Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Michelle, are we ready? All right. Thank you. Good evening. Would like to re uh welcome everyone out to our Riverdale City Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, June 24th, 2025. Um, we have all of our commissioners present with the exception of Commissioner Nolan and Commissioner Herman who are excused. Um, next on our agenda, we have time for public comment. Um this is an opportunity for uh members of the city to um make comments that they would like to address the planning commission on. These would be items separate from our agenda tonight. So we'll open that time uh if there are any. Please if you'd state your name and residents. Jason Francis, Riverdale City. Um, my concern is I wanted to bring it to your attention. I was talking to Brand a little bit. The roundabouts that are here on 700 are being destroyed by semiis. I drive a truck for a living and the semiis routes talking to a couple of the drivers are being routed through the Riverdale and uh, Parker Drive area to get to Walmart. And if you've looked at the roundabouts here on 700 and up, I think is that 40th or 44th at the very top by the bridge, they're dragging their trailers through it, which is now I think the one on 700 is now hit the manholes that are inside of it, and they're destroying the curbs and the gutters. And I didn't know if there was somehow we could get the council or the proper people to put a no truck route sign because the trucks are too long and they get stuck in there. I've had them stuck up on my street, which is 3,800. They've been stuck up there 20, 30

minutes trying to figure out how to get out of there. I didn't know if that was something we could address or maybe push onto the council or however that may be. The roundabouts. Yeah. Yeah. If you look at the roundabouts now, you can see all the rocks been pushed out of it. The manholes been hit inside the roundabout. They've driven right up on top of them because they can't get in. So, which roundabouts? M 700. If you go 700 from Riverdale, go north just right down from Sinclair. 4,400 and 700. And then at the top of 4,400 and Parker, they're both Yeah, they're both being destroyed. I know. I know that I live on 1150. And I'm I see Well, we see two or three semiis a day it seems like or large trucks even on those. I've stopped them and talked to them and they're like, "Yeah, that's where our routing's been." And I guess it's up to Walmart's routing of how they come in because they have them coming down Riverdale and turning left on 750 on 700 going out to River to out River Valley to Parker back in and back down 44th to get to Walmart. Who's they who's Walmart? They're saying it's the Walmart directory to get to there. So which way should they be going? Riverdale to make a right-hand turn just right right behind Walmart. Yeah, they're actually going up and through the neighborhoods. They're a problem there, too. I've noticed on that Riverdale road coming down, they're they're just almost hitting that stop sign on the corner on the corner of McDonald's there. Yeah, that is really tight. Most every time I see a truck, they're driving over the sidewalk and it's it's less than you to me from that power pole. Yes. So, I can see why they're trying to find an alternative possibly because but the truck route is down to 700 down to that down to where Quickquack is. That is the truck route that way. Walmart is not the the route. So, I don't know. Like I said, I don't know if

there's something we can do before we're paying for new roundabouts and the concrete and everything else. So, we just put the roundabout on the south side, right? North south. That roundabout is larger. If they're going 700, they would hit that one as well. Yeah, they could hit that one and make a larger where they could probably turn. And I drive a semi for a living. So, that one's easy to move. These ones, even even at the parade routes when we do our parades for Old Glory Days, that's a tight one for all all the trucks that coming in. So, you can imagine a fully loaded one coming through there. So, I thought I might want to bring that up to somebody's attention. Maybe we can Well, thank you. Work something out. I can take pictures if you'd like. That's a great observation. And that's what we hope to get from from our citizens just because if we don't know what's happening, we can't fix it. We can't fix it. So yeah, I just thought I'd bring Go out and I want to go look at it. What would I be looking for that's damaged? So you look So as you coming in from 700, as soon as you go into the roundabout, start looking at the tire marks going up the curbs and all the rocks and everything getting pushed up into it. And as you can go around, you can see where they've drugged their tires all the way through the gravel, push all the big b uh what is it? 4inch rock and pushing it up in. So, and I know there's sprinklers in there. And then as you make it all the way around coming out by the daycare, you can see the manholes been moved. Same as the ones up. The one up there isn't so bad cuz it's more of a taper. So, it's But you can see where they've driven up across the tops of that. So, I've seen the tire marks. I didn't realize they were from the semi. Yeah. No, the the buses go that way, too. Do they have a problem? Oh, they're shorter. So, they they're What are they 42 foot as a bus? 50. Yeah. A semi is a 54, isn't it? They're 54 foot trailer plus another 25 30 foot truck. So, what Commissioner Pollson said, I've experienced where they're trying to turn right at McDonald's and cars have had to actually almost back up so they can make

the corner or else everything's bottleneck, right? It's bottlenecked. Yeah. I don't know. Like I don't know if how to get around that without a larger no truck route sign or truck route and make the arrow, you know, make the sign the bigger signs that's lit up or like the yellow or I know I know they're white and gray now, but I don't know how to get it so we could route them that way and then no truck routes going into the neighborhood. So that's I know that's going to be an opposition. We're going to have to find it trying to figure out what to do. I know you do. I know U Dots on Riverdale Road. They usually, don't they, Brandon, correct me, look at that type of study on a tight turn for a semitr when they're making these turns for you do on any city. Yeah. As as would the roundabout uh be designed for uh truck traffic. And you'll notice that there's a um there's an apron. So the circumference of the of the roundabout on the inside there's a curb. It's called a mountable curb. So, it's not the fa the square face. It's at an angle. So, it's meant for tires to mount that area and then there's an apron made of concrete in the event that someone drags their tire. Um, so we have staff meeting tomorrow. Our public works director will be there. We'll bring this up. I'm um pretty sure they're if there's damage to the roundabout landscaping, they're probably aware of it. Um, we'll see what they have to say in terms of um the ability to uh enforce a no truck route. That would be probably the the concern that they would bring up is if we sign it that way, is it really going to change? Um, so I think they would probably not want this h to happen just as much as anyone. So, we appreciate you bringing it up. any pictures that you have if you want to send them to myself or the commission if you can tonight. That would be helpful for our meeting by 10 tomorrow. Yeah. I'll stop by on the way because I'm I got to go that way anyway. So, I'll stop by and take some and we'll

talk about it and if there's anything we can do to protect our infrastructure that would be good. Yeah. Also, sorry. Since that road is controlled by Riverdale, not UDOT, we can make that a non truck route, right? That's right. So, the enforcement is the issue. Do we post a a police officer there? Are they willing to give tickets based on, you know, some trucker coming in there based on his GPS? And you first have to post a sign or let them know before you can issue them a ticket, right? Yeah. Well, it's curious though that based on GPS. You're saying that Walmart is is giving them the directions or that's what you're informed. That's what I'm informed. Um because they do their route. So like with over the road trucks, I know that they get a a specific routing of which way they need to be going to get to their location. Interesting. So I have no idea. Yeah. So you'll get a So say you're going from here to or say Logan to Walmart here in Riverdale. It'll route you down through Sardine down 15. You'll get off 31st, come down Parker Drive, go down through the roundabouts, and then 700 because it's the easiest way instead of just getting off room Google or Apple Maps would be directing them that way, not not the Walmart and their the dispatch of said whatever company is if it's Swift or England or Walmart itself, they go through and also dispatch that same direction. You know, Brandon, I think that also should be extended to the Riverdale U DOT turn because if Walmart is directing Swift or these big Walmart trucks coming in there, it's not a matter of if, it's when they're going to take a big power pole out. Cars are backing up to let them go through the lights green for them to go. It's a disaster waiting to happen. Yeah. And they need to look at that tight corner because I bet you eight out of 10 trucks is going over

that sidewalk when they're trying to when a car is trying to turn a left. Mhm. on Riverdale because they can't they can't go while the cars are sitting there, right? And so maybe with in conjunction to the Riverdale site, maybe have UD do look into that location there on Riverdale as well. If they're directing them both ways on 4,400 and down Riverdale, which way is the most practical, safe way for these truckers to come in, right? I think there's two issues of city control and UD do's got a concern there, too. And this is a long shot, but it would be nice if we could get a hold of someone in Walmart because fundamentally Walmart's a logistics company, right? They just happen to sell stuff. Uh so they have a massive logistics infrastructure and so if we could somehow get to that and ask them to reroute their folks a little differently, that would be the best. Going through residential neighborhoods is not something we want. I would imagine that the roundabouts and River Park Drive was designed knowing that truck traffic would take that route given the fact that it pokes into the back door of every big box retailer that we have. Um, but if there's a way to get them to that that infrastructure a little bit more cleanly and maybe there's some signage we can help with, we'll figure it out. I don't have the answer, but it's a good observation. Thank you. Ideally, you're going to try and get them to get off on Riverdale Road exit area. Yeah, they they need to be getting off Riverdale, even off coming southbound. That's more miles. That's more time in the seat. That's money to the company. And so they're going to find the shortest route based on a map, not real life, right? They don't see the turn pocket issues on the Riverdale roadside. They don't see um they're not factoring in maybe some neglig negligent driving on a on a operator's side where they take that

radius too sharp. Um, who knows? But we can look into it. Yeah, because you mean you even think about Parker Drive going down to the the railroad bridge down towards 31st. That's those are tight turns and they're bringing that truck through there. I see them going up Ritter Drive onto Freeway Park as well. Y I seen one today going out of Target, a big 56 foot or whatever that semi was. Target big emblem going up Ritter Drive. And there is no way in heaven that them big boys can turn up on freeway without taking a total two lanes. Especially right now with the construction up there. Yeah. So it's a it's a concern. It's valid. He was lost. I bet because who would route up that hill? Nobody would. That's what my wife said. The exact same thing. So I agree. There's a concerns valid concerns. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate your comments. You bet. Thank you. All right. Next, we have uh on our agenda item C, presentation and reports, community development update. Mr. Cooper, please. Um, thank you. The uh the America First project is um you can't really see it. It seems like it's stalled out, but if you drive up the hill and look down carefully without getting distracted, you'll see that they're on their second level. Y their second tier. Uh so they are making significant progress. The pile driving for that part of the project has has been completed, but the driving for the parking structure still is in progress. So you may still hear county today. Yep. So the parking structure is that a two or three level? I believe it's three. Okay. Um and that's up on the hill. So, they'll be doing that for some time. Um the roundabout uh on 1500 has made some

progress, although they had a setback where they had to take out some concrete and replace it because the grades were off. So, that was a set another setback, but they're um trying to get over that. Uh Mission Barbecue is starting to get their exterior facade um complete. So, that's coming together. The town home project has started framing those buildings. They're going very quickly if you've if you've seen that lately. Um, Panera Bread is moving forward and uh I'm assuming they'll be close to their projected open date, which was end of July. I would expect maybe that's August, but we'll see. And then the exciting news was the Trader Joe's opened up the storefront if you've noticed. So, the one on the far left is the main entrance and then the other two openings actually will get partially blocked in and those are just windows. Uh, and so that'll be neat to watch. Great. Is there any update on the right of way for Panera? I think Shake Shack had to give right away so that road could go all the way through. Did they? We tried. Um, if you've noticed the site, the the wall that was built retains the hillside up against Green Hill Apartments and then it returns to the west along the property line between Shake Shack and Panera. And that's about a 4 foot to zero foot wall. We were hoping to get the easement all buttoned up between Shake Shack and Panera before they built that section of the wall so that we could omit that and just build the road the way it should be. That didn't happen. they had to continue with their work. So they put that wall in as per plan. If that easement is ever granted, then that wall will have to be torn out. Most of it is reusable. It can actually be basically shifted to go in line with the existing wall, opening that section

up. The good thing is the grades match pretty well. So it's very feasible, but it will be a bit more expensive because there's some rework that needs to be done. We're still working with the Shake Shack property owner to see if that's going to happen. So, it's a right in ride out only at Panera then when it's done. There's no going on to 300 West. Uh, no, you can and you just can't go You just can't go back. You just can't go from Shake Shack to 300 West. Correct. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. But there is an easement over um Starbucks from Panera. So, you can go from Panera through Starbucks all the way to 300. Okay. Yeah. You just can't go all the way back behind and then take the light by Oh, I discount tires. Gotcha. Discount. Yeah, there's a because I always use 300 because where I live on Cherry Drive. I don't know if this is something to bring up and it's they put stuff on Riverdale Road so that you can't cross double lines anymore. There's a barrier there which is great. Is that even a thought to going towards the light at 300 and Riverdale Road? so that they won't try and cut across into those places where it's a double yellow line because there's been a lot of traffic that I've seen almost hammered themselves. There's a concrete Uhhuh. concrete barrier. Yep. So, the concrete barrier um at the intersection of 300 and Riverdale Road um was a requirement of UD do um for that reason and that was imposed on the Panera site plan approval. So, that was built by the Panera contractor. Um, we typically try to avoid medians along Riverdale Road because they are um they can be obstructive to businesses, making your trip longer. And so, a lot of times if you see a median uh and it's in a

position that is inconvenient, then you'll pass it pass by that location. So, generally speaking, from a business standpoint, we want to reduce the number of medians. UD do loves them because they are safe. And so, it's this kind of saying it's a median on 300 West where you if you're going down 300, you can't turn left into Starbucks. Yeah. About that spot because and that's not a U dot road that I believe. I think that's a Riverdale Road. Yeah, it is. Um or the the terrace. It's closed right now and I believe that's the terrace that closed it. is I'm confused. I'm talking about right across from Starbucks on 300 and the taco place where you people come down 300 from the terrace. That's Riverdale still, isn't it? Where you It's right there on the backside. Yeah. But the portion that's closed is the terrace those double lines and come across this way to get back into 300 West. And I've seen a lot of close calls. Yeah. So that wouldn't be a U dot consideration for a median. That would be either the terrace or Riverdale. So are you talking like pulling out from 7-Eleven to go up the hill? Either way. But the key thing is that there's if you're coming down 300 from the terrace and you're stopped at the the light where there's two lanes to go, there's a lot of people trying to turn into the taco place and Starbucks from that lane. And there's a lot of people trying to come out of that place into the lane to turn on 300 West to go towards Riverdale Road. You've got a medium a median there though. They'd have to go through the light. You turn it and come back up again to get into any of those businesses. But it's a double line. It's a double yellow line saying you can't do that. You're not That's illegal to turn across the double yellow line into

there. It's already marked that way. So the left turn out of um Jay Dogs and Starbucks and all that is a legal left turn. Yeah. It's a double yellow line. I mean it's the same uh that's that's an imaginary median, I guess you'd call it. Yeah. So they haven't restricted it and so that's why people make that turn is Yeah. Could they make Riverdale Road uh a U-turn and put the barrier in there? So you're on Riverdale Road where you have the open room. You have the barrier. Yeah. Flip around on the intersection to go into Jay Dogs and Starbucks and in that way barrier in place. People do that now, but I doubt UD do would make that. Yeah. On purpose. That's only a safety thing I've seen is that it's just people are totally confused trying to come out of there. They're just Yeah. frustrated trying to get back onto 300 West to go to Riverdale Road. Well, that's why I thought if we had the easement like it would at least eliminate some of that traffic because they could go the back route out the left turn out of Starbucks even with the easement. So, let's say you could come all the way from Brand's Way, which is Shake Shack, all the way through the backside of all those two 300 making a left turn there at the wrong time is difficult. Oh, yeah. So, um, if it cues up past your position, which it often does, then you either have to sit there and wait for it to clear or you make a right turn and before you hit the other median that's up there, flip around. That's usually what I do because it's faster to do that than it is to wait for people in the traffic to clear. So, I can't assume what UD do knows and doesn't know, but that easement across the backside of all of those businesses was something that UD do um was in favor of. And in the case of Panera, um because it wasn't in place, imposed the median on Riverdale Road. And so, I

assume that because they are in favor of that, they realize that left turn is a challenge. There might be a day where somebody in their wisdom makes that a right in right out only. Um but right now it's a legal maneuver to take a left turn despite the fact that that left turn pocket cues up beyond the the drive aisle. Yeah. The double line is just an imaginary barrier that's saying don't do that. It's illegal. So that was a concern when they said they were going to build Starbucks there. I remember that that was a major concern that they people coming down from the terrace wanting to go into there and how are they going to get into there? Yeah. Without major constru major traffic problems they approved it anyway which I is like I said it might be it might evolve into a right in right out that would solve that problem. Yeah, there needs to be a but it would create another one. I know they're they're concerned too when Panera was being built that the uh the islands present a possible hazard for uh emergency vehicles if they have to get over them. Right. And that was one of the reasons they said we'd rather do double lines than having a fire truck trying to climb over the the barrier and he can't make it. That could be a lot worse situation. So I can understand why they didn't put them in there. But they was also talking about which is be besides the point right now. what Wanda was saying about, you know, making it so you could go on the back side of Shake Shack and he can turn right and not double through the double lines. So, you can kind of see both sides of it, you know, but I I agree with Allan. You know, it's a hazard. People jumping across the double lines every day. And when I came down here, uh, it's busy time when I leave my house to come down here. And it was backed up to where you turn in to that house, that odd house by the church. That's how far

back up it was to get onto Riverdale Road to come left. And there was a car that pulled out from the top, even the top part of that parking lot from the Starbucks and they blocked the lane going up waiting for the people to say, "Oh, we're going to be nice and let you in." That's another problem, too, is letting people in when you shouldn't be letting them in. We all know the rules of the law. We're all too nice. seen a motorcycle motorcyclist get laid down on Riverdale Road because everybody says go like this and here come a car from the inside that didn't see the motorcycle and he laid his bike down and everybody was stopping to help him out because you know I mean there's a lot of congestion on that road that one bad mistake will cause a a big problem and but anyway that's that's something an observance that I see all the time it's always happening Yeah, I agree. Okay. Um, next on our agenda, we've got our consent items for consideration for meeting minutes from June 10th, 2025 for our regular meeting and our work session. Uh, commissioners, you've seen some of the amendments that uh, Miss Maraggoni sent out. Do you have any other comments or corrections that we need to address before we uh approve those? The corrections I see need to be made. She's already made them, right? Okay. Then we would need a motion for approval for those minutes. I make a motion to approve the consideration of the M meeting minutes from June 10th, 2025. I'll second it. All in favor? Yes. Any opposed? Okay,

the motion carries. Next is our action items. Item E, uh, public hearing for uh, to receive and consider public comment regarding proposed amendments to Riverdale Municipal Code 10255 regarding site plan review and approval. Um, Mr. Cooper, do you want to go over information on that now or should we open the meeting and discuss it then? Uh why don't I uh give my comments now and then you can take public comment after that if that's okay. All right, great. Okay. Well, thank you very much. Um, as you know, uh, text amendments to the city code is a legislative action, but the, um, city council takes recommendation from the planning commission, especially when it, um, relates to title 10, the development code. And so tonight's proposal is to, u,, as the chair said, is to title 10, chapter 25, section 5. And this is uh related to how we receive and review site plans. If you recall uh sometime last year in the um planning commission bylaws, we recommended to you for a change related to the review of pre preliminary site plans. And so what that effectively did was it created a scenario where the planning commission only sees a proposed site plan once. Well, 1025 is catching up to that. um in in these revisions before you today. Uh so if if you don't mind, I'll just go through each little section by itself, answer any questions, and explain the changes. So all of this is in your packet, and we'll pull it up on the screen here so that you can see it on your monitor. Um so, um at the beginning, we're we're actually striking

the name of the code section, uh from preliminary plan required. Again, we've omitted that from our process via the bylaws and simply stating this as our site plan review and approval section. So, that's the first change. Um, section A under the submission portion. So, everything in black is the original language. So, if there's no line through it, then it remains. If there's a line through it, it's being proposed to be removed. And if it's red, it's being added. Um, so each person who proposes to develop land in the city shall prepare. We're removing preliminary from the entire document and just stating simply a site plan. And um, just for your information, we do have an allowance for a pre-application meeting. So, if a if an applicant wanted to submit a site plan to avoid the preliminary site plan rhetoric, um we offer a pre-application meeting for a potential applicant who before they pay any fees or before any time clock starts, they can come meet with staff and get information about what their site plan needs to entail and how to go through the process. and we have technical folks there that give them information on utilities and roadways and all of that. So, it really um it really takes the position of any preliminary work so that when we do get a site plan submission um they're already all the way down the road when it comes to having some of that information. So, that's why we're comfortable proposing just a one site plan review by both staff and the commission. Um we've reduced the number of um or the number of copies of the plan. Originally it was eight and now we're proposing just three physical copies and one digital copy. That is because some of our reviewers like to have paper copies to review. It's it's

easy to look at a site plan when it's this big versus, you know, this big. Um but we are moving to a digital uh submission because digital allows us to have a a repository of documents and information on the record that we can keep um for a long long time without piling up in my office. Uh so we've changed the submission from going to the planning commission to the community development director. that's consistent with how we do things. You as a body are not receiving anything and processing anything. And so that's a change that I think is consistent with what we do. Um and then uh the last sentence there in in section A, city staff shall review the submitted materials for compliance and then um accept everything. And then it moves to section B for the planning commission's role in the process. So again, we've struck most everything in that section. Not entirely. We've actually moved a lot of it down to section C and D, and I'll I'll cover that in just a minute. But um so this new language in red and section B reflects what the planning commission is actually doing. You review the site plan for conformance uh to title 10 based on staff recommendation and review. Um, and then you either make a favorable recommendation to the council, you do that with modifications, or you um or you uh or deny it and so or reject the plan. So that's now a little bit more clear and prescriptive in terms of how things are done. Um and then as I mentioned, all the rest of that was struck. It talks about the preliminary plan and how many copies go to to uh to who and who's authorized to do things. Some of that I've moved down. Um in section B, the last sentence, I've

addressed amendments to the site plan. That's uh an occasional occurrence where a final site plan approval was given by the council and then the uh developer or or owner has made a change either immediately thereafter or sometime later on and an amendment to the approved site plan needs to take place. So there's just a sentence there that um it essentially goes through that same process as an original site plan by receiving a favorable recommendation. Section C now brings in a whole new uh set of language about what the city council's role is um because that up until now has been convoluted or absent. And so the council's role is now to review the site plan and the recommendation that you all have given. and they then grant either final site plan approval based on your recommendation, final site plan approval with modifications that they feel are are prudent. Um or they deny the site plan and then that kicks off the process again. Um that's where uh the the last sentence there, one signed copy shall be given to the owner. That's language that was brought from the original part of section B. So that's been uh retained but just in a different section. Uh and then no development of land or construction of buildings or addition shall begin until after a favorable recommendation and a final approval. Um that was uh that was also found in section B just retained in a different section. The time limit of the final site plan is still uh one year. That's not changing. Um but it now is specific to the final site plan, not the preliminary site plan because we've removed that as part of the process and um

and identifies the the final site plan being granted by the city council. Um and the the granting of an extension for um for a period is still retained by the planning commission. So even though the final site plan approval is given by the council, any extension thereof um prior to the year expiration is still the planning commission's role. So that's being retained as well. Um section so section C was changed to D. Section D is now being changed to E. Expiration of the final site plan and reapproval of a final site plan. So there's two parts of this. Number one is the expiration. Again, it talks about the one year all vested rights are lost. And if um that expiration um uh happens, then a new site plan application with the fees must be submitted and the process starts all over again. And then section two is new language uh related to the reapproval of an expired site plan. So, if for some reason the developer or owner exceeds the one-year period without requesting u an extension by the planning commission, then they're required to resubmit the plan, the site plan. It comes before you again, and then you're now going to review and approve it. And what this language in section two allows for is that you are able to approve it or excuse me reapprove the site plan based on the ordinances, standards and regulations in effect at the time of the original site plan approval. So that helps to bring continuity in the event that our ordinances, standards or guidelines change between the time of the original site plan approval and the reapproval

after expiration. there are some conditions. So, um you're able to do that provided that the owner or development owner or developer submits in writing um the reasons for the reapproval and any changes. So, you still have discretion here. So, if they provide to you written statement that says that um the site plan has now changed to be this versus what it was on its original approval, then you have discretion then to apply the current ordinances. um and or deny the site plan. Uh so there's no there's no um formal commitment there. It's still your discretion. So that's condition one. And condition two is provided that the planning commission finds that the reapproval under the original ordinances and standards doesn't compromise any public health and safety, nor does it go against the general plan. um and remains consistent with all of the other land use objectives that we've talked about. So again, your discretion based on the fact that if the site plan is essentially its original product based on the original date and hasn't changed, even though our ordinances and standards may have changed, you have that discretion to say we'll approve it based on the original. Um and then the rest of that language is some get out of jail language. basically stating that you may impose um as well as the council in their final approval, you may oppose uh any conditions that you otherwise have the purview to impose. That doesn't restrict you from doing that. Um it also is at your sole discretion and does not create an obligation for you to approve any future site plan application under those same terms. So, what that means is that if applicant A came in and said, "Hey, I would like you to reapprove this

based on its original approval and you say yes." And applicant B came in at a future date and requested the same thing. You're under no obligation to apply that same standard. Um, and then the last sentence there, nothing in this provision prevents the city from requiring compliance with current ordinances and standards for any future submissions. So, it really gives you the flexibility to do what's in best in the best um uh situation for both the city and the developer. In most cases, a developer success equals our success because we don't develop our city. We just govern it through policy and and regulation. We require owners and investment and and developers to develop our city in a way that we think is is prudent to our quality of life. And so their success is our success. Their failure is our failure. In the event of properties that sit vacant for long periods of time and don't go developed, aka the river bottoms here, that has been um that has been under a development agreement for 10 years at least. um that failure, I wouldn't call it a failure, but for the lack of a better term, their lack of development has um affected us in terms of the amount of revenue that's generated for city services and the quality of life that could otherwise be provided. So, it's really meant to tie us together in those terms and allow you all as a body some discretion to make the best decision based on the current circumstances at the time that it is presented to you. There you go. Okay. Comprehensive. Thank you. All right. Um, at this time, it would be appropriate to open the public hearing. So,

commissioners, if there's a motion to be made, make a motion to open the public hearing to receive and consider public comment regarding proposed amendments to Riverdale Municipal Code 10255 regarding site plan review and approval. I second. So, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? Yes. Any opposed? Motion passes. The public hearing is now open and we are ready to receive public comment um if any at this time. So having acknowledged that no comments are to be received. Uh commissioners, do you have any discussions for what Mr. Cooper has pre presented? I like the changes and I feel like they're consistent with other changes that we've already made and I really appreciate the addition of that section E2 that gives us some flexibility when things come up that we have seen in the past where we want to make favorable recommendations but we're now violating current code. It gives us that flexibility as as as needed based on what we want to do. Yeah. And I think that that has with the case of the development of former Leslie's that that hopefully can help motivate that and get that to move along and finally come into completion on that. So what they did that would be nice and I think it will come in handy in the future too besides yeah that will probably rely on this new language if adopted by the council y more than once in the future. Okay.

Any further discussion on the ordinance? Okay. Then a motion would be in order to close the public hearing. I make a motion to close the public hearing. I second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? Our motion carries. So next is on the agenda consideration to forward a recommendation to city council regarding proposed text amendments to Riverdale City Code Title 10 chapter 25 section 5 regarding site plan review and approval again commissioners any comments? I think it's pretty straightforward really. I don't see any any concerns from my opinion. Um I think what you did there to change the the wording there made it a lot more as Councilman Henstra said a lot more open for uh the betterment of the city. I don't think you're being as restrictive by the new wording as it was previous and I think that's a plus for the city. Yep. So, does the city council are they aware this is coming forward to them at all? This going to be surprised to them? I want to say no. At least at least a couple of the councilers um are aware of this. I can't remember if I've brought this up um in an public meeting to the whole council, but through our conversations I've mentioned it. So, they have not been

able to read what we have are going to approve tonight or No, they have not seen this. This comes to you first and then goes to them based on your recommendation. However, because this agenda for our meeting is public record, they could see that. And I'm probably confident that we have one or two that are participating with us tonight. So, I won't say that everybody's going to be blindsided, but uh I think they'll be appropriately prepared. Then, I'd like to make a a proposal to forward this to a motion to forward this to the city council. the amendment to the Riverdale City Code title 10 chapter 25 section 5 as a title as regarding site plan review and approval and is that to forward what kind of recommendation? A positive recommendation. Okay, thank you. So we have a motion approve a second. Okay. A motion and a second. All right. Uh Michelle, would you pull the commissioners, please? Commissioner Anderson, yes. Commissioner Hstra, yes. Commissioner Knight, yes. Commissioner Pson, yes. Both. Yes. All right, the motion passes and hopefully they will agree with us. All right, next we have uh comments from planning commission and city staff. uh if there's any additional information that we'd like to have brought up for our meeting tonight. I appreciate your work, Brandon, from you and your staff. Yeah. A lot of work.

Yeah. Yeah. More to come. This was comprehensive and so I appreciate that. Appreciate the public comments, too. uh without that we probably wouldn't have known until something you know that we don't want to hear about happens. So appreciate that coming tonight. Yeah, I'm curious and probably will take that path home to see exactly what you've been been seeing. I've I I know I've seen that the truck tires on some of those roundabouts and thought uh somebody in a 4x4 was just lazy when actually apparently it's these semis. Interesting. Yeah, I make a motion to adjurnn. I'll second. All in favor? Yes. Motion carries. We're done. [Music] How did you How do you come when you come here? You come by Kangaros down the I go 44 and seven. Take your vitamins.