We'll call this regular meeting of the
Walke City Council to order. Will
everyone please rise for the pledge of
>> allegiance
to the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all.
[clears throat]
>> Great. Thank you. We please roll call.
Mayor Clark
>> here.
>> Council member Anderson
>> here.
>> Council member Cone
>> here.
>> Council member Grove
>> here.
>> Council member Lion
>> here. Council member Pierce
>> here.
Right. Agenda item D is open forum. Open
forum is the time for anyone here
tonight to address the council on any
subject over which the council has the
authority to act or any item on the
agenda other than a public hearing. If
anyone here tonight wishes to address
the council uh and voice your comments
or questions, you can approach the
podium or raise your hand. I want to uh
highlight a couple of things. So, give
me just a minute. Uh if you're
participating via Zoom, you can click on
the raise hand icon located in the
reactions controls. So, go ahead and
approach. But, uh it's the first hand
that I saw. Yep. Um if you want to form
a queue, you can. Want to highlight just
a couple of things uh since we have some
new faces here tonight. So, the only
public hearing we have tonight is on
disposal of property uh related to an
IOD DOT thing. If you're here to speak
on that tonight, you wait until that. If
you're here to speak on anything else,
now is your chance. We do limit comments
to 3 minutes in order to get everybody
through and be out before midnight. Uh
so, if you could limit to three minutes,
we would appreciate that. Um and then
please make sure to address us. Thank
you.
>> I promise to keep it under three
minutes. Perfect.
>> Oh, and you do need to state your name
and address for the record.
>> Yes. My name is Steve Ridge, RGE, and
I'm a new resident at the Center Stage
Apartments. My permanent residence,
however, is in Marian, Iowa. And uh I'm
a licensed private investigator and I
think some of you already may know me. I
have been the lead investigator,
private investigator on the Jodie
Hussein missing person's case for nearly
eight years and am responsible for most
of the progress that's been made.
However, I'm here because I had a rude
awakening when I arrived at u uh my new
residence and that was my car got towed
all of a sudden. Uh and I'd never heard
of Croto. Uh, and I guess they gave me a
sticker and I didn't put it on. Uh,
however, that was not my issue. My issue
is the way the car was, uh, extracted
from the parking spot. Uh, pulled in an
angle and I did about $7,000 damage.
Brand new car, 2,000 miles. So, I'm
still evaluating the damage, but that's
really minor. I have met now dozens of
people that have been affected by this.
And so I will be filing a class action
lawsuit against Croto very soon. Uh but
I also wanted to recommend that the city
council consider looking at some actions
that municipalities can take uh to curb
this kind of predatory behavior. Uh and
Marian Iowa happens to be one of the few
communities in the nation that has taken
action. I worked with the people over
there on this uh three about three years
ago. So, I created a document that you
all can have refer to. I think you have
bigger fish to fry tonight. Uh so, I'm
going to get out of the way and sit
down, but I hope you'll take a look and
I will definitely be in touch. Uh it's a
beautiful city. Uh my wife has been
admitted over at Story Point Kettlestone
in the memory care unit. Uh, and I'm
here indefinitely even though I still
have my condominium in in Marian. So,
I'm here to support her. So, I want to
thank you. It's a great city, great city
council. I met a wonderful police chief
back here and uh I just want to thank
you for all for your time and
consideration. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you.
Steve.
>> Uh, go ahead. Next person can approach.
I do want to add to the something that I
didn't mention. If it is on the agenda
tonight, we can speak about the topic.
If it is not, we are not permitted by
Iowa code since this is an open meeting
and agenda had to be published ahead of
time. So, if it is on the agenda, we can
speak back. That one is not. So, um if
you would like to speak to any of us
after the council meeting, you're
welcome to stay. Go ahead.
>> Madame Mayor, members of the council, my
name is Phil Hoy, 5820 West Parkway,
West De Moines. I'm the vice president
of sort development real estate with HY.
Uh this item that I'm want to speak on
is on the agenda regarding the new
development uh being proposed at Alys's
Road and and Hickman. Uh in particular,
the the traffic uh study is really what
I want to speak to and we did submit a
letter to you earlier today. Uh we
received a copy of the revised traffic
study. Um we actually we received a copy
of the original traffic study um last week and provided a letter to the
planning commission with some concerns
and presented those concerns to planning
commission. Uh they they spoke about
those concerns at the meeting um and the
condition that planning commission gave
was uh recommended approval with an
updated traffic study. So we received
that uh late Friday it would have been
and so we u reviewed that as best we
could and then submitted what we have
for questions concerns remaining um will
admit they did a tremendous job in a
short amount of time from planning
commission to last Friday to address
some of those concerns that we had. So I
want to acknowledge they did uh make
some adjustments, changes,
modifications, updates. Um a pretty
meaningful accomplishment in a short
amount of time. Obviously, staff then
had to review those uh changes and turn
around in a day, the comments um that
they've provided to you likely in your
staff report. We still have a few more
which I highlighted in my letter. So,
I'm not going to read the letter to you.
I just want to pull out a few main items
and just really make our position clear
what we'd like to ask of you. Um, so the the study and some of the comments
from the consultants uh addressed
continued issues specifically the
southbound turn movements on Alys's Road
and Hickman. The Q links will back up
longer than is provided for uh currently
and there's really no solution provided
for or discussed uh in that regard.
There's an exhibit on page 13, similar
to my concern I had on the planning
commission evening that allocates 90% of
the traffic generated, but leaves off
the other 10, calls it local roads, but
there are no local roads contributing to
the traffic because there's no other
local road access to that property. So,
there's still 10% of the traffic that's
missing from the study. Um, these might
be small things, minor things. Um but in
addition to those things, one of the
other uh recommendations is a is some
restriping on the H high property, our
property. Um and while the developer did
reach out uh when we sent the letter to
the planning commission um and expressed
a willingness to talk, um we have had no
conversations about potential solutions
to our site. And as you would all know,
there's been lots of changes out on our
property over the years. the signal
that's there. We we paid for that signal
a number of years ago. Um so we've been
very invested in making sure that our
customers and the community around that
area can access the area safely and
efficiently. And so we obviously have an
interest that that continues. And so we
respectfully ask that the city council
consider a two four-week time frame here
where we can actually really dig into
the solutions that are being proposed
and make sure that they do work for
everybody. Um we would like to have a
seat at the table at those solutions, a
table that we've not yet been to. Um so
that would be our ask. And if if the
city council um does move forward
regardless of our request um then we
have some conditions that we've
requested you make on the approval if
you decide to go that direction as well
which is provided for in the letter to
you.
>> Thank you.
>> I believe that um Rudy will speak at
length about the traffic study in a
little bit and so we will hear more on
that as well. Um
another Yep. Go ahead.
Uh, Mayor Clark, council members, good
evening. My name is Robert Bell. I live
at 135 Southeast Trillium Drive here in
Walke.
I'm here tonight as a Walke parent and
resident to respectfully ask that you
reconsider the proposed amendment to
chapter 135 regarding children playing
in the streets.
Um, I want to make something clear. I
support safe streets. I support
responsible parenting and I support
reasonable rules that protect our
children's drivers and pedestrians. This
is an argument about safety. It's an
argument about proportionality.
Lock key already has an ordinance
prohibiting playing games in the streets
and alleyways.
The proposed amendment goes farther by
making parents responsible for allowing
that conduct and making violations of
the code a misdemeanor.
That's a significant escalation.
My biggest concern is not what this
ordinance is intended to do. It's what
it could become in practice.
Imagine a quiet residential street or
culde-sac where neighborhood kids
routinely play, ride bikes, kick a
soccer ball, play street hockey.
They're not running recklessly into
traffic. They're not intentionally
interfering with vehicles. They're
simply playing outside with kids. They
live around them.
Now imagine a disagreement develops
between neighbors. [clears throat]
Under this ordinance, a neighbor could
repeatedly report those children.
Police could be called, parents
contacted. Ultimately, those parents
could potentially face criminal charges
for what they believed is letting their
kids use something that was ordinary
neighborhood play.
Now, a law doesn't have to be
intentionally abused or create create
the possibility of abuse. That's why I
believe we need to be very clear about
creating criminal liability around
broadly defined conduct.
And if safety is truly the objective,
I believe we should regulate based on
actual safety risk.
The proposed language treats every every
street essentially the same.
It doesn't distinguish between a busy
roadway and quiet residential
culde-sacs.
It simply prohibits playing games on
streets and alleys.
Why not consider measurable factors such
as traffic volume, vehicle speeds,
roadway classifications, visibility, or
other legitimate safety concerns?
A quiet neighborhood street with very
little traffic presents a fundamentally different risk than a busy
collector collector street or arterial
road.
If the concern is safety, let's measure
the risk, not simply the existence of a
street. There's something else worth
considering.
Neighborhood play isn't just kids
occupying the street. It's children
getting outside, getting physically
active, learning to cooperate,
developing independence, building
relationships. We should be encouraging
this behavior. I'm not asking to abandon
safety.
I'm [clears throat] asking you to write
an ordinance that recognizes the
difference between genu genuinely
dangerous conduct and ordinary
childhood.
Protect our children. Respect parents.
address real safety hazards, but don't
create a criminal penalty that can turn
ordinary neighborhood disagreements into
legal problems. We can have safe streets
without criminalizing normal childhood.
>> Sir, your three minutes is up. Can you
conclude, please?
>> Yes. I I respectfully ask the council to
reject the mis misdemeanor provision as
it's currently written. Thank you.
So, I've received a lot of emails on
this topic as I believe most of council
has when we've explained back the
rationale and what is happening on a
couple of streets in our in our
community. Um, there's been very little
concern after that. So, hopefully once
you hear the chief speak on it, we'll be
able to kind of assuage some of those
concerns. Um, your your quest is valid.
Uh, are there additional people who
would like to speak? There is a hand
raised in Zoom.
>> Okay, we'll take the Zoom first and then
you can come up. [clears throat]
Just a moment.
This would be Courtney.
uh, it is your turn to speak.
>> Good evening, Mayor Clark and members of
the city council. My name is Courtney
Mishepsky. I am a direct descendant of
six pioneer families with deep roots in
the history of this area.
>> The Hammond address. Um, Courtney, I I
do need you to state your address for
the record, too.
>> I live in Fredericksburg, Virginia
currently. Um, but I am a direct
descendant of six pioneer families with
deep roots in the history of the area.
The Hammond, Sprag, Reed, Gibler, Zuck,
and Burkholder families.
I am here to oppose the proposed
amendment to city code section 135.04.
I have read both the existing code and
the proposed amendment. My objection is
not based on a misunderstanding of
either. I understand the city's concern
about children playing in traffic. The
issue is whether this amendment
addresses that problem with the
precision expected of a criminal
ordinance.
For context, Mayor Clark explained in an
email to me, and I quote, "I want to
give you some context that I think will
help clarify things, stating that the
amendment originated from one specific
situation involving a child playing in
the street where parents allegedly
refused multiple requests to stop the
conduct. That explains the motivation
for the amendment. It does not justify
creating a townwide criminal liability
provision without clearly defining its
limits. Mayor Clark also explained that
enforcement will be limited to quote
unquote extreme and rare circumstances
after parental notice and refusal to
correct the conduct. If those are the
limits, they belong in the ordinance,
not in an email explaining how the
ordinance is intended to be enforced.
The underlying prohibition may not be
new. The legal consequence for parents
is consider the Walke Cemetery.
Sixth Street is a historic roadway and
there is no protective barrier between
the roadway and the graves along its
edge. When I take my four-year-old
daughter to visit our family graves,
simply stepping out of our vehicle onto
those public rights of way could
technically expose me to a misdemeanor
and a fine of up to $855.
A parent could also have a vehicle
emergency with children in the car and
need to move those children into a safer
position along a public ride ofway. That
is not children playing in traffic. The
ordinance should say so. If the city's
actual objective is to address parents
who knowingly allow dangerous street
play after notice and refusal to correct
it, then write that standard into the
law. Do not enact broader criminal
language and rely on enforcement
discretion to narrow it afterward. I
urge the council to reject this
amendment and require a precise reddraft
that addresses the actual safety problem
without creating unnecessary criminal
exposure for ordinary family activity.
Thank you.
>> Thank you. I uh I have to admit I've
been a little bit surprised by some of
the emails I've gotten that seem to
think it's okay for children to play in
the streets on the regular basis. I
understand neighborhood play. Uh kids
play in the streets all the time in my
neighborhood. however they move when
cars come down. What we're addressing
today is that that is not happening.
in a neighborhood.
And in fact, it's caused police issues.
Um I don't think we should be expending
police resources to take multiple calls
to the same neighborhoods again and again to address issues. Um so
your your comments are appreciated.
Go ahead.
>> Okay.
>> All right. Good evening. My name is
Keith Seashore and I live at 2700
Northwest 167th Court in Clive, Iowa and
my lot butts directly up to the proposed
Walmart. So I am heavily and negatively
impacted by this potential placement.
So, I'm here to share some concerns
today that I have around the location
and also suggest some potential changes
that would really help maintain my
property value as it does unfortunately,
if it does unfortunately move forward.
First, this is not the right location.
There are very few Walmarts that back up
to a residential area. Most Walmarts are
fully surrounded by commercial areas all
around and avoid any of the negative
pitfalls of being close to residents. I
will point out that there was a
potential Ankeny Walmart that was
proposed in 2024 backed up to
residential area that did not move
forward due to significant homeowner
opposition. And I really see no
difference here. Second is a homeowner
who is impacted likely the most of
anyone in the community and whose lot is
the closest to the store. The location
of the auto center along with the
docking placement and trash will be very
disruptive to my property and
surrounding neighborhoods. Excessive
noise from the auto center, Walmart's
recycling bins and semis potentially
dropping off shipments at all hours of
the night on the northern end will be a
major disruptive experience. At the very
least, I would hope the following could
be mandated by this council. There
should be a requirement to ensure a
planting of a significant number of
mature evergreen trees in order to
create a densely populated visual
barrier between the back of the store
and my property line. This is really
important in the late fall winter when
the leaves that currently exist fall off
and you can have direct sight of line
into that building. The plan does not
show how many trees nor the size of the
trees that will be planted. From other
stores that I have seen where there is a
tree barrier line, many times I see
three-foot trees, half of them are dead
in the middle of the summer. Doesn't do
any good. I think Walmart could do much
better and make sure that we have a
large set of mature evergreen trees that
are covering my my sightelines um in my
property. And then secondly, light
should be placed and controlled at a
minimum glare to make sure there's no
spill over spill over into my yard. And
then finally, an 8- foot sound barrier
wall on the segment, the segmental
retaining wall between the store and my
property on the northeast perimeter
should be a reasonable and required
element of the site plan versus what
exists right now with just a cheap 4ft
chain link fence. That could we could do
much better there. And that type of wall
would really help minimize it sounds
from the store potentially coming into
my property. Walmart's value is almost
$1 trillion. These ass are very minimal.
It won't have any impact on the
profitability of this store, but would
have a big impact on our property, the
one that I own. And finally, I would
just say if this was your property, any
of you, I think you would ask for
similar concessions and making sure that
your value is protected the best that it
could. And these couple things that I
would request are very minimal and very
affordable and would help me
tremendously. Thank you.
>> Thank you. You Thank you. Thank you. Uh
your points are well taken. Um I I know
that we've been in communication around
buffering and so hopefully we'll speak
to that tonight, but we will continue to
work on that if it if it moves forward.
Thank you.
Any other comments?
Interesting. Zoom. Okay.
An open forum is closed.
Agenda item E is agenda approval. Can I
get a motion? Move to approve.
>> Second.
>> Any discussion?
>> Please vote.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
Agenda item G1, it's a public hearing on
the disposal of real estate in
accordance with Iowa Code 364.7. I doubt
declared this public hearing open.
Becky, have we received any
correspondence on this?
>> No. and unreceived in the city clerk's
office. Thank you, Rudy.
>> Thank you, Madam Mayor. Good evening,
council members. Up on the screen is a
map displaying um the rightway to be
transferred to the state of Iowa,
specifically even the Iowa Department of
Transportation. Outlined in the red
polygon up on that map, this is the
interchange of Interstate 80 and Grand
Prairie Parkway. Uh on the north, um the
city of Walke on the south of this
interchange, the city of West De Moines.
Um working through our Grand Prairie
Parkway corridor enhancement project. if
you're familiar with that, we've
discussed that at prior workshops. Um,
recently just uh reviewed those bids um
received um going through that rightway
investigation. We noticed we did not
transfer this to the Iowa DOT as we were
anticipated to do, expected to do as
part of that interchange construction
project um several years ago. So this is
really a cleanup item transferring the
necessary rightway to the DOT so they
can continue with their responsibility
for maintenance of the interchange
itself controlling access um distances
and locations as well. Uh we've worked
with the District 1 staff to verify the
area outlined in red works for their
continued and future maintenance efforts
as well as it preserves our efforts in
that northeast quadrant with our U
monument signing that we're proposing
with that enhancement project um and
access to that area as well. So, uh,
with that, happy to take any questions,
but again, this is a transfer to the
state of Iowa for that right away.
>> Thank you. Does anyone here tonight,
either in the council chambers or on
Zoom, wish to speak on this public
hearing item? If so, please approach the
podium or click on the raise hand icon
located in the reactions controls.
There are no hands raised in Zoom. Does
council have any questions at this time?
Okay. Now, declare this public hearing
closed. Agenda item H1, consideration of
approval of a resolution authorizing the
disposal of real estate in accordance
with Iowa code 364.7. We have to
approve.
>> Second.
>> Anything further, Rudy?
>> Nothing to add. City staff did work with
the city legal staff to um prepare the
quick claim dee and so that's what we
will be transferring over to the state
of Iowa via that methodology. So, if
there's any questions of that, happy to
take those. But we again recommend
approving the resolution.
>> Thank you. Any questions?
Please vote.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
Agenda item H1, consent agenda. Can I
get a motion?
>> Move to approve. Second.
>> Any discussion?
» Please vote. Council member Cone.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Lion.
>> Yes. Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Item H2, consideration of approval of an
ordinance for the division of revenues
under section 403.19 code of Iowa for
the North Walke residential urban
renewal area 2026 ordinance parcels.
This is a second reading. Move to
approve the second reading of the
ordinance and title only.
>> Second,
>> Jennifer.
>> Good evening, mayor and councel. Um, as
you just mentioned, this is the second
reading of the 2026 uh, TIFF ordinance
parcel in the North Walke uh,
residential urban renewal area. These t
parcels, excuse me, are are are
highlighted here in green on the screen.
Um, as you know, uh, this these uh, this
tiff ordinances is due to the last uh,
12 months of development in this area
and anticipated uh, development as well.
Um the ordinance uh does establish the
uh city's ability to capture uh tiff
increment. Uh we would recommend um the
second reading of the ordinance. If you
have any questions, happy to answer
them.
>> Thank you. Uh any questions,
» please vote.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes. Council member Lion.
>> Yes.
>> Item H3, consideration of approval of an
ordinance to amend chapter 135 of the
Walke Municipal Code regarding playing
in streets or alleys. This is also a
second reading.
>> I move to approve the second reading in
the ordinance and title only.
>> Second, Chief.
>> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um,
this ordinance was brought uh forth at
the last council meeting for
introduction and first reading. And as
you may recall, even though one incident
um made us realize the gap in the
ordinance, as we grow um that gap is
going to become wider. And what I mean
by that is currently the way the code is
written um if we have a problem with
children playing in the street, our
alternative is to charge that child with
a simple misdemeanor. And we don't want
to do that. Um so the amendment to this
code takes that responsibility off of
the kid and puts it back on the parents.
Um the likelihood of us using this is
slim and I know that's no comfort to
some. However, uh our team uses uh good
judgment every single day and they talk
to people every single day and they
educate people every single day on
hundreds and hundreds of laws that we
have at our disposal that we never
charge. Um but the goal is if we did get
into a situation where somebody just
refuses to obey the law, we need to be
able to enforce the law. and currently
charging a child with a simple
misdemeanor for playing in the street is
not practical. Um, so this this
amendment would take that to the parent.
I do also want to be clear that the
simple misdemeanor is a city code
violation and it is no different than an
animal at large ticket. There's no
fingerprints, there's no mugsh shot,
there's no um federal criminal history
that goes with it. Um, yes, it would
show up on Iowa courts as a city code
violation, but it is the exact same
charge as a dog at large ticket. And the
reason for that is because our city code
under section 1.14 defines a standard
penalty of any city code violation as a
simple misdemeanor just flat across the
board. Um, and that's just the way that the law works. We have to have a
penalty in our code and um, by our code,
the standard penalty is a civil
misdemeanor. So whether you get written
a ticket for a dog at large or whether
you get cited for allowing your kids to
play on the street, it's the exact same
thing.
Along with that, um
I [clears throat] also Mr. Bell's
comments uh about there are there are
different risks with different roadways.
are. However, um number one, it's
impractical to separate out specific
streets and code, but number two, those
vehicles backing out of driveways or
pulling out of driveways in the streets
actually create just as much problem as
a uh you know, street that's heavily
traveled. Now, certainly not to the
level of Pikmin or University or Grand
Prairie, right? Um, but those parents
that back out of their driveway and um
are used to doing that on a daily basis,
I would argue are probably paying less
attention uh than those kids, those
parents that are driving down the street
on maybe a collector street or something
of that nature. So, um we do feel that the the amendment is necessary and
we feel that it's justified.
Additionally, to the comment online,
I can't pronounce Courtney's last name.
I apologize, Courtney. Um, but to your
comment, the code is clear on what we're
talking about, and that is it is
unlawful for any person to coast, sled,
or play games in streets or alleys. The
code says nothing about stepping outside
of a vehicle to cross a street or to get
to a sidewalk or walking down the side
of a street in the essentially in the
gutter area where you're not in the
travel lane. Uh, the code is very very
clear on what is uh prohibited by this
section. We're not changing that at all.
Again, today if we were to enforce it, would be enforced against the child.
And our preference is to change that to
where we speak with the parents. If the
parents refuse to comply after multiple
times of talking to them, then we could
charge that. Additionally, the court
process is designed where we have to
show our case and we have to go and
prove our case beyond a reasonable
doubt. So, a situation where a neighbor
calls in on another neighbor, it we're
not going to take something that's a he
said, she said incident to court because
we can't prove that beyond a reasonable
doubt. We're going to have to have this
the evidence sufficient to do that as we
would with any other case. So, hopefully
that quells a little bit of that. I know
there's still some concerns. I
understand that. But ultimately, streets
are for vehicles. They're designed for
cars. They're designed for traffic.
They're not designed for people. And
what we're trying to do is keep our kids
safe. We're trying to keep Mr. Bell's
kids safe. We're trying to keep other uh
people in the community safe. So with
that, I'll take any questions.
>> Thank you. Any questions?
>> Chad, to be clear, this is state law,
correct?
>> There is a state law that co that
corresponds with this. Yes. State law
says that cities are required to keep um
streets free of um it defines it as
nuisance. I believe um which is anything
that prohibits or conflicts with vehicle
traffic. So, there is a state law that
this city code is based off of.
Additionally, I would say that, and I
haven't gone and looked, but if you
researched any city in the United
States, chances are you're going to find
the exact same language. Uh, because
when I was in Kansas, we had the exact
same language. Windsor Heights has the
exact same language. Clive, Urbandale,
uh, we were talking at Chief's meeting,
they have the exact same language. So,
this is not an US thing.
>> Thank you.
>> Other questions? What is the difference
um with the it just being ticketed like
if you parked on the side of the road
when you weren't supposed to during the
snow to like a ticket that's a simple
misdemeanor.
>> So a traffic infraction um are things
that are outlined by state code which we
adopt as a city code. So like speeding
and stuff of that nature. Those are
traffic infractions that are specific to
um the Iowa code 321 that deals with
traffic. because this is a city code. Um
that is something that the city adopts
that we don't enforce under state code.
And again, our uh code of ordinances
under section 1.14 at the beginning
defines any penalty for any violation of
city code as a simple misdemeanor.
» Anything else?
» Please help.
Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
Agenda item H4, consideration of
approval of an ordinance to amend
chapter 26 park regulations by amending
section 26.12 dogs restricted to rename
section 21 26.12 as dogs and to include
dog park rules and regulations. It's
definitely a Monday. Uh third and final
reading on this one. Go ahead.
[laughter]
Move to approve the third reading of the
ordinance and title only and place it on
final passage. Second, Matt,
>> I have nothing further to add from the
first two readings. As a reminder, this
is a cleanup uh to put the dog park
rules from a resolution into the
ordinance. I'd be happy to answer any
questions you might have.
» Please vote.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
Item H5, consideration of approval of a
resolution approving development
agreement with Alderbrook LLC, Jay
Lararsson Holmes LLC, and Walke Commons
LLC at 310th Street, Can I get a motion?
>> Move to approve.
>> Second, Andy.
>> All right. Good evening, Mayor Clark and
council members. Uh, before you tonight
is consideration of a developers
agreement um with Alderbrook LLC, Jay
Lararsson Holmes LLC, and Walke Commons
LLC. Um really the driver of this
development agreement is the um hotmix
asphalt or HMA overlay of 310th Street.
Uh it's about 1.15 miles worth of uh
asphalt overlay of 310th Street. That
would be just uh west of the southwest
corner. So this property right here, if
you can see on the screen where I've got
my my little red dot, that's the
southwest corner of the civic campus
property that the city owns. Uh the city
previously asked did an asphalt overlay
of UP place and then the rest of 310
street out towards Sixth Street. This
would be an asphalt overlay of the
remainder of 310 street over to T Avenue
and then a short section of T Avenue to
the northwest corner of the Alderbrook
property. Um in addition uh the
development agreement outlines the
responsibility of uh inst installation
of a public water man along this roadway
as well. And really the whole purpose of
this agreement is because there are
several uh residential uh subdivisions
um either under construction now um
within this area or in the near future
will be under construction. Uh they have
a need to get this asphalt overlay
completed probably sooner rather than
later. Uh so that way we uh kind of quit
getting some dust complaint uh dust
complaints. And then in addition, there
are uh these developments also need
public water main um access to them for
future fire flows and things like that.
So um city staff has worked with uh the
three different parties. Um they've all
agreed to pay their fair share. Uh the
agreement outlines the responsibilities
um for this and the city attorney has
prepared the agreement and staff
recommends approval of the development
agreement. Happy to take any questions.
>> Thank you. Any questions?
>> I have one quick question. Um, I
remember we had um we had a couple of
residents that came to us um about
development in this area and had some
concerns about the construction traffic
creating dust in their house. Is that
the same
>> that this would be kind of the same
area? Yep.
>> Okay. Yep.
>> Um Okay. I just wanted I was just
curious if it was that resident that was
impacted or if this was
>> uh this would this would aid in some of
those dust control complaints for
several of those residents within this
area.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. Yep.
Please vote.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Item H6, consideration of approval of a
resolution approving construction
drawings for 310th Street and T Avenue.
Move to approve. Second, Andy. I I think
I pretty much described what's all
included in these plans, but uh this
includes again about 1.15 mile worth of
uh asphalt overlay of 310th Street.
Again, west of UP Place and then over to
T Avenue and then just south uh to the
north northwest corner of the Alderbrook
development, which is this area here
that's shown on that I'm pointing to
here with the red dot. Um the Alder
Brook development would con continue to
do phases of a asphalt overlay of um uh
T Avenue as they continue to complete
their various phases of that project. Um
in addition, there's a 12-in water man
that would be extended along 310th
Street and then it would transition to
an 18-in water man as it goes south
along T Avenue. Uh staff is recommending
approval of the construction plans for
310th Street and T Avenue. I'm happy to
take any questions. Any questions?
Please vote.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Item H7, Allison Hickman Development.
H7A, consideration of approval of a
resolution approving preliminary plat.
Can I get a motion?
>> Move to approve.
>> Second.
>> All right. Um, so I'll present on items
uh 7A and B here because they're
essentially the same request just a
little bit different document. Uh, but
the owner is Herd Land Company uh LLC.
The applicant is Orange Development LLC
and the owner and applicant are
requesting approval of a preliminary
plat and a final plat for a commercial
development. Uh, the property is
outlined in blue on the screen. It's
located at the northeast corner of
Northeast Alys's Road and East Hickman
Road. Uh and it's uh just over 33 and a
half acres in area. Uh for those uh
council members, uh you'll recall this
property was reszoned earlier this year
from the A1 agricultural zoning district
to the C1 Community and Highway Service
Commercial District.
Uh the preliminary plat
up here on the screen uh is kind of the
cover sheet of the preliminary plat. Uh
preliminary plat and final plat identify
the creation of three lots again for
commercial development. uh lot one,
which is the largest lot, uh kind of
takes up the north twothirds of the
property and then kind of down all the
way down into the southeast corner of
it. That's 29.31 acres in area. Lot two,
uh which is the larger lot at the corner
of the at the southwest corner of the
property, that's 3.19 acres in area. And
lot three, which is kind of this small
square right here, that is just over an
acre in area. Uh all lots meet or exceed
the minimum requirements of the C1 uh
community and highway service commercial
district. Um no new public streets are
planned for this development. Uh private
streets and utilities will serve um uh
serve the development. Um those
improvements are proposed as part of the
uh uh site plan for the Walmart project
which we'll discuss uh here in a little
bit. Uh but that would include the
extension of a private street. You can
kind of see the outline of it. a private
street that would uh access off of
Hickman Road or excuse me, Northeast
Alys's Road and then continue over to
the existing access uh that shares that
access point with the Westlike West
Light apartment project that's directly
to the east of this. In addition, there
are two other access points shown uh one
off of Northeast Alys's Road and one
kind of in the center of the property on
the south side to Hickman Road.
A right turn lane is proposed to be
added at the uh easternmost access off
of uh off of Hickman Road. Um that was
warranted as part of the traffic study
that was submitted for the review of
this project. Um this easternmost access
point is a 3/4 access point off of
Hickman Road. The center access off of
Hickman is a restricted right in right
out. Uh these two access points on
Hickman Road, those are the under the
Iowa DO's jurisdiction. Those are
predetermined access points as part of a
corridor agreement that the city and the
DOT already have and have had for
several years.
There is an additional access as
indicated previously uh just north of
the intersection that is a right in
right out. So you'll be able to turn
right into that and come out of it and
go right and go north on Alys's Road. Um
the existing signalized intersection
that's directly opposite of the H high-e
uh grocery store just directly to the
west that is a full signalized
intersection. So you'll be able to go
any direction north, south, east, west
from that from that intersection.
All proposed access points uh meet or
exceed the minimum requirements of the
street design guide. And as indicated,
the DOT has already issued permits for
the proposed access points off of East
Hickman Road.
[clears throat]
Um, I would note there is an existing
wetland area um within this development.
You can kind of see it um here. It's
kind of tough to see, but you can kind
of see this small meandering
wet area here. Um the developer and the
property owner have secured the
appropriate permits from the Army Corps
of Engineers as well uh to mitigate any
sort of impacts to the wetland areas and
to purchase credits uh for wetland
mitigation bank um uses.
This wetland area will be rerouted via
storm sewer pipe that will essentially
there's already a storm sewer pipe there
that outlets uh drainage from the Alys's
road corridor and that pipe will be
shortened a little bit and then we will
be piped and then up and around the
store and will outlet up into the ex
existing wetland area. Probably the
largest wetland area is up here in the
norththeast corner of the property
that's not being disturbed as part of
this development.
[snorts] 30-foot landscape buffer is
required to be installed or required to
be installed as part of the uh project.
You can kind of see those conceptual
plantings along the north and east
boundaries. The purpose of that is to
provide screening from the adjoining
residential uses to the north and to the
east.
Uh the planning and zoning commission
did recommend approval of the
preliminary plat and final plat for
Allison Hickman development um at their
meeting on August 11th, 2026. Um I would
note that um again this is this is
essentially these documents would create
the lots. They're not the they are not
the documents that would authorize the
construction of the proposed Walmart
Super Center. We'll get to that here in
a little bit. So, but with that being
said, uh staff would recommend approval
of the preliminary plat and final plat
for Allison Hickman Development. Happy
to take any questions.
>> Thank you. Uh if there are questions
about site plan, please reserve them for
that item. Um can you speak just a
little bit more about where exactly the
right turn lanes are?
>> Yep. So, the right turn lanes, this
might be Well,
so the right turn lane would be
installed. So, here's the existing
access point. Uh
Yeah, it's in it.
» Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Yes, it's
right here. Yes. Existing right turn
lane at the center access point.
>> Yep.
>> The new one. Okay.
>> Yep.
>> Thank you.
>> Misspoke.
>> What other questions we have? Yep. Do we
have a Walmart representative here?
>> Uh there are applicants
from the um applicant here tonight. I
don't know if there's actually someone
from Walmart corporate here tonight.
>> Okay. Because I [clears throat] the
question I have for whoever that is
um
is I was the thought process for this
site instead of moving further south
towards the interstate or even west
where on Hickman where we've got tons of
room and and looking for developments
like that out there.
I don't believe anybody from Walmart is
on, but if anybody would like to address
that.
>> No, the applicant for this these
>> Yeah, they're they're here.
>> Okay.
>> They can answer.
>> Okay. I'm sure.
» Joseph Parsley, Carlson Consulting
Engineers, president of the company. uh
76 uh Ledgestone Commons, Bartlett,
Tennessee 38133.
I was certainly not part of the
selection process. I'm the civil
engineer on the project, so I can't
speak to demographics or what led them
to choose this piece of property. The
developer was heavily involved with the
selection of this piece of property. Um
I just can't speak to why this one was
the one that they chose.
>> Okay.
My question has to do with Sorry.
>> Is there somebody online who's raised
their hand to speak? Is that somebody
from Walmart?
» Okay. Okay. [laughter] Go ahead.
>> Okay. Um, my question has to do with the seashores and the buffer that
will be along the backside. I I agree. I
wouldn't want the noise in my backyard.
I wouldn't want the light in my
backyard. And I would want as much
buffer as possible.
>> Yes, ma'am. What is the plan?
>> Yes, we actually were 110 feet away from
that back property line with our final
grading. So, we have 110 ft of trees of
existing trees in addition to the
landscape buffer that we're planning.
>> Tell me about that landscape buffer that
you're planning.
>> Yeah, I don't have we can get to think
of landscape plan once we get to the
site plan and show you some more details
what that looks like. But it's a 30-foot
evergreen. I mean, it's smoke trees. is
a staggered landscape buffer in addition
to the existing trees that are out there
today. And again, that's another 110 ft
from the property.
>> Those leaves will drop in the
wintertime, though. So, I'm I'm curious
regarding their question about how tall
these trees will be that you plant,
>> right?
>> Because if they're baby trees, it's
going to take 20 years before they'll
provide.
>> No, we we certainly can get that
landscape plan. I just don't have that
in front of me to tell you what size
those were. Okay.
>> Yeah, it's it's not a three-foot. It's
okay.
>> Mayor, I would suggest um just based
upon some of the the nature of these
questions that it may be of value if
staff would just go ahead and present on
the site plan at this time and then we
could follow up approval of um both
items seven and eight.
>> That would be fine.
>> Thank you.
» Gave [clears throat] me time to get a
water a drink of water, I guess.
All right.
So, I will move on to uh item
eight. Uh again, the owner is Herd Land
Company LLC. The applicant is Orange
Development LLC. Uh the property is
outlined in blue on the screen here. Uh
it's 33.53 acres in area and uh they are
the owner and applicant are requesting
approval of a site plan to complete
private site improvements. assoc
associated with infrastructure and
private road uh for the development as
well as to construct a Walmart Super
Center store and a um fueling station at
the southeast corner of the property.
Uh [clears throat] the site plan
identifies the construction of a 182,429
foot retail store on the north side of
the site. That's the uh large red box
here on the screen on the top of the
screen.
uh within lot one of the Allison Hickman
uh development subdivision that we just
spoke about. [snorts] Uh the store is
proposed to include homegoods,
groceries, outdoor goods, a pharmacy, a
drive-through prescription uh area is
shown here on the west side of the
building
[clears throat] and auto service on the
northeast side of the building. Uh so up
here kind of where you can see my red
pointer, the access into the auto
service center would be from the east
side of the building, not the north side
of the building. In addition, there are
five loading docks shown at the
northwest corner of the building. And
then um a uh trash enclosure and
recycling area uh located, you can kind
of see this long narrow rectangle here
just south of these trees um that's
proposed up on the north side of the
site. The fueling station includes a
fuel canopy with 10 fuel pumps. So both
sides. So there'd be 20 fueling spots
and uh 1,600 square foot um uh sea store
building. They're directly north of the
fuel canopy.
[clears throat] Trash enclosure for the
fuel station would be directly on the
east side of the building.
[clears throat] One monument sign is
planned along Hickman Road and then
there's one proposed along Northeast
Alice's Road. Uh based on the proposed
use of the site, 730 parking spaces are
required and the site plan identifies
just under 750 parking spaces.
The 10- foot wide trail exists along uh
East Hicken Road, Racken Road Valley
Trail that we're all familiar with. And
then as part of the site plan
improvements, a 5 foot wide sidewalk
would be constructed along the west side
um along Northeast Alys's Road. In
addition uh to you can see better
outline of this private road network.
There would be a five- foot wide
sidewalk constructed on at least one
side of the private road network to
facilitate pedestrian movement
throughout the throughout the
development. [snorts]
[clears throat] As we discussed, uh as
far as access points, uh there's an
existing 3/4er access point in the very
southeast corner of the site. There is a
ride in right out in the center of the
site from Hickman Road. Uh there is a
right in right out um just north of the
intersection along Northeast Alice's
road. The full access point would be
here at the signalized intersection. And
then this site plan does show an
additional ride in right out access
point uh just to the north or very at
the very northwest corner of the site.
Um the primary uh need for this access
point is for um uh deliveries and truck
deliveries and things like that. That's
how deliveries would be facilitated to
the site. Again, [clears throat]
Iowa DOT has issued permit
authorizations for the work within the
DOT ride ofway. Um, as previously
discussed, the right-hand turn lane
would be installed at the center uh
access point.
Let's see here.
The extension of the private streets
also that are included with this are
within the site plan improvements as
well as uh um storm sewer, sanitary
sewer and water main would be extended
throughout the development to provide
access to utilities. Storm water
management would be accounted for in a
regional storm water detention basin
kind of up in the northeast corner of
the site. Uh that pond would be owned
and maintained by the owner of lot one.
Um,
so that [clears throat] would provide
detention for lots two and three as well
into the in the future when they do
develop.
A phototric plan has been submitted for
review and demonstrates compliance with
the lighting requirements. So I know
there was a comment previously during
the open forum. Um, so we reviewed that
phototric plan. Um, there shouldn't be
any light spill over to the north, east,
or really into any perimeter boundary.
Um maybe a little bit of lighting here
kind of at these uh uh access points um
just simply because you want to make
sure you have some lighting there as
well. But there shouldn't be any light
spill over um along the north or east
property boundaries certainly. Um all fixtures are required to be full cut
off which basically means you have your
plane of your fixture and basically so
that no light light only goes down. It
doesn't go out this way or go up this
way. So there's no uplighting proposed
as part of this.
Uh the landscaping and open space
requirements are being met. A total of
20% of open space is required and the
site plan indicates that 43.9% is being
provided. Uh as we previously discussed,
um a 30-foot landscape buffer is
required along the north and east
boundaries.
um which the site plan does demonstrate
compliance with that. I would note um as
I believe Mr. Parsley uh indicated,
there's a pretty good stand of existing
mature trees along that north boundary.
Um in fact uh took a trip out there last
week just to kind of go take a look at
it. Um Heard Herd Land Company, the
current property owner, has done some
tree clearing on that property already.
Um and for the most part, they've
removed the trees that need to be
removed for this development. So, um,
there's a pretty good stand of trees out
there already. Um, so we'll certainly
have to evaluate, um, based on what
additional plantings may be required as
part of this buffer, um, depending on if
any other additional removals happen
throughout construction. Um, but
currently the, uh, the site plan does
demonstrate compliance with the buffer
requirement. Um those tree plantings,
sorry,
uh those tree plantings, our code
requires a minimum of a 6ft high
evergreen tree, um 6 foot high
ornamental tree, and then a minimum of 8
foot uh um overstory tree when they're
planted. So, um, you know, while they're
not giant mature trees at the time they
get planted, they are meeting the code
minimums as it relates to, um, minimum
heights and things like that at the time
of planting. As far as species are
concerned, I'd have to really dive into
the landscape plan to tell you what
species and things like that. But what I
can tell you is our landscape buffer
requirements require uh for a 30-foot
buffer, I believe it's two evergreen
trees and uh two ornamental trees and
one overstory tree for every 50 lineal
foot of buffer. So every 50 ft they need
to be providing every 50 ft of that
buffer area they have to provide so many
trees of those different types of
species. Now, whether they're [sighs] a
blue spruce or, you know, some other
type of evergreen tree, that's not
necessarily up for us to decide. That's
up for a landscape architect to design
and make sure that it's compliant with
our code.
Um, [clears throat]
the elevations of the proposed building
to that here.
And I've got some renderings that show the rent the elevations a
little better. Uh the proposed building
is proposed to be constructed primarily
of pre-cast concrete panels of various
textures. So there's kind of some smooth
panels. There's some textured panels
that kind of have a brick look to them.
Uh some masonry. Uh architectural metal
paneling and glazing are shown on the
elevations. Uh fencing used for accents
and screening is shown to be an
ornamental style fencing. So kind of
like your row iron looking type fencing.
[snorts]
Here's a elevation of the proposed uh
fueling station building. Again, very
similar materials to the proposed super
center store.
Uh here's the fuel canopy elevation. Um
they have, as we've seen, uh with a lot
of our most recent uh convenience stores
that have been constructed, the columns
for the fuel canopy have been wrapped in
brick.
>> [snorts]
>> Here's just an elevation of that uh uh
trash enclosure area that's on the just
to the north of the building. Uh those
are pre-cast concrete panels with a
texture.
So the back side of this would face
north. Uh so the very north line of the
property. And here's kind of some
renderings of that. This gives you a
little bit better perspective and
see kind of some of the textures, the
articulation of the building.
So this would be the souththeast corner
of the building. So they kind of have
their outdoor good area within this
area.
There's the autocare area.
Uh staff did receive uh some
correspondence prior to the planning and
zoning commission meeting. Uh that
correspondence was passed on to the
commission as well as was included in
your packet um here tonight. Um in
addition uh staff also received some
correspondence from uh HY as uh the
gentleman uh previously uh spoke tonight
uh regarding some of their concerns
related to the initial traffic study. Uh
staff did um present that to the uh
planning and zoning commission at their
meeting on August 11th. Uh the
commission did recommend approval uh
subject to addressing um some of those
concerns within the traffic study. Uh
staff did request that the applicant
prior to being placed on a city council
agenda uh to address uh some of those
deficiencies in the traffic report. Um
the applicant's engineer was able to um
uh address those deficiencies. Uh Rudy
and his team have reviewed the traffic
study. Um, in addition, we did have uh
two third-party engineering firms review
that traffic study late last week. Uh,
Snyder and Associates as well as both.
Um, their correspondence was included in
the packet uh packet here tonight. Um,
they did agree with the uh methodologies
that the way that the study was done um
the way that the numbers were updated to
reflect more current traffic um and did
agree with the recommendations as a
result of or what was resulted in the
traffic study. And I would note that um
the recommendations between the initial
traffic study and then the traffic study
that was provided late last week, the
recommendations of that essentially did
not change. So um while it was it was a
good exercise to update that, make sure
we had current numbers, the
recommendations of the traffic study did
not change. Um so I just want to make
sure that the council is aware of that.
[clears throat]
Um,
not to reiterate uh what's already been
said here tonight, um, IV did submit a
letter today, uh, which I believe I had
asked Becky to print out for all of you
to have up there tonight. Uh, just some
of their concerns related to, um,
inadequate turn lane length at the
southbound left turns at the
intersection of Alyses and Hickman. Um,
striping on their property uh, that's,
um, not in the public rideway. Uh, truck
traffic and deliveries. um one of their
issues was truck traffic and deliveries
were not analyzed by the study and then
um uh noted that the analysis of
Northeast Horizon Drive did not take
into account the widening of Northeast
Alys's road. So, our current widening
project that we have going on right now.
um specifics related to the traffic
study. I'd be happy to have my
knowledgeable colleague Rudy Caster um
answer as well, but uh um happy to take
any questions uh that
>> Rudy, do you have slides to present on
the traffic study? Something to present
comments, please make them.
» Thank you, mayor. Um just a few comments
there. Thanks Andy for that summary. Um
really um thorough and certainly covered
all the five access points into and out
of the site. Um I will note that
southbound left dual left turn lane and
the defic deficiency shown there in the
10 year and 20 year lookout. Um we're
talking about 35 ft um of a deficiency.
There's about 80 um about 90 feet of um
a full single lane in the taper of that.
So, if you read in the report, 240 is
the uh official full length width, but
there's another 90 ft in the taper that
accounts for one full lane. So, if you
divide that over two, we're talking
about 35 ft of a deficiency on those
southbound lanes um per lane. Um that's
about a car and a half each. Um 20 ft is
about approximately your car length. Um
so, again, staff reviewing that,
understanding it. Um really in the
conversations I've had with um KLA
um their engineers that were working
with um um Joseph here um their
assumption for the eastbound traffic
heading east on Hickman Road. Um there's
a lot to be realized in the next 5 years
on the Alys's Road corridor improvements
as well as the Douglas Parkway corridor
improvements and how traffic will likely
find its way to the north and east via
those improved corridors. um the
assumption of 40% of the the Walmart
generated traffic or the the sites
generated traffic going back to the east
when you have three stores within seven
miles [clears throat] or less to the
northeast east and southeast is highly
conservative. Um we feel that that um
conservatism really just benefits that
southbound left turn lane deficiency
shown in this report. So, um, we have
the ability to capture the real-time
traffic data, and we look forward to
capturing that as as this project moves
forward, if this project moves forward,
as well as the remaining growth in the
community. We took a percent and a half
growth um through this area for
background traffic. That's really the
driving number behind um some of these Q
lengths that we're seeing in that 10 and
20 year lookout. So, again, um it is a crystal ball here. This this
methodology is, but it is sound. uh it
has been vetted by two other outside
engineers that we work with and have
confidence in their and trust in their
um understanding. So um so there's that
on the southbound Q links. I mentioned
the stores in proximity to the east,
northeast and southeast um likely um
driving down that east movement traffic.
Um there is one turn lane on the west
leg of the signalized H high and
proposed developments intersection. uh
it's it's within the public facilities
and use easement that's out there or
that was given to the city when this
traffic signal was constructed in 2018.
That's the only striping modifications
that's being um noted on the site
planned um that the developer is
showing. So nothing further into this
the HY um site at this point that I've
seen or understand from their
improvements. So, it's really removing
that that right turn arrow because that
becomes now a through and right turn
lane as you're heading eastbound out of
the H high store. Um removing that or
modifying it to a through and right
arrow is really the modifications there.
So, um staff um um the engineering
staff, Joseph and his team did share
turning or truck turning templates
coming out of that signalized
intersection um out of the Walmart site,
out of the Hi- ve site. Um there are
median modifications on Alys's road to
pull those noses back to accommodate
those um semi-trailers. So it's a
semi-tractor with a 50-ft trailer coming
out of those entrances east and west. Um
we have to pull those median noses back
5 to 10 feet. Um pretty typical or
anticipated modification there. Um
something we hoped that we had figured
out when we originally constructed
Alys's Road in phase 5 about um seven
years ago, but um we just didn't quite
get those right. So, um those are those
modifications are part of the site plan
improvement shown um with the Walmart
Super Center.
Um as I mentioned uh or as was
mentioned, the configuration and
analysis at um Northeast um Horizon
Drive and Alice Road that revision of
the lane configuration of Alison Road
was included in the updated TSI. Um I
had that specific conversation and did
verify that later this um today as well.
So that that did update that. It
actually improved that eastbound left
turn um on Horizon Drive as you were to
turn left to go north on Analysis Road.
Having those multiple lanes provides
more of a gap opportunity um as well as
a vehicle that may be crossing the
southbound too, stopping in kind of that
middle island um area and then
proceeding with that left turn. So um
again all levels of services are um a
level of D or higher at our um five
intersections or five entrances or um
yeah entrances into the development. So
again to summarize it all staff has
confidence and certainly myself I have
confidence after um going over this
traffic impact study the original the
revisions um as to what we're presenting
here and the recommendations presented.
So happy to take any questions uh and
any of those points if you have any. So
>> okay, for just a second let's keep any
questions to traffic. We'll go back to
buffering in a minute. Um are there
questions related to traffic before we
let Rudy sit down?
>> I don't think so.
>> And I will add one more point. Sorry
>> comment.
>> There was going to be a comment. Um when
this signal was constructed in 2018, it
was paid by both the HY um ownership as
well as the east owner at the time,
which I believe was Right Tree Service.
Um so they paid for this intersection
50/50. Um and so the city owns and
operates it today, but certainly we are
um there are modifications to some of
those signal heads that are being
proposed again being paid for by the
developer um that will be modified at
their expense um this time and or for
this effort. So, um, certainly if
there's continued conversation with, um,
as the letter and that HY presented
today about continued discussion about
an access agreement, we're happy to have
those between the two parties and
ourselves. Um, we want to be a party of
that if that does come to fruition as
well as um, yeah, that that was one thing. And
then a couple other items that they
mentioned on, we did hit on the horizon
drive analysis was corrected. Um the
truck circulation Andy indicated that
north right in right out is their
intended ingress egress for delivery
semis. Um so it is set up appropriately
for that. Um three subject the city
reviewer identified as not being
discussed. Um crash history, site
distance, proposed access, multimmo
accommodations. Really looking at the
global corridor of Alice's and Hickman
were treating this this development no
different than priors had been treated.
So looking into those aspects really
wasn't justified from staff's
perspective. So diving into that effort
um certainly under the time crunch we
were looking at here um wasn't warranted
to be discussed and included in the TSI
at this point. So um and then lastly
that postopening traffic study um we'll
be conducting that ourselves. Again we
have traffic equipment out there. We're
collecting traffic data 247 days a week
365 days a year. So, we'll be looking at
um those real-time traffic datas as
they're realized in the next 5, 10, 20
years and modifying timing plans for
this intersection as well as the Alyses
and Hickman corridors. Um so that we are
being as efficient as we can. Um if
that's taking it to the next level of
adaptive equipment or whatnot, um we'll see if that's warranted at that
time when traffic um traffic volumes
warrant that and that discussion and
analysis. So, um, I think that's all I
have and again, happy to take any
follow-up questions if you have any on
this traffic analysis.
>> Thank you.
>> Should you had a comment?
>> Do Rudy, stay there for a second.
[laughter]
>> Was this traffic study done like you
said three years ago? Were we still in
the middle of
our Alys's Road project at that point?
Was was this done at any point when
Alice's Road was closed? So, the traffic
data that they utilized was December of
2023. And one comment that was brought
up at the PNZ meeting um in the prior HY
letter was it didn't realize or didn't
take account for Target opening um after
the fact. Um which Target wasn't open in
December of 23. Um, so I provided them
February of 26 data that when Alys's
Road was open north of Hickman Road um,
through those winter months when we had
a few uh, opened months there with that
project um, to realize what is reality
and what traffic is. And so we were
within a percent on Hickman Road and
within a few percent on Alyss Road.
Actually the the traffic data they were
assuming was actually higher than what
uh, the real-time data was. So, we
looked at a week in February that was a
typical week u with school in session,
with Alys's Road open, with Target open.
Um,
>> and you said this is a bit like a
crystal ball where we're kind of trying
to guess. Do we know what sort of
development will be happening in
Urbandale Grimes all the way up Alice's
Road? How much more traffic could we get
on Alys's?
>> We I have an answer for that, mayor.
Yep. Um, we did about I want to say
probably been six years, maybe five
years. We did a northwest area study
with between the cities of Clive,
Urbanddale, and Walke. Clive was the
lead agency on that, but we looked at
all of those undeveloped land uses in
all three communities to the north of
Alys's Road Corridor as well as to the
west. Um, and really that was to size
our corridors appropriately. So, with
that, what was realized was Alys's Road,
we have six lanes south of Pikmin Road.
We tapered down to the four north of
Hickman Road or at Horizon. Um, and that
I think at that time we [clears throat]
did
>> we did a we did our
» Can everybody online mute themselves,
please?
» Not entirely sure why we're unmuted to
begin with, but we will deal with that.
>> Yeah.
>> So, we did three communities. We did a
traffic forecasting outlook at those um
land uses. We didn't look at every
parcel. We just took our land use maps
um and applied appropriate um traffic
methodology for trip generations based
on those land uses. So with that that
helped us size our corridors, Douglas,
Alys's Road, Meredith, um Waterford and
uh from that really what was another
document that solidified what we were
projecting for volumes on Alys's Road.
So
>> other questions.
>> Okay, not on traffic. Thank you, Rudy.
Uh
go back to buffering. Uh and any other
questions um related [clears throat] to
site plan or platting, although I want
to be clear, those are two separate
votes and two separate well three
separate actually, but um and three
separate decision points. But uh any
questions related to the site plan that
was presented?
the seashores,
is that correct? It just didn't feel
right,
had mentioned um an 8 foot sound
barrier.
>> Mhm.
>> That Walmart would would put the bill
for. Is that something that we've ever had on any of our other buildings?
Um, I'm not aware in my time with the
city that um either staff or uh the
council has ever required a specific
going above and beyond what the code
requires. Um, uh, technically our code
doesn't allow 8ft fences um, in a
commercial commercially zoned district.
>> Um, they could have up to a six foot
high fence in the in a commercial area.
Um, but I'm not aware that that's um
that the council has ever required that
something an additional barrier beyond
the uh landscape buffer requirement. And
I would note that the 30-foot buffer
actually requires two overstory trees,
three evergreen trees, and two
ornamental trees. So, um, per 50 lineal
foot of the buffer,
>> seven trees. Um in terms of the uh site
plan that you've shown uh you are this
is in addition to the existing tree
canopy that is out there.
>> It would be an addition. Yes.
>> Okay. So this would be an additional
seven trees per 50 ft uh per per 50
lineal feet uh linear.
>> Yep.
>> It's been a long day already. Um along
both the north and east corridor. Okay.
>> But I just want to remind the council
that again there's several mature trees
that would that are proposed to remain
to be kept um along that north property
line as well. So um
again uh as as I previously said uh
that's something that we would have to
address, you know, as they continue to
further uh if if this project were to
move forward and they um get under
construction that uh we might have to
re-evaluate that based on what's being
kept. um can they get a credit for some
of those trees being kept as well? So,
>> I think from the council perspective,
what I'm hearing is more the better.
>> Sure.
>> Uh and that that should be the
communication back. Uh
>> can anyone in the room speak to whether
or not there would be an ability to
discuss a some sort of sound barrier?
Yeah, since my client has gone beyond
his 30-foot buffer, like I said,
essentially in that piece of property in
this, you know, in question, it's 110 ft
of existing landscaping we're keeping
and then putting in all these trees that
we're talking about to infill in between
those gaps to help when the leaves fall
to help buffer it. So again, an 8 or 6t
tall wall along that property line
really won't do much because the
elevation change is about 30 ft down
from the finished floor at the Walmart
Super Center down to that creek.
>> So then it does climb back up about 10
ft, but a 6ft wall
>> not going to
>> it's not really going to help it. It's
the trees, it's the landscaping, it's
those leaves and those needles.
>> Thank you.
>> Yes.
>> Are there other questions? It's not a
public comment item. Um I'm after
afterward.
Um I'm going to ask if there are other
questions for now. Not questions, just
comments.
>> I just
>> Go ahead, Chris.
>> Have you received any any um complaints
from the people on the west side of
Target, that neighborhood?
>> Um not necessarily complaints about
noise or anything like that. Um or light
pollution. Um I'm I'm not aware that
we've had um any complaints regarding
that. Um okay
>> I know we've had some you know
complaints about you know mowing and
things like that but that's something
that our co- compliance office officer
has addressed and we're not getting
those complaints anymore.
>> Thank you.
>> Questions I have are for Walmart
specifically. So, I won't ask them, but
if that can get to them somehow,
>> same, right?
>> I I might have some information to share
if you want to.
>> Perfect.
>> Um, do we know what the store hours are
going to be?
>> Uh, I do have some information as it
relates to store hours.
Oh, here we go. Uh, anticipated
customerf facing hours for the store are
6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. 7 days a week.
uh which is consistent with with typical
Walmart store operating hours. Um
obviously um that's a little bit
different for like pharmacy and the auto
service center. Um I know I I looked up
before the P&Z meeting as it relates to
the auto service center. It appears that
all of our or most of the local uh
Walmart ser auto service centers are
from like 7 am to 7 pm. So those
wouldn't be open till 11 p.m. is is at
least what my understanding is based on
other local stores. Um Walmart indicated
these hours are designed to provide
Walke residents with convenient [clears throat] access to
groceries, pharmacy and health and
wellness offerings, household essentials
and other everyday products.
Final hours will be established as the
store approaches opening and will be
subject to applicable local
requirements.
>> So for the Walmart store, the main
store, and then the convenience center
or convenience store, do we know how
many full-time employees were expecting?
How many part-time employees were
expecting?
>> Let's see here. [clears throat]
Excuse me. Uh the super center is
expected to create approximately 250 to
300 local jobs providing a mix of full
and part-time opportunities for Walke
and the surrounding area.
Um I think this is just a general
corporate uh statistic, but it says
approximately twothirds of Walmart's US
hourly store roles are full-time
and staffing will depend on the store's
final operations, customer demand, and
services offered.
And then just [clears throat] one more
question. Um, as far as being active in
the community, do they plan on like
joining the Chamber of Commerce,
regularly donating to Waypoint, helping
out with Hera, being involved with the
school foundation, those types of
things?
>> Sure.
>> Uh, [clears throat]
uh, Walmart desires to become a long a
long-term member and partner the
community. Um, Walmart has a long
history of supporting the communities
where they live and work, including
through relationships with local
nonprofit organizations,
schools, food security organizations,
first responders, and other community
partners. Uh, as the Walke Store moves
towards opening, local store, and market
leadership would look for opportunities
to develop similar relationships with
organizations serving the Walke
community.
[snorts]
uh
they indicate that they would also
welcome the opportunity to engage with
the Walke Area Chamber of Commerce and
other local businesses and civic
organizations.
» Other questions?
>> Yeah, I do have a few questions. Um so,
um the existing trees that you're
referencing, the 110 ft of existing
trees, is that all on what is go what is
proposed to be Walmart's property?
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Um, so then the 30 extra feet that
we're requiring then, so we're closer to
140 ft of trees, correct? Because I'm
kind of getting some wishy-washy answers
on that. So I'm not exactly sure, not
from you, Andy. Um Um, so I'm not
exactly sure what we're referencing.
We're talking about filling in some
gaps, but then also talking about we
already have 110 ft of trees.
The landscaping buffer is a landscaping
buffer. I think we need to be especially
clear on what we're talking about and
exactly how many feet of trees are going
to be not just planted but maintained
permanently.
» Go ahead.
>> I mean, Walmart isn't here, so I guess I
have to ask you.
>> Yes, we my landscape architect prepared
this plan. So,
>> as you can see on here,
>> there's a lot of trees along this
northern half. So, we're going to have
to not just plant in a straight row all
of these trees every 50 ft. you're going
to have to pick a spot where you can get
some sunlight in there. So, yes, we're committed to plant all the trees
that's shown on this drawing right here
right now. Now, will they be in a nice
straight line? We can't promise that
just because you're going to have to
pick some some areas to get some
sunlight for these trees.
>> But [clears throat] that's in addition,
what she's asking, that's in addition to
the tree buffer that already exists,
>> right? Is there 110 ft everywhere? No,
there's 110 ft where the residential
properties are in CL. And then it kind
of gets a little bit less as you move
west,
>> but there's still a significant tree
buffer there. Just not exactly 110 feet.
Want to be clear on that.
>> Sure.
>> But we're still doing the buffer there
also.
>> But the 110 ft will be maintained where
it exists today.
>> Yes.
>> The trees will be maintained.
>> Yes, ma'am.
>> Okay. Um and then my question then is
for Andy then. So, um once, and I know
we've asked this before, so forgive me,
but it's been a while since we've
revisited this. So once because we
require a landscaping buffer to be
planted at the time um at the time of
planning or site planning. Um well our
requirements are in place then not the
trees are going in place then. Um what
is how does how does the process work
for maintenance of that landscaping
buffer? Like what happens if it becomes
depleted? Trees are dying off. They're
being intentionally cut down. What does
that what does that look like
>> for us? Um so before a certificate of
occupancy is issued by the uh building
department um planning staff would go
out and you know just like a building
inspector would go out to make sure that
you know the building is meeting
building codes. Planning staff would go
out and do a site inspection. So we make
sure their parking lot is striped. We
make sure the building looks like the
way it was approved. We make sure their
light fixtures are in. But we also count
we count trees. Um, so if there's just
for the sake of simplicity, if there's
200 trees required on this site plan,
we're going to go out there and we're
going to count.
>> And if it's 198 trees, we're going to
say, "Where's your where's tree 199?
Where's tree 200?" Mhm.
>> Um and so as far as from a maintenance
perspective, um something related to
this site, um and really any commercial
site, you know, if if staff were to see
someone completely remove their
landscape buffer. I mean, that'd be
either a phone call from me or a letter
from Paul Carpenter, our code compliance
officer, saying, "Hey, what's going on
with your landscape buffer? Um you need
to replace those plantings because it's
a code requirement." Um so if we started
to see, you know, several um trees being
removed, trees are dying off, generally
um you know, these types of sites,
there's a one to two year warranty
period for those trees. No different
than when you buy a tree at your house
that you get planted. Um so typically,
um I would uh think most property owners
go out there and let their landscape
contractor know, say, "Hey, um I've got
six trees dead out here. Please get out
and replace them." Uh it's not uncommon
for the landscape company that installed
the plantings to come back one year
later to do a revisit to see what what
needs to be warrantied and what doesn't.
Um so I know that that's not uncommon
for commercial sites, multifamily sites,
things like that.
>> And then what happens if they don't
maintain the landscaping buffer? If they
don't maintain it and the trees start
dying off, then that would become a
co-mp compliance issue that we would
have to work through with the property
owner
>> and enforce just like any other code
compliance issue. Okay.
>> Um and then I have one last question. Um
there are several lots here. The intent
for Walmart I don't I haven't seen the
purchase agreement so I don't know. Um
is Walmart purchasing all of these lots?
>> Walmart is purchasing lots lot one and
then the remaining two lots my
understanding would be retained by the
current property owner Herd Land
Company.
>> Okay.
Um, okay. So, I mean, it's a sizable development um within our
community. I'm a little bit surprised
that we don't have a representative from
Walmart here tonight. Um,
a little disappointed to be completely
honest with you. Um, because this is a
significant development. Uh, we have
obviously have a lot of questions for
them. Um, it would have been really
helpful to have a representative here.
Um, it's an important development. If it
were important enough to them, I thought
they would have been here to answer our
questions. So, I am um a little
disappointed that they chose not to do
that, especially if um in writing on
black and white paper they're intending
to be good community partners. I don't
think this is a very good first start.
And that's exactly the comment, one of
the comments that I was going to make is
in sitting on city council
and thinking about this particular
project, there are two questions that I
had to ask myself. Number one, how is
this going to affect our residents?
And number two, how is it going to
affect our current businesses that we
already have and retain in Walke? And
when it comes to affecting our
residents, I think the probably the
biggest challenge that we would have in
this particular location is traffic and
people getting through that
intersection, people getting to work in
the mornings, people getting home at the
end of the day and the additional truck
traffic that may be incurred because of
um the new development. The other is in terms of people and the
inconveniences that we would have. I'm
very concerned about noise and what
type of um accommodations we can make as
far as noise goes. And we can talk about
the plantings and all of that and it
sounds great, but there will still be
people who are inconvenienced by noise.
And what we haven't heard from Walmart
is
how they're going to um handle
unloading trucks. Are they going to be
unloading trucks in the middle of the
night? Are we going to be waking people
up in the middle of the night or in the
early morning hours to unload freight um
from these trucks? So, that's a concern
that I have. The hours of loading and
unloading have not been addressed at
all. Um,
we want Walmart to be a good neighbor.
And right now, I'm not certain that I
have the answers that I need. And with
the traffic issues, the truck noise, I
don't think at this point that it's a
good addition for us in Walke. And I
will be voting no.
So, I'm going to um propose something
and uh and we can discuss whether the
council uh would like to move on it.
Platting is a separate conversation.
Platting is right. Dividing the land
into developable components um is a
separate issue from site plan. It sounds
like we have some pretty uh some
outstanding questions I think uh from a
site plan perspective that council would
like to see answered potentially from a
Walmart representative uh at some point.
Um, so what I would recommend is that we
uh still hold the vote tonight on uh the
platting of the site in terms of just uh
dividing it into developable areas and
propose uh for consideration the uh
delay of the plan approval, the site
plan approval until the next voting
meeting.
And one of the other things that I'd
like to see is each of um
the email that we got from Mr. H from
Hib I and the list of things that they
had concerns about. I'd like to see us
type something up that the council gets
so that we can see exactly how each of
those areas are addressed.
You answered most of that, Rudy,
tonight, but if that could be
>> Yeah, I'd rather have it written down so
I can digest it a little bit. Yeah.
>> One thing I do want to um
Yeah, I'm I'm going to be done for the
moment. Are do people comfortable with
that plan of approach?
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Uh then we are going to go ahead
and hold the vote on item H7. H7A uh
which I have already read and has been
first and seconded although quite a
while ago and I forgot who first and
seconded it was the motion was made by
council member Grove and seconded by
council member Lion.
>> I knew you'd be on it. Um so I'm going
to go ahead and uh have us vote on that
one on I7A and I7B and then we will have
a motion to table on I7 on I H8. Wow,
it's been a day. Okay.
Any final comments on H7A? No.
Okay. All right. Please vote.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> no.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> All right. Item H7B, consideration of
approval of a resolution of fin
approving final plat uh which makes it
sound very final. However, as we know,
those have changed in the past. But, um,
well, can I get a motion on that?
>> Move to approve.
>> Second.
>> Any final discussion on the platting?
>> Please vote. So, just to clarify
quickly, the platting is again just this
breaking up. Yes.
>> It's subdividing the property into into
multiple parcels. Okay.
>> So, it's not approving the site plan.
Okay.
>> Thank you.
Right. Please vote.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> no.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> All right, we have item H8, which is
consideration of approval of a
resolution approving site plan for
Walmart Super Center
09872-000
at 1165 East Hickman Road. Uh, can I get
a motion to table? I make a motion to
table this resolution. Do I need to add
to that?
>> Next regular meeting is September 8th if
that's helpful.
>> Sure.
>> Make a motion to table the resolution
till September 8th.
>> Second.
>> Any discussion on that? Tableing it.
Okay. Please vote.
>> Council member Cone.
>> Yes.
>> Council member [snorts] Grove.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes. Council member Anderson.
>> Yes.
» Item H9, consideration of approval of a
resolution approving final plat for
Spring Meadows Plat 4.
Can I get a motion? Move to approve.
Second.
Melissa,
>> can we wait for just a minute? And
because there's a lot of commotion here
from people leaving, so if we can just
let them depart so we can concentrate on
our meeting, that would be great. All
right. Go ahead, Melissa.
>> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Uh, the
owner and applicant is Walke Partnership
LLC. The property is located south of
Hikman Road and east of 20th Street. It
contains a little over 10 acres in area.
Um, it is outlined in pink on the screen
kind of at the northwest corner of that
colored area shown. Um, the property is
zoned R-21
and2 family residential district and R21
and2 family residential district with a
plan development overlay. The final plat
includes 44 lots for single family
residential. 22 lots are zoned R2PD1 and
then 22 lots are zoned R2. All lots meet
or exceed the minimum requirements of
the R2 and R2PD1 zoning districts. Uh
the plat includes extensions to both
Locust Street and Cedar Street. 5 foot
wide sidewalks will be provided along
both sides of both streets with
individual lot development. Public
utilities will be provided to each lot.
uh parkland dedication requirements have
been met or will be met with previous
and future phases of the overall Spring
Meadows uh development. Um the parkland
is in the green kind of just to the
souththeast of that and there's also a
little section right here um that first
phase of Spring um Spring Meadows.
Um
staff recommends approval of the final
plat and I would be happy to answer any
questions.
>> Thank you. Are there any questions?
>> Please vote.
>> Council member Cone.
>> Yes. Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Item H10, consideration of approval of a
resolution approving site plan for
Discount Tire at 215 West Hickman Road.
Can I get a motion?
>> Move to approve. Second,
Melissa.
>> The owner is Walke Crossing LLC. The
applicant is Holly Properties LLC. This
property is located north of West
Hickman Road and west of Northwest
Second Street. contains a little over an
acre. The property is zone C1 Community
and Highway Service Commercial District.
Uh the project includes uh the
construction of a singlestory building
that is 7,320
ft in area and 24 ft in height. A trash
enclosure is proposed at the northeast
corner of the site. Two access points
will be provided into the site from the
private drive along the north. Uh that
private drive is accessed off of
Northwest Second Street into the
Guadalajara site and that is a shared
access for the overall development. A
pedestrian connection will be provided
into the site from the public trail
along West Hickman Road.
Um parking and landscaping requirements
are being met. All utilities will be
provided to the site. Storm water
detention will be provided in the
existing regional detention basin which
is located to the northwest of the site.
You can see it on this screen um just up
here. So that's the detention for the
overall development.
Uh let's go to the building elevations.
So the building elevations are proposed
to be constructed mostly a brick
aluminum um composite panels split face
CMU and storefront system. Overhead
doors are shown on the east elevation.
Uh the trash enclosure will be
constructed of the same splitface CMU to
match the building. stock staff
recommends approval of the site plan and
I'd be happy to answer any questions.
>> Thank you. Are there any questions?
» Please vote.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Item I 11, Stratford Crossing Commercial
Plat 3, Stratford Crossing Retail. 11 A
consideration of approval of a
resolution approving preliminary plat
move to approve.
>> Second
>> and I'll go ahead and present on 11 A
through C together. Uh the owner and
applicant is Sherman Hills Real Estate
Partnership LLC. The property is located
west of Northwest 10th Street and south
of Northwest Strapford Drive. It
contains 8.86 acres. The property is
zoned C1 Community and Highway Service
Commercial District. The preliminary
plat and final plat include one lot and
one outlot. Uh lot one is at the north
side of the site. Um it is 1.87 acres in
area and then the rest of it is outlot X
and that's 6.99 acres in area. The site
plan is for lot one. It includes the
construction of a singlestory
multi-tenant building. The building is
10,000 square feet in area and 27 feet
in height. Go to the next slide here.
Um, a drive-through is proposed at the
south side of the building. A trash
enclosure is shown just to the west of
the building. Uh, two accesses will be
provided into the site from the public
streets, one off of Northwest 10th
Street and one off of Northwest
Stratford Drive. 5 foot wide sidewalks
will be provided along the public
streets adjacent to the site. Pedestrian
connections will be provided into the
site from both the north and the east.
Uh, parking, lighting, and landscaping
requirements are being met. Public
utilities are provided to the site.
Utilities within the development will be
privately owned and maintained. Storm
water detention will be provided with a
large pond located at the northwest
corner of the overall development.
Uh building elevations.
The building elevations are proposed to
be constructed mostly of brick, stone,
and fiber cement. Staff recommends
approval of the preliminary plat, final
plat, and site plan. And I'd be happy to
answer any questions.
>> Thank you. Are there any questions?
Um I may have missed it in the notes. Uh
the drive-thru, I assume that's intended
to be like for like a restaurant type
user or like a coffee shop or something
like that.
>> Yeah, I'm unsure at the time what it is,
but um yeah, so the drive-thru would
start at the um west side of the
building and then work its way to the
south side. And
>> I guess you can go out. So the access
point at Northwest 10th is a ride in
right out. So they could go technically
go out here if they're going south or
they'd have to go back up to the north
to get out. They're going to try to go
north.
Other
questions?
Please vote. Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Item I 11B, consideration of approval of
a resolution approving final plat.
>> Move to approve.
>> Second.
>> Melissa,
>> I have nothing further to add. Any
questions on the final plat?
>> Please vote.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cone,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Item I 11 C, consideration of approval
of a resolution approving site plan at
660 Northwest 10th Street.
>> Move to approve.
>> Second.
>> I have nothing further to add.
>> Any questions?
Please help.
>> Council member Grove,
>> yes.
>> Council member Cron,
>> yes.
>> Council member Pierce,
>> yes.
>> Council member Anderson,
>> yes.
>> Council member Lion,
>> yes.
>> Agenda item J. Reports.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Believe it or not,
school starts next week. Um, so I would
just encourage the public and uh our
mayor and council to be patient with us.
uh as schools starts up, the first
couple of weeks are always a little
traumatic when it comes to traffic and
new traffic patterns and new schools
where uh kids are trying to get to. So,
um we will continue to monitor that, but
uh just realize the next couple weeks
are always a little bit hectic. I know
there was a question relative to some um
improvements that are being done on
University Avenue. Um those are
associated with the school
administration's building and the
extension of Parkview Crossing to the
south. Those improvements do include the
extension of the median through so that
there's no um through movement between
Parkview Crossing and Prairie View
School. Um we have been diligently
working with that contractor. I would
say they're um a little behind. Um, but
the goal is to get as much of that
buttoned up prior to Monday. And, um,
anything that's not completed prior to
Monday, there will be limited working
hours to allow for traffic to get in and
out of those schools. So, uh, bear with
us. We'll do the best we can, but just
know we'll have some traffic jams here
in the next couple weeks.
>> No report.
I want to thank everybody who emailed
the council. We received tons of emails
this week on many different topics and
um though we were not able to reply to all of them. Just know that we do
open them, we do read them.
>> I replied to every single one.
>> Did you really?
>> I did. I didn't. There were some I
missed.
>> I would say I'm very thankful. However,
there were a couple that uh
let's just say my mom didn't raise me to
talk like that to somebody, but uh um
that's fine. I [clears throat] uh I did
reply. Uh I appreciate staff's time and
the detailed explanations for everything
tonight. I really do. I know you guys do
a lot of work in preparation for these
meetings and a lot of work through the
entire process. It's not easy. So, thank
you. Um and with that, I will take a
motion to adjurnn. Move to
>> second.
[laughter]
>> All those in favor? I
>> I
>> Thank you.