##VIDEO ID:BED3CLku4LU## [Music] anybody sees anybody up there that I need to admit let me know I'm G bring the mouse with me yeah there you go did you admit all the participants y you got right now there's no more participants to admit oh you going to hang yeah I'll leave you the mouse then all right want to do it I'll let you no nope NOP I'm good with that all right good evening everybody it is 6:30 and with that we will call to order the planning zoning commission for the city of Oro coh hereit and first off then is roll call I am commissioner Kathy Brant Rucker commissioner Wendy Phillips Vice chair here commissioner Jim Richards here commissioner Jim Phillips here commissioner Scott Sorenson commissioner Colleen freed commissioner John Evans here and for staff do we have Bill Carlson from stantech we do he's there yes we do uh do we have Joe Palin from stantech all right and Jason Baker from the city of Boko all right next up is approval of the agenda for this evening are there any changes additions deletions from the agenda for this evening yeah under new business a a and b um I know we talked about rfps to update our contract for planning city planner um and I'd like us to talk a little bit about this sewage spill okay just make sure the pnz is aware so a would be RFP and B would be sewage spell yeah so sewage update maybe that spell update all right any other changes additions all all in favor of approving the agenda as amended I anyone opposed hey we next have approval of last month's minutes I that corrections to those minutes okay let me put on my glasses real quick so I can read my own writing yeah that's one thing I'll say this no I don't see anything that needs to be corrected on page one but on page two under what would be uh looks like Roman numeral a small four uh it says the stanch record date is stated as September 11th it should be October 10th actually that should read the stantech deadline for Council action is stated as or in the stantech report the deadline for Council action is stated as September 11th it should be October 10th so in the Stan tech report the deadline for Council action is stated as September 11 it should be October 10 so that's the first correction and then if you go down to Roman numeral 6 um and what is written here is number four and five in findings of fact uh solar should not be part of it was actually in the findings of fact dated September 12th on page four it said uh we struck items five and six Al together and in item four findings of fact we struck the verbage that will have reasonable solar access so that number four should read the only practical location for a garage on the site is on the north side of the property within 10 ft of the front lot line requiring a variance what I I don't have that you've got the other one from I didn't pull I pulled I pulled sheets from our last week so that I could make these Corrections accurately right so I'm reading from last month's agenda okay while we're correcting last month's minutes okay and I can give this to you yeah but I I just just the recording actually yeah actually what I could do is email all of it to you tomorrow would that beable okay so just moving on in the corrections um right underneath Roman numeral number six in item e motion uh we need to spell John Evans name correctly EV V ANS correct John correct okay and then on the final page under Item B Linda King's presentation it says Craig Griffin representing Libby King that should be Linda King and so that is it for the corrections minute and I will forward all the corrections to you any other Corrections or changes for the minutes from last moment thank you you're welcome is there a motion to approve the minutes I make a motion to approve with a question second any more discussion okay all in favor of approval of the minutes say I I I any oppose May minutes are approved and I back up a moment did I get a motion a first and second for the agenda no so let's all do that really I make a motion to approve the agenda as amended I will second that any discussion that was as amended correct yes okay any discussion all in favor of approving the agenda again I any opposed okay thank you so much second second yes all right and with that we have a public hearing for this evening scheduled for 6:35 and we are now at 6:37 so we don't have to hang out and wait and with that at 6:37 I will open the public hearing with the public hearing if there is anyone who does want to comment we do have sheets that are up there you can certainly fill one out we will at the close of the public hearing also end up asking the applicant if they have any questions if they are here as well and with that is there anyone here who would like to speak for or against the application I do have to say this three times so I do apologize is there anyone who would like to speak for or against the application is there anyone who would like to speak for or against the application and this is the public hearing for the lot split for 1215 West Center Street in oroco and with no more no more uh requests for public comments at this time we will close the public hearing at 6:38 officially we do have a staff report and stanch we do have Phil here as well Phil are you able to walk us through the application yes um Madam chair and Commissioners can you hear me okay yes okay good um the application as you noted is for a lot splited for the property at 12:15 Center Street it's quite a large piece of property uh and uh the request itself to split it into two lots that uh could be developed with with homes is simple enough but but it's complicated by uh two facts one that uh the Frontage that they want to uh use for this slot is very narrow it's the stub end of uh First Street uh which is only 33 fet wide which means that each of these New Lots would only have 16 1 12 feet of uh Frontage even though the properties themselves are quite large but the frontage would be very narrow which is problematic and something that uh the city code addresses uh requiring 50 foot minimum Frontage for any home lot the second is that this property is at the end of that stub Street uh creating a culdesac that's hundreds of feet long much longer than the uh than the uh maximum that's in the code and it uh suggests and the and the layout of of the streets and the lots and the properties there suggests that uh ultimately uh that street First Street should be continued and looped down to to Center Street uh to make for a a logical connection and open up other parts of the property for development perhaps if that's what these owners would want to do in the future so it really uh presents um a conundrum here uh approving it as it has been requested uh uh furthers this very very long culdesac which is not a good idea from a safety standpoint of view and second it uh gives only very narrow uh piece of Frontage uh for each lot which is also a concern for safety and emergency access point of view on the other hand uh requiring uh which looks good on paper requiring a street to be extended through down to Center Street Street uh looks perfectly logical but it would be a very expensive undertaking and so in essence these uh two Lots at the end of the culdesac uh would have to bear the the cost of extending the street and the sewer and the water uh for that uh loop uh which would be of benefit uh to some of the existing homes that are on uh First Street uh you know a a dead end water main is not a good idea uh both for uh just preventing stagnant water in the main if you Loop it have it extend have it connected on two sides that's always good from an engineering point of view and it uh keeps the water fresher but also from a fir flow uh standpoint uh being able to have that water main looped is a good idea as the city engineer pointed out uh in the report uh and so uh those those two uh uh options neither of which seems ideal uh had us uh uh put this in front of you Commissioners to ponder these policy questions uh we can say as your planner and engineer that uh we think streets should be looped water mains should be looped every lot should have its 50 foot Frontage and yet uh uh those kinds of recommendations would come with a price tag here and the question is uh should it be required and if so who should pay for it um so uh this uh becomes uh perhaps an action item you could take action on this tonight uh either approving it or denying it uh or you could uh pass it on for more information and discussion either among yourselves as the Planning and Zoning commission or perhaps with uh with the city council um there are the details of this in the diagrams of the uh the property what's being uh proposed and uh how it uh might be uh uh you know how it might lead to uh future uh development uh in the future as well as uh information about uh the proximity of the uh uh the FEMA flood uh Zone which is at the North End of the property and the steep slopes which would complicate and make any kind of development or extension of a street uh more expensive but not impossible um so with that uh I would uh open it to your uh questions and comments uh and guidance on this I have a question for you Phil sure um in talking about the looping of the water M and you said that it's not good that a water M would terminate at a dead end um that looping the water man avoids stagnant water in the main significantly improves fire protection flow rates improves water system performance and decreases the risk of water service outages why was this water man put in in a terminating dead end as opposed to looping it originally if all of these things are a benefit of having that water main Loop well that's a good question and I'm I'm not I don't know the details of this project and when it was put in and and why that was decided um I imagine that part of the answer is that looping it would have required it to come through a proper property that didn't need it uh this property now the barge property that is is up for the lot split and so it may have been a question of the the cost as you can see it would be a few hundred feet uh of uh loop to get it down to uh Center Street through a property that at the time uh really was under uh one ownership as opposed to the uh you know dozen or more lots that are on on Center Street so I don't I don't know the the answer specifically as to whether that was considered uh at the time uh but uh you know putting a water man in in a deadend situation is simply not the best option it's not that it it really should not ever be done uh from an engineering standpoint it's just that it's better if it's moved yeah I just was also thinking about the number of dead ends that there are in the city one of them for example would be at Glenn's Motor Coach where that's a dead end on on that water M that's there it was a dead end before when it went to gas and go on that part behind it uh I can even go up to where we're at Riverwood and and the end of that is a dead end as well of what goes on um I can think of numerous dead ends that that there are inside the city right now and they've operated without having any issues and now we we matter of fact we're doing right now is we're fleshing the hydrants and again right now if you look at it it's it's a dead end the way it's set it you know so I mean yeah it's it's a want to whatever and and you know the other thing that that comes to question for me um is I'm reading through this and you're talking about uh being able to to support up to what like seven you know other Lots or different things this was only going to be a lot split for two um and that's why I don't know why we're going into the future development if it was just going to be split for two lots yeah we're making making assumptions that and and that's not the request that there there was from from what there is for the lot split you know it was just to split the line well uh commissioner Richards I can I can answer some of that in talking with Joe Palin the city engineer everywhere uh in the city there were assumptions made about what might be the future uh development so that they could size the sewer Mains uh the sewer pipes and the water mains and so uh since this property is really at the edge of of the city and the West Edge he did say that there were were assumptions made in the engineering study that this property would support up to seven uh Lots that's not to say that it has to develop is seven Lots or that the request now is seven Lots certainly it's not it's only for two it's just that seven is the limit and if uh you know the property could support with smaller lot sizes it could sort support 10 or 15 or 20 Lots uh but he just saying the system is now sized to support seven uh and no more than that but right now they're just asking they're just asking look at what's at hand here me that's what's on the paper and and that's all we have to to look at is what's what's there and what was requested for the split I do agree that having a water loop actually does benefit the fire department and there is some benefit to that but I don't know at this point for two lots that it is necessary to put through there but it certainly might be something where it might be nice if in the future the city needed to put a water line through there there there was a utility ease mon yeah expense I mean but right now no it would be at the city's expense for this purpose right right for safety and and fire if we found that there's a need it would be you know there'd be an easement there and available or if the EAS month's there and later they de is determined to develop up to seven or five more Lots or whatever well then it's a different conversation but right now we've got two right and I I guess I I would assume based on what I'm hearing here that you know with the city suggesting that the best thing to do is to connect those water mains that the city would have that in the plan of the city's expense for the next phase of the water sewer project um and in terms of the the end of the culdesac I mean that that's not the land owners fault that the culdesac is at the the shape or the size that it is because the city put that cuaac in right um I guess I would I would look to the landowner I'm sure they can come up with something creative in terms of the the 16 and 1 12 ft um for Access off the end of the cuac um I know you had mentioned Phil in later about the 20 there's a remaining 23 Acres I think you said that they would have to come to an agreement to share a driveway I think they could do something here where they those lots they you know they could open it up and say okay we're going to we're going to share the end of it I guess is what I'm getting at yeah if you're suggesting maybe there is a a culdesac there that's built so it makes a wider piece of Frontage for each of those two lots is that is that what you're suggesting yeah yeah there is a call to sack there now right it it could be then actually dedicated so that it's an extension of the public Street it just ends there at the culac where where two driveways would be coming into the CAC yep yeah so I I agree Kathy we have to we have to look at what's in front of us it's a lot split um I I don't think we we can say that there's going to be seven homes in there um they're asking for a lot withl I was going to say I don't think that seven homes is part of what should be our consideration right now right that's not part of the proposal course us nor is the the toward the water pipe would there be a possibility like you were mentioning before on on having an easement that that could be there um along the the lot a that if they did need to put that that water line going through there they could do it and and look at that on whatever is going to be developed in that area knowing that we need to have that easement that that they would do that and and be able to the water through there right yeah I would like to see a utility easement through there but I don't know that it at this point for a lot split would be necessary on that but well if if I may uh Commissioners uh the the time when they're doing this lot split which is a form of a subdivision that's the time when you can get that easement from the property um if if they build houses there and then you say oh now sometime in the future in a year or 10 years we want an easement you can't just go back and take it but you can uh require it to be dedicated as part of this lot split this minor subdivision and so with that now being a time to add that E I don't know that I saw language in anything here so we need to come up with some language yeah I think we need to do that but I I think that that that would at least take care of you know that that part in the future I think to be able to to do that would we do it as a condition to the lot split or I think Bill we would have to put that as a would it be a condition or just a part of well it would it would be a condition uh you know this is going to go to the city council and um uh if if you recommend approve it and if the city council approves it it could be a condition that they dedicate uh a a suitable uh drainage and utility easement that would make the connection more or less as shown and then they would have to come back with the with the actual uh survey drawing to show that easement but yes that could be a condition that you would add with your recommendation tonight I think that seems like a reasonable I think it it does I'd like to understand Phil what can you explain the easement so the property owner understands what we're talking about and and what are the requirements of that easement on the property owners well uh every property that has uh sewer and water and everything that every lot that is uh platted is required to give the easements usually at the edge uh so that you can uh have uh sewer pipes water pipes gas electric Etc uh along those common lot lines they're typically only 5 feet wide on each lot so it makes 10 feet wide uh for the entire easement yeah uh in this case um I believe it makes sense to have it go in the middle of the property um I don't agree with that no no easements got to go on the side you know that's the only way it would make sense yeah you're taking Land from the homeowner essentially if you go right up that lot they can't do anything with with that lot Phil well a big lot to buy that lot from lot's not as big as a be lot and we forget about the sea lot but you know the 5 foot easement would would would make more sense to me other than try and do the rest and know so it would be easier to make a turn but I I'm not going to make it easier for that to go right through the middle of aot I don't think that makes sense for that at all you you could uh recommend that and certainly along the edge uh is where most of them go um and uh and then the question is again U planning for the future uh you know it has to work today but it we ought to think about what would happen in the future and would you put a street right next to that neighboring lot on the east side that's why I was suggesting that it might go in the middle you could uh recommend that It Go on the edge if you want I see if it goes on the edge It lines up more or less with the other Street that's coming up doesn't it absolutely no I mean that that 5 foot makes more sense on on everything as an easement to go that way and I don't know who's got the other property on the other side because we're we're not looking at at that there a couple but I'm just saying that that that that 5 foot would would make sense for for that and make it to be developable for whoever wants to live there as they doing it so I I would make a motion that we recommend with a 5 foot well 5 foot equals 10 foot correct easement along utility easement M utility easement along that I would assume it's a fence line and and a street there that's that's quite steep so this is a motion for approval of the lot split with the condition of a 5 of a 5 foot eement along the east property line Y can I foot can I say something with that you might want to make it bigger if they've got to get vehicles back there to do maintenance or anything five foot well it's going to be 10 totally got be 10 be it's going to be five and five it's usually you have five on one property five on the other I don't know if that's and Bill correct me if I'm wrong here but look I'm looking at the lot here is that something where we'd have to go to those other people and take five feet from them as well or from the current property they're looking to split really right um that other property is not part of this request and so you really don't have the authority to make them give it within a subdivision like this request you can require the dedication of an easement so um you could uh uh request the full 10 feet from this property well Phil and if I could here this is not a subdivision is talking about this is a lot split right a lot split is a subdivision part it's a part of the subot splits that weren't called subdivisions yeah I mean we've had them all over town and we never refer to it as a subdivision right so this is a lot split go Ahad I think it's the same section of code whatever you want to call it uh the it would be difficult to go and put not just the five there and try to do the other five it would be really pretty sticky to try and do it and I don't know if the 10 the 10 foot utility easement on the east side of the property line right a total of the 10 foot e based on what Phil is saying I'm looking at the print on that one uh on the East end of that lot a we're looking at 208 fet that there is off of that for for that that side is that correct though um I I don't know the I don't have the dimensions in front of me maybe you do you talking about the north south Dimension or the east West but it says East okay on on the drawing here um it looks like it's almost South if if I look at it or Southwest with the north but it's it's it's labeled East but this is facing north yeah it's so it should be going 200 two that way you know what I'm saying so I was looking at at at this but this one says East you see what I'm talking about yeah yeah so but this one refers to it as East but this is facing north which means this should actually be the south side of that but it would be on the East part of it but I'm looking at at that that footage that's there that says 28.75 so if we look at the overall property we can say give the verbiage on the right side of this plot I just think that's wrong where it says East that's as facing north I guess it is okay we let me ask you a question Phil what we're doing sure sure should we turn around and and also put that that same utility easement on on beot as well and not just a that we have that going through both of those well it's it's a good idea to have those easements on the edges of of all properties so I think be to do it on on be and if if I could come back to the the question you had uh just now it are you looking at the drawing that uh is kind of the second page of survey drawings and at the on the top of it has a dimension of 28.99 yeah yeah yeah well the numbers on letters in front of it say North 86 degrees 58 86 something 13 East that survey language to mean it's just Slightly North of of East so it's more or less an East West line uh it's just that it's got uh the bearing there in degrees and minutes I was looking at the North part of it that way but I think that that would make sense to be able to put that utility easement on both yes yeah if if there's no easements now then now would be the time to to get uh easement saw all the way around these properties and we just don't know in the future what what might be happening but the easma would would be in there I guess right my question would be then how far is that easement on lot a I go all the way because that that lot a goes down to the water correct well right so why would you put that utility easement that far may I would see a utility easement half way yeah there was a c that was on there okay see well that was just for context I was showing the other property that's of this yeah that that property is not involved in this request okay then I would go all the way down just just to what for an easement On A and B on the right hand side on the right hand side which would be the east side and 10 feet yeah but are we saying all the way down here but I just as long as you're doing the split I think you might as well run it all the way down hang on one second so again when you're ready I have a question for the group okay you see here that goes to the bank well that doesn't mean that you're ever you're put it as an easement that would be in there for the plotting all the way to the end because it's not going to be buildable right on the river bank anyway so but at least the even be yeah and you don't know in the future if you ever run something underground under the river to the other side that You' have an easement to be able to do that yeah well and and Commissioners if I may let's be clear the the first page of survey drawings shows the lot that they want to split but it also shows the lot to the north uh it's the one that says area equals 38.5 9 Acres more or less that property is not part of this request so we really can't can't uh get an easement from that but everything that uh uh everything south of that what I've labeled as partials A and B we could get uh it's listed on there as partial one and two but a is two and B is one yeah but I think that we should should do that 10 foot easement that would be there which we have the ability to do especially at this point when we're doing the split and and then people when you got the split do it as a 10 all the way do it as as a 10 because we can't get into the other property that's on the other side that would be going backwards and and and an easement is like like Phil was saying I mean we've got easements all over the city on different things that are going on but they have question I know Jason you had a question yeah and I'm just looking at this and listening to what you guys guys are saying and talking about and I just want to make sure I understand it right so the idea is to have an entrance off of the culde act for both lots and you said Phil that that can be doable correct off that cold well again it's it's not ideal but yes you know you can you can put driveways so so if that's done and the lot split line is from that culdesac wouldn't it make more sense to run the easement along that lot split line five on five on both five on either side of that line and then come down the west side of the property with an easement to connect to Center Street instead talking about this line here the diagonal kind of the diagonal split line and then come down the East Side 10 ft that way you're not running all the way North along the the line 10 ft of that property if I'm following it would be this dotted line that goes right across between a and b and then run it property line you would do You' split North split five you're going to have to do a set back along the property line that would be ideal anyways and then just instead of going the East Side go down the west side of the property so typically typically you take uh easements around all sides of a property so if we are putting easements I would suggest that we take 10 feet on the east side no five feet either side of that the lot split line and uh five or 10 feet on the on the west side as well no I don't agree with that I mean we're we're talking about one line here and and we're talking about a lot split because now we're going with all kinds of easements here I say we do this is my opinion we do an easement on that what we're calling East all the way down I don't know why we would do an easement across that diagonal line well because that might be the location of future utilities or drainage might be I say we well the only thing with with the might be on on the easement you know um and I understand what you're saying Jason on that one which we could do five and five off of it that would open it up um and I wouldn't go down on on the west side if we if you did that that you would do um 10 foot this way and then you could do an eement on on five and five this way and just stop at that point right here so when you at that point right there yeah but look let's get back to the whole idea of this easement the idea of this easement that we're talking about was to bring the water line from first up to West Center basically to put a future path for a loop that's right in the future yeah because it sounds like we've got a lot of other spots in town where we have a lot of deadend dead ends and we may need some future changes there but here I agree go ahead right here we're just planning for if that becomes a necessary thing and putting that easement in place would give us the flexibility as a city to fix it at that time yep and and I agree now whether it's on the west side of the lot or the east side of the lot yeah it because to me it wouldn't make sense logical sense to bring an easement and plan to bring the water like this your the original ask and the original concern was that dead end and hooking it to West Center Street you probably bring everything up this why on Earth would you go acoss the lot then to go up to West Center Street why not to go straight down that's right yeah well if I if I may easements on that common lot line the kind of the diagonal line wouldn't be for the Waterman Loop going down to Center Street but it would be for any kind of drainage or utility needs that might come up again every lot that's platted in the city uh has those easements on all four sides the question that I have on that one Phil is if you you look we're looking at Center Street that there is on the south side and and going down there for future developments at their were we've already got that easement that that should be there on Center Street right so the utilities that there would be if we were going to be heading west would turn around and be fed off with that Center Street area does that make does that make sense of what I'm I'm trying to explain right right so we've already got that in the city that would would be there so that would handle anything else where I'm looking at that that diagonal wouldn't be necessary then if you've got the ability to be able to to come across and and to service from from Center Street and just make it a straight shot down that West or that east line exactly that's saying cuz the utilities would already be up on West Center so it wouldn't make sense to cut all the way across the property line and then bring it up because you're adding that much more cost to the city bring it straight to West Center Street from First Street yeah okay yeah that that makes sense on on that do you agree with that bill well again every lot that's platted in the city has easements on all four sides whether they're needed immediately or not uh and uh a lot of them may not be used but you've got the easements in place for future consideration so I think you're right the the main water Lane water main Loop would not come across that diagonal of the lot split that's not what that would be for um but uh it would make sense uh in in this we we've got the the property in front of us with this split get the easements around the edges just like every other lot uh dedicates well let me ask you a question Phil if if you said that easements are on four sides of properties throughout the city do we know that this one property that is requesting the lot spit doesn't already have easements along the north south east and west sides they would they should show up on the survey that's part of the surveyor's job that if those easements were in place they should have showed up on this survey drawing and I don't see them here and so if they if this is accurate then this property currently has zero easements even though most properties in the city have easements in all four side no I'm saying most properties that are platted in modern times have easements uh properties you know from uh you know 80 and 100 years ago that were just carved up out of Farmland would not necessarily have those easements it's it's only when you get kind of into the Modern urban era then they said you know what we need these easements so every time property is uh uh split up and subdivided then they do request those easements thank you all right so there's no easements in place we have two options that we've thrown out here so far either well there's really three no easements split the lot split the lot and easements on the east side or split the lot and easement on across not down the west side so I know you were talking about a 10- foot setback I don't know if you ever officially got all the way through with your recommendation there so I I make a recommendation that we approve recommend to approve the lot split with a 10-ft easement from West Center Street straight down the First Street on the east side of the of the lwn I'll second that all right and let me just check too I know we've got potentially the applicant that's here I don't know if you wanted to if anybody had questions or if you had questions for us at this time can you see what we're doing or what we were thinking one just throw out a couple things that I know that and it all sounds like it makes sense common sense I think is what we're looking for here yeah and I get it there was a couple on top though that exception area that was split off probably what three years ago that's not part of what we're looking at no I know there was no easements required at that time for anything along that side so I mean I don't know if that's changed and as far as um the other thing I was thinking about as far as that Frontage area talking about a driveway and um off of First Street I've got the existing property has got uh the right how do I want to say it off of uh West Center the frontage there is already established and already there with the driveway and Frontage and distances and the probably this I I would see that this new divider line I kind of picked the center of uh First Street on that just so there was possible access or shared driver access to that area Okay makes sense okay yeah I didn't think of that because there yeah there is there's access to the a lot and the B lot one's upper and one's lower yeah yep I see that well they would only be allowed one though correct for they'd only be allowed one per city code one driveway without coming through we've had people come through to request second ones but yeah allows one yeah and but this property as it currently sits has has two you know it has the the First Street and the West Center Street yep that's already got of the size so and right now as far as like utilities like the natural gas is coming off of First Street that way and I know the um as far as fiber optic and stuff I think that's up on Center Street but I'm not sure what's known on first that was never really run into the property at the time well I think that's where the easement would would be beneficial just to be able to have that you know to be able to get the fiber up there I think it's good to have the agree it it makes sense to have that and and I think the 10 foot is right way to do it because we don't know what's going on on the other side so we don't have access to that no and I'm okay with that okay there you go I think that that takes care of it so would you be able to gets one more y with and Phil maybe you can answer this with the easements I'm just trying to think future depending on where a house is built or something like that everything has to run off of the easement so if there 's something built on the west side of the property and the only easements on the east side piping and everything has to be run all the way across the property correct y okay right yeah once once it's out of the easement it's the it's the homeowners responsibility to connect to it so if I've got this right I there's a motion to approve the lot split with a 10-ft easement on the east side of the lot is it a lot and a and okay any other discussion any other questions all right so this is a recommendation to send a council to approve the lot split with a 10 10 foot easement on the east side of lot A and B all in favor of the motion on the floor I I I anyone opposed it passes and we'll go to city council for final approval so one question I have on that is once if the final approval is taken fa as far as establishing a new address for that North End was I'm guessing that this this would be still 1215 West Center would be one of I think that go the back end we work with the county to get the address 911 address we got to work with post office and all that stuff they can help ass sign those they give us up they say here's your four numbers to okay because the other thing is I've kind of got the surveyor on just a matter of getting the approval so I can get him back to try and establish and that's my question are we wanting him to submit a survey with that easement in it I think you want to have that yeah okay so that that yeah I think it's good for everybody to have that for ages I don't know if the city's got any good established pins off of First Street down there with all the work that's been done because I know my surveyor said that there's nothing he may have to go east of there ways to try Phil if there's anything that's around there for that no I I I don't have any specific knowledge of that okay all right so just so he's clear would it be beneficial before the council meeting to bring that I would bring it in as soon as you could yeah I I think that that you could well think you could bring it to council as a condition right pH yeah well no I I mean but I I'm talking about the the new survey with that in but that would be part of the condition that we until that that condition City wants to have that it's got to Happ so whether it happens before Tuesday or not is not the most important thing they can't officially process the paperwork to split it till that piece is in but the council could approve it it's just with that with that condition that's what I'm trying to I was holding off and spending the money in case for some reason that didn't get approved or wasn't going that way but and I don't know how long it's going to take him like I say I I talked to him and uh he did mentioned that he might have to go back away so it'll take him a little bit to try and establish do it now well it's still warm yeah all right so yeah I will call in tomorrow and agenda so thank you so much thank youate you than you so that public hearing very good thank you I really appreciate that and you guys AR obligated to have to sit here for the rest of this but please it's very entertaining we we appreciate an audience but you can there will be a condition to put on the resolution to have a survey done prior to okay you have to have that 10 foot easan on the east side of lot a andb and the only way to meet that condition is to have it the survey yeah that's that's how You' prove it's there ready to hop into new business next up is discussion RFP potential contract for planning I think oh go ahead no go ahead whatever you want to do yeah so what what that item is about is um we we know that our current contract is hasn't been updated um or put out for RFB since 2006 um we know that's not a good practice um I think we need to look at that um and I say we we need to put it out for RFP um but I think we need to kind of put that together too as a Planning and Zoning commission do we want to structure that the same way we did the other RFP the way weote the code where we just assigned two of us to come up with the draft that we could at least have a discussion point to start with yeah I think it worked for the last one I think it worked well yeah yeah I think it's good Minnesota cities was very helpful as well in reviewing some of and just answering basic questions as well okay so yeah yeah I would say we we do that and do we want to put a date when we would like to have a draft what you I don't know get into it I'm not going to you know put it date on it my schedule is still pretty tight I know we did yeah we um with the last one we talked about some of the things that we wanted and kind of threw the draft together okay uh with that I think my schedule if you are wanting me to assist you with that because you and I wrote the last one we could certainly I'm absolutely willing to do that um after no 5 I was sched just meeting first quarter yeah something like that but yeah I mean that's not something that we need do we want to have a discussion in December yeah yeah I was just going to suggest that we put it on the agenda and we can start discussing some of the things we're going to wait for two months to discuss it again yeah well I mean at least it's on the agenda but I I think that that's L discuss in November and maybe have a draft a discussion in November so it stays in front of our eyes Okay can yeah but I don't I'm not um I don't think we need to well let's put it on for the November agenda as discussion and if we get a chance to put together a rough draft then we'll have something Beyond just the discussion at least an exhibit that we can play around with not saying that that'll be the final thing but at least looking at what other places have done yeah I mean there there lots of moving parts that there are that that are associated with that as well and so that's it's something we have to look at in depth okay it's not not as simple as what we were doing with with the WSB type situation with this this is but at least we can take a look at what's out there and start a draft yeah I I see no problems with that so let's just put it on hold business for next month as the RFP contract for planning again okay for next month any more on that or we'll leave that for next month's discussion can I'll do a little research or maybe some drafting before then yeah next up we have is the sewage update and I've heard a little bit about this but I haven't heard enough so you talking about the sewage spill update yeah well I mean I I if we back up when did this happen it's probably happened last Wednesday what was it I don't have the date on on that last Wednesday night J Jason does what is it the second the second October 2nd okay yeah it happened on and that was about 6:30 is when that took place um we don't have all the information that there was because we didn't have a quorum at the water and sewer meeting but um in a nutshell um it it happened from uh what I refer to as oroko Estates in that part of it so it wasn't part of the city uh but it was a connection and it was part of the uh pipe that that was um oroko State's responsibility where the issue happened at but we're the ones as a city that that um have the permit and operate the sewer plant so that's where it's apart um supposedly there were about 10,000 gallons that that that LE so 10,000 gallons of sewage that l so that's just the rest I think is going to more information will become available um probably at our city council meeting that that we have and so um maybe bring us an update to the next Planning and Zoning for sure yeah and and Jason correct me if I'm wrong Jason you worked with there were multiple agencies involved wait and just so you know Jason was on top of it right away he wrot wrote the email that there was right away on Wednesday night he did an excellent job on that he did a great job following up on on the next morning as well right to give us an update of everything that was going on so it was well handled with with City administrator so kudos to you Jason for everything you did there all right well yeah please bring us the next month up on that one once you get more details so that'll be H old business next next month now uh Now we move into Old business unless somebody has something more to add there okay WSB project update we did have a steering committee did go through some more information but what we will end up having is they're still working on drafting some more of it trying to do it in chunks and so what we're going to do is next month before next month's zoning meeting we will have actually a steering committee for starting at 5:30 to 6:30 and then zoning will start at 6:30 so if anybody wants to attend they'll just do an in-person meeting here at that time and the date of that is going to be um it would be in November it' be November 14 up the second Thursday correct yes 14th okay at 5:30 p.m. yes so 5:30 to 6:30 and we're going to try and take the ordinances in chunks and we'll probably have a few more of these yeah it's G to take more than an hour yeah it's gonna take more we'll do some highlights there is what we'll be able to do but there will be some more information coming out and then what the plan is out of the steering committee is the website that we have for Planning and Zoning that we've put together as we're working on this project project there's a separate one with that we're going to actually be posting the drafts eventually out there so the whole Community has access to them that's and probably not do a public hearing we'll have you know a month or two months for the community to actually look at these digest them before we even start in the public hearing process I think that's wise and so my hope is that we start getting this stuff out there sooner than later so I'm but what they have talked about getting through um so far as very promising so it's what I'd like to say is we had some excellent response that there was for uh the questionnaire that that came and so all of those things but it was it was a very very good response yeah they said we had a very uh big response compared to other cities SI you you just don't get people responding and we had I think 60 or over 60 responses with comments written in comments so I think yeah I think there was like 120 responses quite a few yeah so whatever it was they were impressed with the community of oronoko and yeah the participation that there which was very very good and I think you know part of that you guys had some really good ideas on where to go and how to get people educated so that they knew it was out here and it was written in a good way too to allow people didn't have to did not have actually be familiar with thean language of zoning you didn't have to know what a setback meant you could look at the pictures and say yeah the visual was really good you know that people turned around and said what what they wanted and what looked good to them so I was really happy with that so yeah so that that's the plan so next month we'll do steering committee at 5:30 but everybody who's on pnz if you would like to come and anybody out there as well if you'd like to come and listen into the steering Comm it's going to be a great time it's going to be in this room here at 5:30 when we start our regular meeting at 6:30 questions for me on that one all right make a motion to adjourn no we got one more monthly incoming and questions I know we're close we're very close so excited anybody had any comments or questions we've got the permit report here lot sewer activity going along l [Music] Plumbing I saw there was one that was new construction building it was issued in awaiting a payment for a single family home but that was back at the beginning of September is that the 913 one that there is 22 4 six yes did that one get disolved always ni to have you know anything about that one I don't know i' have to go okay just kind of curious and then just out of curiosity did everybody get two sheets of the same thing or was that just me I got two of the same thing oh okay well and and um I think it was it the the new home that was built on that lot split uh over here off a second is is pretty nice looking and I think that uh think of who the Builder was second or first it's right over here by the old or and I don't know people who haven't seen that you know um in the city I think it'd be worthwhile to drive by because I you know as far as looking at that um cost of new homes and and what's available off of but that's a good representation of what could be little more economical for people that there are in the community they're looking so I thought well done yeah I think it was a single home non slab it looks very nice and it was done quick you know they had that up in about 2 months I think they had it up and finished so that about right Jason more but I thought it I was driving past one day and I'm like oh great appearance I mean it looks there used to be a house there now there is yeah I know quick I I my first thought was did something come down and I didn't remember that either so no they did a nice job I too it looks nice all right well if no there's no other questions on the monthly incoming zoning applications I make a motion to adjourn second the second all in favor of adjourn say I I I anyone opposed me we are a journ it is 735 7:35 thank you thank you I do have one more question off the meeting okay we are we done okay