good evening and welcome to the maple plane city council special meeting it is June 10th at 5:06 p.m. and I'm calling the meeting to order looking for a motion to approve tonight's agenda so moved moved by Francis second second by Fate any further discussion or questions hearing n all in favor of approving the agenda as is signify by saying I I I oppose same sign motion carries 4 to zero first item of business tonight is our public hearing um the public hearing is open to speak about the iup application for Collision corner is there anyone here to speak for the public hearing the public hearing is open is there anyone here to speak the public hearing is open is there anyone here to speak and I just realized we did not motion to open the public hearing so looking for a motion to open the public hearing so move move by Francis second second by Fay all in favor of opening the public hearing I I motion car opposed motion carries four to zero and again I will ask three times is there anyone here to speak for the public hearing for the iup anyone to speak for the public hearing for the iup application and last time anyone here to speak for the iup application hearing none looking for a motion to close um the public hearing so moved moved by Francis second second By Buck all in favor I I post same sign motion carries four to zero um item of discussion this evening is the iup application for Collision corner and I'm going to turn that over to staff Ahad just making sure uh honorable mayor council um the um item in uh before you tonight for consideration is an interim use permit for uh Collision Corner located at 5060 US Highway 12 um in accordance with the stipulation agreement settlement and stipulation agreement um the applicants have prepared an application requesting an inter imuse permit uh to allow uh the continuation of the business um on the subject property which includes um automobile repair collision repair um and uh for sale vehicles on that property with uh interim use permits just like conditional use permits uh the city also considers a site plan review so the subject property again its own miuse Gateway it's Guided by the comprehensive plan is mixed use it's approximately 89 acres in sight uh in size um and as Council knows there was a settlement stipulation agreement which uh provided um requirements relating to the physical site Improvement uh that were to be made to the subject property um and there were um a series of of different areas that were contemplated relating to parking striping uh storage of vehicles and so with that um there was also uh details that specified essentially uh the number of parking spaces that could be provided in particular areas of the property and so uh the city had reviewed a site plan um and a landscape plan that was prepared by the applicant um and presented on April uh 3rd to the city dated April 1 this city reviewed that plan had provided some comments back uh relating to some of the items that were still not in compliance with now the settlement and stipulation agreement um and those areas were uh further referenced the um the applicant did respond and said that they were going to uh make some changes to the site plan to be able to comply uh with the um majority of the comments that were made and the city was waiting on a um resubmittal I will note today we did see a site plan that was resubmitted this afternoon I'm not sure um exactly what time that came in but we um um we did get a resm that appears to have addressed some of the comments I haven't had a opportunity obviously go through fully what that resubmittal looks like with that said um the issues that we had noted in our report and again in our letter that was back to the applicant related to uh The Boundary Avenue parking and that is highlighted in your packet as the parking that is in Orange um on the diagram and so we noted that parking spaces had to be angled um along boundary and um in and otherwise they wouldn't fit as perpendicular spaces to meet the city's applicable dimensions for a parking space and again the settlement agreement spells out that they have to meet all requirements of the city's um dimensions for parking spaces um we also noted that there are in the front which is the um purple or pinkish purple area on the the map has parking spaces that don't appear to meet the dimensional requirements again standards of the city um and that there were more spaces than what was um agreed to in this in the settlement agreement uh so those are the front parking spaces it was noted that there's five spaces permitted along with one required accessible um or handicap accessible parking space and then the back parking area which is the blue area on the attached map it was noted that there was some comments that were made by the city however uh the settlement stipulation agreement um once those spaces are striped and the uh vehicles are parked within the spaces would be in compliance with the agreement um regardless of exactly how that configuration is made and then the Landscaping plan um it was noted that the Landscaping plan didn't fully address the uh settlement stipulation agreement um and the comments or the provisions that were provided uh within that agreement um in looking at what came back this afternoon I noted there there isn't a landscape plan I noted that there was some comments by the applicant um asking questions on that um in the response that was just sent back to the city so noting that we hadn't received at the time we wrote this report obviously we the city received something today um the city prepared essentially two resolutions one which would be a denial resolution based on not complying with the um provisions of the settlement stipulation agreement and then a second um a second resolution which would um essentially allow um the applicant more time to complete the improvements those were included in the packet um given that a revised plan came in today um and Council I don't think has a copy of that or do you have a copy of that Jacob did they just a plat just the map just the map um you can see that the comments relating to Boundary Avenue the spaces the angled spaces there were adjustments made um to those spaces the spaces I mean I haven't really reviewed that in its entirety I would note that there's some spaces now that kind of cross over um the sidewalk that's out in front of the building um and I again there's no dimensions on those spaces so I I can't fully tell just looking at them on the plan whether or not they can ply the five parking spaces in front they look like they um do comply uh with with the dimensional standards I would note the handicap space still doesn't meet the width requirements for uh accessible space um but that's something that um I'm not sure what's what the reason is for that not being able to comply and then I noted that the back parking spaces do they do comply with the uh the provisions of the settlement stipulation um so I'd be happy to answer any questions now or take any questions now on the information that I had or the information that was in the packet and then if we'd like to talk more about any of those pieces we could do that I guess I just like to clarify a couple things I know it was my understanding that Council gave direction to staff um to send a reminder to Collision Corner did that happen uh yes madame mayor members of the council I sent a follow-up uh email to Elizabeth croll as well as a letter in the mail on the 29th of May uh reminding them that um as all submittal to the council I need to have uh the revised site plan by June 4th by 400 pm to be considered by the council okay so that was sent so that was Tuesday June 4th at 4M and we didn't receive anything until today Monday the 10th it looks like it was sent at7 and then you saw it and sent it to council shortly thereafter around 3 30 that is correct so I've had no time to review this so I'm not sure how we can vote on something the letter that was sent everything that was sent said we needed things ahead of time so we can prepare like we do with anything our packets go out on Wednesday um was there any communication with the applicant or anyone from Collision Corner between the 4th and today no okay other questions my notes from the 29th and I believe you were at that meeting Michelle 29th of April was that a closed session was it closed thought it was a special meeting was it closed oh if it was closed I don't have a question on that then my apologies um you drafted the two resolutions yes um staff requested a resolution denying the iup application because as of the date that the packet needed to go out there wasn't a a complete compliant site plan um I would note that the site plan for the settlement agreement was originally supposed to be submitted in on January 16th 2023 the second one was an approval of the iup with conditions correct and the conditions show that the documentation get to the city uh by the 20 in compliance with settlement agreement by the 25th of June and that all compliance issues be completed by the 9th of August how did we deter determine those days dates those were just suggestions I think the council would have discretion to set some deadlines there um you know I would note we didn't include the option to Simply Grant the iup um as I mentioned staff advised that they did not have a a complete site plan um but that would also be an option for you to consider um and then you know the terms of the settlement including it's enforcement Provisions would be available to the council as well because I agree with the mayor and that I can't make an informed decision without looking at the most recent document that was submitted by Collision corner but on the same token I know that the applicant can move heaven and earth when his back is against the wall so my question to council is do we accept with conditions but we change the dates to get this done quickly well council member that is definitely an option but this deadline was first January 16th we extended it to June 4th and we finally get something June 10th Less Than 3 hours before our meeting so how long I know is this going going to go on I mean it's another meeting it's it's time I I think it's time to for us to make a decision and stop moving the goal post administrator Cole Ander thank you Madame mayor members of the council uh one thing I do want to remind to the you know one of the reasons that we're having the meeting today is because we are nearing the deadline of of having to do an approval or Denial on the application so that is one of the reasons that we're having the meeting uh today as well and every time we do this we're spending residents money I mean we're posting this in the paper we're having special meetings and we continue to extend and extend and it's not being honored I mean we even sent a reminder on the 29th email and mail I I get it I I'm going to say we did get the paperwork and it is hard to make a decision without all the information especially when this is the information that is given out to the public and that's the hardest part about this but I do believe we do need to make an informed decision on it mhm even though it is last minute we have a Min are standing June 25th is the final deadline is that correct I'd have to look back um for the for the timeline we have to to review the plans though I'd have to look when you say deadlines are these dates that are imposed well the city has only so much time to review an application we're still well within that time but we could and we do have the ability to extend right we do have the ability to extend again another 60 days if we want it we haven't done that extension yet yeah I mean we've had from January to June and it didn't get done with months yeah and maybe we should just be clear that we're talking about the statutory deadline right for you to make a decision not the deadline that was agreed to in the court yeah okay well the applicant wants to stay in business right so let me let me pose this what would be a realistic date not the 25th of June what would be a realistic date to ensure that that that all the necessary materials are in and they're accurate I ask you the a week from today a week from today I can't answer that council member Francis I think we we've given so many extensions already we've spent so much time and money and effort that we need to make the decision today based on the information we've been able to review that was turned in on time with our last deadline and it's incomplete that you know we came to the table in good faith to make this a working relationship the other party has not done their share of the workload that I I I can't support it approving an iup I'll just put it out there I can't support it it's my tax money our tax money that's going further down the road and enough is enough I would remind you that there is a $3,000 escrow that I'm assuming we're working off of so I do not believe there's any tax dollars spent on these meetings and staff time is that correct being build directly back to the applicant that is correct so the special meetings the newspaper listing all your staff time so outside of cost to the residents of the city which technically there should be none which is why we have escrow why else are you opposed to giving him listen if you want to say next Monday and if it's not in and if it's not I will shut it down I will how many times do we want to extend it before we say enough is enough it was supposed to be in January and now we're June five months later I'm done even if we would have gotten it last Friday we could have had the weekend to review it but we can't expect our staff correct or ourselves we all have full-time daytime jobs we had this discussion to make sure that he was aware I agree and we went above and beyond sending an email reminder and a snail mail reminder I'm I'm All About Grace and Second Chances but we tried and then even tried with the second chance with reminders you're absolutely right there's 30 years of of this and I don't no and it's not easy and it's not fun but these are the facts right council member B yes and so the June 25th that is the statute St of the application correct is that the date no I have August 1st Aug on I okay just I was looking back to see what the letters were but August 1st is the time period where we then can question so all the parking spaces can fit on that property that is allowed so yeah I mean I understand the angles of to meet the dimensions but so right now the way I mean the stipulation agreement determine you know number spaces as long as they met applicable standards and it spells out what those are what you know that it has to meet the parking Dimensions um in looking at the revised plan that came in today the I mean they restripe or they're showing the striping of the front parking spaces um in front of the building I noted that the hand you know we required a handicap accessible space um to be ada8 compliant you have to have an 8ft wide uh side space next to the accessible space that's not shown still on that revised plan is there room to fit that I don't exactly know because they don't without without printing it and scaling I couldn't tell you that right this second the spaces on Boundary um they restrip or they're showing the restriping of those spaces on Boundary with angles and that's again that's what we asked I don't see those Dimensions I noted that there's a a sidewalk that the spaces now are are shown kind of council member beer taking over so I appreciate your question and think it's important this is not a fair position to put our St no we literally got this I I just making sure that it's a realistic number that's that's my question it's a realistic number well it was okay agreed to in mediation in court way back in last year okay by the applicant and the city all right so this is the latest and greatest and this is supposed to have crossed all the t's and dotted all the eyes and make him compliant with everything but we just got it today what if we move what if we move the uh 25th to the 13th or 14th of this week council member Francis we're we're it's just keeping moving the goalpost down the road they they had hours they had but they had a set deadline they didn't meet it it's been five months since the settlement agreement was drawn up and signed by everyone it needs to stop listen there's a better than average chance that this document we got today is nothing but a Hail Mary to satisfy us and there is a very good chance that it doesn't meet the um uh specifications set for it's here it's in front of us 72 hours go or no go if it doesn't meet it I will shut down the iup he he doesn't get to submit anything else this is it this this is it you don't get to correct anything you scale it Mark print it scale it measure it it doesn't meet uh specifications gromberg is a professional architect or professional civil engineer he's dated it he's signed it that it was directed under his supervision he's a smart man if it falls anything short it's done but it's 72 hours all right we've heard from council member Francis council member Fay council member DeLuca my apologies for being late um this is a concerning issue to me I appreciate the fact that we got a plan I find it ironic that the last couple of deadlines that we've imposed on the applicant literally it's been 3:30 to 4:00 each time that the document arrives on our desk we were to have done a public hearing today I don't know how you do a public hearing when the Public's not been presented with the document that he presented at 3:30 this afternoon we talked at our strategic planning meeting about transparency and being able to get stuff to the public I think we're failing ourselves if we don't extend that public hearing to another time when we can get this document out on the public it public can react to it I'm not prepared to make a decision until I see if the public has some comment about this document I did equit pretty quick review this afternoon it doesn't necessarily meet all the conditions that are in the the settlement agreement that's not the point of today the point of today is to try to get what are the Public's comments about this so that we can make an informed decision I would support pushing this for a few days or whatever to get that public input reopen the public hearing and then deliberate on this it doesn't meet all the the specs and there's going to have to be some very quick adjustments and we asked for adjustments on early April and it took you guys two months to bring bring those that was disappointing at best well while I hear what you're saying council member Fay and council member DeLuca to post the public hearing this all has to be back in the newspaper again and does it not so it's not like we can do this in 72 hours does it have to be posted though Jacob or could it be extended and there's not even anyone here tonight leave it open uh no you would have to repost it the public hearing has been closed already uh and if I may to the council from a staff uh perspective um there was a deadline January 16th the deadline was missed we gave leeway went to court case was dismissed had a deadline didn't get the right information send it back asked for further information as Duca said two months later right before the meeting we get further information as a staff person it is would be my recommendation to the council to deny this application and stop it at this point I just wanted to add some comments on sort of the legal landscape so you have those facts in front of you as well um if the iup application is denied you are left with a property um that is out of compliance with City Zoning code um there are some legal non-conforming uses that were agreed to as part of the settlement um that would apply so you have to you know maybe consider what that means for the city if there isn't a shift to those legal non-conforming uses and that would be a a potential enforcement action to enforce the zoning code um if you do Grant the iup there are some additional enforcement mechanisms built into the terms and conditions that were agreed to um that do give the city a little bit more of um I guess it gives it an additional compliance mechanism in terms of you know if if these agreed upon um you know parking limits and um you know keeping the landscaping and keeping the property clean aren't met there are penalties built into the iup that you wouldn't otherwise have um if the application is denied so I just wanted to make sure that those facts were um as before you as well and go ahead member is it possible that there's a middle position here if the public hearing has been closed and we can't get any more public comment without reposting it for a month is there a way of Simply putting a short time frame Define it as days hours whatever where Mark meets with the applicant to hammer out anything that is not in compliance with that to see if there is a willingness and bring back to this group in a matter of hours or days um a final answer that we and then based on a closed public hearing make a decision I would feel a little bit better about that than simply saying no tonight well just to be clear if we say no to the iup we're not shutting down the business noes the oper right but I know but you implied earlier like we're getting rid of the business I'm like no we're changing the the scope of his business to to be in compliance right without the iup he can paint cars but he can't repair them can't what word am I looking for can't replace a fender can't do damage uh correction Auto Body Auto Body the legal non-conforming uses specifically are indoor Auto Service and indoor automobile sales and those are defined in the settlement agreed upon by the applicant and the city at the well I don't know how you want to construct the language but yes I would like to give hours or days to this and like I said this is the document if this document doesn't meet all all the criteria established then then I then I am willing to uh disallow the iup understand John the document as it sits most likely does not all of those well but but I'm willing to give the hours or days to have Mark hammer it out to bring back something that is I don't think it would be very hard to make a couple adjustments that would make that in compliance why on Earth would the applicant give us a non-complete why didn't they listen in January why didn't they listen in April I don't know the answer to that and what's going to change now what's different now than it was in January a threat of a no but but there was a threat of a no really narrow window okay well legally we have to have at least a three-day posting we have to have a quorum and we have to have staff available sorry no May Council I was just gonna um so I mean we're talking about revising the plan there there's a couple of things on this plan that aren't going to just they're just not going to work you're never going to make them work and then there's things that are pretty well done right um so we're not we're not talking about that much stuff the the settlement stipulation agreement has an August 9th compliance date with actually getting the things done to be done well that's not the the settlement that was what we put in the proposed resolution because of the statute deadline for decision so I'm wondering if that day maybe I wonder if there's a middle ground where we could get um if the council would feel comfortable approving with conditions and a in and a and a uh shortened window for getting the the improvements in and the only reason I say that is if you approve it and you have conditions and then they fail to comply we have mechanisms now in a in an agreement to enforce if we don't do that and we deny we we have different mechanisms and you understand those and I think they're diff they're more difficult so I I'm just I'm just throwing that out because you know really we're down to a handicap space in front of the building and a couple of spaces on Boundary that don't work that's what we're talking about the landscape plan is really black and white because the stipulation agreement says 8 625 it's there is there's nothing to that other than they have to perform on that right so they need to they need to give us that but and a cursory inspection of the Backlot between the fences you feel you're you feel that's you're comfortable we did when we initially reviewed the the issue that I have is there's some spaces on Boundary those the three angled spaces on the south end of boundary and the one space that's on the north side of the driveway they don't they don't fit I mean they just they don't meet our requirements and if you're going to provide a handicap accessible space you could provide that easily with the five spaces and then you you'd have a compliant plan so the two of you speaking for the city it would be better to approve it with conditions and if the conditions aren't met the mechanism mechanisms we have available to us are are are are better for us than if we deny it outright and and then we have to enforce well I mean ultim it's a council decision I'm just suggesting that there's there is an opportunity to to get it to compliance if that's what you want and we're close to that then take that next step work with them and bring it back when it's compliant then I'll vote on it not before so so the question I have is on the the public hearing was had we don't you can table this item you don't have to reopen the public hearing if you if you don't I mean you held the public hearing nobody commented right so you could table the item and then we could just table it to your next meeting on the 26 and by then we could bring you uh plan and I was going to say we you know we're happy to revise a proposed resolution that's consistent with Mark's comments if that's what the council would would like to see okay what date did you say 24th 24th 24th when's your next meeting I'm sorry was something special about the6 and I I'm okay with it as long as we have a short leash and a short time and it's clearcut yes it's compliant no it's not done green light red light yep no more discussion it's compliant or it's not okay end of issue and that would be putting June 18th having that information for the packet correct so that would be making the deadline June 18 is that doable staff that's it would be uh June 17th before it would be Monday Monday before oh one week from today one week from today and then I would if we did that then I would recommend that we uh make that August 9th for full compliance date um be August 1st one week after that why does it take six weeks to come in compliance with something I agree when they've had six months to do it well I I I'm trying to seek it's striping that's really it it's striping and Landscaping Landscaping I'm just saying if we're giving them till the 17th to get us the final stuff great by July 1st agree being compliance by July sorry July 1st you said August I did but on my calendar the one is yeah July 1st okay okay so do we need to make a motion to T to table the item till July till your June 24th city council meeting okay I will make the motion to table the issue administrator cander sorry so if we know that we're doing this and we got these dates set why don't we just approve this second resolution with those dates because I'm not going to vote on something until I see it done because of the history of the applicant he may just not do it and there's the third option that you grant it with conditions and rather than failure to meet the conditions being a denial failure to meet the conditions as the first strike under the iup so that you can take advantage of those enforcement mechanisms bring it back when it's done then it's a table motion that's is that right yeah go ahead Connie okay so I'm I'm making a motion to table the granting of the iup until our June 24th meeting okay there's a motion by council member Francis I'll second that motion second by council member bureck all in further all in favor of tbling this discussion until the June 24th meeting please signify by saying I I I oppose same sign motion carries 5 to zero so then staff you'll follow up with the applicants with the June 17th deadline and July 1 deadline and all the deadlines yeah that will be then written into the resolution yeah we can update the Michelle can update the resolution all right and Michelle will update the resolution then okay so then after um the June 24th meeting the decision will be made okay any further discussion or questions right ma' any other city council reports and other business to come before us tonight no ma'am all in favor of adjourning uh looking for a motion to adjourn so moved moved by Francis second by DeLuca any all in favor of adjourning signifi by say I I I post same sign motion carries 5 to Zer the meeting's adjourned at 5:47