Planning & Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

[laughter] Call the December 15th, 2025 Pulk City Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order. Roll call. Here [snorts] item number three, approval of the agenda. So moved. So moved. Second. Second. All in favor? I I Item four, approval of PNZ commission meeting minutes for September 15th, 2025. Make a motion to approve as written.

Second. Roll call. Yes. And yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. All right. Item five, discussion of architectural design standards in commercial town square district. [clears throat and cough]

So, this is going to be a lot more open-ended than a lot of our discussions. Um, what we're really looking for from from tonight is kind of getting the process started. So, back when we did the um architectural updates for the highdensity residential and multif family homes, um there was an expressed interest in modifying the CTS district um to kind of shape what redevelopment and new development looks like and some of the potentially vacant lots um and some of the buildings that could potentially redevelop in that area. Um, so what I did is as part of our memo, um, I put together four kind of talking points kind of to guide the conversation. But I'm really look, what we're really looking for is as much guidance as you guys have at this point, thoughts, feelings, um, whatever it may be to help us kind of guide research. Um because I know in a lot of ways, you know, downtown districts, the square, that kind of thing, it it's probably one of the more important architectural standards that a community like Pulk City can have because it's kind of your community's identity. And so, what are you guys looking for in that? You know, do you want something that's a really classic? Like I I grew up in Matt born in Madison County, you know, do you want a classic like Winter Set Square where you've got the big tall storefronts, you know, all brick, super old school looking? Do you want something that's a little more flexible? Do you want something that kind of more so mirrors the rest of your commercial districts? That's kind of where we're trying to land. um get some feedback of what the commission would like to see, what their thoughts are, and then um kind of steer our research towards communities that kind of mirror some of those characteristics

um that you guys are looking for. So, with that, I'll open it up to thoughts. What you don't want, you know, that kind of stuff is just sometimes knowing what you don't want is almost as important as knowing what you do want. So, I would open that up for any thoughts or feelings you guys have.

Well, I can start, I guess. And u I guess I like the classical look myself. I think um I don't think it would have to be all brick myself, but I think it should be at least 50% brick. I think um glass fronts, windows, doors. Um more of an old style look is what I would like to see. The aluminum I'd like to see if they do aluminum and glass, something like dark bronze or black, nothing colored, like no red, no green. Uh the glass to be tinted bronze kind of glass, not colors, you know, not reflective mirror look kind of thing. Um, I think a mixture of brick, stone, uh, the aluminum, like I said, or, uh, cut limestone would be good. Um, but I would not want to see plastic or metal panels like the high-tech look to go with that classical look. Those I think would just give it a more permanent look and a more tie better with what we have now. So, I mean, some of what we do have now, there is some siding. I'm not real big on sighting. I mean, I'd be more inclined with there is some good siding out there, but not metal. So, some mixture architecturally of some siding, but mainly brick, limestone, um, no pre-cast, that type of thing would be my thoughts. So,

I know I say this all the time, but I would love to see upper story housing like the twotory type of building encourage, you know, even um we would say three story, but we don't have that quite a bit. But that type of me uh so that you have retail on the bottom and [clears throat] you have housing on top. Um, if it's a deep enough building, you can also have housing in the far back, but just not in the So, you can have that retail piece of it. Um, I think any of the old school um, Oscaloosas down uh, Square is phenomenal. Um, that's even Albia's Before the Fire. I mean, there's so many really great that have that. [clears throat] Um,

yeah, that's a good example. Albia. Yeah. [clears throat and cough] How about that? I agree with a twotory. Maybe maybe three in some cases, but kind of keep it not a four story. Nothing beyond three. I was just thinking like if you had the twotory like I know some this is key in some districts they they have like a um like [clears throat] the third floor is really like an outdoor um venue itself type of thing. So you could have like a cool structure so you have um shade or [laughter] some type of coverage. But so that would be like the third. Yeah. Just wouldn't want that prohibited, I guess, is

I think I would echo the same comments. The classical twotory would fit well. I I really think the size of our square I think threetory might might be a little much. I agree.

Yeah. I don't think our square is big enough to have three stories around it. Um I think it dwarf it, but um the classical brick, glass, um nothing real modern. I think we we uh [clears throat] um we're we're a community that like you said, Albia, Oscaloosa, some of those I I think those are some good ones. Even Perry has some nice buildings downtown, just the nice twotory bricks. Um get away from the residential type look of some of what we have today. Um like you said, the sighting I think uh wouldn't be favorable.

I would agree with that as well. uh just a a small smaller bricks. Although uh yes, we could cut limestone and as an accent would be a nice thing and and the size of the facade [cough and clears throat] I would not be in favor of. Uh and also the thought of the third story I think that the scale of our [clears throat]

uh of our particular square would probably be a bit too much. It it really comes down to what is the focal point of the square and we really have two of them and that's the band stand and what I still kind of call city hall but I guess it's the museum and uh you know those two aren't really those two historical features aren't really geared towards a modern look. Uh it's more of a historic look. uh if we got into twostory housing and before we get into twostory housing, we need to solve the parking problem of our current ordinance in the town center because uh West De Moine and Valley Junction got into a huge issue with second floor housing. Uh and we don't want to repeat that mistake they made here. We need to learn by other communities mistakes. So they were similar to us where a building was not required to have off- streetet parking in their commercial district uh that was more historic. They put in seconds story housing. Uh and then nobody could park to go to the businesses and restaurants because all of the parking was taken by full-time residents. And so if we have that second story housing, given some of the small parcels we have, it's going to be difficult to accommodate the parking situations. We just need to solve that problem before we let that uh that downtown housing happen. Uh, also something I've seen some communities do year round is uh a row of white lights around the top of the facade all around their business district or square. I think that would be really nice in our

community. Uh, and again, not just at Christmas time, but all the, you know, all around have them all come on at the same time so it's all hooked up together. It's not each building individually. uh it kind of brings a bit of continuity to the to the district.

I think if we're going to have upstairs [laughter] housing, I'd like to look at the traffic impact as well. Um just being that that's where there's going to be a lot of people going in and out of there. And I don't think it would be able to support it with that stop sign. Um I like the look of the district down in Ankeny, that kind of design, how it's laid out. some of the small towns thinking of Ute maybe Dennis Mapleton kind of a central area I'd like to keep that green space and if we did a third or second story have that open air kind of like the event venue at the district that has that open maybe some green too yeah I think kind of in agreement with most of those I think the only one too I would go for at max a twotory I kind of agree with that a third story just

might feel like it just closes it off too much. But other than that, probably on board with all those ideas.

And something that the commission should be aware of is at the last council meeting um the city council did approve contract with Ser and Associates to prepare the Third Street corridor study, Town Square Master Plan, and West Bridge Road corridor study. And so as part of that, we will look at some concepting as far as infill goes. Um, one thing we would look at is probably the lot, well, the lot that will be created when the north annex comes off of the old city hall. Um, and we could look at something and that's kind of the what's driving some of the timing of this is, right, we want to we want to look at some cuz there's some infill development concepting as part of that study. And so we want to look at um how that fits in. and then we want to make sure that you know we don't want to show this big modern building if that's not what the the commission or the community wants. So that's that's kind of what's driving some of the timing of this. And then the other piece that's part of that too is we will look at the third and Broadway intersection again as well as um parking and circulation around the square. Um cuz the commission some of the commissioners may remember when um the Iowa was the Iowa Development Board. Is that what it was called? that came in and did your town square thing.

Yeah. A

Yeah, IDA came in and did some of the the town square study and put some of those concept together. One of the things that they really gravitated towards was potentially making Van Dorn and second one way around the square. Um so that will be something that I think at some point we'll look at as part of that that town square master plan as well. Um which may help to kind of facilitate some of the things. Um I'm super familiar with like the downtown area in Iowa City and they re right before I was in school they shifted a bunch of those streets to be one ways and that what they what they were able to do is they were then able to take advantage of a widened parking or a widened sidewalk area by narrowing that street down and now they have seasonal outdoor seating that is in the public rideway that those those businesses use. Um, so that was one of the things that IDA kind of gravitated towards. So, just so you guys are aware, that is something that we're working through. Um, it'll be over the next calendar year, but that is something that's on the docket right now. Any final thoughts on the CTS stuff?

Would it be possible to not have hard transitions either? I'm thinking of the Ames downtown main street where they go from a hardwood. They go from a lot of brick to just a random inlay of wood or stone and it just kind of looks a little tacky. So those softs, I do like your lighting comment too, Ron. I think that always looks kind of sharp when you see it. And

uh you you had mentioned the one way uh using Van Dorn and having it go around the square. Uh just a thought I had had a while ago was uh doing the one way but instead of going that direction having fourth be one way south. So, actually take it on this side of this building and then uh as opposed to having on the south end of that a square corner to bring it back to third the the southbound traffic, actually utilizing the lot that the city already owns uh to have a more gradual diagonal come across. So, it would probably have some sort of a square on the north end to get over to the north or to the southbound, but on the south end would have a new road, one-way road constructed diagonally through that lot just as a way to kind of move well to get less traffic on third. Yeah. Again, making third one way.

Yep. Yeah. And I think I think that that'll be part of the third street corridor stay. We're going to um investigate several different options. um we're going to set that up to kind of prime the city um for funding opportunities. And so as part of that um the funding or the grant applications really like to see an alternatives analysis. So we'll come up with at least a couple concepts and kind of land where we think we want to land on that cuz ultimately Third Street is going to be the spine of everything. I mean if Third Street ceases to function, the community as a whole really does. So, um that's going to be a hugely important um study that we're going to complete there. Um, I kind of mentioned this with our next topic, but something that kind of comes to mind as well is so right now the way that the zoning code is set up is you have a CTS district and then you have a C1 district where C1 is meant to be kind of transitionary district between different uses. So the idea being so from town square to the residential to the west you've got a C1 belt that wraps the square it's transitional. The idea being if for whatever reason a portion of like the area right behind um Bridge Road, so to the north, if that were to ever redevelop, which given a lot of that stuff's new enough that we're a long ways away from that, um were to redevelop, we would probably recommend that being C1 as well, being a transitionary period or a transitionary zone where you kind of get a little bit of both and you make those those transitions a lot less hard. How would the commission feel about doing some sort of overlay district surrounding the CTS zoning district as a means to transition from maybe a higher architectural standard on the square or

a very specific architectural standard on the square to maybe into other districts? And I guess does the commission as a whole understand the concept of an overlay district? Let's start there. Overlay [clears throat] districts. Yes, you understand. No, you don't. I know. You just gave them a deal.

Overlay districts are basically you've got an underlying district, but then you overlay it with a very specific band or very specific requirements for a very specific area. The idea being you don't have to necessarily then have, you know, 18 zoning districts. you can still keep with your eight or nine that you have in your zoning code, but then you overlay for specific things. So, the idea being you would have an overlay district that surrounds the square. Um, as maybe 126th Avenue to the north develops, maybe you do an overlay district there cuz you want a specific lookout there. Um, that kind of stuff. Or you want to specifically restrict certain areas with certain uses. Um, and the thinking there and the reason I'm bringing that up and it it's something that we don't have to really detail at this point, but that might be the next step too is once we feel really good about the requirements we have to for the CTS district, what's the next ring out to kind of clean up that next ring and where does the CTS district ultimately land in terms of do you want to keep the CTS district facing onto the square or are you willing to say the CTS district is now this square, this block, and the next block or something like that. That's something that I think I'd like to prime the commission to think about. Um, [clears throat] particularly the opportunities as it comes to as you run out of space on the square, do you want your town square district to extend? So, don't need a lot of feedback on that tonight, but something to think about as we move through this process of, you know, long-term thinking of what do we want the square to look like, but then what do we want that next ring to look like as well. So,

and as we look at the what I call the northeast, and south, there's already some nonresidential uses in that next block out uh to the west. We don't really have anything as yet,

right? But that ultimately is one of the things that we're what we want to think about too is if you do some sort of overlay district, well then you can kind of control the redevelopment of that next ring as well. um to be really particular to maybe it's um supporting uses and roles in terms of the square. You know, maybe that's where you get your walk up twotory apartment kind of situations that face onto the street and then you got parking behind it that also serves as a supplementary to the square. Like that's an example of something that you could really drive home with some sort of overlay district. So, just something to think about. Again, that's probably three steps down the road, but um as we're going through some of this stuff, we just want to make sure that we're doing that long-term thinking. So, any last comments on CTS before we move to the next thing?

Just one note that I had forgotten to mention and I I don't know if I like it or not, but I just want to bring it up. The thought of uh canvas awnings on these twostory brick buildings. Uh, do we like a canvas awning that's non- illuminated? So, not anything that's back lit from underneath, but you know, it's a way to soften a twostory building a bit. Uh, they're it's hard to force maintenance on people, and so that's the only downside. Other than that, I tend to like them. Choose to restrict the colors or Yeah. the textures or I mean there's Yeah. Yeah.

Or not. Yeah. [laughter] I don't think we want circus stripes. Cuz I think ultimately where I go with that, Ron, kind of going back to what Doug said is if you're if you're really wanting those neutral, darker, non extravagant tones. Those are probably also going to be some of the tones that are also that much more susceptible to sun fading, sun rotting, long-term maintenance concerns, too. Um, I don't know that there's a good answer for that. Okay. I because I tend to agree. I like the look of them. I think I think it really lends itself to kind of that same look. It's just, you know, how do you how does it look 10 years down the road,

right? And then how do you go to enforce it? That would be the other thing. Yeah, I think it personally I think might detract a little from the classical look we're talking about. I mean, I like them on certain applications, but I'm just trying to vision like downtown Albia with any of those. You know, you just don't see them. I'm not sure. Some people like to put lettering on them. I mean, there's you'd really have to be very specific. I think I'm not saying I'm against it totally, but my first reaction would be no. Okay. But

I would like to see some ordinances on the distance, how far they expand out because either I see them too short, they don't cover anything, or they're medium and they create ice on the sidewalks, or they're too long, and then you have pillars posting out, or just hazards of various types. Okay. And then also ordinances on if that's under your awning is classified as part of your business. Um, so if people start putting outdoor seating on that front sidewalk or anything like that. Okay.

Okay. Um, only other question I had is so Doug mentioned 50 plus% brick. Is there a number the commission likes as far as a brick proportion? I'll remind you that right now your C2 district is 60% facing a right of way, 50% all other sides and then um your industrial is I think 5040 I'm recalling the changes we made correctly. But so that kind of gives you an idea of where you're at. my head initially probably went to the 80% range if not 100%. But I don't want to steer I I'm trying to avoid steering the commission towards a certain number, a certain percentage.

The question on that, when we count square footage of brick, are we counting um the actual brick surface or are we counting? When I said that, I'm thinking there's probably 30% glass, doors, windows. So, so 50% brick then brings it up to 80% of some glazing perpendicular to the ground is not counted in that proportion. So it would be it the percentage would be based purely on the non-glass frontage. Okay. So could you in so if you in you would like to incentivize having more glass I mean is that could that be a counter to them I mean help me understand that part like

I mean the thing is is you you could dictate proportions of any material. So, if you're looking for a a very prescriptive look, you could say exclusive of doors, you need to be 30% glass and 70% brick. And that is total frontage exclusive of just the door openings. Or you can do so, the way your commercial ordinance is written right now is it's exclusive of glazing. So, it's any vertical glass material. So, your doors technically count against you, but the windows don't. So that's why you end up in a situation where you end up with big windows on some of these businesses because they don't want to they they only want to do 60% of the but it's exclusive of that class. So you're the thing is is if there's a very specific look you want, you can dictate it that way. You just have to remember that the more requirements you put in, A, the more uniform your buildings are going to look if you want variety and then B, the harder it's going to be for somebody to really manipulate that code to make the building their own or to make it pencil out or whatever it may be. So that that's the that's the edge we have to walk on, you know, is being too prescriptive as to not

promote development in your town square, but then also make sure that you're getting the look you want. I'd prefer anything above 50% just so you don't see the other 50. When I tend to look at buildings, it looks equal to me and I don't like that. It's disproportionate. So 70%. 70. I was thinking 75 or 80. I I've seen a lot of brick buildings that will have like above the first floor windows and doors will have a panel of stucco or something a long rectangle where their sign is [clears throat]

uh then put on top of that. Uh and you know where if that would be brick behind the sign or the lettering, they probably wouldn't be able to read the lettering. So, I I would understand why you would want not to be 100% brick, but I uh I agree. I think it needs to be a very high number for the facade facing the uh the square.

What about on the sides there? You know, when you think about there's a couple of them that you see a lot of the side of the building. [snorts] I think that's about 60% to 70 as well minimum just so I'm not getting weird. I think that it would have to be proportional to whatever the front facing is. So I wouldn't want to do a drastic change from 80% down to 60%. I'd like to see it 70 to 80

as it develops. It may not be a whole lot of sides visible, but I agree with you. If it is visible, then you'd have to have a high percent there as well. And I was trying to leave room in there for I'm I like limestone trim and limestone panels, and I don't know if that would I know those are pricey, too, but I was trying to leave some percentage in there for something like that. I don't like stucco. I don't like that [clears throat] ephus. I don't like uh because that's really if they don't maintain it, it falls apart real quickly. Keeping it. So yeah, something like that. Diana's got a picture of some samples of limestone and brick mix. Instead of the word sod, would street facing be a better word?

So that if you're a corner lot, you know, that would really apply to both. Well, and we could write it too cuz you're right in that the idea of the CTS district is you have zero setbacks. So the idea is is that these buildings are like sandwiched on top of each other. So you could do a visibility component too where you you basically put it on the the developer's architect of hey demonstrate that I can't see it and you can use whatever material you'd like behind there, but you have to demonstrate to me that you can't see it. Right. And then we're going to check that when you build it.

Yeah. So then at what point is all this triggered on an existing building on the square? So the way Pulk city code reads right now, 50% of your valuation triggers full compliance with the city code. Anything under that, the way that we administer it is you cannot create any additional nonconformities. You can't make any of your existing nonconformities worse. And we would like to see effort made towards bringing it further into compliance. So the example I would give is Nan Bolong's building just east of the square. Um she had to put several things in to meet ADA requirements and then she had to submit a site plan where basically she said [clears throat] I am either meeting the code requirements or I have a deferral agreement that in 5 years I will meet the deferral or the code requirements if I haven't torn the building down and rebuilt. So that that's the trigger point right now in city code is 50% of the valuation and um building code specifically defines how you determine the valuation. I was looking. Okay, so um kind of going back to the stucco [snorts] comment, not to say that the way and this is the old version that isn't modified, but we use a lot of the same criteria. So stucco is not an acceptable alternative to brick and stone. Um so that would be where you're you're that's what I wanted to confirm.

Your 20% could be stuckco. Yep. Yep. Something like that. Yeah. So, I'm hearing 70 to 80% proportional on the sides and then um we will kind of look at some language to see if there's a way that we can do it restricted to visibility cuz I do I think that makes the town square district a lot more developable. If it's restricted to what you can see and if [clears throat] that if it's right next to another building you can't see it, we don't have to administer against it. I think that's a reasonable thing to do. Okay. Okay.

So, what do you do in a scenario like the pocket park there where we've got the mural that's an exposed building side

and see that's where we would have to really investigate the language. Yeah. Cuz you're right. There's going to be a certain cuz right now what we define as visible from like an HVAC screening standpoint is you stand at the rideway, you're 6 foot tall. Can you see it? Right. So, how how do we go about defining it? Because, you know, you stand dead center of that pocket park where you can see both walls all the way back. But if you stand at the front door of fenders, can you see the whole thing? I don't think you can. So, yeah. I think I think that's the language we'll have to really investigate and look into.

Yeah. How that all works out cuz I think the mural's been a nice, you know, addition there. And is that something we want to rule out or is that, you know, right? No, I think that I think that has [clears throat] been done really well right there that Yeah, great use of a small space and yeah,

something along the lines of non-definable areas looking at because we can define that, but an alleyway you can't really define as something I think the other thing too as we look at an overlay district that would blend the two um I mean there's always the comment that we will hear sometimes justified sometimes not but the cost to develop in town and we you know we want that development to happen. and we want it to happen in a certain way, but um you'll be interested in your guys' input too on how big of a strain on a Mhm. development can take before some of that just goes away and it doesn't develop. Right. Right. Right.

Right. I think an overlay district is something we really need to look at and really define the parameters of what we want the square to look like. Right. Um and then start to relax it as you move out. Yeah. Yeah. So, where are we at in the back of the building right now? Um, as we look at as we look at this [laughter] cold right now, the way that well, like if you look at any commercial structure, if it's a if it basically occupies the whole structure, if it's facing a public street, it would meet that 60%. Um, I think you're probably talking specifically about the south side of the square. [clears throat] Is that an alley?

Define south side for me. [laughter] Right. It's kind of crooked, but behind behind Papa's I mean the back side of that. So I was thinking there too and then on the others behind like rising sun. Is that a I just Ally, I know that cuz the city just repaved it. Yeah. So how is that defined right now? Well, I think the way it would be defined is that is a public a publicly owned right ofway. So it would probably meet the street frontage requirement.

Yeah. I as um I think that's something we need to look at from a cost standpoint. As you look at from developers, uh we we still want it to be obviously aesthetically pleasing, but backing off some of that hard um surface requirement because it it does get cost prohibitive, right? Um so I think that's something we probably want to look at it. What could we do there to be more cost effective for for developers when they're coming in and and trying to develop? Well, and existing building owners too for you know at the point they ever try to sell their business model, you know, right?

I did like when we had the dollar store discussion, Dollar General putting some kind of fencing around or hiding that. take that as an acceptable a wooden fence paneling up behind above my height. And when we when we talk about the twotory, is that allowed but not required or are we saying if it is demoed and rebuilt it? [clears throat] Well, and that I think that ultimately becomes a question because the more requirements you put on something, right, the more niche you're making it. And I think that look is good. I think all of that is good. But when you talk to developers about trying to create that, it doesn't seem like a super feasible Yeah.

model. Like you don't see a lot of people jump not unless a whole quarter block develops or if it's somehow incentivized to do that too. But yeah, I think I think it would be awesome. Yeah, I love the I love the look and I I wish we had it um from from way back when. But um when you look at some of those city squares that we mentioned and uh you know around the state, those buildings are deep.

They are. And so when they have, you know, the the two stories, they, you know, they have a lot of square footage on that second floor to be able to justify the the stairs and uh space for, you know, allocated to all of that or around our square, they're they're pretty shallow.

Yeah. I just thoughts, but yeah, I typically that's how you get it to cash flow though, right? for some of the developers is when you have upper story housing is that that kind of stabilizes and typically that's what it costs for that mortgage typically and then what you have on the bottom is gravy if you will. So, but if you're going to build new, I think encouraging um you know, I guess to to maybe really get it to pencil out, you're probably going to need at least half a block in Pulk City to to make that happen, right? Yeah. Right. Yeah, you really would. Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, just they're going to do what they need to do. And I I think that maybe is what's leading me towards the thought of like an overlay district if that's really what we want is that downtown residential stuff. Maybe it makes more sense as some of the surrounding the area surrounding the square get a little older. Is it more likely that somebody can come in and snatch up a half block, a full block and develop it rebuild, right? Yeah, probably seems more likely. But [clears throat] yeah,

but you could consider I the other thing that you could do is if you like that tall brick look, you could I mean you could tell them that your facade can be no shorter than 15 ft or whatever that number is where you almost simulate one and a half to two stories. Well, on our facades out here out here, isn't they're taller than what the building is, right? Yeah. Isn't that trying to do the what you're getting at? Y but you could dictate that. We can we can look and see if there's there's language in other codes as far as that's concerned too.

Okay. Um we'll move on to the next one here. Um again very abstract. So, um, but this one pertains particularly to, so as the commission's likely aware, um, Pulk City is currently working on the final design for phase one of the Pulk City Regional Trail, 587 acre regional trail or not regional park, um, primarily focused around sports complexes. So, soccer fields, baseball fields, softball fields, pick the football court, dog park, splash pad, playgrounds, um, think Prairie Ridge Sports Complex, things like that. Um in our industry what we've seen is these sports focused regional parks and these sports focused park facilities present a huge opportunity to cities who take advantage of them in terms of commercial growth and just general economic growth in the immediate area surrounding those facilities. Um what we wanted to talk about with you tonight is we included um the current future land use plan. And before we dug too deep into what we think the best approach is, where to take the best advantage of the regional park, all those kinds of things. Is does the commission have strong feelings about something? Um, in terms of do you hate the idea of North Side Drive being a commercial district? Do you love the idea of having commercial immediately north of Big Creek Commons? Um, I don't want to steer you in any particular direction, but all but those are kind of the examples of the things that we want to know. Is is there a place that you think makes a lot of sense to revamp the way we have our future land use set up? Is there a place where you think it's a terrible,

terrible idea to make a modification to for one reason or another? Um, almost to be honest with you, I'm almost leaning on you more as Pulk City residents than commission members in terms of the experiences you have, the things you want to avoid, um, and the the kinds of characteristics that you want to see around that regional park facility. just uh a something I would not like to see that I've always considered a bridge too far for me and that is uh if there is some single family residential and those homes are already built and the land behind them or adjacent to them is undeveloped and currently residential or was residential potential when it was built. I am against converting that adjacent land to commercial. So, a good example of that would be uh well, where the new storage areas is going in uh uh uh north. As you go east on that road, there's already existing residential. Uh, so I would be against putting commercial adjacent to that existing residential to the north. It would need some sort of buffer more than just the commercial standard buffer. Does that make sense?

Yep. So I I want to protect people who bought their homes. Yeah. and yeah, it was zoned uh residential behind them or was showing residential on the land use plan.

Can I provide some extra context for you tonight on this topic? The city's been approached by a few different developers who have expressed interest in developing some sort of commercial amenity near the regional park. And we've had long conversations with those developers about what that would entail and that it would require them to be in a commercial or an industrial zoning district. And I think that is really kind of why we're wanting to have this conversation with you tonight because if you look at the city's future land use plan, there's not a lot of commercial and industrial um zoning districts near the regional park. And I think we are going to continue to have um this brought up to us by by interested developers. So I want to provide that little bit of additional information for you as we're talking this through tonight. Um do you have any questions about what's been proposed or what's been asked of the city so far? I'll just I'll just share with you. Let me just [laughter] continue to go on. So, we've been approached about a wreck facility, like an indoor wreck facility near the regional park. Um, that seems to be the biggest interest. I think someone's looking at it as an opportunity where there's going to be outdoor facilities um at the park. Indoor wreck facilities are a very big thing. They're becoming more and more popular. You're seeing them pop up all over. So, I would say that's the one that we've been inquired about. I will not be surprised if somebody wants to start having conversations with us about restaurants. You see restaurants typically in the near proximity to these uh regional park facilities, indoor uh wreck facilities all across the metro wherever you go. So, I think we're really trying to get ahead of this and have this conversation to see how you all feel about this and if you're

interested in possibly making any changes to the future land use plan. Yeah, I I think having, you know, spent a lot of time at facilities like that, like we're it's kind of our loss if we aren't somehow structuring it to take advantage of these opportunities in between Grimes and and Ankeny will lose people to those locations where we could do that and also build off of the bike trail, you know, that cruise a lot. We don't want to take anything away from the square, but as we grow, we will have a lot more need, I believe. Like when you look at the square on an average right now, it's pretty packed and

um so even people that would be here for things like that if it progressed would would need other other avenues and we could use some commercial activity, right? So I think it's worth looking at. I I do agree with Ron on a lot of I don't want to put in somebody's backyard that's built and has an expectation and even [clears throat] if you would change where something somebody has platted like there would have to be conversations there. So, it needs to be the right fit, but I think it's worth looking at.

And the [clears throat] way the park is located, uh, really three sides of the park are restricted by creeks, uh, residential housing, school, school property. So, really north is the only direction you can go. On North Side Drive, we already have commercial. further to the east, which is about as close as it could be. Uh on North Side Drive, we could extend that a little further west, but you know, it's it's gets we have the the other big green blob there that we are kind of needing to buffer around as well, uh to the east. And so really north is the only direction that it could go. And from a traffic flow perspective, I'm not sure how much of the traffic to the regional park is going to come in and out from the north. Uh, you know, and that's where, you know, a business would want to a a restaurant type business would want to be located anyway is where the traffic flow is. A wreck park would be different because it would almost be its own hub. uh you know that whereas it's not necessarily as dependent on traffic [clears throat] flow but uh I think most of us who on this commission have always wanted more commercial in our city and wanting to diversify our tax break or tax base. So, I am more than open to uh look at extending, you know, commercial further south there and closer, but those homes that are already built uh on that north side of the park or northwest corner of the park, you know, I would like to see a street of by attached town homes north of them or something uh before the commercial would

start. Great. You know, there's the red line there. I guess I think that's, you know, on the north side of the park. Yeah, that would be corporate.

That's where those homes back to currently. And so, north of that red line, like a row of watt hatch town homes or something that would act as a buffer for those folks who bought their home expecting something different behind it. And it's not a case of not doing their homework. Uh, you know, if they had done their homework, they would see that it was expected to be single family residential,

you know. So, it's not a case of uh, you know, something was zoned commercial behind them and it was always been a grassy field and they thought it would always be a grassy field. This is a case where if they did their homework, they would have that expectation. Yeah, I think that's fair. Like to for us to try to come back with a few opportunities for reconsideration. I think we understand what you're trying toite is that you're open to it as long as it doesn't abut existing single family. Correct. [snorts] not only open to it would encourage it.

Yes. Yeah. And yeah, I think too if probably the zoning map if you could overlay like a current aerial over it so you can kind of see it easier. Yeah. Picture where the existing houses are where you know that would be helpful. [clears throat] That whole area to the north with the high density residential uh and light industrial uh we we I don't think we were ever expecting that to exactly develop as that. We kind of always thought it was going to be shuffled around in some way, shape or form.

And so, uh, [clears throat] you know, Poke City is not at a loss for single family housing. And so, getting, uh, more diversity would be would be a great thing in our in our land ownership. and not not only just adding more uh commercial and industrial, but also more higher density residential. Uh I'm going to say something that's probably unpopular, but I'll say it anyway. uh about a year ago when they came out when the de mo register came out with the study uh that showed Poke City I think with the highest median income in the state. Uh I was a little offended by that uh in that I thought it spoke to the lack of residential diversity opportunities that we had. uh you know, Poke City has tripled in size in the short time that I've lived here. And it just showed how new all of our residences are and how little opportunity there is for someone to come here starting out and uh and that gets back to the the need for more diversity and housing. We can't build older homes here clearly and so the only opportunity we have is uh you know through uh higher density residential.

Y I think that's part of that economic development puzzle too. If you want restaurants, you want employees, you know, if they don't live here, have the opportunity to live here, they're probably going to one of our neighboring communities, right, where there's more opportunities. And just so the commission's aware, I don't know who how many of you are aware of this, but the hail property, there is a required buffer. Um, so there there we do have some limitations. Some new folks, can you maybe show that on the map? And yes, I can explain it a little bit more. You sure you want me to do that? [laughter] I cause panic. [snorts]

So, [snorts] if I can get my mouse to work. Right here is the Hail Investment Property. I'm going to scroll in one more time. And what that is is it is quick supply company who is a provider and seller of explosive products. Um essentially what that storage facility is is it is lowrisk explosive storage. Um basically what the property owners have told us is they visit the site once or twice a week, load their materials and they sell them to quaries. Um we just had a meeting with him a couple weeks ago and he told us that if you shoot one of those blast packs it will not explode. So it's very very low risk um from here's their perspective but they are held to certain ATF rules and regulations in terms of how far they can be from any other vertical structure. Um we did ask the question of when the city does eventually need to extend a sewer across the property. that's not going to impact their operation, but any vertical development within that buffer zone would. Um, that is purely dictated by the amount of explosive that is stored on that facility. Um, and so what we're going to do is all of these changes would be based on being good neighbors to these folks in terms of minding that that buffer zone and understanding the requirements that they have and understanding full well that if we make big grandiose plans on their property, the chances of it happening in the next 15 to 20 years probably pretty low. Um, so that's one of the other things that we're kind of contending with. So just so the commission knows, we're not necessarily ignoring that

property. It's just it causes or it possesses a lot of challenges that some other properties don't. So

the portion of their property that goes down to North Side Drive, uh, is that part of the required buffer or is that just on reserve? Basically what they told us is Big Creek Commons over here is more or less like right I think it's a little over the required buffer. [snorts] So from this property line over to the actual storage which is to the right as you go in the driveway. That's more or less the buffer they have. So there is a nonzero chance that if they wanted to they could sell off a portion of this. Um it just it becomes exceedingly difficult to split land in that manner. Um it also becomes exceedingly difficult to plan for things in that manner cuz that's a really good way to kind of work around some of the requirements that the city has particularly as it relates to trip generation. You know the further you cut land down the less likely you are to trigger a traffic impact study the more likely you are to have issues with existing roadways. So, that's some of the the complications that come from that. Um, but what I can show you is so you can kind of see where those facilities are. You've got a whole parcel up here. You've got a parcel here. This was actually split out, I think. Yeah. So, that obviously does not lie in their buffer. So there is a potential for a strip of commercial to happen along here obviously because they've allowed that to be split off at some point. So we'll look at that. Um

so my question was more on the south side. Oh yeah. Where it's touching north side.

Yeah. So basically what they told us is you take this storage facility and you offset it by whatever the distance is. So there is a portion but again I think yeah this has been split off and that has been split off. So I think there would be an opportunity potentially um to work across some of that. The thing is going to be is we just have to be mindful of you can't cut off a property, you can't landlock a property. So how how does that look short-term, long-term? How do we facilitate that? So, um, we've got a planner in our office that's very, very familiar with this. For some reason, she's actually run into another one of these facilities in one of the other communities she worked in. So, um, we'll kind of work through this and we'll kind of put together some options for you to consider at a future meeting. I think that's good direction. We'll kind of be mindful of transitionary zones and then where can we add commercial I think that makes a lot of sense. So, any final thoughts. Hey, that's all we had.

All right. Item seven, reports of particulars. Council liaison. [clears throat] Good evening. How are you?

Hey. Uh, in consideration of time, I do have a few things I want to go over. Um to continue on what Travis said, Travis, keep me honest, but we did approve last week the third street corridor study. Um I know it's something I'm personally kind of excited about. It goes from hub all the way down the south side include um town center. [snorts] We also were able to get some funding with the state. So with that, we were able to include Bridge Road in that study. So, we're looking to start that next year and have it hopefully completed by the end of the year or early 27. Really good strategic study for us to kind of understand what we're going to be looking at in the next several years. Um, one thing if you haven't heard, um, we approved a sidewalk repair program. So that was based off of let Chelsea keep me honest because I'll probably mess it up here. But in in 23 the Iowa Supreme Court found that um even though a budding property owners are responsible for repairing their sidewalks, the city is still liable for any injuries. So to get ahead of that, um I know staff this year went out and did kind of a inventory of sidewalks in disrepair based on a grade and we found a certain amount of them and we're going to implement a repair program next year. So um we're going to give people between 120 days and that repair depending on their um uh how severe the the damage is that need. There's going to be some opportunities depending on what their capabilities are from funding. There's going to be some opportunities.

So, um, more to come on that. Um, so, uh, just a quick question. It, uh, if they don't repair it, then can the city repair it and assess their property or how does that work? Yes. Is that how that went? I mean, I was in West De Moines 30 years ago and got into stuff like that. So, I mean, it's that's not that seems fair. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, again, depending on, don't quote me on the price here, but it's probably, you know, a few hundred a panel.

Panel. Thank you, Travis. That's few hundred dollars per panel. Um, again, there's economies and a scale of a lot of people are doing it at the same time. Um, so again, more to come on that. [clears throat] One of the things I'm really excited about is Snyder gave us came and gave us a presentation on preliminary um, drawing or layout of the regional park. Um, pretty exciting. Like we talked about, we're going to have soccer fields. We're going to have the parking. We're going to have um, I don't know the technical term, but a place for softball or baseball, right? Uh, it's called practice quad. Yes,

practice quad. Um, again, this is all kind of phase one to be able to, the biggest need was to be able to uh have more soccer fields available for our community. Um, we're looking to probably approve that and move forward with that um sometime Q1.

Correct. And um if everything lines up and the loom and the starters line up where they said maybe sometime in the fall of 27 we'll we'll have something available for uh pretty excited where our cities came in 12 13 months um from voting down the referendum to uh right now. So pretty excited about that. Um, [clears throat] the last big thing I just wanted to say, I think everybody knows, unfortunately, we had to say goodbye to two uh city council members uh last week, Jeff Walters and Mandy B. Both of them pretty pretty extensively. They've really made my uh my uh first two years a lot easier than I anticipated just being able to have their console. So, I really want to echo my thanks for those two individuals. We are welcoming back David Borak who had um I think he had 16 years around there um previous council experience and then we're welcoming James Hill. So both of those two individuals will be starting uh in January.

Yeah. Those are kind of the highlights. So awesome. Any questions? Is the uh new water tower functional or not yet? So I believe it's scheduled to come online sometime in late spring. Is that correct? May 2026. Okay. Beautiful. Yeah, it is nice. This might be an aside for the park, but is there any way we can look at possibly doing something like a little RC park included in there or anything like that?

So, again, this is this is phase one, right? Um I know Travis alluded to there's a lot of additional things that we want to do in the years to come. So, it's all about priority and and funding and trying to figure out how to allocate that. I I would encourage, you know, the opportunities that we have to have more commercial NCDs come. Um there's going to be more ways to be able to look for additional funding. That's I would recommend any sort of things like that. Um go to the parks commission, start there. Um Jason, parks commission, right? Okay. Perfect. That message along as well. Thank you. Right. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

City manager comments. The only thing I have is welcome Susan Lton. Susan is our city clerk. We hired her in September. She's been a great addition. So, this is her first planning and zoning meeting she's been to. Good. Awesome. Thank you. Staff comments, would you like to say anything? [laughter] It was easy. They're all that way. So, almost. Almost. Commission comments. All right. Do I have to motion to adjurnn or do we just go? No, you don't have to.

Well, we are. I'll second. All right. All right. Thank you. One today. They didn't. camel the den.