Okay. We'll call this meeting to order, and welcome to our guests today. We'll do a roll call starting with Crystal. Crystal Jamerson here. Mark Sloan here. Astrid here. Lisa Kildy. Ryan Weinserl. Bruce West. Jen Olsen. Dan Morrison. Next, I. And Peyton. Alright. Thank you. We'll move on to the agenda approval for today's meeting. So moved. We have a motion. Is there a second? Second. And a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. Motion passes. Go ahead on to the approval of the minutes. We're gonna start with four a,
which is the approve of the minutes from the 09/03/2025 planning commission meeting. Move for approval. And we have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. And all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. Motion passes for four a. For four b, approve minutes for, 09/23/2025 planning commission special meeting. Is there a motion on that? So moved. Okay. And we have a motion and a and a second? Second. And a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye.
Aye. Post. Alright. And the next item on the agenda is to update the consideration update considerations for the comprehensive plan review. And who's gonna be starting off on that? Turn this over to MetroCog. Alrighty. Good evening, commissioners. Again, name's Adam Alterberg, with MetroCog. And we are, pleased to be here tonight to present the first draft of the Dilworth comprehensive plan. Hopefully, you've maybe had a little bit of time to take a look at that, but and I know we've, we've shared that with the city and gotten a couple of comments already here in
the last week or two. But with that, yeah, we'll just kinda jump right in if that's alright. So for tonight, just gonna kinda, do some high level, highlights from the plan and then talk a little bit about some of the goals and policies that we developed here as part of this update and then, just kinda talk about next steps here for the next month and looking to, December for both caring and adoption. So plan contents, you can see here, this is kind of how we put together this plan here. So introduction just kind of talks about what what comprehensive plan is and the planning
process. We have community profile, which has updated demographic information for the city as well as demographic trends, and then also physical environmental features. Land use, so we're not only looking at existing land use but future land use. Again, we'll talk a little bit more about that tonight. We had a couple of discussions about that here in the summer as well. And then in addition to the future land use, there's also some development considerations that we've included. Housing, looking at housing characteristics, and also looking at stats for rental housing, senior housing in the community, as well as development considerations,
for the city as well. Transportation and we'll talk a little bit more have a couple of slides, regarding transportation. But looking at, existing roadway classifications, traffic volumes, crash data and then also bike ped consideration and transit needs for the future. Public services and infrastructure. Just kind of looking at your basic infrastructure, water supply, sanitary, gas, electric, how those sorts of needs. Just kind of providing some highlights on information on those, infrastructure needs for the city. Parks and rec. So again, looking at existing parks and open space,
community needs, touching about what we heard through from the community, community input process, and then some tips for implementation regarding that. Economic development, just kind of briefly looking at economic conditions, advantages, challenges for the city, and then some goals in looking forward for the city, for new businesses in the future. Briefly, natural and cultural resources. We didn't change this a whole lot from the last plan, but just kind of looking at soils, topography, hydrology, those sorts of needs. And then implementation, so that's kind of looking at the roles and responsibilities of the planning commission,
city council, other boards and committees in making sure that some of these new, goals and implementation steps are, looked at here in the coming years. So future land use, again, we talked a lot about this back in June and July, and this is kind of the final design that we came up with for future land use. Again, kind of that looking at the Southeast corner, kind of a mix of mixed use, high density residential and commercial that would complement some of the development considerations going along
South Of 12th Avenue. To the north, again, kind of looking at that commercial and light industrial, kind of a future land use needs to that to the Northwest there. And then also kind of filling in along 8th Avenue, kind of a mix of low residential, medium low density, medium density, a pocket of mixed use and then kind of that the roadway configuration that we decided on back in June and incorporating that in there. The one thing I'll note is that we did have a meeting with the City
of Moorhead a couple of weeks ago just to share what we've been developing for this process and also, getting information with the there's a MnDOT is doing a study along, I-ninety 4 and looking at that possible interchange. And one thing we will change on this map is it sounds like that interchange is going to be shifted a half mile to the west. So we will kind of we'll shift that arrow, either having some sort of curve curvature, just to note that that's likely where that future, interchange would be would be happening.
But I think it would be good to know that we I think we would like that to connect to 14th Street because that is where we are looking for that, overpass over the railroad tracks between, Highway 10 and to the south there, the rail yard. So, just kind of making notes of that. We make note, Adam, as to why MnDOT would like to see it shifted to the West. Sure. So my understanding is part of it has to do with the, current, weight station that is that's there, that they're just it's it would be difficult to have a full interchange,
at that location. And remind me too, is there additional utility concerns or There's that. There's also the airport being right there. There's concerns with it. And at that intersection point is also where the new I don't know what the plant's called, that the City of Morehead Economic Development Team is working the fuel plant is going out there in the general vicinity as well. So there are some concerns with that additionally. And that's kind of new on our radar too. So it was good that we had those chats here with the City of Morehead
and kind of, sharing some of that. What they've been hearing and what they've been, what they've been discussing as part of that, INDOT study. So I don't know if you're Yeah. With the future land use map. I didn't know if you're we're gonna address later about the Yeah. It's the the dispenser that we'll, looking be looking to adopt that as part kind of separately, but with the comprehensive plan. Yeah. So our future land use map is, frankly, is probably our most important page that we have in the comp plan. There's been a,
you know, discussions with future development, what it's gonna look like across the community. And we felt just from a staff level perspective, it would be good to maybe pull this one page out effectively and just had its own separate approval on the future land use map side, just so that we in the event that there's a holdup with what is in place right now at the policy level, that it does not hold up the entire document approval process. Yeah. Does that the I 94 exchange,
I mean, really does change a lot. It changes that component to the South Of Dilworth because we really talked a lot about that in 14th and that corridor. Right? So it's an interesting my question, I guess, would be, how do we connect the two? I mean, we have no control as to what Morehead does in the development of the two of that section, basically, between the interstate and what we're planning up to. I mean, we okay. You said, like, a curved road or whatever,
which would be the best, but we have no guarantee as to what that is. So I don't know. It just kind of it it is new information. So that it definitely rethinks, what that would look like potentially. And the reality is we have no idea. And when we're seeing curvature, we don't know if that's gonna be just kind of this last bit of it. Mhmm. We don't know if it's gonna come down like we have it right now and have some kind of frontage over to here. We really don't know. And, I think just as we maneuver through this, whenever this may this new intersection may be,
it's just gonna be something just how we evaluated, like, the East end of town. You also just have to take a look at your future lane uses at that time. And if we have to recalibrate at that moment, then you just probably have to recalibrate at that moment. This is the best guesstimate for what we got for the time being. I think it'd be good to show that just that this is what we would like to see part of our future transportation network. So speaking of which, just have a couple of maps, a couple of highlights from the transportation section. So, again, kind of looking at, basic functional class, Traffic volumes, one thing that I did want to highlight,
too, and it's not in the slide, but, Metro COG completed a study last year, a safety action plan that includes a high injury network dashboard. And with that, it shows, locations of all all vehicular crashes over a five year period, whether they're just very minor fender benders up to, serious injury and fatality. So we just wanted to to make make a note of that. It's kind of the first first time that that information has been available for, publics to to view and to see, throughout the entire metro area.
So, just kind of wanted to highlight that as part and that's included as part of this comprehensive plan and some information about that. And then next slide here. Just kind of looking at bicycle and pedestrian network. We included this because this was kind of a bigger theme that we heard about in, the public during the public input process. It was just walkability, improving sidewalks. And then so what we did is so we have this map. We also list some best practices on page 47 for the city to consider. And also, we did, highlight some recent planning studies that are more focused on bike pet needs.
And that includes the Metropolitan Bicycle Destructuring Plan that's completed in 2022. Safe Routes to School, for the Dilworth, Linden, Felton that was completed in 2023. And then as well as the Heartland Trail Study, which was just completed earlier this year, in 2025. There's a few on here that are missing. Okay. You know, as an example, like this I'm sorry. Yeah. You can see it. Like, this is all filled out in. Okay. This is all filled in now and same all the way down to Highway 10. Okay. This is in and across here too.
And I think that so the data, yes, it's from 2024, so we might not have the most up to date data. So yes, that's we can get those incorporated. There's additional links that we missed. Yeah. We got a path across here to crap. I'm looking back and forth here. Sorry. No. I can't see that well. Yeah, across here. Okay. I have a question. Yeah. Well, we're just talking about these different avenues and for vehicles and bikes. But they have now I see preponderance or a lot more of these electric bikes
that are coming and they're zooming around everywhere. I mean, not everywhere, but and I'm not sure where they fit into the plan. That might be something that's coming to us in the future, more electrical vehicles, smaller, that kind of thing. So instead of big wide roads and stuff, something that accommodate those type of vehicles. That's a good point. And that there's a kind of with that, like, one of the things that we've been monitoring with MetroCOG too is impacts of electric
vehicles as well and how that might impact infrastructure throughout the community in the future. So there are those kind of future transportation considerations that are good to note. Yes. We just want to look forward as far as we can and quickly and take this, you know, because once it's done, it's done. So True. Yes, we can we'll, yes, take another look at that and provide some additional information about some of those trends, yes. So with that, just kind of want to take some time now to talk about goals and policies. We kind of separated those into six different areas here. And again,
these are intended to help guide not only Planning Commission but City Council, park board and developers that can kind of align the vision that's been created through this planning process with the city's vision. So first step or first kind of set of goals here is related to land use and policies. Four goals here, so promoting balanced orderly growth, supporting economic development through land use, preserving community character and livability and then planning for future growth. And then you can see some of those policies. So for promoting balanced orderly growth,
just kind of coordinating land use decisions with infrastructure capacity, encouraging infill development and then maintaining a mix of housing types. For economic development and land use, so looking at commercial industrial uses and strategic areas, which we've kind of looked at that future land use map. Promoting Highway 10 as a mixed use corridor, and that's already been incorporated in both future land use map but also city zoning ordinances as well, And then leveraging rail access to support potential industrial expansion.
That's just one that we included here with Dilworth's history with the rail yard. Preserving community character and livability, connectivity between neighborhoods, parks, community facilities. Design standards, we include some information on that. That's something that we've also included in past comprehensive plans, too, for the city and developers for consideration and then maintaining green space, parks, trails as development occurs. And that last goal, planning for future growth, identifying future growth areas, coordinating land use decisions with school districts, utilities and then,
annexation policies that support logical and cost effectiveness expansion, which I think the city is good. Yes. One more another question. One of the green space and that's I see on that future land use map, we have road going north of the school again into the green space, north of the school and taking out a chunk. And I live right next there and I worked at the school and it's a busy, busy, busy place, kids are there and they of course they use that,
utilize that green space And after they built the school or added on to the school, then they lost big chunk of green space. And I think it's important for children to have that, you know, that so I just and it's very busy. You know, there's all kinds of activities in the evenings there. There are ball games, all kinds of stuff. So I just I don't know if there's another alternative to that particular route of that going north of the school, going through to,
I guess, to the future park in that area. Would you wanna break up the future land use map here? Or So Are you talking in this area? Yeah. Right there. Yeah. Is it the north there? Go for that that future Or that on the structure that what what map do we have here? Mhmm. It shows that road going north from the school. Mhmm. Are you talking fourth Avenue? Well, it's the one that no. It's not the avenue. It's in the street going north and south. Extension. It goes right by the school. What's that main Right. But what's what's the intersection you're talking about?
Well, the intersection is 4th Avenue. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. You're you're I just correct. Okay. Okay. I would I mean, to Bruce's Point, 4th Avenue and Maine is that's an intersection right where a lot of the kids are walking. Sure. So it is a busy crosswalk there. And then also for, like, the activities that go on in that green space. So the the road is not reflected on your map here. That's reflected in our map in the, on page 27. Mhmm. The proposed new road is, I'm assuming, what you're talking about, Bruce. Yep. That is the proposed new road going north across 4th Avenue.
And, man, they're going into the green space of as like fields there that they've used. And then once that's gone, you know, you can build more to the north farther, of course, and then for students and stuff going across the street or going that far and getting just getting back and forth because they it when weather is good or possibly they are out there using it Mhmm. During the school days. That was a good point to highlight. That's all I can ask. Thank you. Yeah. Madam chair? Yes. I have a question really quick. Where he's talking about on on Main And 4th,
is there a, a blinking crosswalk at all? No. No? How is there a way that we could help to propose something? Because I agree there's a lot of traffic right there, especially after school, like when you're driving back. Is there what what ways do you go about proposing something like that? Is that in the city of Delos or a metro cog type thing? Or It's actually something that we've been in talks with the school about, splitting the cost of having something right there. The Safe Routes to School plan, I don't even think it reflected it needed it there.
I think it's more of a perception thing that it's needed, but we're still trying to do some kind of cost share thing with them to have it out there. I don't think it hurts anything. I don't know if it improves anything either, though. Well, there's three way stop there. So there's for vehicles. So Just for those kids that are walking back home, I know, like, sometimes those late activities and even after school, if they have to cross the street, I don't know how they would if they would just have to just cross. There's nothing there. So it'd be kinda nice. But they're crossing at a stop sign.
Yeah. Yeah. So you don't need a light. You got a stop sign already. Yeah. No. Not a light, but I mean, just, you know Right. But you you already are stopping the traffic. So what there's you know, they're already stopped. Yeah. It's a totally separate thing. I don't know why you didn't caught up on it. But Just wanted to mention that. Yeah. We're aware of it. K. Alright. Thank you. That's good. Yeah. Is there any other thoughts or questions on land use? Or otherwise, we can move to housing. So housing goals, kind of the second section here that we've put together. Again, four goals, three policies each. Goal one, providing a range of housing types and price points,
promoting housing quality and neighborhood vitality, addressing the needs of seniors and special populations, again, kind of one of the themes that we heard through the public input process, and then also encouraging infill and redevelopment when those areas opportunities arise. Madam Chair? Yes, Tom? Incentives in that are those are policy considerations for you and the City Council on what we use. We have a housing tax abatement now, but use of tax increment financing for developing new housing has been discussed but not used. So, I mean,
use incentives. I mean, this plan could promote that or not promote that or consider it instead of use. You know, sometimes the wording makes a difference there just to say that that's available versus that's something we would use. So, you know, in the future, somebody looks at us and says, well, you have it right here that you'd use this versus consideration of it. That's, you know. And then further on too in implementation strategies or discussion about ADUs, accessory dwelling units, like tiny houses and that And that's a whole another, again, policy discussion thing just to be aware of that's in that plan.
Can you I don't know where that one is. Where where is that? That's on page, 48, 39 of it, but 48 of the handout that you have. Is that specifically listed out in our goals? It is. Well, it's an implementation strategy, updates zoning ordinances to allow accessory dwelling units, ADUs, and cottage homes. So I just thought I'd hit both while we were chatting about housing. Okay. So just to be clear, the goal one has the use incentives to promote affordable housing such as free waivers or tax increment financing. Yeah. And there's what you're saying is a difference between the use and considering of.
Yeah. K. And then is is the second one you're speaking to in the goal number four? Yeah. It's not really laid out in the housing goals policies itself. It's more in the implementation strategies and to gain, to gain density, gain diverse housing forms, including accessory dwelling units and cottage homes. That's a whole discussion again. I'm just pointing that out, that it's in the plan right now, That's something you should think about if you want it in the plan or as a point to be discussed at some point in the future.
And I don't know how much of an appetite there are for ADUs. Again, it's not been formally discussed, but it's not widely accepted at the council level. I'm still trying to find it in the packet. Sorry. Page 48. In 48. Page 48. Did you look at the implementation on the right hand or upper left hand? Okay. Thank you. Got it. I had to look at Don's. Get it highlighted. And I think some of this information came from a housing study that Metrocog developed that was regional in nature, too. So we kind of took some of that language and incorporated that.
And that's fine. We appreciate that. That is indicating that Skansby appointment where they're just coming. Of course. Thank you. ADUs is interchangeable with tiny houses? Accessory dwelling units is, more housing units on a single lot, however you cut it, whether it's part of a, a division of an existing house, development in a garage, or placement of a tiny house or a pod home on a lot. You're basically doubling the density. I could've swore we had a conversation about this a few years back,
and it we we didn't think it was a need or that it was something that we wanted. But, also, I don't think our ordinances allows for multi for, like, necessary building to be a residential building. You're talking about, like, a turn the garage into the mother in law's house? Well or a shed. Oh, yeah. Or a shed. Yeah. Shed into the you know? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Into a permanent residential. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So we'll we'll highlight that. I'm just making note of it first to point out why you brought that up.
Thank you, madam chair. And with respect to ADUs, this is something that's come up now for three straight years at the state level. I could see at some point this being a statutory requirement that we have to offer them in some capacity. And in fairness to the lawmakers, people go down every single year and, gripe about affordable housing, having more housing options. And this has been one of the things put forward. But then all the cities, I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but, you know, the city's response to our, well, we want local control over it. So, you know, they're trying to offer a solution,
but this that solution is not necessarily the one that, cities have advocated for. It's more of a program that you see more reflective maybe in the metro cities area. But I could still see this being something more implement policy level decisions like that driven at the state, forcing local municipalities to handle those, in some capacity, the 80 the ADU requirement. And, yeah, as Adam was stating, that is something that was referenced in the housing study,
so it didn't just come out of thin air. And that's a metro wide study here, and, you know, the respective agencies can take it or leave it, I guess, at the end of the day. One suggestion I do have Yeah. In on the incentive front, they're just maybe rewarding it to continue exploring incentives to promote workforce housing. For sure. Period. I don't think you have to get into state and fee waivers, TIF, or anything of the like. And that keeps it broad enough for us.
In addition to or striking that third line. Sorry. Yeah. Just rewarding. They use incentives to promote that Affordable housing. Yep. Just you yes. Continue ex you know, continue the exploration or something along those lines. Continue incentivizing, you know Affordable and workforce housing. I don't know if we're supposed to we're not supposed to say affordable housing anymore. Right? Well, that's is there a difference between workforce and affordable housing? Yes. Yeah. We'll just say the missing middle. In the missing middle? Yeah. Is that the defined term? Anyways, whatever we go with there.
But the point is I would just don't define fee waivers or TIF. And I have one on the addition or question about it. I see that first line encouraged development of townhomes, duplexes. I'm not sure if we need manufactured homes. Is it listed specifically or somehow mentioned or brought through the floor? I mean, they're you know, up by, option. And now there was a lot of stuff going on with them with the mobile home parks now and stuff and maybe crazy stuff happening. But I don't know if that's something the city or post body wants to talk
about or consider. I think the the goal would be to still to encourage, what's listed. So so that's our goal. Do we then we need to include single family homes because that's still a goal. Right? It is. Then it should be included. Mhmm. Encourage the development of all housing values. There you go. Yeah. There you go. And, again, can you brought up a good point? Like, this is quality information that's brought up through the metro wide housing study, but it's our responsibility to cater it and tailor it for the city of Delworth. Right. So those insights and the conversation is just awesome.
Great work. Yeah. I I would prefer the all housing types. I think that's all housing type is reflected in our map. Mhmm. And so we can and if so that they're on if they're questioning what does all housing type mean, well, then look at the planning map, and then it's clearly defined. And they are in our community. We have those. All. Yes. So, Peyton, just so I have a understanding because I did only one of these before, a long time ago. So this and maybe you can answer the question too,
but this is given to developers to guide them as to what Dilworth wants to see in our community, or is this just an internal working document? Well, this this is a public document. I think it's it's it's, it would be good for developers to consider that, and I think that's kind of the the intent that when they have conversations with the city, that the city would provide, this is what we'd like to see in our community, to provide that information during those conversations. Okay. Perfect. Peyton. Just, Madam Chair, just another comment.
A lot of times, the developers that propose planned use, planned unit developments that have mixed use will be looking at your comprehensive plan to see if it supports what they're proposing. Okay. And the plan, just to be clear, is not just the map, but this this whole entire k. K. Thank you. I guess my overall question would be, was there major changes between what we did six years ago to what we're doing today? Yes. I mean, especially with the goals and policies, I think we went into a lot more depth in this planner.
Last go around, I think we had about 10. It was a lot less. Yeah, 10 goals, kind of broad and generic. The implementation actions were a little bit more specific, and I think we talked about that at one of the initial, commission meetings earlier this year, that the city has done a good job of kind of knocking out a lot of those implementation projects over the last, I would say, five, six years. So if that answers your questions, yeah, we did kind of go into a little bit more detail with these goals and policies just go around. So yes,
unless there's any other questions, I we'll make note of those. We'll get those changes incorporated here before we release the draft here in the coming days. Transportation goals and policies, again, four goals: ensuring safe and efficient street networks, expanding multimodal transportation options, improving public transit access and use and then also looking to enhance connectivity and mobility across the city. And if you want me to read through the policies, or do you just want to kind of take a look at them? It's what are your preferences? I can read through them or
What? The policies? Yeah. Like, under Oh. Underneath the three goals. If we could just, yeah, cover them, I guess, we're I'm learning, I'll say for myself, that they they do have a bigger impact that they are guiding. So, yeah, if we could just kind of go over them. Okay. So, okay, for policies for goal one, improving key corridors, Highway 10, of course, and then also looking at county roads, eleven twenty five. Addressing intersection safety, signage, traffic calming, that maybe kind of goes to your point, Commissioner Jamieson, about, maybe that hawk signal up by the,
up by the school in that park. It's something for consideration, for safety needs. Also looking at the long term road capacity, pavement maintenance, expanding multimodal transportation options, some of the policies there developing, citywide sidewalk and trail master plan. That was something that was kind of discussed in the last comprehensive plan. We did have carried that over. If you have thoughts or questions about thoughts about that, we can, talk about that here in a second here. Adding bike lanes, off street paths to support cycling for recreation and commuting. Again, something that we heard through public input. And then improving pedestrian crossings in your schools,
parks, commercial centers. Improving public transit access and use. So working with MAPIS, kind of looking at some of their goals and policies for their transportation transit development plan. What so this is another study that we're looking to wrap up here in December. In that study, what we are hearing is they'd like to see expanded Sunday service. There's additional routes that the public would like to see. So, when funding potentially arises in the next five years, looking at that plan, looking at city needs and then seeing if there's any synergy to promote additional transit
needs for Dilworth. We put this second policy in, and you can if there's something that you'd like to include or maybe if you don't feel that it's maybe as applicable to Dilworth, but just looking at park and ride facilities near transit stops to, facilitate future growth areas, we've seen a little bit of that in the community, not not much. But we've included that policy for your consideration if that's something that, you think would be good to include, especially now with, with future transit services likely being,
interline. So people from Dilworth, they'll they won't need to, hop off, and get on a new bus at the Walmart Transit Hub. What what we're proposing is that those buses would go, nonstop from the grant, the, GTC in Fargo all the way to Dilworth and back. So if it's thought that there could be a transit, parking rights facility that we can maybe think about that. But yeah. Mark. Included in that, is that, would that be, like, shelters, but for people to wait in? Yeah.
Shelters and then just additional parking as well. Yeah. And I there is an example. I think it's, to the, to the East of Holly. There is kind of a parking lot facility there for for rural transit needs, but I don't know if that's utilized as much. Anyways Oh, that's huge. Yeah. Is it? Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And then I'll just kind of touch on policies for goal four, connections between neighborhoods, residential areas, commercial public facilities. Again, kind of looking at this rail study that MetroCog is completing and looking at kind
of one of those implementation projects that overpass over BNSF on Long 14th, included that as a policy here. And then Land Use planning to support walkability, reduce vehicle dependency. So any any thoughts on language of any of these policies or anything that we missed or anything you'd like to see? What is CR 25? I'm not familiar with that. That might be a wrong one. Is that County Road 25? Yeah. I don't know if that's supposed to be County Road 9. 9. Probably 9. Yeah. Or it could be 18. We could double up there. Yes. 25. Okay. Adam,
I'm glad you put in the fourteenth overpass in there. Just wondering under the implementation strategies, do we need to bolster that a bit and just say, you know, pursue next steps? Yes. Because there's obviously a lot more work has to be done. Yes. If we could just maybe add that in there too. As a kind of a, yeah, additional language for implementation? Yeah, we can do that. Thank you. Yep. Yep. Okay. Unless there's anything else. So infrastructure goals, three, maintaining, upgrading core infrastructure, planning for long term growth and resiliency, providing high quality public spaces,
kind of very high level goals there. A couple of the policies for goal one, prioritizing investment water, sewer, stormwater systems based on growth patterns, implementing asset management practices, capital improvement programming and then minimizing system disruptions through proactive maintenance. For goal two, planning for long term growth and resiliency, outlining infrastructure investment with future land use plan, coordinating utility expansion with phased development, annexation strategies, and designing systems that can withstand extreme weather events.
If you want, we can shorten that policy a little bit if you think that would be better to do. Just keep on getting your thoughts on that. Well, I think it's something to consider. It's a long term, I mean, not maybe not that far away, but I mean, things may get we have to plan for that Yeah. For resiliency and handling more rain, more water, whatever. So I think it should be in there. Okay. What is considered a a system within that sentence? Design systems being what?
See here. Like, are I just I'm trying to think of an example. Yeah. Retention ponds, all stations that can get it. You know? I and I I think about when when you really see what your streets do in terms of holding water, Donnie Vogel, and a and a city truck picks me up and goes check this out, and it's curve to curve, but everything's functioning. The the curves are the streets are holding water. It gets it to the store water retention ponds, and from there, it's pumped out to the to the larger ditches that move it to their the systems are amazing. So there's all kinds of things that operate inside of that system.
No. I agree. I just didn't know. Like, when when I think extreme weather, it's like winter. Like, what are you what are we designing that with? You know, that's where I was so flooding is a good example of an extreme weather event, but yes. Okay. Understood. And I think those are kind of the two. It's the those the winter storms and then also the the spring heavy rains right. Heavy rain events. So One other thing, madam chair. Yes. Peyton. Oh, I'm not sure how to incorporate the language into number one or what whatever section you wanna put it up here. I think there needs to be some kind of a statement about continued partnerships and
collaboration with our neighboring agencies Mhmm. Whether it be the City of Morehead, Morehead Public Service, the Watershed District, all those, we have joint agreements with those for a lot of our utility infrastructure and ensuring that there's cohesion amongst all the jurisdictions, road agreements, whatever it may be. We have all those things. Kind of intergovernmental coordination piece. There you go. Yep. Yep. We'll wordsmith that. That's good. Any other thoughts on those policies otherwise? Yeah. Parks and rec goals and policies. And, madam chair?
Yes. Can I ask a quick question about the last section we were just on? Yeah. On page 62, it talks about educational facilities and resources and talks about the DGF school district and everything. I'm wondering if we need to include the other school district that's in our town. Oh. I mean, it was a big deal yesterday. Yeah. Yeah. Whether we need to talk about, you know, how because there's parts of more or parts of Morehead Public Schools inside Dilworth than there always will be. So I'm just wondering if we need to just include something, whether it's a map or not or just a blur because right now it doesn't even mention it. Yeah. Will there always be?
Yes. Always. On the West of County Road 9. Yep. That part will yeah. Oh, yeah. Okay. I just change. Yeah. Okay. The other parts will eventually change, but not that. So I just I just I just noticed I oh, it's just, you because we had election yesterday, so that's what the part of my thought. That's a good point. Yes, we can add some language. Otherwise, Parks and Rec, four goals here again, Providing high quality accessible parks and facilities, expanding recreational opportunities, building a connected trail and greenway network and then enhancing environmental and community benefits.
Policies for the first goal, maintaining upgrading existing parks to ensure safety, accessibility and relevance, incorporating inclusive play and universal design, and we do have some examples of that in the comp plan for new facilities. And then also using community input to guide design and investment priorities, again, kind of going off what we've heard and then with future park improvements, maybe listening to the community and seeing what see if there's additional wants and needs, for future, future parks in the in the city. Policies for goal two,
supporting diverse recreational programming for all ages, developing new parks and growth areas as development occurs, and then exploring new facilities, such as splash pads, fitness stations, small indoor recreation center. These were kinda some of those specific, comments that we heard. Building connected trail and greenway network. So, kind of thinking back to the bike, that bike ped map that we showed, cleaning missing links in the city's sidewalk and trail systems, providing safe separated bicycle pedestrian routes across the city, especially kind of looking at some of those East West connections in your schools,
and then coordinating with regional partners to extend trail access to Morehead and other destinations. And I think maybe we could add some language to specifically highlight the Heartland Trail. We kinda we don't we don't call that out, but we couldn't we couldn't make note of that. I think that would be good to do. And then policies for goal four, incorporating natural futures, pollinator gardens, native landscaping and park design, using parks and green mazes part of the city's stormwater management, and then promoting volunteers and civic partnerships for park stewardship.
Question about the parks. One of the earlier land use maps that we did had we had incorporated parks into some of the locations. I don't see any of those on here now. Is that something that we would address once it decides to get developed? Or because I don't see any there are no new parks in the open space that I can tell on the future land use map. Yeah. We did kinda remove some of those from some of the initial, concept designs that we, were looking at. In some future land use maps, you they'll kinda some sometimes future parks are kinda represented as an asterisk,
so you don't know exactly where the location is. But just kinda noting that this is where we'd like to see a future, a node of some sort. That is something we could incorporate if that's if that's your if that's your desire. So in general, we would keep it as is until it starts to get developed and then decide that a park should go somewhere near the new development. Yeah. K. Other than the regional park that we use, that's Other than the discussion, the other community park. Yeah. Chad, what do you wanna add? If if you go to the with whatever map that you have of the city of Delray, if you have, like, whatever map we have where you can see to our city,
land use or otherwise, If you look at Summerwood, for example, or even, Keystone, our most recent development, they would have been just a solid yellow square until the developer comes in and says, here's our plan. And then the developer works in conjunction with the city and with the park board to say, okay. They our policy is that, you know, they have to provide x amount of green space, park space for the development, And then it's kind of formulated in partnership with how does the development look? Where are the houses? Where are the roads? Where's the park gonna go? And that's that's kinda what you're seeing here is that it will fill in as
the details arise. So as the developer makes his or her plans, then the parks become or a a green space becomes part of that. But as far as the city goes, we are only really going to decide in bulk where the community one is gonna go in the middle. That's right. Where we own already. And again, the done in partnership with developers as they're looking at bringing in residential area to the east and west of the centralized park. And again, one of the visions of park board in the city for a while is to have that centralized park.
And now it's been determined that the residential space on the left on the west pardon me, on the east side, right, their park space has already been allocated into that centralized park. So there won't be an additional small neighborhood park area in there. It's going to be all allocated into that central green space that we have. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, baby. Chad? Yes. Chad, as long as you're educating, Trying. Help me better understand, undergo for what the city's climate resilience strategy is. Say what I'm trying to look through the right full quote here.
Goal four bullet two. It's not it's It's for regional workforce development? No. Parks and rental Did we did we move to economic? There we go. There we are. I thought we're still on parks. Sorry. Sorry. We're good. So that would be the two And that kinda goes to the point to the prior comment for the infrastructure. If that's something that we the language that you want included, we if you prefer that taken out, we can. The idea there is probably to look again as temporary ponding spots holding for stormwater, that kind of thing,
incorporate the green use of green space for that is a less expensive alternative than piping everything and maybe developing larger ponds. But that they could help alleviate the pressure on the city stormwater system for a short amount of time by just temporarily holding water. This is Chad. It alluded to the streets doing that. You could use greenways and systems like that to do the same thing. Yeah. And if we're if we're looking at not, like, green space, but we're also looking Shrubs and and trees and and elements of nature that will absorb not only the
water, maintain the water, but also help help avoid, wind and water based erosion. It does it does a couple of things. Obviously, park space, I mean, if you wanna get into the whole, like, heat island effect, right, because cities attract and maintain heat from the sun. The more green spaces we have, the the more options we have to actually have naturally cooling systems and help with, like, temperature. Anywhere in is that is that philosophy or is that memorialized in any cities sort of city documentation? I think when I read this I don't see I don't think there's anything in
our city documents or anything memorialized regarding that. I'm just talking about theoretics. Yeah. Because I don't disagree with you, but I think that from a you know, Adam, from your comments related to if developers are gonna be looking at this as sort of a guidepost. So what's the climate resilience strategy? It could be different for you. It could be different for Peyton. It could be different for Don. And yeah. And how does and how does it live on after, you know, we've decided this is enough? Like, how does that philosophy continue on? Is it embraced in the next development and in the next level?
So that's a good question. And I think as we look at policies, how do we how do we embrace those opportunities, to make sure it is incorporated in the future direct trajectory of Delaware. Steve, are you saying that's something that we should I I think it's a bit premature to call it a climate resilience strategy if it's if it's gonna be a philosophical or anecdotal, feeling, and it's gonna be individualized as opposed to something that's maybe more universally adopted by and it that feels a little bit more like a city council conversation and less a planning commission conversation.
Yeah. I would defer to the to Don and Peyton and Becky on that. Mhmm. I I'm I'm I'm all for I guess, I wanna be clear on that. I mean, climate resilience. I mean, strategy to Don's, to their point about saying we use these things. I mean, the the vernacular matters. But yeah. But do we have a plan or we don't? We do have a strategy or don't we? Right. Crystal, madam chair, so I just wanna make I just wanna check. When we have developers that come in and they, like, want to build a complex, and then next to it,
there's, like, a storm drain pond of some sort. Like, kinda like by the fire station, there's, like, a pond. Yeah. Is there anything in our when we talk to developers that say, if you use a certain amount of space, then you have to have so much green space on your property, like, as far as, like, the retention. Is so is that something that, like, we do have, like, written down? Is there anything else to add to that when it comes to the climate resilience strategy? Like, you know, like he was saying, like, is there anything else additional we can add wherever that section is so the developers
know that, hey, this is what we are thinking. When you do come to develop, you have to put so much for retention ponds or maybe your other option is to create some type of green space to to allow for the drainage to work better, like you have two options. Yeah. So we're an MS four city, which means that we are required by law, by the state to have some level of stormwater management practice, whether that be having a holding pond,
dumping into the larger system, whatever it may be. We don't have a defined green space requirement for most of our development or most of our zoning districts, I should say. I think we did a little bit when we were doing our M U 1 and M U 2 zoning districts. But beyond that we don't define green space, some of that's regulated through light coverage requirements, right? Like you can't put a home that's 100% filled of a lot is presumed it's gonna be green throughout the rest of the development. But, yeah,
but to your question on the stormwater management practices, we're required by law. Everyone that operates within the city limits has to establish the minimum design standards for stormwater management, but if you're disrupting more than one acre of impervious space. I just have a big comment, I guess. This is this designing these things is a scientific endeavor. I mean, people it's a techno it's out there. I mean, people do this. Anyway, the science so far as managing water,
vegetation, riparian vegetation slows down water, it absorbs toxic toxins out of the water. There's all kinds of useful benefits also, but it's not a philosophic matter. I think it's a technical matter, scientific matter if you, you know, look at it, you know, like, let's like, managing riparian areas along waterways of any kind. There's there's ways to do it depending what what your goal is and what you're trying to do.
Alright. So any after all that discussion, So I think it's pretty clear we have a a city stormwater management system and guidelines from our state. Whether we have a actual climate resilient strategy plan, we don't. So maybe that language needs to it's just it's just vague. It's it's not pointing to anything that we have in place, whether we wanna put something in place that's for future discussion, I guess. Take it off the stage. Right. Right. Just end the sentence at the word management. Yes.
Mhmm. Because that we are actually doing. Yeah. Or include strategy at the end of management. Yes. So water management strategy. Yeah. So just remove end climate resilience. Last two goals here, related to economic developments. Goal one, supporting local business growth and retention Goal two, expanding commercial employment opportunities Goal three, strengthening Gilberts identity and brand and then the final goal, coordinating with regional economic development efforts. Some of the policies included here, goal one, so partnering with the Chamber of Commerce, regional agencies to support local entrepreneurs,
encouraging homegrown businesses to provide resources for start ups and then creating programs and that support business expansion and succession planning within the city. Policies for goal two, promoting strategic commercial development along Highway 10 and new mixed use areas, attracting light industrial logistics, clean manufacturing to industrial areas, along the B And S Corridor and then ensuring infrastructure investment support designated employment centers. Goal three policy is developing marketing strategies that position Gilbert as a business friendly family
oriented city, highlighting access to regional markets, rail workforce as part of business recruitment efforts, and then revitalizing and promoting walkable mixed use town centers, for the city here. And then policies for goal four, collaborating with, Greater Oregon Moorhead, EDC, and, and, Minnesota Department Employment Economic Development, Dean. And then supporting regional workforce development initiatives, technical training programs and infrastructure funding partnerships. Questions with any of those or thoughts on wording or anything that we missed that you'd like to see incorporated?
Adam, do we need to reference under goal two, the 34th Avenue corridor as far as continued commercial and light industrial development along that corridor. Yes. Crystal, yes. To Don's point, it would it just be okay to just, have the Attract Light Industrial Logistics and Clean Manufacturing in to Dilworth's just because we do have that area at BNSF and then over by 34th Street where the Red River or 34th And 15th or 34th and 24th
And 15th 25th and 28th. Yeah. So just so that we're encouraging, you know, in both areas so it's not just specific to that area. Yeah. We just you wanna just take off the end of the sentence then? Yeah. Just just so that we are encouraging it in both areas. Well, I think to be clear that the BNSF is industrial. The area on thirty fourth is light industrial, so we'll need to define those. So so we can't say to the industrial area period because that would only mean the BNSF area. We'd have to say to the light industrial and to the industrial area.
Do you know what I mean? Yeah. Well, you have a attract light industrial logistics manufacturing to the industrial areas. Which would only be the BNSF one because the the thirty fourth is light industrial. So attract light and dark industrial. That's heavy and heavy and light. Heavy industrial like a foundry or a asphalt plant. Okay. Yeah. That's what on on on my map, it is. This is different than this. One thing I'm sorry to mention. One thing with our future land use map, we don't define industrial I one versus I two like we would in a zoning
map. So that's one thing to keep in mind. So this these purples, I have on page 27. Or are they the same? I can't do that. It's commercial and light industrial and light pink and then industrial Yeah. Dark pink by the BNSF area. Yeah. They look the same. Yes. You have to They sure do? You have to unpurple it. Yeah. That's It's all purple. They look the same on your screen. They're not in the printed version. But, yeah, I've they are different. So as long as we can Yeah. I think we can order Smith that to Yeah. Yeah. Accommodate what we're trying to find there. Yeah. Not a big deal.
Okay. The appropriate businesses to the appropriate location. So would that include in that same sentence the word clean manufacturing? Because I don't know what that means. Zero emissions? No waste. We don't be dirty. I mean yeah. I wouldn't be opposed to it, though. I think I'd bring jobs to town walking to Dilworth. Yeah. Could take all of the word clean. Just manufacturing. At thirty fourth, you could add into, office light industrial. Mhmm. Yep. Thank you. On goal three, the bullet three, revitalize and promote a remarkable, is is that just speaking as to, like, our main downtown area?
Because we have Mhmm. Two mixed use areas. Yeah. So I guess I would like to promote both. We we want to promote the mixed use downtown and their mixed use Royal District. Mhmm. Historical mixed use. Right. Mostly areas. Plural. Areas. One letter. Oh, that's true. Areas. Areas. Yeah. Because they literally are. One's historic and one's neotradition. Right. Just to make sure that we're just promoting the the both. Yep. What'd you call it? Neo what? Neo traditional. I like what I like that neo term. Neo traditional. Yeah. Neo traditional.
That's the that's the terminology. I like it. Adam, I just said one other thing on the bottom. We do work with West Central Initiative Fund. Oh, sure. Yep. Thank you. That's it for me. All right. Any other thoughts or questions? Yeah. So I I guess I just I've got a comment, and I got maybe two clarifying questions. I think from a it was a helpful exercise, Adam, and thank you to you and your team for putting this together. But, that it was great exercise going through it. I I think from, I mean, if this is going to be, a document that collects dust, I think it's,
you know, it's oriented fine as is, but I believe the intent of this is to be utilized. I think it's really challenging to have I mean, just from a functional perspective, to have the goals be embedded in the middle of each section. Yeah. Because I I understand the history of it, but if I'm if I'm doing a quick reference I mean, it was you know, I was looking at the rest of the commission, and you were, you know, in the gold, you know, goal two or three before we had found its way in the packet.
So just, I think, from a functional standpoint, I think that's maybe something to consider. And I the the quite two questions that I had, if we could go back to the goals and policies on pages 41. Let's see. And maybe this is, this is probably more of a question for Peyton and and and Don and Becky, but I'm I'm I'm a little unclear to goal number number two when it discusses leverage rail access to support industrial expansion. Understandably, we talked about the sustaining of the full aviation fuel plant.
I would guess rail is gonna be a component of that, but that is a Morehead issue and not a Dilworth issue. The rail that comes through Dilworth, It's pretty inaccessible unless you're trying and it's especially inaccessible if you're trying to cross. So I I don't know what what is or does Dilworth intend to do to leverage rail access and where is that accessibility currently? Go on. Well, I guess how I look at that is that we could still have spur lines or whatever coming up to serve, and then in industrial development.
I mean, say, Burlington Northern is the size, but we're not gonna do the logistical loading area anymore. We're gonna open that up. We're gonna have I have the industrial park there. We're gonna recruit other businesses that, you know, that come in that can utilize rail, as part of their business in that. And they do have quite a you know, it goes all the way up to 34th practically. So there is opportunity along there. They typically do it in a lease land situation as I've seen elsewhere to to allow that kind of development to occur. But that potential is there, and it's there as as vacant land now to be developed or as a redevelopment
project at some point in the future. It needs to be seen. Is there any business in Dilworth that uses rail access? Like, does that FM, asphalt, do they have rail access? You know? It used to be considered that part does not, but what used to be considered, like, Janesville or whatever it is, you've seen all the cars parked along Highway 10. Those are directly loaded and offloaded from, BNSF and shipped by semis, all over the all over the region. So that one does for sure. Which is separate and apart from BNSF.
It oh. I was thought of Nowadays, I don't I don't know. It used to be it was actually owned by a family from Moorhead for a long time as I understand it. But how that works now, I think it's actually, o the the land is owned by BNSF. I I don't know I don't know who they lease it to, and I don't know how it works. The other part too is, as as Don mentioned, just to have that ability there. And we have entertained, at least one company that was looking at a potential relocation to the city of Delworth because of potential access to the railroad.
How that ever plays out, I have no idea. But it is still one of our nation's greatest ways to move products. So I think any option that we have or any opportunity that we have to leverage that to potentially bring someone into town, I I I think having that as it's a selling point. At some point, maybe a lot of buyer to the climate resilience strategy comment. So you had one potential come in here. What what is what are we doing then as a city to say,
hey. You know, we can we can encourage these spur lines to leverage that access to the rail, you know, instead of letting them come to us, what are we doing to promote ourselves? Because this is this is a promotion for the city. Well, yeah, this would be the tool to promote it then. That's what we're doing. And, really, something like that. It's more of a promotional tool from an economic development perspective. Not not saying we can't be that driver of it. I don't know if a municipality really gets in that business as much as, like, the EDC. Since I've been here, it's been a few years now,
but I think I've they will get interest from a manufacturing business that needs real access, for example. And they'll have give me a list of, like, 10 questions showing what zoning is, where some potential property could be, nearby a rail yard, and to have these first now keep in mind, we're also talking about development all the way out to 336. I think we just sometimes just think right here as far as from a rail accessibility standpoint. There are some opportunities, I think, when you go to the East where those may be.
I'm not smart enough to understand. But a lot of those things get hashed out from an economic development standpoint, and those individuals doing more of the campaigning and getting it out there. So I almost look at more of a tool that we give to them just so they understand, hey. We have this accessibility point in town. We have this infrastructure nearby. And, ultimately, it's, you know, them to, you know, kind of be the driving force of that. Looking way in the future, when 14th Street Overpass is developed and they shift the rail yards and the rail
system within there to be able to assemble those long trains, they may open up more land that right now rails are sitting on that could be utilized for industrial development at that point. Maybe if I if I may Go ahead. Yep. I think another question on page 47 on housing goals and policies. I understand in goal one, we wanna encourage the development of and it was corrected to all housing types. And if I look at that in conjunction with goal four bullet point two, updates only regulations to allow for smaller lots and higher residential densities.
And and and maybe it's just a little bit of, atrophy from the 20 the September 23 meeting, but from a smaller lot perspective, is that something that we we really wanna be looking at as a community? Yeah. And that's a policy level decision. At the end of the day, that is something that's highly recommended as part of the metro. All agencies participating cosigned on this study. Now the council will say or the planning commission, whoever via, you know, VisiVid getting to the council has to make those recommendations ultimately, you know,
if we are supportive of those types. Again, it's one of those things where we can put together I'm just saying we collectively we can put together all these different alternatives to say, you know, if we need to address a housing crisis, these are the steps to take it. Now if you don't like it, you don't have to do it. Right? But you have to really ask yourself, do we want these varied housing types, smaller lot sizes, whatever it may be, to drive some of these, different variety homes that would have to exist to promote the level of desire that's
needed right now to, you know, to accommodate everyone that wants to move into the community. You know, we you self limit yourself. You know, that's really what it comes down to. So I think from a sin like, I mean, just from a readability standpoint, you know, if you if you lead with the negative, people are less inclined to gravitate towards it. So if you lead with positive and so if we're saying I mean, in the spirit of that, Peyton, we update zoning regulations to accommodate, you know, to similar to above any and all type of residents. And that could and as a part of that,
that could be smaller lot sizes. You're the woodsman. No, I get your point. You're a mercenary. Yes. I was just checking and wondering is the reason why we chose the word higher residential densities because from the study, that is what the city was saying that they wanted? Like, they're they want a lot more opportunities to have multiple housing units. Our city did not say that. Yeah. Okay. We said okay. I just was checking because I know that we did,
like, the two studies, so I didn't know if that was the reason why that was chosen there. Well, in our in our updated future land use map, it does reflect more high density residential, with medium density residential, but also a majority of low density residential to fit some of the needs that were found in those studies, but also to fit with what Dilworth is and what, you know, we as a community feel that Dilworth wants to continue as.
So I feel like we have updated the future planning use, and I think, correct me if I'm wrong, but this would just be updating our zoning to fit within what our future. But I don't think there's really any updates that need to be made to our zoning. It just would need to reflect. We're not I don't think we're creating any new zoning, areas. We haven't reflected that in our future use map. Yeah. Madam chair and planning commission, you always have the ability through the plan unit development process, have a developer come in and propose higher densities or smaller lots or whatever.
So and that's typically how it comes in. They'll come in as a development like that. So So I'm not sure I was following what you're saying there, though. I'm sure. I'm sorry. Well, the the goal is telling us to update our zoning regulations to allow for smaller lots and higher residential densities. Right. But what are we changing? Because Well, the eight like, the 80 ADU requirements, I think that's a good example of one. That'd be the don't wanna say the only one, but we're not changing, like, our I don't know. I'm I'm just trying to envision what we would change in our zoning that is
not that is in our future land use map. Okay. Now I understand what you're saying. That was a good point. I I don't know if they changed much of anything. Yeah. Because I feel like our future land use map matches what our current zoning is. We just have to for them further expand it when we get to zoning in those areas. Right. Mhmm. Because we have a number of residential zones right now, a lot of those that match or could closely match Right. The kind of, housing that's being proposed or being utilized currently. Yep. So there, I think we can we can now I lost my page.
Hold on. So to Steve's point on that, I think there's 47. What one? 47. Thank you. I think there's language we we just don't need in there because it doesn't fit what we need to do. And just take that straight and now strike it. I will just strike it. On regulation. Yeah. So take the whole sentence out? Yes. And one thing that now that it matters and we can clarify it, you you are correct. Zoning regulations are more than just the words. It is the actual map itself. So when we do a zoning ordinance, it's not just changing
our outdoor storage wording. The zoning ordinance is also changing the physical map itself. So I guess you could say it somewhat intertwines with it, you know making sure that you're the most important thing is just making sure that you adhere to the future land use map. Right? That's really what it's we should be stressing and not just arbitrarily going about things change of an economic, physical, and social nature over time. They may require you to adjust your zoning map, update your zoning ordinances,
but really, this document that you're using as a planning tool should be adhered to and not just willy nilly, arbitrarily applied as development comes about. Do you feel like that's needs to be a specific goal mentioned, though? No. It should be implicit. It's implied. Yeah. So can we strike that number two goal the bullet number two of goal four? I think with yeah. Let me think on it and just work with I understand the need for it. It's really just trying to I don't know.
I don't do you reference the housing study? Yes. Yeah. You know? I I don't know. We'll we'll look at it. I think it makes sense to remove it. But if I have some kind of a revelation as to how we can wordsmith it a little differently, understand the the need to have some kind of a a company statement about it, but what that is, I don't know what. Yeah. So I think that really fill that fits in within the on on page 48 then, the updo update zoning ordinances. It it literally just spells it out right there. So then I think if we if we take that out or update that,
we have to we have to do the same on the next page. Sorry, Steve. Did you have anything further? Not to be the grammar police, but redevelopment is spelled incorrectly. Just so we don't have anything official. Missing an e. Thank you. There's someone else doing that because we gotta let's see here. And, also, zoning ordinances do evolve. There may be another zoning district that we don't have today that we have to explore in five years for whatever reason. Market consideration? I think if we can link the language to further studies or something, like, that that, you know, that is a need shown to be proven Yep.
Whatever. Yeah. Yeah. Periodically review, manage zoning relation regulations for future, you know, changes, whatever. It's economic. Yeah. Situations dictate. There's maybe I'm just over simplistic, but, like, the goal is redevelopment and infill. Yeah. And it doesn't seem to fit there to me, but I I wasn't gonna say that until I felt it was necessary to, like to me, that whole element about zoning and re doesn't fit. Mhmm. But I like the idea of turning the elementary school into condos and with the
indoor swimming pool someday. I I I got Washington. Well, thank you. Yes, this was a great discussion, in a lot of notes. So we'll get some of these changes here incorporated here as quick as we can. I mean, so we talked about having public review period starting today. I think we might spend the next day or two just kind of absorbing some of the comments here tonight and getting those changed, working with Peyton and Don, to see if there, some of the language changes are acceptable for the city. With that, maybe we shoot for next Monday or Tuesday to have this go live and then
to, let public know that this is available for review. Does that sound like an okay plan? Or Yeah so the December 3 would be Planning Commission would be the one that's heading the public hearing. Yeah. Sorry yep yep. Then the eighth would be council option And again just to remind everyone we're gonna be doing two separate hearings so to speak or two separate adoptions. One will be for the future land use map which has been vetted quite a bit and then the other will just be for the remaining parts of the document just so we don't
want that holding up because we, just because there's been some questions about future development and locations and all that. Crystal. And is this document going to live on our website or Metrocog or I apologize if this It does. It's on our website now. Our existing one is. Thank you. And they have a for this they have a whole website through MetroCOG, sort of a microsite will say that updates as we're working through this here. Okay. So K. So But,
yeah, if so would that give enough time for, planning commission maybe the next next couple of days, maybe through next Monday, if you have additional comments to, provide them to us and we can oh, sorry. Go ahead, Steve. You got a lot of great pictures here too that was specific, but you also have a lot of generic ones that are not that were specific to those. Thank you to Becky. We we just got a flash drive. We have a we have a number of a lot of pictures. Yeah. So that is something that we've been talking about with the city. So you'll probably see some changes to a lot of those pictures.
And on December 3 as well, we were another thing we were planning to do I mean, you've been to a couple of open houses thus far, and you can see the tremendous enthusiasm people have to come and review this. But we plan to have something here at City Hall on that day in the lead up to it. So, say, the afternoon hours from noon until 05:30, someone will be here to answer any questions, and we'll have something up on the screen or we can scroll to it. And hopefully, we'll have some members come by
potentially during the day. Will it be online as well? Is it what you said? It'd be online so people can do it as well? Yes. Go ahead. The draft online. Yep. We'll have Perfect. Both city website and then metro cogs as well. So Thank you. Most will find it on the city's website. So, Peyton, were you saying that we're gonna see this as well as city council? Or do Yeah. So for actually, the public hearing will be before you. Okay. And then you'll make the recommendation to the city council to adopt the comp plan. On December 3? Yep. Okay. Alright. And then city council will see it on the December 8? That's correct. Okay.
Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that. K. Anything further, Adam, from us? Or I don't think so. Do you have anything else from you, madam chair, or the commissioners? I don't. Anyone else? Discussion? Questions? I wanna make a note. It's not almost 08:00. We haven't been here that long. Thank you, Adam. Appreciate your time today Thank you. And all the hard work you guys do on this. So Thank you. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you, Adam. Okay. So moving on to the next item on our agenda is five b Madam chair? Yep. We need a motion. There's a suggested action. It's an update consideration.
For no. For the last one. For the public hearing? Yep. To call for public hearing. Why I don't sorry. That's right. You got it, Mark. I, Matt, I'll make a motion to call for a public hearing to review the 2025 comprehensive plan on 12/03/2025 at the planning commission meeting. I'll second. Alright. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Motion passes. Okay. Next item on our agenda is the regulation of outdoor storage by B. Don, do you get the pleasure? Hopefully, you've had a chance to review it. We've made some changes based upon the discussion at the last meeting.
We're hoping that it reads flows better and represents the intent of that discussion last meeting. The red lines got a little crazy, so we and Peyton was put it together that it's right in front of you here. And if you read it down, we can go from there. Okay. And I can clean it, pull up a clean copy if you'd rather see that. It's kinda hard to see the red ones. Yeah. I'm I'm okay with the clean copy. Okay. We had a question. What? Go for it. Yeah. So on n one c,
the inoperable vehicles Mhmm. How how is inoperable defined, and what is the I mean, if I've got a flat tire, my vehicle is technically inoperable? Yeah. I think it's a little more than that. I mean, obviously, the officer that goes out there is if he pops a hood and half the engine's gone, the thing's been up on blocks for two months. I mean, my mind will come in. You know what I mean? Some discretion. Yeah. I mean, yeah. A flat tire. Yeah. That happens. Right? Technically, you could drive with a flat. That's operable. You can get right down the line and drive it. I mean,
they have to get all lawyer on you, but, I mean, you tax lawyers. On a car with no There you go. Right? Is operable. Good question. We want this by the teeth, please. Can you look at this? Is this enforceable at the end of the day? Oh, I believe it is. Couple comments on it. If I should've just given these version. Non license is is when I looked it up and Googled it, the terminology, we had a discussion about tabs and all kinds of things last week. Non license is the nomenclature to be used. We changed up the trailer. Any trailer with two or more recreational equipment items shall be counted as one item
to clarify that. We added boats, licensed recreational equipment boats They kept in the front yard where they're parked in a paved surface on a side yard or rear yard. There is no paving requirement, and we added in alleyways for the three foot setback because it is there are areas in the community where that is applicable. So that's I was thinking about that. And and also a specific example that has happened in Dilworth is, do we also need to talk about blocking of sidewalks?
Is Well, again that's a violation. I think that's a again, an officer going out there and saying, hey. You gotta be able to traverse the sidewalk. K. And And but that doesn't seem I I don't know. No. I know. But Jump back to, parked cars and and setbacks of, garages to, sidewalks. But, anyway, we won't talk about that today. Well That's a state law. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And that's fine. Happen, and there's some subjectivity to it. Right. You don't just see the car and you out there and just ticket it right
away. Our officers are incredibly generous as far as getting warnings and trying to work with individuals. Understanding some have it really challenging at times where there's very little to no driveway space. Right? You know, they pull into the driveway and half their car is out in the road. Mhmm. Right? You know? So they they they try to understand that, work with individuals best of their ability. Thank you. Also, if you put, let's say, an RV in a driveway that has no sidewalk and it goes all the way back to the driveway, then you're then you're interfering with sight lines.
You you may be if it's on a corner lot. Absolutely. Then the sight triangle. Well, not even in a not even in a corner lot. I mean, just people backing out of their own other driveways and their sight lines. Sure. Absolutely. So I just not that again, we don't need to overword this and overadd it, but if we're talking about saying what you're permitted to and to not have stored, why wouldn't we have a setback from the front also? That's where I was kinda just thinking about that. The front yard, in theory, you've got right of way. Right? So you've got,
what, sixty, sixty six feet of right of way. In theory, the RV or whatever it is should be setting off of that right away in your actual front yard, what you actually own, and that would then preclude the situation you're talking about from happening if that's done. Yeah. Practically, does it's not always there. So I think, again, it's it's it's officer discretion when they take a look at it and see is this truly a hazard or not. K. So Go ahead. Yep. I'm I'm bumping up against n to a and c.
N two a says any trailers count as one. But if you go to c, it says that any trailer with two or more counts as one. So a trailer there counts as one. A trailer with one thing on it counts as? One. So then why do we have two or more in c? We're talking about c with items on top of it. A trailer itself is always one. A utility trailer would be one. A trailer with stuff on it would be one. Okay. So why does c say two or more? The two or more is referring to what's on the trailer. What's on the trailer?
So if you have two utility vehicles, like a four liter counts as two then? No. It counts as one because it's on one trailer. So if you got a trailer that's empty, it's one. If you got a trailer with one thing on it, it's one. One. So then if you got a trailer with two things on it, it's It's one. One. So then in c, why does it say two or more? It should say two or less. I mean, we could solve that by saying on it. And the trailer would No. It just should say two or less instead of two or more. That's all. Oh, what's the So if I have a four place snowmobile trailer,
is that one or five? So one or one or It's one. So if you have a trailer With something on it It's one. What So that's why I'm not add something on it or stored on it or positioned on it or something like that. But if you That one then would sell that problem. Is covered in a and b, and they're counted as one. Why do we need c? Why do you need c? Yep. Yeah. Oh, good point. Yeah. Just We could all take it out. So utility trailer, no matter what's on it or in it or Right. Whatever, it's one. Okay. Load it up with 100 bicycles.
It's one. Okay. Thank you both. Yeah. Just to reiterate, 95% of this is already in existence. Yeah. Just modifying some you can't hear that part of it. Yeah. So it's not like we're creating any from scratch ordinance. I'll just add the three c and d. There's just some leftover red line material on the ending of those right before the semicolon. Yep. But One looks like a one key face. There's a smile face. Maybe it was intended. See if you caught it. And all that and just from a grammatical standpoint, like, those little things like that.
So whether you found this interesting or not, we submit all of our ordinances to a company called m Legal, and they are the ones who actually Scrub it. Compile, scrub it, put into a format that works to our, you know, to our online ordinance system. So regardless of what we do, it's gonna be wrong. Did they do their own? They'll they'll fix it. Yeah. They format it in their own. And they send us a CD word perfect, which just does not make sense. Back in the nineteen nineties. Yeah. I'm not gonna use nineteen nineties. It was on paper. In the February and the February.
So with with the change of removing n to c, is there any other further comments, questions, changes? Does the city feel that this will support the officers and the city staff when you guys deal with these kinds of complaints and calls? This will do sufficient? I do. Okay. Alright. If no no further comments or questions, there is a suggested action on page one zero two of our packet. Motion to call for a public hearing on the proposed outdoor storage regulation ordinance. Alright. I have a motion by Ryan. Is there a second?
Second. I'll take Crystal. Crystal, second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. Motion passes. Thanks, everyone. Okay. Next item on the agenda is six a, the 2025 border city tax credit program. Peyton, are you covering that one or Badan? Don can cover it. Alright. Thank you. Madam Chair and Planning Commission. Yeah. So we're as we do annually, we're presenting you with our border city, tax credit program. This year, we only have two. We have West Main Pizza. It'll be year two for them. They have five,
full time equivalent employees. We can't add more. They've actually added more employees. So, but the way our we're set up, we would take five, the five that they had originally. U Haul too, they probably have had more employees. But irregardless, both of them still get $7,500 state income tax credit if approved by by the city council. So, anyway, we're before you tonight asking for your consideration and approval of, the credits for this coming or for '25, the twenty five year for West Main Pizza and U Haul.
And just on another note, as Peyton has up there, we are exploring other options options on how to expand expand the program. One thought we've had is legacy businesses being being able to go back and utilize monies to support those that have been in town for quite a while and and just, you know, as a part of, obviously, there's there's programs that have been implemented that are costly. Mhmm. Leave programs and, again, workers' comp that are issues for our employers where this credit could be helpful to,
even up a bit with our friends across the Red River. Well, I think that's also in the same light that we've viewed we've awarded the Citi award. We forget what the name is. We do it in December. Star City. Star City. And this last year, we decided to do two, the legacy and the new, because we want to acknowledge those businesses that have stayed in Dilworth. It is an important accomplishment, and we want to just not forget about them. So I think that reflects what we did there as well.
So I guess, would there be requirements, or would there be what would that look like? We haven't really, put put put much time into it than just theoretically and just reaching out to the state to see if it would be allowable. The way the state law reads, there could be up to a $1,500 per employee credit we think could be utilized for that program, but we're probably gonna have to put a little more work towards it and then propose it back to the Department of Economic Development, maybe also Department of Revenue, and make sure that they're in concurrence with what we would do.
We'll be looking at Morehead's program too and reviewing that as a part of this. I'll support that. Any further comments, questions? Question about the agenda item itself, I guess, is this for '24 or for '25? Yeah. I see a suggested action. It should be for '25. And that's last year's suggested action, I would assume. Yes. Yes. It is. Okay. So it should say 2025 where it says 2024 in the description. Yeah. Motion to forward a recommendation to the Delaware City Council to hold a public hearing and approve 2025 border city tax credits to West Main Pizza for $7,500
and U Haul, again, for $7,500. I'll take blame for that, but but, truly, the actual blame should go to our agenda packet software. We have run into this from time and again. What happens, I'll pull last year's staff report, and I duplicate it. And I go in and change everything, but for whatever reason, sometimes it will not update the language or, like, just keep what was there previously, but I should have double checked it. Was that a word perfect as well? No. It's the language. It's happened more than once. Oh, I know. It it'll correct some places,
and it's it's annoying. I have to we have to go in and double check everything that we normally do, but I failed to do it this time. I will I will do better next time. It does say it's the second year for U Haul too, and U Haul isn't listed there in last year's stuff. Yeah. I noticed that too. But it is the second year for U Haul, and the credit will be $7,500 that we're proposing. Do we have a motion on this? I'll make a motion to forward a recommendation that the Delaware City Council to hold a public hearing to approve the twenty twenty five border city tax credits to West Main Pizza for $7,500
and U Haul for $7,500 We have a motion by Steve. Is there a second? Second. And a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. Motion passes. Onto the next item on our agenda is to receive and file building permits for August and September 2025. So moved. Second. A motion and a second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed? Alright. Motion passes. Next item on our agenda is project updates. If you're going along Highway 10, be sure to watch for stoplights.
We're still in the design phase of our community center project. I believe we have our next public hearing on it scheduled for next Thursday at 05:30PM here at City Hall. Our last public input, meeting on it, I think we had three people show. Not not calling out anyone here because y'all are super active. But, if you're available next Thursday to come to it, you can see the progress that's being made on it. And Where's it at, Peyton? Sorry. Right here.
Oh. Next Thursday. Thirty? Next Thursday. Yep. At 05:30. At 05:30. Okay. Yep. Do we do we share plan like, the what the plan is online at all before that meeting to kinda stir up some discussion on it. I don't know. I'm just thinking out loud. Not the actual plan. We have not done that before. Yeah. K. May our dog take? It's more popular than you realize. Any any other project we are doing? Yeah. Worth noting unless you wanna note something. Stop playing on. I did. I said that earlier.
Must not I must not have saved that one. It's always red up there. Yep. And it said, you know, watch for stop lights on how we did. Alright. Thanks for that, and we'll, join the meeting. Thanks, everyone. Thank you.