[0:00] Okay, the hour of 6:30 having arrived,
[0:03] I'd like to call the regular plan
[0:05] commission meeting for the city of
[0:07] Columbus to order.
[0:09] Mike, will you call the roll?
[0:14] » Binkler
[0:15] >> Here.
[0:16] » Here.
[0:16] >> Myers
[0:17] » Myers
[0:17] >> Here.
[0:21] » That was weird.
[0:23] Albright
[0:24] >> Present.
[0:26] » Present.
[0:26] >> Uriah
[0:26] » Uriah
[0:26] >> Present.
[0:28] » Present.
[0:28] >> Juszkiewicz
[0:28] » Juszkiewicz
[0:28] >> Here.
[0:29] » Here.
[0:29] >> Stuke
[0:29] » Stuke
[0:29] >> Here.
[0:31] » Here.
[0:31] >> We have a quorum. Great.
[0:34] » We have a quorum. Great.
[0:34] >> [sighs and gasps]
[0:35] » [sighs and gasps]
[0:35] >> Okay, this meeting was properly posted
[0:38] » Okay, this meeting was properly posted
[0:38] in accordance with state law.
[0:42] Uh there's a agenda in your packets.
[0:44] I'll entertain a motion to approve or
[0:46] amend.
[0:47] >> I'll move to approve.
[0:49] » I'll move to approve.
[0:49] >> Second.
[0:50] » Second.
[0:50] >> I have a motion and a second. All those
[0:52] » I have a motion and a second. All those
[0:52] in favor signify by I.
[0:54] >> I.
[0:54] » I.
[0:54] >> I.
[0:55] » I.
[0:55] >> Opposed?
[0:56] » Opposed?
[0:56] We have our agenda.
[0:58] Uh minutes are also in your packet from
[1:00] last month.
[1:02] I'll entertain a motion to approve or
[1:04] amend.
[1:18] » I'd make a motion to approve.
[1:24] » I'll second that.
[1:27] >> I have a motion and a second. Any
[1:28] » I have a motion and a second. Any
[1:28] discussion?
[1:30] All those in favor signify by I.
[1:32] >> I.
[1:32] » I.
[1:32] >> I.
[1:34] » I.
[1:34] >> Opposed?
[1:36] » Opposed?
[1:36] Minutes are approved.
[1:39] Okay, moving on to our first item of
[1:42] regular business. We have a public
[1:44] hearing regarding the amendment of
[1:46] parking spaces requirements
[1:49] section 114-26.
[1:53] All right, I'll open the public hearing
[1:55] and ask if any member of the public
[1:56] wishes to speak on this item.
[2:02] For a second time, does any member of
[2:03] the public wish to speak on this item?
[2:07] Mike, was anything sent to you?
[2:08] >> No.
[2:09] » No.
[2:09] >> Okay.
[2:09] » Okay.
[2:09] >> Nothing.
[2:10] » Nothing.
[2:10] >> Receive no comments.
[2:12] » Receive no comments.
[2:12] >> Okay.
[2:13] » Okay.
[2:13] >> And for a final time, any member of the
[2:15] » And for a final time, any member of the
[2:16] public wishing to speak on this item.
[2:21] Hearing none, I'll close the public
[2:23] hearing and move on to item three for
[2:27] the commission to consider and take
[2:28] action regarding the repeal and
[2:29] replacement of municipal code 114-126
[2:33] regarding required parking spaces.
[2:37] >> Um this is
[2:38] » Um this is
[2:38] what we discussed
[2:42] uh
[2:42] pre- previously earlier in the year. The
[2:45] reason we're doing this separate is to
[2:48] support uh WEDA programs for residential
[2:53] housing in in downtown.
[2:56] Um that application period is
[2:58] in October and beginning in November.
[3:01] So, if we don't get this adopted now,
[3:05] then then people aren't eligible for low
[3:07] interest loans for downtown uh project
[3:10] redevelopment projects.
[3:12] Um so, this is one of the items on
[3:15] today's agenda that helps to move us
[3:18] allow
[3:19] people to access those low interest loan
[3:21] funds.
[3:23] So,
[3:23] um this is essentially what we discussed
[3:26] previously. Um
[3:30] uh
[3:31] This is just the parking space amendment
[3:35] to the section of the parking code that
[3:38] addresses number of parking spaces
[3:40] required. It doesn't address other
[3:43] parking stuff. So,
[3:44] um we're trying to keep it simple and
[3:46] still
[3:47] meet the requirements for uh WEDA
[3:49] financing. So,
[3:51] um
[3:53] Any questions?
[4:00] » Questions? You know, we've we've talked
[4:02] about this at length, so.
[4:05] Um, all right. Well, for that reason,
[4:09] if there's no comment or discussion,
[4:12] I'll entertain a motion to
[4:15] uh, recommend to council.
[4:18] >> I'll move to recommend to council for
[4:20] » I'll move to recommend to council for
[4:20] approval.
[4:21] >> I'll second.
[4:22] » I'll second.
[4:23] >> Have a motion and a second.
[4:25] » Have a motion and a second.
[4:25] All those in favor signify by saying I.
[4:28] >> I.
[4:28] » I.
[4:28] >> I.
[4:29] » I.
[4:29] >> Opposed?
[4:31] » Opposed?
[4:31] Great.
[4:32] Please forward to council.
[4:38] All right.
[4:41] More organization is necessary. Hang on
[4:43] just a moment.
[4:46] Okay.
[4:48] Uh, moving on to item four, consider and
[4:51] take action regarding the condominium
[4:52] plat for Lamps Landing LLC located on
[4:55] Tower Drive.
[4:57] All right. Mike, you want to introduce
[4:59] your staff report here?
[5:02] >> Yeah, um,
[5:03] » Yeah, um,
[5:03] this is uh,
[5:05] the
[5:07] eight twin home units, four buildings,
[5:09] eight dwelling units.
[5:11] Um, previously you approved the CSM
[5:15] um,
[5:17] with conditions, um, and we just
[5:21] uh, took
[5:23] that CSM, the uh, changes have been
[5:26] received recently, so we're checking
[5:27] those over.
[5:28] Um,
[5:30] we also have items in the review letter
[5:32] for the condo plat from our city
[5:34] engineer. Um, about a half hour ago we
[5:37] received an updated condo plat
[5:41] um, addressing many of those things.
[5:44] Uh, we haven't had time to look those
[5:46] over, but uh they are moving forward
[5:49] with trying to get that um done. Um
[5:53] So, essentially, there's uh um you can
[5:56] kind of see also see the future layout
[6:00] of the apartment um
[6:01] to the north, but that's not the issue
[6:04] today. It's the twin homes um
[6:08] and the platting of that, and uh our
[6:11] city engineer uh provided comments
[6:14] um
[6:15] that need to be addressed, and uh
[6:18] uh
[6:21] You know, you can see it includes
[6:23] stormwater
[6:24] um
[6:26] Uh the development agreement, you know,
[6:28] limited access to Tower Drive to two
[6:30] driveways because of traffic concerns on
[6:33] Tower, so this would be one of the two
[6:36] driveways.
[6:42] Um
[6:44] Any questions?
[6:46] >> How are they owned?
[6:49] » How are they owned?
[6:49] >> Uh twin homes uh through a condominium
[6:51] » Uh twin homes uh through a condominium
[6:52] association.
[6:53] >> Okay.
[6:56] » They considered town homes?
[6:59] Because there are two, or no?
[7:01] >> They're considered twin homes.
[7:03] » They're considered twin homes.
[7:03] >> Okay.
[7:06] » Like a duplex, except not,
[7:08] probably.
[7:09] >> No, I I don't recall us ever calling
[7:11] » No, I I don't recall us ever calling
[7:11] them
[7:12] >> I don't
[7:13] » I don't
[7:13] That's all.
[7:20] » Is the legal arrangement that defines
[7:23] what the common areas are and the
[7:25] private areas are? Is that all part of
[7:28] the condo plat that we're approving
[7:29] tonight, or is that a separate
[7:30] instrument?
[7:33] » Um
[7:35] That would That would be separate
[7:37] instrument.
[7:39] Um
[7:42] I'd have to pull up the review letter. I
[7:43] thought maybe that was addressed in
[7:45] there.
[7:47] Um
[7:49] But yeah
[7:51] um
[7:54] that would be
[7:55] addressed in there um
[8:00] Let me just pull up the review letter
[8:01] and see what else.
[8:04] » Cuz there's always a lot of moving
[8:05] parts, right? There's the There's the
[8:07] legal record of the the
[8:10] the condo plat. There's the site plan
[8:13] which we're not we're not reviewing.
[8:15] >> They still need to uh include covenants
[8:18] » They still need to uh include covenants
[8:19] and those kinds of things too uh that
[8:21] that that should be part of the condo
[8:23] plat.
[8:24] Um and Josh is online.
[8:28] >> Yep, I'm here.
[8:29] » Yep, I'm here.
[8:30] >> There he is.
[8:31] » There he is.
[8:31] >> Yep, I'm here.
[8:33] » Yep, I'm here.
[8:33] You know, Mike, I have all the condo
[8:35] docs. All that stuff's done and uh I can
[8:37] send it to you. You know, it's it's set
[8:39] up just like a normal small condo
[8:41] association set up.
[8:45] » I I guess my question is that is that
[8:47] part of
[8:49] the plat itself?
[8:52] >> No. Typically, I mean, the city council
[8:55] » No. Typically, I mean, the city council
[8:55] would approve that portion, I would
[8:57] think. You know, that's how they did it
[8:58] in Windsor and Deforest, but I've never
[8:59] done a condo project in Columbus.
[9:09] It's pretty straightforward. I mean, I I
[9:10] I'd rather have an apartment building
[9:11] there, but that's what you guys wanted
[9:13] me to put there, so.
[9:15] >> Yeah, I mean, I understand it's I
[9:17] » Yeah, I mean, I understand it's I
[9:17] understand the documents are not
[9:18] complicated. I I guess what I'm trying
[9:21] to make sure that I'm asking is that
[9:24] if this if the
[9:26] recorded part of the
[9:29] condo agreement is part of the plat
[9:34] then doesn't it stand to reason that it
[9:35] should be in front of us here for
[9:39] >> I don't know what you're going to do
[9:40] » I don't know what you're going to do
[9:40] with the
[9:41] I don't know what you're going to do
[9:41] with the condominium documents, but
[9:44] I mean, they were sent
[9:46] they were done 2 months ago.
[9:48] Like I said, if this doesn't get taken
[9:49] care of and approved, I'm not going to
[9:51] do this stuff till next year. So, I I
[9:53] build stuff in the fall, so it's done in
[9:55] the summer. That's my timeline. And if
[9:58] if it's not going to work, then we'll
[9:59] just revisit next year.
[10:01] I'll start my SunPrairie project then.
[10:04] >> I understand. I'm not trying to be
[10:05] » I understand. I'm not trying to be
[10:05] combative. I'm trying to make sure that
[10:07] >> I'm not trying to be combative either,
[10:08] » I'm not trying to be combative either,
[10:08] but what's supposed to be in front of us
[10:09] here? I told the city of Columbus when I
[10:10] bought this property from them that I
[10:13] wanted to do this this year. I mean,
[10:14] there there is a need for housing in
[10:16] Columbus. I mean, those 45 apartments
[10:18] rented out in 30 days.
[10:23] And if we can't figure that out, then we
[10:25] might as well just get our ducks in a
[10:27] row and do this in uh 2028.
[10:32] » Will you give us a minute?
[10:33] >> Sure.
[10:35] » Sure.
[10:35] >> Great.
[10:38] » Um
[10:42] we shared this with the city engineer,
[10:45] and I don't see any
[10:49] uh
[10:53] comments regarding that.
[10:59] Um
[11:08] This is middle of real car.
[11:14] This may not include all city
[11:16] requirements for the submittal.
[11:20] Right. Right.
[11:24] » The
[11:24] council, are we
[11:25] are we actually approving or is it are
[11:27] we recommending?
[11:28] Council
[11:29] >> We're recommending.
[11:30] » We're recommending.
[11:30] >> Right. You're recommending.
[11:31] » Right. You're recommending.
[11:31] >> Yeah, it's going to council.
[11:33] » Yeah, it's going to council.
[11:33] >> Um right. Land division still goes to
[11:35] » Um right. Land division still goes to
[11:35] council. Yeah.
[11:36] >> I mean a motion could be made depending
[11:39] » I mean a motion could be made depending
[11:39] on any additional requirements.
[11:41] Right?
[11:43] Can I just ask a question, Uriah?
[11:44] >> Yeah.
[11:45] » Yeah.
[11:45] >> Is it required to have the condo
[11:47] » Is it required to have the condo
[11:47] agreement
[11:48] >> know. My question was a honest question
[11:51] » know. My question was a honest question
[11:51] that was not intended to be any kind of
[11:53] gotcha.
[11:54] >> Right. Right. You're just trying to ask
[11:56] » Right. Right. You're just trying to ask
[11:56] if it is required.
[11:57] >> Right. Is if it's part of the condo plat
[12:01] » Right. Is if it's part of the condo plat
[12:01] then
[12:02] it stands to reason that it should be
[12:05] part of this packet part of this
[12:06] consideration.
[12:10] » [snorts]
[12:11] >> Um
[12:12] » Um
[12:12] So, my I guess I do have a So, why do we
[12:15] think there's a possibility that would
[12:17] have to be in the development phase? To
[12:19] me, that seems like that's closer to the
[12:21] you know um
[12:23] or when the buildings are up or almost
[12:27] up. You know what I'm saying? Like this
[12:28] is like pre-development.
[12:29] >> Yeah.
[12:30] » Yeah.
[12:30] >> I'm wondering why Why would that be a
[12:32] » I'm wondering why Why would that be a
[12:32] concern in pre-development versus what
[12:35] during the development phase? Or towards
[12:37] the end.
[12:37] >> To me, this is also similar, you know,
[12:39] » To me, this is also similar, you know,
[12:39] condominium documents are about the
[12:41] ownership of the property, not the
[12:44] layout of the property.
[12:45] >> Okay.
[12:45] » Okay.
[12:45] >> And uh our city attorney really
[12:50] » And uh our city attorney really
[12:50] I think in the past has not had like,
[12:52] you know, a single-family traditional
[12:55] development did not want the city
[12:57] approving the covenants that go with
[12:59] that cuz that's really the developer's
[13:01] document for guide, you know, uh it's
[13:03] more of a private document.
[13:05] >> Right.
[13:05] » Right.
[13:05] >> So, to in my mind, that would be in line
[13:09] » So, to in my mind, that would be in line
[13:09] >> According to Google
[13:11] » According to Google
[13:11] it they do not go together.
[13:13] >> Okay.
[13:14] » Okay.
[13:14] >> I mean, for what it's worth. It was a
[13:16] » I mean, for what it's worth. It was a
[13:16] quick Google search.
[13:17] >> [laughter]
[13:18] » [laughter]
[13:18] >> Sure. All right.
[13:19] » Sure. All right.
[13:19] Uh like I said, I'm just trying to make
[13:21] sure that we're
[13:22] >> No, he's
[13:22] » No, he's
[13:22] >> that we've we've got all this stuff
[13:24] » that we've we've got all this stuff
[13:24] aired out in public
[13:25] >> I can double-check if if if you want to
[13:27] » I can double-check if if if you want to
[13:27] forward it on
[13:29] for approval to council. I can double
[13:32] check with
[13:33] the city attorney in between now
[13:37] and the
[13:38] What is it? September 5th?
[13:39] >> Sure.
[13:41] » Sure.
[13:41] I'm satisfied with that.
[13:44] » We can address it that way, too.
[13:46] >> Okay.
[13:47] » Okay.
[13:47] >> So we we talked about the fourplex.
[13:53] That was that was
[13:54] presented to do us before.
[13:58] » And is is the
[13:59] >> This is the This is the first time this
[14:01] » This is the This is the first time this
[14:01] has been presented to the planning
[14:03] commission as a development project.
[14:08] There's been no development plans for
[14:11] the twin homes previously till tonight.
[14:15] >> Okay.
[14:15] » Okay.
[14:15] >> Mhm. But we saw something for the
[14:17] » Mhm. But we saw something for the
[14:17] apartment building.
[14:20] » There's been no development plans for
[14:22] the apartment building as of
[14:23] >> We've seen ideas.
[14:25] » We've seen ideas.
[14:25] and ideas.
[14:25] >> conceptual ideas that were included in
[14:27] » conceptual ideas that were included in
[14:27] the request for proposal.
[14:29] >> That's what I was just going to say
[14:30] » That's what I was just going to say
[14:30] that.
[14:30] >> That's not development plans at all.
[14:32] » That's not development plans at all.
[14:32] >> Okay. I guess I thought I would thought
[14:33] » Okay. I guess I thought I would thought
[14:34] I remember certified site map, but maybe
[14:37] I'm wrong. That's what this is, right? I
[14:39] mean
[14:39] >> All right, let me Let me
[14:41] » All right, let me Let me
[14:41] >> All right, yeah. Real estate
[14:43] » All right, yeah. Real estate
[14:43] >> Previous previous at the July meeting,
[14:47] » Previous previous at the July meeting,
[14:47] you recommended approval of the
[14:48] certified survey map which splits the
[14:51] parcel into three three parcels.
[14:54] >> Oh, yeah.
[14:55] » Oh, yeah.
[14:55] >> One for the apartment, the middle one
[14:57] » One for the apartment, the middle one
[14:57] for the twin homes, and the
[15:00] bottom one for parkland.
[15:02] >> Right.
[15:02] » Right.
[15:02] >> So that breaks it into two three lots.
[15:06] » So that breaks it into two three lots.
[15:06] What this is doing today is breaking it
[15:08] down into further
[15:12] air quotes lots for twin home
[15:14] development. So it's it's it's now going
[15:16] to the next level, but only for that
[15:19] middle lot.
[15:22] » Okay, thank you.
[15:24] Does this go to council?
[15:26] >> Yes.
[15:27] » Yes.
[15:27] >> Okay.
[15:28] » Okay.
[15:28] >> Just like just like a regular plat, like
[15:30] » Just like just like a regular plat, like
[15:30] Cardinal Heights, that goes to council.
[15:33] >> Um I move to approve the
[15:36] » Um I move to approve the
[15:36] um I move to
[15:39] recommend approving of the condo plat um
[15:43] to council
[15:45] with the following conditions, items in
[15:47] the review letter be addressed, and a
[15:49] sewer tap application for all dwellings
[15:51] on the parcel be submitted to Columbus
[15:53] Utilities, and all fees paid in full.
[15:57] >> I second.
[16:00] » I second.
[16:00] >> I have a motion and a second.
[16:01] » I have a motion and a second.
[16:01] Any further discussion?
[16:05] I have another question, Mike.
[16:06] >> Mike um
[16:07] » Mike um
[16:07] Oh.
[16:08] Online.
[16:08] >> Josh, yes.
[16:10] » Josh, yes.
[16:10] >> Yeah, Mike Mike I I I just want to state
[16:11] » Yeah, Mike Mike I I I just want to state
[16:11] something, you know, in regards to the
[16:13] sewer stuff, you know, it it would be
[16:15] nice if the uh the the company, Columbus
[16:18] Water and Light, would know exactly what
[16:19] they're doing. You know, they we were
[16:22] completely blindsided by a bill 13
[16:25] months later from when we started that
[16:28] project. And uh you know, it's that's
[16:31] not how you do business. I mean I mean I
[16:34] love Columbus. I grew up there.
[16:36] >> Josh,
[16:37] » Josh,
[16:37] Josh, we're talking about the twin homes
[16:39] here.
[16:41] >> Yeah, I know that. I know that, but I'm
[16:42] » Yeah, I know that. I know that, but I'm
[16:42] just explaining. Like like like
[16:44] hopefully they have their stuff figured
[16:46] out because I'm very patient. A lot of
[16:48] these developers are not patient.
[16:50] >> You're talking about a previous
[16:51] » You're talking about a previous
[16:51] property, which is not on the agenda, so
[16:53] can't be discussed right now. We are
[16:55] purely talking about what's on the
[16:57] agenda.
[16:57] >> Yeah. Yeah, Josh, I'd appreciate if you
[16:59] » Yeah. Yeah, Josh, I'd appreciate if you
[16:59] brought that up with with staff cuz
[17:02] what we're doing is we're simply
[17:04] recommending to council to follow a
[17:05] staff
[17:07] comment.
[17:07] >> Yeah, that's fine.
[17:11] And I did send you guys all the
[17:12] condominium documents. I have not signed
[17:14] those cuz my attorney has not told me to
[17:16] sign them yet, but I do have them. Mike
[17:18] has them. So, if you guys would like to
[17:20] see those, I'm fine with him sharing
[17:22] those with you.
[17:26] » All right. Staff can contact you.
[17:29] So.
[17:30] I did have one last question, Mike.
[17:32] And that is um
[17:35] the
[17:36] is the fact that there are multiple
[17:38] buildings on this parcel part of
[17:40] basically what we're approving as
[17:43] as a condo plat. So, this serves the
[17:45] function of what would otherwise be a
[17:48] conditional use.
[17:53] » It is a condo plat, not a conditional
[17:56] use.
[17:56] >> I understand.
[17:57] » I understand.
[17:57] >> Yeah. Yeah. I Those are two very
[17:59] » Yeah. Yeah. I Those are two very
[17:59] different things.
[18:00] Um I would This is really it it it's
[18:05] it's similar to a site plan, but not
[18:07] exact. Um it's similar to a site plan.
[18:10] >> Okay.
[18:11] » Okay.
[18:11] >> plan
[18:12] » plan
[18:12] >> The fact that we're approving this is
[18:15] » The fact that we're approving this is
[18:15] in and of itself approval of having
[18:17] multiple buildings on a parcel that
[18:19] would otherwise not be allowed to have
[18:21] multiple buildings.
[18:36] » You can do multiple buildings in
[18:37] different ways. This is one way to do
[18:39] it.
[18:40] >> Okay. There. It's That's
[18:41] » Okay. There. It's That's
[18:41] >> I think we would have figured it out if
[18:43] » I think we would have figured it out if
[18:43] if there was something.
[18:45] >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm curious.
[18:47] » Yeah. Yeah. I'm curious.
[18:47] >> It's kind of sterile.
[18:48] » It's kind of sterile.
[18:48] >> So.
[18:48] » So.
[18:48] >> Yeah. It it it's it's it's just one way
[18:51] » Yeah. It it it's it's it's just one way
[18:51] to doing it. I think if if if uh
[18:55] if the layout worked better and they
[18:56] wanted uh he wanted to have and we do
[18:58] have this in Columbus twin homes on
[19:00] their own individual lot.
[19:02] >> Right.
[19:03] » Right.
[19:03] >> Um we have that in Columbus. Um so, that
[19:06] » Um we have that in Columbus. Um so, that
[19:06] would be another way to do that. So,
[19:08] there's more This is just
[19:10] one way of doing it and it's not
[19:12] any
[19:14] it's not a bad way.
[19:16] >> No, it's not. I'm not saying it's good
[19:17] » No, it's not. I'm not saying it's good
[19:17] or bad.
[19:17] >> It's just one
[19:18] » It's just one
[19:18] >> You answered my question three sentences
[19:20] » You answered my question three sentences
[19:20] ago, so we're good. All right.
[19:22] All right, we have a motion a second.
[19:24] Any other discussion? Everybody's hoping
[19:26] that
[19:27] >> I say one more thing? Can I Mike, this
[19:29] » I say one more thing? Can I Mike, this
[19:29] is how you guys wanted this done. That
[19:30] That's why the the engineers and set it
[19:33] up this way. You know, I I would have
[19:35] rather had
[19:37] >> Josh, I'm not questioning or opposing
[19:39] » Josh, I'm not questioning or opposing
[19:39] this. I mean I'm just asking questions
[19:41] >> I'm just talking about
[19:42] » I'm just talking about
[19:42] >> Yeah, that's what we recommended for
[19:43] » Yeah, that's what we recommended for
[19:43] approval. I think you're good, Josh. So
[19:45] we can move
[19:46] >> to explain. I wanted them zero lot line
[19:48] » to explain. I wanted them zero lot line
[19:48] duplexes and you guys didn't want them
[19:49] that way. So this this was the way that
[19:52] that I was told that we should do this
[19:53] and so that's how we set it up.
[19:56] >> Yeah, I'm just I'm asking questions
[19:57] » Yeah, I'm just I'm asking questions
[19:57] about a proposal in front of me and I'm
[19:59] not opposing.
[20:01] >> I'm not sure you guys got stuck with me.
[20:03] » I'm not sure you guys got stuck with me.
[20:03] My My engineer was supposed to be there.
[20:04] He had a family emergency, so he had to
[20:07] drive to the Twin Cities. I don't
[20:08] typically always deal with this stuff.
[20:09] I'm more on the construction side of it
[20:11] once it's approved. So
[20:13] >> No problem. We'd like to move on with
[20:15] » No problem. We'd like to move on with
[20:15] our vote.
[20:16] >> Perfect.
[20:17] » Perfect.
[20:17] >> All those in favor signify by I.
[20:19] » All those in favor signify by I.
[20:19] >> I.
[20:20] » I.
[20:20] >> Opposed?
[20:23] » Opposed?
[20:23] Okay.
[20:24] Pass it on to council, please.
[20:30] All right, moving on to
[20:35] Where is my agenda?
[20:37] Moving on to number five.
[20:40] Consider and take action regarding a
[20:42] land division in the town of Elba in
[20:45] Dodge County
[20:46] under City of Columbus extraterritorial
[20:48] jurisdiction for the Phyllis Hammond
[20:50] estate. Dodge County activity number
[20:54] as printed.
[20:55] >> [snorts]
[20:56] » [snorts]
[20:56] >> All right.
[20:57] » All right.
[20:57] So this is outside the city of Columbus
[21:00] in our extraterritorial area.
[21:03] So state law state law
[21:06] requires the city
[21:08] to take action on lot splits within that
[21:12] 1 and 1/2 mile area of the city. Um
[21:15] this is a property
[21:19] east of city limits.
[21:21] Um
[21:23] there isn't a super good map, but it's
[21:26] uh kind of
[21:28] south of Rotary Park, south and east of
[21:32] Rotary Park.
[21:34] Um and the railroad tracks, there's a um
[21:37] properties in there. Um
[21:40] and so uh
[21:43] if you approve this, it it moves on. If
[21:45] you deny it, the split, my understanding
[21:48] is the split is denied. But if you
[21:51] approve it tonight and the
[21:54] town doesn't approve it, then it can
[21:56] also stop. So it doesn't get your
[21:58] approval does not guarantee approval
[22:01] throughout the process. So um
[22:04] uh these are large. There's a uh um
[22:08] this is large parcels. We don't have any
[22:11] policies
[22:13] uh in our comprehensive plan or in our
[22:15] ordinances that would that kind of
[22:17] contradict uh
[22:20] uh large splits and those kinds of
[22:22] things. So um I don't see any problems
[22:25] with the split.
[22:31] » East of the city?
[22:33] >> Uh think Rotary Park.
[22:37] » Uh think Rotary Park.
[22:37] Stay on that side of the river and kind
[22:39] of go down along the river to the
[22:40] railroad tracks.
[22:41] >> And
[22:42] » And
[22:42] the north?
[22:44] >> South of Rotary Park.
[22:46] » South of Rotary Park.
[22:46] >> South of the
[22:49] » Outside the city limits.
[22:56] » [snorts]
[23:06] » Any questions? Any discussion?
[23:12] I agree with you, Mike. This looks like
[23:14] it's
[23:15] getting carved off to include buildings
[23:18] on the property and
[23:20] it's almost a it's still a it's still a
[23:22] 33-acre piece.
[23:23] >> Rotary Park?
[23:25] » Rotary Park?
[23:25] City property?
[23:27] >> Yes.
[23:28] » Yes.
[23:28] >> And you're saying to the south?
[23:30] » And you're saying to the south?
[23:30] South and east. Southeast.
[23:33] Cuz the
[23:34] river kind of curves around, so it's
[23:36] >> But really really to get there, Mike,
[23:38] » But really really to get there, Mike,
[23:38] you'd go across the bridge on 60, go a
[23:41] couple streets up and hang a left before
[23:43] you got to
[23:44] the grainery.
[23:47] That's how you That's how you'd actually
[23:48] get there by car.
[23:52] » The grainery. Like a block past the dam.
[23:54] Is that
[23:54] where this is?
[23:55] >> Yeah, it'd be Yeah, it'd be on the
[23:58] » Yeah, it'd be Yeah, it'd be on the
[23:58] opposite side of the dam.
[23:59] >> Okay.
[24:00] » Okay.
[24:00] >> Yeah.
[24:00] » Yeah.
[24:00] >> That's here.
[24:01] » That's here.
[24:01] >> Okay.
[24:04] » [snorts]
[24:20] » Any other questions, Mike?
[24:22] >> No.
[24:23] » No.
[24:23] >> Okay.
[24:23] » Okay.
[24:23] >> Okay.
[24:25] » Okay.
[24:25] >> Um
[24:26] » Um
[24:26] I'll entertain a motion.
[24:29] >> I'd make a motion to approve the
[24:32] » I'd make a motion to approve the
[24:32] request.
[24:37] » I second.
[24:38] >> I have a motion and a second.
[24:43] All those in favor signify by I.
[24:46] >> I.
[24:46] » I.
[24:46] >> I.
[24:47] » I.
[24:47] >> Opposed?
[24:50] Great.
[24:54] And that's really a motion of
[24:55] non-objection to the
[24:57] county, to Dodge County, right?
[24:59] >> It's an
[25:00] » It's an
[25:00] It's an approval.
[25:01] >> Okay.
[25:02] » Okay.
[25:02] >> It's It's an approval.
[25:06] We have the same thing on the item
[25:08] number six, that it's a different
[25:09] property.
[25:11] >> Okay, so we'll move on to that item on
[25:13] » Okay, so we'll move on to that item on
[25:13] the agenda.
[25:17] Can you describe to us where this one
[25:18] is, Mike?
[25:24] » It is
[25:25] >> out there.
[25:29] » Yeah. Um
[25:36] Nina Buck Road.
[25:37] >> Yeah.
[25:40] » So, it's out of ways.
[25:45] So, you got parcel A, parcel B.
[25:48] Again, fairly large splits of land.
[26:03] Again, uh there's
[26:07] we don't have anything in our code or
[26:10] this stuff
[26:11] wouldn't seem to impede any kind of
[26:13] growth of the city or anything like
[26:15] that, so
[26:16] So, these are outside the city limit and
[26:19] we're just They just provided us a
[26:20] letter of intent notification.
[26:23] The city really doesn't have any say,
[26:24] but they don't
[26:25] >> City has say, yes.
[26:26] » City has say, yes.
[26:26] >> We have say.
[26:27] » We have say.
[26:27] >> Yep.
[26:27] » Yep.
[26:27] >> Anything within what, a mile and a half?
[26:29] » Anything within what, a mile and a half?
[26:29] >> Mile and a half is It's called the
[26:30] » Mile and a half is It's called the
[26:30] extraterritorial zone.
[26:32] >> Right.
[26:33] » Right.
[26:33] >> And we have the ability to approve or
[26:36] » And we have the ability to approve or
[26:36] deny this. If we approve it,
[26:39] um
[26:40] it still may not be approved pending the
[26:44] town's approval.
[26:46] So, this is There's multiple approvals
[26:48] needed for the split.
[26:50] Um and the city deals with it prior to
[26:53] the town.
[26:56] » So, they would be held accountable to
[26:57] wetlands and all the normal
[27:01] state
[27:03] >> Yeah,
[27:03] » Yeah,
[27:03] you know, town subdivision as well.
[27:05] >> Yeah.
[27:06] » Yeah.
[27:06] Yeah, this isn't even in our comp plan
[27:08] area.
[27:10] We didn't do our current comp plan does
[27:12] not do any kind of
[27:15] doesn't have any policies addressing
[27:17] growth areas outside the city.
[27:21] >> So, that's part of the reason it's kind
[27:22] » So, that's part of the reason it's kind
[27:22] of like what what would we hang our hat
[27:25] on for denial?
[27:27] We don't really have anything.
[27:31] » Any further questions or discussion?
[27:34] Okay.
[27:36] I'll entertain a motion.
[27:38] >> I'll move to approve subdivision
[27:39] » I'll move to approve subdivision
[27:39] activity number 2026-0356
[27:43] for David and Marie O'Crawley.
[27:46] >> I will second.
[27:47] » I will second.
[27:47] >> I have a motion and a second. Any
[27:48] » I have a motion and a second. Any
[27:48] further discussion?
[27:51] Hearing none, all those in favor signify
[27:52] by I.
[27:53] >> I.
[27:54] » I.
[27:54] >> I.
[27:54] » I.
[27:54] >> Opposed?
[27:57] » Opposed?
[27:57] Great.
[27:57] >> Please forward our approval to the
[27:58] » Please forward our approval to the
[27:58] county.
[28:01] » All right. Last item of business is this
[28:05] uh
[28:06] consider and take action regarding the
[28:08] housing survey in support of updating
[28:11] the city's comprehensive plan.
[28:15] » So, we put together the survey. We tried
[28:18] to keep it as succinct as possible.
[28:21] There's a couple things in there we're
[28:22] kind of like, well, how do we do this?
[28:25] It blends in a little bit in the land
[28:27] use a little bit, but we tried to keep
[28:29] it succinct. Um we do now have a
[28:32] subscription to SurveyMonkey,
[28:34] which allows us to
[28:38] do survey and analysis and all that kind
[28:40] of stuff uh
[28:42] uh in a
[28:44] in a efficient way. Um but we have uh a
[28:48] number of questions here.
[28:50] Try to break it out it identify who's
[28:52] taking the survey, address housing
[28:55] affordability,
[28:58] housing types,
[29:03] also city engagement in affordable
[29:05] housing,
[29:07] timing and growth rate cuz that's a big
[29:09] part of
[29:11] of kind of it's a little bit more land
[29:13] use but
[29:15] they do
[29:16] they blend so much together it's kind of
[29:18] hard to stay out of that
[29:21] but it does give us a
[29:22] some questions on
[29:24] kind of how to approach things.
[29:27] Talks about infill and outward expansion
[29:30] a little bit
[29:32] and then
[29:33] the big debate always in surveys is do
[29:36] you have an open-ended question? The
[29:38] negative on that is
[29:41] the comments are usually all over the
[29:42] map and there's no way to summarize
[29:45] those comments
[29:47] unlike the 12 questions.
[29:52] The the positive of having it it gives
[29:55] someone the opportunity to address, have
[29:57] a say, an open-ended say about something
[30:00] that maybe wasn't addressed in the
[30:02] survey.
[30:04] But what yet you know what how do we
[30:07] communicate that when we complete the
[30:09] survey?
[30:13] Staff could try to summarize it the best
[30:15] we could we can include a list of every
[30:17] single comment
[30:19] but it's not going to be
[30:21] easily necessarily depending on how many
[30:24] people respond doesn't mean it's going
[30:26] to be very digestible
[30:30] but that's in the draft.
[30:35] We will have hard copies available here
[30:37] at City Hall. It'll be online. We'll
[30:40] promote it through social media channels
[30:43] and uh uh
[30:47] we'll have the results for the September
[30:49] Plan Commission meeting.
[30:51] >> Um
[30:53] » Um
[30:53] have you So, you said you were going to
[30:55] have it online and are we going to send
[30:58] this out via mail at all or no? It's
[31:01] just going to be you're going to
[31:02] advertise it, people are going to have
[31:03] to go and
[31:04] >> do it
[31:06] » do it
[31:06] fairly similarly to the Park and Rec
[31:08] outdoor recreation
[31:11] >> which we had I think 350
[31:14] » which we had I think 350
[31:14] responses.
[31:15] >> Well, that's good.
[31:16] » Well, that's good.
[31:16] >> Which is I think I did the calculations
[31:19] » Which is I think I did the calculations
[31:19] on that. For Columbus, that's uh
[31:21] statistically appropriate sample.
[31:25] 350 responses.
[31:27] Somewhere Whatever the number was, it
[31:29] was in that ballpark.
[31:33] Most of the responses came in the first
[31:35] 10 days.
[31:37] Probably 90%
[31:38] >> Probably have kids, too, right?
[31:39] » Probably have kids, too, right?
[31:39] >> 90% of the responses came back in the
[31:41] » 90% of the responses came back in the
[31:41] first 10 days.
[31:42] >> And they people families with kids, I
[31:44] » And they people families with kids, I
[31:44] assume, is the majority.
[31:46] >> I can't remember the results.
[31:48] » I can't remember the results.
[31:48] >> Okay.
[31:48] » Okay.
[31:48] >> I'd have to refer to that.
[31:50] » I'd have to refer to that.
[31:50] >> I know cuz I thought about it and then I
[31:52] » I know cuz I thought about it and then I
[31:52] forgot about it. But I don't have I
[31:54] don't have kids in the system anymore
[31:55] anyways, but
[31:56] >> Parks are for all ages.
[31:58] » Parks are for all ages.
[31:58] >> No, I know. I I get it. I utilize it. I
[32:00] » No, I know. I I get it. I utilize it. I
[32:00] go to the parks and stuff. I wish I
[32:02] would have remembered.
[32:04] >> So, what?
[32:05] » So, what?
[32:05] >> All right.
[32:05] » All right.
[32:05] >> I'm
[32:06] » I'm
[32:06] >> Yep, good.
[32:06] » Yep, good.
[32:06] >> Just a comment on the wording of of one
[32:08] » Just a comment on the wording of of one
[32:08] of the questions. In section two,
[32:10] question four, approximately what
[32:11] percentage of your gross monthly
[32:12] household income is spent on housing
[32:14] costs and rent or mortgage plus
[32:16] utilities.
[32:17] Um I wonder if you might want to include
[32:19] property taxes in those parentheses,
[32:21] too. Property taxes are more or less
[32:24] built into rent uh and in my experience,
[32:27] cost far more than utilities.
[32:29] >> Well, if I was answering it, I would
[32:31] » Well, if I was answering it, I would
[32:31] include that.
[32:34] So, I don't know not.
[32:35] >> that question again?
[32:36] » that question again?
[32:36] >> It's the very
[32:37] » It's the very
[32:37] >> two, number four.
[32:38] » two, number four.
[32:38] >> Yeah, it's the very first question in
[32:40] » Yeah, it's the very first question in
[32:40] section two.
[32:41] Right? Cuz taxes are part of part of
[32:43] housing.
[32:44] >> It's it's a hard one. Uh
[32:47] » It's it's a hard one. Uh
[32:47] there are
[32:48] different thoughts on the definition of
[32:50] how you determine affordable housing.
[32:52] Some include utilities, some do not. I
[32:55] have found
[32:56] contradicting statements on how that is
[32:59] done.
[33:00] >> I don't think we're questioning the
[33:01] » I don't think we're questioning the
[33:01] utilities. We're talking about property
[33:03] tax.
[33:04] So
[33:06] Yeah, I would too.
[33:07] >> with you, Steve, cuz
[33:09] » with you, Steve, cuz
[33:09] rent is usually got property tax built
[33:11] in. But mortgage doesn't. So
[33:13] >> so it's a right.
[33:14] » so it's a right.
[33:14] >> It's a equivalent.
[33:18] » Right. And if people um if their house
[33:20] is paid off and they still have property
[33:23] taxes and or utilities, they still have
[33:26] housing costs.
[33:35] » Other questions or comments?
[33:39] » I had a question about section three,
[33:41] number seven.
[33:43] There's a
[33:44] definition there under the bullet point
[33:48] missing middle housing.
[33:51] Is that a
[33:52] >> Hey hey let me
[33:53] » Hey hey let me
[33:53] >> Oh, sure.
[33:54] » Oh, sure.
[33:54] >> Catching up.
[33:55] » Catching up.
[33:55] What is it again? What question?
[33:56] >> Uh number seven.
[33:57] » Uh number seven.
[33:57] >> Okay.
[33:58] » Okay.
[33:58] >> You have single family detached homes
[33:59] » You have single family detached homes
[33:59] and then something called missing middle
[34:01] housing. Is that
[34:04] editorializing that it's missing or is
[34:06] that actually part of the description of
[34:10] what those are?
[34:14] » I think it's up for debate if it's
[34:16] editorializing or a description.
[34:20] » Okay.
[34:21] >> I I think that's the
[34:22] » I I think that's the
[34:22] >> But a normal person I would I have no
[34:24] » But a normal person I would I have no
[34:24] clue what that means. What is a missing
[34:26] missing middle housing?
[34:27] >> Yeah, it is more of a a profession
[34:29] » Yeah, it is more of a a profession
[34:29] thing. It The middle is is addressing is
[34:33] meaning is that a lot of housing that's
[34:36] being built is either subsidized
[34:41] through grants based on income at the
[34:43] low end or the people who have a lot of
[34:46] money
[34:47] um where the developers make more money
[34:50] on their projects.
[34:52] And then the miss the middle type stuff
[34:54] like duplexes, twin homes, triplexes,
[34:57] fourplexes, those types of things
[34:59] kind of generally a lot of times don't
[35:01] get built because there's incentives at
[35:05] the opposite ends to build them.
[35:08] >> Can we remove the word missing?
[35:09] » Can we remove the word missing?
[35:09] >> That's what I'm
[35:10] » That's what I'm
[35:11] I
[35:11] >> We can.
[35:11] » We can.
[35:11] >> I don't want somebody to be It really
[35:12] » I don't want somebody to be It really
[35:12] confuses me.
[35:14] >> misled when they're trying to answer a
[35:16] » misled when they're trying to answer a
[35:16] question. What should we have? Oh, well,
[35:18] this is missing so we should have it,
[35:19] you know.
[35:20] >> Plus we have duplexes and twin homes
[35:22] » Plus we have duplexes and twin homes
[35:22] currently on the
[35:23] >> Mike following everybody around to
[35:24] » Mike following everybody around to
[35:24] explain it and
[35:25] >> [laughter]
[35:27] » [laughter]
[35:27] >> We have those of some of those available
[35:29] » We have those of some of those available
[35:29] in this community.
[35:31] Um
[35:33] But you do are saying townhomes and row
[35:35] houses
[35:37] are actually
[35:38] >> of
[35:39] » of
[35:39] of this
[35:40] is of this question is what housing
[35:43] types and land use mix do you want to
[35:45] see? That's the purpose of these
[35:47] questions.
[35:48] >> So your comment on the missing middle is
[35:50] » So your comment on the missing middle is
[35:50] appropriate.
[36:00] » Others?
[36:07] If not, I'll entertain a motion.
[36:09] >> Move to approve the housing survey.
[36:15] » Second.
[36:16] I have a motion and a second. Any other
[36:18] discussion?
[36:19] >> Is that with removing
[36:21] » Is that with removing
[36:21] the missing?
[36:24] >> Yeah, I can amend my motion to approve
[36:26] » Yeah, I can amend my motion to approve
[36:26] the housing survey with removing the
[36:28] word missing from missing middle
[36:30] housing.
[36:31] >> Do you want to consider Steve's comment
[36:33] » Do you want to consider Steve's comment
[36:33] about the
[36:36] tax part of the mortgage also?
[36:38] >> And include taxes in the mortgage
[36:41] » And include taxes in the mortgage
[36:41] clarification.
[36:45] » We have a motion.
[36:47] Do we have a second? Okay.
[36:49] Motion and second. All those in favor
[36:51] signify by I.
[36:52] >> I. I.
[36:53] » I. I.
[36:53] >> Opposed?
[36:56] Great.
[36:58] Passes.
[37:00] Last one, any future agenda items?
[37:04] » Um next meeting we'll have survey
[37:06] results
[37:08] draft a draft of the housing chapter.
[37:13] And draft
[37:16] uh housing goals
[37:19] objectives and policies. So, what what
[37:21] I'm we're going to try to do is
[37:23] have um
[37:25] a draft set of goals and objectives for
[37:27] you to review.
[37:30] Um and then also um
[37:33] um so
[37:35] that's going to be held it's going to be
[37:39] well we'll have a lot to talk about.
[37:40] We'll have a zoning rewrite as well.
[37:42] We're we're going to try to staff is
[37:44] going to try to write the best goals,
[37:46] objectives, and policies we can to get
[37:48] you as close as you can.
[37:50] Um
[37:52] um so
[37:53] you know, reviewing those in advance of
[37:55] the meeting will be helpful to kind of
[37:57] move them get the get you there quicker
[37:59] during the meeting.
[38:01] Um if you take a look at
[38:04] I included kind of a process
[38:06] in the on the previous agenda item.
[38:11] We will need comments. Uh we will need
[38:14] to get some fairly good responses from
[38:17] you on what we submit to you
[38:20] so that we can have a public hearing
[38:23] on October 8th
[38:26] and take it to the council on
[38:28] the 20th
[38:31] because we can't we can't take have the
[38:33] public hearing
[38:35] at the November plan commission cuz it's
[38:37] too too late.
[38:41] And I doubt you want to have a second
[38:44] October plan commission meeting.
[38:47] » [snorts]
[38:49] >> Not unless there's chips.
[38:52] » Not unless there's chips.
[38:52] And guacamole.
[38:56] » [laughter]
[38:57] >> Homemade.
[38:58] » Homemade.
[38:58] >> All right.
[38:59] » All right.
[38:59] >> So and then that will have Sonia
[39:01] » So and then that will have Sonia
[39:01] rewrite. One of the things I did just
[39:04] receive a draft chapter of all the
[39:06] performance standards.
[39:10] I will email that out to you in the next
[39:13] day or so
[39:14] so you have a head start on reviewing it
[39:16] cuz I know that's what you want to do in
[39:18] your free time.
[39:19] Um
[39:21] but it is
[39:22] a chunk of stuff. So
[39:24] but at the next meeting Sonia will have
[39:26] her summary PowerPoint as well that she
[39:29] she does such a great job at and um
[39:33] so we'll be on pace for adopting
[39:35] adopting this in December.
[39:38] >> Sweet.
[39:40] » Sweet.
[39:40] >> When is the public hearing for that?
[39:45] » Likely
[39:47] November, I believe.
[39:50] I don't think we want to go any later
[39:51] than that.
[39:53] That'll get us set up for approval in
[39:55] December. [snorts]
[40:04] » Any other future
[40:06] crystal ball type things?
[40:12] » At some point here we'll probably bring
[40:14] through the plan commission
[40:16] a revision of
[40:20] I think it's chapter 86, public
[40:22] rights-of-way and stuff like that.
[40:25] Um
[40:26] that section, it's not in the zoning
[40:28] code, it's in their municipal code,
[40:31] but we would probably bring that through
[40:33] here
[40:34] um for review and recommendation to
[40:36] council.
[40:38] It addresses stuff like
[40:41] if you think especially like stuff in
[40:43] downtown,
[40:45] can you have benches in the right-of-way
[40:47] and on the sidewalk and how do we do
[40:48] that?
[40:50] Um there's some really outdated code and
[40:52] language in there.
[40:54] So, I have a an initial draft on that
[40:56] and I'm going to revise it one more time
[40:58] and then get it to
[41:00] uh
[41:00] the public works and utilities
[41:02] department.
[41:04] Um so, we'll probably bringing that
[41:06] through at some point, probably not the
[41:08] September meeting cuz that's busy
[41:10] enough.
[41:13] That will not require public hearing
[41:15] because it's not part of the zoning
[41:16] code, but it functions
[41:20] in many ways like it.
[41:22] >> Okay.
[41:25] All right.
[41:27] >> I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
[41:28] » I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
[41:28] >> Move to adjourn.
[41:31] » Nobody wants to
[41:32] >> Second.
[41:33] » Second.
[41:33] >> Second.
[41:33] » Second.
[41:33] >> I'll do it. I never do [laughter] that.
[41:34] » I'll do it. I never do [laughter] that.
[41:34] >> Great. Have a motion and a second.
[41:37] » Great. Have a motion and a second.
[41:37] All those in favor signify by eye.
[41:38] >> Eye.
[41:39] » Eye.
[41:39] >> Eye.
[41:39] » Eye.
[41:39] >> Opposed?
[41:41] » Opposed?
[41:41] We're adjourned.