Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Still Water Planning Commission of March 3rd will now come to order. It will be the process this evening to call for items on the agenda. The commission will hear briefly from staff first, then the applicant and or their representative, and then open the public hearing and hear from those in favor, and then those in opposition of the request. When you come to the podium, please clearly state your name and address for the record. And then before closing the public hearing, both staff, the applicant and/or their representative will be provided an opportunity to respond to provide additional information and answer questions. After all interested parties have spoken, the public hearing will be closed and then we will hear closing remarks and alternatives from staff. First item on the agenda this evening for public hearings is to receive public comment regarding a map request amendment or a map amendment. And we'll hear from staff. Yes, ma'am. Um, good evening um, chair, vice chair, commissioners. My name is Henry Balheimer with development services and tonight we're looking at a map amendment for 3398 North Charter Road. The request is to reszone from General Industrial or IG to small lot single family residential or RSS. Here's an aerial view. You'll see two different colors on your screen right here. We're looking at the property outlined in pink. property outlined in green um is a reasonable request that goes with this property. They're for the same project. That will be the next item on the agenda. So, just to familiarize yourself with both those shapes. So, we're looking at the property in pink. This is just south of the southwest corner of Airport and Jardo. Here's the zoning map where you can see the existing zoning is IG or general industrial. That same zoning is to the north south or to the northwest. And then to the south we have some agriculture and RT which is that residential two family for a duplex development to the south of the project. And to the east we are outside of city limits. The future land use map does call for

moderate density residential at this location. What that means is we look at our um word that goes with this. We'll call it a matrix. Um so we're looking at today is single family homes. That is a three out of five appropriateness for moderate density residential. Um the comprehensive plan says it's one of the considerations is it's appropriate on smaller lots since we're reszoning to small lot single family residential. [clears throat] Um this does align with the comprehensive plan. So here's the conceptual site plan. This is to show kind of what we're looking at tonight. Um what we're looking at tonight is the reasonzoning request for this northern portion which is the RSS or small single family residential. The way we got to this weird shape is we did go ahead and go with a minor subdivision. Since there was a um proposed residential development that we're looking at tonight that had single family homes as well as duplexes and town homes, we thought the cleanest way to do that was with two different zoning districts. And the cleanest way to do two different zoning districts was to do a minor subdivision to create those two different parcels. So we'd have one parcel being zoned RSS and one parcel, which we'll look at next, being reszoned to RTM. So, that's kind of how we got to the shape of lots that we're looking at tonight. I'm [clears throat] open to answer any questions if you have any.

Any questions for staff? I don't see any. Thank you. At this time, we would allow the applicant or the representative to come forward and provide any additional information.

All right. Good evening. I'm Ku Smith with Craft and Toll on behalf of the applicant. Uh our address is 300 Point Parkway Boulevard um in Yukon. And so I'd like to ask for your approval on this uh map amendment request. We think that it fits well with the comprehensive planning. And I just want to reiterate everything that Henry said. He did a great job of going over it. Um but going back to I can pull it up on the boards here or on Yeah, just going through the screens would be better. um just the future land use or the existing zoning would be best. Perfect. Thanks.

Thanks, Henry. So, to the north is the general industrial and also the existing site is general industrial. Uh both of those lots are currently vacant. To the west is general industrial and that is developed as general industrial. I believe it's some sort of concrete and then there's also like a tree recycling plant there as well. to the south, like Henry said, is the RT PUB, which is the two family. And so what our plan was with this development was to instead of having an industrial development was to technically downzone it into two different tracks of the residential and to be able to um to be able to go from the residential two family and the industrial through the town homes which is the next item into the single family which then abuts um the exterior Payne County which is outside city limits. So, like Henry said, the the comprehensive land use plan is for 10 to 14 dwelling units per acre. Just running through um for track one, we have 98 lots on 36.9 acres, which is 2.65 dwelling units per acre. And for track 2, it would have 218 dwelling units of town homes on 20.2 acres. And that would yield a density of 10.8. Just for total to give you an idea, the way that that would come out is this entire development has 316 dwelling units on 60.1 acres which yields a density of 5.26 dwelling units per acre. And so we feel confident with our plan. we feel like it utilizes um the comprehensive plan and then also there is an existing 21-in sewer line that runs through the middle of this development and a 12-in water line that runs along Jardo and then also over on Airport Road. So, it is an efficient use of city utilities that are already there. Um our developer is very experienced in the metro in Oklahoma City and they're looking to move out into Still Water to to add their product

to your city. So, I'd be happy to answer any questions. um the the spiel or the proposal for both will be very similar. So I'll try to try to keep the next one a bit shorter, but happy to answer any questions. Any questions for the applicant? How will buffering be handled next to the remaining IG? So the remaining IG, are you talking about on this tract or on the upcoming tract? It could be both, but this tact on this tract, I think if I switch over.

So for this first tract in the residential single family small lot, all of that buffering to the west of the IG will be through the common area, which that is a blue line stream. And so we don't intend to to touch it. We intend to leave it as is as much as possible. Um there's one roadway crossing that we can't get around and that's just for access for the development. So that would be the buffering for that one. And then the buffering for the town homes um would just be those town home lots and generally um there is already a tree line there on the industrial side that shows that buffer there. Okay. Yes sir.

So on the on the west side the intent is to leave the existing trees in place. There are existing trees in place on the adjacent property. On the adjacent property, not Okay. We're not planning for that with ours. Um, we certainly could and we'll definitely look into it and it just depends on the developer and how he thinks if people would be uh would really require that buffering to be able to feel it adequate to live there. Well, that's a lot of residents. Is is um I'm not familiar with Jardo so much up in that area. So, are there any concerns with traffic or access off Jardo?

So, I don't know off the top of my head if this would trigger a traffic impact analysis. Um but just by looking at this uh the residences that you mentioned and looking at uh so we anticipate that this would add about 2,300 vehicles per day. And uh just to give you an estimate of how much is going along Perkins, along Perkins there's about 13,000 and along State Highway 51 again another 13,000. So this would be a small drop in the bucket compared to that. But when we do move forward, if this map amendment were approved with the platting phase, we would be able to look at the full traffic impact of like the intersections of Jardo and airport and then also Jardo and Lake View. We'd be happy to look at those. Jardo is two lane there, right?

Yes, sir. Yeah, one lane in both directions. And I think in preparation, we actually did do a traffic impact analysis. I haven't fully read through it, but we were planning that. So, we do have it on file to look at that. And so, we can go in more depth during the platting stages. Thank you. Yeah. Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you. Can I ask a question?

Just just a moment, sir. Um at this point, we would open the public hearing. And so once we've open the public hearing, this is when we can hear from the public. So um what we typically do is um take those that are in um do we have any written down for this one? Okay.

Okay. Um, so what we typically do is take those in favor first and then we have those in opposition second. And if you have just a general question, you could ask it at either point in time. So if if you have a if you're in favor, I would ask anyone who's in favor in the audience to come forward and state your name and address for the record. Okay. Seeing none, is there anyone in opposition that would like to come forward or ask a question regarding this map amendment? Would you like to ask a question, sir? I would. Please come to the podium and if you could state your name and address for the record.

Uh Keith Massar, I live at 2123 East Marcus, just east of what you guys are proposing. Um, so the biggest thing for me is, so you guys asked about Jardo. Jardo was a dirt road from Lake View to airport uh 20-ish years ago. 20 well 25 years ago or so. Then they um they upgraded that to asphalt and unfortunately over time it's degraded and and the road is actually in pretty pretty rough shape. Um with all the extra work and businesses that have gone in in Perkins Road um a lot of people go around that path and I noticed he mentioned a impact study. Um there was monitoring set up on Jardo. So you guys should have those numbers of the current u amount of uh traffic that goes through there. But adding the additional cars without doing anything to the infrastructure of that road is going to be significant. And another question I have relates to is this entrance that they have is that going to be directly across from our entrance at Marcus Drive?

We can looks like it is. Yeah, we can we can we after we get through with with this piece of questions, we'll give him an opportunity to come back, the applicant, and answer that question for you.

So, my you know, my biggest concern besides the population density, you know, going up significantly. Um, you know, and also the types of homes that are going in. I mean, are these middle inome homes? Are they low-income homes? Are these section 8 homes? What? you know, I see it looks nice on the map, but what is it? You know, what are you really propos proposing? Um, so I mean, those are definitely some of my concerns. Uh, there all of us on Marcus, I mean, we're probably a smaller population, but we all have, you know, two to five acres of land and and, uh, always been outside the little envelope, I guess, of Still Water.

Okay. Any other questions for us or that we could pose to the Yeah, if you'd like to come forward. State your name and address for the record. Yeah, you can pull it down. [laughter] I'm Margaret Massar. I live at 2123 Marcus. And I was wondering if it remains industrial general, what does that mean versus I mean if it remains what it is now, will some loud business move in or would it remain as it is or because I'm not excited about the prospect of all these houses being across from me? We moved there to be in the country. Peace and quiet is what we wanted.

Ch change is different. I know. I know. But Gotcha. I'm concerned about the amount of traffic. All right. All right. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to speak in opposition? Yes, sir. Please come forward and state your name and address for the record.

Good evening. My name is William Cole. I live at 2324 East Marcus. I guess I came here tonight just to listen. I don't know if I'm in favor or against this just yet. Uh, I guess what was failed to be mentioned, you know, you talked about everything that's inside the city of limits, but you didn't discuss or look at what's going on outside the city limits. You know, there's currently a 10 acre commercial site at the corner of airport in Jerardo that starts their business at 5:00 in the morning and usually comes back at 10 10 or 9:00 at night to unload. And we have the light pollution from that facility. And also the city of Stillwater has put their uh electric plant on the north side of airport which will be on the north of Joiner. All these houses will be backing up to that commercial. And I'm just hoping for a good residential development that's successful because it all it's going to do is bring value to the neighborhood. But if it's you're trying to cram residential up against the recycling center, up against uh industrial use, which this has been planned for industrial ever since I guess I've been out there since 1993. So I guess I've been expecting some large corporation or industrial plant to come out there and put nice landscaping out in front. But I guess that's what I was wanted to make sure that was mentioned that you knew that there is someone out there already, not just a vacant track to ground and couple trees and three deer. You know, there's a neighborhood right across the street of large track uh and sight built homes. And that's all I have to say about right now.

Thank you, sir. You're welcome. All right. I'll ask if there's anyone else in the audience that would like to speak in opposition of this item to please come forward. Okay. Seeing none, we'll give the applicant an opportunity to respond to questions that are posed.

Yes, thank you for bringing up those questions and thank you for bringing up the traffic and the existing zoning. Um, so I'll go back to um a couple different maps to just walk through a few of the concerns that were brought up. So this tract as it currently sits is zoned as general industrial. And so the property to the west is fully developed as general industrial and it is currently I believe a cement a cement plant and then also a tree recycling plant. Um, so it's not exactly when you when you drive up and down Marine Drive, it's not quite as aesthetically pleasing as you would have if we had like a a brand new subdivision um with a brand new arterial fence and then if you also had additional enhanced landscaping along it like comes with most new developments. And then to uh to answer the question about um any additional traffic and the the traffic logs that were mentioned um I believe those were by our engineer that did the traffic impact analysis. He also did one uh that was for I believe like a data center or the hub that was just up north. And so he was factoring in all of those um when he was looking at the different intersections as far as Lake View and Jardo and Airport and Jardo and Perkins. And so just trying to project forward as Still Water continues to grow, would these intersections and would these roads, even though they are the two-lane, one lane in each direction, would they operate at an adequate level of service? And in that report, I have it with me, but we didn't submit it to staff for the zoning. Um, but we did evaluate and it is showing that they do work at an adequate level of service. And so, um, and then just lastly, as far as traffic goes, and you mentioned the roadway condition as well, a general industrial development that would be allowed by right here would cause um, I would argue that it would impact the roadway more than residential

traffic would. Passenger cars are much lighter than trucks um, that come and go, and they're often um, they're very frequent in industrial settings. Um, so I believe the road would be better maintained with residential development and then also as you have more and more residents that are out there, the city would be able to prioritize those roadway improvements more as time comes. Um, so I'm forgetting if I missed any of the other questions. Um I believe it was also asked about the the density and also the um the could could you um so they I think they talked about like u an income which which may be hard for you to project. So I think if we could just know like the density the number of people

No, I was going to ask if we could ask like is there like a footprint of like a size of home to give an idea? I think that's really appropriate. The question is whether or not this is a good use for single family residential homes. Those questions can be later when we're plotting and development comes toward you all at that time. Right now, this is a conceptual plan. They will bring back a more solid plan for you to review and discuss those issues of the traffic studies, all those items. Could we could we reference an existing um subdivision that has a similar density to get to the density question that they're asking? cuz I know if you don't work in these numbers um every day like some of us do,

it's hard to understand like how many homes is that and how many people is that based on a a single lot. Um so and I'm I'm going to look at staff and say is there anything you may be thinking currently that we could reference that is similar to this? Yeah, we didn't we didn't prepare an answer for that one just because the density calculations we didn't really get in depth of um the size of the lots or similar size lots as what you would see in like a or what they're proposing in this conceptual layout which is still subject to change would be

something similar to like a park view going down on the southwest or something like the canyons up in the north. They're proposing similarly sized lots. So, so, so similar size lot, similar density per acre like what we're seeing at the canyons. And I think that's what I'm getting at because we don't necessarily we can't hold a plat in and a and a size of a home down. But what we're talking about with residential single family um small lot is is kind of a density per acre. So, a similar density per acre would be the canyons. And one distinction I would make is when you would calculate like density per acre, you would normally do like the full platted area being platted. And this one does have some rather large common areas outlets, right?

Um which might decrease that overall density per acre, but the size of the individual lots in this layout are proposed to be similar. Okay. Yeah. Right. [clears throat] And I think there was there was a question which I I think um I think think the legal council is going to tell us that we can't really address the U road approach at this time until we have the plat. Correct. Correct. And that'll be addressed at a later time and the plat will be come back to this body to consider at a later time as well. So those those more detailed kind of things about where the intersection would be, where the entrance would be that that we don't really know at this time. So we'd have to look at that conceptual at this stage.

Yeah. and and I apologize for answering anything beyond the scope of of the zoning. Um I understand that we really want to talk about the zoning and the density of it and uh just does this zoning really conform with your comprehensive plan as you've adopted which I would argue with moderate density a single family even on small lots is about as uh is about as rural as you're going to get with this comprehensive plan that you guys have adopted. And so we were trying to create a development that did a nice job of creating some sort of buffer to the industrial on the west, some sort of buffer to the two family, the duplexes of White Barn on the south, and then transitioning that gradually because we do know that the adjacent to the east is rural county. Um, and so there's also a vacant lot to the north um that would uh that would likely be some sort of moderate housing or some sort of commercial in the future. So,

all right. I think those were all the questions I had. Did we hit everything? Well, I might have misunderstood, but it seems to me if you're considering reszoning with the impact being a lot more people potentially that the road would matter. [sighs]

The use the zoning of residential, single family residential, that would you need consider is appropriate. Is infrastructure appropriate for this zoning? Is the that use appropriate? I'm saying at this stage we don't have those analysis completed because this is a conceptual that will become a later time when we can get more specifics of the traffic the platting because right now it's just conceptual. You can consider that is going to be used in multiple lots for residential use. Who's responsible for the road Jardo? Is that a city road or county staff? down the middle.

Wow. I honestly don't know that answer. Currently the city maint. Okay.

I there are agreements in place for between the city and the county of who's maintaining which roads. I'm not sure this section of Jardo which one it would be maintained, but I'll make sure to have that answer when we if we were to come back for a preliminary plat. Um but sorry, I'm just not sure right now. The gentleman could be correct. Thanks. Okay. I think Oh, go ahead. I was not specifically question for the applicant. So, if we want to finish that part, go ahead.

All right. So, I don't think we have anything else for you to respond to on that. Um I I I did want to have staff come back and answer the question about um the industrial general. um currently. Did you have did you have a listing of um use by right to kind of respond to their question of what could go in there with the current zoning?

Yes, ma'am. So, here's the comparison of the uses of what's allowed kind of right now. I'll show you. IG is the one on the far right of my screen or general industrial. So, all of these businesses are what would be allowed to come in with the existing zoning. And I can zoom in to make that a little easier. And I've I've we we've got it here. And yeah, there you go.

So this is what would be allowed to come in right now. Um general industrial is our highest intensity industrial district. So um kind of your highest intensity industrial uses are reserved for this district. where in this middle column like right here, you can see what would be allowed in the RSS or small lot single family district if the resoning were approved, which is a conventional single family and residential design manufactured homes. Um, if you'd like, I could also talk to the traffic impact analysis. Um, I can say that that would be a requirement at the preliminary plat phase if the trips per day is either over 1,000 or the trips per hour during the peak hour is over 100. So, they would kind of provide those calculations. If they go over that threshold, which it sounds like they might, then a traffic impact study would be required at the preliminary plat phase.

At that point, can we make a stipulation of our approval of the preliminary plat road improvements? I believe so plats can have conditions zoning cannot specifically for right but okay also curious on landscaping requirements for RSS it does not have any however for general industrial it does when abudding RSS so if we change that would those general industrials that are abuing these newly zoned have to accommodate those requirements or are they grandfathered in and not

grandfathered in? They would not have to go back and create those. Would that mean that they couldn't cut down those trees? Since that is currently a screening, there would be no requirement for them to maintain the existing trees. Okay. If they were to develop the site after this resoning, then that would be a requirement, but since it was developed first, there would be no requirement for them to maintain that. That's what I figured. I just wanted to question. So if if on that if the existing use were to they could come and do whatever landscape work they wanted to do, but if they were to pull a building permit to do an expansion, would they then be required to meet these?

It would depend on the specific expansion. Like if you're tearing down your building and building a new one, for sure. If you're doing new construction, yes. You're renovating the interior, no. And there's some lines there in between that we'd have to look at based on the individual. Okay. Application [snorts] question.

Why was this changed from general industrial to moderate density housing in the comprehensive plan? That's a good question. It just feel that whole area is very industrial Mhm. zoned. So picking out this one section and saying we want to focus on housing there. I want to understand the thought process behind that.

I'll go ahead and pull that back up as well. Um I think it had to do partially with just the development patterns of the area with the single family on the east side of the street, the residential two family on the south. Um I think this was laid out as the moderate density residential to kind of buffer the existing industrial and the existing residential to support that. I think it could also be um that there's a lot of industrial in the area that's not developed or is developing very slowly. So this could you have the future land use? Oh, this is

Oh, that's zoning. So, sorry, there's that. I was on the wrong map. Um so, I think that was some of the justifications there. Um, but I know that to actually answer your question, there was different engagements that were done where you would put, you know, dots of what you want to see places and that was one of the heaviest influences in creating this comprehensive plan was with the um, forgetting all the words with the advisory group as well as with the public. We did different um, activities to kind of see how the city could develop and then that was kind of the basis for the comprehensive plan, the future land use map and then they took in the existing development patterns to kind of influence that as well. Thank you.

So, any other any other questions for staff? We close the public hearing. Okay.

Okay. Yes, sir. You could you could approach again. Once again, my name is William Cole and I I don't want to be indifferent. Uh but basically we're looking here. Could you get a little closer to the microphone because we have we have people that are watched on TV. So yes, sorry about that. That's okay.

I guess you know I am concerned about you know property values inside the city limits outside the city limits. Uh we know it was industrial for the last 30 years. We had the buffer of Jardo to protect us. You know there's nothing we can do about that view. But what we're seeing is that they are wanting to push people uh single family housing closer to that industrial work. You know, there's currently four concrete plants over there and the recycling center and until you go out there and spend, you know, the morning there and the evening and see what kind of traffic there is. Uh I'm just wanting this to be a successful development and not something that doesn't make it. That's all my only concern. But once you do the resoning, you know, this is where we talk about just the the use, you know, where the driveway is density. You know, I understand it can be industrial, but like for for us, we know we have the buffer of Jardo, but with this resoning, you're wanting to push people to within a quarter mile of the that industrial use and then have them come back and talk to you about their problems. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Okay. At this time, we would close the public hearing and ask staff to present findings and alternatives. Yes, ma'am. So, staff finds that the proposed single family homes are allowed by right in the small lot single family zoning district and that the proposed map amendment aligns with Envision Stillwater 2045. Your alternatives tonight are to approve, table, or deny recommend approval, tableabling, or denying the request. staff recommends alternative number one, which is to accept the findings and recommend that the city council approved the proposed map amendment as presented.

Thank you. My thoughts would be that it aligns with the 2045 comprehensive plan. And as far as the development that is being presented goes, I'm going to save my thoughts on that for the preliminary plat because that's really when we can talk about traffic study, when we can talk about density, when we can talk about screenings. And to me, it makes sense. If the city thinks that moving the density of moderate density housing in that direction is what we're envisioning, then I would support that.

I would concur with Commissioner Williams. I think there's a posity of undeveloped land within the city and we're we need housing stock. Of course, there's a concern of the quality of that, the infrastructure there. Um, we understand the concerns with the street, but I think that can be addressed at the preliminary plant. Yeah, you touched on another good point. As um staff mentioned, part of the reason for reszoning it or thinking that we should reszone it to RSS is because it's sitting vacant and we're not seeing the influx of need for general industrial, but we obviously have the need for housing and there is a want to develop it. So giving him the opportunity there. It's obviously already being taken.

Chair would entertain a motion. Motion to approve the resoning to RSS as presented. Second the motion. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes 40. Next item on the agenda is um to receive public comment requesting a map amendment for MA25-18 which is I believe related in the same general area.

Yes, ma'am. I'll go through this presentation a little bit quicker. Um so this is the one just to the south of south of this the parcel we were also looking at a second ago. Um, this is a request to reszone from general industrial or IG to two family and multif family residential or RTM. This time we have the same aerial image. We're looking at that green L this time which is proposed to be reszoneed to RTM, residential, two family, multif family. Um, here's the future land use map which again is that moderate density residential. This time we have the same slide but instead of looking at those single family homes, I'm going to skip down to the middle miss missing middle homes. um that's what would fit the category of the um proposed duplexes and or town homes would fit that missing middle. To just explain that a little bit more, on one side you have your single family homes. That's your traditional one lot, one house. Um on the other side, you have your multif family homes, which would be like the standard like apartments, even on the smaller scale apartments. Those missing middles are everything in between there. Um which is generally what's being proposed with this RTM, residential, two family, multif family. I say that all to say this is that five out of five very appropriate for moderate density residential. Here's the conceptual site plan um where you can see the proposed um conceptual layout of the uh towns andor duplexes. Um again, this is very conceptual in nature. This is just shown to kind of generally see why the lots are shaped the way they are. I'm open to answer any questions if you have any.

Any questions for staff? I don't see any. Thank you. So, at this time, we would allow the applicant to come forward and elaborate on anything you'd like to elaborate with this this development.

Um, not too terribly much. I just, uh, want to keep this one much more briefer and shorter. So, thank you. Um Henry did a good job of going over the uh middle the uh missing middle homes and I just wanted to mention that in the comprehensive plan the town homes as they're proposed um fit perfectly within that missing middle homes and also it I elaborated to this earlier but it does do a good job of transitioning from the two family on the south the industrial to the west into the single family and then eventually out into the county. Um and then there was one last question that was previously mentioned. Um you had a question about the uh the future land use map and why this area was proposed to be moderate um moderate residential in the I know that you guys just recently approved this envision 2045 comprehensive plan. Your old 2030 plan also had this area listed as a highdensity residential. And so, um, I think it was kind of just building off of that and the surveys like Henry mentioned. Um, but it does seem like in Stillwater the industrial does seem to be moving more to the north up along Perkins as you've seen the hub and, uh, I believe another data center as well. So, be happy to answer any questions and, uh, certainly when we do get to the preliminary planning stage, um, dive further into the engineering and the access and everything else that goes along with development. So again, I believe that this fits perfectly well with your comprehensive plan and ask for your approval. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioners have any questions on this one? Yeah, you mentioned in the last uh request about the density. Could you repeat that for this area?

Yes sir. Yeah. So this tract on its own uh if you were to look at the total development I could go through those as well but if you were just to look at this tract uh there are 34 total lots which has 218 dwelling units on 20.2 acres. So that yields a density of 10.8 dwelling units per acre and the comprehensive plan for this land use is 10 to 14. So that 10.8 8 lands nicely within the the 10 to 14. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

So, at this time, we'd open the public hearing and ask if there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this item to come forward. Seeing none, we would ask if there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak in opposition of this item to please come forward.

Sure, please come forward. My name is William Cole. My address is 2324 East Marcus. Again, once again, uh, as spoken at the last uh, applicant, you know, we're just pushing more people closer to industrial use. And I guess one of the questions is how did the existing duplexes get up there? You know, basically it was a spot zoning back, you know, 20 years ago where we just threw residential out there all by itself. And luckily it worked. Though they did have problems. They did have security gates. Some gates are currently I don't know if both gates are still closed or one open for sure, but the north gate is still closed to limit traffic on the Jardo. That was one of the conditions of that site plan. But once again, this is talking about zoning. So we had a residential use that was pushed out there to the limit, not bordered by any other residential development. And then it was successful, thank goodness. And now we're here wanting to put more up against it and move it north uh being surrounded by industrial. Once again, I just want to make sure that we can push people close enough to uh those uses that they can be happy living there. Thank you for your time.

So, your concerns primarily with those who might buy the lots? Yes, sir. Okay. I was, you know, basically, if you're going to raise a family, have dogs, and uh have a backyard, where are you going to enjoy your property at? And basically, you're not going to enjoy it on the front yard. You're going to enjoy it in your backyard. And if your backyard butts up to uh industrial activities that start, you know, as soon as, you know, dump uh concrete trucks are leaving the plant at, you know, 6:30, 7:00 in the morning. So, they go to work and when the noise wakes everybody up, you either get up or you find a better way of getting sleep.

The concerns you're talking about though, they exist, right? these businesses. They do that. They're there. I no doubt that they're there approved by city staff and whatever board it needs to but you're wanting to put people within, you know, 660 ft of an operating concrete plant. Nobody's forcing them to buy them, though. Well, that's why I'm wanting it to be successful. I want someone to buy it. you know, let's make let's put something that uh people can use and be happy to live there. I guess that's the developer's risk.

I know that is there's risk and I just want him to be successful. That's I'm not indifferent. I just want to make sure we have a quality development being pushed up against industrial activities. Just like when you warn people when you move out to have a development next to the airport, you can't come to us and tell us to move the airport. It's there, buyer beware. But right now, it's the same here. You know, you're allowing to be reszoned for residential use. And yes, buyer beware, but I want a successful development in this area because basically it's close to my home and it's good for Still Water.

Yeah. You know, I'm just wanting the best we can put out there. Not the most, but the best. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Clarifying. Thank you. I'd ask if there's anyone else in the audience that would like to come forward this evening. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Um I didn't necessarily hear any new questions that were asked, so um we'd have staff come forward and present findings and alternatives.

Yes, ma'am. So tonight the findings are the proposed townhouse and town homes and duplexes two family are allowed by right in the two family and multif family zoning district. The proposed map amendment aligns with envision still water 2045. And the alternatives tonight are to recommend approval denial or to table the request. Staff recommends alternative number one which is to accept findings and recommend that the city council approve approve the proposed map amendment as presented. Thank you. Any discussion amongst commissioners?

I think the max density is 20 that's allowed and we're about half of that. So it seems reasonable. So nothing else really. Chair would entertain a motion. Motion to approve the change to RTM as presented. Second. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote.

Motion passes 40. Next item on the agenda is to receive public comment regarding request for a specific use permit SUP 2601. And we shall hear from staff. Yes, ma'am. Tonight we have a specific use permit for 4115 North Perkins Road. This is to allow chemical manufacturing facility in the general industrial or IG zoning district. Here's an aerial view of the property. Um, as you can see, it's outlined in pink and it's located at the northeast corner of Perkins and Airport Road. um some developments that we're aware of going on. This property is just south of the existing data center going in right there off Perkins and it's just north of the hub that's going out on the southeast corner of Airport and Perkins. Here's the street view which is from Perkins looking east. Um this is just north of of the facility. So this is kind of the north end of the facility which is where they're proposing to put the chemical manufacturing facility. which we'll see in just a second. But first, we're going to talk about the zoning map. This property is zoned IG or general industrial. Um, as we can see, there's general industrial to the north, to the east, and to the west. There's also some P or public land to the west, as well as to the south, we have some CG or commercial general, which is where the hub is currently under construction. Here's the future land use map, which does call for industrial and skilled trades at this location. A note on the future land use map in the comprehensive plan is that it doesn't generally get as specific as to say this is a a location where you should approve specific use permits for higher intensity uses. So it doesn't get that specific but it does generally say that industrial is very appropriate at this location which means it does support the specific use permit. Here's the specific use permit site plan. Um, this does generally meet the requirements of the specific use permit site plan as laid out in our code with

two exceptions which are those conditions we'll talk about just we'll go ahead and talk about them now. Um, we're going to get into discussing those kind of more in a little bit. Um, but as a brief overview of what we'll be talking about tonight is one is the sidewalk along Perkins. Um, a unique situation with this parcel is that they are leasing a portion of the Kingspan property which I'll let the applicant get to discussing a little more. Um but what that means is they're proposing to develop a portion of the lot. So they're not proposing a minor subdivision to create two lots. Um they would be sharing the Kingspan property. Um so with that being said, um the applicant is requesting to build a sidewalk along Perkins only for the portion of the lot that they're developing. Um the code does say that you are required to develop sidewalks for the um for the site as it's being developed which we've interpreted to be the lot which is along Perkins as well as the north side of airport. Um but for this specific use permit to kind of clarify that requirement staff is recommending the condition that sidewalks be built for the full length of the parcel along Perkins. So that's one of the things that will be discussed tonight. The other is the parking requirement. Um the parking requirement as it sits now again I'll let the applicant get into the actual numbers here and explain why the existing parking they would say is adequate. Um but to get into the context of how we got here right now the existing parking lot which I'll go ahead and show you right here is the existing parking lot for the Kingspan property with the construction of this site which is right here again on the north side of the property. They're proposing eight parking spaces right here and the rest of their parking requirement they would be meeting by making this existing parking lot a shared parking facility. Our code does encourage you to create shared parking facilities and it even allows you to get a 10% reduction in parking requirements for all facilities using that shared parking lot. Um but you do have to show that you meet the parking requirement for all uses minus that 20 that 10%. Um so when we look at

this we on this site plan they have to show they meet the parking requirement. So, we requested the applicant to show the parking requirements for the King's Panther facility the way it sits now, as well as for the Ctheesia um site as it's being added on. Um and to meet that parking requirement, they would have to build um a lot of parking. Um between two and 300 parking spaces would be required to be built on top of what is there existing. Um, and if that were not to be utilized, if that were not to be used by that, that would generally be considered a net negative to the public as that would be reducing that greenscape and landscaping that is there between Perkins and the existing facility. So staff says as long as you can justify that you would be using the existing parking and you don't need any more for your use, the specific use permit is allowed to modify parking requirements as a condition of approval. Um, so that is one of the conditions that we would be recommending as well. And I'll let the applicant get into those specifics. Um, but with all of that, do you have any questions for staff?

Any questions for staff? Is there a zoning that allows for uh for this without a specific use permit? No, sir. It's only allowed with a specific use permit. The code that controls the parking requirements is all based on square footage, right? Of the facility. Yes, sir. Not the use of it, not what they do in there. Just square footage.

There are some situations where it does depend on what's going on. So, for example, if you are one example is what we're doing is a warehouse. You can either do one parking one and a half parking spaces per employee um or one per 2,000 square foot foot of the building whichever is more um that whichever is more is what is requiring the applicant to do the one per 2,000 foot which significantly increased their requirement. Okay. Thanks. Yes sir. Any other questions for staff?

Thank you. This time we'd like to invite the applicant to come forward and provide some additional information. Okay, don't touch me.

Uh, good evening. Steven Ghost with Ghost and Associates, 113 East 8th Avenue here on behalf of our client Synthesia Technologies and the landowner, Kingspan Roofing and Waterproofing. um asking for an SCP like Henry said to allow the chemical manufacturing. We went through the code multiple times trying to figure out the best way to do this and and this is way the way to do it. So, Cynthsia and Kingspan roofing and waterproofing are both sister companies under the Kingspan umbrella and they were looking at building this facility in Little Rock. And once the roofing um came in and said, "Hey, we're going to build in Stillwater in this facility. Cynthsia makes a polyester poly oil which is a component to the foam board that they manufacture for the roofing insulation. And so their plan is to build on the north 270 feet of of this lot. And I don't know if just going to zoom in just a little bit on here. And you can see so we tried to color up a little bit, but this is how engineers color, not landscape architects. So you'll have to to pardon, but one driveway out onto Perkins Road coming in uh utilizing part of the existing Kingspan Fire Lane on the west to create a a full route through. Um I realize you guys can't see really too well the the mouse we're using, but it's going to be a three-phase project. The initial phase is a warehouse, office space, and manufacturing. and one uh reactor tower. And then phase two will be a second tower. The phase three will be a third tower plus this future warehouse on the west side. There

is a loading dock with truck dock height. Um in the first phase of the warehouse, then these um circles to the east are tank farms for the components that go into it. There's some liquid components. There's also some dry components. The primary component is a recycled plastic. So polyester water bottles and whatever, they'll come in shredded in super sacks that will sit in the warehouse. Uh there's some dry acids that are part of the process. Um so all that that synthesia and kingspan both really try to to do what's best for the environment. So that's coming in on this site so they can be close. There will eventually be a pipe running from one of these tank farms over to the building to feed Kingspan directly for that board. And then once the second and third phases are online, they'll produce that material and ship it to other Kingspan facilities in the US and also probably competitors that that need the material. Um, so just some of the sizes real quick. the the manufacturing piece of it is about 10,800 ft². The warehouse all said with both components is about 56,000 ft². The office and lab space is 5800 square ft and all of this and the office is within that first um building in the warehouse. Uh Henry touched on parking. It's not on this plan, but the primary parking will be in that parking lot in front of Kingspan. There'll be these eight spaces up by the office for the general manager, superintendent, and visitors that they expect to have. When we ran calculations for all of it, based on the square footage per use, it was 350 parking spaces or would be required for both facilities.

Talking about talking to them how they function, they plan on functioning here and other facilities they have. And also looking at other parking requirements in other communities that 1 and a half spaces per employee at maximum shift was kind of that sweet spot of you don't over park it, you don't underpark it. You allow that transition. And with the number of parking spaces, there's 173 spaces out there. Today on Kingspan, uh we're adding eight. So that's 181. And if you do the one and a half spaces per employee at max shift, it's 102 spaces required. So we're at almost two times by really not adding any parking other than just that little bit by the office. Um the chemical manufacturing I'll go. This is um kind of a a rendering of what the building's more than likely going to look like. There's going to be some changes to it as we go through. They're at 30% design phase right now. So, they're not waiting to get approval. They're hoping and crossing their fingers that things go good here and at city council. But you can see this what they call the reactor tower on the east end that is 85 ft tall. For point of reference, I I looked today. It appears that the stair towers at Boon Pickin Stadium and the grain elevators down at the mill are about 110 ft. So this will be less than that. Their facilities that they have in mad in Barcelona where they have I think 50 plus of these are all opensided in Still Water because the weather and because of the residential to the west they're going to enclose them. So again it'll help we won't have a Christmas tree out there of lights and then also it'll just help them with the wind and the weather we have to protect their employees and their equipment. Um

the higher part of the warehouse is 40 ft and then the lower piece is about 25 ft. Uh this is just a rendering from the other angle. This is a cross-section. You can see the tower, all the components in in it, the warehouse piece and and the manufacturing. [clears throat] Our client did prepare a sound study which you guys have in the report. The equipment that is on this table, the delivery trucks are the largest noise generator. Um, so everything else is quieter. And so they did this assuming they're sitting outside. They're all going to be in a insulated building. So the sound, really the only sound you're going to hear from it is the idling of the trucks as they come in. And then one thing I didn't mention in the third phase, they're working with Kingspan to expand extend rail to that third tank farm. So they'll be able to take bulk deliveries in and ship product out on the rail line. Um, I got [snorts] some other slides in here if you guys have questions later that we might try to answer, but that's really the the gist of what we're what we're asking for. Um, and [clears throat] that site plan I'm zooming all over the place is is what again we're at the architects are at 30% design. We're at 60% design. So, they're pretty settled on what what it's going to look like from the outside and how it's going to function. And gradewise, we're cutting about 6 ft of elevation where this is at because there's quite a bit of slope on the north side of that site. So, there'll be

a retaining wall near the north property line to drop it from the data center site and then plant in some some larger trees, medium. We may do a mix of tree sizes once we get into the final landscape plan out here in front to provide that screening from the front. So I can answer questions now or wait till after the balance of the public hearing. Um it may be beyond the scope. I'm just curious. So how many new employees?

So I have a chart for that. It's a it's a $70 million investment. The first phase will be $30 million. This next two phases will be 20 million each. Phase one has 13 employees. Uh then 19, 25, ultimately 27 employees. How guaranteed are phase two and three?

Uh they have production goals they have to meet and phase two and phase three are contingent upon them passing quality control tests for what's being produced in phase one. So it's the money's on the book to build it. Are they running three shifts or two shifts or one? They'll ultimately run three shifts. So it be 24/7. Yeah. Is there any type of environmental study that is associated with this?

So everything they have the the the outputs into the environment are very low. It's a low heat process. There's thermal oil oil boilers that will be utilized. I they said it heats up to 240 degrees and the reactor everything that comes out is below the air limits for industrial uses. And then the water, so water doesn't go into the process, but water is an a there's processed water that comes out cuz it's a glycolysis process. They will put that into the tanks and take it off site for treatment. So the the water from the process will not be put into the city of Stillwater sanitary sewer system.

And then I would assume that ensuring that all the facility is meeting all of those requirements is part of the building permit process. Yeah. And then there I'm sure there's some permits they'll have to go through with the state and other things that will be handled by they have consultants handling the environmental piece of it. Okay. And that's dictated by de state deeq. There's probably state rules, national rules. Yeah. And just the way they operate. They're very they're very forward thinking, I guess, is the best term. And in being kind to the environment and it's [clears throat] just what they do.

Do you know if any of those factor in distance relative to residential areas? I don't know. Any other questions for the applicant at this time? Thank you. I'll be here.

Okay. At this time, I'll open the public hearing and ask if there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this item to please come forward. Seeing none, I'll ask if there's anyone in the audience that would like to speak in opposition of this item. Seeing none, um we'll close the public hearing and ask staff to present findings and alternatives.

Yes, ma'am. So, the findings tonight are that the land development code allows for chemical manufacturing in the general industrial district with a specific use permit. The proposed specific use permit for chemical manufacturing aligns with envision still water 2045. Your alternatives tonight are to recommend the city council approve, conditionally approve, deny, or to table a request for a future date. Staff recommends alternative number two, which is to accept findings and recommend that the city council conditionally approve the specific use permit as subject to conditions being met, which can include, but are not limited to construction of a 6ft sidewalk for the full parcel length along Perkins Road frontage and the parking requirement being based on one and a half parking space parking spaces per employee on the largest working shift.

Thank you. Well, I I had two thoughts. One was sounds like a really good project for Still Water. Pretty excited to see that. And I'm excited that my 40 years of recycling plastic water bottles might have a use. Me, too. So, yeah. [laughter]

Yeah. And I think it makes perfect sense to have them do the sidewalk and then base parking off of number of people actually working there, not square footage of a facility. I don't want him building a bunch of parking for no reason. Makes makes a lot of sense. I would agree. Chair would entertain a motion. I'd make a motion. I move to recommend approval of SUP 2601 to allow chemical manufacturing in the IG district at 4115 North Perkins Road subject to construction of a 6-ft sidewalk along the full Perkins frontage and approval of parking based on one and a half spaces per employee on the largest working shift. Second.

We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes 40. Next item on the agenda is um to receive public comment regarding a text amendment. Um this is TXT26-02. I believe that staff had asked to um table this until the next planning commission meeting of March 24th um because there were some additional information and I think modifications that staff wanted to vet. So chair would entertain a motion to table this until March 24th. So moved. Second.

We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes 40. All right. Um, next item on the agenda is any reports from officers and boards. We have any items? Nothing miscellaneous. Okay. Um, we do have a note here that um, the next regular meeting and let's see, we just moved it to the 24th. This says the 23rd. The 23rd is a Monday. Okay, so 24th would be our next regularly scheduled meeting. And the last item on the agenda would be adjournment. Do I hear a motion to adjurnn? So moved.

Second. We have a motion and a second. We shall now vote. Motion passes 40. We now stand adjourned.