[00:00:04]
>> IT NOW 4:30 TIME TO START EXECUTIVE SESSION.
JANUARY 5TH, 2021. IN ORDERED TO COMPLY TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF A GOVERNOR'S ORDER. FO FORUM OTHER THAN IN OPEN AND PUBLIC THIS GOVERNORING GOVERNORING BODY THAT MEET ELECTRONICALLY IS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND THE A WELFARE OF CITIZEN DUE TO COVID-19 OUTBREAK. SO WE ARE NOW READY FOR # THE
[1 ) PLANNING COMMISSION]
FIRST ITEM ON EXECUTIVE SESSION. AGENDA THAT IS TO PLANNING COMMISSION. MRS. TYNDALL, PLEASE, SIR.FIRST ITEM ORDER 552020-21. FIRST READING.
>> THANK YOU MAYOR WELCOME NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS 50I6 AN OPPORTUNITY WITH LOT OF YOU WILL YOU WILL SEE ME HAS ON MONTHEDLY BASIS TO PRESENT ZONING CHANGE REQUESTS AROUND THE CITY AS WELL ANYTHING ELSE THAT DEALS ANNEX ASIAN ZONING CODE AND SOME OTHER ODDS AND ENDS AS THEY COME UP I WILL PRESENT EVERY MEETING I'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE TAKE QUESTIONS HERE AND IF YOU DO HAVE QUESTIONS AFTER THIS MEETING YOU CAN ALWAYS CONTACT OUR OFFICE BEFORE THE VOTING SESSION FOR ANY ADDITIONAL INFOR INFORMATION.
WE WILL TAKE A MOMENT TO GET THE SLIDES UP HERE.
ALL RIGHT. SO OUR FIRST CASE TONIGHT IS MAYOR READ AS ORDINANCE NUMBER AND I WILL READ OR CASE NUMBER FOR THOSE WATCHING AND AS THEY WENT THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION
WE GIVE IT OUR OWN CASE NUMBER >> MR. TYNDALL JUST A MEMBER COUNCILMAN REDD CAN YOU SEE THAT ON THE SCREEN?
>> YES, SIR I CAN, MAYOR >> OKAY.
GOOD, GOOD. THANK YOU PROCEED MR. TYNDALL.
>> THIS IS PLANNING COMMISSION Z502020.
APPLICATION OF REHAD HOME BUILDER EIGHT RITA HOME BUILDER.
JUST UNDER HALF ACRE. CURRENTLY ZONED R 3.
WISHING TO BE ZONED TO R 4. THT PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 615 FEET NORTH OF PROVIDENCE BOULEVARD ON SHELBY STREET ON CITY COUNCIL WARD NUMBER 4. APPLICANT DIDN'T GIVE A STATEMENT BUT R FOUR ALLOW FOR MULTI FAMILY DWELLING UNITS TYPICALLY QUAD MREKSZ OR GREATER FOR THIS ACREAGE.
THE APPLICANT CAN HAVE APPROXIMATELY 5 UNITS ON THE SITE. AND HERE YOU CAN SEE THIS HAS BEEN A PRETTY HOT STREET IN THE LAST YEAR.
PROBABLY SEE MORE APPLICATION NS ON THIS STREET THAN WHOLE AREA IN LAST SEVERAL YEARS. THIS OTHER R 4 YOU SEE NEXT TO HAS DONE BY THE SAME BUILDER AND MOST RECENT MONTHS.
CURRENTLY A VACANT CLEARED LOT. OF THE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS GIVEN NONE WERE NO, CONCERN ARE ONO COMMENTS GIVEN.
YOU WILL ALSO SEE SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS I DO NO THE READ THEM INTO THE RECORD. THERE ARE A BIT REDUNDANT JUST GIVE A CAPACITY OF EVERY SCHOOL YOU'RE WELCOME READ THEM ON OWN IT WOULD REDUNDANT ONE AFTER OTHER ALSO GIVES ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR EVERY CASE.
HERE'S SOME OF THE HOMES IN AREA NEXT TO THE SITE.
LOOKING DOWN STREET BACK TOWARDS 41 A.
AND ANOTHER R 4 PROPERTY NOT A NEW ONE, BUT AN EXIST BEING R 4 PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET. IT'S IN NEW PROVIDENCE PLANNING AREA. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
PROPOSED ZONE CONSISTENT ADOPTED LAN USE PLAN ZONING CHANGES AN ATTENTION R 4 ZONING TO SOUTH AND TO THE EAST.
ANOTHER ADOPTED LAND USE PLAN ENCOURAGING MIXTURE OF DESIRABLE MIXTURE HOUSING TYPES THROUGHOUT COMMUNITY AND THE THE NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME IN PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
>> SORRY I WAS ASLEEP THERE MR. TYNDALL.
ANY QUESTIONS? WE HAVE QUESTION FROM CHAIR LADY SMITH. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
>> WHAT IS THE TRAFFIC OVER THERE? HAS BEEN A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE? FOR ZONING?
>> WE WHICH DON'T REQUIRE TRAFFIC ASSESSMENTS ON OUR FOUR PROPERTIES WHEN THIS TWO ACRE 0.4 ACRE MAKE FOUR OR FIVE NEW UNITS. 10 TO 12 CARS.
THAT'S STREET IS REALLY NOT THAT THE HEAVILY TRAFFICKED.
IT'S A DEAD END. MAYBE ABOUT 30 ADDITIONAL HOMES BEYOND IT. WE DON'T THINK
>> I MEAN WOULD THERE APARTMENTS BUILT
>> R 4 WOULD AN APARTMENT BUILDING.
>> YOU SAID FOUR UNITS >> FOUR OR FIVE.
>> WE WHICH HAVE SITE PLAN YET. BUT, I WILL SAY APPLICANT HAS BUILDING FOURS NEXT DOOR. THE AMOUNT OF ACREAGE THEY WOULD
WOULD ALLOW 5 >> ANY OPPOSITION?
>> THERE WAS NO ONE FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE.
>> OKAY. >> WAS THERE PUBLIC NOTICE SENT
[00:05:03]
THERE HAS FAIR AMOUNT REDEVELOPMENT GOING ON SHELBY STREET DOWN THERE. SO THERE'S LOT OF NEW CONSTRUCTION STREET DEPARTMENT WENT DOWN THERE RECENTLY AND, IMPROVED THE TURN AROUND FOR THE RESIDENTS TO IMPROVE ACCESS FOR OUR FIRST RESPONDERS, FIRE DEPARTMENT, FIRE RES RESCUE DEPARTMENT POLICE, ET CETERA. SO, IT'S BEEN A GREAT IMPROVEMENT TO THAT STREET IN NEW PROVIDENCE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDER UNANIMOUS 55? SEEING NONE HEARING NONE WE'RE READY FOR ITEM NUMBER 2
ORDINANCE 56. >> THIS IS PLANNING COMMISSION Z 51, 2020. APPLICATION OF EAGLE BLUFF PARTNERSHIP. 2.5 ACRES CURRENTLY ZONE R 1 AND WISHING TO GO TO R 4. IT IS AN EXTENSION OF THE R 4 TO THE EAST. PROPERTY LOCATED OFF NEW ROAD THAT JUST GOT PLATTED I BELIEVE CALLED SMITH'S AND LANE OFF TRACY LANE NEAR WHIT FIELD ROAD IT IS CITY COUNCIL WARD 11.
CURRENTLY ITS A VACANT ALTHOUGHED BUT A PORTION OF NEW SUBDIVISION. YOU CAN SEE AN F 4 TO EAST HERE THIS SMALL OUT PARCEL OF ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY TO THE WEST.
THEY ARE JUNIST CORPORATING IT WITH A MULTI FAMILY SUBDIVISION.
THERE'S ALREADY A ROAD ON THE PROPERTY.
IT WAS PLATTED BUT LOTS ALL MEET R 1 AND R 4 MINIMUM LOT SIZE.
REQUESTING ZONE CHANGE SO THAT THEY CAN BUILD SEVERAL MULTI FAMILY BUILDINGS INSTEAD OF SINGLE FAMILY STRUCTURES THAT R
ONE CURRENTLY ZONED FOR. >> APPLICANTS STATEMENT IS TO MATCH ZONING, SO THAT WE CAN BUILD MULTI FAMILY PROPERTIES.
THERE WERE NO COMMENTS OR CONCERNS FROM OTHER CITY OR COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS ARE INCLUDED.
THERE PHOTO FROM CUL-DE-SAC WHERE THIS ANNEX ASWOULD TAKE REZONING. THERE ARE ALREADY A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION OUT THERE ON THIS ROAD THAT WAS RECENTLY APPROVED.
AND LOOKING BACK IN SUCK DIVISION AS WELL.
IN TRENTON ROAD. APPLICANT ESTIMATES APPROXIMATELY 30 MULTI FAMILY UNITS.
I THINK JUST IMPORTANT FOR NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WHEN SAY UNITS OR LOTS WE'RE TALKING ONE UNIT IT COULD ARRANGEMENT OF 4 ARE 6 OR 8 OR 20 UNITS PER BUILDING. I'M NOT SAYING 30 BUILDING SAYING 30 UNITS OF MULTIPLE FAMILY HOUSE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMEND PROPOSED CONSISTENT WITH LAND USE PLAN.
ZONE CHANGES AND EXTENSION OF R-4 TO AEGS AND IS ALREADY PART OF CUL-DE-SAC FROM THE R 4 DEVELOPMENT UNDER WAY ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE SERVES NO ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED
WITH THIS REQUEST >> THANK YOU.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTION ABOUT ORDINANCE 56?
HAS >> I DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC KEY ABOUT AN ORDINANCE BUT SCHOOL SYSTEM I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU SAY AT THE SAY THE SAME THING AND THAT YOU DON'T PUT SYSTEM IT INTO MINUTES BUT MY QUESTION WHAT IS COMMITTEE DO WE, WHERE DO WE SIT DOWN AND TALK TO SCHOOL BOARD AND MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW WORK THESE THINGS OUT? AS I WAS CAMPAIGNING AND KNOCKING DOORS, THIS WAS EXACTLY THE ISSUE THAT MANY PEOPLE BROUGHT UP THAT WE'RE EXPANDING WHICH I UNDERSTAND.
BUT WE'RE PLAYING CATCH UP. YOU KNOW PORTABLE AS WE PUT MORE ROOFTOPS IN. WHERE DOES CITY AND COUNTY MEET
FOR SCHOOLS? >> BEFORE I GET TO TO YOU COUNCILMAN KNIGHT MR. TYNDALL DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT PROCESS?
>> I WILL TALK PROCESS WITH PLANNING COMMISSION FIRST AND THEN COUNTY COMMISSION I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER KNIGHT WILL ALSO GIVE YOU HIS EXPERIENCE OF COUNTY COMMISSION BECAUSE SCHOOLS DO FALL UNDER COUNTER COMMISSION FOR FUNDING AND OTHER RULES AND REGULATIONS. FOR PLANNING COMMISSION EVERY APPLICATION WE GET WHETHER ACTIVITIES SITE PLAN SUBDIVISION OH REZONING REQUEST WE SUPPLY IT TO SCHOOL. THEY USE THAT THAT KEEP A TALLY THEY HAVE THIS OWN I BELIEVE THEY UPPED TO TEN-YEAR PLAN RECENTLY IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROWTH AND GROWTH THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING ON THIS TRAJECTORY, THESE ARE THE FACILITIES THAT WE NEED. ONCE THAT PLAN COMES TO FRUITION AND RIGHT NOW THEY ARE BUILDING THE FIRST OF A TRY SCHOOL PROCESS AT ROSS VIEW ROAD WHICH WOULD ALSO HELP ALLEVIATE NORTHEAST HIGH SCHOOL AND ROSS VIEW HIGH SCHOOL, AFTER THAT THEY WILL BE A REZONING THAT THEN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM WILL LOOK AT SHIFTING THOSE CHILDREN OVER TO THE NEW SCHOOL WHICH WILL OPEN UP CAPACITY IN THE THOSE SCHOOLS WHICH COULD THEN ALSO BE A TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT TO OPEN UP CAPACITY AT OTHER SCHOOLS AND
[00:10:01]
SORT EVEN OUT THE POPULATION FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.WE'RE GROWING VERY FAST RIGHT NOW.
SO THAT PLAN IS UPDATED EVERY YEAR BY THE SCHOOL FACILITIES DEPARTMENT. AND WE WORK CLOSELY WITH THEM TO SUPPLY THE NEW INFORMATION BUT WE DO NOT, WE DO NOT DO THAT WORK FOR THEM THEY PLAN ON WHERE NEXT SCHOOL WE ASSIST THEM.
WE WILL GIVE THEM INFORMATION ON GROWTH PATTERNS, WHERE NEW SUBDIVISIONS ARE COMING, AND WHAT KIND OF UTILITIES AND LAY OF LAND. WE DID WE HAD A BIG ROLL IN HELPING ON THE NEXT SHOULD GO AND WHERE NEXT SCHOOL SHOULD GO A PROBLEM WE HAVE TO STAY AHEAD OF.
IT'S A GOOD PROBLEM TO HAVE I GUESS AS YOU'RE COMMUNITY IS GROWING. BUT WE DO NEED TO STAY AHEAD OF THAT. THAT IS THAT IS SCHOOL BOARD'S
RESPONSIBILITIED >> COUNCIL REYNOLDS, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION OR GET AFTER YOUR QUESTION?
NOW BACK TO COUNCILMAN KNIGHT >> I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF CAVEAT TO THAT JUST LET HER KNOW THAT USUALLY, CMCSS HAS TWO SESSIONS OF THEIR SCHOOL BOARD MEETING YOU CAN GO LIAISON AND TALK TO THEM IN REGARDS TO ANY ISSUES FOR ZONING, YOU KNOW PUTTING ANYTHING UP AND INN THAT PARTICULAR AREA.
YOU CAN TALK TO THEM ABOUT THE ISSUES THAT YOU MAY HAVE DURING
THAT TIME. >> THANK YOU, GOOD INFORMATION TO HAVE. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT REGARDING ORDINANCE 56? SEEING NONE HEARING NONE WE'RE READY FOR ITEM NUMBER 3 ORDINANCE 57.
THIS IS PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NUMBER Z FWOOT 2020.
APPLICATION OF JEFF ROBINSON. AGENT IS CODY DAHL.
ACRE 1.44. A LITTLE BIT A DIFFERENT REQUEST ONE WE HAVEN'T SEEN ONE LIKE THIS IN SEVERAL YEARS.
THIS IS CURRENTLY R4 AND 01. IT'S ALSO IN THE H1 HISTORIC OVERLAY. SOIL ASHOW YOU THAT MAP IN A SECOND. HERE'S THE H ONE HISTORIC OVERLAY. THIS IS EMERALD HILL DISTRICT.
THIS IS HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT OOS ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL MANY, MANY YEARS AGO. THERE'S AN EXTRA LEVEL OF RULES WHEN YOU DEVELOP OR REDEVELOP ESPECIALLY HISTORIC STRUCTURES IN THIS ZONE, THIS PROPERTY IS RIGHT IN ON SECOND STREET.
ON SECOND STREET IF YOU'RE OUT THERE SECOND TREAT LOSS.
THAT'S FRONT HALF OF THIS. COUPLE PARCELS TO THE REAR.
YOU WILL ALSO SEE ZONING. 01 MANY YEARS AGO, PRIOR TO 2010, 01 ALLOWED YOU TO BUILD MULTI FAMILY RESIDENCES.
THIS APPLICANT WAS COMPLIANT AT THE TIME.
01 HAS SINCE CHANGED. AND THEY ARE CONSIDERED A GRANDFATHERED NONCONFORMING USE AT THIS TIME.
WILL BRING THEM INTO MORE COMPLIANCE AND ALLOW THEM TO PROBABLY MORE EASILY OBTAIN INSURANCE OR SELL THE PROPERTY INSTEAD OF SHOWING THAT THEY ARE GRANDFATHERED USE.
ALSO ALLOWS THEM TO REDEVELOP PROPERTIES TO REAR WHICH WE WILL SHOW YOU IN MOMENT. SO THE REQUESTING TO CBD, CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND THE RETAIN THE H1.
SO THIS MAP WILL NOT CHANGE. THEY WILL KEEP THEMSELVES IN THE DISTRICT. WHICH MEANS IF THEY DEVELOP ANYTHING GREATER THAN A DUPLEX THEY DO NEED TO COMPLY WITH THE DISTRICT'S RULES ON AESTHETICS OF THE BUILDING.
THERE'S BUILDING THAT FRONTS ON SECOND STREET.
WE'VE ALL DRIVEN IT PAST IT MANY TIMES.
THEN PARCELS DOWN THE SIDE STREET ARE ALSO INCLUDED IN THIS. THERE'S PARKING LOT IN PART OF REQUEST. ONE HOME SMALLER HOME.
ONE NEXT TO THE THAT I WILL NOTE CORNER VACANT CORNER IS NOT PART OF THIS REQUEST. THEN THERE'S AN OLDER HOME DIRECTLY NEXT TO IT WHICH WILL BE TORN DOWN AND THE OVERALL INTENT OF THIS TO BRING BUILDING ON SECOND STREET INTO COMPLIANCE BUT ALSO ALLOW FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS LOT INTO SEVERAL OTHER
UNITS. >> CITY COUNCIL WARD NUMBER 6 IT IS AN EXTENSION OF CBD TO THE SOUTH.
APPLICANT STATEMENT URBAN RESIDENTIAL.
IT DOES HAVE SEVERAL HISTORIC ZONING CASES 2007, 2008 AND 2016 AS I MENTIONED WHEN IT ORIGINALLY WENT TO 01 IN THE PAST. THERE WERE NO OTHER CONCERNS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS. THIS WAS PASSED BY HISTORIC ZONING COMMISSION WHICH DID NOT OFFER ANY COMMENT OR CONCERN ON THIS APPLICATION. THIS WAS NO CITY HAWAII STORIC ESTIMATE FOR AMOUNT OF UNITS TO BE BUILT AT THIS TIME PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND CONSISTENT WITH LAND USE PLAN, ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE NO AD VERY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED AND PROPOSED CBD ZONING CLASSIFICATION RESOLVES A LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE MULTI
[00:15:01]
FAMILY STRUCTURE WITH MINIMAL CHANGE TO CURRENT FAMILY PARCEL NEARBY PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL>> THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ORDINANCE 57? SEEING NONE, HEARING NOW WE'RE READY FOR ITEM 4 WHICH IS ORDINANCE 58.
MR. TYNDALL. >> THIS IS A PLANNING COMMISSION CASE Z 532020. THE APPLICATION OF SL ENDEAVORS.
1 1.57 ACRE CURRENTLY ZONE R2 WISHING TO GO TO R 6. THIS IS NOT AN EXTENSION OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THIS PROPERTY FRONTS ON CALDWELL LANE AND EAST FRONTAGE OF ROBERT STREET.
JUST NORTH OF BYPASS. ED MONDAY SON FERRY ROAD JUST TO THE EAST OF SIGNAL WITH DOLLAR GENERAL YOU CAN MAKE IT OUT IN HT MAP THERE. THIS COUNCIL WARD NUMBER 7.
IT IS MILD SLOPE VACANT LOT THAT THE DOES HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON IT. NO STATEMENT GIVEN I APPLICANT WHEN THEY PRESENTED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION THEY WISH TO BUILD FRONTAGE LOTS FOR R 6 DEVELOPMENT ON BOTH STREETS.
SO I DON'T THINK THEY WILL BUILD A SUBDIVISION ROAD BUT THEY WILL FRONT ON TWO ROADS THAT YOU WILL SEE IN THESE FOLLOWING PICTURES.
AND THERE'S THE MAP SO R 4 TO THE NORTH AND YOU HAVE SOME HISTORIC R 2 SURROUNDING IT. AND THEN THE C 2.
C 2 WOULD WILL YOU MULTI FAMILY R 4 HAS MULTI FAMILY AND R 6 SIMILAR DENSITY TO THOSE ZONES BUILT OUT FOR MULTI FAMILY.
HERE'S CALDWELL LANE HERE AT THE BACK TO BYPASS HERE.
HERE'S THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY YOU CAN SEE ONE HOUSE THAT'S ALREADY ON IT FRONTS ON THE OTHER LANE THERE.
ROBERT STREET. AND THEY WISH THIS PROPERTY.
ROBINS STREET. EXISTING PROPERTY.
AND THERE'S MULTI FAMILY HOUSING ACROSS FROM THE 150ID STREET.
AND THEN LOOKING BACK TO THE BYPASS.
OF COMMENTS WE RECEIVED THE GAS AND WATER SYSTEM SAID THEY REQUIRE A WATER SYSTEM UPGRADE. THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WILL TYPICALLY HEAR IF UNDER SIZED PIPE OR SEWER PIPE IN THE AREA.
THEY DON'T KNOW YET WHAT GOING TO NEED.
GOING TO DEPEND ON STYLE DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL ALWAYS GET FIGURED DURING SUBDIVISION RECYCLING PHASES.
THERE WERE NO OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS ATTACHED. HISTORIC ESTIMATES WOULD SAY THIS COULD FIT APPROXIMATELY 15 UNITS.
THAT MAY BE A LITTLE HIGH CONSIDERING THE LAY OF THE LAND.
BUT, R 6 IS TYPICALLY LOT SMALLER IN TILL DEVELOPMENT APPEAR AMOUNTED AMOUNT FRONTAGE A LOT OF PROPERTY TO REAR EXPECT THAT THE NUMBER TO LESS THAN 15. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THE PROPOSAL REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH LAND USE PLAN R 6 SINGLE FAMILY ZONING CLASSIFICATION IS NOT OUT OF CHARACTER WITH THE SURROUNDING ESTABLISHED ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE ON SITE OUT RADAR OTHER RESIDENTIAL USES MASS TRAINS IT AND RETAIL SIDEWALKS WILL BE REQUIRED PER R 6 ZONE AND NO AD VERY ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMEND OOD APPROVAL.
THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDLY
ORDINANCE 58 >> WHEN YOU MENTION SEWER UPGRADES I'M SORRY THIS ELEMENTARY QUESTION IS THAT SOMETHING CITY WOULD RESPONSIBLE FOR WOULD BUILDER PAY FOR THAT?
>> THAT'S TRUES SOLID QUESTION. WATER UPGRADES ON THIS ONE.
BUT, WHEN DRIVEN BY A DEVELOPMENT 99 PERCENT OF TIME GOING TO BE DONE BY DEVELOPER IF NOT TYPICALLY A SHARE WITH GAS AND WATER IF IT'S A NEED FOR THE AREA.
THAT'S ALWAYS GOING TO BE THE DETERMINED.
IF THAT SITUATION AROSE WE WOULD LET YOU KNOW GAS AND WATER WOULD PARTNERED. WHEN INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NEED AD PART DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION THEY ARE INSTALLING THEM AND TURNING THEM OFF TO CITY.
>> PERFECT THANK YOU. >> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS REGARDING ORDER U ORDINANCE 58? HEARING NONE SEEING NONE WE'RE READY FOR ORDINANCE 59 MR. TYNDALL
>> THANK YOU MAYOR RIGHT UP ROAD A LITTLE BIT FROM LAST APPLICATION. THIS IS OUR CASE NUMBER Z 542020. THE APPLICATION OF MSI HOMES.
AGENT IS SEAN BURN BERNER. A JUST OVER THIRD OF AN ACRE CURRENT 8 SOAPIED R 2 REQUESTING TO TO GO R 3.
THERE IS. ON NORTH SIDE EVEN STONE FERRY ROAD AND MONROE STREET APPROXIMATELY 165 FEET WEST OF IS THE INTERSECTION. WE HAD A RECENT R 6 ZONING OUT HERE JUST FEW MONTHS AGO. THAT'S THAT BROWN ZONE JUST TO THE EAST. CITY COUNCIL WARD NUMBER 6.
[00:20:03]
THE APPLICATION DESCRIPTION RPT PROPERTY RECENTLY HAD DUPLEX ON SITE WAS DESTROYED BY A FIRE AND THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD A T TRIPLEX IN ITS PLACE.SO IT'S NOT THE WHITE BUILDING ON THE CORNER BUT SECOND WHITE BUILDING ON LEFT THERE YOU CAN SEE FIRE DAMAGE AND THE DEBRIS OUT FRONT FROM THAT RECENT FIRE. THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET ANOTHER LARGER COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND WE'LL ALSO SHOW YOU SOME OF THAT R 6 DEVELOPMENT HERE IN MOMENT.
SECOND BUILDING ON RIGHT. THAT WILL BE REPLACED WITH TRIPLEX IN ITS PLACE. AND THERE'S THAT RECENT R 6 DEVELOPMENT TO THE REAR OF THIS PROPERTY.
NO DEPARTMENT COMMENTS OR CONCERNS.
SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS LISTED. HISTORIC ESTIMATES SAY THREE UNITS THAT. WHAT'S APPLICANT WANTS TO DO ON THIS PROPERTY. IN SCOUT PARCEL PLANNING AREA.
STRAF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AND IT CONSISTENT WITH GROWTH PLAN AND LAND USE PLAN ADOPTED LAN USE PLAN STATES ENCOURAGED TO MAINTAIN DESIRABLE MIX OF HOUSING TYPES THROUGH OH COMMUNITY THT PROPERTY LOCATED INTERSECTION THAT CURRENTLY TRANSITIONING WITH NEW SINGLE FAMILY CONSTRUCTION NEARBY AND POTENTIAL FOR C 2 ZONING FOR MIX USE OR COMMERCIAL NEARBY AS WELL. ADEQUATE INFRA INFRASTRUCTURE SERVES SITE NO ADVERSE TWIERJTS ISSUES AND A PLANNING COMMISSION
ALSO RECOMMEND OOD APPROVAL >> THANK YOU.
A LOT OF ACTIVITY OUT THERE IN THAT AREA.
GOOD TO SEE. GOOD TO SEE ACTIVITY AND THE NEBRASKA CONSTRUCTION GOING ON. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ORDINANCE 59? HEARING NONE, SEEING KNOW WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM NUMBER 6, WHICH IS ORDINANCE 60.
MR. TYNDALL. >> PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NUMBER Z 552020. THE APPLICATION OF HL SIMPSON ET. AL. NO NORMA JONES AGENT IS GREEN SPACE PARKERS.
THIS IS 111.29 ACRE CURRENTLY ZONE M 2 AND R 1.
AND THEY ARE WISHING TO R 1 R 5 AND R 6.
AND SO FOR NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS WE TRIED TO BREAKDOWN WITH DIFFERENT COLORED HATCHING. WE WILL GO FROM WEST TO EAST.
WEST GOING R 5. MIDDLE PIECE R 6, AND THEN THE EAST PIECE IN LIGHTER YELLOW WOULD R 1.
THEN NEXT SLIDE HOPEFULLY YOU'LL SEE WHERE THAT FALLS IN.
I'LL SHOW YOU THIS ONE FIRST. THIS FLOOD PLAINS IN AREA THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. THERE'S RED RIVER AND DARK BLUE.
THE FLOODPLAIN IN LIGHT BLUE. EXISTING QUARRY ON SITE YOU CAN MAKE THAT OUT WHERE THE THAT YOU SEE SORT OF THAT KIDNEY SHAPED OR BOWL SHAPED IN THE MIDDLE OF PROPERTY WHERE THE EXISTING QUARRY IS. SO R 1 TO THE SOUTH THAT YELLOW LIGHT YELLOW TO SOUTH WHERE THE IT SAYS R 5, THAT WHERE R 1 U GOING TO R 5 PER THIS REQUEST. THE DARK GRAY ALMOST BLACK IS THE EXISTING M 2 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL.
AND THE PIECE TO EAST IS ALSO REQUESTED TO THING FROM M 2 TO R 5. THE PIECE IN BETWEEN IS M 2 TO R 6. AND THEN THE PIECE TO THE EAST IS M 2 TO R 1. SO THAT'S WHY ALL DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS ON THAT. THE MIDDLE PIECE ALREADY YELLOW IS PART HAVE THE PARENT TRACT IS NOT BEING CHANGED THAT REMAINING R 1 FOR THOSE WHO FAMILIAR WITH AREA DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THAT THE 5 STAR MEDIA ANTENNA OUT THERE.
THAT'S EXISTING PIECE. PIECE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS A LITTLE FARTHER TO THE NORTH. OKAY.
IT IS AN EXTENSION OF R 1 TO NORTH AND SOUTH.
R 5 AND R 6 WOULD BE NEW TO THE AREA.
R 6 IS SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
R FICH 5 IS TOWN HOUSES BUILT HORIZONTAL BUT NOT VERTICALLY.
CITY COUNCIL WARD NUMBER 9 PROPERTY FRONTS WEST FRONTAGE OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIPE OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIPE AND FANTASY LANE INTERSECTION AND WEST OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIPE CANDLE WOOD DRIVE INTERSECTIONS. LAND HAS VARYING TOPOGRAPHY.
HAS ROCK QUARRY ON SITE. AND ALSO BORDERED BY THE RED RIVER. AND ALSO ADD IT ALSO BORDER BY RJ TRAIN LINE TO THE WEST AS WELL.
THE APPLICANT TO DEVELOP MIX USE NEIGHBORHOODED WITH SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWN HOME COMPONENTS. PREVIOUSLY IN 1980 THIS PROPERTY WAS ZONED FROM R 1 TO M 2 TO WILL YOU FOR THE QUARRY WHEN IT FIRST STARTED. WALK YOU THROUGH SOME SOME PICTURES AND TALK ABOUT DEPARTMENT COMMENTS AND I'M SURE TAKE QUESTIONS. RUSSELLVILLE PIPE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY. THIS IS FANTASY LANE WHICH IS CURRENTLY A STUB ROAD OR DEAD END THAT'S INTENDED TO CONTINUE IN THE FUTURE. THE PROPERTY AT THE END THERE THERE WOULD A PART OF NEW DEVELOPMENT.
[00:25:01]
HERE ARE THOSE TBA LINES I MENTION THAT GO RIGHT THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF PROPERTY. MIDDLE OF PROPERTY IS NOT USABLE EXCEPT FOR POTENTIALLY ROADS OR BACK YARDS.AND NO STRUCTURES CAN UNDER THE TBA LINES.
HERE'S ANOTHER SHOT LOOKING DOWN RUS RUSSELLVILLE SFRM PIKE. IS VERY WILD YOEFR GROWN PIECE OF PROPERTY CURRENTLY. THERE'S AN OLD CLUB HOUSE FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD THAT'S ON PROPERTY.
I WHICH K4 BANK OWNED BACK IN DAY
>> SEVERAL. >> YEAH THERE HAVE BEEN SOME PARTIES OUT TLT FROM WHAT I HEARD.
THAT IS ALSO PART OF THIS APPLICATION
>> I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE PARTIES.
>> THIS IS OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIKE.
PROPERTY IS ON THE LEFT. OKAY.
AS PART OF DEPARTMENT COMMENTS GAS AND WATER ARE THE REQUIRE SEWER SYSTEM UPGRADES. FROM THE STREET DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT WAS REQUIRED AND SUBMITTED.
THE ASSESSMENT WAS FOUND ACCEPTABLE.
TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THE NEW ZONING IS NEARLY SAME WHAT WOULD ALLOWED BY CURRENT ZONING. THERE ARE AREAS OF POOR LEVEL OF IS ITS SERVICE ON DONE BAR CAVE AND A CLARKVILLE STREET DEPARTMENT A EVALUATE AT NEAT FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION. IN ADDITION TRAFFIC IS ANTICIPATED TO HAVE A LOWER PERCENTAGE WITH HEAVY TRUCK TRAFFIC ON OLD RUSSELLVILLE WHICH WE SEE AS A BENEFIT.
ALSO STREET DEPARTMENT ALSO AD AD DRAINAGE COMMENT THAT SAID THEIR AN ACTIVE QUARRY MINE WE SHOWED YOU WHERE FLOODPLAIN WAS.
THERE ARE SOME OTHER COMMENTS, FROM PLANNING COMMISSION OF PROPOSED 13.8 ACRES OF R ONE AND 35 PI 3 OF EXISTING R 1 AND 18.2 OF R 6 AND 44.8 OF R 5 ALREADY INE. ENCUMBERED WITH A QUARRY OR STREEP TERRAIN WHICH YOU CAN'T BUILT ON.
SCHOOL SYSTEM COMMENTS ALSO NOTED.
IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED USE ON THIS SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT WOULD RESIDENTIAL DENSITY AND REMOVAL OF 70 PLUS ACRES INDUSTRIAL ZONED PROPERTY FROM RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO HISTORIC ESTIMATES WE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SAID YOU COULD PROBABLY HAVE BETWEEN 160 AND ONE 90 LOTS OR UNITS ON THE PROPERTY. OR SORRY LOTS AND UNITS.
190 LOTS, 160 UNITS OF MULTI FAMILY.
THAT'S TRYING TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ENCUMBERED LAND OUT OF THAT EQUATION. THE APPLICANT HAS AND I DO BELIEVE THEY SUPPLIED A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN TO YOU.
WE DID NOT TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE VOTED ON THIS.
AS STAFF AND COMMISSION. THEIR THEY ARE SHOWING ONE 65 LOTS AND 150 UNITS. SLIGHTLY UNDER BUT STILL WITHIN TOLERANCE OF OUR ESTIMATES. IN PLANNING AREA.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. PROPOSED SOWN REQUEST IS CONSIST WITH GROWTH PLAN AND LAND USE PLAN.
A REMOVED 70 ACRE OF M 2 THAT PREVIOUSLY USED A ROCK QUARRY PROPOSED R 1 AND R 6 AND R 5 CLEARLY MORE APPROPRIATE USE PLAN THAN CURRENT THE INDUSTRIAL USE THAT PERMITTED IN THIS LOCATION. THE TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT TRAFFIC GENERATED BY A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL CLASSIFICATION IS NEARLY SAME AS WHAT WOULD ALLOWED UNDER INDUSTRIAL CLASSY FIX AND ANTICIPATE A LOWER PERCENTAGE OF TRUCK TRAFFIC WITH PROPOSED WE WOULD SEE BENEFIT TO THE OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIKE.
ADEQUATE SERVES SIDE NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IDENTIFIED.
THERE ARE POOR LEVELS OF SERVICE A DONE BAR CAVE ROAD WITH CURRENT ZONING AND PROPOSED ZONING.
CLARKSVILLE STREET DEPARTMENT WILL EVALUATE NEED AT DEVELOPMENT STAJTS. ADOPTED ATLANTA USE PLAN STATES ENCOURAGED TO MAINTAIN DESIRABLE MIX OF HOUSING TYPES THROUGHOUT COMMUNITY, AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO RECOMMEND OOD
COUNCILMAN RICHMOND YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
>> THANK YOU. MR. TYNDALL CAN YOU SPEAK TO I
THINK THIS IS EMAIL COUNCIL LADY >> REYNOLDS
>> THERE ARE NUMBERS THAT CON CONFLICTING. MAKE SURE THIS RIGHT ZONING CASE. NO NO, TWO Z 55 THING SOMETHING THAT I HAVE TO STRAIGHTEN OUT. YOU I THINK RIGHT CASE.
JUST GOTTEN SEVERAL EMAILS FROM CONCERNED CITIZEN ABOUT A FLOAT PLAIN I LADY REYNOLDS IN VERY THOROUGH PIECE OF NOTES SHE BROUGHT IT UP AS WELL. SO COULD YOU SPEAK TO THAT ISSUE AS WELL AS THAT PART ONE. SECOND ONE IS ABOUT A ROCK QUARRY. APPARENTLY SOME CITIZENS HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT CHILDREN PLAYING IN AREA.
I UNDERSTAND IT IS CLOSED SITE. ANYTHING YOU COULD EDUCATE US ON IN THAT REGARD ABOUT FLOODPLAIN AND ROCK QUARRY AND HOW IT
[00:30:02]
IMPACTS CITIZENS? >> THINGS OFF COUNCIL LADY REJDZ EMAIL NUMBER 7 DISCUSSES THE QUARRY AND OTHER ONE DEALT WITH
>> MY UNDERSTANDING I WASN'T HERE FOR 2010 FLOODS I'VE GOT GO GOTTEN EMAILS SEVERAL CITIZEN THAT IS HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT FLOODPLAIN APPARENTLY OUR STREET DEPARTMENT GOES PUT UP TEMPORARY SIGNS WHEN THERE I GUESS HEAVY
>> SOL SAY WE ALSO RECEIVED 18 LETTERS THEY SHOULD ALSO ATTACHED IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL THAT YOU RECEIVED OVER THE LAST WEEK FROM OTHER CONSTITUENTS AND RESIDENTS.
I KNOW STREET DEPARTMENT IS ONLINE, MAYOR I THINK ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING DRAINAGE FLOODPLAIN SHOULD DWEFRD TO THEM
ON THIS APPLICATION >> COUNCIL COUNCILMAN RICHMOND YOU WANT TO CALL ON STREET DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE TO
ANSWER QUESTION >> YES PLEASE IF THEY ARE
PRESENT MAYOR >> I KNOW WE HAVE MR. SHEPHERD
THANK YOU, MAYOR. >> THIS THIS IS CHRIS COWAN OUR SENIOR TRAFFIC ENGINEER FOR THE CITY OF CLARKSVILLE STREET DEPARTMENT. COUNCILMAN RICHMOND YOUR
QUESTION TO THEM WOULD BE? >> YEAH MR. COWAN HOW YOU DOING HAPPY NEW YEAR, CHRIS. MY QUESTION IS, AND MAINLY FOR CITIZENS I'M STARTING TO UNDERSTAND NARRATIVE BUT 134 CONCERN ABOUT THE FLOODPLAIN THAT DEALING WITH THIS REZONING REQUEST. AND FROM MY UNDERSTANDING SOME CITIZENS WERE SAYING THAT TEMPORARILY THE STREET DEPARTMENT POSTS UP SIGNS I GUESS WHEN THERE'S A HEAVY RAIN ABOUT FLOODING. SO I THINK IF YOU COULD HELP COUNCIL UNDERSTAND AND RESIDENTS UNDERSTAND THIS FLOODPLAIN
>> ABSOLUTELY. WE HAVE -- WE ARE AWARE OF SOME FLOODING ISSUES THAT OCCUR AT THT LOCATION DURING STORM EVENTS. THE WATER DOES THE SUPER CROSS ROAD AT OLD RUSSELL PIKE. IT CAUSES US TO CLOSE SECTIONS OF THAT ROAD DOWN UNTIL WATER C RECEDE. THIS KNOWN PROBLEM WITH AND WITH ANY SUBDIVISION OR SITE PLANNING THAT WOULD SUBMITTED WE WOULD REVIEW THAT TO IMPACT TO SUR SURROUNDING FLOOD ISSUES IN THE AREA.
AND MAKE ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVEMENTS WHERE POSSIBLE.
ALLOW THEM TO MAKE SITUATION ANY WORSE THAN IT IS TODAY.
>> SO, IS THERE WAY TO REMEDY THIS PRIOR TO
>> COUNCIL RICHMOND TO SPEAK INTO MICROPHONE A LITTLE BIT
MORE? >> THANK YOU FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I THINK I GUESS, I'M LOOKING IS THERE SOME SORT OF RECOMMENDATION MR. COWAN FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE ABOUT STREET DEPARTMENT PERSPECTIVE HOW TO PERHAPS ADDRESS THIS GOING INTO VERSUS ON THE REVERSE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING SITE PLAN WILL BE PRESENTED AND THEY WILL ADDRESS IT THEN, IS THAT MY UNDERSTAND FROM WHAT YOU'RE SHARING
>> ONCE WE GET A CHANCE TO LOOK SPECIFIC SIZE AND TYPE OF THE DEVELOPMENT THATTER THAT PROPOSING WE WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTION AS TO HOW THEY MIGHT ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE FLOODING ISSUES OR AND DEAL WITH THE OVERALL STORM WATER DRAINS THAT TAKES PLACE IN THIS AREA.
COUNCILMAN GARRET YOU ARE RECOGNIZED
>>. >> I APPRECIATE YOU PRESENT THAT TO THE COUNCIL. WHAT I WANT NO KNOW IS MORE SORT OF A QUESTION. WOULD IT TOO MUCH TROUBLE IF COUNCIL REYNOLDS WERE EMAIL THIS TO YOU IF UK LOAD OUR AGENDAS AND TOO TEDIOUS WORK MAYBE WHERE TLGS LIKE QUESTION NUMBER ONE, AND THEN HAVE THE RESPONSE UNDERNEATH IT, JUST SO YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG AND MAKE SURE AS YOU'RE READING IT, YOU JUST MATCHING UP EACH CITIZENS CONCERNS.
AS WELL LAID OUT JUST, YOU KNOW HAVING TO TAKE BOTH SHEETS AND LOOK BACK AND FOT RATHER THAN HAVING QUESTION AND ANSWER WOULD A LITTLE BIT BETTER FORMAT FOR ME IF A LITTLE TOO TEDIOUS AND I
CAN TAKE CARE OF THAT. >> OKAY.
I THINK THAT WAS AN AFFIRMATIVE. >> THANK YOU.
>> OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE COUNCIL?
ALL RIGHT WE'RE NOW READY FOR COUNCIL LADY STREETMAN
>> MR. TYNDALL COULD YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CURRENT ZONE, THAT IS WITH THE M 2 AND WHAT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO GO IN THERE AS IT IS NOW IF WE WERE TO LOAD THIS DOWN?
[00:35:03]
>> I ALSO LIKE TO ADD, THERE BE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THURSDAY.
SOME QUESTIONS ARE VERY APPROPRIATE FOR APPLICANTS.
BUT WE WILL HELP YOU WHERE WE CAN.
THE M 2 ZONING IS OUR HEAVIEST INDUSTRIAL ZONE ALLOWS JUST ABOUT ANYTHING YOU COULD IMAGINE.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT INDUSTRIAL PARK ON INTERNATIONAL BOULEVARD THAT IS ALL ZONED M 2. THE QUARRY.
WAREHOUSING 1235U89 PLANTS, YOU KNOW, JUST ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD IMAGINE THAT INDUSTRIAL USE ALLOWED IN M 2.
THAT'S WHY YOU STILL SEE JUST ACROSS THE RIVER ON CRAFT STREET, AND EVEN RUDOLPH DOWN THERE THAT ALL STILL EXISTING OLD M 2 FROM BACK WHEN IT WAS MORE MANUFACTURING PART TOWN NOW BECOME MORE SERVICE PART OF TOWN YES ALMOST ANY USE MANUFACTURING OR INDUSTRIAL USE YOU COULD IMAGINE WOULD AN M 2.
SO WE COULD HAVE YOU KNOW, BED ROCK QUARRY OPEN UP ANY TYPE INDUSTRY OPEN UP BEHIND THAT AREA THAT THAT'S ALREADY ZONE R 1 AND BE THAT CLOSE TO HOMES VERSUS IF WE WERE TO VOTE TO
IF ECONOMICS WERE RIGHT FOR THAT DEVELOPER YES ANYTHING COULD GO IN THERE. WE WOULDN'T HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY NO WE WOULD JUST BE ABLE TO POTENTIALLY REMEDY SOME STUFF BUFFERING OF TREES OR FENCING AND STUFF LIKE THAT THAT'S
ALREADY WRITTEN INTO THE CODE. >> OKAY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY STREETMAN.
WE ARE NOW READY FOR COUNCIL LADY REYNOLDS
>> THANK YOU. I WILL MARRY UP THE QUESTIONS IF I AND THEN FORWARD THAT. AND SO I'LL DO THAT FOR YOU SEND IT TO YOU TOMORROW. THAT IS OKAY? SO I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. I'M NOT SURE WHEN YOU SAID MR. TYNDALL POOR LEVEL OF SURFACE.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT MEANS
>> THAT'S QUESTION I WILL HAVE DEFER TO STREET DEPARTMENT IT
DEALS WITH THE TRAFFIC >> THE TRAFFIC.
THEY ARE THEY ARE MUCH BETTER EQUIPPED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. BEFORE WE GET THEM ONLINE I HAVE A COUPLE. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS BAPTISM BY FIRE. PLEASE, SEVERAL, MY EMAIL HAS BLOWN UP I ACTUALLY MET WITH RESIDENTS ON SUNDAY.
ACTUALLY CAME OUT AND ASKED ME TO MEET WITH THEM WE LOOKED AT THE AREA. SO THERE'S SOME AS AYOU GO BACK AND FORTH MY LETTER ON FRONT HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS AND THEN, I WILL MARRY THEM UP. THEN THE BACKSIDE IN ALL FAIRNESS IS RESPONSE FROM VERY OPEN AND.
TO QUESTIONS AND, VERY TRANSPARENT SEE ANSWERED THEM.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT BY THE TWO EMAILS.
JUST SO YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT
>> WHILE YOU'RE ON THAT, MARRYING UP THE QUESTION AND ANSWERS IF YOUNESS YOU DO THAT IF YOU WILL GET THOSE TO CLERK SHE WILL THEN DISTRIBUTE TO THE COUNCIL
>> RIGHT. SO WE CAN AVOID ANY POTENTIAL
PROCEED, PLEASE. >> SO, THERE'S A COUPLE -- I, THEABLES REZONING IS NOT NECESSARILY -- IS AN ISSUE BUT THE REAL ISSUE IS THE TRAFFIC ON THE ROADS.
I TELL PEOPLE THAT LITERALLY WALK AND KNOCK EVERY DOOR IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IN MY DISTRICT. IF YOU HAD VOTER REGISTRATION I WALKED YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU CANNOT WALK DOWN RUSSELLVILLE PIKE I TRIED TO WALK ON RUSSELLVILLE PIKE AND KNOCK DOORS. VERY FEW HOUSES I SKIPPED BUT IF I SKIPPED THEM THEY WERE EITHER ON OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIKE BECAUSE I COULD NOT PAR A CAR AND WALK TO THEM SAFE PL I DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE DRIVING PEOPLE'S DRIVEWAYS A CITY COUNCIL MEMBER SOMEONE WHO LISTENED TO OUR CITIZENS, ONE OF THE CONCERNS IS AS OUR CITY GROWS, WE HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT'S THERE.
SO MY QUESTION IS PROBABLY TO STREET DEPARTMENT, IS WHAT OUR PLAN FOR THE OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIKE.
JUST PUTTING CARS ON TO THAT ROAD THAT ALREADY NOT SAFE TO WALK ON F YOU HAVE A FLAT TIRE ON THAT ROAD, THERE'S NO PLACE TO PULL OFF AND CHANGE YOUR TIRE.
IF THERE'S AN EMERGENCY AND ROAD IS BLOCKED YOU CAN'T GET IN AND OUT. AND THE SAME PART OF THE PLAN IS TO GO IN THROUGH HERITAGE ESTATES.
THIS IS A SMALL SUBDIVISION I HAVE VERY CLOSE FRIEND I'VE WALKED THAT NEIGHBORHOOD PROBABLY TIMES A WEEK NOR SEVERAL YEARS. SO PEOPLE ARE USED TO WALKING MOVING THROUGH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
PLAN TO PUT 2 TO 300 CARS A DAY ON TO A ROAD THAT IS RESIDENTIAL ROAD WITH NO SIDEWALKS. SO WE AS CITY COUNCIL I FEEL IT'S NOT LIKE JUST TAKE IT, WE OWE THE CITIZENSES RAS WE GROW
[00:40:02]
TO TAKE CARE OF THE LEGACY NEIGHBORHOODS.SO I'M NOT I JUST WANT TO BE VERY, VERY FAIR.
I'M NOT OPPOSEDED TO GROWTH I PERSONALLY I KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE THIS. I APPRECIATE THE MIXED USE I THINK THAT AS A COMMUNITY GROWS THAT ENSURES WE DON'T SEGREGATE OUR COMMUNITY ECONOMICALLY. SO I DO APPRECIATE THE MIXED USE BUT YOU DO FEEL THAT WE ALL ARE RESIDENTS AND WE SHOULD LISTEN TO THEM. SO MY QUESTION WOULD THEN GO BACK TO STREET DEPARTMENT I AGAIN, VERY DIFFICULT TO TURN LEFT RIGHT NOW ON OLD DEL MAR CAVE FROM RUSSELLVILLE PIKE.
IT'S VERY DIFFICULT. SO WHAT WOULD WE DO FOR OUR RESIDENTS IF THIS IF WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS? AND IT'S NOT ONLY THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AS WE CONTINUE INFILL THESE OTHER CONVERSATION THAT IS I THINK WE OWE OUR
TAXPAYERS. >> SO THAT'S A QUESTION DIRECTLY TO THE STREET DEPARTMENT? THE OKAY.
WE HAD A LONG DISCUSSION THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT THIS VERY ISSUES IN THIS CASE. CHRIS COWAN YOU'RE ON THE LINE.
>> YOU DON'T MIND HELP ADDRESS THE QUESTION FROM COUNCIL LADY
AND, JUST AND WE DID HAVE CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS THIS AFTERNOON WITH THE MAYOR, STREET DEPARTMENT AND THE MYSELF.
SOMETHING WE'VE LOOKING AT SINCE THE THIS CASE CASE CAME WAS SUBMITTED TO US TO REVIEW FROM OUR REGIONAL PLAN COMMISSION AS TO WHAT SORTS OF MIGHT BE NECESSARY AS CONSEQUENCES OF TRAFFIC GENERATED FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT.
THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE REQUESTED A TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT BE SUBMITTED. WE REVIEWED THAT.
AND. YOU KNOW, ARE DEFINITELY INDICATE A LARGE NUMBER OF DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC THAT WOULD GENERATED BY THIS POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
BUT THE SPECIFICS AREN'T THERE YET BECAUSE OF THE WE DON'T HAVE SPECIFIC PLAN MRAN SUBMITTED WE DON'T EXACT SIZE WHAT SO ESTIMATES HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED PER REASONABLENESS OF WHAT COULD BE THERE. BUT, TYPICALLY AT PLAN DEVELOPMENT WHEN THEY ACTUALLY SUBMIT AND A. REAL PLAN SHOWING WHERE THEIR ENTRANCE ARE HOW MANY UNITS THEY PLAN TO BUILD THERE GETS SUBMITTED TO ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS AT THAT TIME WE WOULD EVALUATE THE ACTUAL IMPACTS TO THE SURROUNDING ROADWAY NETWORK AND IF THERE ARE NEEDS FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WHETHER ADDING LANES, OR DOING SOME SORT OF CHANGE IN TRAFFIC CONTROL WE WOULD EVALUATE IT AT THAT TIME.
>> COUNCIL LADY REYNOLDS >> AND JUST TO CLARIFY, THEN IF WE DECIDE FOR INSTANCE THAT WE NEED TO A STOP LIGHT AND LEFT-HAND TURN LANE AT THE END OLD RUSSELLVILLE PIKE, WOULD THE DEVELOPER PAY FOR THAT OR TAXPAYERS PAY FOR THAT?
I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO EVALUATE.
IF WE CAN -- AWAY DO HAVE CITY ORDINANCES IN PLACE THAT DO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPER TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DOING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS. BUT IF DELAY AND A TRAFFIC PROBLEMS THEY MIGHT CREATE.
SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE COULD WORK AND EVALUATE AND MAKE A DETERMINATION IF ANY IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE THINK ARE NECESSARY WOULD ARE REQUIRED THROUGH A DEVELOPER OR THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY SHOULD PAY FOR.
BUT I THINK WE LIKELY BE LOOKING FOR DEVELOPER TO PAY IN THIS
CASE. >> WELL I WOULD LIKE TO ADD IF I MAY, THAT YOU KNOW I DON'T AS WE INFILL I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S A BALANCE. BECAUSE OUR DEVELOPERS CANNOT, WE CAN'T MAKE THEM PAY FOR YEARS OF NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING AND BUILDING UP ROADS AND THEN, ALL OF SUDDEN, THIS IS THE LAST STRAW AND NOW WHOEVER PUTS LAST STRAW DOWN HAS TO PAY BECAUSE 24E7B WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT SO PEOPLE WON'T IT MAKE TOO EXPENSIVE I JUST WANT TO THE SAY I RECOGNIZE THAT MAY BE BALANCE.
AND WHAT LOOKS RIGHT AS CITY COUNCIL WE HAVE TO YOU KNOW, MEET THEM PART WAY I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
YOU PERFECTLY SUMMARIZED DILEMMA >> I THINK WE WE CAN'T STICK TO A NEW DAYS FOR 2030 YEARS OF NOT ALWAYS DOING AT RIGHT THING.
IT HAS TO BE BALANCE OR OR WE'LL NOT GET THERE.
SO I THINK, I THINK THAT COVERED I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP MAYBE WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT -- MANY PEOPLE I WILL I WILL TELL AMANY
[00:45:05]
RESIDENTS I'M SPEAKING FOR ARE RESIDENTS NOW WERE VERY OPPOSED TO APARTMENTS. I LOOK NUMBER OF ROOF TOPS MOST WERE NOT NECESSARILY LOOKING A NUMBER RESIDENTS OR ROOF TOPS BUT NUMBER THAT THEY WERE OPPOSED TO APARTMENTS, THAT DID COME UP. THAT SO I WILL AGAIN SUMMARIZE THIS AND MARRY UP WITH A CONTRACTOR WROTE THEN I WILL SEND IT TO YOU U I'M NERVOUS I'M SORRY.NEXT UP IS COUNCIL LADY ALLEN. YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
>> OKAY SO MY CONCERN WITH THIS ONE CAN I GOT A LOT OF I GOT A LOT OF EMAILS ABOUT THE SAME THING.
AND MY BIGGEST CONCERN THAT I GOT WAS SCHOOL SYSTEM ISRY VERY OVERWHELMED ALREADY THERE. THERE'S AN IN THEN READING 118 PERCENT CAPACITY, 113 PERCENT. EVERY SINGLE SCHOOL IN THAT AREA IS OVER CAPACITY. AND THEY ARE SAYING IF IT'S APPROVED WHERE ARE WE GOING TO PUT THE KIDS? SO HOW CAN WE -- WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? MAYBE I DON'T UNDERSTAND YET. BUT AS THE CITY WE SHOULD LOOKING AT THAT. WE SHOULD LOOKING THIS IS BIG STATEMENT RIGHT HERE. WE HAVE KIDS THAT MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TOLL GO TO SCHOOL. SO, HOW DO WE WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING A ZONING WHEN YOU CAME TO YOUR CLASS WE HAVE TO THINGS IN ADVANCE THEY CAN CHANGE WHAT THEY DO LATER.
AND WE'RE SEEING WHERE SCHOOL IS ALREADY OVERWHELMED.
>> I'LL COMMENT ON THAT >> THERE IS A MAGIC SCHOOL
PERSON ON THE PHONE THERE >> NO THERE'S NO MAGIC SCHOOL PERSON ON PHONE. MR. TYNDALL YOU WANT TO TAKE A
STAB AT THAT >> THE ROSS SCHOOL DISTRICT IS LARGEST SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IN TERMS OF NUMBERS. IT STRETCHES ALL WAY FROM DOWNTOWN ALL THE WAY EAST TO ROBERTSON COUNTY.
THAT'S SIZE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SO MONTGOMERY CENTRAL IS PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT LARGER WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SQUARE MILES OF DISTRICT.
BUT, IN TERMS OF ROOFTOPS ROSS VIEW IS BOTH BIG AND THE FASTEST GROWING. AND KNOW NEBRASKA SCHOOL THAT BEING BUILT IS DIRECTLY NECESSITATED BY OVER CROWDING AT ROSS VIEW ELEMENTARY, ROSS VUL AND NORTHEAST HIGH SCHOOL.
THERE HAVE BEEN A, RECENT ANOTHER ADDITION ROSSELLÓ VIEW HIGH, NORTHEAST HIGH, MOST RECENT THE ADDITION A NORTHEAST HIGH ACTUALLY DROPPEDBACK BELOW THAT 100 PERCENT MARK BECAUSE THEY ADDED 12 OR 13 CLASSROOMS. THAT BUILT UP VERY QUICKLY AT THE RATE THAT WE'RE ON. RIGHT NOW.
AS NEW SCHOOL COMES ONLINE ROSS VIEW ROADED THAT ALEVY 88 THE CHILDREN, MORE THAN LIKELY ON THAT SIDE OF THE INTERSTATE WILL THEN GO TOWARD THE NEW SCHOOL OF ROSS VIEW YET TO BE NAMED.
WE CALL IT KICKER WOOD COMPLEX THAT WOULD OPEN SPACE A ROSS VIEW HIGH SCHOOL SO IT WILL FALL BELOW 100 PERCENT.
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS BEING BUILT FIRST.
THAT WILL ALLEVIATE ROSS VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
AS WELL AS PROBABLY OAK WOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
AND THEN THE HIGH SCHOOLS COMING ONLINE A YEAR AFTER THAT.
THEN THE MIDDLE SCHOOL IS COMING ONLINE AFTER THAT.
SO ONCE ALL OF THOSE ARE BUILT OVER THE NEXT 5 OR SIX YEARS WITH FIRST SCHOOL OPENED FALL OF 2020.
YOU'LL START TO SEE THE THESE NUMBERS FOR ROSSVILLE HIGH AND NORTHEAST DROP. STUDENTS FROM OTHER SCHOOLS WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO POSSIBLY REZONE INTO NEW DISTRICTS AND SORT OF SPREAD OUT THAT CRUNCH WORRY FOOLING ON MOST OF OUR THE SCHOOL MORE EVENLY. THE SCHOOL SYSTEM IS A COUNTY THEY ARE THEIR OWN ENTITY THEY ARE FUNDED BY COUNTY THEY ARE KEEP AN EYE ON GROWTH THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO KIND OF STAY AHEAD OF THE GROWTH. AND ONE WAY TO DO THAT BY BUILDING SCHOOLS AND BUILDING ADDITIONS.
>> THANK YOU. >> COMMON THREAD AMONG ALL OF THIS BETWEEN THE CITY AND COUNTY THE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION HAVING MR. TYNDALL HERE REALLY HELPS US SO HE CAN RPROVIDE THA INFORMATION AND CARRY BACK OUR CONCERNS MAKE SURE WE'RE WELL REPRESENTED. SO THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL.
THANK YOU. >> MA MAYOR I TOTALLY FORGOT BY MY QUARRY QUESTION. THAT'S OKAY IT HAPPENS TO BEST
IN LOOKING I JUST WANT TO BRING THIS COULD COUNCIL'S ATTENTION GET SMALL I KNOW SIGHT HERE. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN OF THE DOCUMENT PAGE 1, THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT THE LOOUBLT.
MY QUESTION IS WILL CITY HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR PROBLEMS ARISING IN NEXT 20 YEARS REGARDING AGAIN, THIS 50 FOOT
[00:50:01]
DROP OFF IN QUARRY? I JUST WOULDN'T WANT THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME TO BE DELIBERATING WITH MR. BAKE OTHER STAFF OR ON HIS TEAM ABOUT THIS KIND OF THING.ASK AND ALSO GOES ON GO INTO CLOSED QUARRY. THE SAFETY AT THE QUARRY,
>> I CAN STEL YOU IF CITY DON'T DISNTH OWN IT WE DON'T HAVE DIRECT LIABILITY. I CAN TELL YOU IF IT IS OUT THERE SOMEONE GETS -- FALLS IT WILL BE UP TO OUR CITY FIRE OUR FIRE RESCUE ALONG WITH THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT THE SERVICES OF THE COUNTY AND ANYBODY ELSE TWRA THAT CAN HELP US RESCUE THE PEOPLE WHO HAPPENED TO GET OUT THERE.
WE DON'T OBVIOUS IT THERE WOULD NO FINANCIAL LIABILITY I GUESS MR. BAKER YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG I THINK THAT SHOULD
TAKE CARE OF THAT. >> THE ZONING PUT IS IN JEOPARDY AS COUNCIL OR CITY? AND THEN I THINK THE OTHER THING PORTION IS SECOND PORTION, MAYOR OF THAT SAME WHICH WE WE CAN ADDRESS IN SECOND. IT TALKS ABOUT PARKS AND REC.
IS THIS A PLAN? LIKES LIKE OWNERSHIP WOULD HOA AND SECOND PART SAID THIS WILL ALSO BE A PART OF APPROXIMATELY 65 ACRE WHICH NOT DEVELOPED. AND WILL REMAIN A GREAT NATIONAL PREEFB FOR WILDLIFE IN AREA. THEN IT GOES ON TO DISCUSS DISCUSSION WITH PARKS AND REC THING.
ABOUT A GIFT CAN GREEN WAY. JUST WANT TO
>> I CAN TELL YOU THAT THAT QUARRY AND THAT PROPERTY HAS BEEN OFFERED TO THE CITY MULTIPLE TIMES.
AND WE'VE NOT ACCEPTED THAT GIFT.
>> PRIMARILY BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MUCH PROPERTY IN THE FRONT OF IT TO BE DEVELOPED INTO PARKS AND RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHOUT OUR CITY. PLUS TAKING ON OH BLUFF AND QUARRY WITH BODY OF WATER IS FRAUGHT WITH CONCERN.
UNLESS WE HAVE A PROPER SAFEGUARDS SAYFULLO DECLINED THAT COUPLE TIMES. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T GETTING OURSELVES IN LITIGATION ISSUES
>> I'M SORRY THIS IS CATCHING ME OFF GUARD FIRST TIME I'M SEEING
THIS >> MR. BAKER CAN I GET YOU 0 TO
MOVE CLOSER TO MIC >> YES, SIR.
I'M SORRY. TELL ME WHAT THE QUESTION IS? IT WHAT SITUATION IS? IS
>> I THINK MARCH CLARIFIED IT BUT YOU CAN SPEAK ON IT AS WELL MR. BAKER. LOOKS LIKE FROM THIS DOCUMENT THAT COUNCIL LADY REYNOLDS PUT TOGETHER IS EXCELLENT SHE WILL CLEAN IT UP FOR US ITEM NUMBER 7 ON PAGE 1 MR. BAKER, TALK ABOUT LIABILITY OF QUARRY. LIKE I SAID MAYOR SPOKE TO GO THAT AN ABOUT. AND ON PAGE 3 AS WELL THERE'S SOME TALK BUT MAYOR STATED THAT WE HAVE DECLINED AN OFFER TO TAKE OWNERSHIP OF THAT PROPERTY. I WAS JUST MAKING SURE DOWN THE ROAD THAT WE WOULDN'T UNDER THE GUN UNDER ANY LITIGATION ABOUT THE QUARRY IF WE IF WE GAVE PERMISSION TO REZONE THIS AND THERE WAS ANT INCIDENT MAKING SURE CITY AND TAXPAYER DOLLARS WOULDN'T ON HOOK FIRST AND FOREMO MOST WE DON'T WANT CHILD
TO GET HURT >> I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. LET ME PHRASE IT WAY I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. THERE'S A QUARRY IN THE TRACTOR IN THE LAND THAT IS SEEKING TO BE REZONED.
ITS OWNED PRIVATELY NOT OWNEDED ABOUT BY CITY.
LAPPED IS NOT. YOUR QUESTION IS IF WE REZONE THIS PROPERTY, THAT HAS AT LEAST PART OF IT HAS QUARRY ON IT COULD IF SOMEBODY GOT HURT IN THAT QUARRY LATER COULD CITY HAVE SOME LIABILITY JUST TO MERELY BY THE FACT THAT WE WE APPROVED A REZONING? IS THAT QUESTION
>> YES, SIR. AND ANSWER IS NO.
>> THANK YOU. MR. RICHMOND DOES DISAT THAT TAKE CARE OF YOU ALL RIGHT THANK YOU.
COUNCIL LADY BUTLER YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
>> I THINK WE NEED TO REEL THIS BACK IN FOR SECOND I READ 18 EMAILS AT LEAST THREE EMAILS PERSONALLY TO MY EMAIL ADDRESS I UNDERSTAND THAT IS AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE THESE PEOPLE'S HOMES.
I AM HOMEOWNER HERE TOO. BUT I THINK WE NEED TO REEL IT BACK INTO WHAT SCOPE OF GOVERNMENT AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS. THIS ZONING DOES IT FIT WITH THE PLAN I SCANTY THINK OF EXACT TERMINOLOGY BUT IT DISIT FIT WITH OUR PLANS OVERLAYS ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
THE TRAFFIC STUDY HAD DONE THAT SOMETHING THAT IS NOT REQUIRED BUT THEY DID IT PREEVERYONE ACTIVELY.
THEY KNEW THERE WAS 2GOING TO B AN ISSUE.
I THINK WE JUST TALK ABOUT WE HAVE THE GROWTH, WE DON'T WANT TO SPREAD, WE WANT BACK FILL. THIS IS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CITY. AND THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL AREA IN MIDDLE OF CITY. AND LIKE M STREETMAN SAID THEY CAN BUILD WHOLE OTHER STUFF HERE THAT MIGHT NOT APPEALING CONSIDERING THIS IS A PRIMARILY RESIDENTIAL AREA.
[00:55:02]
SO I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO JUST CONSIDER WHAT OUR SCOPE WHAT OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE IS IN ZONING CASES. ASK I JUST REALLY THINK THAT PUTTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA IS BETTER THAN TR INDUSTRIAL.I ALSO BELIEVE THAT, WELL KNOW I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT I DON'T WANT TO GO ON REAL LONG. WHERE I STAND ON THIS.
>> THANK YOU, WELL SAID. OKAY COUNCIL LADY STREETMAN
YOU'RE RECOGNIZED >> THANK YOU MAYOR I WANT TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR HERE AND TALK IN REGARD TO WHAT WE'VE DISCUSSING WITH TRAFFIC AND AGAIN, BACK UP ONE MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS SAID. WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE'S ALREADY TRAFFIC ISSUES ON THIS ROAD.
THAT THIS WOULD ADD THE SAME AMOUNT TRAFFIC INDUSTRIAL TRAFFIC COULD ADD. ONE THING WE CAN THINK ABOUT HERE WE'VE SEEN WITH OTHERS IS I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED ABOUT NOT MAKING A LAST PERSON COMING IN DOING IT.
BUT WHAT WE'VE SEEN SOME OF OUR DEVELOPER THEY HAD AN ASSISTED US ON CITY LEVEL TO BE ABLE TO HELP US YOU KNOW THAT WE CAN KIND PARTNER UP TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH WAYS TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF TRAFFIC ISSUES THAT MIGHT BECOME THAT MIGHT HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING AND SEEING AS WE ALREADY HAVE THAT HERE, THIS COULD POSSIBLY BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY GO AHEAD APPROVE THE TRAFFIC FOR THOSE THAT ARE ALREADY DEALING WITH IT. SO I JUST WANTED TOP POINT OUT THAT I DID APPRECIATE WE WEREN'T TRYING TO PUT IT ALL ON DEVELOPER BUT THAT WE COULD YOU KNOW POSSIBLY HAVE A THOSE CONVERSATION AND NOT NEXT WEEK BUT THURSDAY NIGHT ASK DEVELOPER KIND WHAT WHAT THEIR INTEREST LEVEL WOULD IN TRYING TOE ASSIST IN THAT PROCESS TO HELP US OUT ON THE CITY LEVEL.
SO I I HAVE ENJOYED ALL DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD ON IT I APPRECIATE IT SOME COMMENTS DIFFERENT ONES HAVE MADE.
COUNCILMAN KNIGHT >> I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF WE COULD POSSIBLY ON NEXT READING HAVE SOMEONE FROM SCHOOL SYSTEM COME OUT AND THE PROBABLY ARE EXPLAIN DYNAMICS OF THE CAPACITY ISSUES THAT MAYBE PRESENT CONCERNING FACT THAT THE WE HAVE VIRTUAL SCHOOLING THAT MAY CHANGE THE DYNAMIC JUST A BIT.
I THINK MAYBE IF WE HAVE SOMEONE FROM A SCHOOL SYSTEM COME OUT TO SPEAK TO THAT THAT WOULD BE IDEAL
>> WELL THEY CAN REQUEST TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
BUT THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN THEIR OPPORTUNITY THIS IS OUR DISCUSSION TIME NONVOTING SESSION
COUNCIL LADY REYNOLDS YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
>> I PROBABLY HAVE A FOLLOW-UP TO MR. BAKER ABOUT, TO FOLLOW UP WITH COUNCILMAN RICHMOND SAID IS THAT IF WE'RE BUILDING, YOU KNOW CLOSER TO THE QUARRY AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT ARE AWAY FROM QUARRY. BUT WHAT IF EVENTUALLY THERE ARE SYNCH HOLES ARE OR YOU KNOW THE PROPERTY BECOMES UNSTABLE BECAUSE OF WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE YEARS AND THEN, I GUESS DOES THAT MAKE US ARE WE THEN LIABLE? I GUESS THAT'S MY
>> NO. >> AND HAVE WE I GUESS MY CONCERN IS AS A CITY ENSURED TO BEST OF OUR ABILITY, THAT THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN OR DO WE RELY ON THE BUILDERS TO TELL US
IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN >> WELL UNDER GOVERNMENTAL PORT LIABILITY ACT THE CITY WOULD HAVE HAD AN IMMUNITY FOR ANY LEGISLATION THAT YOU PASS. WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE, THAT'S NOT TO SAY WE COULDN'T BE SUED. WE CAN GET SUED AN ANY TIME FOR ANYTHING. BUT, IT WOULD NOT BE A GOOD LAWSUIT. WE WOULD ABLE TO DEFEND AGAINST IT. WE DON'T HAVE LIABILITY FOR APPROVALS. OR DISAPPROVALS OF ZONING DECISIONS. WHEN SOMEONE GETS HURT IN CONNECTION WITH PRIVATELY OWNED LAND.
NOT CITY OWNED LAND MIGHT BE DIFFERENT THAN CITY OWNED LAND PRIVATELY OWNED LAND SOMEWHAT GETS HURT BECAUSE SINKHOLE.
AND COULD BE, WEE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT SOMEBODY GETTING HURT BUT SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY GETS DAMAGED BECAUSE OF A SINKHOLE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE LIABLE FOR
GOOD QUESTIONS GOOD DISCUSSION. YEAH.
MR. TYNDALL. >> TONIGHT YOU'RE BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER VOTING ON THURSDAY FOR JUST ZONING WHICH IS CONCEPT OF WHAT WHAN GO THERE HOW MANY UNITS WHAT SIZE OF UNITS WHAT USES. THEN AFTER IT PASSES THE SECOND READING SOME POINT AFTER THAT THE OWNER ENGINEERS WILL COME BACK WITH ACTUAL PLAN. IT WILL BE MORE DIALLED IN.
GEO TECHNICAL. ACTUALLY GO DOWN HERE AND A, AND SEE THIS SOIL IS GOOD. THIS SOIL NOT SO GOOD.
CUT FILL YOU WILL HEAR SOMETIMES A FOR PROPERTY LIKE THIS THERE BE A DIRT MOVING GOING ON. WE HAVE AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WE WILL LOOK A ONE, TWO LONGER MONTHS WORKING OUT DESIGN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHILE THAT'S GOING ON THE STREET
[01:00:03]
DEPARTMENT IS WORKING ON DRAINAGE AND THE ROAD LAYOUT.IF AFTER WE APPROVE IT THEY CONTINUE TO WORK ON THIS.
WITH THE GRADING PERMIT. IF THEY FIND AN AREA THAT THROWING UP FOR A CONCERN THEY WILL BRING US BACK REVISED PLAN AND WORK OUT STREET DEPARTMENT ASK SEE IT AGAIN BEFORE IT GOES FINAL. THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER STEPS ALONG THE WAY WHERE THE SOIL AND LAND IS LOOKED AT BY BOTH US AND
STREET DEPARTMENT. >> WE'VE GOT A TECHNICAL ISSUE.
FOLKS SOME FOLKS CAN'T HEAR US. SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND ADDRESS THAT. IF I'LL PAUSE JUST A MOMENT MR. TYNDALL. WE WILL MAKE SURE WE GET THIS RIGHT. TREY IS ON THE JOB.
>> OKAY. ARE WE BACK MS. WILSON?
>> OKAY. I'M GOING TO ASK COUNCILMAN
REDD, CAN AWE YOU'RE HEAR US >> I CAN NOW, YES, SIR.
>> ALL RIGHT. WE APOLOGIZE FOR TECHNICAL
>> NOW PROCEED MRSHGS TYNDALL. >> AGAIN THIS IS FOR A LOT OF NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS GOOD REMINDER FOR OTHER ONES THAT ARE ON THE BOARD. CONTRACT ZONING IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN STATE OF TENNESSEE.
YOU CAN'T TELL AN APPLICANT WE'RE WILLING TO PASS THIS IF.
THAT WORD IF SHOULD NOT INVOLVED IN IT IF YOU'RE WILLING TO IMPROVE INTERSECTION IF YOU'RE WILLING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE QUARRY IS SAFE, IF THIS OR IF THAT.
ONLY ONE PLACE IS THAT ALLOWED. I EXHAUSTION CAUTION YOU GO FORWARD FOR THIS CASE AND ALL CASES THEY ARE ASKING TO CHANGE A ZONE. WH WHEN THAT ZONES IT HANDS OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS TO DETERMINE WHERE RULES THAT OAR ADOPTED WE ACTUALLY HAVE ZONING ORDINANCE CHANGE HERE IN MOMENT. WE HAVE THEN APPLY RULES TO THAT
ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. TYNDALL BEFORE WE MOVE ON? HEARING NONE SEEING NONE. OKAY.
WE'RE NOW READY FOR ITEM 17 WHICH ORDINANCE 61.
THE LAST SIDE SLIDE. SO OUR SECOND TO LAST SIDE.
THIS IS THE LAST SLIDE. O 05 ZONING ORDINANCE CHANGE.
WE PACKED FIVE DIFFERENT ITEMS INTO THIS YOU WILL SEE TRACT CHANGES DOCUMENT AS WELL THE ORDINANCE IN FRONT OF YOU SO THE CITY COUNCIL IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE ZONE CHANGES YU VOTE ON THEM WAY YOU DID ARE CANNED CHANGES TO ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP WHICH CONTAINEDED IN THAT ORDINANCE. WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION IS BRINGING FORWARD TO YOU TODAY IS SOME RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO THAT ZONE THING ORDINANCE. THIS IS A REQUEST THAT WAS STARTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS NOT BY CITY COUNCIL TWO WAYS YOU CAN CHANGE ZONING ORDINANCE OPINION ONE OR TWO THIS PAST YEAR CITY COUNCIL INITIATED THE CHANGE SAID I RECOMMEND PLANNING COMMISSIONS TO STUDY THIS BRING IT BACK CHANGES OR REPORT OR BOTH. WE'RE CONTINUING TO WORK ON ONE COVID THROUGH THAT FOR A LITTLE BIT OF LOOP BUT STILL ON OUR RADAR. THE OTHER WAY FOR IT TO ACTUAL PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINT TEES COMMISSIONERS CAN ALSO INITIATE A CHANGE AND BRING IT TO THE APPROPRIATE BODY WHETHER THANKSGIVING CITY OR COUNTY FOR THOSE OF AHERE YOU WILL REMEMBER FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE LAST MONTH THAT WAS INITIATED BY PLANNING COMMISSION TO GET IT MOVING TO HELP SPEED IT UP A LITTLE BIT WHEN WE CAN DO IT SAVERS US ABOUT A MONTH.
A COUPLE CHANGES. THEY ARE NOT LARGE CHANGES I BELIEVE THEY HAVE SOME BIG IMPACTS FOR OUR CITY OUR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY. FIRST ONE IS TWO OF OUR ZONES R 2 AND R 2 A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONES.
ONE OF THESE SECTION ISES OF THE CODE CHAPTER 4 TALKS ABOUT THE SET BACKS. SO EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY THE WHY ARE ALL HOMES THIS AROUND FAR OFF ROAD THEY ARE SET BACKS.
YOU'VE SEEN LOT R 6 OVER LAST YEAR.
ONE REASONS AFTER TALKING TO COMMUNITY AND ENGINEER IS THERE'S REALLY NOT R 2 A ZONE REALLY DOESN'T A DATE TYPE OF
[01:05:06]
HOMES THAT ARE GETTING BUILT NOW A DAYS.R 2 A IS 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM.
YOU CAN GO DOWN TO 6,000 SQUARE FOOT.
BUT IT'S A 50 FOOT WIDE REQUIREMENT THAT LOT HAS TO BE 50 FEET BY 120. BUT THEN WE HAVE 8 FOOT SET BACKS FOR TOTAL OF 20 FEET. SO EIGHT FOOT ON ONE FOOT 12 ON OTHER OR 10 AND TEN. SCOMPLEVEN AND 9 WHATEVER IT DOES HAS TO EQUAL 20 FEET ONCE YOU TAKE AWAY 20 FEET FROM THE 50 FEET IT 30 FEET WIDE OF BUILDING AREA ON THAT LOT.
AND A LOT OF OUR HOMES RIGHT NOW MAYBE 32, 33 FEET WIDE.
TYPE OF HOMES THEY ARE BUILDING IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SO WHERE AS LOT RECENT ZONING REQUESTS FOR R 6 COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE BEEN R 2 A ZONES, HOMES ARE PUTTING WITH SET BACKS WE REQUIRE ARE KIND KEEPING THAT AT BAY.
I THINK R2A IS A LITTLE BIT BETTER FEET WHEN A LITTLE CONCERN WHEN R2 A VERSUS R 6. I THINK R 6 DOES SOAK UP SOME CONCERNS AT TIMES WE'RE PROO PO PROPOSING R 2 AND THE R 2A SET BACK CURRENT SIDE FROM SIDE YARD TO SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE IT SAYS CURRENTLY EIGHT FEET FOR TOTAL OF 20. WE'RE LOWERING THAT EIGHT FEET TO THE TOTAL OF 16. EIGHT AND 8 INSTEAD OF 8 AND 12.
THIS WOULD ALLOW THE BUILDERS FOUR MORE FEET OF SIDE MOVEMENT WITHIN R 2 LOT FOR R 2 A A SLIGHTLY BIGGER CHANGE INSTEAD OF EIGHT FEET FOR 20, 5 FEET FOR 10.
SO 5 ON BOTH SIDES. THEY CAN ALWAYS GO BIGGER.
THEY JUST CAN'T GOT SMALLER. FOR R 2 A WE ALSO ADJUST THE ACCESSORY USES WHICH ARE SHEDS, POOLS, OUT BUILDINGS, ANYTHING ELSE LIKE THAT. INSTEAD OF TEN FEET AND 20 FEET, 5 AND 10 FEET TO MATCH THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON THAT PROPERTY. UNDER R 6, FOR SOME REASON THE CHART NEVER HAD AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FOOT IN THE THERE SO WE ADDED 5 AND TEN FEET LIKE OUR R 2A TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT MAYOR, CAN I ASK QUESTION ON EACH INDIVIDUAL SECTION I THINK
IT MIGHT BE EASIEST >> THAT'S PROBABLY WISE.
ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT EACH SECTION 1 OR PART 1 OF THIS ORDINANCE?
>> COUNCIL LADY SMITH YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR COMMENT?
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE COMMENT. ON THE SET BACKS FOR THE R2 AND CAN YOU SHOW US AN EXAMPLE USING THAT PIECE OF LAND THAT YOU HAVE UP? CAN YOU SHOW US AN EXAMPLE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FOR BOTH BUILDINGS?
>>I CAN'T DO THAT ON THE FLY BUT I DEFINITELY CAN DRAW SOMETHING UP AND SEND TO MS. SKINNER TO GET TOUT LOOK WHAT PROPOSED
CHANGES WOULD VISUALLY. >> IS THIS GOING TO BENEFICIAL FOR CONTRACTOR THAT BUILDING OR
>> I BELIEVE BENEFICIAL TO HOMEOWNERS BUILDERS A WELL FUTURE REZONING REQUESTS OPENS UP SOME MORE OPTIONS
>> BECAUSE THE WIDTH OF LOT 50 FEET RIGHT NOW 20 FOOT WE WILL USE R 2A AS THE EXAMPLE, 20 FEET OF THAT 50 FOOT WIDE IS RESERVE AD SET BACKS. SIDE SET BACKS FROM YOUR
NEIGHBORS >> GETS IS THAT ALL WAY AROUND
>> SIDES. JUST WE'RE ONLY CHANGE'S SIDES HERE. YOU HAVE IN THE SOUTH TOO LONG
>> YOU STILL 40 FOOT FRONT SET BACK WE'RE NOT CHANGING AT THIS TIME. YOU STILL HAVE 25 FOOT REAR SET BACK WHICH NOT CHANGING A THAT TIME ONLY CHANGES 24 ED INN RED ARE BEING PROPOSED INSTEAD 20 FOOD WIDE THIS WILL BE TEN FOOT COMBINED OPEN UP TEN ADDITIONAL FEET BUILDING ROOM TO EVEN MOVE THAT BUILDING, CHANGE THE SHAME SHAPE OR THING A LITTLE WIDER
THEN THEY CURRENTLY ARE. >> THAT THAT TAKE CARE OF YOU COUNCIL LADY STREET MAN YOU'RE RECOGNIZED.
I APPRECIATE FACT YOU ACTUALLY AREN'T MESSING WITH THE SET BACKS FOR THE FRONT. SO IT'S NOT CREATING TOO MUCH ISSUE IN REGARD TO PEOPLE HAVING TO PARK IN STREET I CAN SEE HOW IT WOULD BENEFICIAL FOR HOME INNERS.
WE KNOW HOW EXPENSIVE LAND IS HERE.
THEY ARE HAVING TO PAY FOR ADDITIONAL LAND WITHOUT GETTING ADDITIONAL HOME FOR IT. I DO APPRECIATE THAT Y'ALL ARE LOOKING A LIKE I SAID IT DOES IN MY OPINION CREATE A COST SAVING FOR THE HOMEOWNER. SO THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY STREET MAN.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT SECTION 1 HEARING NONE SEEING KNOB WE'RE READY FOR SECTION 2.
I'LL JUST ADD TO WHAT COUNCIL STREET MAN SAID WE MENTION THIS 50 FOOT LOT R 6 IS 25 FEET. WE HAVE NOTHING BETWEEN THERE
[01:10:01]
WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOK POTENTIALLY ANOTHER ZONE IN FUTURE THAT WOULD FILL THAT GAP BETWEEN 50 FOOT LOT AND 25 FOOT LOT.AGAIN, SO THAT WE'RE NOT OVERLY USING R6.
THE NEXT SECTION REMOVES LANGUAGE IN THE FM ZONE FOR MULTI FAMILY BUILDINGS THAT ARE BU BUILT UNDER 5.1 PERMITTED WITH CONDITIONS IN C 2 DISTRICTS AS I MENTIONED A LOT OF YOU BEFORE YOU'LL SEE IT, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BUILD MULTI FAMILY AND/OR COMMERCIAL OR COMMERCIAL AND/OR MULTI FAMILY ON THE SAME PARCEL. AND THAT KICKS IN THIS SECTION WHEN YOU WANT TO THE BLT MULTI FAMILY THERE ARE CERTAIN RULES THAT HAD TO BE FOLLOWED WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT THESE RULES FOR NUMBER 2 BE STRICKEN. TESS FOR TOWN HOUSES, FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALLED BE MET NO MORE 8 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING MAYBE ATTACHED TO EACH TOWN HOUSE UNIT MUST MINIMUM OF 16 FEET WIDE OFF STREET PARKING SHALL BE AT THE SITE OR REAR OF THE PROPER OR DWELLING UNIT. REASON FOR THIS IS, THAT THE WAY THESE PROPERTIES AND SEE TWO WITH PROPERTIES OFTEN DEVELOPED THIS IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO BE DEVELOPED ON THOSE SITES.
ESPECIALLY IN WE'RE HOPING SOON THAT WE DO SEE SOME DEVELOPMENT WHERE COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL ARE MARRIED UP IN THE SAME BUILDING FRONT TO THE BACK OH OR ON TOP OF AEACH OTHER YOU CANNOT FOLLOW RULES IN THAT MATTER MANNER WE'RE RECOMMEND REMOVING NUMBER 2 AND TWO SMALL SECTION BECAUSE CURRENTLY NOT FEASIBLE TOLL APPLY THOSE THE WAY IT'S BEING BUILT.
>> THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS COUNCIL REGARDING SECTION 2? IT COUNCIL LADY RENTAL YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
>> I WOULD JUST LIKE ASK IF YOU'RE GOING TO STILL REQUIRE THE THAT THEY PROVIDE PARKING? HAS THIS SAYS IT HAS TO BE AT THE REAR OR SIDE. SO YOU'LL STILL REQUIRE PARKING
>> PARKING IS ALWAYS REQUIRED. BUT, THE ORDINANCE AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN REQUIRES THAT PARKING BE AT THE SIDE OR REAR OF THE BUILDING. THIS RECOMMENDS IT THAT AT THE SIDE OR REAR THIS FLEXIBILITY WHEN THERE ARE STANSZ WHEN YOU CANNOT PUT THE AT THE SIDE OR REAR BUI BUILDING.
COUNCIL LADY SMITH YOU'RE RECOGNIZED
>> SO THINKING ABOUT WHAT WAS JUST SAID, IF THEY THERE SOME APARTMENTS BUILT RIGHT DOWN HERE ON I THINK THE BLUE AND YELLOW.
THERE HAVE BEEN SOME IS PROBLEMS WITH PARKING.
WHAT I'M SAYING IS THIS, IS IF THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING, THE CAR IS TOWED SINCE THE RESIDENT HAS BEEN STAYING THERE HER CAR WAS IN NOT ENOUGH PARKING WHY ARE WE NOT REQUIRING THAT WHEN THEY BUILD APARTMENTS THAT THERE SHOULD ENOUGH PARKING FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT'S GOING TO RENT THERE? THE IT HAS BECOME A PROBLEM.
I GOT COMPLAINTS ABOUT HER DAUGHTER'S CAR WAS TOWED BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING. IT'S A PROBLEM.
AND A SHE PARKED ON SIDE OF THE STREET.
>> THAT ZONE I'M DOUBLE-CHECKING HERE WITH OUR ZONING MAP --
>> IF TUESDAY CBD. >> CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.
THAT IS IN CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.
SO, THERE IS NO PARKING MINIMUM REQUIREMENT WHEN YOU'RE IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. IT IS ASSUMED FOR LACK OF BETTER WORD THAT YOU EVEN HAVE STREET PARKING, YOU MAY NOT OWN A CAR BECAUSE THERE'S STUDENTS THAT LIVE DOWNTOWN AND OTHER FOLKS THAT DON'T NEED CARS REGULARLY. OR YOU DISPLAY PARKING AT LOT DOWN THE STREET. SO THE CBD ZONE DOES NOT REQUIRE YOU TO HAVE MINIMUM WORKING. I DO KNOW BUILDING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT ONE PARKING SPACE PER UNIT BUT ASSUMPTION IS THERE IS ON STREET PARKING ALL WAY AROUND BLOCK WITHIN BLOCK OR TWO YOU SHOULD FIND SOME PARK SPACE OR STUDENTS TOO THAT MAY NOT HAVE CARS.
I'M SORRY IT HAPPENED THAT'S PART APPEAL DOWNTOWN DISTRICT IF WE DID REQUIRE SAME AMOUNT PARKING WE REQUIREDED IN MORE SUBURBAN PARTS OF TOWN KWO DEVELOPMENTS WOULD NOT BE AND HALF LOT WOULDN'T PARKING THAT NO NOT CONDUCIVE
>> CBD DISTRICT IS NO THE CONSIDERED RESIDENTIAL AND CBD
[01:15:01]
DISTRICT? >> BLG IT IS RESIDENTIAL IN CBD DISTRICT MINIMUM PARKING IS NO THE REQUIRED.
YOU CAN PUT A MANY OR FEW AS YOU NEED BASED ON YOUR CALCULATION
AND YOUR NEEDS. >> WELL IT IS A PROBLEM FOR RESIDENTS THAT RENTING FROM THEIR BUILDING.
IT'S PROBLEM BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GETTING TOWED BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW WHERE TO PARK. WE NEED TO COME UP IN SORT OF AMENDMENT OR ORDINANCE TO REQUIRE THAT GOING TO BUILD A LARGE RESIDENTIAL LET'S SAY RENTAL PROPERTY THERE NEEDS TO BE PARKING FOR EACH OF APARTMENTS THAT GOING TO BE BUILT. YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD AN AN APARTMENT YOU OUGHT TO HAVE 50 PARKING SPACES.
IT'S A PROBLEM. I'M GETTING COMPLAINTS ABOUT CARS BEING TOWED. WE JUST ALLOW PEOPLE TO BUILD BUT THEY HAVE NOWHERE TO PARK. SO THERE'S A PROBLEM.
THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED. OKAY COUNCIL LADY ALLEN YOU'RE
SO LISTENING TO WHAT PREVIOUS SPEAKER SAID, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, SO WE'RE TAKING AWAY WHEN YOU SAY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSES TOGETHER, RIGHT? H EIGHT PLEX. WE'RE TAKING AWAY THE EIGHT PLEX SO THEY CAN BUILD 20 IN THE ROW IF THEY WANT TO NOW.
AND THEN, WE'RE SAYING THAT THERE DOESN'T HAVE TO OFF THE
YOU STILL HAVE TO MINIMUM PARKING CURRENT THE ORDINANCE SAYS IT MUST BE AT THE SIDE OR REAR.
THIS SAYS IT SHOULD BE AT THE SIDE OR REAR.
SO STILL ARE TO HAVE SAME AMOUNT PARKING SPACES BUT IN INSTANCES PUTTING AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY ESPECIALLY IF A CORNER PROPERTY MAY BE ONLY PLACE YOU CAN HAVE IT WE CAN'T ENFORCE SIDE OR REAR ON A PROPERTY. WE ALSO HAVE INSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE RESIDENTS NOT SIDE BY SIDE BY SIDE BY SIDE FOR UP TO 8 YOU MAY HAVE VERTICAL OR OVER A STORE FRONT.
FRNLTSZ ANYBODY SELLS V'S SKWES ABOUT SECTION 2.
HEARING NONE SEEING WE'RE READY FOR NUMBER 3.
>> NUMBER 3 IS IN SAME SECTION 4.1.1.
BUILDING SET BACK EXCEPTIONS THIS REALLY BORN OUT OF A COUNTY ISSUE WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST YEAR.
AS YOU KNOW THERE'S DIFFERENT COUNTY ZONING RESOLUTION, CITY ZONING ORDINANCE. WE'RE MAKING THIS JUST SO IT'S IN BOTH DOCUMENTS AND APPLICABLE BOTH CITY AND COUNTY WIDE.
IF A DEVELOPMENT STARTS NEXT YEAR PROPERTY AND SAY PUTS A ROAD NEXT TO YOUR PROPERTY. PREVIOUS TO THIS EXEMPTION EXEMPTION THAT NEW SET BACK FROM THAT ROAD WOULD APPLIED ON YOUR SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE. AS LONG YOU DON'T REDEVELOPMENT DEVELOP OR FURTHER DEVELOP YOUR PROPERTY YOU DO NOT HAVE THE TO COMPLY WITH NEW SET BACK YOU BECOME A LEGAL NONCONFORMING USE. WE HAVE SOME ISSUES IN COUNTY WHERE, EITHER SPIKE STRIPS OPEN SPACE OR WEIRD LOTS WERE BEING CREATE TO KEEP AN EXISTING LOT OFF THE ROAD BY JUST 5 OR TEN FEET. THIS KIND OF SILLY TO DO.
THIS KIND OF EXEMPTS EXISTING LAND OWNER FROM ANY NEGATIVE PR PROBLEMS FROM WHEN NEW DEVELOPMENT GOES NEXT TO THEIR PROPERTY.
ANY QUESTIONS OF COUNCIL REGARDING SECTION 3? HEARING NONE SEEING NONE WE'RE READY FOR SECTION 4 MR. TYNDALL.
>> THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO HELP STAFF AND HELP ENGINEER AND ALSO WE'RE GOING TO MAKING SURE THAT COUNTY AND THE STET ORDINANCES FOLLOW EACH OTHER. THEY WERE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ON THIS EXISTI THIS SECTION.
DURING A WE WILL GET SITE PLAN NOT EVERY SITE PLAN GETS VOTING ORDER BN I PLANNING COMMISSION. SECTION NUMBER 5.10 SAYS THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT EXEMPT FROM GOING TO PLANNING COMMISSION.
STAY STAFF LEVEL. A SPEEDS UP THE PROCESS AND WE GET SAME AMOUNT REVIEW GOES OUT TO ALL DEPARTMENTS STAFF GETS COMMENTS BACK BUT INSTEAD OF HAVING PUBLIC HEARING ON IT, THEY ARE DEEMED LESS IMPACT NOT A MAJOR IMPACT LARGER DEVELOPMENT AND STAFF JUST HANDLED REVIEW BETWEEN EACH EVEN OTHER. WHAT THIS DOES IS FURTHER CLARIFIES IT THAT, IF THE PROPERTY IS AN ACRE OR WLES.
A LOT OF RECORD OR ALREADY PLATTED SUBDIVISION LOT, YOU CAN ADD UP TO 25 PERCENT TO YOUR CURRENT BUILDING.
[01:20:01]
AND IN NEW SIGN OVER 50 FOOT IN HEIGHT NEW NEW BUILDING LESS THAN 15,000 SQUARE FEET ANY NEW MULTI FAMILY DEVELOPMENT LESS THAN 16 UNITS OR ANY COMMUNICATION TOWERS OR EQUIPMENT, THOSE ARE ALL DONE AT THE STAFF LEVEL AND AREN'T REQUIREDED TO GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION.ALSO CLARIFIES, A LITTLE AREA HERE WHERE WE STARTED TO RECEIVE DIGITAL COPIES, AND LONG-TERM GOAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO GO MORE DIGITAL LESS PAPER. RIGHT NOW WE DO GET 16 PAPER COPIES OF JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING. I LOVE TO START REDUCING THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. AND WORKING WITH OUR OTHER DEPARTMENTS, CITY ASK COUNTY AND COUNTY DEPARTMENTS THOSE THAT CAN TAKE DIGITAL. WITH PDF COPIES INSTEAD.
AND SECTION ALSO UPS THE REVIEW TIME FOR SEVEN TO 10 CALENDAR DAYS. WOEN REASON WE PUT TEN IF YOU LOOK A THIS PAST WEEK OUT 7 CALENDARS WE WERE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NEARLY WE JUST UPPED TO 2E7B INSTEAD BUSINESS DAY CALENDAR DAYS TO THAT SECTION AGAIN NUMBER 4 JUST TALKS ABOUT UPDATING THE STAFF REVIEW AND FURTHER CLARIFYING WHAT GOES INTO THE STAFF WHAT GOES TO THE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
>> THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL. ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT SECTION 4?
>> HEARING NONE SEEING NONE WE'RE READY FOR SECTION 5.
EVERYBODY FAVORITE TOPIC. >> BLTHS FINAL SECTION UNDER SITE PLANS, CURRENT LANGUAGE STATES SITE PLANS SHALL INCLUDE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PLANS TO ACCOM ACCOMMODATE INTERNAL SIDEWALKS KRAUSE WALKS ACCESS RAMPS TO MEET ADA REGULATIONS AT TIME OF CONSTRUCTION.
WE'RE ADDING? NESS THAT SIDEWALKS SHALL BE REQUIRED AT THE DISCRETION OF REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE STREET DEPARTMENT ALREADY DOES REQUIRE SIDEWALKS AT CERTAIN TIMES. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE MAY HAVE A NEED TO REQUIRE SIDEWALK WHERE THEY DON'T THIS JUST GIVES US THIS OPPORTUNITY WHEN WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REQUIRE SIDEWALKS OF A SITE PLAN. THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL.
ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCIL LADY BUTLER YOU'RE
RECOGNIZED. >> JUST TO CLARIFY WENT THROUGH I READ ALL OF THIS LAST NIGHT. WOULD YOU SAY THAT BASICALLY THIS WILL IS WITH EXCEPTION OF THE SIDEWALK ADDITION, BASICALLY
MAKING IT LESS STRINGENT? >> THE NUMBER 4 HELPS STAFF OUT WITH THE WORKLOAD AND BALANCING WORKLOAD.
AND THEN THE NUMBER ONE CHANGE THAT OPENS UP THE SET BACKS A LITTLE BIT MAKE EASIER TO PUT LARGER HOUSE ON SMALLER LOT.
NUMBER 2 IS LANGUAGE THAT'S ALREADY KIND OF RESTRICTIVE WE'RE OPENING THAT ONE UP A LITTLE LESS RESTRICTIVE THERE.
AND SET BACK EXEMPTION TRYING TO VOID PUTTING UNDUE HARDSHIP ON
EXISTING PROPERTY OWNERS >> THAT WHAT I LIKE LIKE LESS
LEGISLATION >> THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY BUTLER. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT SECTION 5? COUNCIL LADY SMITH YOU'RE
RECOGNIZED. >> CAN COULD I ASK YOU TO TALK
INTO YOUR MICROPHONE PLEASE? >> YOU'RE ON.
NOW YOU ARE. ANYWAY I WAS TALKING ABOUT INTAUKS BEING REQUIRED AT THE DISCRETION REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION. HOW GOING TO A REQUIREMENT WHEN YOU SAY AT THEIR DISCRETION, SO YOU GOING TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION BASED ON WHAT?
>> TYPE OF USE AND SURROUNDING AREAS.
I'LL GIVE YOU TWO EXAMPLES. ONE WE JUST REVIEWED APARTMENTS THIS PAST MONTH NEXT TO THE THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
INITIALLY IT CAME IN A WENT DOWN AND CAME ALL THE WAY BACK UP CAROLINE. WE GOT SECOND SIDEWALK SO KIDS DON'T DIDN'T HAVE TO GO OUT AND THE AROUND BLOCK THEY WILL GO RIGHT TO THE SIDEWALK AND THEY WILL ALREADY BE ONLY COUPLE HUNDRED FEET FROM THE SCHOOL. THIS HELPS US GET THOSE THINGS ACCOMPLISHED. OFTEN WE HAVE TO USE WIT AND THE THE GOOD LOOKS TO GET THAT DONE NOW WE CAN HAVE REQUIREMENT TO DO THAT. AN EXAMPLE WE WOULD NOT USE THIS PART DISCRETION TERMINAL ROAD OFF MOSTLY INDUSTRIAL ROAD.
IF A USE CAME IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT BLOCK I DON'T THINK WE WOULD REQUIRE SIDEWALKS TO JUST MEET IN MIDDLE OF BLOCK WHEN IT'S NOTHING BUT INDUSTRIAL TRUCK AND AUTO USES ALL WAY AROUND IT. THERE IS DISCRETION TO BE APPLIED DEPENDING ON WHAT USE IS WHAT THE AREA LOOKS LIKE.
[01:25:07]
NEEDS TO BE SOME KIND OF STANDARD RULE INSTEAD OF AT THE DISCRETION. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE STANDARD RULE BASED ON AGREE WITH AT YOUR CONCESSION. BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD KNOW AND WHY WE WANT IT THE. YOU KNOW I JUST I JUST THINK YOU NEED TO COME UP WITH A STANDARD RULE JUST COMBAFD UPON YOURDISCRETION. >> I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I THINK MY CONCERN WOULD IF WE TRIEDED TO RESULTS TO EVERY POSSIBLE SITUATION WE WOULD HAVE PAGES ON JUST
>> MAYBE YOU'RE NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M WHAT I'M SAYING.
A STANDARD RULE WHEN IT COMES TO ANOTHER YOU AT YOUR DISCRETION. THAT MY CONCERN.
BECAUSE AS I SAID I THINK YOU NEED TO SET A STANDARD SIDEWALKS ARE REQUIRED LET'S SAY FOR SCHOOL. SO CHILDREN CAN HAVE A GET ACROSS THE STREET. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO.
COMMON IT COMES TO. BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF UPROAR COMES TO SIDEWALKS WHY DO THEY DO THAT WE HAVE THAT COMPLAINT.
YOU KNOW THAT. SO I'M JUST SAYING WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING, YOU KNOW MAKE US STANDARD RULE ABOUT IT.
YOU KNOW, HEY DO SOME CHEM EXEMPTIONS.
>> I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING I WILL ALSO THROW OUT THERE THEY AWAY DO NOT REVIEW DUPLEX IT IS WOULD NOT BE AN INDIVIDUAL HOUSE OR DUPLEX.
>> SUBDIVISIONS ARE REQUIRED TO ALL NEW SUBDIVISIONS RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AS HAVE SIDEWALKS AS PART OF THE SITE PLAN.
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL LADY SMITH. COUNCIL LADY REYNOLDS YOU'RE
RECOGNIZED. >> YI SIR I JUST WANT TO ASK, WHEN YOU SAY AT THE CONCESSION OF REGIONAL PLANNING THAT MEAN VOTED ON ECONOMIST WHEN YOU SAY AT THE DISCRETION?
>> IT DEPENDS ON WHAT KIND OF PLAN.
IF STAFF LEVEL PLAN STAFF WOULD THAT LET THAT DETERMINATION PLAY OUT. IF SOMEONE HAS AN A PEEL IT WOULD GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION. WOW I DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD SIDEWALK THEY APPEAL THAT TO PLANNING COMMISSION IF STAFF REVIEWED IF GOING TO PLANNING COMMISSION THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD HAVE THAT HEARING AND FOR SOMEONE TO SAY THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO IT. I WILL SAY, BEFORE THIS IS LANGUAGE WE HAD ALMOST NOTHING TO REQUIRE SIDEWALKS.
I THINK THIS IS A STEP IN RIGHT DIRECTION
>> I THINK SUPPORT SOME FLEXIBILITY IF THEY DON'T AGREE THE ABILITY TO APPEAL. I MEAN THAT MAKES ME FEEL BETTER ABOUT THAT THEY DO HAVE THAT. AND THEN, SIDEWALKS, SO THIS IS, SIDEWALKS ARE ONLY REQUIRED ACTUALLY WITHIN SUBDIVISIONS.
YOU PUT UP HOUSES THAT NOT SUBDIVISION THEY DO NOT HAVE THE
TO PUT UP SIDEWALKS >> THE CORRECT.
AND SINGLE LOT SAY ON MAXI ROAD OR A SIDE ROAD OR SIDE ROADS IN YOUR SUBDIVISION, YOU KNOW C PICTURE A ROAD THAT DOESN'T A
SIDEWALK >> SINGLE HOME CAME IN WE WOULD NOT, THAT WOULD GO RIGHT TO CODE DEPARTMENT WE DON'T REVIEW SINGLE HOUSE. BUT A NEW SECTION OF THAT SUBDIVISION CAME IN IT WOULD HAVE TO MEET THE CURRENT STREET STANDARD WHICH IS AT 24, 26 FEET WIDE.
PAIFT CURB GUT PAVEMENT CURB, GUTTER.
R 6 IS ZONE SIDEWALK IS ALWAYS REQUIRED YOU WILL SEE R 6 WILL ALWAYS HAVE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF IT BECAUSE OF THE COMPACT NATURE OF THAT AND WALK ABILITY WE HOPE TO BUILD UPON AS WE ZONE AREAS R 6. INFILL R 6, MULTI FAMILY WILL BE REQUIRED. INTERNAL CIRCULATION OUT TO THE ROAD. AND LONG-TERM GOAL OF OURS TO HOPEFULLY START CONNECTING THESE THINGS BOTH WITH PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE WHERE IT REYNOLDS I THINK THERE BECKER. I REFER YOU MAY WANT TO THE AS
[01:30:04]
YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT THIS IN PREP PREPARATION FOR YOUR VOTEON THURSDAY >> THANK YOU ADDING CONTINGENCY OF SIDEWALKS. THAT'S REALLY APPRECIATED OOP I KNOW PEOPLE WITHIN OUR COMMUNITIES APPRECIATE THAT AS WELL. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL. WELL SAID.
QUESTION I HAVE, THAT COMPLETES THIS ALL 5 SECTIONS IS THERE
>> GOOD. QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHAT'S THE PROCESS YOU ALL WENT THROUGH TO ARRIVE AT THESE CHANGES?
>>SURE. WE KEEP A RUNNING LIST OF ISSUES AS WE TALK TO DEVELOPER AS WE'RE GOING USING OUR OWN CODE, BUT THAT EITHER READS WEIRD OR COULD A LITTLE MORE CLARIFIED.
OR SITE PLANS AND DOES DOESN'T QUITE FIT MOLD WE KEEP RUNNING NOTES OF THIS. WE CONSIDER LOW HANGING FRUIT WE LOT LARGER ISSUES. LARGER THOUGHTS.
WE MENTIONED R 2 B POTENTIAL ZONE THAT MAYBE AN IN BETWEEN R 6 AND R22A. THAT WILL BE A LARGER CHANGE.
A LITTLE BIT OF LOW HANGING FRUIT.
SORRY TO DO THIS TO COUNCIL MEMBERS IT'S NOT EVEN WE SO MULTIPLE AMOUNT OF CHANGES AT ONE TIME WE TRY TO DO ONE AT A TIME, BUT THESE ARE ALL CONSIDER RELATIVELY SMALL VIDEO.
BUT AGAIN, MAKING GOOD CHANGES FOR THE CITY
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING ORDINANCE 61? REMEMBER EVERYTHING UP TO THIS POINT IS FIRST READING.
OKAY. WE'RE READY FOR ITEM NUMBER 8
RESOLUTION 43. >> I DON'T HAVE SLIDE ON THIS ONE. THIS IS FOLLOW-UP FINAL PLAN AN ANNEX ASIAN FOR 11. THIS WILL BE LOOP PROPERTY.
SCHWINN SOMETHING ANNEXED INTO AT THE FOLLOW PLANS THAT 6-MONTH MARK AND 6 MONTHS AFTER THAT IF IT'S NOT BE TIED.
WHEN WE DO PLAN OF SERVICE WE ANNEX A PIECE PROPERTY WE LOOK DIFFERENT 15 AREAS OF PUBLIC SAFETY PROVISION ACTION ZONI ZO UTILITIES GATS AND WATER THEY ONLY ITEM THAT WAS LEFT OPEN AFTER THE LAST PLAN OF SERVICE ON THIS PROPERTY WAS THAT CDE HAD YET TO THE EXTEND TLLIGHT BD THAT AS ACCOMPLISHED.
ALL RAY PAIR BEEN HAVE TRANSFERRED OVER I LETTER FROM THE CD. THIS ESSENCE CLOSES OUT ANNEX ASIAN AND CITY CLEAR ALLOWS US TO CONTINUE TO ANNEX OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE FUTURE.
I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS ON IT. REALIZE I YOU HAVEN'T VOTED ON THAT WE WILL SENT OUT A MAP SO YOU KNOW ABOUT AREA WEE TALKING
THANK YOU MR. TYNDALL ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT RESOLUTION 43? HEARING NONE, SEEING NONE I THINK THAT WINDS YOU UP DOESN'T
[01:35:02]
ALL RIGHT THANK YOU FOR YOUR OUTSTANDING WORK.
[2) CONSENT AGENDA]
WORRY NOW READY TORE CONSENT AGENDA PART OF OUR AN AGENDA.MADAM CLERK IF YOU WILL READ ITEMS PLEASE.
[9) MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS]
>> THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR EXECUTIVE SESSION IS MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS AND ANY COUNCIL MEMBER HAVE A COMMENT THEY WISH TO SPEAK? MR. COUNCILMAN RICHMAN.
>> CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF OUR NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND I REMEMBER BEING IN THAT POSITION NOT TO LONG AGO AND WELCOME TO THE COUNCIL AND I LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING BETTER ACQUAINTED WITH YOUR WORK AND WHO YOU ARE AS A LEADER AND LET'S TAKE CLARKVILLE AND KEEP IT NUMBER ONE. EVERY WARD WINS. THANK YOU.
>> WELL SAID. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS?
>> I HAVE ONE. >> YES, COUNCILMAN RED. >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO THANK MY CONSTITUENTS AND I WOULD LIKE TO CONGRATULATE ALL OF MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WE HAVE ON THE COUNCIL AND THE ONES THAT WERE NEWLY ELECTED AND CONGRATULATE COUNCILMAN GARRETT ON THE MAYOR PROTEM AND I'M CONFIDENT HE WILL DO A WONDERFUL JOCKEY WOULD AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU, MAYOR, FOR NOMINATING ME TO BE THE MAYOR PROTEM AND LOOKING
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH EVERYONE. >> ANY OTHER MEMBER OF COUNCIL
[01:40:04]
HAVE A COMMENT? I WILL ANNOUNCE WE'LL HAVE AN ORIENTATION -- I'M SORRY,COUNCIL, YOU'RE RECOGNIZED. >> WHEN WILL WE FOUND OUT WHAT COMMITTEES WE'RE ON?
>> I'LL SEND THIS OUT TOMORROW? WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER MEETING NEXT THURSDAY, 3:30 P.M. AND WE'LL COVER IN THE FIRST HOUR, THE ETHIC'S CODE, A PROVISION OF THE CITY CODE AND THEN ALICIA HODGE WILL DO AN OPEN MEETINGS PRESENTATION THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT TO US AND THAT WILL BEGIN AT 4:30 AND YOU'LL BE GETTING MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.
ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? WE WILL CONSIDER THIS ADJOURNED AND CLOSED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.