WEBVTT 00:00:00.130 --> 00:00:07.800 - Okay, everyone, it's 530, so I will go ahead and call to order the Flying Commission Administrative 00:00:07.800 --> 00:00:15.700 - Meeting. And at this meeting, there will be no public comment taken. Do we need to call the roll? Yes, 00:00:15.700 --> 00:00:23.601 - we can go ahead. Please call the roll. Okay. David Bush? Yes, here. Margaret Clements here. Thank you. 00:00:23.601 --> 00:00:28.126 - Tom Enright-Randolph? Here. Pat Farris? Here. Rudy Fields? 00:00:29.442 --> 00:00:40.030 - David Henry? Jeff Morris? Here. Joe Van Deventer? Julie Thomas? Here. And then Steve Bishop? Here. OK. 00:00:40.030 --> 00:00:50.618 - So in person, we have six voting plan commission members and one non-voting plan commission member and 00:00:50.618 --> 00:00:58.430 - a quorum. We don't have to introduce evidence. No, we don't. OK. All right. 00:00:59.874 --> 00:01:07.227 - We'll go ahead and take away with the first item. Yeah, we'll go ahead and go to the first item on the 00:01:07.227 --> 00:01:14.438 - agenda. OK. This was just a report that we did. The GIS team in the surveyors office did publish the 00:01:14.438 --> 00:01:21.863 - road inventory map. So you could use that at any point to look up your address and check to see if your 00:01:21.863 --> 00:01:29.502 - property abuts a county maintained roadway. I think this will be helpful in communicating with the public. 00:01:29.602 --> 00:01:38.125 - whether or not their road would be, you know, cloud for the winter, for instance, or any other consideration 00:01:38.125 --> 00:01:46.101 - for replacing them sidewalks or things to that nature. So we're happy to have this as a published map 00:01:46.101 --> 00:01:53.998 - and it's on the GIS Division website. Thank you, Kron. Thanks. So has this been posted? It is on the 00:01:53.998 --> 00:01:59.550 - GIS Division website. It's at other places if you want us to do like a 00:01:59.906 --> 00:02:06.568 - We can do press release or we're thinking about doing something like that. So on the county's website, 00:02:06.568 --> 00:02:13.230 - those notices you put out? Yes. This would be worthy of a notice to let people know about it. I agree. 00:02:13.230 --> 00:02:19.827 - I do have a question regarding this. If someone notices that there is some road that's not maintained 00:02:19.827 --> 00:02:27.006 - by the county that they would like to be, is there some way that they could easily identify that through this? 00:02:27.938 --> 00:02:33.661 - like next steps, basically. Yeah, because I could see somebody going on there and be like, 00:02:33.661 --> 00:02:39.949 - oh, my neighborhood, my development is not part of this, but I'm worried, so. Right. When you start 00:02:39.949 --> 00:02:46.427 - the map, it does have sort of a disclaimer, and it does point people to reach out. This is the Highway 00:02:46.427 --> 00:02:53.030 - Department's dispatch, and we're hoping, and then there's also a list of private contractors, if they're 00:02:53.030 --> 00:02:55.294 - foreclosed or there's no emergency. 00:02:55.458 --> 00:03:02.400 - but I would hope that people would start with that number and then we would be able to communicate to 00:03:02.400 --> 00:03:09.411 - them. I'm not to say that they don't get bounced around a couple of times, but it's usually not a very 00:03:09.411 --> 00:03:16.625 - straightforward answer when people ask, how do I get into the inventory? It's usually a little bit longer 00:03:16.625 --> 00:03:22.206 - of an answer. It was just more, is there an avenue for intake just to start that? 00:03:22.306 --> 00:03:28.602 - you know, discussion. Right. Really good. Starts with a bubble cover problem. There you go. I have the 00:03:28.602 --> 00:03:35.144 - scary part. So I would suggest you add it as a notice. Okay. It's visibility. I mean, it's a good product. 00:03:35.144 --> 00:03:41.562 - We ought to take it. There is a possibility of maybe working with, I would assume Lynette would probably 00:03:41.562 --> 00:03:47.675 - be kind of the contact at the highway and John and putting kind of the one, two, three survey, kind 00:03:47.675 --> 00:03:51.710 - of what you did with the draft zoning map to potentially just get 00:03:51.970 --> 00:03:59.359 - feedback. On the map? Yeah, if there's any like errors or omissions by accident because some of the 00:03:59.359 --> 00:04:06.821 - roads are public and then at a certain point they go private. So if we could get feedback from folks 00:04:06.821 --> 00:04:14.210 - that are using it. Also to your point too, just I know I could speak with them too by trying to let 00:04:14.210 --> 00:04:20.638 - you guys organic organically kind of developments. But I know you're familiar with the 00:04:20.834 --> 00:04:35.557 - CDO draft zoning map, so kind of very similar to that. Okay, and that's all that I had on that item. 00:04:35.557 --> 00:04:45.470 - If anyone doesn't have anything else, we can move on. Okay, please. 00:04:45.698 --> 00:04:55.128 - We have been operating under our new fee schedule that was adopted December 1st. And we have noticed 00:04:55.128 --> 00:05:04.465 - a few things that we would like to have either corrected, added, removed. So what we've done is put 00:05:04.465 --> 00:05:09.694 - in red new items that we'd like to break out for a fee. 00:05:10.434 --> 00:05:17.874 - And then in yellow, we have one thing that we're wanting to strike. This is actually an error because 00:05:17.874 --> 00:05:25.459 - it's listed twice. And then below, we have another item that we would like to add. I would like to talk 00:05:25.459 --> 00:05:33.190 - about this one just for a moment. So we'll go through each of these. This petitioner requests to continue 00:05:33.190 --> 00:05:39.390 - the petition on, for instance, board zoning appeals and regular commission meetings. 00:05:39.618 --> 00:05:47.346 - we are required to send our agendas to the newspaper. Each one of those blocks of text equals somewhere 00:05:47.346 --> 00:05:55.223 - around 10 to $15 every single time we notice something. So when you see a petition that's been continuing 00:05:55.223 --> 00:06:03.025 - for months and months and months, that's 10 to $15 times the number of times they've continued. We don't 00:06:03.025 --> 00:06:09.118 - wanna penalize petitioners who we are needing more information for, they show up, 00:06:09.282 --> 00:06:15.848 - You know, we decide we need more information. We continue them. But we have a lot of petitioners that 00:06:15.848 --> 00:06:22.479 - file and then they do not meet the... You've already spent the money for... We already spent the money 00:06:22.479 --> 00:06:29.174 - for the notice. So we're trying to keep up a little bit with the paper notice fees. And our budget went 00:06:29.174 --> 00:06:35.998 - down. Right. I know this. We had to reduce budget. So that would be a fee increase. We're still deciding. 00:06:36.546 --> 00:06:43.065 - I think this would be petitioner-led continuances, and sometimes there's a limit, sometimes there's 00:06:43.065 --> 00:06:49.584 - not. If, for instance, you have a petition on, let's say, tonight's the regular planning commission 00:06:49.584 --> 00:06:56.104 - meetings agenda, and you decide, I'm going to continue this to August, we would not charge them the 00:06:56.104 --> 00:07:02.688 - months of April, May, June, July, because we can put on the next month, continue to August, and then 00:07:02.688 --> 00:07:04.318 - we wouldn't have to keep 00:07:04.418 --> 00:07:11.954 - noticing it. So we are going to try to incentivize people to kind of have a more strategic understanding 00:07:11.954 --> 00:07:19.274 - of when they'll be heard and that way we can save everyone time and money. So that's this item and we 00:07:19.274 --> 00:07:26.666 - figured that $20 covers actual notice and then administrative time to just keep up with that. Just due 00:07:26.666 --> 00:07:30.398 - to the processes are we talking about just planning 00:07:31.490 --> 00:07:37.752 - for instance, if it gets continued at the drainage board or if it gets continued at the commissioner 00:07:37.752 --> 00:07:44.014 - level. Right. This would just be for planning. We're thinking BZA and planned commission are the two 00:07:44.014 --> 00:07:50.462 - meetings that we have to make a notice. That sounds right. I'm just curious because those are two other 00:07:50.462 --> 00:07:56.972 - areas where notice has to be made. Sometimes it's not a paid notice, but we have to send it to the paper 00:07:56.972 --> 00:08:00.382 - per the codes. I'm fine with it. Okay. I like it being 00:08:01.474 --> 00:08:12.298 - and then occasionally we would be able to waive the fee if it seemed reasonable. And then this item 00:08:12.298 --> 00:08:23.231 - we've separated type B and type C out. We did pretty drastically increase the fee for administrative 00:08:23.231 --> 00:08:28.318 - subdivisions because they've involved a lot of 00:08:28.994 --> 00:08:36.189 - Title work, deed work, a lot of staff time to determine what they're starting with. But these two types 00:08:36.189 --> 00:08:43.177 - of administrative subdivisions are court decrees and correctives. And so they typically only involve 00:08:43.177 --> 00:08:50.372 - working at new and old legal descriptions and not a plat. So they're much less work than the other ones 00:08:50.372 --> 00:08:57.982 - that we left up here. Type D is for creating new right of way on a plat. Type D is shifting lot lines between 00:09:00.642 --> 00:09:08.333 - cemetery plots and type G is new, that's the conservation lot creation. So all of those involve plat 00:09:08.333 --> 00:09:16.253 - review, which we feel like that fee is still appropriate. And then B or C would lower back down to more 00:09:16.253 --> 00:09:24.097 - closely to what it was before December 1st of 2025. And that's largely because we're mostly just doing 00:09:24.097 --> 00:09:30.494 - D review and not the plat review as well. Those fees that you're proposing based on 00:09:30.978 --> 00:09:39.376 - like an aggregate average amount of time you're spending on these? We get into the labor analysis for 00:09:39.376 --> 00:09:47.774 - each category, so, oh, yes. We've had a couple recently where we've, again, recap the labor. And then 00:09:47.774 --> 00:09:56.254 - this is something that we have put into the CDO. It was a late amendment in the old ordinance as well. 00:09:56.354 --> 00:10:03.141 - But we did add that we require a permit when you increase the number of bedrooms, because it's typically 00:10:03.141 --> 00:10:09.734 - a septic situation in the county. We do not have a current fee for that, but we are doing the work of 00:10:09.734 --> 00:10:16.779 - issuing a permit and checking their septic, and it sometimes involves a bit of coordination. So we recommend 00:10:16.779 --> 00:10:23.566 - a $50 fee for that permit. It would not be a fee if it's a residential remodel without bedroom increase, 00:10:23.566 --> 00:10:25.182 - that just gets a waiver. 00:10:25.346 --> 00:10:32.420 - But this requires a permit from us to make sure that we're verifying as a last step that their septic 00:10:32.420 --> 00:10:39.771 - is capable of handling the bedroom increase. And then, like I said, this was a duplicate, the residential 00:10:39.771 --> 00:10:46.776 - accessory building that's down here at 150. And then we wanted to make that a little bit more clear, 00:10:46.776 --> 00:10:48.926 - so we made the example garage. 00:10:49.730 --> 00:10:57.843 - And then we have two people in our office that are notaries, and we do not have a charge for it right 00:10:57.843 --> 00:11:05.955 - now, but we would like to implement a charge because we do support their notary license. So those are 00:11:05.955 --> 00:11:15.102 - the changes. There was, I need to look at what was the final version of the document, but House Enrolled Act 1001. 00:11:15.202 --> 00:11:21.999 - does have some language in it or did have some language in it. So last we checked about fees and when 00:11:21.999 --> 00:11:28.662 - it starts to be January 1st of 2027, they had some language in there that says we mainly update our 00:11:28.662 --> 00:11:35.459 - fees every five years. So we do want to make sure that the schedule is in good shape before we get to 00:11:35.459 --> 00:11:40.990 - that point. So are these five years from one December or five years from one July? 00:11:41.858 --> 00:11:49.222 - I think it'll be five years from December 31st, 2026, because that bill goes into effect January 1, 00:11:49.222 --> 00:11:56.659 - 2027. I think it will be whenever I would hope we do an amendment close to the new year. Then we get 00:11:56.659 --> 00:12:04.170 - five-year time. You're not looking to revise anything else on this list between now and that date? It 00:12:04.170 --> 00:12:11.166 - seems like it's doing pretty well right now, but I'm not to say we won't revise anything else. 00:12:11.394 --> 00:12:17.943 - So this was an aggregate of- Because you're locked in for five years is what I'm talking about. I know. 00:12:17.943 --> 00:12:24.240 - There's no adjustment because of inflation or anything like the cost of living are replaced, right? 00:12:24.240 --> 00:12:30.601 - Right. So what happens if this, through the fee schedule, if you start running a deficit, because in 00:12:30.601 --> 00:12:37.150 - that five years, we just start losing out on basically the amount that it costs to do the work relative 00:12:37.150 --> 00:12:41.054 - to what we're already in. What happens at that point in time? 00:12:41.442 --> 00:12:49.828 - We're already at a deficit. So we may be going to cover about 25 to 30% of our bread. I think we hope 00:12:49.828 --> 00:12:58.131 - to cover about that maybe a little bit more. And how much of that fee schedule actually gets touched 00:12:58.131 --> 00:13:06.434 - in a regular course of business? Like a month or a quarter, like is most of those enacted throughout 00:13:06.434 --> 00:13:11.038 - the stuff that you typically work on? So would you say, 00:13:11.266 --> 00:13:17.932 - Yeah, companies are going to move right. Sure. But like, you know, in, let's say, you know, summer or 00:13:17.932 --> 00:13:24.860 - November, sorry, not November, September, you know, three, six months down the road, should we reevaluate 00:13:24.860 --> 00:13:31.527 - this and try, you know, just like, are you making some headway on that deficit, you know, to where we 00:13:31.527 --> 00:13:38.062 - can actually feel confident going into the end of the year? Or, you know, what happens if you run a 00:13:38.062 --> 00:13:40.350 - surplus? Right. Well, I would say, 00:13:40.610 --> 00:13:46.968 - The labor analysis was based on the 2026 salary COLA adjustment. When I say we run a deficit, that's 00:13:46.968 --> 00:13:53.642 - because we do a lot of other things that aren't in this fee schedule. So we take phone calls from people. 00:13:53.642 --> 00:14:00.126 - I look at my run into the inventory. We're not going to charge them for that time on the phone. We had 00:14:00.642 --> 00:14:06.975 - Well, I think we had determined that we had over 600. What do we call player of the day inquiries in 00:14:06.975 --> 00:14:13.371 - a year? So we have quite a few, like, 40 per person per month, getting quite a few calls. Maybe cases 00:14:13.371 --> 00:14:19.390 - are created from there, but we have a lot of lead time to talking to the public from when they. 00:14:19.522 --> 00:14:28.117 - from that point to educate them and then when they actually file. So with a lot of what we would call 00:14:28.117 --> 00:14:33.342 - free. But should we be baking that into this week's schedule? 00:14:33.570 --> 00:14:39.593 - We can talk about that. Yes, the labor analysis that we did was sort of after we educated them on, 00:14:39.593 --> 00:14:45.860 - you know, this is what the ordinance says. You need a variance. You can make that decision if you want 00:14:45.860 --> 00:14:52.004 - to apply for the variance or, for instance, you can move your shed to meet the setback and you don't 00:14:52.004 --> 00:14:57.054 - need the variance. So it's sort of like it depends. It's more finicky on the time. 00:14:57.474 --> 00:15:03.825 - but pre filing, then we know it's pretty predictable. Once you file variance, we kind of know the hours 00:15:03.825 --> 00:15:10.054 - that it will take for that case, depending on the number of variances and things like that. So we did 00:15:10.054 --> 00:15:16.467 - try to think through, and I'm happy to share with you because it came out last year. So we have an Excel 00:15:16.467 --> 00:15:22.818 - spreadsheet with them. It's just trying to future proof since once the end of the year old around where 00:15:22.818 --> 00:15:25.566 - we're stuck with their life or not. So that, 00:15:25.698 --> 00:15:32.382 - I mean, and I guess that would be the question is if we did adjust it again before the end of the year, 00:15:32.382 --> 00:15:39.001 - what would happen if you did actually have a surplus? What would happen in that instance? I would just 00:15:39.001 --> 00:15:45.621 - like to say that Jackie has done, and Tammy and the planning staff has really done their due diligence 00:15:45.621 --> 00:15:52.047 - with regard to the workflow and the work product and this fee schedule. And one thing that I really 00:15:52.047 --> 00:15:55.582 - admire about your professionalism is that you're aware 00:15:56.098 --> 00:16:04.003 - to the penny, how much money we're down and how, you know, we're never really up, but we provide great 00:16:04.003 --> 00:16:11.678 - services despite those challenges like, for example, the County Council losing track of $4 million, 00:16:11.678 --> 00:16:19.814 - you know, and it costing us a hiring freeze and things like that. So you've planned this, you've balanced 00:16:19.814 --> 00:16:21.886 - it. She understands, yeah. 00:16:22.498 --> 00:16:30.126 - We can certainly put this on the agenda for November. I'm just taking a kick at the end of the year 00:16:30.126 --> 00:16:37.831 - and it's going to be relevant. That sounds good. We'll keep checking back in. So you need to approve 00:16:37.831 --> 00:16:45.459 - any of this now? Yes, so you can at least have real data to track for the next six months. Right. I 00:16:45.459 --> 00:16:49.502 - really want to see how this legal notice speed goes. 00:16:49.634 --> 00:16:58.705 - Are you asking to approve that tonight? Yes, you could approve this tonight if you would want to take 00:16:58.705 --> 00:17:07.954 - a vote on that if the board would. The revenue generated here, it doesn't necessarily revert right back 00:17:07.954 --> 00:17:16.936 - to planning, right? It goes to the county general and so like there are funds that are non-reverting 00:17:16.936 --> 00:17:18.270 - that have been 00:17:18.434 --> 00:17:26.165 - kind of go back to the cash balance. What they bring in here goes back to the larger county general, 00:17:26.165 --> 00:17:33.896 - and then the council weighs that into their decision of their appropriation. So you do report on the 00:17:33.896 --> 00:17:41.703 - dollars coming in, but these dollars that we receive through a calendar year aren't necessarily going 00:17:41.703 --> 00:17:48.286 - to a planning's operational costs. Just not sure if we kind of directly address that. 00:17:48.930 --> 00:17:57.479 - I do agree. Jackie does a tremendous job of looking at these and weighing them for the time spent and 00:17:57.479 --> 00:18:06.111 - trying to find that appropriate dollar amount of charge. Any further discussion? If someone would like 00:18:06.111 --> 00:18:13.822 - to make a motion. I have a motion to approve the fee schedule as presented by the Director. 00:18:14.626 --> 00:18:42.686 - Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. 00:18:43.426 --> 00:18:50.967 - All right, moving along to the next administrative item on our agenda, which is the Ellisville merger 00:18:50.967 --> 00:18:58.434 - summary. Yes. So this was something that was presented to the building association for which some of 00:18:58.434 --> 00:19:05.975 - our other departments are members of our building department as a member of that organization. So our 00:19:05.975 --> 00:19:11.742 - building commissioner came over and let me know that this was being discussed 00:19:12.258 --> 00:19:19.356 - in the community and gave me this handout, so I wanted to share it with you all as it's relevant. In 00:19:19.356 --> 00:19:26.455 - discussing how to kind of disseminate this information, I wanted to provide maybe a few maps or some 00:19:26.455 --> 00:19:33.553 - information and then get from all of you any comments or anything that you would like planning to do 00:19:33.553 --> 00:19:41.214 - and more research. I have some discussion questions at the end, but essentially what they're proposing is to 00:19:41.538 --> 00:19:51.385 - Merge or annex Richland Township into Ellsville. So this dotted green and black line is their current 00:19:51.385 --> 00:20:01.232 - corporate boundary. And then this is partially the city. And then everything in here is currently the 00:20:01.232 --> 00:20:09.534 - campaign. So it's about, the county has about 18,790 acres or only 9.36 square miles. 00:20:09.858 --> 00:20:17.139 - a large area that we're talking about. And then this is the zoning map, just so you get an idea of the 00:20:17.139 --> 00:20:24.207 - components of that area or what the makeup is. It's some light industrial, some mineral extraction, 00:20:24.207 --> 00:20:31.347 - primarily agriculture. There's some residential low density and medium density residential, and then 00:20:31.347 --> 00:20:38.910 - brown is one acre residential as well. So as you get closer to the city, we do have some industrial areas. 00:20:39.010 --> 00:20:46.792 - here as well. And this is PD. That's not parking. So that's the zoning makeup. And then I also wanted 00:20:46.792 --> 00:20:54.573 - to just note some of the environmental constraints. So they have quite a bit of karst density in this 00:20:54.573 --> 00:21:02.279 - area. This is from Indian map. So the blue is sinking streams. The yellow, orange is sinkhole areas. 00:21:02.279 --> 00:21:07.390 - So we have quarry, like I said, quarry areas in this area as well. 00:21:07.522 --> 00:21:15.057 - mixed with low density residential. And then here's the slope map showing just the 25% or greater. And 00:21:15.057 --> 00:21:22.665 - then the floodplain, this really doesn't really address this stuff. There is a jacks to feet creek that 00:21:22.665 --> 00:21:30.127 - goes through here and does cause some issues now and again. So there is some floodplain. So just some 00:21:30.127 --> 00:21:35.102 - discussion questions, forthright question to try and guide us here. 00:21:35.362 --> 00:21:42.334 - if you would like us comparing further information for your review, or if you'd like to discuss any, 00:21:42.334 --> 00:21:49.307 - you know, text or zoning map amendments or anything ahead of the possible merger, or we can just let 00:21:49.307 --> 00:21:56.279 - everything, you know, decide for ourselves how we want to move forward. And I'm going to be going to 00:21:56.279 --> 00:22:02.078 - a conference next Friday, the Indiana chapter of the American Planning Association, 00:22:02.274 --> 00:22:10.952 - They have a session from referendum to reality planning after a town township consolidation. So I'm 00:22:10.952 --> 00:22:19.716 - going to go and learn about how a town of Ellsville did it. Yeah, or yeah, there's a Hamilton County 00:22:19.716 --> 00:22:28.394 - example and it was all because of the Government Modernization Act. So yeah, so I'll be I can write 00:22:28.394 --> 00:22:30.910 - up my notes and report that. 00:22:31.202 --> 00:22:39.068 - My basic question is, and I asked this almost all these cases, that what is the impact on our ordinance 00:22:39.068 --> 00:22:46.631 - with respect to this? Well, we would not be able to administer the CDO in any of these areas. Well, 00:22:46.631 --> 00:22:54.346 - that's talking about the documents. The case. I mean, these are all illustrations they haven't gotten 00:22:54.346 --> 00:23:00.926 - to, like the nuts and bolts, like they could still potentially ask now there had to be 00:23:01.090 --> 00:23:07.126 - in our local or some type of agreement, but like, it's yet to be determined, but we could lose all our 00:23:07.126 --> 00:23:13.045 - planning oversight, our building oversight, even police protection and fire protection, all of that. 00:23:13.045 --> 00:23:18.963 - And I was gonna get to that. They're still discussing as illustrations. I was gonna get to that. And 00:23:18.963 --> 00:23:24.824 - so I'm just saying your question can't really be answered. No, but this is, we're setting the stage 00:23:24.824 --> 00:23:28.574 - for whether we need to do anything, okay? And so at this point, 00:23:29.794 --> 00:23:38.398 - what would be the changes to our ordinance if in fact we lose 40.5 square miles of territory, which 00:23:38.398 --> 00:23:47.089 - is more than half of our area. I think we have, I did the math, 29.36 will remain miles. I mean, you 00:23:47.089 --> 00:23:55.521 - lose over half of your area. So what happens to our ordinance and the fact that it doesn't apply? 00:23:55.521 --> 00:23:57.758 - Is that it? That changes. 00:23:57.890 --> 00:24:04.621 - The map changes. Yeah, exactly right. I mean, so we're no longer responsible for firing police. We're 00:24:04.621 --> 00:24:11.220 - moving the income potentially to the filing. So like it could kind of make everything a little more 00:24:11.220 --> 00:24:17.951 - difficult to administrate as is. I know Commissioner Thomas has a lot to probably weigh in on here as 00:24:17.951 --> 00:24:24.550 - a lot would eventually fall to the Commissioner's dais. And the other point I was going to bring up 00:24:24.550 --> 00:24:25.342 - is revenue. 00:24:25.634 --> 00:24:33.105 - Do we lose any revenue as a result because we're not collecting. The one last thing I think is very 00:24:33.105 --> 00:24:37.438 - important is we reference other county ordinances in our. 00:24:37.634 --> 00:24:45.045 - ordinance like stormwater, highway, and all of those are going to be impacted too. So like we're a MS4 00:24:45.045 --> 00:24:52.239 - community, so we have rate fees for our stormwater. If this occurs, then that's going to have to be 00:24:52.239 --> 00:24:59.434 - addressed too. And again, these are just illustrations they're talking about. But from my following 00:24:59.434 --> 00:25:05.406 - the town council and some of the subcommittees that were appointed by the township 00:25:05.698 --> 00:25:13.610 - trustee and the town council. They seem to actually, I think, being considered of wanting to kind of 00:25:13.610 --> 00:25:21.522 - take those fees and take that jurisdiction over. But again, the devil's in the details. And until we 00:25:21.522 --> 00:25:29.982 - see that referendum, because it goes to a vote, and they have to be ready, and the deadlines are coming up. 00:25:30.754 --> 00:25:36.325 - So I'll pause there. It's just, there's a lot going on. To finish my thought, all I'm trying to figure 00:25:36.325 --> 00:25:41.841 - out is what is the impact that we need to take and look at now to be ready? And I think what you just 00:25:41.841 --> 00:25:47.520 - told me is that it's a wait and see, even though there's potentially you're going to have, I would argue 00:25:47.520 --> 00:25:53.037 - it could even hurt your manning requirements for your, for the various departments here, because that 00:25:53.037 --> 00:25:58.878 - duty is going to shift someplace else. I mean, so the argument goes, I mean, so manning revenue, et cetera. 00:25:59.586 --> 00:26:05.552 - and you're talking about police and fire, and you're talking about probably a longer list of things. 00:26:05.552 --> 00:26:11.754 - They have their own building departments. Yeah, and so as far as what we can do, I don't think you could 00:26:11.754 --> 00:26:17.897 - do anything. I think the only thing that we could consider is if we look at some of the areas that have 00:26:17.897 --> 00:26:23.804 - been voluntarily annexed, what type of development are they shooting for in Alexville that we maybe 00:26:23.804 --> 00:26:25.694 - aren't zoned for in the county? 00:26:25.826 --> 00:26:31.687 - And so to have a conversation with people, if people are calling in and saying, Hey, how many homes 00:26:31.687 --> 00:26:37.549 - can I get? How many, how many lots can I create? And we tell them four or less and they hang up and 00:26:37.549 --> 00:26:43.410 - they call Ellipsville and they tell them, you can have 20 lots or what have you. That's the, that's 00:26:43.410 --> 00:26:49.389 - the conversation that's happening behind the scenes that we don't always hear about. So. Commissioner 00:26:49.389 --> 00:26:54.078 - Thomas has been patiently waiting to weigh in. So can we hear from her, please? 00:26:55.234 --> 00:27:05.097 - Yeah, and I'm never patient, so thank you. I'm chomping at the bit. Yeah, I think it's a wait and see. 00:27:05.097 --> 00:27:15.152 - There are a lot of unknowns and I wouldn't start making decisions or even start worrying at this moment. 00:27:15.152 --> 00:27:22.334 - I believe the deadline is around May for the town council and the township 00:27:22.530 --> 00:27:31.625 - board to vote on whether or not to approve whatever plan it is that they're supposed to have done by 00:27:31.625 --> 00:27:40.720 - the end of this month. If it does pass both boards, both the council and the board, it will go to be 00:27:40.720 --> 00:27:47.294 - a referendum style vote for all Richland Township residents in November. 00:27:47.426 --> 00:27:57.099 - at the general election time. Their plan, just so everybody's clear, is to start doing this to take 00:27:57.099 --> 00:28:06.966 - over to annex. It would be January 1st of 27th. They would have a lot of work to do if the referendum 00:28:06.966 --> 00:28:16.446 - passes. The other thing I will say is that I don't think the issue of housing is relevant because 00:28:17.314 --> 00:28:25.325 - If Ellisville annexes, it's going to charge a local income tax that's a city style income tax in the 00:28:25.325 --> 00:28:33.652 - future when everything changes fiscally across the state. That's not who we are. We're not a town, we're 00:28:33.652 --> 00:28:42.059 - not a city, we're not charging that. I think we have a CDO that went before the entire public, the entire 00:28:42.059 --> 00:28:47.294 - community. I don't think there's anything we should be looking at 00:28:47.458 --> 00:28:54.639 - out of some reaction to anything. The Basque advertisement piece that Jackie included here, 00:28:54.639 --> 00:29:02.756 - let's be clear, it's a red herring. Ellisville wants to do well fiscally, and to do well fiscally, they 00:29:02.756 --> 00:29:10.796 - need to charge a local income tax. To charge a local income tax, you have to be annexed into the town. 00:29:10.796 --> 00:29:17.118 - That's what this is. It's not about housing. It will impact their housing, fine. 00:29:17.506 --> 00:29:25.040 - but they're going to be a town slash small city if this goes through and they will be charging residents 00:29:25.040 --> 00:29:32.359 - an additional local income tax in order to pay those bills. It's not about housing, it's about money. 00:29:32.359 --> 00:29:39.606 - Housing does connect with money in that way. But I just wanted to say those things. I don't think we 00:29:39.606 --> 00:29:46.494 - should spend any time on this at this moment. I don't think we should speculate at this moment. 00:29:46.626 --> 00:29:56.765 - We all know what we have to look at if this passes in November, and we will have to talk about it then 00:29:56.765 --> 00:30:07.003 - and see what happens. But let's see if the plan is done. Let's see if both the council and the Township 00:30:07.003 --> 00:30:14.878 - Board approve it. Let's see what happens. Thank you. Yeah, I agree. It's a lot. 00:30:15.170 --> 00:30:22.360 - to try to figure out what we can address. I think sending the maps of some of the CARS features and 00:30:22.360 --> 00:30:29.550 - the best available floodplain data, even though I'm sure they have it, who knows, could be helpful. 00:30:29.550 --> 00:30:36.884 - I do think that part two of the question, should we be considering the zoning around these areas? But 00:30:36.884 --> 00:30:41.054 - one thing I was going to say is it would be nice to start 00:30:41.474 --> 00:30:49.376 - tracking the voluntary annexation so we can kind of see how that is progressing. Like when did we see 00:30:49.376 --> 00:30:57.277 - this uptick or seeing a consistency to people volunteering annexing over there. But one issue that is 00:30:57.277 --> 00:31:05.257 - gonna be very difficult is they're in the town, which I think then that means they're gonna get sewer. 00:31:05.257 --> 00:31:11.454 - So even with the questions you posed of is it because they can get more density 00:31:12.226 --> 00:31:17.878 - Yeah, they probably can because they probably can get sewer and they might be able to get something 00:31:17.878 --> 00:31:23.643 - similar, we could extend sewer. So that's not the same issue that we're grappling with in the county. 00:31:23.643 --> 00:31:29.464 - So like, it's going to be really hard to kind of determine if this was rezoned to maybe allow a couple 00:31:29.464 --> 00:31:35.173 - more units would they stay in the county, which I would love to see that because we have some better 00:31:35.173 --> 00:31:40.542 - ordinances that focus on some more of our environmental protections and things of that nature. 00:31:41.026 --> 00:31:48.070 - We can't guarantee that because right now, unless we change other things, a lot of those properties 00:31:48.070 --> 00:31:55.185 - are going to get sewer and that's going to allow them to have that more density. Again, I think it's 00:31:55.185 --> 00:32:02.017 - just too complicated to try to sort out. We just wait and see as Commissioner Thomas was saying, 00:32:02.017 --> 00:32:07.582 - but yeah, it's very interesting. Well, it's my understanding that the law that 00:32:07.714 --> 00:32:15.654 - The capital improvements would have to be made within like a three-year period of time. So even though 00:32:15.654 --> 00:32:23.671 - it looks relatively rural, Ellensville would have to extend services equitably out into the county area 00:32:23.671 --> 00:32:31.534 - to compare with that in the city. But that being said, I don't have a clear handle on the population. 00:32:31.534 --> 00:32:35.774 - How many residents live in the city? 7,000 in Montana. 00:32:35.906 --> 00:32:42.448 - In the town of about 13 altogether. And then how many people are bariatric? So the people don't really 00:32:42.448 --> 00:32:48.799 - have a say, right? Because they'll get, you know, percent from the town. As you were saying, so how 00:32:48.799 --> 00:32:55.341 - much are they outweighed? I don't actually know that information. I use some old census data and I can 00:32:55.341 --> 00:33:01.438 - give you more precise numbers from the old census data, but that's not necessarily one for one. 00:33:01.634 --> 00:33:10.005 - I guess it's about even. Yeah. It's about even really in the areas that they're wanting the annals. 00:33:10.005 --> 00:33:19.129 - The folks in the Richland Township and then compared to the folks in the town of Ellitsville, the difference 00:33:19.129 --> 00:33:27.500 - is not huge. But I'm using 2020 census data. This is the, I mean, all of Ellitsville and everything 00:33:27.500 --> 00:33:30.430 - on that screen is Richland, right? 00:33:30.850 --> 00:33:41.110 - Except for the town and the town would be excluded from all of the reorganization discussions. 00:33:41.110 --> 00:33:51.262 - Just for my. Yeah. Okay. Sure. I think so. That's a good question. Just for my own education. 00:33:52.130 --> 00:33:58.819 - What is the southern boundary? Is there, what's that road that parallels the southern boundary in the 00:33:58.819 --> 00:34:05.639 - original township? This would be 48. That's 48? Okay, and what about the eastern, the north-south? This 00:34:05.639 --> 00:34:12.196 - is 46 in Arlington, et cetera. Okay, yeah, yeah. Is that Curry? This would be, yeah, this would be, 00:34:12.196 --> 00:34:18.361 - well, this is Curry. Okay, so it's a little bit east of Curry, a little bit later. All right, 00:34:18.361 --> 00:34:21.246 - thank you. Yeah, and the chorus, they show, 00:34:21.346 --> 00:34:30.042 - and the Coraline down there is all the way down on the bottom right. That's it right there. Yeah. Is 00:34:30.042 --> 00:34:38.995 - that the driving? Corning or the? That'd be Reed, right? Well, that's Reed. I think that's Debbie Reed, 00:34:38.995 --> 00:34:48.638 - I think. They were off of Prow Road by the high school, North High School. I think this is the old murder room. 00:34:48.930 --> 00:35:05.216 - Okay, so What I'm hearing is no no immediate action on our part just to keep our finger on the pulse 00:35:05.216 --> 00:35:17.310 - of what's happening and is is is someone for your department doing that or 00:35:17.794 --> 00:35:26.934 - We can, well, I think that the. Not trying to give you more. No, I think that that's helpful to follow 00:35:26.934 --> 00:35:35.897 - the township board and the town council meetings and we report back in May or about even June. Sure, 00:35:35.897 --> 00:35:46.014 - I'm sure there will be people from this group attending. All right, well, I can't make any more comments on that. 00:35:47.746 --> 00:35:57.813 - So shall we move on to SIA-22-3? Yeah. So this is the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. This is an 00:35:57.813 --> 00:36:07.879 - extension of performance period completion. It would be for just phase one, seven minutes. So we're 00:36:07.879 --> 00:36:17.342 - looking at the prior phases of seven minutes that have been recorded and are being built out. 00:36:17.858 --> 00:36:25.086 - There's a timeline under the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and the performance bond that says they'll 00:36:25.086 --> 00:36:31.973 - be finished in a certain month, day, or year. This one was supposed to be finished and accepted into 00:36:31.973 --> 00:36:39.678 - the inventory by August 18, 2026. They are asking for two additional years to finish up the public improvements. 00:36:40.002 --> 00:36:48.430 - So what that means is that we're looking at this from the CDO perspective now, and there would be a 00:36:48.430 --> 00:36:56.858 - 10% annual required inflation adjustment. So instead of the 337 number, they would be asked to post 00:36:56.858 --> 00:37:04.190 - $371,120.90. So we have a quick summary here of what is in the phase one construction. 00:37:04.322 --> 00:37:11.777 - We've talked about this quite a bit, so I don't want to belabor it. But just to reiterate, the phase 00:37:11.777 --> 00:37:19.306 - one improvements include three-stem water basins, extension of west that road from South Roger Street 00:37:19.306 --> 00:37:26.983 - and all associated infrastructure, street trees turned lane on South Roger Street, and a multi-use path 00:37:26.983 --> 00:37:30.526 - along Forest Peak urban. When I put it in bold, 00:37:31.074 --> 00:37:38.753 - Among the updates to this, if they're already, um, they're saying to the updates, some of them we haven't 00:37:38.753 --> 00:37:46.287 - had any progress or we're still waiting, but they did provide us with that skills to show us, um, where 00:37:46.287 --> 00:37:53.604 - they are so far. And we do anticipate at some point they may come back with a reduction, but at this 00:37:53.604 --> 00:38:00.414 - point it's just a inflation adjustment with a new performance period and date. Okay. Page 15. 00:38:01.922 --> 00:38:09.570 - You make a statement, this is on C1. C1, you say, subdivider has been unable to complete the required 00:38:09.570 --> 00:38:17.668 - improvements due to those magic words, due diligence. So this is a longer list that you see on the previous 00:38:17.668 --> 00:38:25.392 - page that you just went over. You see some progress. So if you were to ask the question, do you really 00:38:25.392 --> 00:38:28.766 - believe, because I actually drove out there. 00:38:28.962 --> 00:38:36.716 - I have seen, I did see some changes, but do you fully believe that there really is due diligence in 00:38:36.716 --> 00:38:44.237 - them trying to complete those actions? That's a test question from our perspective. The biggest, 00:38:44.237 --> 00:38:52.301 - I would say, one of the issues with the items on this list is the churn lane on South Roger. We've been 00:38:52.301 --> 00:38:56.798 - asking for that since phase one. We're on now phase four. 00:38:56.930 --> 00:39:05.025 - we do feel like with that preventing the planning of phase five, that that has really spurred a lot 00:39:05.025 --> 00:39:13.444 - more progress in that department. But I do know, once you start a subdivision phase, your goal is going 00:39:13.444 --> 00:39:21.782 - to be sell lots, build homes, transfer those homes to people. And so any offsite improvement, anything 00:39:21.782 --> 00:39:26.558 - extra is just background. So that's why the multi-use path 00:39:27.138 --> 00:39:34.515 - certainly a lot of that stuff gets held off when we have the money for it. Basins, things like that. 00:39:34.515 --> 00:39:42.258 - I think that they've made progress on selling and developing the lots. I don't know how well the progress 00:39:42.258 --> 00:39:49.562 - on the public improvements have put them in shape to get acceptance. Have they made any progress on 00:39:49.562 --> 00:39:53.726 - getting their permits to do the work in the field right? 00:39:54.498 --> 00:40:01.703 - I think they were held on that as well. Well, it's all right there together. They broke it into two 00:40:01.703 --> 00:40:08.980 - phases. So where they had enforcement action, where they fill in the floodplain, they remedied that. 00:40:08.980 --> 00:40:16.473 - They've already remedied that. They got the permanent through DNR. They did not need to get conditional 00:40:16.473 --> 00:40:23.966 - letter of application, which would be federally, like would change the maps. But because they broke it, 00:40:24.194 --> 00:40:32.063 - that one intersection down there does need a conditional letter of revision because they're indicating 00:40:32.063 --> 00:40:39.702 - that there's a rise in the work that they get out there and that they still need to do, which would 00:40:39.702 --> 00:40:47.419 - impact. Where that he has a company in Chicago that he's trying to work with, but they never reached 00:40:47.419 --> 00:40:50.398 - out to me. And I just got conditioned. 00:40:50.850 --> 00:40:58.588 - And taught and seen something I haven't seen the conditional like I hope that people notice to those 00:40:58.588 --> 00:41:06.326 - property owners. For an example, we just got a conditional letter of revision for Hunter Valley Road 00:41:06.326 --> 00:41:13.374 - for this week. We started that years ago. And like another one that we have is a two meter. 00:41:13.538 --> 00:41:21.056 - just to get that approved, not that work done, not to then do the follow-up of change in that, as far 00:41:21.056 --> 00:41:28.869 - as I've built and a lot of other things. So it's a long process. Steve, is there any specific performance 00:41:28.869 --> 00:41:36.830 - bond in force already on this one? Because I know there's another property that we've seen develop earlier. 00:41:37.474 --> 00:41:47.001 - that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's 00:41:47.001 --> 00:41:56.528 - that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's 00:41:56.528 --> 00:42:06.056 - that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's that's 00:42:06.056 --> 00:42:07.326 - that's that's 00:42:08.002 --> 00:42:15.152 - So if the letter of credit date this Friday expires, that's when you want to extend your sentence. Ideally, 00:42:15.152 --> 00:42:21.904 - if they're going to put the letter of credit to be expiring two years from now, in one year from now, 00:42:21.904 --> 00:42:28.657 - and it's hovering beyond August 18th, we would like it to have the inflation adjustment. What happens 00:42:28.657 --> 00:42:35.343 - if it expires and they do nothing to get it done? Total passion for dates expiring. And we put it in 00:42:35.343 --> 00:42:37.726 - the budget. And then accounting is, 00:42:38.050 --> 00:42:45.923 - going to have to do some of all of this work. So is there any sort of work on your side that would need 00:42:45.923 --> 00:42:53.796 - to happen to be able to engage that letter to be able to get it? We have templates. We use site drafts. 00:42:53.796 --> 00:43:01.669 - Just making sure. We didn't cash maybe three in the last year or two. I just want to make sure you guys 00:43:01.669 --> 00:43:03.486 - get set up for the best 00:43:03.842 --> 00:43:10.269 - I agree. It's nearly impossible given the opportunities that you're seeing. And because of the change 00:43:10.269 --> 00:43:16.570 - and the flow model requirement, if we don't know that fast, you know, this amount, pre-37, could be 00:43:16.570 --> 00:43:23.438 - not very quickly just in engineering for doing this. Well, I'm not quibbling about the amount. I'm quibbling 00:43:23.438 --> 00:43:28.542 - about, like, I want to make sure that if you have to get in, be in there. Right. 00:43:28.738 --> 00:43:39.781 - We've been talking with them. So going back to my question of due diligence, have you had this discussion 00:43:39.781 --> 00:43:50.616 - with them lately on these 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 items and their movement toward completing a recent discussion? 00:43:50.616 --> 00:43:53.950 - We have been talking with them. 00:43:54.914 --> 00:44:02.344 - I think that in terms of the due diligence, there is some interpretation that we've made there. I think 00:44:02.344 --> 00:44:09.703 - that the latest conversation that we are kind of working from was that phasing change and then holding 00:44:09.703 --> 00:44:16.848 - up phase five of Southern Meadows from being reported until they do the turning. Now what I think I 00:44:16.848 --> 00:44:24.350 - put in the report, but it will come up this year as well. Phases five and six also expire on this eight. 00:44:24.866 --> 00:44:31.175 - August 18, 2026. So we will have to come back to the planning commission to ask for phase five and six 00:44:31.175 --> 00:44:37.546 - again, unless they can be platted. They cannot be platted, phase five cannot be platted until we finish 00:44:37.546 --> 00:44:43.672 - with the term line around your street for that red connect. So they're gonna catch 22 on that. I'll 00:44:43.672 --> 00:44:49.981 - just say it one more time. And I brought it up at the planning commission meeting. I'm concerned about 00:44:49.981 --> 00:44:53.534 - systemic non-compliance. That's what I'm concerned about. 00:44:54.178 --> 00:45:02.369 - And I'll keep bringing that up until I feel satisfied that there's due diligence to correct those things. 00:45:02.369 --> 00:45:10.251 - They say that what we say, as everybody says, need to be correct. And so I guess it's important to me 00:45:10.251 --> 00:45:17.978 - that we see intent. And you're asking us, this body, to approve this POP form and et cetera. You're 00:45:17.978 --> 00:45:19.678 - asking us to do that. 00:45:20.514 --> 00:45:33.885 - With the alternative knowledge that we would cash. I mean, one of your actions is to possibly recommend 00:45:33.885 --> 00:45:48.542 - that we cash it in. I couldn't hear that said again. We can sue them for the work that we cannot cover. Go ahead. 00:45:49.570 --> 00:45:56.799 - I'm sorry. It's okay. When we condition the extension upon getting any sort of a basic timeline of those 00:45:56.799 --> 00:46:03.683 - improvements that, you know, within the six months of this time, six months of this time, that they 00:46:03.683 --> 00:46:10.636 - provide us because they've asked for the extension based on their understanding of due diligence. So 00:46:10.636 --> 00:46:16.350 - that to me says that they have a timeline in mind. So if they haven't shared that, 00:46:16.482 --> 00:46:23.149 - I think that'd be really beneficial. This is Scott's point. Then you can actually go back and say, you 00:46:23.149 --> 00:46:29.881 - told us you would do X, Y, and Z in this timeframe. And when we start to see that happen or not happen, 00:46:29.881 --> 00:46:36.354 - then we have something we can go back to. But otherwise, it's just, yeah, everyone acting in faith, 00:46:36.354 --> 00:46:38.878 - this provides a little more key to it. 00:46:40.290 --> 00:46:49.870 - I just didn't want to jump. Mine's, I think, in my opinion, getting at what I hear this conversation. 00:46:49.870 --> 00:46:59.638 - I reserve my right to be wrong. But staff is recommending approving this two-year performance. I wanted 00:46:59.638 --> 00:47:06.494 - to hear your take because I think based off of conversations, also maybe 00:47:07.266 --> 00:47:14.813 - some of the timeline Tammy just alluded to it takes to maybe address some of what needs to be done outside 00:47:14.813 --> 00:47:22.077 - of the maybe improvement off the project site or offsite project improvement area you are recommending 00:47:22.077 --> 00:47:29.342 - approving and I'm guessing that's one we're uncertain that the dollar amount is going to cover all the 00:47:29.342 --> 00:47:36.606 - cost two there might be a couple other mechanisms in place where we could get the developer to kind of 00:47:36.738 --> 00:47:44.709 - finish the project to completion. I'm going to pause there and just hear your take on this recommendation 00:47:44.709 --> 00:47:52.304 - of approving this. Sure. So at this juncture, they have not completed all the phase one improvements 00:47:52.304 --> 00:48:00.124 - to get accepted into the inventory. So we are faced with either extending that timeline or cashing that 00:48:00.124 --> 00:48:03.358 - amount and then trying to do it ourselves. 00:48:03.554 --> 00:48:10.203 - Since they're still engaged in the subdivision and there's other deadlines, including the prerequisite 00:48:10.203 --> 00:48:16.659 - to record phase five contingent upon the turn lane on South Roger Street, we feel there's enough of 00:48:16.659 --> 00:48:23.502 - a carrot there for them to get the work done, for them to get it approved. With the inflation adjustment, 00:48:23.502 --> 00:48:29.054 - I know that that will help. I mean, they said, I think they look forward to phase one 00:48:29.762 --> 00:48:37.622 - three, I want to say. So it's already been three years. So inflation does catch up to that. And they've 00:48:37.622 --> 00:48:45.406 - done some, they've done work in phase one. So that 337 number is from where they were three years ago. 00:48:45.406 --> 00:48:53.265 - So any sidewalk they have put in directly, we're still capturing that funding in the event the sidewalk 00:48:53.265 --> 00:48:58.782 - is not correct. Just a follow up on that is it would be nice to see what 00:48:59.170 --> 00:49:06.141 - Improvements they have already put in place so we kind of get a better sense of that's what that dollar 00:49:06.141 --> 00:49:13.381 - amounts was speaking to okay, but like maybe like a cost forecast like okay, they put in a hundred thousand 00:49:13.381 --> 00:49:20.084 - dollars worth of improvements already that we're not necessarily accounting for in that 300 In with 00:49:20.084 --> 00:49:25.246 - the increase 377. Sorry. I don't remember what the other one was like 334 or 00:49:25.346 --> 00:49:33.096 - Yes, anyone. Okay. So this is the as built. So you can kind of see here that they have installed sidewalks 00:49:33.096 --> 00:49:40.629 - on the south side. You can zoom in and check what the cross slopes is. Sorry, this isn't sure. Is there 00:49:40.629 --> 00:49:47.944 - any way for you to try to like give us a ballpark amount of what improvements were in and or what we 00:49:47.944 --> 00:49:50.334 - still need to cover and how that 00:49:51.106 --> 00:49:57.248 - gets to the dollar amount that we have? So I have also in tandem asked for a reduction, but they have 00:49:57.248 --> 00:50:03.270 - not, they need to provide us more information. So we're taking that as a future separate issue, but 00:50:03.270 --> 00:50:09.593 - that's where we would really document how much we could potentially reduce. My concern with just telling 00:50:09.593 --> 00:50:15.976 - you, you know, hey, they put in how many linear feet of sidewalk is that we don't know that that sidewalk 00:50:15.976 --> 00:50:16.638 - is put in. 00:50:17.090 --> 00:50:27.365 - to meet the cross-slope ADA. Well, we do have that. So we can start that process, but we were hoping 00:50:27.365 --> 00:50:37.640 - to do that in tandem with the reduction. The final thing is, do we have discretion for the increase? 00:50:37.640 --> 00:50:45.982 - I know we have 10% kind of baked into our ordinance, but do we have discretionary 00:50:46.114 --> 00:50:53.272 - matter or ability to say we would actually want to see a 20% increase if we're going to extend this. 00:50:53.272 --> 00:51:00.642 - I'm just trying to understand the role that the plan commission not pitching that idea. Is that subject 00:51:00.642 --> 00:51:08.296 - to our discretion that inflation amount? I don't think that the installation amount but possibly re-looking 00:51:08.296 --> 00:51:15.454 - at the itemized. So we could re-determine the cost of the improvements that have yet to be completed 00:51:16.706 --> 00:51:23.879 - There's two ways of doing it that we offer. So one is they can come up with a valid contract amount, 00:51:23.879 --> 00:51:30.982 - and then they're already beyond their performance period, so they have to do the 10%. But we didn't 00:51:30.982 --> 00:51:38.368 - make them update their unit pricing since 2023. So the inflation is hopefully capturing the unit prices 00:51:38.368 --> 00:51:43.198 - increase, but we're calling it inflation. But if we say since 2023, 00:51:43.394 --> 00:51:49.713 - We understood now that the terminate is going to require CLOMAR, which requires engineering and other 00:51:49.713 --> 00:51:55.971 - fees. We've asked our legal department before and we can re-ask to say, is there anything we can put 00:51:55.971 --> 00:52:02.352 - into the estimate to capture what it would actually take to get approval for that terminate? Typically 00:52:02.352 --> 00:52:08.733 - under the state code, I don't think that we can include engineering fees into that. And it's extremely 00:52:08.733 --> 00:52:12.574 - hard for us to estimate what those are or what they could be. 00:52:12.866 --> 00:52:19.495 - Okay. That is, I'm trying to identify the tools that we have because I agree that like this idea of 00:52:19.495 --> 00:52:26.456 - extending it, but still uncertain if they're going to put in those improvements is a little challenging. 00:52:26.456 --> 00:52:33.152 - So I really just want to understand what tools were at our disposal. Thanks, Margaret. I'd just like 00:52:33.152 --> 00:52:37.726 - an update on any ongoing litigation with regard to this development. 00:52:51.458 --> 00:53:01.917 - would you be able to answer that question about the litigation update for Margaret on solo or is that 00:53:01.917 --> 00:53:12.582 - a Justin question? Jackie, that's a Justin question. I can get online and see what I can find out about 00:53:12.582 --> 00:53:20.990 - the status, but last time I talked to him about it, it was kind of on hold. Yeah. 00:53:21.282 --> 00:53:29.539 - Go ahead. Yeah, I think it's kind of interrelated with Colonel Farris's question I'm going to ask. 00:53:29.539 --> 00:53:37.879 - I agree. And along that same line, I'll get to you in a second, Chef. Along that same line, is your 00:53:37.879 --> 00:53:46.720 - summary of work to be completed, for lack of a better term, does that include everything that they pledge 00:53:46.720 --> 00:53:50.974 - to do in their written commitments? Because I know 00:53:51.202 --> 00:53:59.144 - There's another contractor, the Blind Squirrel Group that's trying to build their development as well. 00:53:59.144 --> 00:54:07.164 - And I think they're being held up by part of this as well. So there is on the first page, the multi-use 00:54:07.164 --> 00:54:15.106 - path along the Blind Squirrel Company was part of phase one. And then also the turn lane. So those two 00:54:15.106 --> 00:54:17.342 - items have been there since. 00:54:17.826 --> 00:54:25.428 - been sort of refactored based on the amended written commitment. They're sort of under phase five now, 00:54:25.428 --> 00:54:32.956 - but originally they were estimated under phase one. We have a 211 subdivision that's being held up by 00:54:32.956 --> 00:54:40.410 - this. The Shermer subdivision. To the east. To the east. That was approved like. I think you have to 00:54:40.410 --> 00:54:45.502 - have phase five plotted to connect. That's good information to have. 00:54:45.602 --> 00:54:54.492 - Where does that end? It's right here. So this is Westat and Rogers. And then this is College Drive over 00:54:54.492 --> 00:55:03.809 - to Orchard. This is a dead end of College Drive. And this is Church. Oh, right. It generates more questions. 00:55:03.809 --> 00:55:12.442 - So this was approved as a 21-pot. So that's yours. But they only have one way in and out of college. 00:55:12.442 --> 00:55:14.494 - So they're second base. 00:55:14.658 --> 00:55:20.721 - Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They're hung up. They're being hung up as well. Jeff is next. Yes. Go ahead, Jeff. 00:55:20.721 --> 00:55:26.905 - So thank you. My concern about just approving those things is that a couple of these items on the list 00:55:26.905 --> 00:55:32.908 - feel like public safety issues to me, mainly the asphalt path not being along Rogers, because I see 00:55:32.908 --> 00:55:38.371 - people walking in the road along Rogers right there on a daily basis in the dark and rain, 00:55:38.371 --> 00:55:43.294 - you name it. So I think that combined with the fact that there's not a turn light 00:55:43.458 --> 00:55:49.097 - there on Roger Street, yet that neighborhood has brought quite a bit of additional traffic. I think 00:55:49.097 --> 00:55:54.848 - it's back traffic at times when White House is letting out or other heavy traffic times they day. And 00:55:54.848 --> 00:56:00.712 - I'm concerned about just pushing this down the road a few more years, especially with pedestrians being 00:56:00.712 --> 00:56:06.350 - in the road. Great. Kind of piggyback on that later. The one thing I was wanting to throw out there 00:56:06.350 --> 00:56:12.158 - is, is it in the county's best interest to just call that letter of credit and do the work themselves? 00:56:12.322 --> 00:56:20.044 - E-products, that's A, an expediency piece. Two, ensures the work actually gets done as intended. 00:56:20.044 --> 00:56:28.641 - And three, it alleviates any immediate safety concerns. Right. So I would say that without the complication 00:56:28.641 --> 00:56:36.761 - that Coloma requires for the turn lane, that we would be maybe feeling a little more confident in our 00:56:36.761 --> 00:56:39.070 - ability to do that in-house. 00:56:39.170 --> 00:56:46.207 - we would not be able to do a COMAR in that study in-house. We're automatically contracting it out. So 00:56:46.207 --> 00:56:53.727 - as far as expediency, we're talking about not being able to use a single dollar of this fund for engineering 00:56:53.727 --> 00:57:00.764 - costs, going to council for that appropriation, hopefully getting that appropriation, doing the study 00:57:00.764 --> 00:57:07.870 - ourselves, working hopefully with the progress they've already made, two years where COMAR potentially 00:57:08.546 --> 00:57:18.456 - and then doing the work with the money we cashed on Friday. You said that at the beginning, I'm sorry, 00:57:18.456 --> 00:57:28.366 - Scott, you alluded to that at the beginning when you indicated that would barely cover the engineering 00:57:28.366 --> 00:57:35.774 - costs. We cannot actually even use that money for engineering. Sorry, Scott. 00:57:36.194 --> 00:57:43.716 - They take it as a devil's act, but we call the line of credit. What happens to the work in that neighborhood? 00:57:43.716 --> 00:57:50.896 - Well, you mean for the homes? I'm talking about for the development. He stops what? Everything? He stops 00:57:50.896 --> 00:57:57.939 - sidewalks. He still does that problem. He still builds the homes and stuff like that. But the roadways 00:57:57.939 --> 00:58:05.598 - wouldn't be completed. The sidewalks would not be installed. And all of these other things that we've got here, 00:58:05.986 --> 00:58:14.176 - He stops. And what is his course of action at that point? Could he come back to the county and sue us? 00:58:14.176 --> 00:58:22.287 - I mean, I guess, I don't know if that's a decision that can be appealed. Dave, do you have the answer 00:58:22.287 --> 00:58:30.796 - to that? Can they appeal the decision? I've got a follow up question. Let me say the rest of the question. 00:58:30.796 --> 00:58:33.022 - I go back to due diligence. 00:58:33.346 --> 00:58:40.771 - If we firmly believe that they've met the criteria for due diligence in responding to these items here, 00:58:40.771 --> 00:58:48.268 - then we have a very difficult time in calling the line of credit. If we, in our own right, look at these 00:58:48.268 --> 00:58:55.622 - individual items here and say that, yeah, he's done some things, but there's a lot of things he hasn't 00:58:55.622 --> 00:59:02.334 - done. And there are indications of systemic noncompliance with respect to this area out here. 00:59:02.594 --> 00:59:09.986 - And again, that's that precedent thing that we keep coming back to that we don't want to ever live with 00:59:09.986 --> 00:59:17.377 - again. This is a mess. I mean, I personally, after hearing this conversation, because of lack of intent 00:59:17.377 --> 00:59:24.982 - and discussions, et cetera, and moving forward on some of these items, I think pulling the line of credit, 00:59:24.982 --> 00:59:30.526 - crashing out the line of credit. Am I interrupting at a wrong time? Go ahead. 00:59:30.818 --> 00:59:39.108 - from what I hear from Jackie and Tammy you know I just want to amplify what you know they have exceptional 00:59:39.108 --> 00:59:47.166 - judgment and I refer to that is that overall it's going to cost the county probably an additional three 00:59:47.166 --> 00:59:54.526 - hundred thousand dollars or something like that so the line of credit is not adequate to cover 00:59:54.786 --> 01:00:04.582 - the all the costs, plus there would be a two year delay impacting two other developments, blind squirrels 01:00:04.582 --> 01:00:13.730 - and Shermer. So I don't know, I think my inclination is to get the additional money into the bond. 01:00:13.730 --> 01:00:16.318 - You know, the inflated rate 01:00:16.546 --> 01:00:23.887 - and any other justifiable bank account that you can justify, like an engineering study that you keep, 01:00:23.887 --> 01:00:31.300 - even though you said we can't bond for that, there are additional costs that we anticipate we're gonna 01:00:31.300 --> 01:00:38.713 - be stuck with. And we need to have that in the bond so that we can finish the work if we end up having 01:00:38.713 --> 01:00:45.118 - to pay. So let me just echo, let me finish my line of thought since you brought that up. 01:00:45.730 --> 01:00:53.311 - You brought up a very good point about time-lapse. Yeah. If in fact we were to take and approve the 01:00:53.311 --> 01:01:01.499 - POP and the additional amount of money, can we stimulate somehow some sort of a timeline for the completion 01:01:01.499 --> 01:01:09.459 - of these things as a metric for performance? Can we do that? We can increase it only one year or approve 01:01:09.459 --> 01:01:13.022 - a lower performance period and time extension. 01:01:13.858 --> 01:01:19.698 - and then you would only have that time period to finish. Or can we increase the bond amount? That's 01:01:19.698 --> 01:01:25.304 - what I was getting at. Can we do an extraordinary amount? Because, again, we're kind of looking 01:01:25.304 --> 01:01:31.260 - at extraordinary, extenuating circumstances that are impacting more than just the development of that 01:01:31.260 --> 01:01:37.392 - particular property. So in the greater court's tradition, you have to look at what happens if everything 01:01:37.392 --> 01:01:41.246 - falls apart and we wait two years, even if you have to pull this. 01:01:41.794 --> 01:01:49.186 - And that was the question I was asking. Is that like, the answer you're comfortable with giving or do 01:01:49.186 --> 01:01:56.577 - you need to talk with legal? Because that's what, you know, I was really kind of pondering. I suspect 01:01:56.577 --> 01:02:04.766 - what we're doing is kicking the can. Well, we could maybe kick the can with a better advantage for the county to 01:02:04.930 --> 01:02:12.277 - maybe see him done, like if we asked him for like $450,000 instead of 377, is that possible or a 20% 01:02:12.277 --> 01:02:19.914 - increase? I'm not gonna try to get that math. And then even reduce the duration of it to one year, yeah. 01:02:19.914 --> 01:02:27.334 - And then if they don't, then maybe we actually can cover some of that engineering. Well, we can't use 01:02:27.334 --> 01:02:32.862 - that, but we can at least cover all the improvement. Is there a way to put, 01:02:33.090 --> 01:02:41.097 - engineering work into a performance bond? I don't believe so under the state code. So the state requires 01:02:41.097 --> 01:02:48.799 - us to, we must accept a bond, in return we create the loss. That's the option he's provided us with. 01:02:48.799 --> 01:02:56.577 - Now once he goes along and he does those improvements, what our estimate has been historically really 01:02:56.577 --> 01:03:00.542 - bad at doing, because we are not allowed, is saying 01:03:01.026 --> 01:03:08.604 - What's the contingency for if you do this wrong? So we put in a sidewalk for 10 feet, and it costs us 01:03:08.604 --> 01:03:16.108 - $100. If you put that in wrong, it's now $60 to take it out, $40 to regrade it, and $100 per day. So 01:03:16.108 --> 01:03:23.538 - we have $200 for that 10 feet, but we only estimate $100. So that's the problem. Too much liability 01:03:23.538 --> 01:03:29.630 - to take on. Something we did at the US government level when I was in Washington, 01:03:30.050 --> 01:03:36.800 - Yes, we did. Performance-based contracting. Okay, so if in fact you do something, you're rewarded for 01:03:36.800 --> 01:03:43.418 - doing something. Particularly if you do it ahead of schedule. It's performance-based, so it's based 01:03:43.418 --> 01:03:50.168 - upon that metric. I haven't heard that in any of the discussions we've had ever. At this level, maybe 01:03:50.168 --> 01:03:56.919 - it's not something that's even relevant to this level. Has that ever been discussed before? You don't 01:03:56.919 --> 01:03:58.110 - think it's legal? 01:03:58.338 --> 01:04:06.102 - I mean, Dave would have to say we aren't able to bring in past. Consider past performance, but as he 01:04:06.102 --> 01:04:14.096 - performs, couldn't you decrease the bond amount relative to that as a reward for getting it done? Yeah, 01:04:14.096 --> 01:04:14.942 - that's it. 01:04:15.138 --> 01:04:23.687 - You're asking for way more than you need. You cover all the circumstances to diminish it over time. 01:04:23.687 --> 01:04:32.321 - Nothing else is wrong. I have to just just say something just global on this because we get you know 01:04:32.321 --> 01:04:41.724 - we're all concerned about affordable housing and we are all concerned about the stewardship of our community. 01:04:41.724 --> 01:04:42.750 - Now when we 01:04:43.010 --> 01:04:51.098 - asked for these bonds there, even though we should not be concerned about it, there are costs associated 01:04:51.098 --> 01:04:58.802 - with taking out these bonds for the developer. And probably, and I don't know exactly how it works, 01:04:58.802 --> 01:05:06.582 - but probably depending upon their credit rating, it's more or less. And so all those costs get added 01:05:06.582 --> 01:05:09.278 - back into the housing development. 01:05:09.602 --> 01:05:19.355 - the one thing we want to encourage is good behavior. And we want to do what Colonel Ferris has been 01:05:19.355 --> 01:05:29.107 - talking about, that's compliance and intent. And I think that we have a duty to ascertain the level 01:05:29.107 --> 01:05:37.982 - of due diligence of this particular development and then try to work with them to keep the 01:05:38.274 --> 01:05:47.575 - costs down at the same time cover the exposure the county has with regard to unconsidered costs such 01:05:47.575 --> 01:05:57.613 - as engineering studies and timeline. It's a tough one. It's a tough one because it's costing the surrounding 01:05:57.613 --> 01:06:07.006 - properties additional exposure. There's inflation on their building costs. There's inflation on their 01:06:07.298 --> 01:06:17.147 - Facing opportunity costs, certainly at least. And I just, I'm flummoxed. I would like to see this. I 01:06:17.147 --> 01:06:27.288 - would like to see good wind. I'd like to see, you know, good wind. I think we should consider extending 01:06:27.288 --> 01:06:35.966 - this for a much shorter period. I'm thinking like four months. I think that was in July. 01:06:36.578 --> 01:06:42.358 - And I think it gives us a point to, or gives us a reason to do research again. And then to your point, 01:06:42.358 --> 01:06:48.195 - Steve, if the asphalt path's done and we can drop this down a little bit, but at that point, if we just 01:06:48.195 --> 01:06:53.862 - think that we're gonna cash it and let the county take over, there's still time in this construction 01:06:53.862 --> 01:06:59.923 - season to get some of this done before winter, I think. I think that's where I'm at right now. Technically, 01:06:59.923 --> 01:07:01.214 - if you took no action, 01:07:01.410 --> 01:07:09.880 - He still has a performance period until August 18th of 26th. So if we put it off until, say, early August, 01:07:09.880 --> 01:07:17.795 - that would be the start of when he needs to renew his performance period. So we could take the same 01:07:17.795 --> 01:07:25.711 - amount of money we have today and let him renew that for six or less months. And then bring it back 01:07:25.711 --> 01:07:27.294 - and say, we are not 01:07:27.426 --> 01:07:36.664 - We're not looking to fit. We would like you to try and make more progress in these items. But we could 01:07:36.664 --> 01:07:46.440 - extend it for four months at the $371,000. I've had more money. Yeah, I think the people have been deflated. 01:07:46.440 --> 01:07:55.230 - Yeah. Is there a downside? No, just the performance period based on an annual basis, so we don't. 01:07:55.618 --> 01:08:04.344 - If we're doing 10% per year, we were assuming that 371 numbers for 26 to 27 and 27 to 28. We're also 01:08:04.344 --> 01:08:13.070 - within the year of 26. I don't know that the code applies to the 10% annual because we haven't moved 01:08:13.070 --> 01:08:21.796 - a year. So I don't know what we would be able to do in terms of that. Could we at least crank it 15% 01:08:21.796 --> 01:08:23.870 - to cover tariffs? Yeah. 01:08:24.098 --> 01:08:31.890 - Because that's the problem. It's like, we're focused on the increased cost, but we can't take into account 01:08:31.890 --> 01:08:39.391 - everything beyond inflation, which includes tariffs right now, which are going to come back into play. 01:08:39.391 --> 01:08:46.892 - So the concern is really just how do we account for that? Because we don't want that money. It's there 01:08:46.892 --> 01:08:53.374 - in case we need it. And so if we need it, we don't want to come to a less than full cup. 01:08:54.562 --> 01:09:00.835 - So I think what I heard you say is that we leave the pop alone of the way it's stated and you don't 01:09:00.835 --> 01:09:07.107 - do anything with respect to increasing the bond amount because we can't prorate to 10% because it's 01:09:07.107 --> 01:09:13.568 - not a full calendar or fiscal year, whatever we're using. Didn't I hear what you heard you say? That's 01:09:13.568 --> 01:09:20.091 - what the text says currently is a full fiscal year. So we could just continue this to August. They need 01:09:20.091 --> 01:09:23.102 - to hear our question about intent. Right. Yeah. 01:09:23.298 --> 01:09:33.800 - And this period that we're allowing them to complete is all about intent. And we need to see progress. 01:09:33.800 --> 01:09:43.384 - Right? Does that make sense? Yes. Again, systemic down compliance is the issue here. I agree. 01:09:43.384 --> 01:09:49.502 - I like that, Chris. And we got a couple new acronyms today. 01:09:49.666 --> 01:09:57.362 - I like that. Every now and again, I put on my DC hat and I quote and sew this nonsensical brooch that 01:09:57.362 --> 01:10:04.983 - we use in this Washington DC area. Margaret, to answer your question about the update on litigation, 01:10:04.983 --> 01:10:12.528 - Dave wrote to us and said that parties are currently conducting discovery and that there's a status 01:10:12.528 --> 01:10:18.942 - conference scheduled for June 30th at 8.30 AM. Okay. That's not necessarily going to 01:10:19.074 --> 01:10:28.440 - resolve quickly. So that's in the legal system. So just our job is not in the legal system, but we need 01:10:28.440 --> 01:10:37.806 - to be informed. So would you like to bring this back in early August then before the performance period 01:10:37.806 --> 01:10:47.262 - expiration? Please, Scott. Just one final thing. I definitely feel like you're attempting and doing your 01:10:47.362 --> 01:10:56.185 - absolute best at putting the county in a good position and trying to work with folks to see these projects 01:10:56.185 --> 01:11:04.514 - to the finish line, if you will. So I understand that there's a lot going on in this discussion, but 01:11:04.514 --> 01:11:13.502 - I'm just going to go ahead and let you know that I'm most likely going to support staff's recommendation. So 01:11:14.274 --> 01:11:21.096 - or just wanted you to know that, because there's a lot of things being juggled here simultaneously. 01:11:21.096 --> 01:11:28.533 - I think you can maybe take our comments and see if that could refine some of how we do this. But ultimately, 01:11:28.533 --> 01:11:35.491 - I'm most likely going to defer to your recommendation. So that's my position on this discussion as of 01:11:35.491 --> 01:11:42.655 - now, is your recommendation that you, unless that has changed throughout this discussion. Is Julie still 01:11:42.655 --> 01:11:43.678 - with us? Yeah. 01:11:44.450 --> 01:11:55.293 - She's there. I don't think she has her hand raised. Is it possible to extend this for six months? A 01:11:55.293 --> 01:12:06.461 - lot of credit can be extended for any period of time. Right. That's the thing that's expected already. 01:12:06.461 --> 01:12:13.726 - So hear me out. Extend it for six months, more or less, and add in 01:12:14.018 --> 01:12:23.019 - half of the increase that you're requesting of the, you know, the three, 33, 738, more or less divided 01:12:23.019 --> 01:12:32.369 - by two, you can bump this system up by half of what you're looking for your full increase and say, because 01:12:32.369 --> 01:12:41.982 - I expect the developers going to come back and say, well, why are you jacking me up? And I would answer that. 01:12:42.178 --> 01:12:49.605 - we're giving to six months to kind of show us some movement. And if we don't see movement, then this 01:12:49.605 --> 01:12:57.105 - is going to happen again in another six months with another increase. So it keeps us stable as far as 01:12:57.105 --> 01:13:04.532 - the 10% that we're allowed to collect. We're collected 5% for six months. So essentially what you're 01:13:04.532 --> 01:13:11.518 - doing is you're keeping the top. Yep. What you're doing is you're extending the literal credit 01:13:12.258 --> 01:13:19.312 - and with a certain amount of money. And what would the certain amount of money be? I believe that we 01:13:19.312 --> 01:13:26.296 - would have the ability to collect the reasonable amount up until their performance query end dates. 01:13:26.296 --> 01:13:33.490 - They reported signed up and said, we will finish by August 18, 2016. An extension of six months beyond 01:13:33.490 --> 01:13:35.166 - that, I can see the 5%. 01:13:35.490 --> 01:13:42.736 - But I don't see between today and August 18, 2026, an ability under the current code, because they already 01:13:42.736 --> 01:13:49.575 - have approval for this performance period to adjust for the function. So I think that's carrots too. 01:13:49.575 --> 01:13:56.550 - We're bringing this back based on one of credit expiration dates, which I understand is confusing, but 01:13:56.550 --> 01:14:03.593 - really we're going after this performance period. I can't think of the dates. Multiple dates can always 01:14:03.593 --> 01:14:05.150 - happen with the piece. 01:14:05.506 --> 01:14:12.386 - I think you leave the pop alone, and I think you just take and adjust whatever that delta is on a lot 01:14:12.386 --> 01:14:19.536 - of credit, but that's it. That's the incentive to take and work toward these items, which you're probably 01:14:19.536 --> 01:14:26.754 - not going to take and have much progress on, but you'll want to do another pop here. So this is continued. 01:14:26.754 --> 01:14:31.678 - Do you need a motion for us to continue this until the meeting on August 01:14:32.162 --> 01:14:39.796 - whatever, and can we vote on it at that admin meeting? Or must we just vote on it at the end of the 01:14:39.796 --> 01:14:47.583 - meeting? Okay, so do you know what date that is in August, the first day in August? It might actually 01:14:47.583 --> 01:14:55.141 - be. Do we need to vote? August 4th? August 4th. You what? You need to give me an idea, keep going. 01:14:55.141 --> 01:15:01.630 - I got it. So you always used to contract. My coffee says the 4th. It must have been. 01:15:01.794 --> 01:15:11.432 - Continue this item to the August 4th administrative meeting. I don't want no language. On the disposition 01:15:11.432 --> 01:15:20.615 - of the extension of the bond. Hey, there's a motion on the table. Right here a second. I'll tell you 01:15:20.615 --> 01:15:30.526 - what I'm sorry I was talking. Do you want to could you re-state the motion? We continue this item. SIA-22-3. 01:15:30.786 --> 01:15:38.965 - to the August 4th administrative meeting of the planning commission, at which point we will consider 01:15:38.965 --> 01:15:47.468 - and delivery both the extension period and the amount of the increase of the bond amount. I second that. 01:15:47.468 --> 01:15:56.133 - Okay, it's been moved and seconded to continue SA-22-3 until August 4th planning commission administrative 01:15:56.133 --> 01:15:58.238 - meeting to re-discuss the 01:15:58.498 --> 01:16:07.669 - I'm out in the performance period. And in the meantime, staff will reach out to let the petitioner know 01:16:07.669 --> 01:16:17.016 - that they need to make progress on items noted in the report and encourage them to re listen to tonight's 01:16:17.016 --> 01:16:26.011 - hearing. I vote yes. Is the vote to continue this item to August. This doesn't change my support when 01:16:26.011 --> 01:16:27.422 - we get to that. 01:16:27.682 --> 01:16:47.977 - I think this is fine. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion does carry 6 to 0 discussion 01:16:47.977 --> 01:16:55.870 - discussion. Okay. Thank you all for that. 01:16:56.162 --> 01:17:06.922 - I'm screaming right along. Hopefully we see some progress. Yes, hopefully we do. All right. Unfinished 01:17:06.922 --> 01:17:17.681 - business. P. U. O. dash 23 dash five Highlands P. U. D. Outline Plan Amendment to parcel D. So similar 01:17:17.681 --> 01:17:24.158 - petitioner here is written to name, but it's the same person. 01:17:24.738 --> 01:17:31.845 - We did meet with the developer for this neighborhood this afternoon and actually went through the two 01:17:31.845 --> 01:17:39.162 - inspection reports line by line, and they are agreeable to making some changes. That's correct. So we're 01:17:39.162 --> 01:17:46.200 - going to report back since that just happened this afternoon, we're going to report back on what the 01:17:46.200 --> 01:17:51.774 - changes are before the planned commission meeting. So we basically went through 01:17:51.938 --> 01:17:59.292 - these four questions that you all had with them. So they are under number three, willing to make the 01:17:59.292 --> 01:18:06.718 - changes for Wiccans, and also under item number one, willing to make some changes for range recircle. 01:18:06.718 --> 01:18:14.072 - So we will report back on that. Number two, the HOA, they confirmed, the attorney confirmed there is 01:18:14.072 --> 01:18:19.678 - no HOA. They were mistaken in that during the testimony, they misunderstood. 01:18:20.098 --> 01:18:26.634 - but that they could create an H2A, but they have no interest in selling any of the lots at this point, 01:18:26.634 --> 01:18:33.298 - so they are not intending on creating an H2A. And then number four, the petitioner's number for a letter 01:18:33.298 --> 01:18:39.644 - of credit. We talked with their engineer about this, and we are going to, we have a little bit of a 01:18:39.644 --> 01:18:46.053 - strategy for how we can get to that number. They believe, and I will have to double check with legal 01:18:46.053 --> 01:18:46.878 - and highway, 01:18:47.106 --> 01:18:54.707 - that the driveways that you saw in the photos, since those are outside of the right of way, they believe 01:18:54.707 --> 01:19:01.945 - there's a design where they could potentially not touch the slope of those driveways, but still fix 01:19:01.945 --> 01:19:09.473 - the sidewalk by doing the apron to the road and meeting ADA. So a unit price for removing and replacing 01:19:09.473 --> 01:19:16.350 - sidewalk, which we have from NDOT. So we will get that to you. That's the update on that case. 01:19:16.610 --> 01:19:26.531 - One question, as far as if they're going to keep that slope and maybe reconfigure the sidewalk, is that 01:19:26.531 --> 01:19:36.356 - going to impact stormwater and drainage? Are we going to be satisfactory on those fronts because we're 01:19:36.356 --> 01:19:42.366 - talking about the volume or the speed of the water going down? 01:19:42.466 --> 01:19:49.125 - I think that they have signed off on the ponds and so they are pretty, there's inlets in this area. 01:19:49.125 --> 01:19:55.851 - So I think that they're. I'm talking about like just the potential speed that the water could go and 01:19:55.851 --> 01:20:02.577 - then the sizing of the piping to make sure that like it's not restrictive. And that's just kind of a 01:20:02.577 --> 01:20:07.838 - thought I have is like if the volume of the water should be moving faster that 01:20:07.970 --> 01:20:16.591 - create the possibility of the ponding quicker. And if the sizing of the inlets are equipped for that 01:20:16.591 --> 01:20:25.467 - type of volume, then we're going to see some ponding. Yeah, so that's kind of just my thought. So maybe 01:20:25.467 --> 01:20:34.259 - just get some more feedback that there isn't another deficiency trying to remean, fix one of the other 01:20:34.259 --> 01:20:36.990 - deficiencies. OK. Sorry, first? 01:20:38.562 --> 01:20:45.172 - Did you all read this summary table on the inspection checklist? I mean, did you see the extensive? 01:20:45.172 --> 01:20:51.847 - This is not a simple little, also very expensive. So tell me again, what did you just say about them 01:20:51.847 --> 01:20:58.721 - looking at this list? We looked at it together this afternoon and went through it line by line and they 01:20:58.721 --> 01:21:05.529 - decided which ones we took notes. Yes, I will make that change. No, I will not make that change. Okay. 01:21:05.529 --> 01:21:07.710 - Can you tell us what those were? 01:21:08.706 --> 01:21:14.911 - Um, I can, I have some rough notes, but- Well, here, I mean, you can- It's gonna be in the presentation. 01:21:14.911 --> 01:21:20.939 - What's that? I mean, we'll get the packet out next week and- Yeah, I know. But see, that, that's part 01:21:20.939 --> 01:21:27.027 - of this discussion now because it's relevant. And that's part of it's- Do you want to break you first? 01:21:27.027 --> 01:21:32.936 - Again, I keep bringing up subsisting non- systemic non-compliance. This is the non-compliance right 01:21:32.936 --> 01:21:38.078 - here, and it's been going on for years. I mean, this was done, this inspection report, 01:21:38.594 --> 01:21:47.716 - was done in 2023. Right here. And the problem still exists. The discussion about the private road, did 01:21:47.716 --> 01:21:57.104 - you bring that up? Did we talk about the private road? Arrange you? That's a different one, right? That's 01:21:57.104 --> 01:22:01.886 - a different one. I think it's in this packet, though. 01:22:01.986 --> 01:22:10.194 - I saw private. I saw private road up here. Wiggins. You're in Wiggins, I think. Wiggins and Ranger. 01:22:10.194 --> 01:22:18.649 - So they're asking for Ranger to become private there in order to get Wiggins accepted. So on my notes, 01:22:18.649 --> 01:22:23.902 - I'll go through what he was willing to change. So the first was 01:22:24.546 --> 01:22:31.319 - They were going to relook at the manhole 207 to be flush with the roadway. We looked at the picture, 01:22:31.319 --> 01:22:38.159 - it's slightly sunken, and they said they would look at that, but that it was good for plowing to have 01:22:38.159 --> 01:22:45.066 - that a little lower than the profile we wrote. Then the lower the water shutoff valves, once we looked 01:22:45.066 --> 01:22:52.510 - at the photos, they said they would work to do that. The mailboxes, they said that they would work to do that. 01:22:53.186 --> 01:23:00.096 - They are currently in the right of way, and we have another location, but we need to check with USPS. 01:23:00.096 --> 01:23:07.412 - The angled parking, this was a contention point, so that angled parking, where it's supposed to be parallel 01:23:07.412 --> 01:23:14.255 - parking, if everyone can envision that, or I can pull the picture. That, they said that because they 01:23:14.255 --> 01:23:19.742 - have such, they have those units right in front of those, or three bedroom each, 01:23:20.290 --> 01:23:27.346 - they have a parking capacity problem. So if they switch them from angle to parallel, they lose spaces. 01:23:27.346 --> 01:23:34.265 - Additionally, I asked Daniel Butler, you know, because we had the conversation about the school bus, 01:23:34.265 --> 01:23:41.115 - school buses do not come around there, is what they're saying, but a fire truck, they said can fit, 01:23:41.115 --> 01:23:47.486 - but they originally in that proposal for the construction plans made it parallel to in part, 01:23:47.650 --> 01:23:55.372 - meet the turning radius and the turning movements for construction and engineering. So I asked Daniel 01:23:55.372 --> 01:24:03.019 - Butler to report back on whether that angled parking impacts his original recommendation that it can 01:24:03.019 --> 01:24:10.590 - meet, you know, movement requirements for a fire truck or a semi truck, things like that. So that's 01:24:10.722 --> 01:24:16.025 - That was that discussion. They would not, they will do this if they absolutely have to, but they said 01:24:16.025 --> 01:24:21.380 - the tenants will be extremely unhappy. You're not going to be able to get a plow, a bus, a moving van. 01:24:21.380 --> 01:24:26.943 - You're not going to be able to go out there and drive, just drive through that neighborhood and go through 01:24:26.943 --> 01:24:32.351 - that area over there. It's also, and it hadn't been brought up here. It's a safety issue with children. 01:24:32.351 --> 01:24:36.094 - Right. Anybody who's doing like compact signs, compact cars only, which 01:24:36.354 --> 01:24:42.954 - maybe get limited compliance with those types of self-limiting signs, so. When I lived in Virginia, 01:24:42.954 --> 01:24:49.818 - I lived in a townhouse complex and we had, I was actually on a HOA board. We had an issue with children 01:24:49.818 --> 01:24:56.550 - and parking because of the kids outing out between the vehicles. You've got to really be careful when 01:24:56.550 --> 01:25:03.216 - you take it, when you put and make it so dense with vehicles. You're just asking for somebody to get 01:25:03.216 --> 01:25:05.790 - hit. I mean, it's a real safety issue. 01:25:06.594 --> 01:25:13.754 - So that was these three items. Stop bars are willing to put in. So that was something they said yes 01:25:13.754 --> 01:25:20.986 - to. Private water line, we're going to recheck with Highway. We believe that they're public based on 01:25:20.986 --> 01:25:28.432 - the engineer's remembrance of the project, but we're going to just make sure we're all on the same page 01:25:28.432 --> 01:25:34.590 - for what they're talking about in terms of this comment here. The private water line. 01:25:35.554 --> 01:25:42.483 - So it is CBU. CBU covers the sewer and the water, but I guess there was an existing private water line 01:25:42.483 --> 01:25:49.748 - from the subdivision to the south. You mean with a small water corporation? Is it still in fact a different 01:25:49.748 --> 01:25:56.609 - water corporation? Is that what you mean? It must be. I need to get a little bit more clarity on that 01:25:56.609 --> 01:26:03.134 - comment, because it is CBU serviced. So I'm not sure, because you would not consider it private. 01:26:03.586 --> 01:26:11.035 - Right, I would like to know if the small water corporation sold that water line to CBU or whether or 01:26:11.035 --> 01:26:18.632 - not, I just have no idea what that means. Right, okay. So we'll get a little bit more clarity on that. 01:26:18.632 --> 01:26:26.007 - And then 139 feet of sidewalk, they do not want to do that. That's the one that's to the north with 01:26:26.007 --> 01:26:30.654 - the angled driveways. So they're not interested in making that 01:26:30.914 --> 01:26:38.495 - Improvement though, we are going to estimate what it would cost based on the removal and replacement 01:26:38.495 --> 01:26:46.001 - from an engineer's perspective. They are not wanting to replace the cracked sidewalk. This sidewalk 01:26:46.001 --> 01:26:53.657 - against back of curb measures five feet wide. Sidewalk located back of curb must be six feet wide. In 01:26:53.657 --> 01:26:58.686 - review of the approved plans, we did see that there was five feet. 01:26:59.010 --> 01:27:06.965 - though ADA says six feet, so they were hesitant to do that because again, that would take up more of 01:27:06.965 --> 01:27:14.998 - that area that they're very limited to with the cross-silt problem. We said five, I'm good with that. 01:27:14.998 --> 01:27:22.953 - Okay. That was more of just like a point when you get out. Private signage, they have a block camera 01:27:22.953 --> 01:27:27.678 - with a sign on it and another sign. They said that they are 01:27:28.066 --> 01:27:35.819 - not interested in moving those signs if they can avoid it. But one of them was easy to move the flock 01:27:35.819 --> 01:27:43.496 - camera, so maybe it's not. Is that a private agreement with the flock? I didn't have to do that, but 01:27:43.496 --> 01:27:51.173 - I'm guessing yes. I think that's worth a question, because I know there's been some re-evaluation by 01:27:51.173 --> 01:27:57.406 - the city level. So I mean, from our side of things, that's something that- Right. 01:27:57.602 --> 01:28:03.909 - Yeah, it was like, if that's an agreement between him and Flock, it's not what it's supposed to be. 01:28:03.909 --> 01:28:10.406 - Right. Yeah, that would be our ultimate, like, we just move it, but they're saying that's a just word. 01:28:10.406 --> 01:28:16.966 - That's their answer. I'm sorry, I wrote to Jackie in advance of the meeting to say that I have to leave 01:28:16.966 --> 01:28:19.678 - at 7, big team. Will that ruin our quorum? 01:28:20.258 --> 01:28:26.202 - wasn't planning on coming until I knew I needed to be there in person. So I am more than eager to meet 01:28:26.202 --> 01:28:32.031 - that. So I just want to make that if we go through this loss, we will exhaust time. And so the other 01:28:32.031 --> 01:28:38.090 - ones seem like they could be quite quick. I just have I just had one last. I don't I don't know. I don't 01:28:38.090 --> 01:28:43.861 - want to stifle you from going here. One last questions or anything. This has become the center grab 01:28:43.861 --> 01:28:48.766 - it right here. This is our gravity and bless you for going through and talking about 01:28:49.090 --> 01:28:55.268 - having a nice fruitful conversation about what they can or they will not do or about planning. And so 01:28:55.268 --> 01:29:01.627 - if we were to take a look at this using that as a center of gravity, I mean, at the next time this comes 01:29:01.627 --> 01:29:07.684 - up, I know if it's not addressed, I plan on bringing it up. Okay, let's go to this and show us what 01:29:07.684 --> 01:29:13.861 - you can and what you can do, you won't do, or you've discussed with planning and you decided it's not 01:29:13.861 --> 01:29:19.070 - required. And at the end of the day, when I go back to this summary page, which says, 01:29:19.650 --> 01:29:26.057 - what the results are, and it says fail. At the end of the day, after you've done that analysis on what 01:29:26.057 --> 01:29:32.401 - they can and cannot and will not or what you agree they're not required to do, if it still says fail, 01:29:32.401 --> 01:29:38.621 - then we're into systemic noncompliance again. That's the bottom line. I didn't have the question. I 01:29:38.621 --> 01:29:44.841 - watched the video and the discussion, but I'm not sure if you addressed this. And if you did, maybe 01:29:44.841 --> 01:29:49.630 - it didn't resonate with me, but with them wanting to keep the roads private, 01:29:49.986 --> 01:29:59.157 - I hope this doesn't create this whole debate again because there's an interesting meeting. Does the 01:29:59.157 --> 01:30:09.061 - planning commission have a role in that? So we would have to amend the outline plan. That's what I thought. 01:30:09.061 --> 01:30:18.782 - I just wasn't sure and I figured. That was my key question. We need to do with this worksheet right here. 01:30:19.394 --> 01:30:25.315 - is color code on, not necessarily these colors, but what they're going to do and what they're not going 01:30:25.315 --> 01:30:31.122 - to do and what you say is no longer relevant and it's no longer required. Because that little summary 01:30:31.122 --> 01:30:36.814 - is going to lead in that discussion and that should be shared with before the next meeting with the 01:30:36.814 --> 01:30:42.621 - petitioner so they know exactly what we're going to talk about. Again, this is incentive. It gets you 01:30:42.621 --> 01:30:48.542 - toward compliance, et cetera. Because I was on the client commission when this was approved originally, 01:30:49.090 --> 01:30:58.313 - The entire approval for this project in my opinion, in my memory, relied entirely on whether or not 01:30:58.313 --> 01:31:07.998 - the boat would become public. So that is the very thing that intentionally has not been done. So because 01:31:08.386 --> 01:31:17.955 - housing affordability, street maintenance, snow removal. We made concessions on widths. We made concessions 01:31:17.955 --> 01:31:27.258 - on driveway depths. Susie and Julie and Lee and I and other people were working on this to do everything 01:31:27.258 --> 01:31:36.030 - we could to ensure that the streets would be accepted into the public inventory. So I'm unwilling. 01:31:36.930 --> 01:31:45.410 - to allow this myself to be remain a private road. Now Lisa has said at the last meeting, she does not 01:31:45.410 --> 01:31:53.723 - want it. So to me that just resounds with even more problems. And I think those comments need to be 01:31:53.723 --> 01:32:02.036 - fixed. And to be clear, it's a planned commission final decision with the outline amendment or does 01:32:02.036 --> 01:32:06.110 - that then goes to the board of commission? Okay. 01:32:06.722 --> 01:32:16.096 - That's really where I was trying to get at with the process question. Thank you. Okay, so are the point 01:32:16.096 --> 01:32:25.289 - PD this and we didn't share with them the easements. It was an easement and a contribution before the 01:32:25.289 --> 01:32:29.886 - documents. So that document is privately enforced. 01:32:30.178 --> 01:32:37.492 - What we discussed with the petitioner is even if we were able to add the use of the self-storage, they 01:32:37.492 --> 01:32:45.018 - would have to figure out the easement conflicts before we could approve the development because we cannot 01:32:45.018 --> 01:32:52.261 - approve a storage unit over an easement. So to my knowledge, we don't have any update from them after 01:32:52.261 --> 01:32:56.734 - they've received that document. So that could be one that they 01:32:56.930 --> 01:33:04.470 - If they don't have an answer to us by next meeting. Just continued. Okay, so we'll just tell them if 01:33:04.470 --> 01:33:12.085 - we don't have an answer, substantive answer for the planning commission, we're just going to continue 01:33:12.085 --> 01:33:19.775 - this on. Okay. Should we make a motion to continue it unless it's resolved or just continue it? We can 01:33:19.775 --> 01:33:26.046 - just communicate that to them, I think. Sounds good. I don't want to evaluate this. 01:33:26.466 --> 01:33:34.052 - validity of their response, but if they don't have any update, then I'm going to say it's easily continued. 01:33:34.052 --> 01:33:41.356 - Yeah, sounds good. There's a lot more to that discussion. All right. And then these last two, the first 01:33:41.356 --> 01:33:48.380 - one went to black leaf and it was recommended to move forward. They are still missing their average 01:33:48.380 --> 01:33:53.086 - daily trip data, which we've given them until Friday to get to us. 01:33:53.346 --> 01:34:00.403 - That will determine the labor for the road with based on your that's the truth generation matters. So 01:34:00.403 --> 01:34:07.529 - is this something we approved? Or is that the next meeting would be a fine commission decision if they 01:34:07.529 --> 01:34:14.585 - went, but it's a preliminary hearing. Yeah, in if they weren't asked for the word with labor and then 01:34:14.585 --> 01:34:22.334 - plat committee decision and Mr Bush is serving as the chair of the plat committee this year, which is nice and. 01:34:23.298 --> 01:34:29.853 - I'm sure it's been clearly indicated to the petitioner that they can kind of do the back of the neck 01:34:29.853 --> 01:34:36.537 - and daily average travel. That is given theirs with the Highway Department gave them an exact template 01:34:36.537 --> 01:34:43.091 - to use. Yeah, yeah, because that's what he alluded to was okay. Okay, I just want to make sure so it 01:34:43.091 --> 01:34:49.646 - makes it easier for them to achieve. Okay. And then the next fact, friends, this is your MedFram 5B. 01:34:49.646 --> 01:34:50.814 - This is how other 01:34:50.914 --> 01:34:58.268 - One interesting one in that the lot currently has this. They found out after they filed with us that 01:34:58.268 --> 01:35:05.621 - the easement they thought they had through their neighbors is not real. It was not recorded. So they 01:35:05.621 --> 01:35:13.048 - currently have no access to this lot and would be creating a plot that changes the lot line and still 01:35:13.048 --> 01:35:15.742 - does not have access to County Road. 01:35:16.578 --> 01:35:24.146 - You know, the ordinance requires that this is what the lot would look like. So this lot to the east, 01:35:24.146 --> 01:35:31.789 - which does have access, would be getting bigger. They want to build a home on this area here. So they 01:35:31.789 --> 01:35:39.357 - want to apply some of this area. There's a very, very steep ravine here. So there's no way to access 01:35:39.357 --> 01:35:42.654 - from this lot over to this lot by driveway. 01:35:43.074 --> 01:35:50.659 - It would be extremely steeped down, extremely steeped up. So their main way is to come out to go up 01:35:50.659 --> 01:35:58.472 - to this way, which I think is actually the best way. Thank you. So they do not have access. They won't 01:35:58.472 --> 01:36:06.436 - have access. The question is, can we waive the requirement that they have to be accessed first to create 01:36:06.436 --> 01:36:07.422 - this plaque? 01:36:07.714 --> 01:36:14.255 - Um, if we do that, if the planning commission approves the waiver, you know, we have findings in the 01:36:14.255 --> 01:36:20.990 - packet. Something that we're always concerned about is buyer beware and putting that stamp on something 01:36:20.990 --> 01:36:27.725 - was very, very small thing. And by the way, it looks like we don't have any access to it, so you cannot 01:36:27.725 --> 01:36:34.266 - develop it. Um, so we did give some options under the report, uh, that we're welcoming discussion on 01:36:34.266 --> 01:36:37.310 - at the regular meeting or now if you did think 01:36:37.506 --> 01:36:43.858 - to approve or want to approve the way to request at the next commission meeting, we would say that there 01:36:43.858 --> 01:36:49.423 - should be a note that lot one is inaccessible, cannot be further developed, almost just say 01:36:49.423 --> 01:36:55.594 - like non-buildable all over, noted on the deed and on the plaque. So, and then if they want to remove 01:36:55.594 --> 01:37:02.006 - that in the future, they would have to come back to the planning commission to remove it. But ultimately, 01:37:02.006 --> 01:37:02.974 - we really think 01:37:03.362 --> 01:37:10.997 - They should get the access figured out before we do anything. I think you're creating a precedent, again, 01:37:10.997 --> 01:37:18.272 - by allowing, if in fact we would take and approve something. My question is, has it been done? Yeah, 01:37:18.272 --> 01:37:25.547 - they already don't have access. You didn't see that. What I wrote on top of this is, what I wrote on 01:37:25.547 --> 01:37:32.318 - top of this was, not ready for prime time. That's what I wrote. This needs a little bit more. 01:37:34.242 --> 01:37:43.153 - Did we get totally? Well, I think we did. Good job, buddy. All right. Any other business to take care 01:37:43.153 --> 01:37:51.453 - of? I was going to move for adjournment, but I don't want to jump in front of staff to update. 01:37:51.453 --> 01:37:59.927 - Anything else? No, I was just asking. No, thank you. All right. I move for adjournment. I moved. 01:37:59.927 --> 01:38:03.422 - All right. Thank you. Thanks, everyone.