[0:00] e
[0:45] follow
[1:16] we heard that start
[1:27] over good yes yes I think so
[1:34] yes wait until you say
[1:40] go okay all right okay we will call to
order city council work session a
[1:46] regular business meeting for February
20th
[1:48] 2025 it is 6:03 PM Lindsay would you
please call the RO council member Baker
[1:54] Brown here Co here Livingston miniki yes
mayor Philip I'm here we have a quorum
[2:01] so we'll move on item number two is a
pledge of allegiance would please rise
[2:04] and S the Pledge of Allegiance with
[2:10] me United
[2:17] States
[2:23] indivisible all
right item number three is approval of
[2:28] the agenda we are going to remove move
items 7 I and 7j from the agenda would
[2:33] anybody like to move any of the consent
agenda items to the regular
[2:39] agenda none can I get a motion to
approve the the agenda as amended
[2:45] motion second
it okay so motion by Brown seconded by
[2:50] mini all those in favor say I I I I post
same that motion carries item four is
[2:56] dedicated work session uh this is
dedicated work session s for mayor and
[3:00] Council uh the regular city council
meeting will begin following this work
[3:05] session item a is The Envision 2023
strategic visioning and goal setting
[3:11] review so Luke and Lindsay have been uh
working with department heads to share
[3:15] the Strategic Vision formulated by C
city council and myself uh we felt that
[3:21] this work session would give us a chance
to talk to any questions and establish
[3:25] clarifications so that we have a solid
document to guide the city
[3:30] lind's going to step us through the our
visioning process mostly for the benefit
[3:36] of the V of the citizens present or
watching online and then we're going to
[3:39] go and discuss the goals and refine the
2035 strategic Vision which is called
[3:46] Envision 2035 it's good name uh Lindsay
floor is yours thank you uh so mayor and
[3:53] Council h of strategic thinking and
execution planning session last November
[3:58] uh as you just said it's been en it's
been titled Envision 2035 a pathway to
[4:03] norwalk's
[4:06] future thank you um we're aiming to
create strategic goals to achieve
[4:11] alignment and Clarity for the city with
specific actions and benchmarks to
[4:15] ensure
[4:19] implementation and as you're all aware
uh we have our purpose statement
[4:24] here some of our past accomplishments
included safety initiative staff
[4:28] development infrastructure and growth
commercial development the bike trail
[4:33] and Industrial Development while
maintaining our tax
[4:38] levy some of our critical Trends Show
Stable growth a desire for increased
[4:43] Services State legislator's goal to
reduce local government strong
[4:47] intergovernmental relationships and
overall citizen
[4:53] satisfaction um from our citizen survey
we compiled the top things that we feel
[4:58] like our citizens uh had expressed that
they wanted or wanted us to improve
[5:03] which was our street and sidewalk
conditions more Economic Development and
[5:07] expanded park and rec programs and
Facilities we also did a SWAT analysis
[5:14] to identify our strengths opportunities
weaknesses and threats I'm not going to
[5:19] go over each of those but you could
reference back to this if you want
[5:24] to which brought us to our six um top
10e goals so the first one is championed
[5:31] by council member Livingston and it's
the master plan and new urbanism so
[5:36] execute a master plan and include the
Interstate 35 interchange and scurve
[5:41] area and to have a series of
neighborhoods and Commercial
[5:45] hubs second one is championed by mayor
Phillips and it's the North River and
[5:49] I35 interchange so to develop those
areas and to have a fully developed
[5:54] interchange on Interstate
35 the third one is championed by
[5:59] councilman miniki and his walkability in
connecting
[6:04] neighborhoods kind of self-explanatory
uh the fourth is championed by Jason
[6:09] Brown and it's how Norwalk is viewed so
distinct neighborhoods that are viewed
[6:13] as unique fun and proud to live
in the fifth is championed by Ed Co and
[6:19] is uh Highway 28 so after dot
reconstruction uh Council wishes to have
[6:26] the city owned Highway 28 inside
corporate limits and this is been the
[6:30] one that we've gotten the most questions
on from staff so they might ask for a
[6:34] little bit more Direction on that one
and lastly Champion by Brian Baker is
[6:38] balanced tax base which this one rolled
over from our 2028 Vision which is to
[6:43] have uh 30% of our tax base be
commercial or
[6:49] industrial then we defined how we were
going to accomplish these goals which is
[6:52] to dedicate staff time Implement
communication strategies prioritize
[6:56] projects and funds identify and work
with key stakeholders and review our
[6:59] comprehensive
[7:04] plan then we set threeyear one year and
90day benchmarks with specific action
[7:10] items for each time frame staff has
already begun working on the 90-day
[7:13] benchmarks we've identified staff and
departments to lead each of these
[7:17] projects or goals um I will then after
tonight go in and add those projects to
[7:22] each department heads project management
spreadsheet and Tai will create a Public
[7:27] Communication plan to get that get it
out to the public
[7:35] so same slide as before with our 10e
goals but with the lead Department above
[7:40] department or departments I should say
above those goals um although there are
[7:44] one or two lead departments or people um
for these it's important to note that
[7:50] accomplishing these will be a team
effort and will require the help of
[7:52] numerous
departments do these look okay as far as
[7:58] the Departments that would take lead on
those goals
[8:04] yeah lastly just questions comments
[8:11] concerns have clarifying
questions Wayne did you wanna uh do you
[8:18] want to bring something up about the
Highway 28 question do you want me to no
[8:21] I can bring it up
um first I just wanted to mention the
[8:25] walkability connecting neighborhoods I
think that's a great goal and a great
[8:30] that kind of aligns with a bigger
picture ADA compliance regulations that
[8:35] we're trying to accomplish so that is a
great goal on there regarding the
[8:40] Highway 28 had a few concerns with um
taking over the ownership of the
[8:46] highway if we were to try to take over
ownership of it through Norwalk it'll
[8:50] still be a state controlled and owned
Highway North of Norwalk and south of
[8:54] Norwalk the state will require even if
we own it that the highway within
[8:59] Norwalk be operated and maintained to
their standards and their rules so the
[9:04] rideway will still have access
restrictions there'll still be the
[9:08] traffic control will still be under DOT
[9:14] regulations um so they're still going to
have authority over how it's operated we
[9:20] won't have autonomous control over it
they're going to want it to be operated
[9:23] as a State Highway it'll be there's some
concerns with that another concern is
[9:30] along with the payment it's probably
going come the rest of the RightWay the
[9:33] green SPAC is next to it and the storm
sewer ditches the spiles the trees it's
[9:38] not just the pavement it'll be they want
the entire right away to be conveyed
[9:43] over um and if that's what we want we
can definitely work toward that if the
[9:48] goal is just more maintenance or an
improved
[9:50] rideability of the payment I think
there's a way to do that we can work
[9:55] with the dot we have a annual agreement
with the dot for snow removal and winter
[10:00] maintenance on the road I think we could
look at our annual agreement um to try
[10:06] to encourage more maintenance by the
state or we can look at that to see if
[10:09] there's some options
for um encouraging them to maintain the
[10:13] road better we might have other options
to get an improved Highway 28 without
[10:17] ownership of it um it's just kind of
wanted to know what the goals were was
[10:21] the goal if we want ownership of it
that's fine but the goal was improving
[10:25] the rideability maybe there's another
option site toing it
[10:29] comment yes okay my understanding from
our meeting was that the purpose of this
[10:36] was for me to put together study group
and to
[10:40] determine uh what the pluses and minuses
were for City acquisition of this or
[10:49] state retention of it and if it was for
the city at what point in time would
[10:57] that decision have to be made because
obviously the state because you're going
[11:03] to rebuild that Highway probably go
soon and my understanding is that
[11:09] nothing would happen anyway until after
the state had
[11:14] rebilt
so uh the impression I had was that you
[11:21] wanted me and the council wanted me to
go out and collect the best minds and
[11:25] information I can to provide information
both ways right yeah so that we can make
[11:33] an decision I think the points that he's
made are well made and I don't
[11:42] disagree but uh to be objective about it
you know I think you have to consider
[11:47] both sides and all the pluses and
minuses that
[11:51] may uh you but anyway did it am I
tracking is
[11:57] that what we were want to accomplish
here or did I
[12:03] misunderstand I think that's
[12:07] what that's what I remember that's a
good direction yeah yeah okay so I'll
[12:13] I'll task myself I guess to uh help to
bring bring together that study group
[12:19] and we'll probably take different people
at different times you know because it's
[12:23] hard to getbody one room at one time and
try to get input in all that regard
[12:31] obviously big key is
[12:36] State any I don't know if that helps
it mayor what what I'm hearing in in my
[12:43] words
is I hear Ed and Wayne kind of saying
[12:46] the same thing it's more of a we're
exploring what those options are for
[12:51] Highway 28 as opposed to the goal being
to take over right the goal is
[12:57] information
the goals information yeah making an
[13:02] informed
decision yes I think we need to make the
[13:06] informed decision whether or not to take
it right yeah yes
[13:12] sir I think part of what you said at the
department had meeting the other day uh
[13:17] mayor
mentioned he felt like it was the
[13:20] overall condition of Road the goal is to
have Highway 28 approved so that when we
[13:25] do a community survey and our citizens
say hey the drivability of a bunch of
[13:28] our streets are in bad
condition Highway 28 is our major
[13:34] highest travel roadway in
town currently it's not any part of our
[13:40] decision on when that gets
approved so you were just saying overall
[13:45] improve drivability yeah of the highway
[13:50] yeah and maybe that's part of that well
yeah that's right take a look at it see
[14:01] so so we might even think differently
about
[14:05] what because this
says so we might think the big goal is
[14:11] improve
dve how we get there get to be deter
[14:17] determined and ownership might be the
answer other things
[14:24] might about explore options for Highway
28 improve
[14:31] drivability it's just we want
drivability
[14:36] period like
that's
[14:42] so
fure now for some reason my memory
[14:48] serves
[14:51] that I feel like Jackie was one of the
most outspoken on this particular item
[14:56] well I disagree because would never
[15:02] she would appreciate that comment I'm
sure she could she couldn't be here
[15:07] today I do remember she specifically
brought that up as um as something that
[15:13] she wanted to address and she couldn't
be here she was traveling she had a
[15:16] business thing that uh she
just made it so she could be on the
[15:22] meeting so I feel like maybe that's even
something we if she gets a chance to
[15:26] watch this maybe she could give us some
additional feedback there are definitely
[15:29] some reasons
why
[15:33] right and you know I think the
trafficability was one of them also
[15:39] Aesthetics was another one you know and
Community improvements I there all kinds
[15:45] of but you know you have to wave both
ways right and the question is you know
[15:53] even even if we acquired that Highway
would we still be able to do the things
[15:57] we want to do that's a question
[16:03] too so those are the questions we have
answered but I would say if a person
[16:08] wants to sharpen the guidance on that it
probably wouldn't hurt
[16:12] anybody but that's that's how
[16:18] I Lindsay did you get a good rewarding
of
[16:21] that um I think so I think we'll get
some feedback from Jackie first and then
[16:27] possibly either just ask add improve
drivability to the statement or change
[16:33] it to exploring options for Highway 28
to improve
[16:37] drivability we could probably um we
could email Brian and Jackie both that's
[16:42] not a quorum so we could email both of
them and say hey if you wouldn't mind
[16:46] you know watch this segment they know
about the background all that good stuff
[16:50] but we can get them to this point where
they can listen to this conversation and
[16:53] then they can give us some feedback as
well and ultimately we'll come back to
[16:57] council and explain what what the result
of that is be
[17:06] good Wayne does that give you some
comfort of yeah very much I like it you
[17:11] thought we were gonna own that baby
tomorrow oh
[17:19] no there's been some a lot of
conversation about that I think I can
[17:23] hear well
enough that I heard some reservations
[17:29] yeah yeah I like the idea of exploring
it more
[17:36] yeah anything
[17:40] else we go to the next topic Item B uh
businesses with online sales only so
[17:47] Council may recall that we discussed a
local entrepreneur that is starting an
[17:52] online sales business uh his business
model did not originally include an
[17:57] immediate buildout of the storefront
uh he had hoped to get the business
[18:01] going and then add a storefront at a
later date and this has caus some
[18:05] frustration uh main issue to discuss
tonight is if the city would be willing
[18:10] to adjust our zoning ordinance to allow
online retail businesses in certain
[18:16] commercial districts without a
storefront so staff had difficulty
[18:21] reconciling this as it distribution
issue to discuss tonight is if the sorry
[18:28] muted somebody okay thank
[18:33] you there's the
[18:40] cther there's a
[18:47] few
uh okay staff had difficulty reconciling
[18:52] reconciling this as it appear to be more
of a distribution center rather than a
[18:56] retail uh storefront zoning ordinance
does not specifically call out an online
[19:03] retail sales business while this is a
short summary Luke do you have some
[19:08] additional
clarification I don't I do know that
[19:12] Blake is here tonight if you'd like him
to give any more clarification but I
[19:16] feel like you summarized it well sure
Blake you wanna come up and sure if you
[19:23] if you want to if you don't that's fine
well just a recap kind of what yeah come
[19:28] on up and state your name and address
SCH 3147 perero
[19:34] Drive
um yeah so I I have an online I've had
[19:38] an online business for for a while that
I've that I've ran and now it's just
[19:43] it's more of a focus for me so I own the
old Fairway building so I got a permit
[19:49] to build 4500 square feet of it is is
basically office
[19:56] space product storage space whatever
like Works Space for me and my business
[20:01] there so um as a start now the rest of
it is just you know it's the old grocery
[20:07] store building so I mean it's just
basically a warehouse building sitting
[20:12] there already so yeah my issue was is I
wanted to permit I just want to get the
[20:17] permit to use the whole entire building
and while my business fits you know it's
[20:23] a hobby business so it fits the c012
designation C to you know see why I
[20:31] couldn't go into the go into the space
so and I ran into obstacles because
[20:36] because I'm not open to the public I was
told I had to go into C3 so which seems
[20:43] maybe I'm more of the extrem you know
looking at it and being able to reflect
[20:47] on it for for a couple weeks here but
you know you might
[20:52] have you know Mona store somebody that
you know like sells clothes you know
[20:57] might have people come into the store
but mainly does it online like are you
[21:00] going to go tell them that they got to
go into a warehouse Building and find a
[21:03] thousand square feet to to lease out a
warehouse building and they could you
[21:08] know fill a vacant space and okay well
what we were talking about was all
[21:12] Fairway building and how it's C2 right
now appropriate uses in C2 and repeating
[21:18] myself a little bit uh it's I think it
it's clear in the zoning code that C2
[21:23] does not allow warehousing as we're
talking about here uh
[21:29] uh I believe the definition of
warehousing is also clear that this is a
[21:32] form of warehousing receiving orders and
storing property to be sent out uh for
[21:37] online sales uh what I was saying is
that I'm not telling the council whether
[21:44] they should allow this or not but in
order to permit this
[21:48] uh they you know the development
department was correct in saying that
[21:53] you couldn't have that use currently
what zoning is and uh the downside to it
[22:00] I think was kind of what I was
addressing also I mean I could certainly
[22:03] talk about upsides and downsides the
downsides to this is certainly that this
[22:06] is a dedicated commercial area and uh
just like any type of zoning uh you know
[22:12] whether you know
it's it's it's a bank or it's a medical
[22:18] facility when they locate someplace they
kind of depend on the neighbors too
[22:21] being the same use uh so could the
council rezone it uh we'd have to look
[22:28] at and see what the cooperat plan says
but yeah legally there's a way that you
[22:32] could probably get it reson to allow
this purpose
[22:36] um but you you still have all the
arguments regarding spot zoning and
[22:41] everything like that and we've already
turned down in this area businesses in
[22:45] the past number of years that were you
know a commercial use that wasn't an
[22:51] industrial use so
um yeah storage facility there was a
[22:57] doggy care facility that wasn't allowed
there uh but with that being said
[23:04] currently our code would not allow this
and I agree with the development
[23:07] department with their answer that no you
can't do that and if they sold on the
[23:11] site if they had a walk in Custer and
sold product would that me
[23:16] commercial if it was a clearly a
commercial use yeah I mean you couldn't
[23:20] just window dress it and say oh yeah we
got a we got a door over there and let's
[23:23] put ours you know based upon appointment
only I mean if it's a legitimate
[23:27] business
you can't you know dress it up as a
[23:30] business not have it be a legitimate
commercial site um it's it's got to be a
[23:35] legitimate business and you know what's
the definition of that you know I can't
[23:39] tell you what that is but you know when
you see it I mean if uh because clearly
[23:43] it already looks like a commercial
building so it wouldn't be that hard to
[23:45] say okay I'm commercial we're open for
business whenever we get a customer that
[23:48] decides they want to come in and you
they happen to have a customer come in
[23:51] and I'm not saying that that that's
what's going on here but you know
[23:54] clearly there's a difference here
commercial uses intended
[23:59] for Onsite
[24:03] transactions you know with maybe some
sales I mean like O'Reilly certainly I'm
[24:07] sure they probably have some orders
where they send off parts places uh and
[24:12] I'm sure there's other commercial people
that do that as incidental to the main
[24:17] business but incidental the main use the
main use is a commercial
[24:21] use if there was a walk-in business
there that was a viable part of the
[24:26] business that was probably see more
reasonable yeah with a commercial use
[24:32] there's a certain alloud amount of
storage in the back whether you want to
[24:37] call it warehousing or storage there's a
certain percentage of storage that's
[24:41] allowed within the building when it's a
commercial use uh clearly not all of it
[24:45] can be out front when it was fair away
there's a certain amount of storage in
[24:49] the back and like I said O'Reilly has a
large portion probably half their
[24:52] building is storage in the back uh but
you know that storage needs to be
[24:57] incidental to the main commercial use it
can't be a warehouse that might have a
[25:04] cash register from that's incidental to
the main use which is
[25:08] Warehouse
so
[25:11] uh could we right now the way our code's
written it doesn't necessarily talk
[25:17] about internet sales it doesn't talk
about internet businesses uh certainly
[25:21] that can be addressed I think most of
those internet businesses I think we
[25:24] probably have a lot of them in town out
of houses is that certainly those are
[25:28] allowed to be sold out of houses and
uh but uh right now could we put in
[25:36] definitions that maybe help the code a
little bit on internet sales yeah we
[25:39] don't have something in there that says
internet sales at this point in time but
[25:42] we do have something called called
warehousing which fits this definition
[25:45] when you you know if you got packages
that you sell online and ship
[25:53] out other cities anybody investigate
what they've done with this
[26:00] uh I guess there hasn't been an
investigation of but know this it's
[26:05] warehousing I it's pretty cut and dry I
mean it's cut and dry what it is and
[26:10] this property's been zoned this way for
a number of years now
[26:15] yeah that original store
right what 10 15 years ago yeah
[26:23] obviously Fairway is a huge draw for
that whole
[26:25] area now it's not there that's right and
[26:32] so it's a bad idea to do it because as
it was put out by staff as well you can
[26:39] get a bunch of Internet
[26:43] businesses full activity yeah except for
vehicles coming in picking up stuff once
[26:48] while whatever
delivery which could harm though last
[26:53] person left that's actually
retail cost of it would be I think
[26:59] industrial warehousing cheaper I could
be wrong about that but maybe the new
[27:04] stuff more concerned about even old
detail areas too that could go in there
[27:09] that'd be kind of the death Mill to an
area
[27:14] that
[27:17] nobody it's cheaper I would
guess have retail in there as opposed to
[27:22] internet thing
where just not bringing anybody around
[27:29] yeah I would imagine if you talk to the
businesses along that strip they've
[27:32] already been impacted somehow by Fair
Way not being there right uh you know if
[27:38] that ends up being a long-term situation
where there's no traffic in there it
[27:42] would be a long-term effect versus a
temporary effect when another for
[27:46] another Commercial Business to come in
but I think those are all kind of things
[27:50] that Council would want to discuss if
they were inclined to do a zoning change
[27:54] or zoning amendment process for changing
zoning would be not UNAM you know unlike
[28:01] other ones that we've seen where you
know Council can initiate a resoning on
[28:04] their own that pnz look at it or the
property owner can get a petition that
[28:09] satisfies the
requirements uh
[28:13] to to require a zoning consideration to
go to pnz consideration if it's not in
[28:20] line with our comprehensive plan well
the council can't change that zoning
[28:23] unless comprehensive plan was also
amended and I think that's the same
[28:25] process you've seen on the two items
that were removed from the agenda today
[28:30] uh we had a couple that were removed for
resoning where where we had a petition
[28:35] but it's also not in line with the
comprehensive plan I think the owners of
[28:37] that property want to kind of regroup
and look at it again before it went
[28:41] forward
uh it's possible that the owner might
[28:47] decide to configure that business so it
might be able to be in that kind of an
[28:53] area but that's entirely up to them I
think and I this more hearsay from
[29:02] talking to the development department
was that originally I think there was a
[29:04] plan submitted where there was going to
be multiple retail businesses in there
[29:10] with maybe storage in the back that was
warehousing I think the indication was
[29:14] okay might do that as long as you have
the retail Parts out front but uh then
[29:19] there'll be indep independent uh
occupancy permits you know as the
[29:24] building built out in pods or whatever
you call it in
[29:28] but uh I think that's changed at some
point in
[29:34] time I know that um Luke Paris is on and
he I don't know if he has additional
[29:41] comments or not but I know that in my
discussions with Blake I think there
[29:45] were a couple things I don't know if I'm
going to hit them just right Blake but
[29:48] I'm gonna try to pass them along is one
of the concerns
[29:52] was there there's a plan at some point
in time in the future to have a
[29:57] storefront now I think you're actually
moving forward with the storefront but
[30:01] we still wanted to to bring up the
issue um but I believe part of the
[30:06] requirement to achieve approval and
accomplish what he's wanting to do
[30:10] immediately is if you install a
storefront then you're able to check
[30:14] that box you're meeting that requirement
of the
[30:20] code so I think that he's you're moving
forward of that to put in the
[30:25] storefront it's still because you're
saying limit on storage if you have a
[30:31] storefront no
percentage right from
[30:37] a from a real General perspective then
somebody might say well how much time
[30:42] and effort does the city put in to make
sure that storefront is
[30:46] active and so somebody kind of has to
I'm not saying this coming from like
[30:50] this is just more running through my own
mind uh just to fully think through it
[30:56] is if there's a the president of a
storefront but there's not a lot of
[31:00] traffic very
minimal but then you kind of feel bad
[31:05] from a government perspective saying hey
do these things even though it's a you
[31:11] know I think I'd probably feel more
comfortable if the if the owner worked
[31:16] with the staff to see if there was a way
to legitimately accomplish what he's
[31:22] after I mean it's possible we'd like to
have some other businesses in there too
[31:29] you know what I mean not just your
business but some other businesses in
[31:33] with you that may be sub you
know
[31:38] um but we've gota I I think we owe it to
the other businesses in area to keep
[31:45] that area viable as much as we
can because they invested you know they
[31:52] came in right they
invested and they believed that it was
[31:56] zoned this way it was going to stay that
and that there was going to be traffic
[32:00] in now I mean I you know we can only
control we can control right so we
[32:06] couldn't control the the store movement
and they needed a bigger area any so
[32:13] that's a big change right big change for
those
[32:17] businesses so now if we just say oh
we're just going to reone it I think
[32:22] we'd be kicking the legs out from under
all those businesses and their
[32:26] Investments it just doesn't seem like a
good idea to me on the other hand I I
[32:31] would like to accommodate the person
that owns the property I mean I would
[32:36] like to do that because we need people
to invest in the community so I'd like
[32:42] to
see if if you're interested trying to
[32:47] work on a way to to make it work what
would it take to make it
[32:53] work so we're not letting down those
other businesses we're satisfying our
[32:58] code he can work in with what it is that
he
[33:03] needs and I and I believe for the most
part you have figured out a way working
[33:08] with staff of how to accomplish what you
want to do but also meet the intent
[33:13] spirit and intent of the zoning
ordinance so I think they've got
[33:23] there so so you think it sits right now
where it would be without change in
[33:30] Z right this is um during discussions
with Blake it was hey a last ditch
[33:37] effort before you have to go down that
path of installing the storefront would
[33:40] be to come to council for some
alternative
[33:44] Direction and that that's why we're
having the discussion if if the end
[33:48] result is Council says
Hey the ordinance covers it as best we
[33:53] can please follow that guidance from
staff that's one alternative other
[33:58] alternative would to say staff hey tell
you what take this to pnz and explore
[34:01] making a change of ordinance to allow
what he wants to do those are kind of
[34:05] the two two options and I think you're
looking at my building is like a
[34:10] different scale right so like
26,500 feet a lot different some a th
[34:16] square feet that might want to have a
business that's similar to mine they
[34:20] just don't need right so much space in
an area they might need a little less
[34:25] space I
mean you're excluding them too so I just
[34:29] I think that's the reason for the
discussion is is are we really excluding
[34:33] everybody that might you know need space
that's more
[34:37] retail but it's online versus versus you
know open to the public all the time so
[34:45] what where are you where you find that
balance like what balance does the city
[34:51] want it's a
little my personal opinion right is
[34:58] traffic Walkin traffic to draw Walkin
traffic because I think that contributes
[35:04] to those other businesses in that area
and I'm sure that that grocery store did
[35:08] there's no doubt in my mind right so
when it left then that traffic volume is
[35:16] greatly reduced you know and I think
those businesses suffered a little bit
[35:21] because of
that so I would like to end in a place
[35:26] where we have some level of volume
coming into that building traffic right
[35:34] of people and cars driving by the other
businesses I think I'll have lunch or I
[35:40] want a taco or whatever it is right but
it would be helpful to the other
[35:45] businesses
too that's why I'm at I'm just
[35:54] one I don't know what you guys think to
I feel your way be a
[36:01] [Music]
[36:09] streeta yeah but we don't control the
kind of I mean you know right well
[36:13] you're trying to tell me I need traffic
in my building in order to I I don't
[36:17] care what you do in that building as
long as it's legal right but I want
[36:20] traffic in that building if it's in that
zoned area you understand what I'm
[36:23] saying it just might I mean it's nothing
going to replace the traic so no that's
[36:29] true but we don't have to we need to be
smart too right that's all I'm saying
[36:35] right so I mean you knew that was Zone
that way when you bought it
[36:40] right yeah yeah
[36:45] okay that's why at I don't know what
everybody else think I feel the same
[36:52] way the bigger picture standpoint I
think we need to consider not having
[36:57] Internet sales in C2 District not just
this one piece but just
[37:06] period it's already excluded though
right
[37:09] Elliot so yeah right now warehousing is
excluded so you I think the definition
[37:17] of warehousing clearly fits when it's
something that's exclusively internet
[37:23] [Music]
sales okay
[37:28] and the reason why I wored it that way
but you could have a hobby store that
[37:31] their main business is or gun store
their main business is to sell a retail
[37:36] product out of their out of their store
except you might still have some
[37:41] internet sales involved I like I say it
would the warehousing has to be
[37:44] incidental to the main Commercial
Business not the other way when
[37:50] incidental that means the primary
purpose shouldn't be warehousing the
[37:53] primary purpose should be a commercial
use which is not
[38:03] warehousing you know similar to maybe
I'm talking too much but it's similar to
[38:08] home business now you know home
businesses are allowed under Iowa Co but
[38:12] you can't move somebody out of the home
and make it a home business still have
[38:16] to be legal I mean the primary use of
that structure is still it's somebody's
[38:20] home and so the primary use on that home
and a home business is incidental to be
[38:25] in a home so somebody couldn't decide to
open up for instance an internet sales
[38:30] thing out of their basement which
legally they cancel out as their home
[38:33] but if they move out they can't turn
that building into exclusive warehousing
[38:37] and internet
[38:41] sales so what I'm hearing is is that
there's no there's no desire to look at
[38:47] to changing zoning to allow internet
business in a C2 area right correct you
[38:54] good with that okay
[39:01] do we need anything else we need to
go no okay uh item C is talking about
[39:09] Beggar's Night I think uh Brian wanted
to talk about that since Brian's not
[39:13] here I think we'll remand that over to
the next work
[39:18] session good with
that all
[39:23] right okay
[39:31] were we supposed to
[39:35] decide or were we just having a
conversation work that's
[39:41] conversation I I would think that what
would happen is if it was something that
[39:45] wanted to actually bring on to an agenda
item at the end of the meeting when
[39:50] council members make motions to have it
appear on a future agenda item certainly
[39:54] council member could ask that put on
there for official decision or official
[40:00] deliberation well I do it's always
difficult when you have an actual human
[40:06] being
invol
[40:12] yes when you think about how that play
what's intended there um that's not
[40:22] it and that's not a personal thing like
just that's sure and you know you can
[40:30] you could make an exception because
we're like I like that guy and doesn't
[40:34] seem like we're really you know nobody's
really buying that spot and you know
[40:38] putting something in there with the kind
of traffic We Wish It
[40:41] Would um but it's when you begin to play
that out that it's like really in
[40:48] general do we like that idea no know and
so it's uh I think there are times for
[40:58] ceptions right it's deciding whether or
not this is a the right spot the right
[41:07] time or something that we would say
we're we're fine without
[41:14] exception and I I feel like what I heard
George say is we sure would love to try
[41:23] and figure out hold out hope for a
business that would draw
[41:33] traffic
[41:36] right good to move
on okay item number five welcome guest
[41:41] and public comment thank you for being
here tonight participating in the
[41:43] meeting uh we'll open up the de for
comment if you want to address uh myself
[41:50] or city councils uh this would be for
non-agenda items give you three minute
[41:55] time limit realize we can't take action
on on those on what you're talking about
[41:58] tonight because they aren't on the
agenda and that would be talking about
[42:02] them then would be in violation of open
meetings law also I'd like to comment on
[42:07] any item in the consent agenda now would
be the time so anybody any
[42:11] takers I'm only going to look for takers
within the room
[42:16] this maybe this is a good time to say it
just so you know anybody that's showing
[42:20] up asking for Access yes I have a
feeling it has to do with the fact that
[42:24] we posted on social media the link
immediately before we got started that
[42:30] we're getting so many of them so I'm
communicating with anybody any
[42:34] participant in the waiting room to get
feedback on what agenda item they're
[42:39] here for and letting them know that they
can access the meeting via YouTube
[42:43] stream that's awesome um Barry is still
trying to join so I've asked Elliot to
[42:48] let him know to try via calling so you
may see a phone number pop up there 614
[42:54] area code 614 are
[42:59] uh so just as a sideline Lindsay if you
look at the host
[43:06] tools button there's only two things I'm
allow I've allowed that's chat and to
[43:13] unmute themselves okay I
think for now that would be okay okay
[43:21] but if we want to there we
go uh we want to pull pull off unmute
[43:28] themselves we can do that
some
[43:36] I okay that was sure
[43:41] fun uh item number six consent agenda
can I get a motion to approve the
[43:45] consent agenda motion second okay motion
by Co seconded by Min key Lindsay would
[43:51] you please call R council member Brown
yes K yes miniki yes right Mo carries
[43:57] item seven old a new business for
consideration discussion and possible
[44:01] action item a is a continuation of a
public hearing regarding a zoning
[44:06] amendment to amend the Maple Heights
plan unit development regarding location
[44:10] and type of residential uses so we'll
continue the public hearing at
[44:14] 659m Elliot I'm gonna let you take this
one and I'm gonna pass the Baton off to
[44:19] Paris if he's audible I am you all can
hear me yes okay so uh I'm on Zoom
[44:25] appreciate the option to do this I've
got to step out to my son's band concert
[44:29] here in a bit so um but I wanted to walk
through this I've worked a lot with uh
[44:33] Lone Tree on getting this uh ready so
they can take their next steps in
[44:38] development um we have the Lone Tree
folks online as well um to answer some
[44:43] questions and there's a couple aspects
of this that um maybe warrant some
[44:48] discussion and really some decision
points um so want to start with uh
[44:54] really this is looking at uh a few
different things um firstly it's mainly
[45:00] identifying where some specific use
types will be if you can go into the
[45:05] ordinance um we can take a look at some
maps um but it's identifying some Ali
[45:10] loaded product uh in the northern side
of the development uh a town home area
[45:16] some traditional single family areas um
and then uh again just increasing some
[45:22] numbers of those types um if you could
go down Luke to page I believe it's
[45:27] 26 so I included in the staff report the
uh original PUD just uh if anyone wanted
[45:33] to reference that um but let's go down
and take a look at that initial map um
[45:39] sorry it was a long document um but
there you go uh go back up to the parcel
[45:44] map the one right above that I guess it
was
[45:47] 25 so um right now the Pud uh we're
primarily in this amendment talking
[45:53] about parcel B yeah maybe you can open
it up and turn it there I'm we're
[45:59] talking about parcel B and parcel F and
while Luke gets that uh oriented
[46:04] correctly uh partiel B in the original
PUD allowed for a mix of densities R1 R2
[46:11] and R3 and then parcel F and parcel B
was on the west end of the project
[46:17] parcel uh I'm sorry parcel B was West
End parcel F was a traditional single
[46:22] family uh type uh zoning development um
and that was on the far East End of the
[46:28] project and the pond kind of separates
the two so we're just talking about
[46:32] refining kind of what the land uses are
here and what projects and things might
[46:36] go there uh if you scroll down to that
next map that's kind of sideways you can
[46:40] see what their kind of initial layout
was there were some town homes that were
[46:43] kind of on the exterior of the
development some of those allei loaded
[46:47] products in the center on the and that's
all on the west side and then on the
[46:50] east side you get over to more of a
traditional Suburban single family
[46:54] development um but again with some uh
options to do some of that R2 or R3
[47:00] stuff on the far East End so if we jump
back up to I believe it's page uh
[47:05] seven um or I'm sorry eight um one page
off today um page eight is the layout
[47:14] that they're proposing and what we've
done is um to get granular with what the
[47:19] different develops are parcel B we've
split into two so it's parcel B1 and B2
[47:26] um and then the rest of the west side of
the development gets zoned as parcel f
[47:32] um so to talk quick about
B1 B1 is that uh uh what do we call it
[47:39] uh Aly loaded Villa project project and
so what you see there um is a public
[47:45] Street to the south of B1 and then
there's a public Street to the West that
[47:50] goes up with paral a and then there
would be private drives that came
[47:55] between these units
um and then the other areas so like that
[48:00] would be a private drive but then the
kind of opposing one which might
[48:04] normally be a public Street would be a
green space with a walkway so um some of
[48:09] these units would face out to a public
Street to the uh Far West and then the
[48:14] other all the other units would have
kind of a front door that goes out to a
[48:17] green space with their uh access to
their property on the The
[48:23] Alley um from like a car access um the
other thing in parcel B is uh you see
[48:29] the north side of that development has a
bunch of smaller lots and then there's
[48:33] kind of an area that's right above
parcel c um we do allow for some
[48:38] traditional Town Homes to be in parcel
B1 um in those two areas um just because
[48:44] of the shape of everything and the
layout it worked better that way so
[48:47] that's B1 then partiel B2 is a more
traditional Town Home Development again
[48:53] uh alley loaded so things have uh
uh car access to the alley um the space
[49:01] in between things um in kind of in the
center of B2 is again another Greenway
[49:06] walkway path um that provides access to
every uh unit from a walking
[49:12] perspective um and again those are just
traditional town home similar to what
[49:17] you will'll probably see in the
Brownstones or or lots of our other uh
[49:21] town home developments um and then
parcel F which is the remainder of this
[49:26] original partial B on the west side of
the development is uh single family um
[49:32] so that went to just a normal um single
family lot for what parcel F was um and
[49:38] then if you can go to the east side of
the
[49:42] development um we didn't change parcel F
over there but we did um definitively
[49:47] call out that parcel F can also have
some duplex units some R2 duplex units
[49:52] and those are shown ghosted in there on
the far East side of parcel F those
[49:57] smaller Lots um so that's really the how
the layout of the development is
[50:02] changing with this PUD request um the
other two points that are included if
[50:08] you go back over to parcel
B1 um the developer has asked for some
[50:14] variations to what our garage
requirement would be for a single family
[50:17] unit so for a single family unit we
typically require a two-car garage um
[50:23] only in partial B1 they're asking for
the ability to have uh units that have
[50:29] no garage a onecar garage a twocc car
garage or or more a three-car garage
[50:34] potentially um so that's different than
what our code would have um right now uh
[50:40] the ordinance before you does call out
um that that can happen so that's how
[50:48] we've written the ordinance um let me I
got to get to the right spot in my sheet
[50:55] um the way it's work Ed is that uh each
unit is required to have a garage uh or
[51:03] 75% of the units are required to have a
garage and uh no more than three uh
[51:10] units without a garage can be adjacent
to one another so we're trying to
[51:13] understand that we don't want to have a
bunch of the no car garages all in one
[51:17] spot um so that you know there maybe
only be three in a row um um and then
[51:23] you know again a minimum of those B1
units minimum of 75% of them have to
[51:28] have a garage um with any town home
that's shown in B1 or B2 um they're not
[51:34] requesting for no car garage stuff so
any of those would have a single or a
[51:38] double car garage which is what our code
currently requires for a town home um so
[51:42] that's
garages and then the last thing that we
[51:46] have here is talking about adus and um
we've had a lot of good discussion with
[51:52] uh uh lry and staff and pnz we had some
good discussion about it um and really I
[52:00] think and I'll let them maybe talk from
their side more from this the staff side
[52:05] and I think even when the city approved
this PUD there was a desire to um really
[52:11] look at having an 8 Adu somewhere we'd
had a a resident come in and ask the
[52:15] city to allow them on Residential
Properties by right and we kind of felt
[52:19] like that was maybe jumping too far into
the deep end and then this opportunity
[52:24] presented itself and we thought well
that would be a good place to give it a
[52:28] try in dwalk would be a brand new
development um one of the conditions
[52:34] that we put in this PUD originally was
that the Adu had to be owner occupied um
[52:39] or rather that the lot had to be owner
occupied for them to be able to uh use
[52:43] an Adu um from the development
standpoint and and jamus or Jenny can
[52:48] talk more about this there were just
some concerns that you know they
[52:52] wouldn't be able to Market that or or
that it wouldn't work for them from a
[52:55] business standpoint of selling somebody
a property with an Adu and then if that
[53:00] person wants to then move to a bigger
property or move on in Norwalk or or do
[53:05] something now they don't have the right
to rent out the house and the Adu um so
[53:11] that's something to talk about I think
they're willing to uh give the adus a
[53:16] try in B1 um if we can come to an
agreement on how that language be
[53:22] written right now the uh what pnz
recommended and what's in the
[53:27] uh PUD would allow for adus um without
being owner occupied uh main unit on the
[53:34] lot so that's kind of where we sit with
that um they can uh talk a little bit
[53:40] more on their side uh about their
thoughts on that but I think
[53:44] collectively it's just a matter of we're
willing to do what council wants to do
[53:47] on this one from a staff perspective we
think it would be a a good thing to try
[53:51] as far as housing affordability goes and
and housing diversity but uh certainly
[53:58] um understand if if there's concerns
about that so with that um I will answer
[54:03] any questions and I know lry is on the
line as
[54:09] well I think it's a good
[54:13] idea so it's Innovative it's it's it's
something new uh you know our good
[54:20] friends at pnz you know recommended it
that always matters to me I'm not saying
[54:25] we got to go along with them but we
asked them to do a job they've done it
[54:30] and I'm sure they took this very
seriously I think staff is also probably
[54:35] excited about this as well um yeah it's
it's different it's Unique and
[54:43] um I'm I'm glad we've got a developer
that's you know saying hey we'd like to
[54:48] try something like
[54:54] this yeah I know Bri is not going to buy
one of those houses that doesn't have a
[55:00] garage but okay however I have to go
wander down wakanda they trying to cut
[55:06] across country and saw some houses but
didn't have garages and there I know
[55:11] there's some on that east side of town
that doesn't have garages so I don't
[55:14] have a big problem with not having
garages I think they're going to put a a
[55:17] slab Park cars I believe so it's not so
much on street parking am I correct on
[55:23] that l
[55:31] yes F he was available for questions but
he was
[55:35] kid hear them so yeah then the ad I
think that's yeah I get the idea that
[55:42] you can't de they own it or rent it yeah
you manage that so yeah I'm I think it's
[55:49] a good
idea I recall the discussion we had
[55:55] earlier uh uh in an earlier design
because I know you know we traveled
[56:00] Eastern is we were looking for uh
different designs for how we might put
[56:09] developments
together for a portability as well as
[56:14] loil and we decided that a new
development would be the best place to
[56:20] try that
[56:23] experimentation might not work real well
in
[56:29] just so I don't have any problem with
this because of that now the
[56:35] question about owning and
renting I don't know quite how you make
[56:41] that I mean you can say that first first
the
[56:48] to but can you really put a tie bar on
an owner not being able to rent
[56:54] something out of
that gets into all those private
[56:58] property
issues I think they let that
[57:06] out I think they left that out should be
it could be a renter or or a investor or
[57:14] an owner yeah it's it's difficult for a
city to legislate own or occupy it only
[57:19] and fact there's some pretty direct
State statutes that prohibit us from
[57:23] doing that uh certainly a
developer can put whatever restrictions
[57:29] they want on it themselves uh so if they
were to put restricted confidence on it
[57:34] saying owner owner occupied only they
could certainly do that so if we move
[57:39] this as it sits right now that would not
be a requirement in that's right I think
[57:44] the pz's recommendation was not to have
an owner occupied
[57:49] requirement relating to that that's
correct the uh the way the ordinance is
[57:54] worded right now would allow for adus
without the primary residents being
[57:59] owner occupied was there a reason for
that
[58:03] Luke the reason for why we have it it
now was uh that's kind of what the
[58:09] lundry Development Group uh suggested
they would need to feel comfortable
[58:13] building
them yeah and and you and Elliot are
[58:18] good with that correct
[58:24] okay I kind of excited to see what they
come up
[58:28] with I mean looks like a lot of variety
of housing types
[58:33] here and it's pretty well divided up the
way they've got green spaces in the pond
[58:38] there you
know and I don't hear the Public Works
[58:43] director going crazy about the private
streets
[58:49] so all right Lindsay have we received
any oral written comments on this we
[58:54] have not okay we have public comment on
[59:01] this hearing none I'm going to close
public caring at 7:14 p.m. item 7B is
[59:07] the first reading of an ordinance
amending the official zoning map of the
[59:11] city of nor Iowa by amending the Maple
Heights plan unit development regarding
[59:15] location and type of residential uses we
just had a public hearing on this
[59:18] amendment to the Maple Heights PUD luk
or Elliott do you have anything to add
[59:24] nothing else unless there's questions
I'll answer him this time discussion
[59:28] from Council
[59:32] public he none can I get a motion to
approve first reading as presented
[59:37] motion second okay Co seconded by Brown
Lindy would you call roll council member
[59:42] Co yes yes Brown yes all right motion
carries item seven C it's continuation
[59:50] of public hearing regarding an amendment
to The Orchard Hills planned unit
[59:53] development related to high density
resid itial and neighborhood commercial
[59:57] uses in PUD land use parcel one so we're
going to continue the public hearing at
[1:00:02] 7:15 p.m. lcer Elliott I'm gonna let you
take this one yep so I'll go ahead and
[1:00:08] do this one um request here this is the
one that Barry account is is uh is on
[1:00:14] the call for so 614 area code he told me
he's good so um we'll proceed with this
[1:00:20] one um I'm I'm kind of looking at item
7D while talking about this um basically
[1:00:28] we got a request for a PUD amendment in
Orchard Hills PUD parcel one um the
[1:00:35] current Orchard Hills PUD allows for R4
high density or C1 uses uh but requires
[1:00:43] an amendment to the Pud affirming said
uses whatever they end up being so um
[1:00:50] the request tonight mostly deals with
the southern 2.75 Acres which is just
[1:00:56] over half of the parcel and the request
is to allow for the construction of the
[1:01:02] concept you see before you which is a 62
and
[1:01:06] up
residential project with h two row
[1:01:11] houses um the buildings that are
oriented north south and then a three
[1:01:16] unit
um R4 building with an elevator um
[1:01:22] oriented East West this concept
originally had
[1:01:26] the larger building Ora north south
directly adjacent to Orchard Hills Drive
[1:01:33] they decided to revise the concept and
bring bring this one back uh to pnz um
[1:01:40] so pnz reviewed and approved this one um
something that's worth noting as far as
[1:01:45] the rezoning technically as a PUD
amendment being a rezoning this is in
[1:01:50] our future land use map as new urbanism
so something that we wanted to have them
[1:01:55] do is put the park
behind the building Froning the street
[1:01:59] and so we designed setback regulations
to allow for that um that's what they've
[1:02:03] produced here so um staff is pretty
satisfied with the layout uh the one
[1:02:10] thing that is a little bit different
from typical Zoning for a property like
[1:02:15] this is they have 72 parking spaces
while code normally would require
[1:02:20] 96 um I believe with Alice place that
was kind of the first senior project
[1:02:25] where we looked at
um doing a pretty significant cut to the
[1:02:28] number of spaces needed in addition to
uh amending our code to not require
[1:02:33] garages for senior projects so if you're
wondering about that element of the site
[1:02:39] plan or excuse me the concept this is
not a site plan um that explains
[1:02:45] explains that piece uh the reason that
we split this into Parcels 1 a and 1B is
[1:02:51] because the first time this uh came to
the attention of council
[1:02:56] uh there there was emphasis on retaining
commercial uses in the remaining ground
[1:03:02] and so that's the way that I have
written the amendment here to um
[1:03:08] basically just keep that Northern 2.73
Acres the same as it is right now and
[1:03:13] still require an amendment affirming a
use there um the application is only for
[1:03:20] the southern half and the owners of the
remaining 2.73 Acres have decided not to
[1:03:25] move forward with any more detailed
amendments at this time so we're not
[1:03:31] touching that it's just being cut off
from parcel
[1:03:36] 1B um Minor Detail in the staff report I
found out while um earning my way up to
[1:03:44] full-time employment with the city that
a amendment to this PUD at some point
[1:03:49] deleted the land use table for the
entire Orchard Hills
[1:03:53] development um and so so this thing is
putting it back in there the way that it
[1:03:59] was supposed to be you know originally
from the beginning it was inadvertently
[1:04:03] deleted so we're putting it back in
there um along with this amendment so
[1:04:08] I'm happy to take any questions and uh
we do have representation for this item
[1:04:13] here on the call
[1:04:16] tonight does it Alice's Place seem to
work with not as much
[1:04:21] parking heard no complaints okay and
like no
[1:04:34] garages I like the design of it uh I
thought the last Council me or Council
[1:04:40] meting or two ago we talked about the
north side as well and we restricted
[1:04:46] that or maybe we just talk be commercial
yeah be
[1:04:51] commer but you're saying we're going to
leave that open now or I TR the
[1:04:56] applicants are not choosing to move
forward with making that change right
[1:05:00] now so we're just leaving that alone
they will have to come back and do
[1:05:03] another PUD Amendment at a future date
to affirm uses there which they've we've
[1:05:08] talked to them several times leading up
to this meeting um Grant Wright who we
[1:05:13] heard from earlier um is kind of
spearheading the real estate side of
[1:05:17] that so he's aware of I don't what the
city's
[1:05:22] expecting we made no decision at that
time no okay okay thank you what can go
[1:05:29] over in the panh
handle an access easement for Public
[1:05:34] Works to get to the water tower
um
[1:05:39] and if an accessory building of some
sort will fit in there then that um it's
[1:05:46] technically rear yard so um it's not a
very wide envelope I think
[1:05:52] it's about 45 feet in width my
understanding is that's the geometry of
[1:05:57] the site uh just to get the right amount
of space under control for the
[1:06:03] app okay so no apartment building could
be put over there not with the current
[1:06:10] PUD language
though
[1:06:14] okay but if we accept this P the way it
is which
[1:06:20] proposed then that could be right no so
I wrote the uh the language I wrote for
[1:06:27] this says that this concept will be
predominantly followed at the site plan
[1:06:31] stage so if if we get a site plan back
showing four buildings we're going to
[1:06:35] make him come back and do PUD Amendment
just like what we're doing right
[1:06:39] now
good assume the city owns everything
[1:06:45] South yeah so if you square this
rectangle off the remaining space around
[1:06:50] the water tower is public
[1:06:54] ground l have we received any orally
written comments on this we have not all
[1:06:58] right any public
[1:07:04] comment hearing none we're going to go
ahead and close public hearing at 7:22
[1:07:08] PM item 7D is the first reading of an
ordinance amending the master plan on
[1:07:13] rules regulations and guidelines for the
excuse me for the Orchard Hills plan
[1:07:18] unit development as cont take in
ordinance
[1:07:23] 04-05 uh we just had a public hearing on
this amendment to The Orchard Hills PUD
[1:07:28] Elliot got anything to
add any discussion from Council further
[1:07:33] discussion or public
[1:07:38] comment I get a motion to approve the
first reading well I'm glad to hear that
[1:07:42] it's nailed down what we're looking at
there and that we can't be
[1:07:47] surprised because I don't want to be
surprised right like we were
[1:07:51] before yep so I'll move this with that
understand sounds good second all right
[1:07:59] so motion by Co seconded by Min any
further
[1:08:04] discussion Lindsay would you call a
council member miniki yes Brown yes cool
[1:08:09] yes all right motion carries item seven
e is a resolution initiating rezoning
[1:08:15] referring the rezoning proposal to the
Norwalk Planning and Zoning commission
[1:08:18] and setting a public hearing regarding
the proposed zoning Amendment to the
[1:08:22] Norwalk zoning map by changing 7680
County Line Road from AR agricultur
[1:08:27] Reserve to re1 rural Estates Elliot I'm
going to let you take this one yep so
[1:08:33] this is a property that was developed
back in uh in a subdivision that was
[1:08:37] approved I think 1978 and then
subsequently annexed into the city so it
[1:08:42] defaulted to a zoning the owners want to
do an expansion to the house that a
[1:08:47] zoning setbacks don't allow um it was
developed in a in a in a in a fashion
[1:08:54] that resembles re1 rural Estates so if
we rezone to that class they would have
[1:08:59] enough setback space to do their
expansion all right any discussion
[1:09:04] Council or public
comment I get a motion to approve moot
[1:09:12] second motion by Mani seconded by Co any
further
[1:09:18] discussion Lindsay would you call the
role council member miniki yes Brown yes
[1:09:23] cool yes all right carries item 7f
resolution initiating rezoning referring
[1:09:29] the rezoning proposal to the norock
Planning and Zoning commission and
[1:09:32] setting a public hearing regarding the
proposed zoning Amendment to the Norwalk
[1:09:37] zoning map by changing 1421 Sunset Drive
from C2 Community commercial to IP
[1:09:44] infield plan unit development with C2
uses Elliot yep so this properties is at
[1:09:49] the southwest corner of high road and
Sunset Drive it's where the Rodney
[1:09:54] Albert's house
uh was demoed within the last 30 days or
[1:09:58] so um currently Zone C2 so the setbacks
take up about 94% of the parcel area um
[1:10:06] in order for it to be redeveloped we've
got to get creative so we've got an
[1:10:11] infill plan unit development ordinance
drafted up that we're ready to take to
[1:10:15] pnz if uh Council elects to S it
there all
[1:10:23] right discussion from Council
public
[1:10:32] comment and I get a motion to approve
resolution as presented second motion by
[1:10:37] Brown seconded by Min any further
discussion Lindy would you please call
[1:10:42] roll council member Brown yes cool yes
Min yes all right motion carries I was
[1:10:48] waiting for another one there's usually
more
[1:10:51] here uh item 7g as resolution accepting
infrastructure and approving the final
[1:10:57] plat Marketplace at Echo Valley plat 5
so all the infrastructures in place for
[1:11:02] this we need to approve the final plat
to create a buildable lot exactly that
[1:11:08] any anything else uh I made an error by
saying accepting infrastructure there's
[1:11:14] nothing to
accept so all right uh any discussion
[1:11:20] councel or public
[1:11:24] comment all right right can I get a
motion to approve motion second
[1:11:30] George motion by Co seconded by
Brown any further
[1:11:37] discussion ly call council member Co yes
Min yes Brown yes all right motion
[1:11:43] carries item 7 H resolution approving
the site plan of Pizza Ranch our
[1:11:49] previous action created the buildable
lot where the new Pizza Ranch is going
[1:11:52] to be constructed this is approving the
site plan
[1:11:55] Elliot yep so Pizza Ranch site plan um
is that's the item um it's pretty
[1:12:04] self-explanatory I think it's about a
12,000 foot building um I did a little
[1:12:09] parking analysis in there kind of
explaining how the the arcade space
[1:12:13] inside there um we didn't feel it was
appropriate to um factor that into the
[1:12:18] parking calculation just because that's
predominantly a use for people who don't
[1:12:24] drive they're typically passengers so um
we thought that made made sense to uh to
[1:12:30] Omit that um something we' decided to be
a bit more deliberate about in our staff
[1:12:35] reports is anytime something that
Council can wave is being proposed we're
[1:12:41] starting to list that in staff reports
so um the only thing that isn't
[1:12:47] necessarily Zone and compliant but wable
by Council would be the space count uh
[1:12:51] for parking they're proposing a 100
rather than the typical 100 15 um we
[1:12:56] think that's appropriate because
Marketplace Drive was designed
[1:13:00] specifically so that people could park
on the street so we think that some of
[1:13:04] the spaces adjacent to the site can
factor into that
[1:13:07] number um don't have a whole lot else to
add other than um the folks working on
[1:13:13] the architectural elevations did a good
job indicating uh sight lines that's
[1:13:18] something we don't see too often in some
middles so that's good to see um and
[1:13:24] I've got nothing further to add but
happy to answer any questions if I can
[1:13:28] all right discussion questions from
Council or any public
[1:13:35] imput so the treatment on this building
will be similar to what's up there now
[1:13:41] in that area I would
imagine mostly um yeah mostly Stone
[1:13:48] composits a little bit of engineered
wood composite yeah
[1:13:53] [Music]
[1:13:59] any want to make anybody want to make a
motion okay motion by mini seconded by
[1:14:04] Co any further
discussion lindsy would you call roll
[1:14:09] council member mini yes Brown yes cool
yes all right motion carries item 7 K
[1:14:15] it's first reading of an ordinance
amending chapter 92 water rates in
[1:14:19] chapter 177 rates and fees providing for
amended secondary water or irrigation
[1:14:24] rates
so irrigation continues to drive up
[1:14:27] water usage within the metro area uh in
summer as a metro area we use about two
[1:14:33] times the amount of water than during
winter uh also High nitrates lower the
[1:14:39] amount of water that de Mo Waterworks
can produce and we're running into Times
[1:14:44] where we're looking at implementing
water saving procedures it is very
[1:14:48] costly to the overall Metro to create
more capacity uh purpose of this rate
[1:14:54] change is to offset the overall cost of
producing more water we also realize
[1:14:59] that a secondary positive impact is a
possible decrease of water usage we are
[1:15:04] asking Council to change our irrigation
meter rates to an inclining block
[1:15:08] schedule and to use that rate schedule
all year round Jean I'll turn it over to
[1:15:13] you okay thank you um as you know we
have we charged $2 on top of the regular
[1:15:19] rate right now two months out of the
year um last year here again was about
[1:15:25] 81 million gallons um in that two
months
[1:15:31] the was about 20 million so there's
about $61 million of irrigation or
[1:15:37] million gallons sorry of irrigation that
we did not charge for um I think the
[1:15:43] best way to put this is um on an average
day we use the city entire city uses
[1:15:51] about a million gallons during these
high peak times when we're using
[1:15:55] irrigation we use about 2 million
gallons and of
[1:16:00] our U 5,300 MERS about 1,200 of them are
irrigation so
[1:16:06] 22% of the people IR using irrigation
are kind of um increasing the cost for
[1:16:14] the entire city so we think it would
make more sense to charge these uh
[1:16:19] irrigation rates and the schedule I
don't think we mentioned that um would
[1:16:23] be 0 to6 ,000 gallons be 1.25 times the
regular rate 6 to 9,000 gallons 1.5
[1:16:32] times the regular rate and above 9,000
would be two times the regular rate um
[1:16:38] the main reason for doing this um is
central Iowa
[1:16:43] Waterworks not one of the it's just one
of the additional reasons I should say
[1:16:48] uh Central Iowa Waterworks is going to
be doing an expansion the Sailor Ville
[1:16:52] plant it's about 160 million
10 million of that will be norwalk's
[1:16:59] portion you just think about a 20-year
srf loan at 3% it's about 695,000 a year
[1:17:07] we go a 30-year loans about 500,000 a
year these rates just get us a little
[1:17:12] bit closer to paying uh making those
payments it doesn't cover it completely
[1:17:17] um but will help in that regard and
maybe hopefully people will pay
[1:17:22] attention a little bit more um I'm sure
there's some
[1:17:26] overwatering that doesn't need to happen
so just trying to offset those costs one
[1:17:33] thing we did talk about and I'm not
going to ask you to do it tonight
[1:17:36] because I don't like to throw this on
you but we charge an availability fee by
[1:17:41] meter size we put that in place last
April and through our discussions about
[1:17:46] this uh we realized we only charge for
one meter and we just charge whatever
[1:17:51] the larger meter is so if they have a
3/4 in regular meter and a 1 in
[1:17:56] irrigation meter we charge the
availability fee only on that 1 in
[1:18:01] meter we might be bringing back we have
an availability fee for irrigation
[1:18:06] meters as well as the base meter so that
might be something to think about um I
[1:18:10] calculated that would be another
130,000 would really help go toward
[1:18:15] offsetting the costs that we are
experiencing due to
[1:18:20] irrigation and I know that um Finance
work group reviewed this and admin
[1:18:25] policy work group reviewed this and both
recommended that we move
[1:18:31] ahead you have any
questions how did you how how did you
[1:18:35] come up with the numbers there the one
point two times rate 1.5 two times uh
[1:18:45] you know we really just kind of made
some comparisons with other cities yep
[1:18:49] and
um there's no consistency across the
[1:18:54] board we thought we would ease into it
and we thought you know if you only use
[1:18:58] so many maybe not get uh dinged as much
as someone who uses 20,000 so if you're
[1:19:04] only using 5,000 to irrigate maybe you
pay a little less than someone that uses
[1:19:08] 20 we have some people that in the month
of July we'll use 30,000 gallons for
[1:19:12] irrigation what's the average use per
household is there for irrigation or for
[1:19:19] household usage household us
overall I don't have that I don't have
[1:19:25] that because you know what it es and
flows from year to year yeah um you know
[1:19:30] last year wasn't the beginning of the
year was really wet uh it was less and
[1:19:35] then toward the end of the year got
really dry the year before was super dry
[1:19:39] and
um so I don't I don't really have that
[1:19:43] number I'm I suppose maybe I'm wondering
a little
[1:19:48] bit I'm on the committee that talked
about this so uh it's like um you
[1:19:55] know is if if some people are using 20
to 30,000 like that's not
[1:20:03] 9,000 and it's like so they're paying
the same rate from nine to 50,000
[1:20:09] whatever they want so I'm
wondering if the if there's partially a
[1:20:16] goal of reducing water
usage if
[1:20:22] uh if we
like if the rate would be even higher at
[1:20:27] some point too because there's kind of
like wow that's
[1:20:33] excessive right I mean we're we're not
really trying to penalize people who
[1:20:37] irrigate um but we are just trying to
recover our Cost U Pick this is maybe a
[1:20:43] way to start looking at it see what
happens the first year maybe we can
[1:20:47] increase it after that what I'm thinking
about there is let's say we we also want
[1:20:52] to help people now not use as much water
so like again it would be the creation
[1:20:59] of some sort of fund that would be that
that our residents could take advantage
[1:21:05] of
to like if they wanna do something to
[1:21:11] their lawn that would reduce the need
for water that we might be able to
[1:21:17] be help like a some sort of a carrot
there yeah we have talked about programs
[1:21:25] we kind of have a program in place that
Elliot overseas uh we don't get much um
[1:21:32] traffic there we don't get many requests
um like water barrels and soil control
[1:21:38] soil Rion control and or rain barrels I
should say it's like a soil um what's
[1:21:44] the word I'm looking for where they soil
quality restoration yes so we do have
[1:21:50] some programs in place to encourage and
if you do that restoration
[1:21:55] you have more ideas then you end up with
more top soil so you don't need as much
[1:21:59] irrigation to keep that on so we do have
that available okay yeah maybe it would
[1:22:06] be matter of like if we wanted to make
this a big deal overall to the city
[1:22:13] there would almost be a marketing game
plan that would be hey we want to help
[1:22:20] people use less water for their for
their laws
[1:22:25] again that may be just too big of a
discussion on
[1:22:31] this why I could certainly talk to our
um marketing and communication staff and
[1:22:38] see if they could come up with some
ideas on how to try to promote some of
[1:22:41] those programs at the same time that
these rates are going into
[1:22:47] effect yeah and if we find then that
they're being more used then maybe we
[1:22:56] can think about how to make more dollars
available I
[1:23:01] suppose that'd be a good problem to have
[1:23:08] yeah send me an email to remind me of
this program because I might take
[1:23:14] advantage of it because i' turned off my
irrigation the last two years three
[1:23:21] years now hit your water barrel and I
mean the lawn in the back looks very
[1:23:26] interesting by the end of the summer
but it's I I can't believe how much I
[1:23:32] would have to water to like keep it
green yeah so it's like a loss
[1:23:39] cause to add on to well go ahead I'm
sorry you're done so to add on so that's
[1:23:47] for the current for the Sailor bille
expansion it's $160 million for 10
[1:23:52] million G 10 million gallons of water
additional capacity the next expansion
[1:23:58] will be another from what I understand
is planned to be another 10 million
[1:24:02] gallons of water per day but it's going
to cost like
[1:24:07] $320,000 wow so the cost of producing
water is going
[1:24:14] way and that's why it's essential to
react on something like this because we
[1:24:19] somehow need to curve the use while
we're setting money aside to be a pay
[1:24:24] for
the find a grass that keeps green while
[1:24:28] it's out water huh need to have green
grass with less water find a grass that
[1:24:35] will do that as opposed to I'm sure
sports turf would be happy to talk show
[1:24:41] you some that stuff gets hot indoor
outdo or country yards they look they
[1:24:48] look nice I like
mine a yard of
[1:24:52] Clover Clover keeps green
man one of my brothers in Nevada has
[1:24:58] painted rocks you know but no I I think
this is uh something we need to do here
[1:25:05] okay any other discussion councel or
public
[1:25:10] comment I get a motion to approve the
first reading motion second motion by Co
[1:25:16] seconded by Min key any further
[1:25:20] discussion hearing none Lindsay would
you please call a roll council member
[1:25:24] cool yeah miniki yes Brown yes all right
motion carries item 7 L second reading
[1:25:30] of an ordinance granting to Mid-American
Energy company it successors and assigns
[1:25:35] the right and non-exclusive franchise to
acquire construct direct maintain and
[1:25:40] operate in the city of Norwalk Iowa a
natural gas system and to furnish and
[1:25:44] sell natural gas to the city and its
inhabitants and authorizing the city to
[1:25:49] collect franchise fees for a period of
25 years so we had a public hearing on
[1:25:53] this side item and first reading at our
last meeting this is to replace local
[1:25:58] option sales tax on our natural gas
bills with a 1% franchise feed like to
[1:26:04] also add that just a couple days after
our last council meeting held normal uh
[1:26:09] mayor's chat in here we had several
people in attendance where they asked
[1:26:13] questions about the franchise fee uh I
was I was impressed with the detail the
[1:26:19] citizens of the citizen questions and
their desire to learn what what was
[1:26:23] going on
uh I can't say they were excited about
[1:26:26] the establishment of a fee but there
seemed to be a genuine agreement that it
[1:26:30] was the right move to make uh their main
issue was disagreement of the fee
[1:26:35] increasing Beyond
1% Jim Gan or Luke anything to add did
[1:26:41] not no all right discussion from Council
or public comments yeah I was gonna say
[1:26:46] one thing is uh you know uh I'm sad that
we're forced to do this you know the the
[1:26:53] LW stuff is is a way of saying hey we're
good neighbors within our County you
[1:26:58] know people come here they spend money
Norwalk people go there they spend money
[1:27:02] and it's a way of being a community it's
a way of like sharing and you know uh it
[1:27:10] makes me sad that we have to turn to
doing this because we're saying nope we
[1:27:15] got to keep it all but I think we've
been forced to make that decision and
[1:27:20] overall I would say that I'm sad at the
overall perspective on taxes because it
[1:27:28] feels to me like um we're just it's it's
another way that we're losing a a sense
[1:27:36] of hey we're all in this thing together
called a a good city with good streets
[1:27:43] good sidewalks good you know good safety
good good schools right and there's just
[1:27:50] what's in people's ears saying I kind of
want to opt out of that now just because
[1:27:55] I don't want to pay for that so I'm
getting on a hobby horse I
[1:28:00] realize but doing this I'm just kind of
like shoot it was nice that we were even
[1:28:08] though maybe we were getting a lot of
Revenue we were sharing it with our our
[1:28:12] neighbors in Warren County I like that
perspective um so I it's the right thing
[1:28:19] to do um
[1:28:26] they can do the same thing
though yeah they are well they will they
[1:28:31] are I mean George I'm not saying that we
shouldn't do it yeah yeah I just don't
[1:28:36] like the fact that our hand has been
forced yeah let's get
[1:28:41] selfish right now looks like I just
looked up Indian orans first time I
[1:28:45] looked at they got a 5% franchise fee
right now yeah
[1:28:54] Johnson just went to
[1:28:58] 5% and did they do that
explicitly because they're like Johnson
[1:29:03] at least was like we got to generate
more
[1:29:07] Revenue yes to replace it's a house file
718 deal yes yeah they wouldn't have
[1:29:13] done that correct I think that's true
yeah all right any other discussion from
[1:29:19] Council or public comment motion second
all right motion by Co for second
[1:29:25] reading seconded by
mini Lindsay would you call roll council
[1:29:30] member miny yes Brown yes cool yes all
right motion carries item 7 m it's
[1:29:35] second reading of an ordinance granting
to Mid-American Energy company its
[1:29:39] successors and assigns the right and
non-exclusive franchise to acquire
[1:29:44] construct erect maintain and operate in
the city of Norwalk Iowa an electric
[1:29:50] electric system to furnish and sell
electric energy to the city and its
[1:29:54] habit and its inhabitants and
authorizing the city to collect
[1:29:58] franchise fees for a period of 25 years
got a public hearing on this item and
[1:30:03] first reading in our last meeting this
is to replace local option sales tax on
[1:30:07] our electric bills with 1% franchise
feed anything else to add Jim L te
[1:30:15] discussion from councel public
comment one more thing I was I asked a
[1:30:20] few of my friends if they knew that they
were even paying this one % and they're
[1:30:25] like no
[1:30:31] idea 4% was 4% yes
wow you remember I mentioned when we got
[1:30:38] together with the Min Ministerial
Association there was more than one
[1:30:42] Pastor that said they weren't sure if
they were filed as exempt in paying the
[1:30:46] local op of sales
[1:30:49] tax yeah I'm not saying that's a
positive or negative for it it was just
[1:30:53] an interesting thing that if it didn't
show up on the radar maybe it wasn't
[1:30:57] that big of a deal all right can I get a
motion to approve second reading motion
[1:31:02] second motion by Co seconded by Min
Lindsay would you call roll council
[1:31:06] member mini yes Brown yes cool yes all
right motion carries item seven n it's a
[1:31:12] second reading of an ordinance amending
the code of ordinances of the city of
[1:31:16] Norwalk Iowa to adopt the Norwalk
technology in Industry overlay District
[1:31:20] so we had a public hearing and our first
reading of the addition of the overlay
[1:31:24] District to our ordinances at our last
meeting Elliot anything to add uh per
[1:31:29] Luke Paris he added what council decided
on for the makeup of the Niti Review
[1:31:34] Committee to the ordinance
okay all right so can I get or any
[1:31:42] discussion from councel or public
comment I get a motion to approve motion
[1:31:47] second reading as amended I got a motion
by Brown seconded by I think
[1:31:54] rule uh Lindsay would you call rule
council member Brown yes cool yes Min
[1:32:00] yes all right motion carries item eight
future agenda items purpose for this is
[1:32:06] for Council to give direction to staff
by way of motion to have items placed on
[1:32:10] future agendas it's not for a discussion
of the merits of the subject matter do
[1:32:14] we have any future agenda items
tonight car none we'll go on Council
[1:32:20] inquiries and staff updates number nine
I'd like to remind everybody that this
[1:32:24] portion of the meeting is much less
formal uh you may hear some back and
[1:32:29] forth banner and general joking around
we believe this can build camaraderie
[1:32:33] and cohesiveness between staff and
councel but please keep it professional
[1:32:39] Jim uh gotta talk about this
gy look at
[1:32:45] that well I guess so that's my daughter
Olivia uh she had her first college
[1:32:51] outing pitching softball lastek weekend
down in Texas and she had three games
[1:32:57] that she pitched and as a result she was
named athlete of the week for the
[1:33:02] Iowa I'm not sure what is
NJCAA conference so all the junior
[1:33:09] colleges in Iowa she was named athlete
of the week for it so she did pretty
[1:33:13] good for her first outing in
college
[1:33:21] mother lot of ours sitting on a
[1:33:26] bucket yeah anything else uh I assume
you'll talk about annexation so we'll
[1:33:33] let you do that I can do that our leader
during that so you could take the glory
[1:33:37] of talk about it okay uh
George Ed uh no sir
[1:33:44] Ellie real quick thing a little bit
extracurricular you guys know that I
[1:33:48] sometimes send you articles and and
interesting tidbits I run across uh two
[1:33:51] weeks ago today Donald shot passed away
if you don't know that name don't be
[1:33:56] embarrassed he wrote The High Cost of
free parking which came out in uh
[1:34:03] 2005 um it's a the book is big enough to
be used as a weapon um but it has become
[1:34:10] kind of staple literature in our field
and he was uh he's a very very funny guy
[1:34:15] he's got some TED Talks that are
interesting to listen to um his actual
[1:34:19] website is shoot
dog.org um so very enlightened fellow
[1:34:25] but he passed away two weeks ago and
just uh you know encourage you to check
[1:34:29] out his material if you're uh
ridiculously
[1:34:34] bored that's all I got good thank you
car nothing tonight
[1:34:40] wait with the warm weather coming next
week we're gonna have a lot of melting
[1:34:44] and we'll have refreezing at night that
turns into pothole season so if you get
[1:34:49] complaints from residents we do have a
form on our website where people can go
[1:34:52] and report potholes uh we will be out
filling them next week so if they let us
[1:34:57] know we love it when we hear from people
are telling us where they where they
[1:35:00] have
issues at the next city council meeting
[1:35:03] I'm going to have a contract from both
uh on the agenda to engineer what's
[1:35:07] called a dowar retrofit project on 50th
Avenue this will be a project from North
[1:35:13] Avenue to County Line Road if you drive
that segment you'll feel bumps the
[1:35:17] joints are starting to
offset uh this project will put Dow bars
[1:35:22] at the joints then we diamond TR it to
smooth it out it'll add about 15 more
[1:35:26] years of life to that road I'm just
telling you now my plan I'm telling you
[1:35:30] now because my plan is to use
reallocation of the ridge money the
[1:35:34] money we had set aside for that
assessment project we tried hard to find
[1:35:39] a project that's going to affect a large
percentage of the community but it
[1:35:44] couldn't be a full rebuild because I
don't want it start over another
[1:35:47] assessment project I'm just trying to
stay out of that for now um so we're
[1:35:52] proposing to use the money on that
that'll be on the next
[1:35:56] agenda that's it all right Mr fire
inspector nothing all right Chief yeah
[1:36:03] since the last council meeting
unfortunately we at the police
[1:36:06] department had two resignations of
officers um one for medical reasons and
[1:36:13] one change in family circumstances both
were um not really anticipated so to uh
[1:36:20] fill those gaps uh you'll see at the
next meeting or request for funding for
[1:36:25] um an Academy training and we are hiring
now looking for two good applicants or
[1:36:32] actually we have one applicant in the
pipeline so we're looking for one
[1:36:35] applicant
now hopefully we find it uh just want to
[1:36:40] point out that because of the academy
cycing uh when they start and when they
[1:36:45] end and where we are in a hiring process
just starting um from today it'll be 15
[1:36:52] months um before we have a person in
position trained and operating on the
[1:36:58] roads by themselves to replace the
officer that resigned last week so just
[1:37:04] want to put that in perspective that's
all sir all right thank you Jean Kelly I
[1:37:09] have nothing thank you olly you have
some business updates um for retail and
[1:37:15] restaurants just a lot of tentative
opening planning date plan dates so the
[1:37:20] sports plx Norwalk facility is open so
that's kind of within the the bigger
[1:37:26] Sports plex facility next to our
Fieldhouse that's the indoor tur and
[1:37:29] sports training so might have seen that
on news story so they're doing good
[1:37:34] Ember Market Vivid lifespa will be
opening soon probably the next couple of
[1:37:38] months mullets still scheduled for early
April K High Golf is planning for June
[1:37:43] Christian Brothers Automotive this
spring um Cooper Central table on
[1:37:47] cockail as you know has been open for a
couple weeks doing super great they're
[1:37:51] doing so well that there's already maybe
some talk of expansion in their really
[1:37:55] near future something cool with them is
they are working with the Fairfield and
[1:37:59] I'm sure they'll be working with the
Hilton as well once they're open but
[1:38:02] they their guests that stay at the
Fairfield can put their food on um their
[1:38:07] Cooper's food on their hotel tab so it's
kind of cool and then their outdoor
[1:38:11] patio will open this spring Sunset
Lounge is now open already super packed
[1:38:15] and popular um so it's not just a
cocktail lounge it's got the full food
[1:38:19] menu so that's kind of another just cool
option for people to have hot works
[1:38:23] studio is looking to open by mid-march
um just another great health and fitness
[1:38:28] opportunity for residents Pizza Ranch
would like to be open sometime this year
[1:38:32] um I know they're still kind of in their
early stages but them having an arcade
[1:38:36] is kind of a cool thing for families and
all the kids that'll be here um over the
[1:38:40] summer for the tournaments and
everything at Sports Flex so that's
[1:38:44] another good option art um Hilton Hotel
also plans to open by late winter this
[1:38:51] year they've had lots of delays a lot of
electricity and things like that that um
[1:38:55] you know we all deal with neure Smoothie
Cafe and Bakery and Sports Nutrition
[1:39:00] Affiliates that's under construction
north of chat plan to open by summer
[1:39:04] they'll also have an outdoor patio and
then they're working on another
[1:39:07] development next door that'll include
more retail and a fitness fitness center
[1:39:12] um we have another new upscale
restaurant coming to the former Warrior
[1:39:15] Run Clubhouse they'll announce details
on that soon couple weeks hyper energy
[1:39:19] bar will be building south of Subway in
norlock central they'll double Drive
[1:39:23] through super popular um all over the
place especially with sports and
[1:39:27] recreation areas nothing but healthy
drinks coming out Health lot of caffeine
[1:39:32] as you know we like um Credit Union will
be building just south of Hy River um
[1:39:38] planned to start this year as well the
done industrial Flex buildings are full
[1:39:41] so they'll be announcing all their
tenants soon the Koso State delegation
[1:39:46] trip tentative dates are June 22nd
through the 27th if you're interested in
[1:39:50] that please reach out to me the
Washington DC legislative and economic
[1:39:54] development trip is May 7th through 9th
so talk to L Nelson and orene about that
[1:39:59] and
budget um and then on Tuesday May or you
[1:40:03] want to talk about that governor and
then oh this super fun um deas is they
[1:40:09] will be making an announcement this week
we'll put out a press release with they
[1:40:12] purchased land along Highway 28 and
Turnberry to build a new Clinic um
[1:40:16] they'll start this year around 20,000
square feet facility Orthopedic Urgent
[1:40:22] Injury Clinic um they'll also have
physical therapy and sports performance
[1:40:26] training they will plan to be open by
Spring of 26 and then lastly check out
[1:40:32] our new website we have for the
Southwest development Corridor we can
[1:40:36] email you that link but even if we just
Google Southwest Bor it will pop up um
[1:40:41] it includes our Economic Development
guide as well and it's just a really
[1:40:46] cool comprehensive place for people to
be able to get every bit of information
[1:40:50] going on in that whole area including
the annexation developers looking for
[1:40:54] land or land owners looking to be
included infrastructure utilities so
[1:40:59] it's kind of kind of cool let us know if
you see anything that needs to be
[1:41:02] changed and that's
it all right
[1:41:07] St would you like come
[1:41:12] on I just wanted to point out I did
deliver the March April activity
[1:41:17] calendar so please take a look there's
than 29 activities for all ages in there
[1:41:22] and we would to have you stop in and see
what our residents are up to thank you
[1:41:26] all right thank you Robin said she
didn't have anything so Lindy nothing
[1:41:32] all right uh Jason so the Norwalk girls
team finished the season with one
[1:41:39] loss um they're ranked fourth in State
uh and uh so they start their state you
[1:41:47] know Journey on
Saturday um with you know if you have
[1:41:52] any time come join us at the Fieldhouse
for that game uh there're a lot of fun
[1:41:58] to watch um and we we had two girls that
were first team All Conference two girls
[1:42:06] that were second Team all conference two
girls that were honorable menion all so
[1:42:10] six wow that's like one more than a
starter uh so uh it's the tied for the
[1:42:18] best season in Norwalk
history um and we were champ Co
[1:42:23] champions of the conference this year we
beat dcg for the first time in nine
[1:42:28] years uh I don't know the last time we
were champions of our conference um and
[1:42:35] so and you know if you come pay
attention to the 59 real
[1:42:41] jumpy afraid to take
shots stealing the ball passing for
[1:42:47] assists rebounding doing all the things
good coaches like uh
[1:42:53] Pearl Brown also should say this since
we're bragging about kids I think my
[1:42:59] middle son may have run the fastest mile
of anyone who's ever lived in Norwalk so
[1:43:05] he ran a 406 out of
Bost so Tony anania who's a senior he
[1:43:10] ran a 406 something 1600 at state so I'm
sure he's going to try and beat that
[1:43:15] this year he's a
senior but Jack didn't even do track in
[1:43:19] high school he did soccer
[1:43:25] so
anyway nice yeah I know that his goals
[1:43:30] are more he's a sophomore it's he wants
to run faster than 406
[1:43:40] but thank you yeah thanks for
[1:43:45] listening uh just a few items uh I I
want to com commend the mayor on his
[1:43:50] mayor's chat that did happen last last
Saturday two Saturdays go um it's good
[1:43:58] that you put that on I know you host
that sometimes you don't get a lot of
[1:44:02] participation uh but the mayor invites
me he says Luke I want you to be there
[1:44:07] it's a nice invite and I'm there and I
was there at that one and um I I was
[1:44:13] pleasantly surprised with I don't maybe
a dozen people yeah several outside
[1:44:19] corporate limits several from inside
corporate limits on a couple different
[1:44:22] issues
and I am quite confident that every
[1:44:26] person left that feeling better not
saying happy but feeling better about
[1:44:31] the decisions from the city because they
had a chance to speak it face to face
[1:44:36] one-on-one with what was going on with
the mayor so I'm glad you do those I
[1:44:40] know that takes time out of your
Saturday morning uh in case any of our
[1:44:44] staff doesn't realize it it helps us as
staff a lot by him being willing to
[1:44:49] answer those questions with the public
so thank you for doing that I wish it
[1:44:52] was better attendant we'll just say that
yeah and unfortunately the way I think
[1:44:57] that you uh get better attendance is by
frustrating some folks yeah I hate to
[1:45:03] say it but that's generally what gets
people out not necessarily the good news
[1:45:06] and we have so many good things
happening sometimes that just doesn't
[1:45:09] bring them out as much uh the other
thing I wanted to note is uh Doug Stout
[1:45:14] is a local staffer for congresswoman
Miller Meeks and he's done a pretty good
[1:45:21] job of being a ten to things happening
in
[1:45:24] Norwalk uh he brought the congresswoman
up last week and we presented her with
[1:45:30] this uh graphic this information little
flyer that we gave her that talked about
[1:45:35] the new interchange and also the
i435 interstate
[1:45:43] designation uh I was impressed that she
knew exactly what we were talking about
[1:45:49] with the interchange she had remembered
that when we uh visited her in D and
[1:45:53] also when she was here last time so just
pretty neat that she took the time and
[1:45:57] Doug thought of us to bring her up for a
visit and can you hold that up there for
[1:46:02] a second yeah um you know Ty's a good
photographer but how do you'all feel
[1:46:07] about my picture I just texted her it
looks
[1:46:10] awkward if you want the truth I did no
in all fairness I said Ty I think I need
[1:46:15] to get a new picture she's like sure
anytime and then I haven't done it yeah
[1:46:19] the flag flag's not there you think I
look
[1:46:26] I think he look like a high school
football player was trying to make him
[1:46:28] look like
aular NE like you guys have seen like
[1:46:33] I'm not
exactly out you know Mr Olympia you know
[1:46:38] so I am now gonna close this
so that's all uh I was gonna mention
[1:46:44] about annexation but I figured
you uh on the
[1:46:50] 12th we could go Wednesday uh
staff and myself I was on Via Zoom but
[1:46:58] uh we met with the city development
board about our
[1:47:01] annexation uh went through it was
probably about a
[1:47:05] two-hour public hearing and at the end
the city development board approved our
[1:47:12] annexation so we are in a 30-day review
period at this point in time
[1:47:18] so things went
well so good job staff
[1:47:23] they they were impressed with the
submitt I point that out I mean it's uh
[1:47:28] a lot of them you just see people not
showing up for their hearings and
[1:47:32] filling out filling inform forms not
really providing a lot and I think the
[1:47:36] uh hours that were spent on that uh but
whole staff putting together maps and
[1:47:43] assembling things uh they were quite
complimentary of that they pointed out
[1:47:47] and saying how good it was and I think
they really appreciated it and there was
[1:47:52] at least one one of the board members
that indicated that uh we did everything
[1:47:57] right it looked like this is the way
that it's supposed to happen yeah good
[1:48:02] and after a two-hour presentation there
were hardly any questions whatsoever so
[1:48:06] I take that and I take that to me that
hopefully the presentation answered all
[1:48:10] the questions that was kind of cool okay
yeah then uh on Tuesday on Tuesday Holly
[1:48:19] and I went down to the governor's office
uh where Governor Reynolds signed a
[1:48:25] proclam proclamation recognizing the
17th anniversary of kosovo's
[1:48:30] Independence so that was really good
good all I
[1:48:38] have all right item 10 this closed
session pursuant to Iowa Code section
[1:48:44] 2073 to discuss labor negotiations for
Police Department bargaining unit
[1:48:49] agreement Jim is this AED reason go in
close session yes it is can I get a
[1:48:53] motion to go in CL
[1:48:59] session can I get a second okay so
motion wow I didn't think we were gonna
[1:49:05] go in close
session motion by Man seconded by Brown
[1:49:10] Lindsay would you please call R council
member miniki yes Brown yes cool yes all
[1:49:15] right that motion uh carries it is 804