[0:49] All right, we'll call the meeting to order. On behalf of the planning commission, I'd like to welcome our residents and viewers to this regular meeting of November 12th, 2025. On tonight's agenda, it's relatively short. We have one discussion item. Uh before we get into that discussion item, we have one housekeeping item. That would be the minutes of our October 14th, 2025 regular meeting. Are there any additions or corrections to those minutes? [1:12] If not, is there a motion? >> Motion. >> Have a motion to approve. Is there a second? >> A second. >> Motion second. All in favor say I. I minutes are approved. Thank you. >> All right, we'll open up our discussion item then. This is the final plat for the Parkview Pond second edition. And Tony, you're going to take this? [1:28] >> I am. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commission members, before you this evening is the final plat for Parkview Pond's second edition. >> Um, the property is located at the intersection of Embers Avenue and 198th Street West, obviously in the Park Bup Ponds neighborhood. Uh the final plat itself uh consists of the conversion of an outlot into a single buildable residential lot. Uh the property was originally platted in 2005 uh as outlot H within Parkview Ponds. Uh then tent of outlot H was to preserve a potential roadway corridor uh that extends from Embers Avenue to Aken Road. [2:13] Um at that time in 2005, city council did indicate uh when this got taken uh through the the process um that pond buildout of the Parkview Ponds subdivision that Outlot H could be converted back to a standard residential lot. Um if the extension of 198 Street uh to Aken Road is determined not to be warranted. [2:36] Um with the buildout of Park View Ponds, which has been built out now for a couple years now, um staff has determined that that connection to Aken Road um is not warranted based on current traffic patterns and needs. Um we just don't see that that connection happening. The other thing is is it goes right through the park preserve, which is another issue, and there's some great elevation changes and things like that to where it makes it very difficult to make that connection even if it were to be warranted. [3:07] uh on this on the screen and in your packet. This is the actual plat itself, the final plat. Uh the lot uh which would be legally described as lot one block one park view pond second edition um has a lot size of 11,783 square ft with a lot width of 85 ft. Um, this property along with all adjacent property in the Parkview Ponds subdivision is zoned R1 which requires a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet and a minimum lot width of 75 ft. Uh, the lot does meet all the minimum requirements, actually exceeds all the minimum requirements. Uh, there will be standard drainage and utility easements provided. Um, that means there will be a 10-ft drain and utility easement along [3:53] the front and rear property line and 5-ft easements along the side lot lines. The city's intent upon this repling as it is a city-owned property is to have it appraised and then to potentially sell the property. Um, a buyer for the property has not yet been identified. [4:13] uh outlot H um as it exists today uh was platted with a blanket drainage utility easement. So essentially that entire outlot is covered by drainage and utility easement. Um in order to uh proceed with the plat that uh easement needs to be vacated. Uh we have set a public hearing for that vacation and it's scheduled for the November 17th city council meeting. Um and again as I previously mentioned new new drain and utility easements will be um dedicated with the uh second edition plaid. [4:50] Do want to mention there is an existing 10-ft wide Bumis trail that does go through this uh lot. Um on the screen and in your packet there is a a survey showing the location of that trail. uh extends from Embers Avenue west to the Farmington Park Preserve and then uh kind of winds its way through the park. The trail will remain on the lot. Um and a separate trail easement will be required to cover that trail section. Um we cannot uh put a trail easement on a plat. So it has to be a separate document. Uh that easement will have to be executed and recorded at time of closing for the sale of that uh lot. Um, I already have the uh easement [5:36] drafted. Um, just don't know when that will be uh actually executed. Uh, as long as the lots in the city's name, we really do not need the easement. It's once that uh transfer of title happens is when we need to have that easement secured. [5:54] The action that's requested this evening is to recommend approval of the Parkview Pond second edition final plat contingent upon the following and forward the recommendation to the city council and that condition is the vacation of the blanket drainage and utility easement on the property legally described as outlot H Park View Ponds. [6:14] >> Thank you Tony. Um Commissioner Windshuttle. >> No, I just have one question. Uh Tony, as a city, I know they're they're looking at, you know, potentially selling a lot, but as far as the development that in Mystic Meadows, like with this road out to Aken Road from 198, the embers cut down potentially on the traffic issue that would have been to the south and Mystic Metals there. [6:47] you know, I I just don't want to necessarily >> give up the slot if that truly can help make the development happen. And >> right, I don't know that that would make a substantial impact. Um the more important connection would be the extension of uh Diamond Path. [7:06] Um I don't know that having that this particular extension out to Aken Road would create that much of a difference. Yeah, I guess my only concern is that Embers goes out to Diamond Path there and potentially the cars from the south come up, >> right? [7:23] >> Go west on Embers and then >> No, I guess overall I think it's fine. I just that's my concern. >> Yeah, I I know our city engineer has looked at it and has determined that at this point it's not warranted. >> Thank you, Commissioner Snowbeck. [7:39] >> Just interesting on this. How does a city look at properties that they own and decide when they want to sell it? What what spurred this just because it's it's it's not used or do you do a yearly? >> This is a very interesting um this is a very unique situation. Normally when we take property from the city standpoint, we take it either for park dedication or if there is let's say um a future well site. Um those are typically the two times we take property. Um, we normally don't do this. That's why at the time of approval, the council said, well, you know, if it's determined it's not needed, it can be reverted back. Um, so really this is a oneoff. This is not [8:25] something that we're going to see probably ever again. >> Okay. Thanks. That's all I got. Commissioner Berg. >> Um I'm going to kind of tag on to what Phil was talking about with the traffic out to out to 195th there. So the way it looks here where you take Dover Drive south, it looks like there's maybe potential future land to the south there. [8:52] >> Is there any plan at this time to build out to the south in that section? because I think there still could be some potential for a build out if that ever got built out into residential as well >> to the south. >> Yep. >> Yep. Oh, absolutely. Uh we get calls on that property all the time. I know there's a number of developers who um uh the Murphy family owns a majority of that property. Um and I know that they've been contacted I can't tell you the number of times that they've been contacted specifically on that property. [9:23] So I wouldn't be surprised if in a year two years that we see a plat for >> okay >> that and the Harris property that we reviewed earlier >> right so given that and then potential likelihood does it still make sense to sell this lot and not keep it for potential >> we do feel that because eventually that would connect into 200 Diamond Path would connect into 208th Street >> to the south >> um again we've we've looked at it through all of our departments and determined that at this point it we just don't see the viability of it with what we would lose with having that extended through the park preserve. [10:03] >> Okay. >> Okay. Um and then my only other question Tony is on the the path that runs through that lot >> given the easement that will need to be put in place there does that still leave enough room to build a a matching size home right relative to the neighborhood that it's in? It might end up being a little smaller in width, but it could certainly be longer in length. [10:26] >> Okay. >> Um, it leaves still 60 plus feet from the edge of the trail to the easement. >> Okay. >> Um, again, is it going to look identical? No. But >> yeah, >> there's no covenants or anything like that as regards to that within this development. [10:44] >> Yeah. And I did I wasn't expecting it to be a perfect match, right? But I just didn't want a really small house. >> Yeah, we we certainly don't want to lose that trail connection because it is a pretty important trail connection >> for sure. Okay. Yeah, that's all I've got. Thanks, Tony. [10:59] >> All right. Well, good questions. Um actually, I I kind of remember this um from 20 years ago. Um it wasn't a significant issue at the time >> and I certainly hope if the city does decide that they're going to part with it that it doesn't become an even more significant issue in the future. [11:16] >> Right. Um, so I was waiting and Tony did give the explanation of, you know, the grade and going through the park reserve and it'd be it sounds like it'd be a very expensive section of of roadway to build. Um, the other thing that I see where it would connect to and and I do remember when 198 to the west of Aken Road was put in and and all that and and the concern with that, you can see the curve of Aken and it's kind of a blind intersection that if if and when this road is ever built, I think they'd have to do something with that intersection control a little more or it could be a little more of a dangerous um intersection. The one question I got is, okay, so the city took this piece of property from somebody who was developing the land and now 20 years later it's a city's [12:01] property. Why is there any been consideration on is it somebody else's property that owns it? I mean, why is the city >> No, that was negotiated as part of the development agreement. >> It was I mean I just I go if I were the developer, I'd say, you know, that's my piece of property. You took it and I'm not going to use it. And >> you know, we've we've been maintaining it for the last 20 plus years. Um Okay. [12:20] we've and we're not looking to break the bank with this um property. Um but we're looking just to kind of recoup what we've spent over the last 20 years for maintenance essentially. >> You know, I I think from all the commissioners I' I've heard tonight, it it sounds like there's some there was some hesitancy, but I I think there there's enough buy in that we're willing to pass it on a recommendation to our city council um to sell it. [12:47] >> Yeah. Tony, is there is there really any rush to sell this. >> I I don't know that there's a huge rush. I know we've had some there's been some issues with encroachments from the neighbors on it and some infighting that's kind of pushed us to maybe look at doing or disposing of the property because it was never taken as park dedication or anything like that. Um, >> and I and I the only reason I ask is again I'm actually really concerned that you know if this does get developed even to the south, you know, down do that we're giving up a piece of property that potentially [13:33] could be developed with a road by another developer or something. >> This would be a city it would it would be a city-f funed project. to connect because it goes right through the park reserves. It's >> it's city- owned property. [13:54] >> Sorry. >> A developer would not be on the hook to put that road in on any upon probably any kind of circumstance. >> It's negotiable. It could be. >> It'd be a stretch. >> It'd be a stretch. >> Okay. And I and I'm fine with it. I just don't want to give up something if if there is a concern >> and there's no imminent sale of this um at this point in time. [14:19] Um we're just literally trying to set it up for if and when it does >> sell. >> So I'm going to I'm going to jump off Phil's wagon here, too. So if we if we look at that property further south, right? Is there potential to connect with Aken further south or are there no easements for roads further south if that was something that a developer wanted to look at doing down the road? [14:44] Uh there could be some potential. Um a lot of that until you get further south, there's some pretty significant grade elevation changes there. Um so I don't know that one will really happen. [15:01] Um it may we may get one that um connects into the road just south of the Lutheran Church and then 208th Street. Um, but I don't know that there will be anything further north of there. >> Okay. And I think the reason I'm asking is cuz in some of the earlier discussions we've had this year, we've talked about on the east side of Diamond Path where we were struggling to make those connections out there. So, I would hate to say, "Yep, go ahead and sell this. We build the house and then >> right >> two years from now, we're having a conversation about how do we connect with Aken down down the line." So, >> yeah. [15:38] >> Yeah. Yeah, I I think from the conversation, like I said, uh the the commission struggled a little bit with giving up something that we may or may not need in the future. It sounds like staff and the city engineer feels that we won't need it. We don't need it now, we won't need it in the future. Um I guess I won't second guess that. Um so I I I would support sending this to our city council. Hopefully um it's the right move, but I think there's some hesitation on this commission whether it's the right move or not. [16:09] >> Yeah, you know, I'm fine with it. Again, I I trust trust you guys that you made the right decision or you know, and again, there's no buyer in hand, so it's it could sit there too or it could sell instantly, but at least everybody's looked at it and we're all on the same page. And yeah, >> and I think my concerns have been alleviated. Durk, I Tony, sounds like you've you've been able to answer the questions that I have and we've talked through it. Sounds like you guys have already thought about it. So, I'm I'm okay with it, too, Derek. I just wanted to make sure we had the >> If it wouldn't have come to us, I I think we would have been fine with that, too. [16:38] >> Yep. Exactly. Exactly. >> But it did come to us. So, now we're going to address it tonight. So, with that, then I'd look for a motion um either to recommend approval or disapproval of the park von second edition final plat contingent upon uh the one thing and this would be a recommendation to our city council. Is there a motion? [16:56] >> I'll make a motion to recommend it to city council. I have a recommendation for approval of park fans. Second peron second, excuse me. Um, is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Motion and second. Is there any more discussion? >> If not, call the roll, please. >> Windshid, >> yes. [17:11] >> Rody, >> yes. >> No, >> yes. >> Yes. >> All right. Well, thank you, Tony. Was there anything else from staff? >> Nothing. Just wanted to make sure that you all got the received the email on the boards and commission um reception for December 4th. Um, if you haven't RSVPd, if you plan on attending, please do so. So, >> thank you. Anything else from the commission? [17:33] If not, I'll remind our viewers our next regular meeting is December 9th. And with that, I'd look for a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> We have a motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion and second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. We are officially adjourned. Thank you everybody.