from where we're at or >> Sure. >> Okay. No, we got this straightened out. >> Okay. Chair Ames >> here. >> Commissioner Ha >> here. >> Commissioner Bees >> here. >> Commissioner Carlson he is an excused absence. Commissioner Perroll >> here. Commissioner Jorgensson >> here. >> Commissioner Lewis, Miss Lewis is absent, Mayor Hibbon >> here, >> Cindy Nash here, and myself, Natalie Johnson. All is complete. >> Okay. Thank you. The next thing on agenda was approve approve the August 26 25 meeting the first agenda first. Okay. agenda. We have the agenda first. Would somebody make the motion that we make a motion to approve the agenda? Commissioner Hip made this. Somebody like to second this. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Anybody got any discussion? See none. We'll call for a vote. All say I. >> I. >> I. Okay. >> Mr. Chair. >> Pardon. Um could you when people make a motion please repeat who did first and second please. >> Oh I said I did say it's commissioner hipla and >> arrow >> you need to speak louder. >> Okay >> just a bit. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Uh the next thing on the agenda for the August 26 2025 meeting is and I'd like to uh make a correction on the minutes. Uh if you turn over and look at the first page, it's got Commissioner Ruth being present and also not being above that direction. Anybody else? Any other questions? >> Yes. The vote for the building changed. It should be in four eyes and two myself and chairman voted against that motion. I think I thought they corrected that. Didn't It's not corrected on here, but it was noted. >> I think it was corrected on the copy that will go and be signed. >> Make sure that's important. Okay. The uh any discussion about the not call for the vote. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Oppos. Motion carried. Who was the second on that? >> Did anyone second that motion? >> I don't know. >> He just made a correction. He didn't actually >> That's okay. Well, I'll make a motion then. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Uh so the next thing on the agenda is the uh open the public hearing. The public hearing has to do with an intern use permit home occupation for commercial count at 8614 211 Northwest she has for us. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. So Mr. has submitted an application for an interim use permit for an extended home occupation to allow for a commercial kennel along with dog training at his property at 86421th Avenue Northwest. A copy of his application was in your packet along with a description of what he is hoping to do with the site. The proposed use at this time, um, so this is his property. It's on the south side of 211 where it kind of makes that bend to Tiger Street. Northwest. So, it has an existing house and an existing accessory structure. What he's proposing to do is to have this commercial kennel operation at this point in time be predominantly within the house. Um, the garage would be converted and not house cars anymore. And then the dogs would also be inside of his house. um at some and then there would be a fenced off area in the backyard for the site plan that was in the packet to give some space for them to run and and get some outside time. Um he does have ideas that in the future at some point he would like to potentially expand that use um and occupy a bigger space um once he builds up his business. But based on the application we have here today, this is what we reviewing, not the not the future use. And um if he does want to do that at some point in the future, he would need to bring in an amendment to the interse permit to ask for that to occur. Um so in looking at this request as it as compared to your extended home application standards, um it is homesteaded property and who lives on the property. Um, do your ordinance requires that it not be permitted that it may be permitted within an accessory within a principal structure but not exceeding 25% of the gross floor space. And the way it was described, he it would expand, it would go throughout the first floor basically because the dogs would be in the house when they're it's a limited number of dogs at this point. Um, and when they would be there overnight, they would be, you know, have some room to be within the house, but it's also still a house. So, um, we have a little bit of a tricky situation with your ordinance there. Um, but the use of the greater portion, um, which is access by the dogs to be in there with him could be mitigated a bit by limiting both the number of dogs as well as the number of employees as a condition where it's still a house. Um, so you'll have to think about that piece and what you want to do. Um, Mr. Bra would be the only employee of this. Um, we don't anticipate that there would be any changes needed to the home as a result of building code for what is proposed to be done. Um the animals everything's supposed to be conducted within a building approved for the home occupation but he is proposing that the animals be outside at times in the fence in the area. Um a couple of the other conditions you have are really not applicable to this kind of use. There are no retail sales proposed for this. We didn't ask for a landscape plan because it's still even though there would be some animals outside this it's a limited number proposed and it still really looks like a home and this would be to the rear of the structure. So the home kind of blocks most of the view of where the fencing area and any animals would be. Um, generally there's not a need for extra parking because the the traffic coming to this would be so limited for a drop off and pick up, you know, one person at a time basically at most. And um I think that kind of is the um I think that's sort of the gist of the the main points here. The dogs would be on site 24 hours per day potentially. Access would be limited to certain hours by customers though. And um it's it's one of those uses that doesn't necessarily fit perfectly within your ordinance. Yet at the same time, you could potentially mitigate for the impacts that other uses that might say occupy the whole a whole floor of a home would have. just it's it's a different nature of an animal literally um for what they're proposing to do here. Um I think at such time like if he was to expand and have many more dogs or have employees that might not be the case anymore, right? If he was using the whole for so um I'm sure he would like to >> I could speak to it if that's okay. Hi everyone. I'm Luke Braith, owner of Operation Good Dog. I just moved here in April. So, you guys have a great town. I love it. I love the land I'm on, which is wonderful. Um, just to speak about the 25% of the use of a home for business. Um, what I labeled in the outline there, whichever you guys are seeing, um, I put in the master bedroom as well, just as kind of a depending on what dogs I have and what might need to happen or what space might need to be made. I might use the master bedroom to put a dog there, but it won't necessarily be that whole first floor. It'll mainly just be the garage, the living room, and then outside. So, if that helps to like make it down to that 25%, we can change that if needed. So, pretty much that's kind of the only caveat there. >> Can you expand on um the garage situation, please? >> Yeah. So, the garage is a two-car garage. Um it is heated and it has air conditioning as well, so it's temperature controlled. Um And uh yeah, I've got uh I would put um like 4x6 or 5x5t size kennels in there. So plenty of big kennel space. I also have smaller crates um that could be put in that garage or in my living room. I've got plenty, so I've got plenty of crates all over the house and things like that. So just kind of depends on the dog. Um if I'm just watching one dog, a lot of times they're not even there's going to live in the living room, right? It's more of a management issue. Some dogs can get along with others. So, it's all about just making sure that I'm responsible and none of the dogs interact that aren't social enough to interact. Does that answer your question? >> Sure. Could you expand on just it's number 11 just talking about the noise level. So, say dogs go outside. Talk about what you're going to do to help control the noise. >> Right. So, I remember reading about the nuisance. I think uh says something about so many barks or loud noises over a 5m minute period checking every 30 seconds. Um so typically whenever dogs are outside I'm outside with them or I'm just like in the kitchen living room and so if I hear them barking I always go out there. Um it's my main goal to not upset my neighbors. So um what's nice about the land here is all my neighbors are actually pretty far away. So when I hear their dogs barking it's very limited. I'm like I can barely hear that. Most of the dogs at my house won't even bark when they hear those dogs. Every dog is different. But for the most part, I've noticed, oh, you're not reacting to that dog barking because it's so quiet. It's so far away. So, I don't think there's going to be too much of a noise pollution issue. Um, however, if that does become an issue, I'd be more than happy to rectify it in any way that you guys see fit. Um, you know, I understand it's complaint driven city as well. So, um, I haven't received any complaints yet. I hope not to, but if you know the neighbors do have an issue with it, I hope they come to me first. But if they do playing with the city, I'd be more than happy to make amends or just make sure that like, yeah, as soon as the dog barks, I got to get them back inside within 5 minutes basically is what I'm understanding. And when they are inside and that they'll bark inside too sometimes, but again, it's really unlikely that anyone will hear it outside of my property. >> Thank you, Mr. Brett. Uh I'm going to ask the clerk to stand legal publications and mailings posted been completed. >> Yes sir. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh we go go ahead and ask asking more questions about this uh Mr. Chair question. >> Yes commissioner. >> So how many of your personal dogs will be in addition to these one to five? >> I have one dog. Okay. So it would just be the one. Um, as I've read in here that my one dog counts as the five. Um, so and that's fine. My goal is to only board four dogs at a time. That's the amount of space I feel comfortable boarding that amount of dogs. So again, it's a very small scale operation. I know plenty of people that own more than four or five dogs, right? Um, so just, you know, hopefully that gets rid of any wos you guys might have about this, but um, yeah. So I just have the one dog. I don't plan on ever getting more than one just because I always have my hands full with other dogs. >> So, you're applying for four additional dogs in addition to your own, >> right? Yeah. So, five total is I believe what the permit states, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> So, what's your plans for expansion timeline wise? >> Uh, that kind of depends. I'm not in a huge rush for it. be nice maybe in a few years but uh I'm still you know prices of cost of goods and things like that are kind of high so I don't really want to do any or anything like that >> where you would go to a actual kennel layout and >> yeah basically like that pole barn that I have there it might be like I'd probably end up tearing that down just cuz it's not >> suitable for dogs um but uh I would probably take about the same amount of footprint would be my plan in the future but again that plan may change. >> It may never come to fruition. So, I'm not too worried about, >> you know, getting in the nitty-gritty of that tonight unless you want to. But >> yeah, it's still kind of a dream rather than a plan. >> Yes. >> Are you just training? Are you also training along with >> Yeah. So, sometimes it's just boarding. People are going on vacation or out for the weekend and I just watch the dog. I do also offer what I call board and boot camp. So, while they're with me, I can then apply some training to that dog every day. um so that they can get their dog trained a little bit. Um I may also expand to more like a board and train which is where you know someone drops their dog off for four to six weeks. Um and then that's a little more rigorous of a training, right? Or you know it's not just them going on vacation. Um but either way it's still the same idea of no more than four dogs and stay overnight. Um, and then there may be some actual like one-on-one training with clients. Like, you know, they might come to their property to do some training because I have a good amount of space there. And I'd have other dogs we could work with if that's one of the issues they're having with their dogs. But typically, if I do one-on-one training people, I usually go to their homes and work with them and their dogs where they live so they can get real world training that way. So hopefully that >> the question is, are these hunting dogs or you train them for other things? >> Uh, no, not hunting. I'm just a pet dog trainer. I mainly deal with um just your normal kind of reactivity and aggression issues um or just your simple pet dog obedience or puppy training. So I don't specialize in hunting or search and rescue or anything like that. >> You have no intention to have a puppy no or something like that? >> No, I don't do any breeding. I don't I don't want to get into any of that at all >> because we've had those problems before. >> Okay. >> Are there any other questions that the commission would like to ask here? >> Don't open it public. Is anybody out here in the crowd? I know there >> I think it's a great idea. >> I don't know. Do you have anything? >> I have no comments. No comments. Okay. Uh I'll go back and ask the commission again if there's any further questions you'd like to ask. Mr. How do you pronounce your name? Grace. >> Grace. >> Braith. And see there's no more question. Yes. >> Yes. I have a question. How often will you have clients come over to get interact with the dog or drop off or >> uh it it can vary. Typically weekends are usually a little busier. So there might be like um you know there could be up to four in one day because I can allow up to four dogs. So I might have four drop offs in a day. But typically it's going to usually just be one or two if that. It really just kind of depends. Like right now I don't have any dogs, right? So no one's coming by. But uh it might be you know up to four typically a day but that's not a standard day. A standard day would be anywhere between zero. >> So how long might you keep a dog on the days? >> Uh like I mentioned it might be you know typically it's weekends or like a long vacation a week or two. Um however it might end up being up to four to six weeks if I do the board and train. However I'm a big proponent of I don't want to train your dog for you. I want to teach you how to train your dog. So, I really want to be with the person while I'm training them. Um, so I'm not quite sold on the board and train yet, but I just know that might be a business avenue that I do. >> Are there any more questions? I ask again the guest here any questions they have. >> I have one last question. Commission >> on in this um packet that we're going to approve, it's giving you an outdoor area currently of 28 by 40 ft. Is that going to be enough? >> Well, that's that fenced in area. And actually, I did want to actually bring that up, so thank you. um is is there a way to either amend or um I just don't know how, you know, hard and fast vast all these documents are, but um cuz basically like I have all this property, so I do like walking dogs around the whole property. However, that's not where they spend most of their time and they're always leashed and control when they're walking around there with me. So, um if that's something we need to amend or something I need to bring up later, just let me know. But I would like to use more of the property. However, the most of it's going to be garage in that fenced in area. >> So, that's what I I'm just getting at is that that's an that's an fenced in area. Is that going to be enough for when you do have all five dogs in the presence? Is that going to be a big mistake? >> But yes, I can see no problem with you having a dog on leash, training it, or walking it around. That doesn't seem because it doesn't seem like it's going to be a dog on its own running around, >> right? >> Yeah. And not spending all day out there. It's usually a 20inut. >> I see that as being a completely different. >> But I I will say that the way a conditional use permit works is that the um whatever the conditions are are what's supposed to be met. So, while Nolan typically operates on a complaint basis, >> um, and most of the time if you took a dog out on a leash, then that wasn't your dog, say, probably most people wouldn't complain or even think twice about it, there is the chance that somebody could. So, if that is something that everybody's okay with, it would be better to write it into the permit, >> right? So that >> it's just different because this is when you're talking a commercial entity. You're talking dogs, not a product. >> They're not making furniture. They're not making >> It's a difficult >> completely different. >> It's It's got a heartbeat. It needs to be cared for completely different than something that's being made out of products. >> M Mr. check. >> Um, Cindy, would you would you write that in to state that he should be allowed to if he has dogs on leashes to walk around his property? >> Yeah, >> that should be written in. >> We could add that in as >> I I would recommend that because that's a very legitimate request. >> I I I kind of agree, but I mean, you could take a dog for a walk down any of the public roads. What's the difference? >> That's funny, too. I know. >> That's what I was thinking. I thought you put on a leash and go down the road. >> And you're absolutely correct. But just the concern is if somebody had a complaint and it wasn't by adding it in it just eliminates that. >> True. >> That's all I was trying was trying to protect the homeowner. >> I agree on your property. >> Yeah. >> I think that also protects his clients too. >> So that we should agree. >> I definitely agree with your point. >> No other questions now discussion. >> This is good. Okay. I'm going to pick it. If not, we'll close the public hear. Now, we'll act upon we'll have to have a motion that goes along with our planner recommendation and also we want to include this. He could take on lease and plas >> um Mr. chairman. >> Yes. >> Another thing to consider is um that whole 25% of the space issue and he's already voluntarily said that he could limit to meet that limit the area that they're in the house to occupy to meet that 25% issue. So I would suggest that he provide a updated site plan that does that and we would attach that to permit for it goes to city council. Again, that's I mean, we're talking about a dog. You're talking about a dog roaming around a house. It's not like it's a product. He's gonna sit there. It's gonna sit still. Um, I don't know how we can I mean, other than him just saying he's using these rooms on his apartment. Yes, they exceed the 25%, but not at one given time is it going to have all of them in three different, >> especially when there's a limit to the number of jobs and there's not more employees besides him. >> Okay. And yeah, I feel like having that percentage in this situation seems really silly. He's limited to a number of dogs and they're going to roam through the space however they feel fit unless he blocks it off. >> But by leaving the 25% it beats our ordinance and we don't have to change. >> True. >> Okay. >> And if they wander into the master bedroom, >> right? Go stand in the toilet room. Whatever. They're going to stare at the toilet. Okay. >> If there's no complaints and no issues, >> no one's going to know. >> Yeah. Okay. That's right. >> So, uh, our plan. So, we're okay with just leaving 25%. >> Yeah, because we would have to set plan B in the >> records, too. So, if you could >> provide an updated plan before we go to city, >> just to note, I know this is going to sound weird, but my computer that has everything on it actually just crashed the other day. And so, I'm in the process of, you know, removing the hard drive and hooking it up to another computer to get everything out. That's where all those site lines were. So, it just may be a little while until I can get you that. Okay. >> Okay. >> Seeing as he only has four dogs that are at a time, that's significantly less than 25% of the house. So, seems like comply with 25% even though it's not. >> Each dog takes up less than 25% of the home. You're right. I get it. >> So, I think we're still competing never use up. >> They're not that big a dot. They have to be the big size of a queensiz bed, right? >> I'm pretty sure we be compliant with the intent of that ordinance even though it's more than 25% of the house. There's a limit on I think we're ready for the motion. Would somebody like to make this motion? We'll make a motion to uh approve this application with the amendment to uh allow STS to be walked on the leash outside of the general area. This entire property that we discussed earlier is sufficient written. I'll second made the motion and a second was by Commissioner Le. Any further discussion about this and then add on. Yep. accept that there >> resubmit the plan with minim minimizing to the 25% just here just to resubmit this to make it 25% >> I'm not sure he has to do that seems like can't even use that whole area right I mean or do we just I I think I think the intent of the hornets is being met even though it's 25% equipment. >> He's not is the intent is for you not to store inventory or something in the entire area of the house and then operations. Can we do it without resubmitting? >> I can I'll probably just adjust some of the findings of fact that they go to council to kind of cover all those scenarios and explain the logic basically. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh so moved. >> All in favor say I. >> I >> I motion carried. >> Thank you. Thank you guys. My first you know [Music] when you're in person. >> Say that again. >> Second. >> Um planning commission just makes a recommendation to the city council. So >> Okay. second Tuesday of the month this will go to the city council meeting. >> Gotcha. Okay. Do I need to be present for that as well? >> Yes. >> Okay. The next thing on the agenda we're going to be covering the uh place minor subdivision on 229 Northwest [Music] we have here. >> Thank you. So the place own this property on 229. They actually have a couple different parcels of theirs. Some of you may be aware. So out of this 144 acre parcel plus this about 70 acre parcel, they want to carve off one parcel of land to build a house on. Um, and this parcel is, you can zoom in on the, um, actual site survey for just that one parcel, but I wanted to show to you guys that it's coming out of a very large piece. But, um, this was a little bit of a challenge to get done. There's some odd situations with 229 that Let me just actually go up there and start with that because I got to explain what's going on for the rest of it to make a lot of sense here. So, first I'm going to tell you that. So, these are the two parcels that they have that we're starting out with. Right next to each other, they're on the south side of 229. Um, north of 229 is St. Francis. So, we're right on the northern boundary of the city. Um, GIS is very misleading at times because GIS would imply to you that 229th Avenue exists all the way back here as a road just because of how it's being shown here. And a lot of people would make that assumption. Um in fact 229 actually um for its border with this eastern property. It's a town line road so it's shared by the two cities. It's predominantly maintained by the city of N then much of the road actually kind of moves slowly moves north into St. Francis. So it's outside of now then um and and the city stops maintaining it right here, but there's no culde-sac or turnaround if you And then from this point to the west, even though GIS implies that this might be a public road here, it's actually a private and there's a sign that says no trespassing and everything. So, it actually is part of somebody's parcel that written supposed. >> Is it just a driveway or does it go to multiple homes? It goes to it serves multiple properties back here, >> but they're all family, right? >> Yeah, it's all home. >> So, um they own the north side of the road as well, but it I just had to tell you that this is a very odd situation. And then similarly with even this part, so we're maintaining it. We acknowledge that it's a public road. However, it's not necessarily 66 feet wide as you see here because there has never been a land dedication in a plat or a recorded easement for it. So, basically, we have it by use of maintenance over a long period of time. And what that means is that if um let's we only have we don't have it for 66 feet necessarily. We have it for whatever width we're using and maintaining. which doesn't do the city a lot of good if you ever had to do like a road reconstruction or anything because then to bring it up to current standards, you would need more space. You would have to obtain right away to get it to the 66 ft wide. So that kind of brings us to where we are today. So, they want to carve off a lot that is sitting um basically kind of straddling this area. And the reason it's straddling is so that they can very intentionally get 150 ft on the portion that is a publicly maintained road. Okay. Um but as part of that then they have provided the draft documents for an easement for um a culde-sac to be installed right here on the far western side that they would then be putting in because this is a half mile long without a turnaround today which doesn't meet fire code. Um, so they'll install that and then they're dedicating um or giving an easement to the city for the rightway that's basically um 33 ft from their property line down. So we have that part. Now we still between us and St. Francis, we still will not have the rightway on the northern half of that road. >> Um, so that can be collected by St. Francis says they might have subdivisions over time, >> but that's sort of the lay of the land and what's going on here. Other than that, the parcel itself, if you kind of don't look at all of the unique right of way situation that's going on here, the parcel itself um easily will meet everything regarding um upside down or something here. >> No, it's it's not quite all showing. So, they will take a driveway off the end of the culde-sac to come down to the house. Um, the lot's plenty big. It needs set up backs. It has enough of a buildable area. It meets all of the city codes in all those other regards. So, the lot itself will be fine once it's on a culac and a has 150 ft of furniture, which they now will have with this design. >> So, for turn. >> Nothing today. So, they'll be installing the turn. >> They're going to extend off our road. >> Yep. >> And they're going to have to turn on. >> Right. So, right here, they'll be putting in this culde-sac here. And included in your packet is the grading plan for what the grading of that looks like. And they'll do all of that probably at the same time as they're doing the grading for the house that they need to do. >> But the question is, do we have how much of this do we have to maintain? >> We would maintain a culde-sac the same amount of what we have we have plus a culdeac. >> No. >> Yeah. >> Because we don't have a turnaround. No, >> no. >> Sharing. >> Yes. Joe had been using like a little farm access, like a a field access to turn around with the plow. >> That's what was there prior to >> Mr. Chair? >> Yes, ma'am. >> So, this actually might make it easier for Jill. >> Yeah. >> So, as he's going to go down, he'll actually have a turnaround and he can maintain that while he turns around. >> So, it's probably better for the city than what we had previous. But now the question I have is part of the city road you say is just not very wide. So we don't have any easements on the sides of it at all. >> Well, we'll be getting the easement on the south side which is the land that the place is going back. >> What about the rest of it? >> That will have to wait this picture. >> Yeah. >> No, no. Next one. The actual parcel. >> I'll help you that the Another one with the big part so it will show it shows it on. Okay, down right here up at the top there is 33 ft all the way to right here. That's what they're granting to now then for a a future road. >> It's 33 feet from the property line down granting the road is not going to be reconstructed in that area. It's going to stay the way it is. They're just adding all this. >> Is that good enough for the city? >> Yeah. >> Yeah, it's it's it's a it's an improvement on the current situation and it will help our fire department because they'll have a turnaround at the end that they can get a truck maneuvered around in. >> No, I realize that's right on the border of St. Francis. St. Frances on St. transit property. >> Yep. >> That's why we're only taking 33 feet on our side with the intention that anything changes on their side, they'll do the same. >> It's called sharing. >> It's very confusing because I >> It's called sharing. >> I know with that SL. Are you in Mr. PlayStation? >> No, I'm a builder. I'm going to be building the house for >> Oh, yeah. Because PlayStates come way down. area up. There used to be a road up there, but there's not used in years. >> Yeah. Essentially, they're granting the 33 ft on their side. It's on the north side of the road. We don't own it. So, they can't grant 33 ft on our side. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes, Commissioner. >> So, I see the uh the 32 ft go to the culdeac. If there's future development test that seems like it should be 33 ft long both parcel one we don't have to get it later. So then our road needs to go to parcel two where we have that easiness to continue the road. >> Those are different homeowners at this time. >> Yeah. What he's suggesting is that instead of it ending right here that it should go all the way through. >> I know what he's saying. Yeah. Well, yeah, it should go to there that way. It could be built if somebody built parts of food. >> And and we thought about that as staff and consultants, but opted not to do that at this time because there's also not been a plan to go along with that to improve that stretch as a city road. Um that adds a whole extra level of complexity to it. So from our perspective in the future it's and the road starts veering into St. Francis even more at that point as you can kind of see here it's totally outside of actually now then and that's 400 ft beyond the the spot we're talking about that the city would then have to bring up to city standards. The city wouldn't have to develop it until there's some problem. >> You're saying just to put the easement in road, >> but there could be a chance that the road if they develop that parcel too, the road goes south from there and divert from 229th, right? >> You would need to go wrong parcel one >> past it. Yeah. >> But then they would be putting in the culdeac. >> I think so. There is a wetland in the building. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I think without any plans for parcel two. >> I mean, if that was an option >> to scrap the cult and just give them an easement past one, they would jump all over it because they don't want the cult. >> Yeah. No, we need the easement, they would happily give the past one. >> I knew how that was going too. It would still need to be a temporary >> until wouldn't it be wise >> had the 66 east ement through the whole thing >> we're trying to share >> why why take away from one one side of the road and it's it's a it's literally a county line it's a town line there >> but I can see in the future there could be a problem there's more devel up there. >> There could be at that point it's actually kind of leaving Melvin as well and the it's on different property that a place that entity still owns. Um so that could be addressed at that time and have it all 66 ft beyond the parcel to the north if need be. >> Would it be easy to do it that at that day >> if they're asking for development? Yes. Because that would just be a standard thing that somebody would have to put in a row and then That would be up to St. Francis. >> No, >> right now he he's we're requesting him to put in that car side plus extend the road up the top of the lake for Joe to maintain. >> So Joe's already maintaining that section of 229 half mile. Yes, >> approximately. He's already maintaining that. It's a city road. >> We're extending it. >> Oh, just a culdeac. >> Just add >> Yep. Just >> so St. develop >> they could y >> pay for any maintenance on that road >> to to my knowledge there is not an agreement between the cities for a road maintenance agreement that's certainly something that um the city council could ask us to look into doing negotiating with them. But right now, I don't believe you have any with anybody, right? For any stretches of throat. >> No, it's pretty much just a gentleman's handshake. Sometimes Joe does it, sometimes St. Francis does it, whoever gets there first. It's just kind of they just work it out. >> Are there a number of roads like this? >> Not that I'm aware of on the county line like that. This is the only one that I'm aware of that we share with St. Francis, you have another little stretch of 229th as well that is Townline Road again. Um, but it's the same street >> that that would be a town line, not a county line. >> Yeah, this is town line. They're both town line. >> Yeah. >> So, this as you leave that site and move further to the east, this stretch again to share. Um, >> this one's actually I think sitting completely in this part of it's completely in now then, >> but might potentially be accessed by people from St. Francis. And >> I think there used to be a set of buildings on the St. Francis sign side of of the road years ago in there, but that's where Paul Harris's folk used to live at. Did Henry Bernard did he back in there too? >> He probably there was could have been, you know, because everybody had a little spot. They put built a little shack and used to be a sign right out on the street out there, too. It said, "We don't call the sheriff." And he shows a picture of a gun. You're trespassing. No trespassing. That's gone now. was for years it was back there. So I guess just a quick recap I guess the whole gist of this is the son of the son of play heads wants to build a home on that parcel parcel too. There's already a farmhouse that's been there for 100 years. So they're going to let us build another home on that parcel. So that's why we're creating a third part. So I mean they have a couple hundred acres there. All we're trying to do is get a home built for the sun and we obviously going through a lot surveying all of this landation through a lot of loops now putting a culdeac all just to build one home on 300 are whatever they have there. So we're kind of you know going through the just to get one house on just because there's a farmhouse already on that we're not tearing out. So that's just trying to get one house built on all this land. That's why we're adding that little sense. >> I think it makes total sense. >> And now we're adjusting. You know, it would have been easier to keep it in line with, you know, the property line that was already there north to south, but now we're encroaching, you know, on property to the east just so we can gain 150 ft of the public road. Public road ends at that property line. So you know now we do that parcel for surveying or title work or adjusting all the property lines. So it's become a huge project just to get one house built. >> There you go. Welcome to the world. >> See, we had the same problem down at Miss Duke. There's no turnar around there for Joel either up there by San Louis. >> He makes it work. >> Yeah, that that sort of dead ends there too. >> So Mr. Chair. >> Yes, Mayor. So just in summary what I just said a lot of work and efforts went into this like a lot in many phone calls and more phone calls. So looking at what they proposed to me this this makes sense with the cult where it is they've given all the pieces I think it meets the intent and um Miss Nash could you give your recommendation on this? You may not be there yet but maybe I could speed that up a little bit. >> Yep. No, we are recommending approval of it subject to the findings in the conditions in the packet. Um, we did give them an option of two different paths for how to get towards building that home quicker. Um, one option would be if to either enter into an agreement with the city, kind of a mini version of a development agreement, if you will, to build that culde-sac later, um, or while they're constructing the home so that we can lease the building permit. or they could do all that work first and then we release the building permit. Um we're starting to work on the agreement after discussions with them so that that's ready for the city council meeting to be approved and then move on. >> We'll leave the options in there for now just in case it looks better there. Uh there any other discussion on this subdivision seek motion to send this to city council. Anybody like to make this motion? I'll make a motion to recommend this um subdiv subdivision to council. Commissioner >> made the motion. Somebody like second it. >> I'll second. >> Commissioner Jordan second it is there. Any further discussion? Seeing none, I'll call for the vote. All in favor say I. I. >> Motion pass. >> Let's go to the council. All right. Okay. That' be same thing as the next city council second. Okay. We'll go on to the next thing we have here. Item B, the recommendation. Recommend members for the zoning ordinance commission. >> So, short version of this is that the city council has authorized us to do a complete overhaul of the zoning ordinance. Um and as part of that we will have a working committee of two members of council, two members of planning commission and the city clerk um to work closely with me on that before that's brought to all of you as a bigger group for review. Um so looking for a two people to be recommended by the planning commission, maybe a third as well and then the city council can select which ones. >> May I ask a question? I I know there's some things in there. It should be updated, but it's that bad. >> It's very difficult to read. It's been amended many times over the years already, and there's different things in different areas that you have to know to look in that aren't necessarily, it's not the way people think. If you reach the part you think you're supposed to be looking for and you read that part and don't and you think you have the answer, you stop there and you don't know to look in five other places, for example. Um there's definitions that actually have ordinance embedded within the definition. So people don't know that. So it and then there's just some things that have changed over time. So, we want to make it more user friendly, update it to current um statutes and standards. And >> anybody else have any questions about it? >> What's the timeline? >> Oh, yeah. Approximately 6 months. Um, and we're planning for two meetings of this working committee. The second one will take the most prep for that meeting because that you'll be reviewing a draft before the meeting of the document. The first one is more um pinpointed questions, brainstorming kind of policy type of stuff that there will be some prep for but not nearly as much. that second meeting it will whoever is on this I do ask that you know you be committed to when you get that draft to reading it very critically and thoroughly because it's all of our jobs to make it as as good as we can. >> What are the estimated meeting dates? >> We don't have those yet. So we will wait and see what works for the committee and obviously we'll probably be avoiding most of the month of December regardless. Are we is the holiday schedules for everyone? Are we suggesting two three names from here and then the council's going to pick from there? >> I think that's what you should do. >> Okay. >> Um maybe suggest two and a third as an alternate and the council can actually volunteer. >> I'll volunteer. >> I'll volunteer also. >> I volunteer too. >> Okay. There you go. >> You got one, two, three. >> Yeah. I'll bring if everybody else is okay. I'll bring your three names to council and let council pick two and >> Yeah. Y maximum three >> we yeah and I think you know I set it up as two and two the council can do whatever it wants to do because it would still be as you said avoiding that form. Mhm. >> Okay. Uh that's all we have on our agenda. Does somebody like to make a motion to journ? >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> Commissioner second. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Nice work.