and made a recommendation to the city council to approve the preliminary plat and site plan subject to approval of trail deferral agreement that um, defined the completion criteria to be either as part of lot three construction, which is the southernmost lot, or or um December 31st, 2026, whichever comes first. So, that is the recommendation that the commission made, the council is considering tonight. Um as part of the site plan, so this is lot this site plan is for lot two of the West Bridge Road commercial subdivision. That is the middlemost lot. Well, not the middlemost, it is the middle. Um it's one 8,350 ft commercial structure proposed to be split within into five different tenant spaces. The northernmost is proposed to have a drive-thru location with the other three being or the middle three being um retail space and then the uh

southernmost one is designated on the site plan as a medical user. Um, so like an office or clinic type use. Um, as part of the site plan, lot two will share two access locations with lot one and three. The northern access, which will be a full access, is directly across from the full access on the Quickstar site. Um, and it encroaches onto lot 3 and will be constructed as part of this proposed site plan. Um these shared accesses will be uh contained within an ingress ingress egress easement allowing both city and shared users to access these facilities. Um and then the southernmost access would be constructed as part of the southern lot. Um the proposed structure is proposed to be a mixture of black brick, red brick, matte black fiber cement board and batten sighting along with matte black aluminum accents including the canopies and storefront framing. Um the proposed proportions appear to be in general conformance with the Pulk City's architectural standards for the C2 district. Um a monument sign and trash enclosure are proposed as part of the site plan and are coordinated with the primary structure. Um as mentioned as part of the preliminary PL final plat um this site will have a privately maintained underground detention basin um that will be constructed and then the site plan is in general conformance with Pulp City's open space parking area and headlight screening requirements um as part of the site plan. The developer will also install parkway trees along Parker B or Parker Boulevard in accordance with your comp plan and they're not required uh to install any buffer plantings as part of this site plan. Um as I mentioned um this site plan approval is subject to approval of the previous two documents as well as that trail deferral agreement that the developer wishes to discuss tonight. and

I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have before um the developer steps to the podium. Council, any questions of Travis? Travis, would you mind going over the ingress egress one more time for me?

So, it's going to be it to visualize it. There's going to be two driveways and they're going to be directly across Parker Boulevard from Quickstar. The southernmost one will be a right in right out just like Quickstar has. And then the northernmost one will be a full access. So you'll be able to make a right and left-hand turn out of that axis just like you are with the Quickstar site. And then the driveway locations plus the drive aisle across lot two connecting the two will all be in an ingress egress easement on the city's standard form which provides shared access between the properties as well as access by the city for emergency purposes.

Thank you. So what I didn't hear and I know was discussed at a couple P&Z meetings was the frontage road to the east. I should have mentioned that the amended preliminary plan has that requirement.

So the so the first resolution is requiring a frontage road access to the interconnected parking lots is how it's defined. So it does not necessarily have to be a standalone frontage road, but there has to be connections between the parking lots. So they could have they could technically have parking along the the interconnected parking lots. It does not have to be a dedicated frontage road. Okay. So I Well, I guess we'll let the developer talk, but also does that include the church's parking lot too. It has to be interconnected or

correct. And there is a deferral agreement for that interconnected parking lot already recorded with Lakeside Fellowship that was included as part of the last site plan amendment. So that the city has the ability to trigger that upon completion of the southernmost lots interconnected parking lots. Well, I [clears throat] I guess I'd like to hear from ATI on this because I I I don't know that I'm trying to envision what flow like who's going where that benefits from that access point to that direction because I I don't think the church is in favor. I don't think the developer here is in favor of it. And and I and I do appreciate and [clears throat] we'll get more into this later, P&Z sticking to the original plan, but when when the church constructed the the parking lot that that stemmed the tide of a frontage road, I know we keep using that word and it's probably not accurate, but you know what I mean. Um did did we make did that change the overall flow? So, and and in which one of these businesses are you either going to or leaving from where you're going to consistently use that I guess is so the the movement that that interconnected parking lot requirement is meant to stem is somebody using a business getting onto Bridge Road and then again having to turn off a bridge road. Um primarily because we have a limited amount of capacity on Bridge Road because of either end. It's a T on the east end. It's the mileong bridge on the west end. And so what we're trying to as the example I would give you is somebody's getting out of church on a Sunday, wants to go use the restaurant facility that's located on lot two. We're trying to keep that traffic off of [snorts] Bridge Road to protect the capacity along West Bridge Road. That's the movement.

I mean, you're parked behind it. So the sidewalk once you just use the sidewalk, you're going to drive around to park again. That's the move. Whether I think whether or not they drive I think is the question. But if there are if they are going they do I mean I shouldn't have said that in a challenging fashion. I Yeah, maybe you would if it's golden. I don't know. that that that's the movement we're trying to protect and get off of Bridge Road is the one that turns on and then turns right back off because that but there would be also access on on Edgewater which Okay, I'm following you

council. Any other questions for Travis? Yeah, real quickly. Um, why do you think three water detention underground ones is preferable to one?

Because there's multiple storm discharge sites on this property. Um, so they the northernmost lot is going to have to deal with a significant um drainage outlet from the northeast corner that's existing. Um and then there's another outlet further to the south in the roadway ditch. And so from our perspective, although Pulk City Municipal Code um calls to prioritize regional detention, um we felt that that was a reasonable concession due to the um challenges in the different discharge points that this site has.

Okay. So with that statement, does proposed lot two does its capacity have the ability to handle both one and two? So say one's not developed for a couple years and that's the north one. It's higher slope. It's going to drain onto two. Does it have enough to hold all of one and two? So the way that their drainage is currently set up, most of what's going to lot's detention basin is the site itself. They're basically building that pad site up to channel the flow from the northeast corner to the existing 54 in that goes under Barker Boulevard, the Quickstar extended as part of their site plan. So they operate independently and we their storm water management plan accounts for that. And then as part of the site plan, they would establish the an overland flow easement that would provide the city the right but not the obligation to maintain that overland flowage as well.

I think what we really don't want is mud over the sidewalk. Correct. And what I will tell you is in the developed condition that should improve significantly even if the northernmost lot sits undeveloped for a year or two. Any other questions of Travis from council? So just just clarify that one more time on that north lot. Where is the water going? [clears throat]

So, it's from the northeast corner to just north of Quickstar's driveway. Basically, there is an existing 54 in cover that goes under Parker Boulevard that Quickstar extended across their property as part of the their site plan. Okay. So, it starts in the heavily wooded area in the very northeast corner of this property and then it continues, I'll call it west southwest. So, it's more westerly than south, but it does work its way slightly south. Um, and actually the developer that just this week um revamped some of the drainage or it would have been last week um revamped some of the drainage soil grading to better channelize that flow. Just a quick question for you. Um, the additional parking lot that connects to the church parking lot, is that the developer's expense? There's no church expense involved in that.

Not on this site. There would be a small extension of the existing pavement to the western property line. Um, but there is an easement and an agreement. The Lakeside Fellowship Church is aware of that. Okay. So the church knew about that all along. Correct. And that one comes into play when site three, lot three is developed. Correct. Yes. That is the language in that agreement is basically the city has provides written notification that that is going to be completed and then that and that they are calling on that recorded agreement.

Okay. [clears throat] And it's not unusual for us to call on those kinds of agreements. the this was so this is the last lot along West Bridge Road and every other lot in that whole corridor has been required to do so. Okay. [clears throat] Anything else with Travis? Um okay. Uh thank you Travis. Uh understand the developer wants to speak.

Yeah. Good evening. Uh Trent Smith, ATI Group. Uh address is 1535 uh Market Street, Sweet 200, uh Anthony, Iowa. Uh thanks for taking time tonight. I know there's a lot of business items, so I'll be courteous of your time, but I'm going to cover a number of topics. I think I'll start with just a quick summary. Some of you have seen this plan before with the preliminary plat that was approved in March when we did the grading exercise. There's some new faces tonight, so I'll just summarize what we've done to date. Uh, I'll provide some color to some of the questions that came up and then I think maybe last we'll touch on the trail agreement and some of the concerns I have with it. Certainly don't have any concerns with uh installing trails. Trails are a reason why uh my family moved to Poke City, why I moved back to Poke City. If you use the trails, you've probably seen me struggle pushing a 4-year-old up the hill by uh the old sports complex. And so we are we are excited for that trail section to be installed on our property. I think it adds a ton of benefit to to Poke City. It's one of the last links. I think we're all aware of that that needs to get installed and it adds value to our tenants, too. And it's more of a a timing mechanism that uh we're having issues with. So, to back up a little bit, um the the reason we're amending a preliminary plat instead of a brand new preliminary plat is we brought forth uh a preliminary plat to do grading and and demolition of the property. It was an existing residence if you recall uh single family residence on the south side and a lot of vegetation and and during our due diligence process we uncovered the property just has a ton of grade. Uh it's about 20 ft of fall from west to east and that's pretty hard to build a building on. Uh so we had to export uh it's 15,000 cubic yards of material roughly to lower that down so we could get you know pedestrian connectivity from Parker to those building pads uh that's accessible compliant uh and and really build it to a marketable condition similar to the lots that are uh just south of Homestay bacon east of Casey's where it's nice

leveled out uh minimal work that needs to be done when a when a tenant comes along. And so we were fortunate enough to partner with a contractor that won the contract for 110th Street Extension, which is west of Sailor Bill Lake across a bridge uh next to that uh I think it's an Army Corps building maybe. Uh and then they did that north road extension and they had the opposite problem as us. So they needed about 15,000 yards. So we married up those two projects. Uh and then that was in March of uh 2025 when that preliminary plat was approved. And then we hit the ground uh running with marketing material and over the next kind of 6 to 8 months. We have two tenants on board for this strip center uh that we're really excited about. It's taking a long time to get here. And then we have a user that's under contract uh for the south lot, south acre and a half. That will be a build a suit uh that will just be a land transaction on our end and then will be built uh by a third party. Um so that's kind of the timeline of events tonight. I think my goal, my my primary focus is is to get vertical on this strip center. We've been talking to these tenants since uh November 2024. Uh we've strung them along for quite some time, but it took a lot of work to kind of put the building package together that's before you and and making it fit kind of a look that I think some of these other red brick buildings in town. I think it'll be a good product and and a nice fit for the community and certainly, you know, really uh capitalizes on an underutilized property. you know, a large residence on a primary corridor doesn't generate a lot of taxes for our citizens and this is going to this is going to have a huge impact in terms of tax generation uh for this 3.7 acres roughly. Um to provide a little color on the questions. So, the mud on the sidewalk certainly don't want to have that happen again. Uh that kept me up at night. Don't love watching the forecast uh and and stressing about what's happening down the street, especially the day before the Four Seasons Festival cuz that's when one of the events happened last year. And so we've done some studying on it. It's kind of hard

to picture how much runoff came from that uh just with it being 3.7 acres. You take a house down, you take the driveway out, you're really removing the impervious area that creates some of those issues and why detention basins are required in the first place. And I'm going to cover that swale. Uh so there's a a drainage swell if you kind of picture it on the north side of the property that drains water from uh the subdivisions to the north of us over to Quickstar. It's 48 in cover pipe uh that goes over to quick start and there's really not a swell in those trees. Uh you'd think there is there's really no capacity and in this last rain event I think it was really the only big deluge we had a big wash out that wasn't overnight. Uh we went out and took pictures and there's quite a bit of runoff coming really from those subdivisions through the property and then out of that swale. So we worked with our erosion control contractor and got that defined and I think that will mitigate a ton of the issues in the interim until we start construction which will have its own storm sewer infrastructure underground detention basin uh and things like that to help mitigate those flows. Uh as part of that exercise too, they replaced most of the erosion control uh sill fence that went down during kind of the winter snowstorm. So we're hopeful that addresses the issue and it's going to be continually monitored especially in these April rain events that are that are coming up. Um the there's a question related to multiple storm water basins instead of just one. Uh civil engineering background totally makes sense to do one basin in terms of the efficiency you get out of one versus three. The problem with kind of commercial development when you try to attract national retailers is they don't want someone else to maintain something that they rely on. They don't want to pay into an association. They don't want uh you know they don't want to rely on us or another property management company uh to manage that. On top of there's really two drainage areas. So the north the north portion of the property drains west kind of through the quick start site and then the south 2/3 drains uh to well there's a culvert kind of in the ditch if you could picture it and then some storms in it takes down there. So we really need to have two

discharge locations. The reason we have three well the tenants to the south will provide their own detention basin and kind of accommodate the drainage area that goes to the south. The reason we're we're going underground is so we can get more parking. Um, we originally proposed above ground I think in one of our first site plan renditions and uh I think that really would box us in into low traffic tenants and we want to we want to provide uh opportunity for high quality tenants to come to town regardless of their of their use, higher demand, more sales, a bigger impact to Poke City and so we've parked it out I believe either near or at the uh highest parking requirement for all uses of that building and that required us to go underground and underground systems are extremely expensive But we think it makes sense to make that investment to open the door up for more tenants. It actually drains all of our lot or it will provide storm water uh detention uh drainage systems for all of our lot and then a portion of lot one that's south of the uh south of the kind of existing swale. And then the intent would be to do another underground swer system for that that building up there. Our hope is we go vertical with this building. We hope to start construction in May. We think it's going to be about a fivemon shell delivery process and then another three-month uh process to to build out the TI of those spaces. Uh but our hope is that leasing goes great. We we lease the remainder of the building shortly and then we do the same exact building on the north lot. Uh or very close to the same exact building. It's not quite the size. Um I think it's 200 ft shorter. Uh but that's our hope. So two kind of mirrored buildings similar to the elevations that are in front of you tonight. Uh and and we're pretty happy with kind of what we you guys allowed us to do with opening up the site uh turning it from a residence to really what looks like a commercial property and generating marketing material uh and and to get some tenants interested in Poke City and in this property specifically that hopefully by the end of this year we have chewed through twothirds of the site really two of the

three lots and then if leasing goes well we can just do this building again next year or the year after and chewing through 3.7 acres and call it 3 and 1/2 years is is pretty good absorption uh compared to the projects we have. Um so that I think answers kind of the two questions uh that came up. I I do want to talk about the frontage road just briefly. So I I think many of you and staff are aware that we originally had concerns about the frontage road its connection mainly related to the grade. [snorts]

Um, we have worked with our own engineers and I know I've had several meetings with uh that buyer's engineer talking about that particular connection. They have some similar concerns about the grade as well. I think they've been able to find a solution to accommodate that grade and make it work. I think their primary concern right now is the traffic type that's going to flow through Lakeside Fellowship. I don't feel equipped to talk about that topic tonight in front of you because I don't have uh I I don't know their stance. I don't know their stance if they want to exercise that right to make the connection to the church or if they want to push back on that requirement. Right now I know they are working over the next week to determine the direction they want to choose. They are modeling uh truck turning movements through the Lakeside Fellowship parking lot that already has parking bays and islands and making sure that any traffic that they generate with uh deliveries or other vehicles can make those turning movements. And I think that information will really paint a better picture than what I can share tonight with my um kind of the information that I have in hand. And so I don't know if you know I would be curious and we don't have to decide now if for whatever reason the information comes in front of you and they don't move forward with the front and road and council supportive of that what mechanisms need to take place cuz there is verbiage on these documents that talk about the front road. I don't have that answer and I don't know if we need it tonight but that's the update that I have on my end regarding that. I don't know if they want to exercise it or not. [snorts] Uh, but I know they're working on it and I know they're very excited to come to Poke City. And so I will use that to segue into this trail deferral agreement. Uh we [laughter] the trail deferral agreement if you're not familiar with it as proposed and I'll just read kind of the timing requirement

is uh in consideration of the trail of the deferral granted in section one the developer covenants that the owner of lot three so that' be the south lot that uh is immediately adjacent to the trail shall commence construction of the recreational trail within 3 months of city approval of the site plan for construction improvements upon lot 3 as shown on the plat or kind of summarizing by December 31st of 2026. And what I am proposing or asking or appealing tonight is to modify that particular section of the trail deferral agreement to remove any requirement related to uh the site plan approval and move the date from December 31st to May 1 of 2027. And the reason I ask that have that request is the goal that I mentioned earlier is to get construction of the strip center started in May. Um my concern with the particular trail deferral agreement has nothing to do related to the trail construction. The cost of the trail has nothing to do with any of that. But the preliminary plat as approved in March of 2025 uh stated that the trail was going to be constructed with the site plan of the southernmost lot. We then went under contract with this buyer in September of 2025 with the scope of the trail kind of all understood that it's being constructed by the south lots user. They have designed their site plan where it's possible they will need to rip up panels if that trail's put in because of their storm sewer detention. And then in October of 2025, that requirement got a date put to it via site plan and preliminary plat comments to this. So if we would have known about that prior to putting this property under contract, we would have modified our purchase agreement uh [snorts] with that user. Unfortunately, what I can't do and what my concern is

is I don't want to leave tonight with a final plat that I can't record because this propertyy's under contract and I can't put a requirement on a property under contract without their consent. Now, I've had several conversations with them about our hope to start this strip center that I think will be a good kind of co-eny of of the property. And uh I I got them to commit to a May one date. [snorts] Uh they got them comfortable to a May 1 date. And the reason it's May 1 is because their purchase agreement due diligence period goes to uh it's 390 days from September of last year. So that puts us to about October or November of this year. And so their concern is if they exercise their whole due diligence timeline, which they might not, but if they exercise their whole due diligence timeline, it will be pretty difficult to construct a trail between November of 26 and December 31st of 26, depending on whatever weather we get. Their other concern with the agreement is that it says that it needs to be constructed within 3 months of the site plan approval. The way that their purchase agreement is written is they hope to have site plan approval. Well, really it was March of this year, but they have four 20 uh four 30-day extensions. So, it's probably not going to be March, but then they will buy the property 3 months after the uh that they get site plan approval. So, that the the order of operations as written to us is they will get site plan approval, then they will take it out for bidding for their contractors, they'll get bank financing set up, and then they will start construction. So that might be 3 months from site plan approval before they even put a shovel in the ground. And so to clean it up, you know, I'm appealing to you that with with trails of focus of mine and why I live in Pulk City, I'm I'm appealing that can we

modify this agreement to extend the date to May 1 of 2027. If this user falls apart, falls out of contract, doesn't move forward with the project by November when their due diligence ends, we will pick up the pieces and we'll install it. we'll we'll install it as fast as we can if they were to fall out of contract. If they don't fall out of contract and they move forward with the project, that gives them enough time to put it in. And so I can't record a final plat without their consent. And so really, you know, there's two avenues I think tonight is approve the uh the trailer referral agreement as is and I will do my best to get them on board so that I can record this final plat and start with construction or I do have their kind of agreement that the May one date works for them and if we can extend it to May 1, I can I can get this agreement executed and and we can move forward with the strip center project with them on board with the timing. So that's kind of the summary. It's not again it's not related to cost. It's not related to uh headaches related to the construction of the trail. It's purely a purchase agreement issue that I have right now and timing um without a trail deferral agreement is written. Um I think I covered quite a bit and jumped around a lot. So I'm happy to answer any questions uh related to the project. Council, any questions? So, I'm not sure the the property legalities here, but once you get the site plan, so once you get the site plan for the south lot, they have, you said a month before they purchase.

Yeah. As it's written in their agreement, now they can really close whenever, but as it's written in their agreement, they've given us kind of dates of forecast. So, they've given us what they've called an inspection period, which is 120 days. That expires, I think, this week. And then they've defined an approval period of 90 days, which is them having enough time to get their site plan approved. Then they have four 30-day extensions. And in their purchase agreement, they forecast kind of a July closing date. Now, they have four 30-day extensions, so that could be November. And then in and that July closing date, you know, I mentioned earlier they forecasted site plan approval in March. Um so that's you know 3 3 months or so after after their expected site plan approval when they would purchase the property. Now those can consolidate you know those aren't written in stone. It's just a forecast for us to be able to kind of uh both gauge progress and make sure they're making progress in and on their agreement on their side of the agreement. Um, but it's possible they don't start construction, you know, 3 months after they get site plan approval so that they can set up bank financing and get contractors lined up.

So, the latest date you would expect them to begin construction? Yeah, latest date I would expect them to be construction would be uh the latest would probably be spring of 27. Anything else council for mine? Go ahead. No, you first.

So, five months on the trail I if we're getting it, especially when a decent chunk of that time is winter months. I know this month is all over the place with weather. I I was dubious on the usage of the trail, but having watched the um um the PNZ meeting, Ron in particular, much better source of accurate information and he he thought it would get used. So I that's but still a 5-mon delay not a big deal from my standpoint. So I'm I'm kind of okay with that. the the more substantive or subjective decision I think is on the frontage road and I I'm trying to envision uh what it looks like and and would assume a little bit more aesthetic benefit to not having a road there connecting it for the the narrow use case if we think it's just going to alleviate traffic onto Bridge Road if you're at the church and then decide already at the church and then decide to go over to the strip mall or vice versa. I mean, that's a that's a connection for a narrow use case in my opinion. Um, so I but from a actionable standpoint, whi which of the three resolutions has verbiage specific to the frontage road or whatever it's called uh in it?

That's the preliminary plan. [clears throat] So, and the mechanism by which you would omit it if you approved it as presented tonight is whoever wants to omit it would submit a another amended preliminary plot to remove that requirement. But we we don't [clears throat] have to address that furniture tonight. Correct. No. Well, approval of the amended preliminary plat tonight would carry the precedent that has already been set on this property. Yeah. requiring the frontage. Correct.

So, help me understand how we're approving this tonight with that language in there, but the best mechanism is to is to amend it after the fact. If if council wants to remove that requirement tonight, you could do so. What I will tell you is that will create a lot of leg work from a perspective of there are recorded agreements already in place and we have required every commercial property along West Bridge Road to construct interconnected parking lots. So there is a level of risk in our opinion if you were to not require the last parcel along the entire corridor to construct those interconnected parking lots. and and I I

risk what sense? You've held the rest of the corridor to a requirement. You're not holding the last one, but all traffic is not equal. The flow is different. And we've already talked about the limitation. Well, it's important to distinguish too. It's not just church to this retail center traffic that you're eliminating. It's every trip generated between the businesses between Tyler and Parker. Those are the trips we're trying to keep off of Bridge Road, which widens, in our opinion, significantly widens the number of trips and the breadth of the trip generation in that corner.

But, but I would argue that's more appropriate to put that traffic on a road than going through a parking lot with kids in it. And again, I I can appreciate to a certain degree sticking to a plan. However, when you you morph it a little bit here and you morph it a little bit there, which happened with the the church not being required to to make that a frontage road and made it a parking lot as they did. I I think that flow has already been compromised and sticking to a plan just for the purpose of sticking to a plan rather than designing what's best for the flow and and how it looks with everything else involved is a more appropriate weight to put on things rather than like this is what we set out 8 years ago and designed. I would argue that the church's frontage road and interconnected parking lot is actually the variation from the corridor because almost every other business along that corridor has parking off of their interconnected.

That contradicts what you said earlier that we've not required them to do the same thing in all earlier cases. We've allowed each commercial developer to interconnect their parking lots in a manner that they see fit whether it is a frontage road or a parking lot. So, which the Lakeside Fellowship actually has. Oh, am I missing something? I didn't know that that was even the ask tonight. It's not. We're just talking your ask is about the

trail. Yeah. To go to go back just just so it's clear. I think my ask related to that particular item is just getting clarity on if this user comes forth with information that you all agree with one way or the other, frontage drug or no frontage drug. Is there anything in these documents that we would need to amend prior to recording that? It sounds like that was answered. It sounds like it would just be another amended preliminary plat that will come forth in front of you guys. Whether we're putting that together or or the the user's putting that together, I think is am I clear on that? Or there is a mechanism by which city council can explicitly approve a deviation from an approved preliminary plot.

Okay. As part of the site plan.

Okay. And I'm good with that. If if the developer is like [snorts] if we're not we're we're we're punting on this issue. We're not approving that issue. So I don't want to hear an argument down the roads that you're deviating from the plan when I think we deviated from the plan 6 years ago already. Does that make sense? So by approving that tonight, it's immaterial to the progress that's needing to be made imminently and and we can talk about that whenever it becomes appropriate, but we're not explicitly approving that tonight as as take that's how it has to be later on. Does that make sense? We can make the change you're talking about later if it comes to it and it makes sense for the purchaser of that south lot. Yes, [snorts] that is something we can reconsider. [clears throat]

So, if I may back to the trail. So, I think I heard you contradict yourself. That's why I wanted to make sure I So, you said um there was concern about constructing the trail at first because of the the um retention would cause some issues with building it, right? But then your last statement was there's no issues with that. It's just the timing. So, which Yeah, great great question. So, our buyer has concerns related to reconstructing a portion of the trail because their detention pond reconstructing.

Yes. So, if we were to put it in by December 31st of 2026 as the agreement stands, and they don't start construction until spring of 27, which is a possibility based on based on the agreement, they would they would have issues. They'd have to rip up a portion of that potentially. Now, their site plan's not defined. Travis, can you speak to that? Is that does that seem reasonable that they would

that there there is a nonzero Yeah, a nonzero chance that that does happen. And then the other thing would be is if you put a trail across that frontage, there is also the possibility that equipment, even if there wasn't a penetration of a storm sewer system under that trail, that that panels get broke because of the heavy equipment that comes in with building construction. Now, I [snorts] would say that's a pretty minor cost based on the investment that's coming up with this particular property. And so when I say we don't have a concern with the construction of the trail, that is in the event that this user falls out of contract and we put it in because we know it's a priority for Poke City. And so if we need to put in that trail, you know, in May, preferably after they were to fall out of contract and we have full rights to do everything we want on the property, we would put that trail in and a future buyer may or may not have issues related to, you know, removing call two or three panels or whatever amount of damaged panels are in there. they'd have to construct it anyway. So, it, you know, it would probably be a cost savings on their end. Uh, regardless, my primary concern is the mechanisms behind what requirements I can place on a property that's already under contract.

So, if if we wait hypothetically to May and either you or they build it, what's what are you looking like before it's actually usable? Spitball. I mean, 2 months, 6 months. If there is a May 126 completion, it has to be open to traffic. Yeah. 27. May 127. It would have to be open to traffic the way that the agreement is written or would be written.

So I I mean, personally, one of the issues I have is, you know, I I continually see kids, families, everybody walking out on Bridge Road to walk around, can't walk on the sidewalk because it's full of mud. They [snorts and clears throat] can't walk in front of the property. And I just have a hard time. I mean, to kind of quote what Ron said, it seems like we give more deferrals than not. And I thought it was pretty generous that we decided to give one, you know, to the end of this year. So I I I'm struggling with just kind of kicking the can a little bit more. Um, so you're saying that if they fall out and you would pick up the tab and have this in place by May 1st? 100%. Yep.

James. Yeah, just clue me in a little bit. Was I wasn't here last year, so going back to to last year, was it always the intent that another party would build that trail? Yes. Okay. Was that is that accurate? So we So what's our normal requirement just real quick in this in this case? It's 3 months after the plaque, right? So our normal requirement would be that it would be constructed or an agreement would be in place prior to a final plat approval because we would treat this very similarly to like a sidewalk ramp or a trail in front of a park or a trailer sidewalk in front of a park, a trail along a walkway.

This one's a little bit different because there are no public improvements associated with it. So the timing gets a little bit weird. So typically we would take it on a site plan. Um, and I think one of the reasons we didn't specifically talk about it being the first site plan was the original preliminary plan had one lot and we weren't prospecting on what it could be or two. Um, I think I think it could have probably been communicated a little bit better that our expectation was the first one. Um, we may have mentioned it in inerson meetings, but I think re reiterated in our members. So, I guess another comment I have real quick is um you know, I' I've heard Rob over the past several years say it's really hard to go against, you know, our P&Z commission on when they make recommendations. So, I guess my question to you as the developer, you know, you brought some new information, you know, talking about with the potential um purchaser of this, is this relatively new information that we didn't have last month when you met with PNZ?

Uh, I was not at that particular meeting. I was out of town or I would have shared that. Um, so coming out of that meeting, this this trail deferral agreement timeline was new information coming out of that planning and zoning meeting. That timeline was not defined before that meeting. It it was a result of discussions at that meeting. Um, so that's when the timeline got put into place. the preliminary plan that we had approved in March. Uh the documents that we submitted with that explicitly state that you know we were forecasting timeline of all these improvements and in those documents we state that the trail uh is going to be constructed with the southernmost lot and uh to Travis's point the trails often times get uh constructed as as part of the preliminary plat process. I'd say our final plat process. I'd say that's definitely true related to residential subdivisions. Um, you know, this is a commercial subdivision. It's a little bit different. And I think this isn't the first request related to deferring a trail that's happening in Poke City. I think a good example of that would be uh the Kimberly property that we compete with. Uh, just south of Home State Bank has a trail section that's missing as well. Uh, so that'll be constructed as part of that site plan improvement as well. uh and is also you know kind of a similar link in terms of getting from the square to Neil Smith Trail. So you know I am totally fine deviating from the preliminary plat document that's approved that says it will be constructed with the site plan of the southernmost lot if that user falls out of contract. We will pick up the pieces and put it in earlier than what that was defined uh to to kind of appease council uh a peace planning and zoning's request to get that in. Uh my main kind of roadblock related to that right now is just this purchase agreement. If that wasn't in place then then we would put this in. [clears throat]

So to the deferral point I I mean those are all a point in time assessment of the current situation and as we all know they develop at different times. So I I don't know that it's wholly inappropriate to adjust those. But the greater point that that I would make here is in the abstract we often talk about we need commercial develop we need commercial commercial development to reduce the residential tax burden. And then when it come when the rubber meets the road we prioritize trails over commercial development. And maybe that won't compromise anything here but it also might. So I I think we need to fully reconcile how hard we want to push on some of these trails. We have invested a lot of money into trails and they are great, but doing so may may cost us some commercial development the more we do that. I'll just frame it that way. Trent, would [snorts] you guys not do uh because of the trail, would you not do business with Book City

because of this trail again? If we if we couldn't give you No, I'm kidding. No, no. And I know it's Yeah, [laughter] that's not the point. He he as the developer, he may not be able to sign a tenant to move in because of the requirements on the timing, which is why we're adjusting. I I totally understand timeline. Okay. Dave, Dave, Dave, I think your question is sort of deviating from the topic tonight. Um I I I don't think that uh Aren't we allowed to ask whatever questions? Yeah, but to put a developer uh No, I I was in that position I simply just Okay. Yeah, I didn't I meanly interested in his answer.

Yeah. Yeah. No, I uh I uh I would say that uh our office is I think 14 people now and six either live in Poke City or the North Poke School District. So, I hope that this isn't the last project we do in town. Yeah. Anything else from this side? Travis, can you remind us when the completion date of the remainder of the Pulk City Junction Trail segments are that the city is responsible for?

So, um, the intent is to have all of the trail open to traffic by the end of this calendar year. What I will tell you is that the phase 4, five, and trail head project is a working day contract. So, I cannot give you a completion date off that. [snorts] The intent also is to have the trail section through the park done and open to traffic. It may not be completely seated by then. And PK County section will be in the June DOT letting their intent is to have the trail open for traffic by [snorts] the end of the calendar year, but they anticipate in order to get optimal bids allowing the contractor up to June 30 of 2027. So they're bidding June

of this year of this year with the the potential that their section of trail the the section north of city limits up to the oasis might not be done until June of 2027.

What they are hearing though is that trail contractors are very hungry. So they do not anticipate the entire project leaking in the spring of 27. They're anticipating it being a seating getting into the seating window for native seat type situation. So, um I would just like to make a comment and and that is um one of the things that um I haven't heard tonight is uh I've heard a lot of emphasis on the development and on the potential uh buyers of the properties, but I really haven't heard an awful lot about Poke City citizens and the importance of trails. and trails connectivity to um Oak City citizens. That section that that sidewalk there is the number one thing that I get questions about. When are we going to get that finished so that we can get from Parker to the other part of the trail without having to walk out uh like Jeff said on to Bridge Road? I don't know. Trent, um, if you know or not, so I just thought I'd give you a little history. Uh, and for anybody in attendance, the council started working on this project of trails connectivity in 2015 when they first identified routes for the um, for the O'Neal Trail. Um, and you know, there have been many roadblocks along the way. I've been connected and witnessed to many of them along the way all with the intention of getting this project done um all at the

same time which in this case would be by the end of 2026. Um so here we are asking to move that deadline um that we've already promised. I mean, in every speech I have given, every article that I put in a newsletter, every comment that I've made to the public, um, all the work that we put into community visioning to identify trails connectivity. I'm not even saying that that piece of the trail is solely for the uh, Pulk City Junction Trail. I'm saying that's a big piece of trails connectivity in Poke City. So everything we've done up to this date is to have that project completed in by the end of 2026. I hate the idea after all that work, you know, cuz you know, it's been 11 years worth of work to now say, well, let's just pump that down the road a few months and and um and we'll do it in May instead. And to me, that just doesn't give enough credibility to the citizens of Pulk City who have wanted that trail connection for the past 11 years at least and potentially beyond that. So all I can do uh is um encourage council to stick with the plan and go with what uh planning and zoning re recommended and that is that we get that section done uh by the end of 2026 December of 2026. I I think it's an gross mischaracterization of the discussion over the last however many half an hour or whatever to say that the citizens haven't been represented. I every question that I've asked is in furthering commercial development which we've all said multiple times we need to reduce the tax burden. So we're clearly talking to different people. I've heard

a lot questions about what buildings are going there more than the connection which again I don't I don't want to defer on but you if we've been working on this for 11 months or for 11 years a fivemon potential worst case scenario delay doesn't seem super egregious. So, I'm trying to stand up for the Pulk, if you want to frame it in this uh woe is me way, I'm trying to stand up for the Pulk City citizens who don't like paying the 95% tax burden that they have to with the residential properties grow the commercial tax base so we can make it a better place to live and have taxes a little less.

Yeah. I'm trying to stand up for both. So, you said

No, I don't really think you did. I think you wanted to stand up for um commercial development first and I want to stand up for the citizens of Bulk City and and commercial development. So um that said and since unless there's something else from council I've got a I've got a little bit I've got a little bit more that I'd like to put out there. I really want this trail done. I've said that from the beginning. Um, but I recognize that you've got a real issue with trying to get this property sold. Uh, I can respect that. I see it. Um, again, I want this trail done, but what I'm most concerned about right now is the safety of people trying to traverse that section. Is there any way we could lay down like some rock off-road off the side of the road to create just a temporary off road path that we could at least let people walk across so they're not physically on bridge road?

There there are um accessible means by which are not faced. Um I know in the city of De Mo we've done rolled in asphalt millings as a temporary facility. Um I would have to look specifically at what the exact allowable situations are. Um but I think I think there are there is a path by which we would do some sort of temporary we could do a temporary thing. I mean is that something is that something you guys would be amendable to?

I think we would just put the trail in. Uh the whole hangup is not related to installing the trail. It is related to encumbering the property with a a requirement that's under contract whether that's granular or paving and that property is under contract. So I just need that buyer's buy off and I don't have that and it doesn't matter that this is just throw away.

It's really any any specific requirement, you know, if we do earthwork exercises for the strip center and we want to we want to place some export material on that property, I can't touch it without kind of their approval. Now, I've worked on getting their approval and expediting this timeline. Uh when I first started this conversation after this timeline came up, they wanted August 1st of 2027. And I knew that just wouldn't be received. Well, I mean, that's a whole another summer of active use of a trail that just doesn't make a lot of sense. And honestly, that timeline doesn't make a lot of sense either in terms of the way the purchase agreement is written. And so I I've kind of put pressure uh on this particular buyer to to kind of make a decision or at least allow us to put it in. And that's the feedback that I got uh to to kind of comment on your comments, Mr. Mayor. Uh I totally understand the amount of work that Poke City's put into their trail system. I think I attended uh I can't remember where it was even at. Uh but there was like a trail focus group that I was a part of to talk about that. And I know this was one of the items that came up. this section and then uh the section by the Lost Lake subdivision, kind of the link between the Big Creek Trail and uh kind of those last remaining subdivisions uh last remaining lots. And so, you know, I I totally uh commend you and and council and council before you uh with the trail work that's been done. I would also like to add that the project manager that I talked to on this particular project is hopeful that they start construction this year. So, it's possible this doesn't really even matter and they get approvals and they move forward with the project and it's in by the end of the year or they can't commit to that because it's just so early in their site plan process. They don't know how long it's going to take to get approvals and and contractor bids and and then if it's fall then then uh then they might not be able to get it in by December. And uh you know I think one of the things that everyone weighed is what's the remedy for this particular agreement? What happens if we were to breach the agreement? and the breach

remedy if the city were to put it in and assess the property. And I don't want to sign any sort of agreement that puts an unbburdened headache on Travis and Chelsea related to a street assessment if we knew that we wouldn't be able to commit. And so, you know, what I'm proposing to you tonight is something that I can stand behind 100% what our buyer can stand behind. And I understand it's a delay and it's it's uh frustrating with the amount of trail work that's been done in this community, but it's it's an agreement I can sign and it's agreement I can stand behind and I hope I hope to outperform the deadline. Can I I just have a couple of follow-up questions. Trent, um the city could put the trail in, correct? We have full plans already done for section six of the trail.

You have preliminary design done. I could have final design and bid documents in two weeks.

I'm I I'm not saying that's something that I necessarily recommend. This is not a project that the city had planned for. We had planned for it back in 2021 2022 and then the property sold and the city had to pivot on moving forward with this trail connection. But I'm asking if that is a another avenue we could look at so that we stand by the um the timeline of constructing the trail and um it gets [clears throat] the council the trail by the end of the year. I'm asking if that is something you'd like me to look into further. Cost.

I would have to get back to you on cost. I feel like our estimated costs are going to be outdated. When what was the cost? I believe it was 38,000. Um, that's the number that sticks in my head. What I can tell you is at the time when we looked at it at the preliminary design stage, it was under the threshold where we would not have to publicly bid it. We could have competitively quoted it. So, it is in the grand scheme of a city expenditure viewed by the state as a swallow. Is that still the case? Uh we haven't t since we since the property sold we've not touched our cost opinion so I cannot speak to that.

Have we already paid Snyder and Associates full design for the trail? What outstanding fees would we incur? Uh approximately half of the design plus the bid phase services. I do not recall. I believe we did not add constru we would have to add construction phase services as well. So I think you'd in the ballpark of 8,000 if that.

So c can city staff work on getting an estimated cost to construct that portion of trail? We'd have full cost in of what we would need to possibly look at. And Trent, I know you said that you don't necessarily want to look into a special assessment because that would violate your agreement with the potential buyer. But could we have conversations about cost sharing? Um, could we somehow try to get a little bit creative on this?

I think we could we could find a solution out. Um, and I think I can, you know, do my part and talking with this buyer related to kind of wherever those conversations go and what mechanisms need to be put into place and maybe their sentiment related to the timing changes a little bit. And [clears throat] that would turn allow you to to move forward as you mentioned to go vertical with to to be able to even though we're looking at the cost sharing option you would still be able to move that forward.

Yeah, I I would believe so. I think you know depending on what that looks like I think the main hangup is uh you know we've had other incumbrances on this property that we had to get buy off on. We have a parkway easement along the west side of their property. We have a public utility easement. We have a number of things that got added. Most of them are pretty traditional for commercial properties and and they've been very responsive and accepting of those. The ingress eager easement is another one and certainly have discussed the frontage road a number of times and none of that has scared them away. It was their main concerns were related to committing to a timeline when they haven't committed to a project yet because they don't have site plan approval. They don't have, you know, their due diligence done. They might pull the plug tomorrow for all I know. Um, now it seems like they're very motivated to come to Pulk City. Um, based on the number of conversations I have with them and, you know, I hope they start construction this year and, you know, maybe this conversation we've had tonight is moot and they just are able to put it in themselves. I think the the kind of rub that I'm having right now is we'd love to start construction on a strip center and we'd love to start off the construction on a strip center in May and we're just a little bit ahead of them. Um, and so if they were to, you know, fall out of contract or move forward with their project, I think it'd probably be in by the end of the year. Uh, it's just a matter of committing to an agreement with a lot of unknowns right now.

Yeah, I appreciate it. And we haven't even mentioned how the aesthetics of the building. It's going to be a wonderful building. I hope so. It'll be great. We recommend everything about everything else, but um the addition to that corner will be amazing. It's a It's going to look wonderful. It's not going to be just a traditional like strip center. It's a the brick uh could it's going to be really nice looking coming in town as well. I hope so. Appreciate that.

Okay. If I can take it back to the city manager's suggestion is I feel like we're trying to come up with a compromise here. Um, if we're I I think that's a a good idea for a compromise, but to agree to it, I think we need a little bit more assurances that there can be some agreement so it's not just the city paying for the entire trail.

So, the resolution before you tonight, the approvals are subject to some sort of trail deferral agreement. we reference to it fairly generically being in place prior to a building permit for any site plan being issued. So we could continue this conversation. You could approve an agreement at the next meeting, two meetings, whatever it may be. Basically, it would just be that the building permit would be held until such time whatever that agreement is is approved. And that would give us two meetings, right, in April.

Yes. I feel like we could figure a solution out in the April meetings before we get a building permit

because ultimately we're we can't I'm speaking for Cody a little bit, but we can't review a building permit until the lot's platted. Part of it's the system. Part of it's just you have to be able to review against the recorded final plat for the building permit requirements. So, I think we're not losing time in that in that [clears throat] manner. So, we approved tonight saying that we need a trail deferral, but we don't have to specify what the trail deferral is. And we've got those next two meetings in April to figure that out. We don't figure that out. We withhold the building permit.

And again, which of the three is that on? It's just discussion. um preliminary plat

it would be on the amended preliminary plat and the site plan because of the way that the amended preliminary plat is shown. Um so both of those need to be approved subject to a new trail deferral agreement not the stated one with resolution should be written to be subject to a trail deferral agreement. And I think yeah, I think if you if you motion to approve those subject to a trail deferral agreement to be determined at a later date. Um I think that would suffice to cover the conversation that we're having right now. How about April by April 27th?

The second meeting and Okay, that gives us 3 to 5 weeks to come up with a solution. Yeah, that should be plenty of time. I've already been at work that when this came up. It's why, you know, I apologize for pulling the agenda item last time. I think we're on the first March meeting and a lot of that was in an attempt for me to come with a better solution than I have tonight. And so it was only a couple weeks. I think I can do better. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve resolution amending the preliminary plan subject to a new trail deferral agreement rather than the current one.

So does council agree with that language? So we will have roll call. Hill yes. Otis yes. Shat yes. Savage yes. Dorak. Yes. Item number two, resolution to approve final plat for West Bridge Road commercial plat one. Is there any discussion on that? If not, we will ask for a motion and a second to approve. So, we need to motion this one similarly to how Rob just motion the last. This one is asis. This one is asis. This one's asis, right,seelie? I believe so. This one is asis. Yes. Nick Duncan, are you making a motion?

I will make that motion. All right. Is there a second? And we'll have roll call then. Hill. Yes. Otis? Yes. Sir Chad? Yes. Savage? Yes. D'vorak? Yes. Um, business item A3, resolution to approve site plan for West Bridge Road commercial plat 2. Chelsea, I'll defer to you. contingent on a trail deferment agreement being approved prior to April 27th, 2026. Pri prior to issuance of a building permit. Okay. Susan, do you have that? I think so. Okay. So, we'll ask uh any comment.

Uh beforehand, I I would like to apologize for my uh tongue and cheek. No, that's taken. Yeah. I I hope you uh I apologize for that, but I will make that motion. Uh and a second. Second. And roll call. Savage. Yes. D'vorak. Yes. Hill. Yes. Otis. Yes. Serette. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to item 7B. Then third and final reading of ordinance 2026-400 approving reszoning of property located near the intersection of Northwest Hug and Northwest 72nd Street from R1 to C1 restricted. I need a motion and a second. So moved. Second. Is there council any comment on this? All right, then we will have roll call. Savage? Yes. D'vorak? Yes. Hill. Yes. Otis. Yes. Sir, yes.

Item C, resolution approving Four Seasons Pulk City amended preliminary plat. Travis. So, for council's consideration tonight is an amendment to the Four Seasons City Preliminary Plat. Um, some history on the on this property so that um all council members are aware. The property was voluntarily annexed in July of 2019 and subsequently reszoned from A1 to R1. A preliminary plan for this property was originally approved in March of 2021 and amended in March of 2022. Um, this proposed amendment adds an approximately 14 acre commercial parcel to the proposed subdivision along um Northwest 72nd or what will be Northwest 9th Street. um and then relocates the um the required park plan within the subdivision and revises the single family number of lots from the originally proposed 220 down to 195. That's a combination of um some street layout changes um lot layout changes and then the addition of that 14 acre parcel. Um, [sighs and gasps] with council's action tonight on the third reading for the proposed resoning, um, the proposed commercial property matches the layout of that proposed resoning. Um, so that the amended preliminary plot is in order. Um, the proposed single family uh, lots range in size from about 12,000 ft² all the way up to just short of 100,000 ft. The commercial property is exactly or is more specifically 14.272 272 acres and the commercial parcel is if the commercial parcel were to be split further an amended preliminary plot would be required for that parcel. Um the propos proposed public improvements include a portion of whites Parkway new streets and seven culde-sacs um which is in conformance of Pulk

City's municipal code. Um the [gasps] municipal code allows seven and change. So they are proposing seven which is in accordance. Um the the proposed roadway network includes three connections northwest 72nd street, one connection to northwest hug drive and conversion of northwest hug drive to a culde-sac at hug circle. Um once whitetail parkway is connected or constructed all the way through the property. Um access locations for the commercial parcel would be determined as part of future platting actions, but as of right now, there's one known um which will be constructed as a part of the public improvements along White Tail Parkway. Um the development contains a number of detention basins with the largest main basin being located in the existing ravine west of Northwest 72nd. um all the lots or all all the lots within this um property would be part of an HOA that would be responsible for maintenance of those ponds and would be amended at each final plat. Uh water main sanitary and storm sewers are extended to to provide service to each lot including the proposed parkland as well as a water man is proposed to be extended to the western boundary of the commercial property for future looping through the commercial site. Um the proposal requires 4.46 acres of parkland dedication and the proposed parkland totals 4.63 um parkway trees along Whitetail Parkway as well as a 10-ft uh PCC trail along Whitetail Parkway and then the required sidewalk crossings four crossings at full intersections with two crossings at T intersections according to New York City code. Um I prepared this memo prior to uh the resoning being complete. Um so one of the subject to is essentially null and void but will be a part of the resolution um of the the resoning being

approved. Um approval of development agreement that defines the developer responsibility for off-site improvements. There's one in place but the developers request reconsideration of that agreement. Um so that's just a more of an awareness thing. And then the developer is responsible for acquiring all off-site easements um prior to applicable construction drawing approval. And in hindsight, I owe Kelsey an apology because we probably should have had this item first, but Kelsey Skell with Shy Patter um is here to answer any questions you may have. [laughter] Any questions?

We've peeled off a lot of people tonight, so thanks for sticking. [laughter] Um, have we had any more conversations on Whitetail Parkway with either the DOT or the county or whoever's kind of leading the effort to get that straight connected all the way over to 35 or that is that a pipe dream anymore? I don't know that we've had any specific conversations about further to the east. Um, we did we applied for um STBG funding. Would that have been two years ago, Chelsea? Three two two years ago. Well, actually, no, three years ago.

And we're not we were not awarded that funding. Um I don't know that we've had any specific conversations, but I think um as the as we continue to garner interest from the Young Investment Property, I think those conversations will ramp up.

Okay. I I do think we need to have a so I'm for approving this but all of these um uh four seasons developments have have been constructed in a way that hug will not be the through road that it continues to be longer than we originally thought it was going to be. So at some point I think we got to adjust the like if it ain't coming in a certain amount of time plan accordingly because you know with buses and uh bad roadway we got to drop off and I'm just fearful you know it's not a volume accident thing it's a really bad one there with a road that wasn't never really designed to have uh a shoulder with a huge drop off with the traffic that we're putting on it. So again, approve this tonight, move ahead with that, but we got to keep on our radar. Um h have we how long has it been before we've compromised the the structure or the use and design of that road before [clears throat] we let something bad happen and then decide to do it. [snorts]

Any other questions of Travis? Uh just to clarify on Rob's point, do we know which plat and when hog drive would be closed off into the

So as of right now, the preliminary plat is that portion is part of plat 8. Um I think that's a conversation as part of this development agreement. Um because there are dates for certain portions of it um as to when there's and they're recorded agreements. Um, and so I think that's part of the discussion with the development agreement is understanding that timeline cuz what I will tell you is Pulk City code requires the develop the preliminary plan to show a development schedule but it does not require adherence to that. Um because we understand that development is driven by interest and you know um economic factors and sometimes you know different lots hit at different times. So, um, that's part of the development agreement conversation, but we do and I would have to go revisit those development agreements to give you specific dates, but there are requirements for that. The current phasing I will say is um I don't want to say significantly better because it makes it sound bad, but um plat 2 and plat 3 of this subdivision would it be it would intend to make the connection from 72nd to what was originally Buckstown Drive and will now be Northwest 13th Street. Um there is an existing portion of rideway that's already dedicated there. Um, so those constructions would loop through and so we would be able to route some of um, this subdivision's traffic off of HUG drive sooner rather than later.

Thank you. Motion to approve res uh, four seasons bulk city amended preliminary plan. Um, second. Is there any further questions of Travis from council? All right, then I need uh roll roll call then. Otis, yes. Sirad, yes. Savage, yes. D'vorak, yes. Hill, yes. Moving on to item D, second reading of ordinance 2026-200, amending chapter 25, city manager section 25.04, duties purchasing. Um, any questions about that? If none, let's have a motion in a second. So moved. Second. And roll call. D'vorak. Yes. Hill.

Yes. Otis. Yes. Sirette. Yes. Savage. Yes. Moving on to E. Second reading of ordinance 2026-300 amending chapter 58 urban chickens section 58.04 zoning districts allowed. Any questions from council on that? If none, I'll ask for a motion in a second. So move to second. And roll call. Dorak, yes. Hill, yes. Otis, yes. So, yes. Savage, yes.

Moving on to item F, first reading of ordinance 2026-500, amending chapter 155, building code. Cody, I understand there you are. Just a quick rundown. We kind of went over this in our last work session. Um, basically just the overall update of our code adoptions from the 2018, which would now include the 2024, international building, residential, existing building code, property maintenance code, mechanical code, fuel, gas code, and swimming pool and spa uh, and the fire code with the proposed amendments. And then it would point to the state for the adoption of the 2024 uniform plumbing code, the 2023 National Electric Code, and the 2012 International Energy Conservation Code. Um, just a product of getting updated to the current codes to more align ourselves with surrounding municipalities in the state. Um, very few amendments different than what we already have adopted under the 18. So,

any questions of Cody? Then I'll ask for a motion and a second to approve. So moved. Second. And roll call. Hill. Yes. Otis. Yes. Sir Chad. Yes. Savage. Yes. D'vorak. Yes. Item G. First read. Thank you, Cody. First reading of ordinance 2026-600 amending chapter 166. Sign section 166.03 permit required exceptions. Um, Chelsea, I think you got something to say about this.

I do. Give me a second here. Okay. um tonight for the city council to consider is a an ordinance amending chapter 166 which is specific to um temporary signage in the right of way. Uh per the last city council meeting it was requested that the city allow temporary American flags to be installed in the city right ofway. Based off of the information that I was given um at the last meeting, I've asked the city attorney to work on amending our ordinance. Um so the way the ordinance is currently written is it would allow temporary American flags approved by the city manager um to be installed up to four times a year and each period would not exceed 10 days. Um the uh Comet Wrestling Club, which was at the last council meeting, had requested the that the flags be installed at the three holidays, major summer holidays, which include Memorial Day, uh the 4th of July, and Labor Day. I asked for it to be rounded up to four in case there was another holiday that wanted to be recognized. Um and uh a period of not to exceed 10 days. I've put some additional language in this section of the code that would allow certain regulations of the flags. Um, but it was my understanding that the city council wanted this on the council agenda for tonight and an optional wave the second and third reading so that the Comet Wrestling Club uh could begin this fundraising opportunity. I'm happy to answer any questions the council may have on this matter. So, if we're adding a fourth one in addition to

what we expect to be Memorial Day, Fourth of July, and uh Veterans Day or Labor Day, that might be the fourth one. There there you go. That That's kind of where my question is going. Who decides what that fourth one is? It doesn't say it. It just it all it says is that there's four periods per year. That's all it says. So, I think there's some discretion that can be given if they want to choose Patriots Day instead or that is the fourth holiday. What if it's like another group that comes in with an idea and wants to snatch up those holidays, those four periods that we've got outlined before Comet Wrestling Club comes in. If we're not outlining which ones they are,

I think the way that this is written will allow anybody that wants to install American flags in the right of way as long as they file a permit with the city. I don't think the city can pick and choose who they give permits to and who they deny permits. Kind of where I'm where I'm going with us deciding which of the holidays. But if you're saying it's each individual homeowner can have four periods of 10 days, is that what you're meaning to lay out here with this? Yes. Okay. Yes, that's great. That works. Any questions of Chelsea? Just one quick one, Chelsea. So I I assume that the the responsibility for the person that's setting stuff in the rightway has to call the 1800 dig.

Yes, correct. We don't state that anywhere in our guidance, [clears throat] right? Um that might actually already be in our code of ordinances. Um I just know is a topic we discussed right last time. So [snorts] it is a I mean it is a state law. you're required to follow that procedure. So, yes, you would have to you would have to call um the 1-800 number before you install anything. And any question, further questions of Chelsea? Um motion to approve first reading of ordinance 2026 600. Can you make it to wave the second and third?

We need a second motion. Okay. Second. [clears throat] All right. Uh, roll call. D'vorak. Yes. Hill. Yes. Sorry. Otis. Yes. Sir Chad. Yes. Savage. Yes. All right. Then item number H. Discussion of sale of property. We need a motion to believe the second and third reading of ordinance 2020. Yes. Are you making that motion? And do we have a second? Yep. and roll call Hill. Yes. Otis, yes. Sir Chad, yes. Savage, yes. D'vorak, yes.

Moving on to H, discussion of sale of property located at 300 South Forest Street. This is uh item on the agenda is just a discussion. So, let's open that discussion of that topic. Who'd like to begin? I will lead off and then I will need some of the council members to chime in on this matter. Um the city acquired the lot at 300 South 4th Street several years ago and the um anticipation was that the city would consider constructing a police station on that lot. Um, the city invested some money into the purchase of four houses that used to be located on the lot and then the city demolished those four houses after we took possession and um I I think the city has an estimated $900,000 invested in the lot. Um, some of the council members have have indicated that they would like to consider selling this parcel and looking at different lots that could be available for a future police station. Um, which is why the matters on the agenda tonight. Um, this is just a discussion matter. So, um, does the council have anything that they'd like to add to the discussion of sale of this property?

Yeah. So, I'll kick things [clears throat] off since I had asked for this. I I would describe it a little bit differently. As I remember the discussions on the acquisition of of this property, it it was for multiple reasons with the potential uh city hall or excuse me, uh police station. Um I I kind of I would distinguish between the decision to do it and the future use. That's why I don't see this being um a change as we move ahead. Um but let's let's get a little bit more information to the commercial viability of what this could look like. [clears throat] And the the reason that I was pushing for the timing is we've got some other commercial property that's available and in in the meantime since we talked about this and now uh some interest on on our other property on uh on um on on the same road here. So, if I would like to be thoughtful about both developments and and make a decision um because obviously one affects the other. Um we've got limited options on on the amount of traffic that can flow through there. It's we've changed our comprehensive plan to make this essentially all commercial. And so, um, having an idea on what this could be, um, and [clears throat] getting some feedback from the market, uh, developers, um, to have an idea. So, what I'm asking for is to to make it known that it's available and then at a later date, [clears throat] you know, if it leads to an offer, uh, do we then what does that mean for city hall development? Gosh, I keep doing that. Police station development. Um this is just to get at this stage not

saying we convert it to commercial from police station use but try to get a little bit more information as to what it could look like what we could bring in um some options for the site and then make a decision because I don't know that we have enough to say um what it would look like given our investment here. Does that make sense? Is that property zoned government or commercial? Pretty sure it's government. Did we change it to government a few years ago when we cleaned up? So, we would have to change that, too. If you were to sell it. Yes.

Okay. If we were to sell it, it that doesn't impact the the awareness that it's available. Right. Okay. I think the uh one of the important parts would be to if we were to do that is to establish another uh you know where a backup for potential police department would be. Um so we don't go and you know taking taking property if you will uh for what we thought about before and we don't have a second plan. Um, so that would be my my only ask would be to make sure that we if something was to come up that we have a plan to um pivot accordingly.

Yeah. I guess I would like to say [clears throat] that I'd like to understand what it look like to what you were pitching Rob about the viability, right? Understand what that process would look like. I I think it's a good idea, but I don't understand what that consists of. the the fact that we are wanting to make that a commercial corridor. I I support that, but I wholeheartedly agree with what Dave said. Um I would like to kind of have an idea in if we do sell that and develop that area. Um does that really limit our options where we could potentially build a new um police department? Um, [clears throat] so I'm interested in in a feasibility or understanding what that's going to look like. Um, but at the same time having conversations about an alternative.

How many acres is it? N.9 acres 0.91.9. And how much did the city spend to acquire it? approximately $900,000 for um acquiring all four of the properties and demolition and cleanup of the buildings. Oops. Oops. Anything else? Okay, that was just a discussion item on our agenda. So,

did you get enough Chelsea? I think how I would handle this is if we get inquiries for development, I would um bring that to the council's attention, very similar to how we've handled Third and Davis Street, unless you're asking me specifically to go talk to some development companies to see if they'd be interested. Like, are you wanting me to do like a more formal process for seeking out proposals? [clears throat]

I don't know about seeking out proposals. I guess some middle ground more proactive than just responding to any I I don't know that potential developers know that it's available. So, I I don't want to get too prescriptive in what we do to make that like I'm not saying we'd, you know, sign an agreement with a commercial broker or anything like that, but how can we make it known that this is available and we would entertain uh options like you could do an RFP like we did for Third and Davis Street.

Okay? you know, like we we did the RFP for the property and the council uh rejected all the bids we received for that RFP. We've not done anything since and we have gotten inquiries just word of mouth. So, if we did that, what are the costs associated with an RFP? Um, just time. I mean, we might need some assistance, like engineering assistance, but it's time.

Okay. So, yeah, I mean, that sounds great to me of whatever minimal version we can do at no cost to put something together. [cough] And I mean, that would drive uh the interest or in the availability. So, I guess um [clears throat] would we want to um if we're going to go this avenue of doing an RFP for this property, when would be the time to look at options for the city, for the police station? Is it after someone has brought something forward related to the RFP or is it prior to the RFP going out?

Well, if we start that process, I think we can uh maybe add on to a a work session that we have. I don't know that we've ever talked about a specific timeline for a new city hall. And then installation a new a new police station. Uh and then um you know existing options that we would have to put them and and quite honestly preferences from PD on you know what kind of property they're looking for, location, that kind of thing. I think if you're going to do an RFP, this the city council needs to be serious about wanting to sell the property because if you recall the Third and Davis Street RFP, we did get we received two proposals. The city council rejected both. I just You don't recall that?

I thought we had three. Oh, we just had we had two. Yeah. One for commercial, one for residential development. [snorts] Um, I don't think you want the reputation that you put RFPs out and don't follow through with them. So, that would be my one suggestion. And I think we could word the RFP as such, right? the the council has had discussions on um how this could be developed and or [clears throat] I mean I don't

so so I just go back to what pre what precludes us if we're going to go down this road what precludes us from just also going down the road to find out what else is available for police station property and whether it would work be the right size in the city is there anything that would stop us from doing that at the same time?

No, I think if we are going to look for police station property, we might need a little bit of assistance. Um, I don't know. I would probably call that a feasibility study of some sort. I think that would probably cost a little bit of money, but we would need some assistance with that matter. We can certainly um bring some additional information back though if that's what the council would like us to do. You want us to is it okay?

Try to look for additional property that the police station could go on with some basic parameters of size of lot uh proximity. Probably want some help from chief on response. I think we might be getting a little aggressive with that. I I mean, [clears throat] I don't know that we've heard a business case on when it's needed. I just want to look out for uh citizens on the development here. Um and we do have other properties that it could go on. Third and Davis being one of them, Regional Park. Uh so what

I I guess I don't really have anything else to add right now is regarding uh a different property for size or anything like that, but I could probably come up with some more information. Well, [clears throat] I mean, we have a plan to start looking at that schematic, right? We can't do that without have an idea what the footprint's going to look like from a property perspective. So, if we don't start doing that, we're going to have to put the schematic stuff on hold.

I think if you're going to do a schematic, we need to have property identified to do the schematic because they will do drawings based off of the property. That's how the render renderings were done for city hall. it would just sucks to go through all this effort and there's no commercial appetite for that property because it's too difficult to develop on um or something like that.

I'm just curious how much space a police department needs like looking at that lot compared to where our fire station is for example. City spent a lot of money getting this property. Is it is it worth looking at? Could you put a police station on it and have a section that could be sold for commercial?

Yeah. Could it be both commercial and both? Let's see. Because I mean, if you look at how big the fire station currently is with the police next to it, it's less space than that entire lot. When we had that study done, didn't they come back with I feel like it was either six or nine. Yeah. We square foot and we're currently in like 1500. We could we could probably answer that question with information we have from that study that was done a few years ago. Yep.

Um that's that's a good possibility. Could you split the lot and sell a portion of it? Maybe. Okay. Okay, let us do a little bit of work on the matter and we will um we'll come back to the council in the near future.

Okay. Um anything else on that item? Um if not then we um instead of going to item number eight which is close session we will move to item number 10 first which is reports and particulars and uh give um all of our staff the opportunity to to exit in advance of close section. Um so let's begin with staff any report from staff members. All right. How about city manager? Any any information?

I don't have anything other than Mike Schulty left uh before the end of the meeting. And um I just I I want to thank him for his years of service. He has been tremendous for the city of Pulk City. For 32 years, he's been our public works director. So, um congratulations to Mike on his um well-earned retirement. Chelsea took the words right out of my right out of my mouth. Um I have worked with Mike the entire 17 years I guess been on here so far. Uh and he's he's a wonderful man. Uh not only is he a great public works director, he's even a better person. And uh that's that says a lot. His integrity, the way working with Mike was was so much fun because you knew what he said. Uh you didn't have to you just it's black and white. And so he's not here to uh but I doubt he watches this to be honest cuz I think he's going to be done. But in the event that he does or AI picks up on it, congratulations and have fun.

Uh anything else from council? I I think we all echo those sentiments. Mike's been a great uh city city staff person.

So I I know it's late, Mr. Mayor, if I may make one thing. Um, so I recently attended the first board meeting as the um, uh, Bravo Greater De Moines uh, representative for our community. I'm really excited about representing our city's interests and the interests of the rest of the communities that are a member of Bravo. Um, I wanted to call out an exciting opportunity or an exciting win for our community. Um, I want to give kudos to our arts and culture committee. They participated in a pilot grant program with Bravo this year and they they were accepted um and awarded $10,000 from Bravo to apply to our Four Seasons um music series uh this year. So, I think it's a it's a wonderful example of ROI being part of that program and look forward to additional things um um opportunities to come for our city. It's good news.

Yes. Uh okay. Anything else? If nothing else, then we will um thank everybody for being here who's here. But uh if you're not part of the closed session, you uh don't need to stay as part of that. Um we'll uh we go into close session when we want to discuss items such as the purchase or sale of real estate. Um uh where premature disclosure could be reasonably expected to increase the price the governmental body would have to pay for that property or reduce the price the governmental body would receive for that property. So, once we close the doors,

could we take a two-minute break? Anybody have any reason we can't take a two-minute break? We ask for a two-minute break. We need a two-minute break. [laughter] We'll take a two-minute break cuz I think otherwise it's not fair. There's cake. It'll take me about especially when it's your birthday. And Jy's [clears throat] birthday cake after Mike left. That's the purpose of the cake. Okay. [laughter] Yeah. You tell me. Oh, my bossing got hard. Oh, well. Sorry. Yeah. Okay.