[0:07] [music]
[0:31] All right, we'll call the meeting to
[0:32] order. On behalf of the planning
[0:33] commission, like to welcome our
[0:35] residents and viewers to this regular
[0:36] meeting of August 12th, 2026.
[0:39] On tonight's agenda, we just have one
[0:41] discussion item. Uh we'll get to that
[0:43] after one housekeeping item, which is
[0:45] the minutes from our July 14th, 2026
[0:49] regular meeting. Are there any additions
[0:51] or corrections to those minutes?
[0:54] If not, is there a motion?
[0:56] Motion.
[0:57] >> Have a motion for approval. Is there a
[0:59] » Have a motion for approval. Is there a
[0:59] second?
[0:59] >> Second.
[1:00] » Second.
[1:00] >> Motion and second. All in favor say I.
[1:02] » Motion and second. All in favor say I.
[1:02] I.
[1:03] >> Minutes are approved. We'll start our
[1:05] » Minutes are approved. We'll start our
[1:05] discussion item. This is a concept plan
[1:07] for the Sunrise North um addition. Tony,
[1:11] you're going to take this?
[1:12] >> I am. Let me get it pulled up here.
[1:20] There we go.
[1:22] Yes. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair, commission
[1:25] members, uh we have a concept plan for
[1:28] what is uh at least right now called
[1:30] Sunrise North. Um Mr. Tim Giles
[1:33] submitted the the concept.
[1:35] Um the site is 3.48 acres. Um it's owned
[1:40] by P MKR Real Estate. Um and it's
[1:44] located directly north of the Sunrise
[1:46] Ponds development on the east side of
[1:48] town. um kind of at the juncture of
[1:51] Cambodia Avenue and 210th uh Street
[1:54] West.
[1:56] Uh the concept plan shows a total of 32
[1:58] town home units. Uh those would be four
[2:00] pods of eight units. Uh shows a gross
[2:03] density of 9.19 dwelling units per acre.
[2:06] Uh it does include the extension of 210
[2:09] Street West uh through the site. Uh, one
[2:12] thing to note is that right ofway 4,
[2:14] 210th Street was originally dedicated
[2:16] with the Sunrise Ponds Plat back in 2006
[2:20] and it runs that right of way runs
[2:22] parallel to the southern boundary of
[2:25] this site. So, in between the original
[2:28] development and this parcel, the road
[2:30] itself was never constructed being that
[2:32] it really didn't serve anything at that
[2:35] time, but we wanted to at least have the
[2:37] rightway preserved. Um with this uh
[2:41] concept plan, it shows the realignment
[2:43] of that road uh through the center part
[2:46] of this parcel. Um that realignment
[2:50] serves a couple purposes. Um it allows
[2:54] for um some more flexibility and usable
[2:57] space of the site. Um while also
[3:00] providing a buffer um to the res single
[3:04] family residents uh to the south as
[3:06] well. um so that those houses don't have
[3:10] double frontage on roads. Um the
[3:14] realignment would require vacation of a
[3:16] portion of the existing 210th Street
[3:18] right ofway. Um and it should also be
[3:21] noted that 210th Street would have to
[3:23] connect into Cambodia Avenue and Cameron
[3:25] Way um as well. So a portion of Cambodia
[3:29] Avenue right now is gravel um basically
[3:32] from the entrance of Sunrise Ponds
[3:34] north. uh that would have to be uh
[3:38] improved with Batuminous um if this were
[3:40] to move forward.
[3:42] Uh this just shows the concept plan. It
[3:45] shows uh 210th Street going through the
[3:47] center with town home units on either
[3:49] side of the road
[3:52] um with Cambodia again getting extended
[3:54] north and then uh extending into uh
[3:57] Cameron Way on the uh west side as well.
[4:03] Zoning. The property is currently zoned
[4:05] R2, which is our lowmedium density
[4:07] residential. Um, due to the town homes,
[4:11] uh, it should be reszoned to an R3,
[4:13] which is our medium density residential.
[4:16] Um, and also due to the, uh, density
[4:19] being, uh, nine units an acre. Uh, the
[4:23] R3 does allow for 12 to six dwelling
[4:25] units per acre.
[4:27] The comprehensive plan currently shows
[4:29] this as a lowmedium density residential.
[4:31] So it's in line with the current zoning.
[4:34] Um has a development time frame of 2030
[4:36] to 2040. And a lot of that just had to
[4:39] do with the develop how the site is.
[4:42] It's a very unique site. Um and it's a
[4:45] challenging site to develop. Um the
[4:48] property is located in the current Musa
[4:51] municipal urban service area. So um that
[4:54] does not have to be amended. Um but if
[4:57] the com if this process or this project
[4:59] were to move forward, there would need
[5:01] to be amendments um to change the land
[5:03] use designation to medium density
[5:04] residential and also to change the
[5:07] development time frame uh to 2020
[5:10] instead of keeping it in the 2030 2040
[5:12] time range.
[5:15] Uh the action requested tonight is just
[5:17] to discuss the concept plan. Um that's
[5:19] all it is concept and provide feedback
[5:22] to uh the property owners. Um Mr. Giles
[5:25] is not present. Apparently he is uh
[5:27] sick. Um but we do have the property
[5:29] owner here as well as their engineer. So
[5:32] >> all right. Thank you Tony. Uh Mr. Egan.
[5:36] » all right. Thank you Tony. Uh Mr. Egan.
[5:36] Uh Mr. Chris. I don't know why I didn't
[5:37] meet your last name.
[5:39] >> Chris Awig.
[5:40] » Chris Awig.
[5:40] >> Okay.
[5:42] » Okay.
[5:42] Do you have anything to add to Tony's
[5:43] report or anything you'd like to state
[5:45] to the commission? uh you know, Tony did
[5:48] a pretty good job on it. Um what we have
[5:51] is, you know, we're just trying to
[5:53] utilize this uh odd triangular piece and
[5:56] and uh working with staff. This is this
[5:59] is what we came up with. Um and we're
[6:02] eager to get going on it, but we
[6:04] definitely want your feedback before we
[6:06] do to
[6:07] >> make sure that
[6:08] » make sure that
[6:08] >> you're bringing it in. If you could stay
[6:09] » you're bringing it in. If you could stay
[6:09] available for questions. It's absolutely
[6:11] just a discussion item, so we're not
[6:13] quite as formal, but
[6:14] >> Sure.
[6:15] » Sure.
[6:15] >> you still have questions. Commissioner
[6:16] » you still have questions. Commissioner
[6:16] Berg.
[6:16] >> Sure.
[6:18] » Sure.
[6:18] >> Yeah. Thank you, Chair Rody. Uh, just a
[6:20] » Yeah. Thank you, Chair Rody. Uh, just a
[6:20] few questions more just for my
[6:23] understanding and anything. Tony, you
[6:25] mentioned Cameron Way. Is that the
[6:27] proposed name of the road that goes in
[6:29] in front of the the town homes there or
[6:31] which road is that referencing?
[6:35] >> Oh, it is. Okay.
[6:37] » Oh, it is. Okay.
[6:37] >> I think it's okay.
[6:41] » I think it's okay.
[6:41] >> Does it switch name?
[6:42] » Does it switch name?
[6:42] >> It switches north south.
[6:44] » It switches north south.
[6:44] >> Okay. Okay. That makes more.
[6:45] » Okay. Okay. That makes more.
[6:45] >> We have 212 as it comes in and then as
[6:47] » We have 212 as it comes in and then as
[6:47] it goes north it turns
[6:48] >> as it turns. Okay. Thank you for that
[6:50] » as it turns. Okay. Thank you for that
[6:50] clarification. Um so Tony I think you
[6:53] covered it. That portion of gravel would
[6:55] be matched with whatever road
[6:58] >> on Cambodia
[6:59] » on Cambodia
[6:59] >> on Cambodia there all the way up and
[7:01] » on Cambodia there all the way up and
[7:01] then as it turns east I assume it would
[7:03] turn back gravel.
[7:04] >> Correct.
[7:05] » Correct.
[7:05] >> Okay. Um and then the road that goes
[7:08] » Okay. Um and then the road that goes
[7:08] north as Cambodia continues would it
[7:11] terminate where that land terminates?
[7:14] where that development terminates on the
[7:15] north.
[7:15] >> Correct.
[7:16] » Correct.
[7:16] >> And also on the west s same question
[7:18] » And also on the west s same question
[7:18] that road would terminate at that pond.
[7:21] >> Correct.
[7:21] » Correct.
[7:21] >> Okay,
[7:22] » Okay,
[7:22] >> that helps. I just wanted to understand
[7:24] » that helps. I just wanted to understand
[7:24] what the plan was around the roads
[7:25] there.
[7:26] >> Um, second is around uh any sort of
[7:30] » Um, second is around uh any sort of
[7:30] thought or discussion around any sort of
[7:32] park. I I'm fairly familiar with that
[7:35] area. Is there any plan at this point to
[7:37] put any sort of park or uh public place
[7:41] for kids?
[7:42] >> No. Uh we did discuss this at our
[7:44] » No. Uh we did discuss this at our
[7:44] internal DRC meeting, development review
[7:47] committee meeting. Um Kelly, our park
[7:49] and recck director reviewed it. Um at
[7:52] this point, no, there would be any
[7:56] >> we wouldn't be looking to take park in
[7:58] » we wouldn't be looking to take park in
[7:58] this area. We take park dedication.
[8:00] Yeah. Um
[8:02] the
[8:03] park dedication
[8:05] um code got changed a couple years ago
[8:08] to where they're looking to do more
[8:11] >> larger communitywide parks. Um
[8:15] » larger communitywide parks. Um
[8:15] >> that are spaced out a little bit further
[8:18] » that are spaced out a little bit further
[8:18] just from a maintenance standpoint and
[8:19] things like that. That's why they did
[8:21] that.
[8:22] >> Um
[8:23] » Um
[8:23] >> and in this case, there's just not
[8:24] » and in this case, there's just not
[8:24] enough not enough land to do anything.
[8:28] >> Okay.
[8:29] » Okay.
[8:29] The the reason I'm specifically asking
[8:31] about park is because there's a really
[8:32] nice one to the north of this
[8:34] development, but it's on the other side
[8:35] of the water. Right.
[8:36] >> Right. So, that's why I was like, if
[8:38] » Right. So, that's why I was like, if
[8:38] you've got kids that are attracted to
[8:40] that park, um just making sure there was
[8:42] some thought there around
[8:44] >> Yeah. And there there is a small total
[8:49] in the Sunrise Ponds development south.
[8:52] >> Um just off the map here south.
[8:54] » Um just off the map here south.
[8:54] >> Okay.
[8:54] » Okay.
[8:54] >> But it is very small.
[8:56] » But it is very small.
[8:56] >> Okay. Um, and then it appears at least
[9:00] » Okay. Um, and then it appears at least
[9:00] from this drawing to the the west and
[9:02] then the south there's some out lots,
[9:04] some sort of triangular outlots here. Do
[9:06] we have a plan for what would be done
[9:08] with those? Is there any thought around
[9:10] if it's built as sort of mapped out
[9:13] here, what what would be done in those?
[9:14] >> I I don't believe potentially
[9:18] » I I don't believe potentially
[9:18] potentially storm water maybe if
[9:20] necessary.
[9:21] >> Okay. Um, I know there's been talk about
[9:24] » Okay. Um, I know there's been talk about
[9:24] expanding the existing ponds to
[9:26] accommodate the storm water
[9:27] requirements.
[9:28] >> Okay.
[9:29] » Okay.
[9:29] >> Um, but really it's just the uniqueness
[9:33] » Um, but really it's just the uniqueness
[9:33] of the the parcel itself. Um,
[9:37] >> it really doesn't lay out to, you know,
[9:39] » it really doesn't lay out to, you know,
[9:39] fill the entire piece.
[9:41] >> Yeah. And honestly, that's exactly what
[9:43] » Yeah. And honestly, that's exactly what
[9:43] I was asking, right? It you guys
[9:45] referencing, right? It's a unique piece
[9:47] of land. So, trying to understand what
[9:49] the plan was. Okay.
[9:50] >> Mr. Chris, is that accurate? The land to
[9:52] » Mr. Chris, is that accurate? The land to
[9:52] the west that there's a parcel, I'll
[9:55] call it. Tony, you can point to him or
[9:57] maybe he knows we're talking about.
[9:58] >> Tell me if I'm wrong, Tony, that I
[10:00] » Tell me if I'm wrong, Tony, that I
[10:00] believe the city owns some parcels right
[10:02] here.
[10:02] >> City owns parcels through here. Um, the
[10:05] » City owns parcels through here. Um, the
[10:05] city owns all of this. It was done as
[10:06] part of the Prairie Waterway back in the
[10:09] '9s.
[10:10] >> I was looking at the stuff to the right,
[10:13] » I was looking at the stuff to the right,
[10:13] I'll call it west, southwest.
[10:14] >> Yeah, that little one right here. Yeah.
[10:16] » Yeah, that little one right here. Yeah.
[10:16] >> Yeah. Is that accurate?
[10:18] » Yeah. Is that accurate?
[10:18] It would likely just be open space,
[10:21] >> right?
[10:21] » right?
[10:21] >> Nonbuildable there.
[10:23] » Nonbuildable there.
[10:23] >> Yeah.
[10:23] » Yeah.
[10:23] >> Okay.
[10:24] » Okay.
[10:24] >> Yeah, it gets to be too small to do
[10:26] » Yeah, it gets to be too small to do
[10:26] anything.
[10:26] >> All right. Okay. Okay.
[10:28] » All right. Okay. Okay.
[10:28] >> Gary. No, that's good for me.
[10:30] » Gary. No, that's good for me.
[10:30] Commissioner Rutherford.
[10:34] » Yeah. I got just a couple of questions,
[10:36] Tony. Was there ever any No, I assume
[10:39] the the rightway for the existing
[10:41] rightway is what runs right along those
[10:43] backyards on the north side of the
[10:45] current development. Yeah, that area.
[10:47] >> Yep. It's all that
[10:48] » Yep. It's all that
[10:48] >> and that lines up with 210th Street to
[10:51] » and that lines up with 210th Street to
[10:51] the east. Was there ever any plan for
[10:53] that to connect all the way to Highway
[10:55] 3?
[10:56] >> That was the intent. We actually have
[10:58] » That was the intent. We actually have
[10:58] easement through Mr. Regan's old bus
[11:00] garage property that's just to the west
[11:02] of
[11:03] >> Y
[11:04] » Y
[11:04] >> um to eventually make that connection.
[11:07] » um to eventually make that connection.
[11:07] >> Sure. And does this re would this
[11:11] » Sure. And does this re would this
[11:11] realignment have any negative impact on
[11:13] that future plan?
[11:15] >> No.
[11:16] » No.
[11:16] >> Okay. So engineering has taken a look at
[11:18] » Okay. So engineering has taken a look at
[11:18] this and they're okay with the
[11:19] engineering proposed realignment look at
[11:21] it. Um they've actually looked at
[11:24] designating as MSA route actually.
[11:26] >> Okay.
[11:28] » Okay.
[11:28] >> So
[11:29] » So
[11:29] >> uh and then one final question on the
[11:31] » uh and then one final question on the
[11:31] existing rightway if that's vacated who
[11:34] takes ownership of that then what what
[11:36] happens?
[11:36] >> Uh 50% goes to the north 50% goes to the
[11:40] » Uh 50% goes to the north 50% goes to the
[11:40] the south property line or property
[11:43] owners.
[11:43] >> Okay. All right. That's all I have for
[11:45] » Okay. All right. That's all I have for
[11:45] now. Thank you,
[11:46] >> Commissioner Lemire.
[11:49] » Commissioner Lemire.
[11:49] >> I took a stroll over by this property
[11:52] » I took a stroll over by this property
[11:52] here a little bit this evening and when
[11:54] I did I just the one thing that popped
[11:57] out at me was the um electrical lines.
[12:01] >> And so what sort of uh items would be a
[12:06] » And so what sort of uh items would be a
[12:06] hindrance for this conceptual plan in
[12:08] relation to those electrical lines and
[12:11] and
[12:11] >> right
[12:12] » right
[12:12] >> what goes through there at this point in
[12:14] » what goes through there at this point in
[12:14] time. Actually, that's one of the other
[12:16] reasons why the realignment of 212 went
[12:18] through because they would have had to
[12:21] um either relocate those lines or
[12:26] bury them or do some some other thing
[12:30] with those lines. And that is a very
[12:33] costly thing to do with those lines. Um
[12:35] to the point where, you know, even
[12:38] making this development work as is
[12:40] tight. Um, but then you throw that on to
[12:43] it, it just adds to that. Um,
[12:47] >> but it's still doable with where those
[12:49] » but it's still doable with where those
[12:49] lines are at at this point in time and
[12:51] what the development is looking like at
[12:52] this point.
[12:53] >> Right.
[12:56] » So, [snorts] is there actually going to
[12:57] be a road that can go through 210 then
[13:00] >> or to like from Highway 3 to 210
[13:05] » or to like from Highway 3 to 210
[13:05] or like will 210 go all the way to
[13:07] Highway 3 because of those lines? Not
[13:10] because of those lines, but just because
[13:12] of need for transportation connectivity
[13:14] through the area.
[13:15] >> But those lines won't be a hindrance for
[13:17] » But those lines won't be a hindrance for
[13:17] that road to be developed later on down
[13:20] the line.
[13:20] >> Shouldn't.
[13:21] » Shouldn't.
[13:21] >> Sorry. Okay.
[13:23] » Sorry. Okay.
[13:23] >> Um, is there a need to expand that 210th
[13:27] » Um, is there a need to expand that 210th
[13:27] all the way west to Highway 3 or can it
[13:30] come up Cambodia and have the entrances
[13:33] and exits through the current
[13:35] development and Cambodia?
[13:38] >> [clears throat]
[13:38] » [clears throat]
[13:38] >> Well, you don't need the connection to
[13:40] » Well, you don't need the connection to
[13:40] Highway 3 to develop this okay
[13:43] >> specific parcel. Um I think long term
[13:47] » specific parcel. Um I think long term
[13:47] the plan is to have it connect in. Um
[13:50] but yeah, you we're not saying that you
[13:53] need to have that connection with this
[13:56] specific development.
[13:58] >> Okay. So with the entrance um through
[14:01] » Okay. So with the entrance um through
[14:01] Cambodia,
[14:02] that would be sufficient enough at this
[14:04] point in time for the development to
[14:06] happen. Okay, that should be it for me.
[14:09] >> Yeah, there there would be multiple ways
[14:10] » Yeah, there there would be multiple ways
[14:10] in and out. You could have Cambodia and
[14:12] then you also have Cameron way to get in
[14:14] and out. So, you have your multiple
[14:16] accesses.
[14:18] >> All right, thank you Nate. And I'll ask
[14:20] » All right, thank you Nate. And I'll ask
[14:20] a few questions then I'll touch a little
[14:22] more on what Nate was getting at but and
[14:24] what others did too. But um and this
[14:26] might be a question for Chris or Pat or
[14:28] I would ask Tim this if he were here.
[14:30] Now Tony laid out several road projects
[14:33] that kind of he's right in your
[14:34] checkbook for you.
[14:37] Are is you as the property owner, Pat or
[14:40] Chris as the engineer,
[14:43] is is that going to fly with this
[14:45] project?
[14:46] >> I mean, there's some significant road to
[14:48] » I mean, there's some significant road to
[14:48] build here.
[14:49] >> Yeah. So, I assume you're talking about
[14:51] » Yeah. So, I assume you're talking about
[14:51] paving uh Cambodia.
[14:53] >> Paving Cambodia. And also the, you know,
[14:56] » Paving Cambodia. And also the, you know,
[14:56] the other stuff. Yeah.
[14:58] >> I mean, that's that's some significant
[14:59] » I mean, that's that's some significant
[14:59] roads.
[15:00] >> There's more.
[15:01] » There's more.
[15:01] >> Two10.
[15:02] » Two10.
[15:02] >> Two10th. Yeah.
[15:03] » Two10th. Yeah.
[15:03] >> Among others. I mean it's it's you got a
[15:06] » Among others. I mean it's it's you got a
[15:06] number of town houses here but yeah
[15:08] >> I mean you got some road construction to
[15:09] » I mean you got some road construction to
[15:09] do. Are you okay with that?
[15:11] >> Are you okay with this question?
[15:13] » Are you okay with this question?
[15:13] [clears throat and laughter]
[15:14] >> Then I'll get into the reason why in a
[15:16] » Then I'll get into the reason why in a
[15:16] little bit and explain to the
[15:18] commission.
[15:18] >> It's a good question. I have the same
[15:20] » It's a good question. I have the same
[15:20] question.
[15:20] >> Okay.
[15:21] » Okay.
[15:21] >> Uh and I wanted to react if I could. Um
[15:25] » Uh and I wanted to react if I could. Um
[15:26] the road termination points of the new
[15:28] 210th if you could call it that. this
[15:30] relocated 210th and the and Cambodia.
[15:35] Uh, as as I stand here now, I think
[15:39] we're going to want to try to minimize
[15:40] the length of those roads on I don't
[15:44] know how I point, but uh
[15:47] >> on the on the west end here, I don't
[15:51] » on the on the west end here, I don't
[15:51] envision that we would want to put a
[15:53] road next to the neighbor's sideyard. I
[15:56] think we'd want to connect directly to
[15:58] Cambodia and just make it kind of
[16:01] >> Cameron way. I'm sorry.
[16:02] » Cameron way. I'm sorry.
[16:02] >> So maybe end it like right here.
[16:04] » So maybe end it like right here.
[16:04] >> Yeah. And just just connect here. Those
[16:06] » Yeah. And just just connect here. Those
[16:06] those power poles are they're a main
[16:10] line from Great River Energy. We've been
[16:12] involved in this area in with wearing
[16:16] multiple hats for 25 30 years now. And
[16:20] the same question I have is what Mr.
[16:24] Rod's asking. What would be the the
[16:27] final condition on the east end at
[16:29] Cambodia and the new 210th? In in my
[16:33] view, we would just connect them and
[16:36] maybe extend long enough to do a
[16:38] turnaround. I don't think we would be
[16:41] interested in building a culde-sac or
[16:43] anything like that because emergency
[16:45] vehicles would be able to connect and
[16:47] make a loop through the the new 210th
[16:52] Street. the history here. Uh,
[16:56] I bought the property to the east of to
[16:59] the west of here where the bus terminal
[17:01] is was and where it was the Dakota
[17:06] electric pole yard prior to that and
[17:09] there was a a railroad right away that
[17:12] went through there and then I
[17:16] um needed more land and there was a very
[17:19] large multi- uh single family
[17:22] development that was going to take up
[17:25] a few hundred acres and a few hundred
[17:27] homes to the east of us that was being
[17:31] proposed by one of these big developers
[17:33] during the the boom in the '9s. And so
[17:36] the city and I made an agreement to
[17:40] allow for an easement to create that
[17:42] 210th Street connection from from
[17:45] Highway 3 all the way to the east end of
[17:48] my property that the bus terminal was
[17:50] involved in. And the question about
[17:55] 210th Street uh was always there for me
[17:59] in the future because these this big
[18:01] development that never occurred was the
[18:04] driving force. So in that easement
[18:06] agreement that we have with the city, I
[18:10] traded the easement and the city gave me
[18:13] the lot over in the in the uh new
[18:15] Farmington Industrial Park that is now
[18:19] uh I developed it. I moved a building
[18:21] over there. We had buses parked there
[18:23] and I've since sold it to another user.
[18:26] Um
[18:28] that's on
[18:30] 208th Street I think.
[18:32] >> Yeah.
[18:33] » Yeah.
[18:33] >> And uh so we were able to expand our
[18:37] » And uh so we were able to expand our
[18:37] operation. The city got the easement.
[18:40] Part of that agreement provides that uh
[18:45] this property I retained
[18:48] does not would not be subject to any
[18:51] assessment if a road is ever built. And
[18:53] it's such a long stretch. I think it's
[18:57] would that be 1,800 ft? I think it's a
[19:01] from here to here. It's it's a long long
[19:05] road and uh would never be economically
[19:08] feasible for our property because of
[19:10] this triangular shape that was formed by
[19:13] the railroad originally. The same thing
[19:16] applies on this
[19:19] small parcel that we got we were
[19:22] involved in the Sunrise Ponds
[19:25] development when that was built and then
[19:27] Mr. Giles and then it then it got hit
[19:30] hard in the downturn. We foreclosed on
[19:32] the property. That's I'm wearing my
[19:35] banker's hat now when I'm talking about
[19:36] that. And those were tough times and I
[19:42] along with the bank and Mr. Giles came
[19:44] in and and were able to replplat this
[19:47] part of Sunrise, the the part of the
[19:50] Sunrise Ponds that's existing and but we
[19:53] couldn't come to an agreement on what to
[19:55] do with uh with this parcel we're
[19:57] looking at today and because of the
[20:00] 210th Street
[20:03] uh condition was just too much to invest
[20:07] on such small lots if they were going to
[20:09] be single family. So the the ability to
[20:12] relocate
[20:13] 210th Street and it's a 50- foot Yep.
[20:16] >> right away makes this at at all
[20:20] » right away makes this at at all
[20:20] financially feasible. And the fact that
[20:22] we can get 32 units in here, there are a
[20:27] lot of other similar products in the
[20:30] market nearby that we've tried to
[20:32] emulate here that have been built by
[20:34] multiple builders and developers. So,
[20:37] and we've got the waterfront which we
[20:39] think is going to be an attraction. So,
[20:42] uh,
[20:44] long answer to your short but pertinent
[20:47] question about does this work
[20:49] financially. We think it does under this
[20:51] relocated road design. There
[20:54] [clears throat] was an earlier question
[20:55] if I could respond to the idea of the
[20:59] vacation of the existing 210 street
[21:02] rightway. I think that's an open
[21:05] question. There is you can see a trail
[21:08] there was the base of that road was
[21:10] installed because there are some
[21:11] utilities in that line also. So I think
[21:16] it's worthy of further study and
[21:18] consideration. The basically the the
[21:21] base for the bike trail if you wanted
[21:23] one is there and who owns it. The city
[21:27] could take an easement or take ownership
[21:29] of a
[21:31] >> or you could just leave it as right of
[21:32] » or you could just leave it as right of
[21:32] way. We could leave leave it as right of
[21:35] >> An option.
[21:35] » An option.
[21:35] >> You can see in the photos the neighbors
[21:37] » You can see in the photos the neighbors
[21:37] are using part of the the the 210 street
[21:42] right ofway which is natural. There's
[21:43] nothing else going on back there and it
[21:45] hasn't bothered us. It's not our right
[21:47] away.
[21:49] Um but there's there is enough extra
[21:52] space between the right of way and these
[21:55] little pockets for for drainage or if we
[21:58] wanted to plant a grove of trees and
[22:00] that kind of thing. I I think it would
[22:02] fit in well. And I was going to refer to
[22:04] the little tot lot that was part of that
[22:07] Sunrise Ponds. It's just off of the map
[22:09] on the on the corner.
[22:11] >> Okay.
[22:12] » Okay.
[22:12] >> Um
[22:14] » Um
[22:14] so we'd have to be thoughtful about this
[22:17] the final road design and if we start
[22:20] stretching out the road, it could end up
[22:22] being a a problem for the for the uh
[22:27] the development and the power poles. We
[22:30] did investigate the cost to relocate or
[22:34] bury those. They're are they 150 ft
[22:37] high? They're they're
[22:40] >> transmission. They're It wouldn't be
[22:42] » transmission. They're It wouldn't be
[22:42] >> many many many many hundreds of thousand
[22:44] » many many many many hundreds of thousand
[22:44] dollars.
[22:44] >> It wouldn't be cheap for you. So,
[22:45] » It wouldn't be cheap for you. So,
[22:46] >> so it wasn't
[22:47] » so it wasn't
[22:47] >> okay
[22:47] » okay
[22:47] >> feasible.
[22:49] » feasible.
[22:49] >> Well, thanks Pat.
[22:49] » Well, thanks Pat.
[22:50] >> Any other questions? No, I just want to
[22:51] » Any other questions? No, I just want to
[22:51] follow up then to Nate and uh what's
[22:53] going on and and as we go through our
[22:55] comp plan, we'll do a transportation
[22:57] section and things like this row and
[22:59] stuff will be shown and and discussed
[23:01] further and why and then what I wanted
[23:05] you alluded to it and and why I brought
[23:07] it up and wanted to ask cost first is
[23:12] is we don't want to leave roads to be
[23:14] built by our taxpayers. you know, if
[23:16] there's a development that's going on,
[23:17] and you guys understand as you've been
[23:18] in this business, um, one time in my
[23:21] career, years and years ago, 30 some
[23:24] years ago, we didn't make a developer do
[23:26] it, and then the next one came back, and
[23:28] then he he or she or they had to in
[23:32] essence pay for it or find means to pay
[23:36] for it. and and so we do in this
[23:38] community and others too, I'm sure Chris
[23:40] you've been working with them kind of
[23:41] require as a development goes they they
[23:43] pay for the roads. Um and that's why I
[23:47] thought it was pertinent. I just want to
[23:48] let the other commissioners know why why
[23:50] we're doing it rather than letting our
[23:51] taxpayers foot the bill for, you know,
[23:54] the road that's going in front of
[23:55] somebody else's. Yeah. When it comes to
[23:56] maintenance in the future, everybody
[23:58] contributes to road maintenance, but new
[24:00] construction is that of the developer.
[24:03] So, I just had a few others. Um
[24:06] Tony um you know this you listed all the
[24:08] different things comp plan um reszone uh
[24:12] land use time frame as we're working
[24:15] through a comp plan. Can this be tied
[24:17] into it or are you thinking this is
[24:19] something that um is going to be an
[24:22] exception too or what what are your
[24:23] thoughts on that?
[24:24] >> It certainly could be tied into that um
[24:27] » It certainly could be tied into that um
[24:28] you know obviously the comprehensive
[24:29] plan um takes a a number of years. Uh
[24:34] we're looking probably a year and a half
[24:35] out um for that to be approved. Um you
[24:40] know, I know we've had this conversation
[24:42] on a number of different parcels.
[24:45] >> Um
[24:48] it could be tied to that or, you know,
[24:51] we certainly could um or they could
[24:54] apply and at that point we'd have to
[24:57] make a decision one way or the other.
[24:58] >> Yeah.
[24:59] » Yeah.
[24:59] >> Um at that time.
[25:00] » Um at that time.
[25:00] >> Sure. and and you know, you're going to
[25:02] » Sure. and and you know, you're going to
[25:02] have a lot of discussions. Pat brought
[25:03] up some great questions that I think
[25:05] still need to be talked discussed with
[25:08] staff. Um things that the commission
[25:11] doesn't decide. Uh Pat, um things that
[25:15] you know, the staff will bring a
[25:16] recommendation. Most likely a lot of
[25:18] that would be finalized with our city
[25:20] council.
[25:21] >> Sure.
[25:21] » Sure.
[25:21] >> But you know, we certainly uh will see
[25:23] » But you know, we certainly uh will see
[25:23] it in the future if it does come. And
[25:25] the last thing I wanted to mention and
[25:27] and I say this as much for the
[25:29] commission but is developers certainly
[25:31] know this but when we have two different
[25:33] zoning districts
[25:35] we always like a buffer. Um you know 50
[25:38] foot road right away with the road in
[25:40] there to me I I I think would suffice as
[25:44] a buffer. Um I think that Tony you
[25:46] alluded to that in there. Maybe you
[25:47] didn't say it, but I think that's why
[25:49] you said there's a road in between,
[25:50] >> right?
[25:51] » right?
[25:51] >> Single family and the multi
[25:53] » Single family and the multi
[25:53] >> and the actual right ofway for 210
[25:55] » and the actual right ofway for 210
[25:55] that's in between. Um I believe that's
[25:57] either an 80 I think it's an 80 foot 80.
[26:00] Okay.
[26:00] >> So it's it's it's a 70
[26:04] » So it's it's it's a 70
[26:04] >> 70. Okay. It's either 70 or 80.
[26:06] » 70. Okay. It's either 70 or 80.
[26:06] >> All right.
[26:07] » All right.
[26:07] >> So it's a substantial right.
[26:08] » So it's a substantial right.
[26:08] >> Yeah. And but I just want to make known
[26:10] » Yeah. And but I just want to make known
[26:10] then for the the newer commissioners
[26:13] that you know we always do look for some
[26:14] kind of buffer. If this was backyard to
[26:17] backyard, we'd say, "Hey, let's think
[26:18] about this a little more." But when you
[26:20] got, you know, 70 80 feet in there, are
[26:23] you guys okay with that as a buffer
[26:25] transit? I I call it a buffer some
[26:27] transition maybe a better term. But uh
[26:30] so that you know you don't because you
[26:33] know I don't know these people that
[26:34] bought these lots you know when they did
[26:36] at their backyard what you know they
[26:37] were backing up to what they assumed
[26:39] would be single family not and I don't
[26:42] know if town houses are are any
[26:44] different but you know that's just what
[26:46] their assumption was when they bought
[26:47] the lot with the house. So
[26:50] >> that's why I mentioned that I really
[26:52] » that's why I mentioned that I really
[26:52] don't have an issue you know I think
[26:53] it's a fine use for the piece of
[26:55] property. Um I think you can make it
[26:57] work if you can do it financially.
[26:59] That's why I brought that up. But that's
[27:01] not my job. It's your job to to, you
[27:04] know, crunch the numbers on that and
[27:05] work with staff. Work with Tony. He'll
[27:07] direct you to the right people in and
[27:09] the city to to talk with and deal with.
[27:13] So, I actually I kind of like the
[27:15] concept. It's it's a useful piece of
[27:17] land. Somebody mentioned the frontage of
[27:19] the water. I think I think that would if
[27:21] you sight them right, I think that'd be
[27:23] a great amenity for some of those uh you
[27:27] know, the back ones. I really do.
[27:29] >> We think so, too.
[27:31] » We think so, too.
[27:31] >> Yeah. Yeah. I think that it would be
[27:33] » Yeah. Yeah. I think that it would be
[27:33] nice lots there. So,
[27:36] >> I don't have anything else. Tony, how
[27:37] » I don't have anything else. Tony, how
[27:37] about you?
[27:38] >> No. Um,
[27:39] » No. Um,
[27:39] >> okay.
[27:40] » okay.
[27:40] >> At this time,
[27:41] » At this time,
[27:41] >> I'd like to add that it's our intention
[27:43] » I'd like to add that it's our intention
[27:43] if we have to go through the cup
[27:44] amendment, we would make that
[27:46] application as soon as we feel confident
[27:49] we can go ahead and a year and a half
[27:51] wouldn't wouldn't work.
[27:53] >> That's why I asked that's why I asked
[27:55] » That's why I asked that's why I asked
[27:55] Tony that same question. I I didn't know
[27:57] your timing, but now you've told us your
[27:58] timing.
[27:59] >> Yeah, we if we have to put in the that
[28:01] » Yeah, we if we have to put in the that
[28:01] application to get that amendment to
[28:04] this land, we do have plans we're
[28:06] working on for the bus terminal property
[28:09] also.
[28:09] >> Okay.
[28:10] » Okay.
[28:10] >> That's impacted by the the big uh um by
[28:14] » That's impacted by the the big uh um by
[28:14] the same road right away and the staff's
[28:16] been flexible and open to some ideas on
[28:19] the width of that easement and that kind
[28:21] of thing. We're talking about garage
[28:22] condos probably because of the the big
[28:25] uh warehouse to the south of us and uh
[28:29] we don't think it's going to work very
[28:31] well for residential because of that.
[28:33] That's a so it's but it is a nice
[28:36] transition. We've got the the holiday to
[28:38] the north.
[28:39] >> You know, Pat, if you were talking 160
[28:41] » You know, Pat, if you were talking 160
[28:41] acres and I've been pretty vocal on
[28:42] this, I'd say, you know, then then I'd
[28:46] ask you, can you wait? But you're not
[28:48] talking 160 acres. you're talking the
[28:50] smaller concept plan here.
[28:52] >> Um,
[28:53] » Um,
[28:53] I think it's doable. I think I don't
[28:55] know what other you'd use the land for.
[28:56] I mean, if you came in with a different
[28:58] use, maybe we'd have a different
[29:00] question, but this this would work here.
[29:03] I believe I don't, you know, I leave it
[29:05] up to the other commissioners if they
[29:06] don't agree. But, um, I think our city
[29:09] council, you know, would think it's a
[29:11] nice addition to the area, but that's up
[29:14] to them, not to me. I think it makes
[29:16] good use of the the regional pond that
[29:18] was built there since we owned the
[29:20] property that we can turn it into an
[29:23] amenity. These aren't these are going to
[29:24] be houses that'll that'll fit a broad
[29:27] economic market. They'll be available to
[29:30] a lot of people. I don't want to use
[29:32] >> certain words that means certain things
[29:34] » certain words that means certain things
[29:34] to other people, but they're these are
[29:36] going to be houses that a lot of people
[29:38] should be able to be interested in and
[29:40] it be affordable and and uh but
[29:44] and again, we did look at other projects
[29:47] in
[29:49] other other communities nearby and and
[29:51] tried to model those. They look like
[29:53] they're they're moving pretty well and
[29:55] uh so
[29:57] we want to
[29:59] get it done. We've had it long enough.
[30:00] We've got to make make something happen
[30:03] here. So, we appreciate it.
[30:05] >> We got everybody involved. Did you have
[30:06] » We got everybody involved. Did you have
[30:06] anything to add?
[30:08] >> Nothing. All right. All right. Anything
[30:10] » Nothing. All right. All right. Anything
[30:10] else from staff? You got Do you guys
[30:12] have enough Pat? Chris, you have enough
[30:14] to go on from here? Deal with Tony. Not
[30:16] [laughter]
[30:18] >> this has been helpful. Thank you.
[30:19] » this has been helpful. Thank you.
[30:19] >> All right. Yeah, I got a lot of good
[30:20] » All right. Yeah, I got a lot of good
[30:20] questions, I thought, from the
[30:21] commission. They they did a nice job.
[30:24] >> All right, Tony. Anything else,
[30:26] » All right, Tony. Anything else,
[30:26] >> uh, not on this? No.
[30:28] » uh, not on this? No.
[30:28] >> All right. Do you have anything else?
[30:29] » All right. Do you have anything else?
[30:29] >> I was just going to mention our uh
[30:31] » I was just going to mention our uh
[30:31] meeting in uh September will also be uh
[30:35] on Wednesday as well. Um just so you're
[30:40] aware um due to uh the holiday and then
[30:44] the city council meeting being pushed to
[30:46] the Tuesday where we would typically
[30:48] have our meeting. So just wanted to make
[30:51] you aware of that again. So
[30:52] >> perfect. And I'll just remind them our
[30:54] » perfect. And I'll just remind them our
[30:54] next regular meeting is September 9th
[30:55] and it is a Wednesday and Tony will do a
[30:58] nice job of emailing us and reminding us
[31:00] so nobody absolutely Wednesday night. If
[31:02] you are you can sit through the council
[31:03] meeting [laughter] with that I'd look
[31:05] for a motion to adjurnn.
[31:07] >> A motion.
[31:08] » A motion.
[31:08] >> We have a motion. Is there a second?
[31:09] » We have a motion. Is there a second?
[31:09] >> Second.
[31:09] » Second.
[31:10] >> Motion a second. All in favor say I.
[31:12] » Motion a second. All in favor say I.
[31:12] >> I.
[31:12] » I.
[31:12] >> We're officially adjourned. Thank you
[31:13] » We're officially adjourned. Thank you
[31:13] everybody.
[31:24] » [music]