[0:16] Good evening, everyone and welcome to the city of Sharon's August 24th, 2022.

[0:21] any six study session, it's five or three so we'll go ahead and get started.

[0:25] We have five items on the agenda, and we'll jump right in with item number one, which

[0:31] is discussion of ordinance 23-06-26, the deannization of 1.5 acres at 4,672 or 4672

[0:43] coffee avenue, and with this is our city planner, Kelly Schroeder, welcome Kelly.

[0:47] Thank you, Mayor and good evening.

[0:52] So the city received a petition to DNX, this parcel of land located at 4672

[0:59] Coffin Avenue, which is currently uncladded.

[1:03] 1.5 acres in size.

[1:05] This was previously annexed into the city just a few years ago in 2022.

[1:11] And at that time, it was zoned our three residential.

[1:15] We don't have anything in our code about DNxation, so we follow what state statute says.

[1:21] I think in the last 20 or so years we received three DNxation petitions, so this isn't something we see a lot of.

[1:30] But this following state statute, the petition to DNx was filed with the city on June 23.

[1:36] And then within 10 days of that filing, the Petitioner published legal ad in the paper,

[1:43] notifying the public that they were requesting to DNAX.

[1:47] And then within 60 days of that filing, the Board of County Commissioners approved a DNAXation Report,

[1:52] which was just last Tuesday on August 19, 2026.

[1:59] That DNAXation Report is included in your packet.

[2:02] I'll go through a brief summary of this, basically outlines the service and fiscal impacts

[2:08] if the property were to be DNX and there would not be very many service or fiscal impacts

[2:16] given that the property is currently served by SOS water and city of Sheridan sewer so that

[2:22] would not change for the county. The access for the property is currently off of USAV7, which is a

[2:32] any of the service or maintenance impacts to that.

[2:35] Law enforcement would shift from city police to the sheriff.

[2:40] Emergency response would shift from

[2:41] shared by a rescue to the shared area

[2:43] rural fire protection district.

[2:46] And then there'd be a slight change in property taxes

[2:49] with the mills.

[2:49] So the standard county mill would still apply.

[2:52] There would be no more city mill,

[2:54] but there would be an additional, I think,

[2:55] three mills for the shared area rural fire protection district.

[3:00] So all equals out to 23 mills to 18 mills.

[3:05] So fairly negligible to the county in terms

[3:07] of their fiscal impacts, if this were 2D annex.

[3:11] However, that report does emphasize

[3:13] that the property lies within our urban service area,

[3:17] and that community development principle

[3:19] should also be considered with this D annexation.

[3:23] The county's report also requested

[3:25] that a record of survey with an accurate boundary description

[3:28] be provided should this be successful and that's something that the city would like to see as well.

[3:35] You'll notice in that petition to DNX, the legal description provided is the same legal

[3:41] description that's on the warranty deed which is rather incomplete, it just describes a point of

[3:47] beginning and then 100 feet to the north 393 feet to the south, etc. it doesn't provide any bearings

[3:53] and distances for being able to locate those lines.

[3:58] City staff comments about this DNxation.

[4:01] This is kind of like a DNxation report from the city as well.

[4:05] The property lies within our planning area boundary, which is that one mile radius around

[4:10] the city and our urban service area.

[4:14] If DNx to future subdivision of the property would still be considered under that JPA boundary

[4:20] meaning the MOU with the county would apply and all city infrastructure standards would apply.

[4:25] So, if that property were DNIX and then the Petitioner chose to subdivide the property,

[4:31] they would still have to put in roads, waters, sewer, how to city standards,

[4:34] since it's available to the property and adjacent to the property.

[4:40] The city is currently providing size water to the city,

[4:43] size water, and city sanitary sewer service to the property if it were to be DNIX,

[4:48] rates would increase to outside city customer rates. If DNX, future development of the property

[4:55] will remain subject to the International Fire Code requirements regarding fire apparatus access

[4:59] roads and hydrant spacing. It is located in an area of logical municipal growth for several

[5:06] adjacent or nearby properties have already been annexed. And again, city staff would request

[5:11] that record of survey to be filed with the DNX Asian ordinance with an accurate description

[5:16] of the property. So just to kind of point out where this is in relation to other city properties,

[5:21] they have the GIS image up here. The yellow is city. So it is adjacent to city here to the south.

[5:28] This is the woodland creek. Woodland Park is across the road. This is woodland creek estate.

[5:35] Across U.S. 87 there is Whitney Benefits. And then if you kind of zoom out a little bit,

[5:41] you can see that the city really is growing kind of in this south direction with woodland

[5:48] arc across, woodland creek is daily across, like you get those two confused all the time.

[5:54] But there's the two cities, subdivisions down there, an additional city land that's kind of

[5:59] naturally grown south there.

[6:03] Staffs that notification to 42 surrounding property owners, we also published a legal

[6:08] in the press regarding the planning commission meeting and the city council public hearing.

[6:15] We did receive a few phone calls from surrounding property owners and firing about the purpose

[6:18] of the DNA station, but no specific comments or concerns will were received.

[6:24] I will say that we erroneously sent out a handful of maillers that did not include an actual letter in

[6:30] them. So we're not really sure how that happened, but once we discovered that happened we recent letters

[6:35] to all 42 surrounding property owners.

[6:40] So thankful for the people that called and asked,

[6:42] what is this empty envelope about so that we realize

[6:45] that we made that mistake.

[6:49] Tonight, staff recommends that planning commission

[6:51] and next week, City Council denied this deannexation petition.

[6:58] However, if planning commission or council chooses to advance

[7:02] this item staff would request that there's a condition that the applicant provided an accurate

[7:07] record of survey for that parcel.

[7:11] Are there any questions?

[7:15] So in 2022, this was basically annexed into the city.

[7:20] I can't remember that time that that section, that annex section, was that involved in any

[7:26] and their bigger piece of property has been since September.

[7:31] Mayer, for you, no, it has not been resup divided since.

[7:35] But at the original time in 2022, is there another piece of was annexed with it?

[7:40] No.

[7:41] No, thank you.

[7:43] And at the time, the annexed, was there a reason they wanted it annexed?

[7:50] Mayer, I made you for this two staff who might have been here.

[7:54] When that went through, things, homes could speak a little bit better to that.

[7:58] I'm a mayor of the council member, Brad.

[8:00] Yeah, I was annexed in for some sort of a multi-family development

[8:06] lab.

[8:07] Is it the plan that four years ago?

[8:10] Is this the property that we had all the trailers on it?

[8:16] That we had.

[8:17] That we're just on and they were camping in that area.

[8:19] Mayor, that is correct.

[8:21] Yes.

[8:22] I recall it.

[8:25] Any other questions?

[8:30] Can't take you anywhere.

[8:33] So if I recall too, why not, did they approve the multifamily going in off of coffee that you would enter into this off of coffee?

[8:48] Through you may or the current access permit is residential and it's capped at an or more than 10 dwelling units.

[8:57] And they will not increase it to commercial due to the space requirement, so it cannot go up.

[9:03] Yeah, because they can't exit and enter from a trout lane.

[9:07] That's correct.

[9:08] That's private property.

[9:11] That Jason to that beauty.

[9:15] Just my last question.

[9:17] Did he give a reason why we're changing his ideas?

[9:22] Mr. Mayor, not particularly, no.

[9:25] This applicant has come in a couple of times to discuss

[9:27] some dividing the property and we've, you know, stated what would be required is the city subdivision.

[9:34] And, you know, there's been several options on the table in terms of the number of lots or the number of units,

[9:40] but it was not really clear as to why the applicant wanted to be part of the county rather than the city.

[9:46] You know, because I know, you know, conversations we've had in the past that this kind of goes against what we're really trying to achieve as far as some sort of cohesive area and where we don't have these weird islands out there.

[10:02] So I guess we'll just have to see what happens with it.

[10:05] So any other questions?

[10:07] Go ahead, Councillor.

[10:08] Sorry about the man, my pair.

[10:11] I need to set the cup.

[10:12] I need to set the cup.

[10:13] I need to set the cup.

[10:14] And I may have missed it. I know back when we voted on this four years ago, there was the access issues.

[10:21] Did you bring that up?

[10:24] And it doesn't change that then?

[10:28] No.

[10:29] No. And just for some clarification here. So the access is currently off of USAV7 here.

[10:36] And they cannot get access to trout lanes on the west side of the property because trout lane is a private road.

[10:43] So, any access to any portion of this backlog would have to be accessed from US-87 and

[10:51] meet-IFC requirements in terms of fire apparatus access, turn around, and hydrants facing,

[10:59] et cetera.

[11:00] All right.

[11:01] Thank you.

[11:01] Sorry about that.

[11:02] So, Travelling is a private road?

[11:05] Yes.

[11:07] Okay.

[11:07] Tell us.

[11:10] Kelly, you're probably not going to know this because you weren't here at that time,

[11:14] But, Hans, wasn't there an issue with drainage on this property as well?

[11:22] Mr. Mayor, yes, there is some drainage issues.

[11:26] It's a complicated piece of property to develop.

[11:29] And our storm drainage criteria manual would state that the excess storm water would need

[11:34] to be detained and released at the pre-development rate.

[11:38] But it would need to be withheld in easements.

[11:40] and the natural drain is just to the self-west and through private properties and those

[11:47] use them, that's a very hard to obtain.

[11:52] So, I'm sorry.

[11:54] Go ahead.

[11:56] Go ahead.

[11:56] They asked to be annexed in, and now they wanted to be annexed, but if they develop it, they

[12:03] have to do it to city standards.

[12:09] I'm flumixed.

[12:13] That's just flumixed.

[12:18] All right.

[12:18] I'll note that.

[12:19] next.

[12:21] Anything else on this topic? Okay, well, thank you guys. Kelly, you're still out.

[12:29] Number two, discussion of PL-26-22 Resolution 16 that's 26. Storyhouse minor number

[12:36] one subdivision, and again with this is our city planner, Kelly Schurter.

[12:50] Storyhouse minor

[12:52] number one. So this subdivision is concerning this northern portion of the existing storyhouse

[12:58] property on the east side of town. The property has an address of 2300

[13:03] storyhouse lane. It is currently unplatted land 130.69 acres. It is owned B2

[13:11] business district, so the PUD just applies to that southern portion that's

[13:15] already been platted. The rest of this is owned B2, which allows for a wide variety

[13:19] of uses including residential, commercial, even up to light industrial uses. There's

[13:25] also no density restrictions with B2, so really just about anything could go into B2.

[13:33] This subdivision, 139, 130, 0.69 acres into two lots.

[13:39] The applicant is proposing a lot one, which is a five acre parcel in the northeast corner

[13:44] and track to A, which would be the remainder.

[13:47] The subdivision, this type of subdivision requires the extension of infrastructure to serve

[13:52] lots and therefore would constitute a major subdivision, however the applicant is not proposing to

[13:58] extend infrastructure and is requesting that the subdivision be considered as a minor subdivision

[14:03] and is proposing easements and a development agreement in lieu of those required improvements.

[14:09] So here is that subdivision plat. You can see a lot one, the five acres appear in the northeast corner.

[14:16] The existing subdivision is down here to the south, and this plot would establish a couple of different access and utilities easements that would provide a future connection and future utilities to this tract A and to lot one.

[14:34] As currently proposed, this subdivision does not meet the city subdivision regulations, the

[14:39] public infrastructure design standards, nor international fire code, regarding the extension

[14:44] of transportation and utility infrastructure to serve all lots within the subdivision.

[14:49] The creation of additional lots without adequate transportation and utility infrastructure

[14:54] raises significant concerns regarding long-term access, infrastructure maintenance, emergency response.

[15:00] There's the order as proposed, in pairs, the orderly, efficient and coordinated development of future phases of this subdivision and adjacent properties.

[15:09] Staff sent notification to six surrounding property owners. A legal ad was published in the press. A sign was posted on the property.

[15:15] We don't receive one call from a resident inquiring about what the intended use of the five acre parcel will be.

[15:21] I do not know what the intended use of the five acre parcel will be, so at this time we kind of have to assume that it would be anything that would be allowed in B2.

[15:30] Staff discuss the ways in which this proposed subdivision does not meet the adopted city regulations with the applicant,

[15:37] but the applicant has requested that the subdivision be brought forward with the understanding that staff would not be making a positive recommendation on this.

[15:48] Do you have any questions for me?

[15:49] Questions for Kelly regarding this topic?

[15:54] You're real quick because I mean we're dealing with this in some other subdivisions.

[15:59] What would be the secondary access or egress from that area in the future?

[16:04] Is that, has that been determined?

[16:08] So, right now, the current subdivision on the south here, their primary access comes off of

[16:18] There are no road and their secondary emergency access will also come off of where no road

[16:23] somewhere down in here.

[16:26] For this tract A, as it's subdivided in the future, there is currently this access here

[16:33] a little further up the way.

[16:35] It is currently the access for the gravel quarry over here in that county section.

[16:41] So that is actually considered the access for this five acre parcel at the moment.

[16:46] But there would be technically two access points to this because there is this access down here.

[16:52] Trivers is quite a bit of terrain to get up to a lot one.

[16:58] I should say that those are simply access easements.

[17:01] There's no improvements that are being made with this subdivision at this time.

[17:04] So there's no roads, no gravel, no pavement going down.

[17:09] Thank you.

[17:10] Councillor. I respect what you're saying and understand what you said.

[17:17] It's not uncommon for me to kind of show some confusion when it comes to subdivisions because I mentioned that before.

[17:25] I cannot believe how many subdivisions we've had over the last five years. Every council meeting we have seems like we're proving a subdivision.

[17:35] My biggest concern is the inventory we have for water and sewer capabilities.

[17:42] Now, I know I've been answered a few questions I've asked, but I still wonder if we were to actually fill every lot that we have in town, would we actually have enough water and sewer capacity?

[17:55] I would question that.

[17:57] I don't know where all of a sudden, in five years, we've expanded so greatly, and I know we've got some water acquisitions.

[18:03] I understand all that, but I just really want to be careful that when we

[18:09] especially as a politician that we are, we talk about a controlled growth in our community.

[18:14] But yet I've never seen a subdivision, maybe this one, but I've never seen a subdivision being denied

[18:20] because of not having adequate services.

[18:24] And I'm really wanting to make sure that maybe someday we could have a meeting and really

[18:29] down and look at how much we really have to offer all these lots that we've actually approved.

[18:36] But I appreciate your presentation, but just so you know that I will be watching for

[18:42] subdivisions really critically. Thank you. Well, part of the issue with this particular

[18:49] parcel and the request is that there is no utilities going to it. There's no plan for utilities

[18:55] that they have a line on a map that they've drawn, that they potential, but it sits way up in the corner pretty much disconnected from everything else around there, so it's essentially an island out in the middle of this property, and so that causes me great concern, and so I probably will not get into it. Well, I'm not probably. I will not be able to just open the windows.

[19:20] I think the fact that it doesn't meet our subdivision regulations, our design standards, nor our international fire code, regarding the extension of transportation and utility infrastructure to serve all of those lots is huge.

[19:45] I don't know how we can go forward with all of this not being met, so at this point in time, I'm not in favor of going forward with this.

[20:00] And here are the questions for we move on with Kelly.

[20:05] Okay, Kelly, it's still a Kelly show.

[20:08] Number three, discussion of PL-26-29, resolution 17-26,

[20:15] High Eagle Minor Subdivision, and again,

[20:18] with this is our city planner, Kelly Schrotter.

[20:21] Thank you, another subdivision.

[20:25] This subdivision is up on Yellowtail Drive.

[20:29] 4101 and 4103, also unplotted land 15.35 acres in size.

[20:37] It is currently zone gateway district, part of our rent ranch master plan phase two.

[20:44] And within that master plan it is in the mixed use area.

[20:47] So there's a variety of uses that would be allowed on these lots, primarily commercial or residential in nature.

[20:55] The proposal is to divide these 15 acres into three blocks,

[20:59] a lot one being 6.9 acres in size,

[21:01] a lot two being 3.8, and a lot three being 4.6.

[21:05] All lots currently have access to dedicated public streets

[21:09] and utility infrastructure, so there would be no extensions

[21:12] required with this subdivision,

[21:14] and thus no new improvements that are being proposed.

[21:18] Here is that plat.

[21:19] So I would take the that unplotted blend, create those three lots here with access off of yellow tail drive for this lot to the west and then these two would be accessed most likely off of high tech dry.

[21:38] Our future land use map is a little split in this area.

[21:42] It is appropriate according to this map for commercial or agricultural use.

[21:46] the agricultural is the green, the red is commercial.

[21:50] This map was created in 2017, at which time

[21:53] the college Agra Park had just gone into the west there,

[21:55] so I think the vision for kind of this western portion

[21:58] of the ranch ranch area was to be a little bit more

[22:02] agricultural and use.

[22:03] But as commercial development has made its way up yellow

[22:06] tail drive, we're starting to see some of that

[22:08] come down through yellow tail drive.

[22:11] So I do believe this is in line with that future land use map,

[22:14] because it will kind of allow additional commercial use in that area, adjacent to our business park.

[22:24] Staff sent notification to seven surrounding properties.

[22:30] Receive any questions or comments to be on this proposed subdivision. Staff will be recommending approval of this subdivision to planning commission and the governing body.

[22:40] Are there any questions?

[22:42] Questions regarding this one?

[22:44] Just have one.

[22:46] Is it a tale drive? Is that the one we've had a lot of concerns with? Is that the next road closer to Mullinx?

[22:54] Which one is that that we've been having?

[22:56] May or two, are you talking about real bird waves?

[22:59] That's great.

[23:00] That's what I'm thinking of.

[23:01] So this is, yeah, this is further.

[23:03] A little further north.

[23:04] Okay.

[23:04] Sounds good.

[23:05] Thank you.

[23:07] Anything else for killing, you're going to use one?

[23:11] I think you're all done for tonight.

[23:12] Kelly, thank you so much.

[23:15] We move on to item number four.

[23:17] Discussion of the appointment or in professional.

[23:20] Appointment and Professional Services Agreement.

[23:22] for a primary municipal court judge, Zach Lininger, and with this is our city clerk, Ashley

[23:29] Tonglo.

[23:31] Thank you, Mayor.

[23:32] If it's all right with you, it will remain seated.

[23:34] Good evening, Mayor Council.

[23:36] So, as some of you may be aware, Judge Kissling was recently appointed by the governor

[23:41] to serve as our circuit court judge for the fourth district.

[23:46] We are very excited for him, but that does leave a vacancy in our municipal court.

[23:51] So, his last day with the city will be September 14th.

[23:55] We've been working through what that transition looks like,

[23:58] and how we can kind of maintain court coverage.

[24:01] We did speak with our current alternative municipal court.

[24:04] He's more than happy to help with transition and all of that,

[24:07] but he would like to remain the alternate judge.

[24:10] So, we looked at other options,

[24:13] and we are recommending that we appoint Zack Lanager

[24:17] as our new primary municipal court judge.

[24:19] Zach has served in our municipal court since January of 24 and was a public defender prior to that appointment, so he is familiar with our court proceedings, our staff, functionality and just how everything works.

[24:34] Mayor Bridger is the one that who appoints the judge ship and he has indicated his support for his acts of appointment.

[24:40] The professional service agreement that you have in your pockets is identical to our current judges contract, including fees, everything, there's no difference for our budget.

[24:52] Obviously with the appointment of Zach that would leave another hole in the prosecuting position.

[24:59] We are working through that and we will, we have coverage, we're not concerned about that at the moment, but we will be bringing forward a contract once we sort that out.

[25:08] that would be appointed separately. So for tonight we're just asking Council to consider. Obviously we're not approving anything this evening.

[25:16] The appointment of Zach at next week's meeting. Are there any questions?

[25:21] Questions regarding this? No, Zach. Step forward and he said he would be willing to do that. And so we just thought it was a nice fit because he's already been a part of the municipal court system.

[25:33] So as once we take that position,

[25:38] then we'll have to work on the next position.

[25:43] OK, well, thank you guys.

[25:45] We'll go to our last one, which is General Discussion

[25:49] and potential future agenda items.

[25:52] And with us, is our city administrator, Stuart McGrane,

[25:54] and I'll give you guys the floor if you have anything to add.

[25:58] Stuart McGrane, Mr. Mayor of Council,

[26:00] just a couple of things to update you on and remind the public

[26:05] of first of all tomorrow is the first day of school so there'll be little small humans running

[26:12] around the streets so just be aware of that.

[26:17] This week's Citizens Academy session is with Parks.

[26:21] They're going to be taking them around starting at Kendrick Park and doing some stuff around

[26:26] the Arridam.

[26:29] Just a reminder to Council that next Monday is a fifth Monday so you get a night off.

[26:34] there's no meeting that night.

[26:37] And then last I had a street superintendent

[26:43] his wife approached me about there is a number of BFW scholarship

[26:50] opportunities coming up.

[26:53] The one that's closest is there's one for six through eight

[26:58] creators of written essay about what a veteran taught me about America, and then there's

[27:07] another one, an oral three or five-minute oral presentation from 9th to 12th graders on

[27:16] the same thing.

[27:16] And they have several levels that they can go up through local district state and then to

[27:21] national, which could result in some really nice scholarship funds.

[27:26] We're trying to encourage our local shared and youth

[27:30] participate in this because it's open to anyone.

[27:34] So, if anybody has any questions from the public or anything,

[27:37] they can call our office and we could get a link up with the right people.

[27:42] So, you made me think about something which I was hoping

[27:46] and I'm just springing a question on you guys and you probably don't know what it is

[27:50] I apologize, but on the news they've been doing that, they've had that street blocked now

[27:55] for, oh, I don't know, it's been a while over a week, and I thought they were going to be

[28:00] done because they, they would put asphalt in where they dug up the roadway.

[28:05] Do you know what, if there's any kind of timeline on that, because I'm seeing a lot of potential

[28:10] with school getting in house?

[28:16] Yes.

[28:16] We need to be made in council.

[28:18] Yes, so that's a bit of utility work for a service line going into one of the houses on

[28:22] low and street.

[28:23] So they do have the appropriate street permit for that's from a week and see this week.

[28:30] I'm sorry last week is they're starting to finish that up.

[28:33] So we may see a little bit more delay tomorrow and maybe Wednesday, but the work should

[28:38] be done this week and that's something we'll follow up with tomorrow morning.

[28:41] Yeah, because they dug the trench and they I noticed they covered it and they put

[28:44] asphalt down. So hi, hi, hope say we did be done today because I just see tomorrow being

[28:50] in just a total mess. That street being blocked. But yeah, if you get them, get them

[28:55] to move on, they'd be great. Thanks. Anything else for the council? Yes, Steve.

[29:01] Well, like I mentioned earlier, possibly. I would heavily ask that we could do a work session

[29:07] on our water and sewer inventory. I would like to know in our relationship to how many

[29:13] lots we have that are right now vacant how much water we have in reserve if we were to

[29:20] have to fill all these lots in. I know there's always this projection of maybe some other

[29:25] water coming. I would like to know right now as of this year if we would have enough water

[29:31] how much water we have left, how much water we would need because I know we have a lot of lots

[29:37] that are setting just waiting to be developed and I just want to make sure that we coat

[29:42] build our community. So that's what I'd like to, you know, it's information. So thank you.

[29:48] We can do that. Any chance for the good of the group? Well, it sits clock straight up.

[30:00] Call at me and everybody have a nice night. So thank you all for coming.

Aug 24, 2026 Study Session

Agenda

Transcript