Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

e e all right all right we're going to go ahead and call the March um Planning Commission meeting to order uh we'll uh we'll start off by our housekeeping items here um commissioner black if you would take the rooll jack all right we do have a quum all right everybody's had an opportunity to look over the minutes from last month I'll entertain a motion to approve those what's your pleasure gentlemen make a motion to approve okay have a motion to I hear a second motion we have a second all those in favor a knowledge by saying I I any opposed hearing anotherone motion carried all right no one finish business we're going to move on to item number one we have a uh special use permit install off premise sign at 46 Bradley Co Road submitted by River Valley signs on behalf of quick Truck Wash

Incorporated Mr John do will you take that away absolutely like you said this this is a special use permit over on Bradley Cove Road they're proposing to do a sign this is the proposal that they have provided to us uh for review existing conditions currently vacant it's the former location of Southwestern Energy located across from Flying J on Bradley Cove in this area you're going to find a few other businesses including two truck washes a commercial vehicle repair business craft Intel and Associates and waste management and then just beyond this is City Limits line where you'll have um the RV Retreat Center Front portion of the property is zoned C2 while the rear portion of the property is C5 primary distinction between these two zones is that C5 allows one additional use otherwise both share the same building and permitting requirements the review comments this is an off- premise non-digital sign which is permitted by special use and could be in line with uses in the district um special consideration must be given to each application to provide reasonable conditions and protective restrictions to protect the character and integrity of the area um in review of the regulations article 7.88 um for for pylon double post signs is what we would review this against it's a sign erected and maintained as a free standing frame mased Pole or two posts not attached to any building and not including signs mounted to the ground so as shown this is a two poost sign sign Dimensions the maximum square footage is 150 square ft they're

proposing a 20 by 7.4 foot sign which is 148.5 2 square ft so just within the allowable signage for the property for freestanding signs the maximum height is allowed to be 35 ft and once you Pro um add the dimensions together it's a total s height of 15.4 feet so that's within the regulation as well uh they are permitted to have only one freestanding sign structure um per Street Frontage there are two open sign frames at the two driveways to the property there do not have any sign facings in them they're just the frames and then there are two signs attached to the fence at approximately the same location of the proposed sign uh removal of the sign frames and the two signs attached to the fence um shall be removed since the proposed sign is utilizing the allowable square footage for the property so they're using up all the square footage that they can have and they're only allowed to have one freestanding sign um on that property property it is the recommendation to approve the special use permit to allow the installation of an off- premise sign uh with the following condition to remove existing signage from the property including both signs attached to the fence and the two unused open signs at both driveway locations this is as a result of the findings that the applicant is utilizing all the square footage for the sign allowance for the property the applicant demonstrates compliance with the regulations within article 7.7 and 7.8 and off- premise signs are utilized within this commercial Corridor are there any questions thank you

Sarah is there anybody here that is anybody from Riv sign here that wants to speak I mean we didn't have anybody sign up but want to give you the opportunity okay all right commissioners okay we have a motion second to approve as staff recommended all those in favor acknowledgement saying I any opposed hearing none the motion carried all right item number two outside service agreement to install a sewer line for a new 7unit townhouse uh style development at 1285 East gun Street submitted by Nicholas Hardy is am I saying that huh hagy okay Victoria yes so this is an outside service agreement located at uh 1285 East gum um this is an existing 1.2 uh acre property where a proposed 7unit multifam uh dwelling has been proposed adjacent uses include residential single family developments including two residential sub divisions to the west and south uh the property is not currently zoned as it is outside of City Limits however it is noted as being Suburban single family on the future land use plan so several things that we have to review when looking at these outside service agreements the first are to evaluate the impact on the local community uh considering factors such as public health safety and the general welfare of residents extending the sewer to connect to a residential facility within a residential area would make sense however uh this is more than just a simple connection to a house it is construction uh for a multi family housing development including seven units the project may impact the surrounding Community as surrounding

uses are typical single family residential subdivisions however in discussions staff does concur that this land may be suitable to be zoned as R2 medium density residential in the future which would allow up to 12 units per acre this is a higher density than what the applicant is proposing at this time while higher densities would be allowed uh the current development as is would not be allowed technically as proposed um would instead have to be a mixture of duplexes triplexes quadplex or um have to be developed uh as true Town town homes on their own Lots uh the second thing we have to review is to assess the capacity of the existing sewer infrastructure to accommodate additional connections the city corpor coration board did uh approve the sewer connection at their board meeting on February 25th of this year and the city sewer system has uh sufficient capacity to provide service to the project the commission should consider uh including a condition that they extend the line to the Upstream side of the property this would allow Upstream properties to connect to the Sewer in the future without having to acquire an easement or going through this property after construction is completed um so being that this is within the planning boundary we do need to consider future growth in this area and extending that sewer to the Upstream side of the property uh allows for potential future development therefore staff does recommend extending the sewer line to the Upstream side of the property unless the applicant can demonstrate that it will already be extended to the higher highest portion in the area um three is the proposal in line with the future fut land use plan uh technically no as stated uh in the instance of our future land use plan it does indicate that this would be Suburban single family uh multif family developments

would not be permitted within a single family Zone however zoning has not been applied to this property um in this location so strict compliance with the zoning regulations would be at the discretion of the Planning Commission as well as a city council um and as previously stated staff could see this area realistically being zoned R2 which would allow that higher density development for the application uh is under the thresholds for large scale development requirements so this will be the only review that the city has on this development um and although strict compliance with the Ral zoning code is not required they do meet the following requirements within their proposal um they are meeting the parking requirements that the city has um at two spaces per dwelling units they've provided 14 parking spaces um and the proposal uh appears to meet our area requirements and then finally although it is not uncommon to extend services staff believes it is in the best interest of the city to require annexation as this property is immediately adjacent to City Limits this annexation would have to be completed prior to the Sewer extension being made so um as a result of all of this staff does recommend forwarding this request uh to city council for approval to extend the gravity sewer line with the following conditions uh first extend the sewer to the Upstream side of the property or as stated the applicant would show us that they're already doing that to obtain gravity sewer extension and Associated easements in align with except uh in alignment exceptional acceptable to City Corporation and Property Owners where sewer extension is proposed uh and then third and finally Annex the property prior to the extension being completed as the property is uh immediately adjacent to City elements this is as a result of the findings that there are no adverse impacts to the sewer system there is adequate capacity for sewer service

treatment uh City Corporation approved the application to extend the new sewer line on February 25th of this year and then finally this is in line with the land subdivision and development code article 12.5 I know that was a lot of information are there any questions for staff so it would just uh be This 1.2 Acres that's proposed right now any other questions thank you Victor you got something you want to add to that Richard I'm Richard San Fire Marshall y'all hadn't seen me in a while um I I want to I want to make a a statement for the record and I've dealt with this for a number of years on these properties that lie just outside the city when they're looking for a sewer normally when you're looking for a sewer sewer extension you're dealing with City Corporation in the city you're looking at Water and Sewer and they can regulate they can closer regulate the water side of it many times and I'm not against the sewer extension I'm I'm not against this at all I just want to make a statement for the doc for the uh for for the record and that is one of the things we're faced with as was mentioned just a little while ago with by Victoria is when you look at annexing you look at uh how what to what

standard are those properties built are they substandard or not and and when you build a town home okay you saw those lined up okay one one thing I might say is there's nothing about water or fire protection in here I can't do anything about that we've had other issues at other properties in the last few years but I've seen it over a number of years so I try to make statements so that everyone knows where I'm coming from but in the in but there's not there's nothing in there about fire protection the other thing is is when you build a town home there's no Architectural Review of the plans in a town home seven units okay according to state code you can build a duplex any larger than a duplex triplex on up to Apartments you have to sprinkle them unless you design them by uh by way of a townhouse or town home and what a town home essentially is is a single family unit where the exterior walls are buted together so you get in this case you get seven single family units okay and there is a 2hour wall That's not penetrated from the decking uh from the floor Foundation up to the decking so what's happening is you and you can build 15 of those together if you want as long as it's designed as a town home and so what the the issue that we get into is there's no way to regulate that so he can he can put seven or he can put eight or he can put 10 he may have an architect but at the end of the day the only thing I wanted to say was is we have no say so in fire protection we have no say so in the plan review we don't know if it's truly a town home by definition by state code and we have no way of inspecting it

potentially you could get substandard construction that that's that doesn't have review again pass this on I may get a chance to also mention this to the city council as I did with the last project that that they did a sewer extension but I feel like uh uh if if that's something that I can that I can make a statement about um uh obviously in the future if something happens uh you these these these kind of things when you're talking about fire protection Life Safety you know it's about it's about sleeping well at night so just want to make that statement and if you got any questions I'll be glad to to answer them do not it it's not a it's not anything to influence your vote because it's about a sewer extension but it is a seven unit town home thank you sir s i appreciate Richard I appreciate your comments uh question is this something that we can look at addressing in the planning code itself I'm sorry can you repeat that question is this something that we can look at you know the situation I mean that Richard was talking about I mean we're going to see more of this it sounds like in the future is something that we can look at addressing within the code the only way we can look at this um based on the zoning code and permitting is if we actually apply zoning out outside of the planning bound outside of city limits in our planning boundary and I'm not sure that that is something that we intend to do at this time the only other way to solve this would be to just Annex a whole bunch of property and I don't know that we want to have that conversation at this time either maybe we do but that's a city council conversation not a Planning Commission so I don't know that there's any way for us to address that

um besides an outside service agreement to let him go through this process request that he Annex uh it's not a great answer we just don't have a lot of authority in the planning boundary what my concern is if that is going to be annexed in you know pretty soon then we're going to accept that building as is and if it doesn't meet our standards then we have a issue and I don't know by law if we can put that in the agreement that it's built by City requirements I do believe that the state building code is in effect in the county um because we just have the minimum requirements of the building code it's nothing against that it's just that there's no inspections that occur by our staff um to ensure that they do build it to the State Building Code but the State Building Code in is in effect within the entire state so any areas that are not um regulated inspected they're still they are still anticipated that they're going to build to that standard it's just not always the case that it is and I think that's what Richard's concern is is that there's no one doing inspections doesn't that meet our one mile rate one mile off the it is within our planning boundary and that is part of why we are here um because we have to go through this process to give anybody service outside of City Limits um but it is it's adjacent to our city limits so it's definitely within the one mile planning boundary but

because there's not zoning there we haven't gone through and said this is R1 R2 R3 C1 C2 any of our zoning we cannot enforce our zoning code regulations well we haven't had zoning that's been in that one mile from C limits and we still have to inspect it make sure it's done right I know in the past other properties have um I think I kind of get where your train of thought is it doesn't meet any of the like large scale velopment requirements which is typically where we see applications before you all that are in that planning boundary it is just under those large scale development so at eight units it would have to come in for large scale development they are planning seven units so that's why they don't trigger the large scale development requirements and that's why they don't have the large scale development review um building permits that that sort of thing you got anything you want to add to that is that does that answer your question Mr yeah I was kind of confused on yeah sorry the regulations on that so okay you got anything you want to add to that yeah I I just I I think the the to answer your question about code and law so the state legislature adopts the international fire code building code residential code and they and they make amendments and it's called the Arkansas fire prevention code volume 123 right and and it is a state law the problem in the rural areas is you don't have enough people to enforce the code and you also don't have a permit process so what happens is is if you're building a home or an apartment complex out in a rural area you you're you might get a state inspector but you may only have

three inspectors for the whole state so that that's that's the issue and so so I'm just you know I people don't realize this but since I've been on the building side also I've gotten calls over the last couple years from residents that questioned um our inspection program out in some outer areas and they felt like they had bought something substandard and what they don't understand is I don't have control over that and you know again if this was a single family dwelling you know there's water shuttles and all that but when you're doing what they call a town home there's a lot that goes into a town home so um and again don't want it doesn't need to influence sewer extension at all so thanks Comm so I guess I've got a process question so if the property was within City Limits then it would go through all the inspections and so on and so forth because it is outside City Limits it is not in the recommendations uh for approval one of the recommendations is voluntarily annexation into the city has the pro has the project started already okay if we were to require the annexation prior to we're already going to in the recommendations requiring voluntary annexation prior to the extension if we require voluntary annexation prior to starting work would it then be in the city and then would fall under that to be able to ensure that what the the structures

that are being built in the city of Russellville aren't I'm not saying that you are going to be building something subst I'm sure you're going to build something very nice but to be able to say that we've had our inspectors go out there to make sure that everything is the way it's supposed to be would that be a way to potentially handle this yes you could um require that the annexation be completed prior to construction which would then require him to go through the building permit process review um it would require him to go through some drainage review because then it it would fall under all of the city regulations um we were looking at it going that anything built in the city is just more expensive and I know he's trying to get this in so we were trying to be somewhat working with the property owner to allow him to move forward to get this started and maybe not come into all of the into compliance with all of our regulations because like I said there would be drainage that he has to consider that he doesn't have to consider right now that he's in the county um he would have to have a building permit and go through all of that review and then there's multif family design standards that would be triggered for this because it is a seven unit complex so we were we're looking at this we do when you are extending Services outside of a city you want to ensure that people are coming into the community at some point and that's why we're recommending the annexation because this is immediately adjacent to our community so the idea is that you would bring them in through that annexation and voluntary annexation is a way simpler process than us having to go through to voter um required annexations and when they're developing

that's that's the trigger that usually requires annexation uh we were just trying to allow a path forward for them to get started get moving but if you all decide that you would rather see them Annex prior to and then be required to have the building permits and come into compliance we can follow that process as well it would mean that it comes it the petition um annexation by petition does go they file with the county clerk it goes through like a 15 30day review then it would come to the city we would make a determination and present it to Planning Commission on what zone that we would recommend and which you've already heard from Victoria most likely we're going to be looking at an R2 Zone in this area and then that would go to city council and so it would slow down the process um there's another option if the Builder wants to continue going forward and you're going to require the annexation you could ask him to voluntarily apply for the building permits and go through that process at the same time so that he could get started um it it's we were just trying to find a path forward to allow him to move forward but still meet the end goal of having additional property annexed into the city I'm kind of confused about this is this application is to extend the sewer line yes it has nothing to do with the building correct it is just to extend the sewer line it's for to give him sewer service for his seven unit um town home house style development it's nothing with the building permit he just

and and again I'm I'm a non-voting member on this body I was just asking a question just from a process of how to potentially move it forward and also address some of the issues brought up by our would the owner be willing to go through the planning through the building code and get a permit that way you can continue on and then when it is annexed in then everything's good to go and slowing nobody down that's kind of meeting everybody halfway and you know uh and main thing is is life safety and I love the growth and I love what you're doing uh adding on but I think there's kind of a way we can meet halfway uh and give our citizens the best opportunity and sa living quarters yeah I understand your concerns you would take your name for the record my name is Nick hackery okay and I'm the owner of this property uh so the the first concern I want to address is Richard's uh I do have a set of stamped plans from s uh structural architectural mechanical electrical Plumbing um and as far as the the firewall goes and it is up to code and that that's how I will be building it um another thing I want to address before I answer you guys's question is uh the uh the Upstream there there are actually two manholes that that are uh decently close to this property uh the one that I believe Victoria is talking about is a little over 300 ft away at the corner of Drive she wasn't referencing a specific okay okay um I think the the one that was shown on on the presentation was that the one at the corner of Huntington Huntington

Drive okay and and that is in the right away but I'm I'm in the process of getting an easement from a property owner on East uh Elm Street I believe and she's going to get that in the mail maybe tomorrow or early next week and mail it back to me notorized and that's what the city corpor is requiring if I wanted to tie into the manhole down there East Elm Street you said yes yes it'll just be on the south side of Gum Street right and and that is in city limits um as far as getting permits and and things like that I know that as of now and and I've talked to uh some some septic people some septic installers and I would be able to fit a duplex uh easily a duplex possibly a triplex on there now and I wouldn't have to go through this process but because I'm doing seven then I can't fit that on on a septic system reasonably so that's why I do want to extend the sewer service out there um but if I was to Annex before before building then that's a that's a you know a substantial amount of money that I would have to invest in this Pro in this property as far as the civil engineering goes um and that that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid I went through this with with Pottsville and that's where I got all these plans from and they're saying it's going to take too long now and that's another um issue that I may run into with you guys is I'm wanting to do all this myself um I am experienced I built two houses from the ground up I know what I'm doing but I haven't been doing this long enough to get my contractor's license this project will allow me to get my contractor's license right after

the I I basically finish this um I don't know if that answered your question or not but I I believe that I've responded to most of the concerns yes thank you yeah I wish more contractors had that uh had that view I wish more contractors did have that that you know that opinion or that you know that way of doing things so but all right Commissioners you have any questions for the applicant or the uh our planner Richard you got something else you want to have yeah the only thing I want to add is I appreciate the fact that Nick has stamp plans um and again it's it's about the review right uh there's a ton of stuff you you look at in a firewalls not necessarily a firewall and penetrations and there there's a lot there's there's challenges to doing a townhouse not questioning that the architect did it right it's just there's a review process uh the other thing the confusion with the sewer extension Don has to do with you know when it's a city Corporation service City Corporation generally marries the two on a project right do you have water do you have sewer but what happens is is we have a tendency to give away a Russellville service a partial russleville service and and we we link these like fire protection like for example why why you know you know why does City Corporation not say well if you want my sewer we need you to extend

an a 6in fire line at least get a high but they don't they just they just go you need sewer and and that's it's nothing against them but to answer your question what what what I what I've seen a number of times in my career is this sewer line extension into an area that there's no requirement for fire protection architectural plan review and inspections and then when we Annex it we got the sewer but we got the subst substandard fire protection there's nothing I can do about this it it but but I I I do I I on the on the Tony War project here last year they did a sewer extension and I said massive homes being built out there please let them know there's no fire protection now I I don't think he probably did that he's trying to sell homes but I went to city council and I put that on the record you got to be that there's property owners that have no idea about things like like fire protection uh mechanical electrical Plumbing utilities done right okay uh you know and so so I did I did want to finish up with that I appreciate that Nick has a full set of stamp plans but there's there's so much more to it than that so anyway thanks thanks for your time I won't delay any thank you for your comments Richard s our fire marshal appreciate you bud all right Commissioners what's your pleasure you have any more questions or no I don't I don't really a question I would I do want to take Richard comments kind of into thought consideration just even if it's discussion amongst this group plan commission to maybe see if there's way

that we can applications we will see this right I mean there's going to be plenty of these projects that are within our planning boundary that we're going to have to make calls like this on in the future the mechanic s a lot a lot easier too yeah I mean so not as it pertains in this necessarily but I think we do need to address it especially for PR Marshall is publicly telling us that it's an issue right great so Gum Street is the line I guess right through there okay is north sub there's about what 15 or 20 houses on that little Street there I guess or not that many I don't guess but

while I I I think uh we were talking about meeting in the middle a little bit earlier and I think a a reasonable compromise here would be to uh to let me put up the structure first because the the way that the plans are laid out it's h it's post frame so it's built like any other Barn dominium you can throw up the whole structure all at once with a you know gravel floor and then go on the inside and finish that one unit at a time I I wouldn't mind uh annexing the property before anything is done on the inside um but but I would like to build the the outside structure before getting uh permits also to to address Nikki's question or concern earlier about um about drainage I do have a set of civil engineering plans but not on this proc property uh David's done this for another prop uh property of mine and uh you know it does show the you know Road specs sidewalk curb um elevations not for this property but this would what would be what I I would be following and on these planes it does have a place for a fire hydrant so I wouldn't mind putting putting a hydren out there either worried about the uh fire hydrant uh my because that that could be when it's annexed in we could build uh fire protection out there mine is uh the safety of the tenants uh because once it starts in one if you don't have a

firewall it could go to one end to the other in in a matter of minutes and that that's where I'm coming with the issue I kind of have and if it's going to be annexed in then we're fixing to have that property in the city that is not real safe for the tenants that's kind of where I'm going with it Richard from a review perspective you know you mentioned you know if to Mr Hager just kind of point if if he's kind of able to meet halfway does that allow you or your team to be able to be out there you know if it's going to have to be annexed and we're prior to a CO if it's an nexted prior to you're going to have to issue a CO correct I mean does it allow you an opportunity to get out there and look at I'm just trying to understand the process a little bit there there's there's a number of ways to look at I mean it's really outside our jurisdiction so as a courtesy we know we now there's there are times that the State Fire Marshal says Richard could you go look at this or do a origin cause investigation on something I may get a call from a a nearby Fire Chief Fire Mar fire chief or something like that um you know it's like I said I mean there there's just there's a number of things that you hope for like for example if you Annex it in and say well we'll we'll get fire protection there when you Annex it in well City Corporation is just not they're not into that by you know they they're not going to say Hey you Annex this we're going to run you an 8 inch

line with hydrant that's just that's not that's not that's not workable for them in most situations now I'm not saying that that there's not some infrastructure buildout plan but they typically put that on the developer right so so I don't really know uh how to answer your question about I mean we could do a lot of things we could you I could take those plans home tonight and take a look at them and tell you whether or not it's truly done like a townhouse unit should be done uh we could go out and do inspections I don't think it's you know like I said it's it's kind of that' be me getting outside my Lane a little bit so um th this is not the first time this has happened uh this is closer this is closer to home you know we've had some Koval Landings and some stuff that was years ago out out further away and like I said that recent one up on up um uh what was that property that Tony Moore uh Eagle Crest you know that was that's that that's a that's a ways way so uh maybe I won't be around by then or maybe I will uh but but there you know when you when you start looking close you you just really have to think about that right and so I Cody I don't know if I answered your question or not man we can't we we can but we can't how about that we we can but we can't I mean I don't know the way I look at it is uh me it's out of our jurisdiction we have really no reason to decline it and I make a

motion to move it on to uh city council for review and approval that's my motion okay we have a motion gentlemen second okay we have a motion as second to move this on to city council all those in favor acknowledgement saying I was that with staff recommendations I'm sorry yes I'm sorry yes as presented yes yes sorry all right all those in favor saying I I any opposed none the motion carried while we're on this topic I would like to put that in the long range planning just for record thank you good idea okay all right item number three we have vacation right away between the 12 and 13 of block 42 of the ja Shen Edition located at 2115 South Arkansas committed by rvi Investments LLC Victoria take it away okay so this is a vacation of ride of way um at The cocreate Innovation Hub the existing conditions this is a commercially developed Corridor within the downtown commercial business district several businesses in vacant buildings are located within this area surrounding uses include uh a client's retail business in an old surface station to the north and uh Casey's General Store in the Pope County Library to the South this property and all surrounding properties are zoned C1 um and they are within the downtown commercial District so when reviewing vacations there are three things we have to consider the first is what is the impact of the proposed vacation upon the public trust functions of the rideway uh does the vacation impair circulation access utilities open space and or views uh this proposal is requesting to vacate an unopened Alley between an the existing V

business and a home that um is owned by rvi Investments as well to utility uh retention of an two utility companies have requested uh retention of an easement to be able to maintain their utility lines as staff understands that there is an existing gas line that runs north to south in the alley and a 10-in sewer m where future maintenance may be required um Summit utilities uh that has the gas line was unable to provide a specific location for the easement that they are needing so staff is recommending retention of the full 20 foot alley as a utility easement uh the second thing we have to consider is what are the land use impacts regarding the vacation of ride of way uh the impact is that the property owner will now be able to utilize the unopened Alley between the two properties that they own um as the alley is unused there is not an impact to the public use uh the third and final thing we consider is what is the public benefit uh received by vacating the ride of way um there's neither a benefit received nor reduced uh by vacating this right of way since the right of way is unopened um and not being utilized by the public with the exception of the utility lines where we are requesting the easement to be retained so staff does recommend forwarding this application to city council for the approval to vacate the 20 foot uh rideway between 215 South Arkansas and 119 East Third Street with the following condition to retain a 20 foot uh sewer and public utility easement for the existing sewer line and gas lines that run within the alley this is as a result of the findings that there is not an impact to the public trust land use and no adverse effects to the public benefit uh no objections were filed by any utility company for the vacation Summit utilities is requesting an easement for future maintenance of

the utility lines and then finally that City Corporation has a SE remain in the area of the vacation and request retention of an easement are there any questions for staff thank you okay thank you Victoria any questions gentlemen motion to approve okay have motion to approve as uh presented by staff do I hear a second all right we have motion and a second all those in favor by saying I any opposed hearing none the motion carried all right let's move on to the next agenda item here we have a uh large scale development for Taber extrusions to construct a 126,000 square ft addition to the site at 9:15 South Elmyra submitted by Barrett assciates on behalf of tab extrusions Mr John do take it away absolutely like you said this is a large scale development Taber extrusions they announced uh in the last year that they were expanding and so now they're moving forward with that expansion uh the existing conditions that the primary structure sits on the property along the railroad tracks at the East side of the property and is located on South almyra the property adjacent to the subject property is all M1 um with a small portion on the other side of the railroad to the north that is C2 the uses in this area are a mix of some commercial with all other properties consisting of mostly industrial uh businesses include Americold hne Ladish Firestone and ConAgra under the review comments metal mod molding and Extrusion plant or manufacturing uses permitted use within the M1 light industrial Zone due to the

size of the project it exceeds the exemption clause and is therefore subject to large scale development review uh site plan review will be required at the time of building permit application the following items need to be addressed with site plan review all other items as noted in the staff report appear to be in compliance with the regulations there is currently only one adaa space shown a total of 5 adaa uh spaces will need to be provided fences are permitted with barbed wire in the M1 Zone with a total height of 6 feet um include the height of the proposed fence at time of the site plan review Landscaping is required Street trees are shown along with the parking lot Landscaping Street Frontage buffer may be shown exact details will be confirmed with the site plan review and then a note from engineering was submit civil site plan showing compliance with the grading and drainage permit application it is our recommendation that you all approve the large scale development to allow construction of the new 126,000 ft Edition at the Taber Extrusion site with the following conditions provide details as noted in the staff report required to confirm compliance for site plan review submit the Civil site plan showing compliance with the regulations regarding drainage as a result of the findings that the applicant has expressed their commitment to adhere to the zoning regulations and the applicant demonstrates compliance with the regulations listed in section seven of the land subdivision and development code are there any questions thank you

M you have any questions for Sarah on this uh matter here if not what is your pleasure okay we have a you got anything you want to have sorry about that something at me man come on David Garza with Barrett Associates representing uh Taber extrusions uh we we've been working with the design team sorry we meet with them weekly at Richard has had extensive meetings with them as well uh just the I mean just looking at the equipment alone that's going in this building is phenomenal I mean I don't know how they do it I mean they're they're having to work with all these equipment um the the builders the ones that are putting this stuff together and then they have to go back and work with the steel to make sure the columns don't get in the way I mean it's just it's been a process for them uh but this is a huge a huge Improvement a huge expansion uh like am miracle was and so you know that just shows they're here for the long term you know they're going to add some employees and they're expanding the parking lot I think by 40 spaces or more and and we've been dealing with Sarah and we're going to put all that stuff in there i' I think I've already have it on the site plan the five spaces for the Ada and stuff and we've been working with Glenn as well and like I said with all the staff but um you know it's it's going to be huge it's it's really good that's all I've got to say yeah thanks Dave we appreciate you man it's good for Russellville yes it is I like that we have a motion and a second on the floor

here guys um who our motion second Mr chair who was the motion I made motion you did who was second okay Mr chub was second all right all right all those in favor of approval of this this u l skill development acknowledgement saying I any opposed hearing none the motion carried okay all right I've Got a Feeling Sarah is going to be talking to us for a minute here Zone Zone Tech amendment to adopt proposed changes to the Russell zoning code submitted by city of Russellville Sarah John do the floor is yours thank you uh yes we have a few items that are we are bringing to you all uh for your consideration so the long range planning committee me met for its quarterly a meeting on February 10th um and these are the following items that have been forwarded to you for consideration uh I am starting slightly out of order because I feel like this is the one that has the most information with it so we're going to start with accessory dwelling units um in recent years staff has received an increasing number of inquiries about the feasibility of constructing accessory dwelling units within Russellville many other communities have successfully implemented accessory dwelling unit regulations as a way of diversifying housing option addressing housing shortages and providing flexibility flexible living arrangements while ad accessory dwelling units adus are not a comprehensive solution to housing challenges they offer an alternate how housing type in areas with existing infrastructure minimizing the need for new public utility extensions allowing accessory dwelling units can provide several benefits including support for men multi-generational housing affordable

housing opportuni ities efficient land use and lower construction costs the proposed regulation update would allow accessory dwelling units while ensuring that they align with the existing character of residential areas and provide a valuable housing option the regulation will include Provisions to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties including design standards and shared utility connections to the primary structure on the assessed property so that's all about the accessory dwelling units we spent a good year on this conversation in committee did surveys within the community to find out um what is amendable to the community for accessory dwelling units and we're able to finally come to a potential resolution that we are proposing to you all um tonight do you have any questions about accessory dwelling units before I go on okay so the rest of these are pretty straightforward cleanup changes um article 1.11 the lot of record uh is just dis correcting a discrepancy between the minimum lot width in the R3 District to match what is allowed in the district a lot of Records actually were required to have a larger W lot width than what is allowed in the the district and so we cleaned that up um article 2.3.1 the general description for R1 single family just updates to allow Adu is permitted by that Adu allowance in article 3.1 that's being proposed article 2.16 planned unit developments we've all heard Hudson

Harbor will this um subdivision taught us a lot uh and this is going to correct uh that um kind of the issues that we've had is planning so the subdivision that Hudson Harbor was allowed to run as a one lot PUD but there's 20 some houses in there and they're selling off properties even though it's still one lot and it's caused a lot of issues and so this update uh does correct that to ensure that future puds if it's going to be subdivision where people can purchase houses that they do have to go through that long process and create individual Lots within the Pud so that's the 2.16 correction which is four different subsections within 2.16 article 3.22.20 on a property um article 7.8.9 uh regarding Monument signs ensures that any Monument sign placed adjacent to a residential property meets setbacks of that adjacent residential property so if it's an R3 Zone and adjacent C2 Zone the C2 Zone says that it can place that sign on the property line whereas an R3 Zone has that sidey yard setback that it would have to be setback and so that's what this um update does creates a buffer so that C2 property would have to set its sign back five or 15 feet depending on where it is um article 8.3 special use permits this updates to clarify that all notice

requirements followed the same notice requirement in article 10.7 there was a little bit of a discrepancy there and this creates consistency and ease of use for everyone article 10.5 and 10.6 regarding Administration and enforcement these updates formalize the existing practice that the yearly meeting schedule is established by the planning and development department and clarify the acceptable documentation required to verify that notices were sent the current regulations requires return receipts which are returned to applicants by the post office but may not always be received before um um scheduled meetings and historically have delayed applications for a lack because of a lack of a documentation um State Statute does say that we just have to confirm that notices were sent and so we're updating this to uh line with the state regulations that therefore the applicant just has to provide documentation that they did in fact send the notices um and then lastly article 12 we are adding a definition for small scale is being added to clarify for consistency what constitutes a small scale development in relation to the requirements for landscaping that is everything that I have for you all do you have any questions thank you thank you sir we need to vote to approve these changes here or is this just are you is that or just informative that's we I do okay I'm sorry apparently I'm a little tired uh so we are recommending that you forward this application to city council because the long range planning committee recommends

these additions and updates the changes align with the intent of the language um and changes are consistent with the objectives outlined and reimagine russeville 2040 comprehensive plan and the Russellville zoning code thank you so much I am I apologize it's all right you're good at what you do Mr John do we appreciate you very much gentlemen make motion approval okay all right A second we have a motion a second to approve this uh these additions to the uh long rage move this stuff on to uh city council all those in favor ackn knowledgeable saying I any opposed hearing none motion carried we're if we don't have anything else we're adjourned