- Okay, everyone, it's 530, so I will go ahead and call to order the Flying Commission Administrative
- Meeting. And at this meeting, there will be no public comment taken. Do we need to call the roll? Yes,
- we can go ahead. Please call the roll. Okay. David Bush? Yes, here. Margaret Clements here. Thank you.
- Tom Enright-Randolph? Here. Pat Farris? Here. Rudy Fields?
- David Henry? Jeff Morris? Here. Joe Van Deventer? Julie Thomas? Here. And then Steve Bishop? Here. OK.
- So in person, we have six voting plan commission members and one non-voting plan commission member and
- a quorum. We don't have to introduce evidence. No, we don't. OK. All right.
- We'll go ahead and take away with the first item. Yeah, we'll go ahead and go to the first item on the
- agenda. OK. This was just a report that we did. The GIS team in the surveyors office did publish the
- road inventory map. So you could use that at any point to look up your address and check to see if your
- property abuts a county maintained roadway. I think this will be helpful in communicating with the public.
- whether or not their road would be, you know, cloud for the winter, for instance, or any other consideration
- for replacing them sidewalks or things to that nature. So we're happy to have this as a published map
- and it's on the GIS Division website. Thank you, Kron. Thanks. So has this been posted? It is on the
- GIS Division website. It's at other places if you want us to do like a
- We can do press release or we're thinking about doing something like that. So on the county's website,
- those notices you put out? Yes. This would be worthy of a notice to let people know about it. I agree.
- I do have a question regarding this. If someone notices that there is some road that's not maintained
- by the county that they would like to be, is there some way that they could easily identify that through this?
- like next steps, basically. Yeah, because I could see somebody going on there and be like,
- oh, my neighborhood, my development is not part of this, but I'm worried, so. Right. When you start
- the map, it does have sort of a disclaimer, and it does point people to reach out. This is the Highway
- Department's dispatch, and we're hoping, and then there's also a list of private contractors, if they're
- foreclosed or there's no emergency.
- but I would hope that people would start with that number and then we would be able to communicate to
- them. I'm not to say that they don't get bounced around a couple of times, but it's usually not a very
- straightforward answer when people ask, how do I get into the inventory? It's usually a little bit longer
- of an answer. It was just more, is there an avenue for intake just to start that?
- you know, discussion. Right. Really good. Starts with a bubble cover problem. There you go. I have the
- scary part. So I would suggest you add it as a notice. Okay. It's visibility. I mean, it's a good product.
- We ought to take it. There is a possibility of maybe working with, I would assume Lynette would probably
- be kind of the contact at the highway and John and putting kind of the one, two, three survey, kind
- of what you did with the draft zoning map to potentially just get
- feedback. On the map? Yeah, if there's any like errors or omissions by accident because some of the
- roads are public and then at a certain point they go private. So if we could get feedback from folks
- that are using it. Also to your point too, just I know I could speak with them too by trying to let
- you guys organic organically kind of developments. But I know you're familiar with the
- CDO draft zoning map, so kind of very similar to that. Okay, and that's all that I had on that item.
- If anyone doesn't have anything else, we can move on. Okay, please.
- We have been operating under our new fee schedule that was adopted December 1st. And we have noticed
- a few things that we would like to have either corrected, added, removed. So what we've done is put
- in red new items that we'd like to break out for a fee.
- And then in yellow, we have one thing that we're wanting to strike. This is actually an error because
- it's listed twice. And then below, we have another item that we would like to add. I would like to talk
- about this one just for a moment. So we'll go through each of these. This petitioner requests to continue
- the petition on, for instance, board zoning appeals and regular commission meetings.
- we are required to send our agendas to the newspaper. Each one of those blocks of text equals somewhere
- around 10 to $15 every single time we notice something. So when you see a petition that's been continuing
- for months and months and months, that's 10 to $15 times the number of times they've continued. We don't
- wanna penalize petitioners who we are needing more information for, they show up,
- You know, we decide we need more information. We continue them. But we have a lot of petitioners that
- file and then they do not meet the... You've already spent the money for... We already spent the money
- for the notice. So we're trying to keep up a little bit with the paper notice fees. And our budget went
- down. Right. I know this. We had to reduce budget. So that would be a fee increase. We're still deciding.
- I think this would be petitioner-led continuances, and sometimes there's a limit, sometimes there's
- not. If, for instance, you have a petition on, let's say, tonight's the regular planning commission
- meetings agenda, and you decide, I'm going to continue this to August, we would not charge them the
- months of April, May, June, July, because we can put on the next month, continue to August, and then
- we wouldn't have to keep
- noticing it. So we are going to try to incentivize people to kind of have a more strategic understanding
- of when they'll be heard and that way we can save everyone time and money. So that's this item and we
- figured that $20 covers actual notice and then administrative time to just keep up with that. Just due
- to the processes are we talking about just planning
- for instance, if it gets continued at the drainage board or if it gets continued at the commissioner
- level. Right. This would just be for planning. We're thinking BZA and planned commission are the two
- meetings that we have to make a notice. That sounds right. I'm just curious because those are two other
- areas where notice has to be made. Sometimes it's not a paid notice, but we have to send it to the paper
- per the codes. I'm fine with it. Okay. I like it being
- and then occasionally we would be able to waive the fee if it seemed reasonable. And then this item
- we've separated type B and type C out. We did pretty drastically increase the fee for administrative
- subdivisions because they've involved a lot of
- Title work, deed work, a lot of staff time to determine what they're starting with. But these two types
- of administrative subdivisions are court decrees and correctives. And so they typically only involve
- working at new and old legal descriptions and not a plat. So they're much less work than the other ones
- that we left up here. Type D is for creating new right of way on a plat. Type D is shifting lot lines between
- cemetery plots and type G is new, that's the conservation lot creation. So all of those involve plat
- review, which we feel like that fee is still appropriate. And then B or C would lower back down to more
- closely to what it was before December 1st of 2025. And that's largely because we're mostly just doing
- D review and not the plat review as well. Those fees that you're proposing based on
- like an aggregate average amount of time you're spending on these? We get into the labor analysis for
- each category, so, oh, yes. We've had a couple recently where we've, again, recap the labor. And then
- this is something that we have put into the CDO. It was a late amendment in the old ordinance as well.
- But we did add that we require a permit when you increase the number of bedrooms, because it's typically
- a septic situation in the county. We do not have a current fee for that, but we are doing the work of
- issuing a permit and checking their septic, and it sometimes involves a bit of coordination. So we recommend
- a $50 fee for that permit. It would not be a fee if it's a residential remodel without bedroom increase,
- that just gets a waiver.
- But this requires a permit from us to make sure that we're verifying as a last step that their septic
- is capable of handling the bedroom increase. And then, like I said, this was a duplicate, the residential
- accessory building that's down here at 150. And then we wanted to make that a little bit more clear,
- so we made the example garage.
- And then we have two people in our office that are notaries, and we do not have a charge for it right
- now, but we would like to implement a charge because we do support their notary license. So those are
- the changes. There was, I need to look at what was the final version of the document, but House Enrolled Act 1001.
- does have some language in it or did have some language in it. So last we checked about fees and when
- it starts to be January 1st of 2027, they had some language in there that says we mainly update our
- fees every five years. So we do want to make sure that the schedule is in good shape before we get to
- that point. So are these five years from one December or five years from one July?
- I think it'll be five years from December 31st, 2026, because that bill goes into effect January 1,
- 2027. I think it will be whenever I would hope we do an amendment close to the new year. Then we get
- five-year time. You're not looking to revise anything else on this list between now and that date? It
- seems like it's doing pretty well right now, but I'm not to say we won't revise anything else.
- So this was an aggregate of- Because you're locked in for five years is what I'm talking about. I know.
- There's no adjustment because of inflation or anything like the cost of living are replaced, right?
- Right. So what happens if this, through the fee schedule, if you start running a deficit, because in
- that five years, we just start losing out on basically the amount that it costs to do the work relative
- to what we're already in. What happens at that point in time?
- We're already at a deficit. So we may be going to cover about 25 to 30% of our bread. I think we hope
- to cover about that maybe a little bit more. And how much of that fee schedule actually gets touched
- in a regular course of business? Like a month or a quarter, like is most of those enacted throughout
- the stuff that you typically work on? So would you say,
- Yeah, companies are going to move right. Sure. But like, you know, in, let's say, you know, summer or
- November, sorry, not November, September, you know, three, six months down the road, should we reevaluate
- this and try, you know, just like, are you making some headway on that deficit, you know, to where we
- can actually feel confident going into the end of the year? Or, you know, what happens if you run a
- surplus? Right. Well, I would say,
- The labor analysis was based on the 2026 salary COLA adjustment. When I say we run a deficit, that's
- because we do a lot of other things that aren't in this fee schedule. So we take phone calls from people.
- I look at my run into the inventory. We're not going to charge them for that time on the phone. We had
- Well, I think we had determined that we had over 600. What do we call player of the day inquiries in
- a year? So we have quite a few, like, 40 per person per month, getting quite a few calls. Maybe cases
- are created from there, but we have a lot of lead time to talking to the public from when they.
- from that point to educate them and then when they actually file. So with a lot of what we would call
- free. But should we be baking that into this week's schedule?
- We can talk about that. Yes, the labor analysis that we did was sort of after we educated them on,
- you know, this is what the ordinance says. You need a variance. You can make that decision if you want
- to apply for the variance or, for instance, you can move your shed to meet the setback and you don't
- need the variance. So it's sort of like it depends. It's more finicky on the time.
- but pre filing, then we know it's pretty predictable. Once you file variance, we kind of know the hours
- that it will take for that case, depending on the number of variances and things like that. So we did
- try to think through, and I'm happy to share with you because it came out last year. So we have an Excel
- spreadsheet with them. It's just trying to future proof since once the end of the year old around where
- we're stuck with their life or not. So that,
- I mean, and I guess that would be the question is if we did adjust it again before the end of the year,
- what would happen if you did actually have a surplus? What would happen in that instance? I would just
- like to say that Jackie has done, and Tammy and the planning staff has really done their due diligence
- with regard to the workflow and the work product and this fee schedule. And one thing that I really
- admire about your professionalism is that you're aware
- to the penny, how much money we're down and how, you know, we're never really up, but we provide great
- services despite those challenges like, for example, the County Council losing track of $4 million,
- you know, and it costing us a hiring freeze and things like that. So you've planned this, you've balanced
- it. She understands, yeah.
- We can certainly put this on the agenda for November. I'm just taking a kick at the end of the year
- and it's going to be relevant. That sounds good. We'll keep checking back in. So you need to approve
- any of this now? Yes, so you can at least have real data to track for the next six months. Right. I
- really want to see how this legal notice speed goes.
- Are you asking to approve that tonight? Yes, you could approve this tonight if you would want to take
- a vote on that if the board would. The revenue generated here, it doesn't necessarily revert right back
- to planning, right? It goes to the county general and so like there are funds that are non-reverting
- that have been
- kind of go back to the cash balance. What they bring in here goes back to the larger county general,
- and then the council weighs that into their decision of their appropriation. So you do report on the
- dollars coming in, but these dollars that we receive through a calendar year aren't necessarily going
- to a planning's operational costs. Just not sure if we kind of directly address that.
- I do agree. Jackie does a tremendous job of looking at these and weighing them for the time spent and
- trying to find that appropriate dollar amount of charge. Any further discussion? If someone would like
- to make a motion. I have a motion to approve the fee schedule as presented by the Director.
- Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
- All right, moving along to the next administrative item on our agenda, which is the Ellisville merger
- summary. Yes. So this was something that was presented to the building association for which some of
- our other departments are members of our building department as a member of that organization. So our
- building commissioner came over and let me know that this was being discussed
- in the community and gave me this handout, so I wanted to share it with you all as it's relevant. In
- discussing how to kind of disseminate this information, I wanted to provide maybe a few maps or some
- information and then get from all of you any comments or anything that you would like planning to do
- and more research. I have some discussion questions at the end, but essentially what they're proposing is to
- Merge or annex Richland Township into Ellsville. So this dotted green and black line is their current
- corporate boundary. And then this is partially the city. And then everything in here is currently the
- campaign. So it's about, the county has about 18,790 acres or only 9.36 square miles.
- a large area that we're talking about. And then this is the zoning map, just so you get an idea of the
- components of that area or what the makeup is. It's some light industrial, some mineral extraction,
- primarily agriculture. There's some residential low density and medium density residential, and then
- brown is one acre residential as well. So as you get closer to the city, we do have some industrial areas.
- here as well. And this is PD. That's not parking. So that's the zoning makeup. And then I also wanted
- to just note some of the environmental constraints. So they have quite a bit of karst density in this
- area. This is from Indian map. So the blue is sinking streams. The yellow, orange is sinkhole areas.
- So we have quarry, like I said, quarry areas in this area as well.
- mixed with low density residential. And then here's the slope map showing just the 25% or greater. And
- then the floodplain, this really doesn't really address this stuff. There is a jacks to feet creek that
- goes through here and does cause some issues now and again. So there is some floodplain. So just some
- discussion questions, forthright question to try and guide us here.
- if you would like us comparing further information for your review, or if you'd like to discuss any,
- you know, text or zoning map amendments or anything ahead of the possible merger, or we can just let
- everything, you know, decide for ourselves how we want to move forward. And I'm going to be going to
- a conference next Friday, the Indiana chapter of the American Planning Association,
- They have a session from referendum to reality planning after a town township consolidation. So I'm
- going to go and learn about how a town of Ellsville did it. Yeah, or yeah, there's a Hamilton County
- example and it was all because of the Government Modernization Act. So yeah, so I'll be I can write
- up my notes and report that.
- My basic question is, and I asked this almost all these cases, that what is the impact on our ordinance
- with respect to this? Well, we would not be able to administer the CDO in any of these areas. Well,
- that's talking about the documents. The case. I mean, these are all illustrations they haven't gotten
- to, like the nuts and bolts, like they could still potentially ask now there had to be
- in our local or some type of agreement, but like, it's yet to be determined, but we could lose all our
- planning oversight, our building oversight, even police protection and fire protection, all of that.
- And I was gonna get to that. They're still discussing as illustrations. I was gonna get to that. And
- so I'm just saying your question can't really be answered. No, but this is, we're setting the stage
- for whether we need to do anything, okay? And so at this point,
- what would be the changes to our ordinance if in fact we lose 40.5 square miles of territory, which
- is more than half of our area. I think we have, I did the math, 29.36 will remain miles. I mean, you
- lose over half of your area. So what happens to our ordinance and the fact that it doesn't apply?
- Is that it? That changes.
- The map changes. Yeah, exactly right. I mean, so we're no longer responsible for firing police. We're
- moving the income potentially to the filing. So like it could kind of make everything a little more
- difficult to administrate as is. I know Commissioner Thomas has a lot to probably weigh in on here as
- a lot would eventually fall to the Commissioner's dais. And the other point I was going to bring up
- is revenue.
- Do we lose any revenue as a result because we're not collecting. The one last thing I think is very
- important is we reference other county ordinances in our.
- ordinance like stormwater, highway, and all of those are going to be impacted too. So like we're a MS4
- community, so we have rate fees for our stormwater. If this occurs, then that's going to have to be
- addressed too. And again, these are just illustrations they're talking about. But from my following
- the town council and some of the subcommittees that were appointed by the township
- trustee and the town council. They seem to actually, I think, being considered of wanting to kind of
- take those fees and take that jurisdiction over. But again, the devil's in the details. And until we
- see that referendum, because it goes to a vote, and they have to be ready, and the deadlines are coming up.
- So I'll pause there. It's just, there's a lot going on. To finish my thought, all I'm trying to figure
- out is what is the impact that we need to take and look at now to be ready? And I think what you just
- told me is that it's a wait and see, even though there's potentially you're going to have, I would argue
- it could even hurt your manning requirements for your, for the various departments here, because that
- duty is going to shift someplace else. I mean, so the argument goes, I mean, so manning revenue, et cetera.
- and you're talking about police and fire, and you're talking about probably a longer list of things.
- They have their own building departments. Yeah, and so as far as what we can do, I don't think you could
- do anything. I think the only thing that we could consider is if we look at some of the areas that have
- been voluntarily annexed, what type of development are they shooting for in Alexville that we maybe
- aren't zoned for in the county?
- And so to have a conversation with people, if people are calling in and saying, Hey, how many homes
- can I get? How many, how many lots can I create? And we tell them four or less and they hang up and
- they call Ellipsville and they tell them, you can have 20 lots or what have you. That's the, that's
- the conversation that's happening behind the scenes that we don't always hear about. So. Commissioner
- Thomas has been patiently waiting to weigh in. So can we hear from her, please?
- Yeah, and I'm never patient, so thank you. I'm chomping at the bit. Yeah, I think it's a wait and see.
- There are a lot of unknowns and I wouldn't start making decisions or even start worrying at this moment.
- I believe the deadline is around May for the town council and the township
- board to vote on whether or not to approve whatever plan it is that they're supposed to have done by
- the end of this month. If it does pass both boards, both the council and the board, it will go to be
- a referendum style vote for all Richland Township residents in November.
- at the general election time. Their plan, just so everybody's clear, is to start doing this to take
- over to annex. It would be January 1st of 27th. They would have a lot of work to do if the referendum
- passes. The other thing I will say is that I don't think the issue of housing is relevant because
- If Ellisville annexes, it's going to charge a local income tax that's a city style income tax in the
- future when everything changes fiscally across the state. That's not who we are. We're not a town, we're
- not a city, we're not charging that. I think we have a CDO that went before the entire public, the entire
- community. I don't think there's anything we should be looking at
- out of some reaction to anything. The Basque advertisement piece that Jackie included here,
- let's be clear, it's a red herring. Ellisville wants to do well fiscally, and to do well fiscally, they
- need to charge a local income tax. To charge a local income tax, you have to be annexed into the town.
- That's what this is. It's not about housing. It will impact their housing, fine.
- but they're going to be a town slash small city if this goes through and they will be charging residents
- an additional local income tax in order to pay those bills. It's not about housing, it's about money.
- Housing does connect with money in that way. But I just wanted to say those things. I don't think we
- should spend any time on this at this moment. I don't think we should speculate at this moment.
- We all know what we have to look at if this passes in November, and we will have to talk about it then
- and see what happens. But let's see if the plan is done. Let's see if both the council and the Township
- Board approve it. Let's see what happens. Thank you. Yeah, I agree. It's a lot.
- to try to figure out what we can address. I think sending the maps of some of the CARS features and
- the best available floodplain data, even though I'm sure they have it, who knows, could be helpful.
- I do think that part two of the question, should we be considering the zoning around these areas? But
- one thing I was going to say is it would be nice to start
- tracking the voluntary annexation so we can kind of see how that is progressing. Like when did we see
- this uptick or seeing a consistency to people volunteering annexing over there. But one issue that is
- gonna be very difficult is they're in the town, which I think then that means they're gonna get sewer.
- So even with the questions you posed of is it because they can get more density
- Yeah, they probably can because they probably can get sewer and they might be able to get something
- similar, we could extend sewer. So that's not the same issue that we're grappling with in the county.
- So like, it's going to be really hard to kind of determine if this was rezoned to maybe allow a couple
- more units would they stay in the county, which I would love to see that because we have some better
- ordinances that focus on some more of our environmental protections and things of that nature.
- We can't guarantee that because right now, unless we change other things, a lot of those properties
- are going to get sewer and that's going to allow them to have that more density. Again, I think it's
- just too complicated to try to sort out. We just wait and see as Commissioner Thomas was saying,
- but yeah, it's very interesting. Well, it's my understanding that the law that
- The capital improvements would have to be made within like a three-year period of time. So even though
- it looks relatively rural, Ellensville would have to extend services equitably out into the county area
- to compare with that in the city. But that being said, I don't have a clear handle on the population.
- How many residents live in the city? 7,000 in Montana.
- In the town of about 13 altogether. And then how many people are bariatric? So the people don't really
- have a say, right? Because they'll get, you know, percent from the town. As you were saying, so how
- much are they outweighed? I don't actually know that information. I use some old census data and I can
- give you more precise numbers from the old census data, but that's not necessarily one for one.
- I guess it's about even. Yeah. It's about even really in the areas that they're wanting the annals.
- The folks in the Richland Township and then compared to the folks in the town of Ellitsville, the difference
- is not huge. But I'm using 2020 census data. This is the, I mean, all of Ellitsville and everything
- on that screen is Richland, right?
- Except for the town and the town would be excluded from all of the reorganization discussions.
- Just for my. Yeah. Okay. Sure. I think so. That's a good question. Just for my own education.
- What is the southern boundary? Is there, what's that road that parallels the southern boundary in the
- original township? This would be 48. That's 48? Okay, and what about the eastern, the north-south? This
- is 46 in Arlington, et cetera. Okay, yeah, yeah. Is that Curry? This would be, yeah, this would be,
- well, this is Curry. Okay, so it's a little bit east of Curry, a little bit later. All right,
- thank you. Yeah, and the chorus, they show,
- and the Coraline down there is all the way down on the bottom right. That's it right there. Yeah. Is
- that the driving? Corning or the? That'd be Reed, right? Well, that's Reed. I think that's Debbie Reed,
- I think. They were off of Prow Road by the high school, North High School. I think this is the old murder room.
- Okay, so What I'm hearing is no no immediate action on our part just to keep our finger on the pulse
- of what's happening and is is is someone for your department doing that or
- We can, well, I think that the. Not trying to give you more. No, I think that that's helpful to follow
- the township board and the town council meetings and we report back in May or about even June. Sure,
- I'm sure there will be people from this group attending. All right, well, I can't make any more comments on that.
- So shall we move on to SIA-22-3? Yeah. So this is the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. This is an
- extension of performance period completion. It would be for just phase one, seven minutes. So we're
- looking at the prior phases of seven minutes that have been recorded and are being built out.
- There's a timeline under the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and the performance bond that says they'll
- be finished in a certain month, day, or year. This one was supposed to be finished and accepted into
- the inventory by August 18, 2026. They are asking for two additional years to finish up the public improvements.
- So what that means is that we're looking at this from the CDO perspective now, and there would be a
- 10% annual required inflation adjustment. So instead of the 337 number, they would be asked to post
- $371,120.90. So we have a quick summary here of what is in the phase one construction.
- We've talked about this quite a bit, so I don't want to belabor it. But just to reiterate, the phase
- one improvements include three-stem water basins, extension of west that road from South Roger Street
- and all associated infrastructure, street trees turned lane on South Roger Street, and a multi-use path
- along Forest Peak urban. When I put it in bold,
- Among the updates to this, if they're already, um, they're saying to the updates, some of them we haven't
- had any progress or we're still waiting, but they did provide us with that skills to show us, um, where
- they are so far. And we do anticipate at some point they may come back with a reduction, but at this
- point it's just a inflation adjustment with a new performance period and date. Okay. Page 15.
- You make a statement, this is on C1. C1, you say, subdivider has been unable to complete the required
- improvements due to those magic words, due diligence. So this is a longer list that you see on the previous
- page that you just went over. You see some progress. So if you were to ask the question, do you really
- believe, because I actually drove out there.
- I have seen, I did see some changes, but do you fully believe that there really is due diligence in
- them trying to complete those actions? That's a test question from our perspective. The biggest,
- I would say, one of the issues with the items on this list is the churn lane on South Roger. We've been
- asking for that since phase one. We're on now phase four.
- we do feel like with that preventing the planning of phase five, that that has really spurred a lot
- more progress in that department. But I do know, once you start a subdivision phase, your goal is going
- to be sell lots, build homes, transfer those homes to people. And so any offsite improvement, anything
- extra is just background. So that's why the multi-use path
- certainly a lot of that stuff gets held off when we have the money for it. Basins, things like that.
- I think that they've made progress on selling and developing the lots. I don't know how well the progress
- on the public improvements have put them in shape to get acceptance. Have they made any progress on
- getting their permits to do the work in the field right?
- I think they were held on that as well. Well, it's all right there together. They broke it into two
- phases. So where they had enforcement action, where they fill in the floodplain, they remedied that.
- They've already remedied that. They got the permanent through DNR. They did not need to get conditional
- letter of application, which would be federally, like would change the maps. But because they broke it,
- that one intersection down there does need a conditional letter of revision because they're indicating
- that there's a rise in the work that they get out there and that they still need to do, which would
- impact. Where that he has a company in Chicago that he's trying to work with, but they never reached
- out to me. And I just got conditioned.
- And taught and seen something I haven't seen the conditional like I hope that people notice to those
- property owners. For an example, we just got a conditional letter of revision for Hunter Valley Road
- for this week. We started that years ago. And like another one that we have is a two meter.
- just to get that approved, not that work done, not to then do the follow-up of change in that, as far
- as I've built and a lot of other things. So it's a long process. Steve, is there any specific performance
- bond in force already on this one? Because I know there's another property that we've seen develop earlier.
- 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
- that's that's
- So if the letter of credit date this Friday expires, that's when you want to extend your sentence. Ideally,
- if they're going to put the letter of credit to be expiring two years from now, in one year from now,
- and it's hovering beyond August 18th, we would like it to have the inflation adjustment. What happens
- if it expires and they do nothing to get it done? Total passion for dates expiring. And we put it in
- the budget. And then accounting is,
- going to have to do some of all of this work. So is there any sort of work on your side that would need
- to happen to be able to engage that letter to be able to get it? We have templates. We use site drafts.
- Just making sure. We didn't cash maybe three in the last year or two. I just want to make sure you guys
- get set up for the best
- I agree. It's nearly impossible given the opportunities that you're seeing. And because of the change
- and the flow model requirement, if we don't know that fast, you know, this amount, pre-37, could be
- not very quickly just in engineering for doing this. Well, I'm not quibbling about the amount. I'm quibbling
- about, like, I want to make sure that if you have to get in, be in there. Right.
- We've been talking with them. So going back to my question of due diligence, have you had this discussion
- with them lately on these 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 items and their movement toward completing a recent discussion?
- We have been talking with them.
- I think that in terms of the due diligence, there is some interpretation that we've made there. I think
- that the latest conversation that we are kind of working from was that phasing change and then holding
- up phase five of Southern Meadows from being reported until they do the turning. Now what I think I
- put in the report, but it will come up this year as well. Phases five and six also expire on this eight.
- August 18, 2026. So we will have to come back to the planning commission to ask for phase five and six
- again, unless they can be platted. They cannot be platted, phase five cannot be platted until we finish
- with the term line around your street for that red connect. So they're gonna catch 22 on that. I'll
- just say it one more time. And I brought it up at the planning commission meeting. I'm concerned about
- systemic non-compliance. That's what I'm concerned about.
- And I'll keep bringing that up until I feel satisfied that there's due diligence to correct those things.
- They say that what we say, as everybody says, need to be correct. And so I guess it's important to me
- that we see intent. And you're asking us, this body, to approve this POP form and et cetera. You're
- asking us to do that.
- With the alternative knowledge that we would cash. I mean, one of your actions is to possibly recommend
- 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.
- I'm sorry. It's okay. When we condition the extension upon getting any sort of a basic timeline of those
- improvements that, you know, within the six months of this time, six months of this time, that they
- provide us because they've asked for the extension based on their understanding of due diligence. So
- that to me says that they have a timeline in mind. So if they haven't shared that,
- I think that'd be really beneficial. This is Scott's point. Then you can actually go back and say, you
- told us you would do X, Y, and Z in this timeframe. And when we start to see that happen or not happen,
- then we have something we can go back to. But otherwise, it's just, yeah, everyone acting in faith,
- this provides a little more key to it.
- I just didn't want to jump. Mine's, I think, in my opinion, getting at what I hear this conversation.
- I reserve my right to be wrong. But staff is recommending approving this two-year performance. I wanted
- to hear your take because I think based off of conversations, also maybe
- some of the timeline Tammy just alluded to it takes to maybe address some of what needs to be done outside
- of the maybe improvement off the project site or offsite project improvement area you are recommending
- approving and I'm guessing that's one we're uncertain that the dollar amount is going to cover all the
- cost two there might be a couple other mechanisms in place where we could get the developer to kind of
- finish the project to completion. I'm going to pause there and just hear your take on this recommendation
- of approving this. Sure. So at this juncture, they have not completed all the phase one improvements
- to get accepted into the inventory. So we are faced with either extending that timeline or cashing that
- amount and then trying to do it ourselves.
- Since they're still engaged in the subdivision and there's other deadlines, including the prerequisite
- to record phase five contingent upon the turn lane on South Roger Street, we feel there's enough of
- a carrot there for them to get the work done, for them to get it approved. With the inflation adjustment,
- I know that that will help. I mean, they said, I think they look forward to phase one
- three, I want to say. So it's already been three years. So inflation does catch up to that. And they've
- done some, they've done work in phase one. So that 337 number is from where they were three years ago.
- So any sidewalk they have put in directly, we're still capturing that funding in the event the sidewalk
- is not correct. Just a follow up on that is it would be nice to see what
- Improvements they have already put in place so we kind of get a better sense of that's what that dollar
- amounts was speaking to okay, but like maybe like a cost forecast like okay, they put in a hundred thousand
- dollars worth of improvements already that we're not necessarily accounting for in that 300 In with
- the increase 377. Sorry. I don't remember what the other one was like 334 or
- Yes, anyone. Okay. So this is the as built. So you can kind of see here that they have installed sidewalks
- on the south side. You can zoom in and check what the cross slopes is. Sorry, this isn't sure. Is there
- any way for you to try to like give us a ballpark amount of what improvements were in and or what we
- still need to cover and how that
- gets to the dollar amount that we have? So I have also in tandem asked for a reduction, but they have
- not, they need to provide us more information. So we're taking that as a future separate issue, but
- that's where we would really document how much we could potentially reduce. My concern with just telling
- you, you know, hey, they put in how many linear feet of sidewalk is that we don't know that that sidewalk
- is put in.
- to meet the cross-slope ADA. Well, we do have that. So we can start that process, but we were hoping
- to do that in tandem with the reduction. The final thing is, do we have discretion for the increase?
- I know we have 10% kind of baked into our ordinance, but do we have discretionary
- matter or ability to say we would actually want to see a 20% increase if we're going to extend this.
- I'm just trying to understand the role that the plan commission not pitching that idea. Is that subject
- to our discretion that inflation amount? I don't think that the installation amount but possibly re-looking
- at the itemized. So we could re-determine the cost of the improvements that have yet to be completed
- There's two ways of doing it that we offer. So one is they can come up with a valid contract amount,
- and then they're already beyond their performance period, so they have to do the 10%. But we didn't
- make them update their unit pricing since 2023. So the inflation is hopefully capturing the unit prices
- increase, but we're calling it inflation. But if we say since 2023,
- We understood now that the terminate is going to require CLOMAR, which requires engineering and other
- fees. We've asked our legal department before and we can re-ask to say, is there anything we can put
- into the estimate to capture what it would actually take to get approval for that terminate? Typically
- under the state code, I don't think that we can include engineering fees into that. And it's extremely
- hard for us to estimate what those are or what they could be.
- Okay. That is, I'm trying to identify the tools that we have because I agree that like this idea of
- extending it, but still uncertain if they're going to put in those improvements is a little challenging.
- So I really just want to understand what tools were at our disposal. Thanks, Margaret. I'd just like
- an update on any ongoing litigation with regard to this development.
- would you be able to answer that question about the litigation update for Margaret on solo or is that
- a Justin question? Jackie, that's a Justin question. I can get online and see what I can find out about
- the status, but last time I talked to him about it, it was kind of on hold. Yeah.
- Go ahead. Yeah, I think it's kind of interrelated with Colonel Farris's question I'm going to ask.
- I agree. And along that same line, I'll get to you in a second, Chef. Along that same line, is your
- summary of work to be completed, for lack of a better term, does that include everything that they pledge
- to do in their written commitments? Because I know
- There's another contractor, the Blind Squirrel Group that's trying to build their development as well.
- And I think they're being held up by part of this as well. So there is on the first page, the multi-use
- path along the Blind Squirrel Company was part of phase one. And then also the turn lane. So those two
- items have been there since.
- been sort of refactored based on the amended written commitment. They're sort of under phase five now,
- but originally they were estimated under phase one. We have a 211 subdivision that's being held up by
- this. The Shermer subdivision. To the east. To the east. That was approved like. I think you have to
- have phase five plotted to connect. That's good information to have.
- Where does that end? It's right here. So this is Westat and Rogers. And then this is College Drive over
- to Orchard. This is a dead end of College Drive. And this is Church. Oh, right. It generates more questions.
- So this was approved as a 21-pot. So that's yours. But they only have one way in and out of college.
- So they're second base.
- Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They're hung up. They're being hung up as well. Jeff is next. Yes. Go ahead, Jeff.
- So thank you. My concern about just approving those things is that a couple of these items on the list
- feel like public safety issues to me, mainly the asphalt path not being along Rogers, because I see
- people walking in the road along Rogers right there on a daily basis in the dark and rain,
- you name it. So I think that combined with the fact that there's not a turn light
- there on Roger Street, yet that neighborhood has brought quite a bit of additional traffic. I think
- it's back traffic at times when White House is letting out or other heavy traffic times they day. And
- I'm concerned about just pushing this down the road a few more years, especially with pedestrians being
- in the road. Great. Kind of piggyback on that later. The one thing I was wanting to throw out there
- is, is it in the county's best interest to just call that letter of credit and do the work themselves?
- E-products, that's A, an expediency piece. Two, ensures the work actually gets done as intended.
- And three, it alleviates any immediate safety concerns. Right. So I would say that without the complication
- that Coloma requires for the turn lane, that we would be maybe feeling a little more confident in our
- ability to do that in-house.
- we would not be able to do a COMAR in that study in-house. We're automatically contracting it out. So
- as far as expediency, we're talking about not being able to use a single dollar of this fund for engineering
- costs, going to council for that appropriation, hopefully getting that appropriation, doing the study
- ourselves, working hopefully with the progress they've already made, two years where COMAR potentially
- and then doing the work with the money we cashed on Friday. You said that at the beginning, I'm sorry,
- Scott, you alluded to that at the beginning when you indicated that would barely cover the engineering
- costs. We cannot actually even use that money for engineering. Sorry, Scott.
- They take it as a devil's act, but we call the line of credit. What happens to the work in that neighborhood?
- Well, you mean for the homes? I'm talking about for the development. He stops what? Everything? He stops
- sidewalks. He still does that problem. He still builds the homes and stuff like that. But the roadways
- wouldn't be completed. The sidewalks would not be installed. And all of these other things that we've got here,
- He stops. And what is his course of action at that point? Could he come back to the county and sue us?
- I mean, I guess, I don't know if that's a decision that can be appealed. Dave, do you have the answer
- to that? Can they appeal the decision? I've got a follow up question. Let me say the rest of the question.
- I go back to due diligence.
- If we firmly believe that they've met the criteria for due diligence in responding to these items here,
- then we have a very difficult time in calling the line of credit. If we, in our own right, look at these
- individual items here and say that, yeah, he's done some things, but there's a lot of things he hasn't
- done. And there are indications of systemic noncompliance with respect to this area out here.
- And again, that's that precedent thing that we keep coming back to that we don't want to ever live with
- again. This is a mess. I mean, I personally, after hearing this conversation, because of lack of intent
- and discussions, et cetera, and moving forward on some of these items, I think pulling the line of credit,
- crashing out the line of credit. Am I interrupting at a wrong time? Go ahead.
- from what I hear from Jackie and Tammy you know I just want to amplify what you know they have exceptional
- judgment and I refer to that is that overall it's going to cost the county probably an additional three
- hundred thousand dollars or something like that so the line of credit is not adequate to cover
- the all the costs, plus there would be a two year delay impacting two other developments, blind squirrels
- and Shermer. So I don't know, I think my inclination is to get the additional money into the bond.
- You know, the inflated rate
- and any other justifiable bank account that you can justify, like an engineering study that you keep,
- even though you said we can't bond for that, there are additional costs that we anticipate we're gonna
- be stuck with. And we need to have that in the bond so that we can finish the work if we end up having
- to pay. So let me just echo, let me finish my line of thought since you brought that up.
- You brought up a very good point about time-lapse. Yeah. If in fact we were to take and approve the
- POP and the additional amount of money, can we stimulate somehow some sort of a timeline for the completion
- of these things as a metric for performance? Can we do that? We can increase it only one year or approve
- a lower performance period and time extension.
- and then you would only have that time period to finish. Or can we increase the bond amount? That's
- what I was getting at. Can we do an extraordinary amount? Because, again, we're kind of looking
- at extraordinary, extenuating circumstances that are impacting more than just the development of that
- particular property. So in the greater court's tradition, you have to look at what happens if everything
- falls apart and we wait two years, even if you have to pull this.
- And that was the question I was asking. Is that like, the answer you're comfortable with giving or do
- you need to talk with legal? Because that's what, you know, I was really kind of pondering. I suspect
- what we're doing is kicking the can. Well, we could maybe kick the can with a better advantage for the county to
- maybe see him done, like if we asked him for like $450,000 instead of 377, is that possible or a 20%
- increase? I'm not gonna try to get that math. And then even reduce the duration of it to one year, yeah.
- And then if they don't, then maybe we actually can cover some of that engineering. Well, we can't use
- that, but we can at least cover all the improvement. Is there a way to put,
- engineering work into a performance bond? I don't believe so under the state code. So the state requires
- us to, we must accept a bond, in return we create the loss. That's the option he's provided us with.
- Now once he goes along and he does those improvements, what our estimate has been historically really
- bad at doing, because we are not allowed, is saying
- What's the contingency for if you do this wrong? So we put in a sidewalk for 10 feet, and it costs us
- $100. If you put that in wrong, it's now $60 to take it out, $40 to regrade it, and $100 per day. So
- we have $200 for that 10 feet, but we only estimate $100. So that's the problem. Too much liability
- to take on. Something we did at the US government level when I was in Washington,
- Yes, we did. Performance-based contracting. Okay, so if in fact you do something, you're rewarded for
- doing something. Particularly if you do it ahead of schedule. It's performance-based, so it's based
- upon that metric. I haven't heard that in any of the discussions we've had ever. At this level, maybe
- it's not something that's even relevant to this level. Has that ever been discussed before? You don't
- think it's legal?
- I mean, Dave would have to say we aren't able to bring in past. Consider past performance, but as he
- performs, couldn't you decrease the bond amount relative to that as a reward for getting it done? Yeah,
- that's it.
- You're asking for way more than you need. You cover all the circumstances to diminish it over time.
- Nothing else is wrong. I have to just just say something just global on this because we get you know
- we're all concerned about affordable housing and we are all concerned about the stewardship of our community.
- Now when we
- asked for these bonds there, even though we should not be concerned about it, there are costs associated
- with taking out these bonds for the developer. And probably, and I don't know exactly how it works,
- but probably depending upon their credit rating, it's more or less. And so all those costs get added
- back into the housing development.
- the one thing we want to encourage is good behavior. And we want to do what Colonel Ferris has been
- talking about, that's compliance and intent. And I think that we have a duty to ascertain the level
- of due diligence of this particular development and then try to work with them to keep the
- costs down at the same time cover the exposure the county has with regard to unconsidered costs such
- as engineering studies and timeline. It's a tough one. It's a tough one because it's costing the surrounding
- properties additional exposure. There's inflation on their building costs. There's inflation on their
- Facing opportunity costs, certainly at least. And I just, I'm flummoxed. I would like to see this. I
- would like to see good wind. I'd like to see, you know, good wind. I think we should consider extending
- this for a much shorter period. I'm thinking like four months. I think that was in July.
- And I think it gives us a point to, or gives us a reason to do research again. And then to your point,
- Steve, if the asphalt path's done and we can drop this down a little bit, but at that point, if we just
- think that we're gonna cash it and let the county take over, there's still time in this construction
- season to get some of this done before winter, I think. I think that's where I'm at right now. Technically,
- if you took no action,
- He still has a performance period until August 18th of 26th. So if we put it off until, say, early August,
- that would be the start of when he needs to renew his performance period. So we could take the same
- amount of money we have today and let him renew that for six or less months. And then bring it back
- and say, we are not
- We're not looking to fit. We would like you to try and make more progress in these items. But we could
- extend it for four months at the $371,000. I've had more money. Yeah, I think the people have been deflated.
- Yeah. Is there a downside? No, just the performance period based on an annual basis, so we don't.
- If we're doing 10% per year, we were assuming that 371 numbers for 26 to 27 and 27 to 28. We're also
- within the year of 26. I don't know that the code applies to the 10% annual because we haven't moved
- 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%
- to cover tariffs? Yeah.
- Because that's the problem. It's like, we're focused on the increased cost, but we can't take into account
- everything beyond inflation, which includes tariffs right now, which are going to come back into play.
- So the concern is really just how do we account for that? Because we don't want that money. It's there
- in case we need it. And so if we need it, we don't want to come to a less than full cup.
- 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
- do anything with respect to increasing the bond amount because we can't prorate to 10% because it's
- not a full calendar or fiscal year, whatever we're using. Didn't I hear what you heard you say? That's
- what the text says currently is a full fiscal year. So we could just continue this to August. They need
- to hear our question about intent. Right. Yeah.
- And this period that we're allowing them to complete is all about intent. And we need to see progress.
- Right? Does that make sense? Yes. Again, systemic down compliance is the issue here. I agree.
- I like that, Chris. And we got a couple new acronyms today.
- I like that. Every now and again, I put on my DC hat and I quote and sew this nonsensical brooch that
- we use in this Washington DC area. Margaret, to answer your question about the update on litigation,
- Dave wrote to us and said that parties are currently conducting discovery and that there's a status
- conference scheduled for June 30th at 8.30 AM. Okay. That's not necessarily going to
- resolve quickly. So that's in the legal system. So just our job is not in the legal system, but we need
- to be informed. So would you like to bring this back in early August then before the performance period
- expiration? Please, Scott. Just one final thing. I definitely feel like you're attempting and doing your
- absolute best at putting the county in a good position and trying to work with folks to see these projects
- to the finish line, if you will. So I understand that there's a lot going on in this discussion, but
- I'm just going to go ahead and let you know that I'm most likely going to support staff's recommendation. So
- or just wanted you to know that, because there's a lot of things being juggled here simultaneously.
- I think you can maybe take our comments and see if that could refine some of how we do this. But ultimately,
- I'm most likely going to defer to your recommendation. So that's my position on this discussion as of
- now, is your recommendation that you, unless that has changed throughout this discussion. Is Julie still
- with us? Yeah.
- She's there. I don't think she has her hand raised. Is it possible to extend this for six months? A
- lot of credit can be extended for any period of time. Right. That's the thing that's expected already.
- So hear me out. Extend it for six months, more or less, and add in
- half of the increase that you're requesting of the, you know, the three, 33, 738, more or less divided
- by two, you can bump this system up by half of what you're looking for your full increase and say, because
- I expect the developers going to come back and say, well, why are you jacking me up? And I would answer that.
- we're giving to six months to kind of show us some movement. And if we don't see movement, then this
- is going to happen again in another six months with another increase. So it keeps us stable as far as
- the 10% that we're allowed to collect. We're collected 5% for six months. So essentially what you're
- doing is you're keeping the top. Yep. What you're doing is you're extending the literal credit
- and with a certain amount of money. And what would the certain amount of money be? I believe that we
- would have the ability to collect the reasonable amount up until their performance query end dates.
- They reported signed up and said, we will finish by August 18, 2016. An extension of six months beyond
- that, I can see the 5%.
- But I don't see between today and August 18, 2026, an ability under the current code, because they already
- have approval for this performance period to adjust for the function. So I think that's carrots too.
- We're bringing this back based on one of credit expiration dates, which I understand is confusing, but
- really we're going after this performance period. I can't think of the dates. Multiple dates can always
- happen with the piece.
- I think you leave the pop alone, and I think you just take and adjust whatever that delta is on a lot
- of credit, but that's it. That's the incentive to take and work toward these items, which you're probably
- not going to take and have much progress on, but you'll want to do another pop here. So this is continued.
- Do you need a motion for us to continue this until the meeting on August
- whatever, and can we vote on it at that admin meeting? Or must we just vote on it at the end of the
- meeting? Okay, so do you know what date that is in August, the first day in August? It might actually
- be. Do we need to vote? August 4th? August 4th. You what? You need to give me an idea, keep going.
- I got it. So you always used to contract. My coffee says the 4th. It must have been.
- Continue this item to the August 4th administrative meeting. I don't want no language. On the disposition
- of the extension of the bond. Hey, there's a motion on the table. Right here a second. I'll tell you
- what I'm sorry I was talking. Do you want to could you re-state the motion? We continue this item. SIA-22-3.
- to the August 4th administrative meeting of the planning commission, at which point we will consider
- and delivery both the extension period and the amount of the increase of the bond amount. I second that.
- Okay, it's been moved and seconded to continue SA-22-3 until August 4th planning commission administrative
- meeting to re-discuss the
- I'm out in the performance period. And in the meantime, staff will reach out to let the petitioner know
- that they need to make progress on items noted in the report and encourage them to re listen to tonight's
- hearing. I vote yes. Is the vote to continue this item to August. This doesn't change my support when
- we get to that.
- I think this is fine. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Motion does carry 6 to 0 discussion
- discussion. Okay. Thank you all for that.
- I'm screaming right along. Hopefully we see some progress. Yes, hopefully we do. All right. Unfinished
- business. P. U. O. dash 23 dash five Highlands P. U. D. Outline Plan Amendment to parcel D. So similar
- petitioner here is written to name, but it's the same person.
- We did meet with the developer for this neighborhood this afternoon and actually went through the two
- inspection reports line by line, and they are agreeable to making some changes. That's correct. So we're
- going to report back since that just happened this afternoon, we're going to report back on what the
- changes are before the planned commission meeting. So we basically went through
- these four questions that you all had with them. So they are under number three, willing to make the
- changes for Wiccans, and also under item number one, willing to make some changes for range recircle.
- So we will report back on that. Number two, the HOA, they confirmed, the attorney confirmed there is
- no HOA. They were mistaken in that during the testimony, they misunderstood.
- but that they could create an H2A, but they have no interest in selling any of the lots at this point,
- so they are not intending on creating an H2A. And then number four, the petitioner's number for a letter
- of credit. We talked with their engineer about this, and we are going to, we have a little bit of a
- strategy for how we can get to that number. They believe, and I will have to double check with legal
- and highway,
- that the driveways that you saw in the photos, since those are outside of the right of way, they believe
- there's a design where they could potentially not touch the slope of those driveways, but still fix
- the sidewalk by doing the apron to the road and meeting ADA. So a unit price for removing and replacing
- sidewalk, which we have from NDOT. So we will get that to you. That's the update on that case.
- One question, as far as if they're going to keep that slope and maybe reconfigure the sidewalk, is that
- going to impact stormwater and drainage? Are we going to be satisfactory on those fronts because we're
- talking about the volume or the speed of the water going down?
- I think that they have signed off on the ponds and so they are pretty, there's inlets in this area.
- So I think that they're. I'm talking about like just the potential speed that the water could go and
- then the sizing of the piping to make sure that like it's not restrictive. And that's just kind of a
- thought I have is like if the volume of the water should be moving faster that
- create the possibility of the ponding quicker. And if the sizing of the inlets are equipped for that
- type of volume, then we're going to see some ponding. Yeah, so that's kind of just my thought. So maybe
- just get some more feedback that there isn't another deficiency trying to remean, fix one of the other
- deficiencies. OK. Sorry, first?
- Did you all read this summary table on the inspection checklist? I mean, did you see the extensive?
- This is not a simple little, also very expensive. So tell me again, what did you just say about them
- looking at this list? We looked at it together this afternoon and went through it line by line and they
- decided which ones we took notes. Yes, I will make that change. No, I will not make that change. Okay.
- Can you tell us what those were?
- Um, I can, I have some rough notes, but- Well, here, I mean, you can- It's gonna be in the presentation.
- What's that? I mean, we'll get the packet out next week and- Yeah, I know. But see, that, that's part
- of this discussion now because it's relevant. And that's part of it's- Do you want to break you first?
- Again, I keep bringing up subsisting non- systemic non-compliance. This is the non-compliance right
- here, and it's been going on for years. I mean, this was done, this inspection report,
- was done in 2023. Right here. And the problem still exists. The discussion about the private road, did
- you bring that up? Did we talk about the private road? Arrange you? That's a different one, right? That's
- a different one. I think it's in this packet, though.
- I saw private. I saw private road up here. Wiggins. You're in Wiggins, I think. Wiggins and Ranger.
- So they're asking for Ranger to become private there in order to get Wiggins accepted. So on my notes,
- I'll go through what he was willing to change. So the first was
- They were going to relook at the manhole 207 to be flush with the roadway. We looked at the picture,
- it's slightly sunken, and they said they would look at that, but that it was good for plowing to have
- that a little lower than the profile we wrote. Then the lower the water shutoff valves, once we looked
- at the photos, they said they would work to do that. The mailboxes, they said that they would work to do that.
- They are currently in the right of way, and we have another location, but we need to check with USPS.
- The angled parking, this was a contention point, so that angled parking, where it's supposed to be parallel
- parking, if everyone can envision that, or I can pull the picture. That, they said that because they
- have such, they have those units right in front of those, or three bedroom each,
- they have a parking capacity problem. So if they switch them from angle to parallel, they lose spaces.
- Additionally, I asked Daniel Butler, you know, because we had the conversation about the school bus,
- school buses do not come around there, is what they're saying, but a fire truck, they said can fit,
- but they originally in that proposal for the construction plans made it parallel to in part,
- meet the turning radius and the turning movements for construction and engineering. So I asked Daniel
- Butler to report back on whether that angled parking impacts his original recommendation that it can
- meet, you know, movement requirements for a fire truck or a semi truck, things like that. So that's
- That was that discussion. They would not, they will do this if they absolutely have to, but they said
- the tenants will be extremely unhappy. You're not going to be able to get a plow, a bus, a moving van.
- You're not going to be able to go out there and drive, just drive through that neighborhood and go through
- that area over there. It's also, and it hadn't been brought up here. It's a safety issue with children.
- Right. Anybody who's doing like compact signs, compact cars only, which
- maybe get limited compliance with those types of self-limiting signs, so. When I lived in Virginia,
- I lived in a townhouse complex and we had, I was actually on a HOA board. We had an issue with children
- and parking because of the kids outing out between the vehicles. You've got to really be careful when
- you take it, when you put and make it so dense with vehicles. You're just asking for somebody to get
- hit. I mean, it's a real safety issue.
- So that was these three items. Stop bars are willing to put in. So that was something they said yes
- to. Private water line, we're going to recheck with Highway. We believe that they're public based on
- the engineer's remembrance of the project, but we're going to just make sure we're all on the same page
- for what they're talking about in terms of this comment here. The private water line.
- So it is CBU. CBU covers the sewer and the water, but I guess there was an existing private water line
- from the subdivision to the south. You mean with a small water corporation? Is it still in fact a different
- water corporation? Is that what you mean? It must be. I need to get a little bit more clarity on that
- comment, because it is CBU serviced. So I'm not sure, because you would not consider it private.
- Right, I would like to know if the small water corporation sold that water line to CBU or whether or
- not, I just have no idea what that means. Right, okay. So we'll get a little bit more clarity on that.
- And then 139 feet of sidewalk, they do not want to do that. That's the one that's to the north with
- the angled driveways. So they're not interested in making that
- Improvement though, we are going to estimate what it would cost based on the removal and replacement
- from an engineer's perspective. They are not wanting to replace the cracked sidewalk. This sidewalk
- against back of curb measures five feet wide. Sidewalk located back of curb must be six feet wide. In
- review of the approved plans, we did see that there was five feet.
- though ADA says six feet, so they were hesitant to do that because again, that would take up more of
- that area that they're very limited to with the cross-silt problem. We said five, I'm good with that.
- Okay. That was more of just like a point when you get out. Private signage, they have a block camera
- with a sign on it and another sign. They said that they are
- not interested in moving those signs if they can avoid it. But one of them was easy to move the flock
- camera, so maybe it's not. Is that a private agreement with the flock? I didn't have to do that, but
- I'm guessing yes. I think that's worth a question, because I know there's been some re-evaluation by
- the city level. So I mean, from our side of things, that's something that- Right.
- Yeah, it was like, if that's an agreement between him and Flock, it's not what it's supposed to be.
- Right. Yeah, that would be our ultimate, like, we just move it, but they're saying that's a just word.
- That's their answer. I'm sorry, I wrote to Jackie in advance of the meeting to say that I have to leave
- at 7, big team. Will that ruin our quorum?
- wasn't planning on coming until I knew I needed to be there in person. So I am more than eager to meet
- that. So I just want to make that if we go through this loss, we will exhaust time. And so the other
- 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
- want to stifle you from going here. One last questions or anything. This has become the center grab
- it right here. This is our gravity and bless you for going through and talking about
- having a nice fruitful conversation about what they can or they will not do or about planning. And so
- if we were to take a look at this using that as a center of gravity, I mean, at the next time this comes
- up, I know if it's not addressed, I plan on bringing it up. Okay, let's go to this and show us what
- you can and what you can do, you won't do, or you've discussed with planning and you decided it's not
- required. And at the end of the day, when I go back to this summary page, which says,
- what the results are, and it says fail. At the end of the day, after you've done that analysis on what
- they can and cannot and will not or what you agree they're not required to do, if it still says fail,
- then we're into systemic noncompliance again. That's the bottom line. I didn't have the question. I
- watched the video and the discussion, but I'm not sure if you addressed this. And if you did, maybe
- it didn't resonate with me, but with them wanting to keep the roads private,
- I hope this doesn't create this whole debate again because there's an interesting meeting. Does the
- planning commission have a role in that? So we would have to amend the outline plan. That's what I thought.
- I just wasn't sure and I figured. That was my key question. We need to do with this worksheet right here.
- is color code on, not necessarily these colors, but what they're going to do and what they're not going
- to do and what you say is no longer relevant and it's no longer required. Because that little summary
- is going to lead in that discussion and that should be shared with before the next meeting with the
- petitioner so they know exactly what we're going to talk about. Again, this is incentive. It gets you
- toward compliance, et cetera. Because I was on the client commission when this was approved originally,
- The entire approval for this project in my opinion, in my memory, relied entirely on whether or not
- the boat would become public. So that is the very thing that intentionally has not been done. So because
- housing affordability, street maintenance, snow removal. We made concessions on widths. We made concessions
- on driveway depths. Susie and Julie and Lee and I and other people were working on this to do everything
- we could to ensure that the streets would be accepted into the public inventory. So I'm unwilling.
- to allow this myself to be remain a private road. Now Lisa has said at the last meeting, she does not
- want it. So to me that just resounds with even more problems. And I think those comments need to be
- fixed. And to be clear, it's a planned commission final decision with the outline amendment or does
- that then goes to the board of commission? Okay.
- That's really where I was trying to get at with the process question. Thank you. Okay, so are the point
- PD this and we didn't share with them the easements. It was an easement and a contribution before the
- documents. So that document is privately enforced.
- What we discussed with the petitioner is even if we were able to add the use of the self-storage, they
- would have to figure out the easement conflicts before we could approve the development because we cannot
- approve a storage unit over an easement. So to my knowledge, we don't have any update from them after
- they've received that document. So that could be one that they
- If they don't have an answer to us by next meeting. Just continued. Okay, so we'll just tell them if
- we don't have an answer, substantive answer for the planning commission, we're just going to continue
- this on. Okay. Should we make a motion to continue it unless it's resolved or just continue it? We can
- just communicate that to them, I think. Sounds good. I don't want to evaluate this.
- validity of their response, but if they don't have any update, then I'm going to say it's easily continued.
- Yeah, sounds good. There's a lot more to that discussion. All right. And then these last two, the first
- one went to black leaf and it was recommended to move forward. They are still missing their average
- daily trip data, which we've given them until Friday to get to us.
- That will determine the labor for the road with based on your that's the truth generation matters. So
- is this something we approved? Or is that the next meeting would be a fine commission decision if they
- went, but it's a preliminary hearing. Yeah, in if they weren't asked for the word with labor and then
- plat committee decision and Mr Bush is serving as the chair of the plat committee this year, which is nice and.
- I'm sure it's been clearly indicated to the petitioner that they can kind of do the back of the neck
- and daily average travel. That is given theirs with the Highway Department gave them an exact template
- to use. Yeah, yeah, because that's what he alluded to was okay. Okay, I just want to make sure so it
- makes it easier for them to achieve. Okay. And then the next fact, friends, this is your MedFram 5B.
- This is how other
- One interesting one in that the lot currently has this. They found out after they filed with us that
- the easement they thought they had through their neighbors is not real. It was not recorded. So they
- currently have no access to this lot and would be creating a plot that changes the lot line and still
- does not have access to County Road.
- You know, the ordinance requires that this is what the lot would look like. So this lot to the east,
- which does have access, would be getting bigger. They want to build a home on this area here. So they
- want to apply some of this area. There's a very, very steep ravine here. So there's no way to access
- from this lot over to this lot by driveway.
- It would be extremely steeped down, extremely steeped up. So their main way is to come out to go up
- to this way, which I think is actually the best way. Thank you. So they do not have access. They won't
- have access. The question is, can we waive the requirement that they have to be accessed first to create
- this plaque?
- Um, if we do that, if the planning commission approves the waiver, you know, we have findings in the
- packet. Something that we're always concerned about is buyer beware and putting that stamp on something
- was very, very small thing. And by the way, it looks like we don't have any access to it, so you cannot
- develop it. Um, so we did give some options under the report, uh, that we're welcoming discussion on
- at the regular meeting or now if you did think
- to approve or want to approve the way to request at the next commission meeting, we would say that there
- should be a note that lot one is inaccessible, cannot be further developed, almost just say
- like non-buildable all over, noted on the deed and on the plaque. So, and then if they want to remove
- that in the future, they would have to come back to the planning commission to remove it. But ultimately,
- we really think
- They should get the access figured out before we do anything. I think you're creating a precedent, again,
- by allowing, if in fact we would take and approve something. My question is, has it been done? Yeah,
- they already don't have access. You didn't see that. What I wrote on top of this is, what I wrote on
- top of this was, not ready for prime time. That's what I wrote. This needs a little bit more.
- Did we get totally? Well, I think we did. Good job, buddy. All right. Any other business to take care
- of? I was going to move for adjournment, but I don't want to jump in front of staff to update.
- Anything else? No, I was just asking. No, thank you. All right. I move for adjournment. I moved.
- All right. Thank you. Thanks, everyone.