City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, it's 5:30. We'll call this meeting to order. Thanks everybody for being here. Um we'll start tonight. We're we're grateful um to have uh Terrence Farnsworth from the Cedar State High Council of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will offer a a prayer and then Carter Wilkkey, Councilman Wilkkey will lead us in pledge. Dear kind heavenly father, we are grateful to be gathered here this day to discuss the needs and desires of our community. We are grateful for this community that we live in in this beautiful area and for the progress that we continue to see and the families that are continuing to gather here. We pray that thy blessing may be upon all of those who work tirelessly to keep our community safe and functioning. We pray that we may be led by thy spirit that we may continue to find unity as neighbors and friends and be a welcoming people to those who visit here. We say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. Afternoon. Would you all please rise? Follow me in the pledge to our flag. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. You don't have to stay unless you. Thank you. But you're always welcome to, too. That's my nephew. Oh, council. Is there any adjustments we see on the schedule? You mean on the agenda? On the agenda, I mean. I don't know. I mean, there is item number three, which I'm kind of I'm just kidding. That's you, Amber.

Uh, mayor, I would move that we approve the agenda order for this action meeting, March 25th, 2026. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Second. I second. Councilman, I didn't hear. I'm sorry. Sorry. All All in favor? I I any opposed? Great. Then uh consent or first um yeah, we approve the consent agenda as one. Hey, it's been a long day. All right. So, we'll do your staff comment first though. Yeah, we'll do staff comment first. So, we have our active transportation presentation today. So, welcome.

Thank you. Uh Ben Cousins, active transportation committee. I knew this was You got the short straw, huh, Ben? Maybe. Yeah, I'm a volunteer. I get bored, so might as well. Uh, perfect. So, uh, I'm here with the Cedar City Act Transportation Committee. Uh, just trying to show what we've done over the last year, trying to um Yeah. Yeah.

Uh, perfect. So uh probably one of the biggest things I wanted to share with you uh is this statistic of um bikeability and bike interest. Uh so uh 0.5 people will uh 0.5% of people will ride a bike um with no bike lane. Uh then that goes up to about 7% will ride a bike with a bike lane. And then uh 60% of the population is interested but concerned where they will ride a bike if uh they have a separation between cars and the street. Um so that's about um twothirds of all people will ride a bike um when you create a separation and one-third will never ride a bike. Um so just to uh that's a general statistic. So, bringing it back to our city, Cedar City, uh in the 2022 survey for the U master plan, uh or general plan, I think it was, uh 67% of Cedar City said walking or biking was important. Uh 21% said walking or biking was a top transportation issue. Um then going to uh the well-being domain of Cedar City from the USU uh survey that they do each year. Uh transportation is the lowest standard that uh domain rating that we uh do here in the city. Um and then comparing community connection and participation in recreation and naturebased activities. So um the green dot and in the purple dot are the biggest make the biggest difference between a community connection walking or biking in your neighborhood or city makes the second biggest difference behind community events. Um then crash data for Cedar City uh with bicyclists involved. Uh from 2020 to 2024 uh the average um the average bike crash

was about three or four a year until 2025 that number tripled to 12. So where do they get the data if there's no injury in a bike accident? Um that's just uh what uh or is it just a survey that they did? I'm just curious. Police uh police reports do it. So, they still report even though they're not injured, I guess. Uh I'm not I'm just getting this data from No, I would think it would be because they still if there's a call out for anything, even if there's no injuries, they're still going to put it down as on a traffic report. Is that correct, Chief? Yeah. Yeah. So, it's probably under reportported if anything. Yeah.

Right. Um more crash data. The biggest month for bicycle crashes is September. We believe that is because that is the beginning of a new school uh school year going back to school. So um yeah, learn to ride together after school. Um bicyclists involved um ages 13 to 20 are the largest proportionate um people involved in bike crashes. Um, you're safe, Ann.

Um, the biggest vehicle maneuver involved is turning right followed by going straight ahead, then turning left. And just the biggest driver contribution is failing to yield. People aren't looking. They don't know to look. They're not used to people biking around them. Um, and then bicyclist location. Unmarked crosswalks and shoulders are the biggest followed by intersected uh marked crosswalks, sidewalks, etc. Um so here is all of the bike crashes within the last five years. Um and then here is just the ones from last year 2025. Uh then going to to pedestrians.

Wait, will you go back one slide? Yeah, sorry on our screen it's kind of hard to see those dots. Okay. Uh going to pedestrians once again age 13 to 20 is the largest range of uh people getting hit. Um driver contribution failing to yield once again. Um pedestrian action entering the uh the walkways. So really trying to um emphasize it's um any intersections um is or they're getting hit obviously.

Just a little quick question on two previous slides. Uh the uh yeah is there a seasonality analysis on this because of the age groups and so forth. I mean it's got to be uh maybe you know during school year or whatever. When I was looking again, I didn't find any same direct correlation with pedestrians as opposed to bicyclists. Bicyclists went shot up in September. Pedestrians, it didn't change as much. So So we're just hitting them steadily through the year. Yeah. I could bring up the number, but uh it's Yeah. Yeah. Pretty much these are just the numbers I find. So um we're doing something.

So where were we? Um yes. So, here is all the pedestrian crashes uh hits within the uh last uh 5 years. There was one death in in the Smith's parking lot. Um I also know that there was another um fatality in another parking lot at Evans Hair Styling, but I'm not sure why this isn't on there. Um so, this isn't complete data. Well, this is 2025. This is within the last 2020 to 2025. Oh, 2020 to 2025. Yes. Last five years. Last five years. Yes.

Um then just out of interest, I was finding the correlation between uh bike and pedestrian crashes per zoning. Um so R3M we get the most. Uh central commercial we also get the most. Not trying to say we shouldn't do these or we want less of these, but just trying to say uh we need more precaution and need to think about planning for pedestrians and bikes when in these areas. Do you think one thing? Oh, sorry. No, I was just going to ask, do you think there's more bicycles in R3M because they tend to be higher density apartment kind of complexes, things? Yeah. Maybe there's more bicycles in that than maybe other zones.

Yeah. Yeah, that could definitely be it too. Yeah. You know, another interesting correlation is R3M and RNC are both usually privately owned. Those aren't public streets. R3M is all private streets for the most part. And if you're in a parking lot, that's a privately owned parking lot, too. So, sorry. Keep going, Ben. Good. Um, and then bringing it to uh street types, uh, principal arterial far above um, any in uh, crashes and serious injuries. And here's a map for reference. Obviously, a lot of this falls onto U dot, but um major art collectors are in second. So, yeah. I don't know.

Um so, now just looking at what the committee has done in 2025. Um so, we got get healthy Utah designation for the entire city. Uh we went to the Utah bike summit. Uh we had slow rolls. Uh we helped with the Cedar Enit trail plan. The Fort Cedar Trail has been something we've been working on ongoing. Um, and then we had the we helped in planning the south interchange and then we're work uh we submitted for an IMBA trail designation. Can you explain that a little bit? I don't think people understand that very well.

Right. I'm I'm actually going to go through each of these individually. So, uh, get healthy Utah designation. Um, first we had to get a letter from the previous mayor G. Green on a commitment to creating a healthy community. Uh then we created a healthy coalition which was which we counted as the active transportation committee. We identified health strategies um developed a community health plan um which includes community health status uh the three greatest health needs from my research on this um the three greatest needs were social connections, physical health and then more access to marine spaces and then coming up with a community health plan. Um so within the next three years we said that uh the three the things that we would do is develop a new walking or biking trail or add to an existing one which we thought we could do with the um trail coming up over by Fiddlers. Add wayfinding signage for trails that provide both time and distance for routes which thank you to Ken. We got done already. Um establish a community garden. That's one that we're currently working on. um implementing a strategy to promote safe gun use and then beautify, enhance or create a section of the community that promotes social gathering connection, which we're also counting as the Fiddler Canyon Park. Um added signage. Just wanted to highlight what we got up on our new signs for distance and whatnot. Um then the Utah Bike Summit, just some uh uh slides from that. Um walkability and diabetes and more walkable areas. There's a 39 decrease in decrease in diabetes. Um, time spent in a car has been linked with obesity and chronic disease. Each additional hour spent in a car is associated with a 6% increase in the likelihood of obesity. Um, and then walkable and walkability and a sense of community. 47% increase in community, a sense of community within a walkable area. And then, uh, mixed use versus

vehicles. Uh mixed use reduces vehicle miles traveled by between 30 and 50%. Um uh slow rolls, we've had spring fiesta, pickle, uh June we had a pickle ball event, uh slow roll, and then August roll with patrol south trail head and uh trail and treat. I was trying to get the numbers on this, but we have don't have exact numbers on participation, but the first and last one always gets uh a few hundred. So, uh, then we helped plan the Eno to Cedar Trail. So, they said that this was going to this is in the works and it's 2 to 5 years. Here's the planned route for that. Um, and then Fort Cedar Trail. Obviously, you've been updated on a lot of this and we got the monument moved and whatnot. um south interchange. Um we got that bottom trail beh uh bottom that bottom that south trail uh to go underneath the uh freeway. Yes, there. Thank you, Ken. Um and

K that's been has that been changed? So the uh the current plan with UD do they don't have the finalized design yet, right? But they are planning to take that up over the freeway on a bridge rather than through a tunnel, but the connection will still be there. Um, but as they've looked at as they started getting into details, they found that that was going to be a less expensive option. So, good to know. But it'll be the same location. There shouldn't be there should not be stairs. Okay. So, the way it's working, but just so you So, a new bridge, not the existing flyover.

No. So anyway, the underneath is probably going to go away. Good to know. Yeah, the rest of the project will require the removal of that flyover structure. We've also talked about connecting creating a small trail here because I know that uh the Levit group wanted to build all of the bike paths here. So, a better connection rather than having to bike all the way up and around. Um I don't know where that's at at all. Um still in discussion, I think.

Okay. Um then what we're planning to do, so more bike parking. I did a big study on bike parking and we just don't have much here, especially in places of needs like grocery stores. Uh there aren't too many. Um updating the current active transportation map. Um combining the trail and active transportation map. Uh expanding the trail system. Recommending trail standards is one that we've been uh pushing on. uh applying as a bike friendly community. Uh start counting trail usage and then uh obviously the Fiddler's Canyon Trail as well. Uh and then what we could use help from you on uh mainly striping bike lanes with the resealing of roads. That's been something we've been really hoping for. Um just as you're rest uh resealing that hopefully we can also get the roads that we're already planning on doing uh would help us a lot. And then also bike parking minimums at least in grocery stores or some kind of incentive would also help us uh immensely. Um this picture here is in Smiths and they don't have any bike parking so they're just uh connecting to whatever they can find. Um uh adopting trail standards. That's one that uh we've also been pushing. Uh Mosuba from Southern Utah Bike Alliance. They have trail standards all around in Washington. So, we're just trying to find what works for us and um uh try and push that forward as well. And then when planning, don't forget to think about bikers and pedestrians. Um other quick highlights, uh so we have applied uh Cedar City to be an IMBA trail. Uh we have just over 100 miles of mountain bike trails within 30 minutes of Cedar City. Uh SEU is working to apply as a bike friendly university. Uh in 2025, uh we started a bike group that does social bike rides. We'd love to

have any of you out there. Uh we meet at Bsentennial Park and bike to Southview Trail Head and back. Um come on, Scott. Walker on the trail. Um and then Cedar City Bike Works, the local nonforprofit, has now donated 98 bikes to uh children and people in need at Karen Share and um Kane Creek City Services uh and 475 bikes in total. So

I just want you to know that if you if you become a trail town, it's a big deal. the International Mountain Biking Association uh tourism office is very keen on this because people seek those kind of communities out to travel to and spend time and money and stay overnight and spend and do the trails. So, they're really wishing working to try and get this to happen. Yeah. And um Mac, do you have any updates on that at all or? Yeah, we got it. We did get it. Congratulations. Congratulations. Perfect. is pretty stoked about that.

What are what are the qualifications to maintain it or to reertify or whatever you've got to do? You need to come up. Yeah, you got to come to the mic, sir. And introduce yourself.

Um Mur Active Transportation Committee. Um also serve as a president of Iron Trailcraft. So, uh we're the nonprofit that's over all the mountain bike trails in Iron County. Um, we submitted the application like we talked about. There's a a by it's either yearly or by year-ly fee that you pay, but once you have it, you have it. Um, we had to list the number of trails and create an exact map with the mileage and the distance from downtown Cedar City. So, that is an actual number that we have over 100 miles of mountain bike trail within a 30-minute drive of downtown Cedar City. Um, Iron County is more than that, but obviously it's not within 30 minutes. And then you have to have a dedicated um, nonprofit group such as Iron Trailcraft to be able to partner with land managers to to build and maintain the trails for the lifelong uh, use of the trail and then just kind of talked about population and user count and stuff like that. So then where our funding forces funding sources come from and and how how that's gone. So yeah, the next there's a couple different IMBA trail designations. Uh I don't know for those of you who don't know, IMBA stands for Inner Mountain Biking Association. They're um based in Colorado, but they do trails all over the country. They're the number one proponent of mountain bike trails in the nation, and they also go worldwide as well. Uh they have a pretty good lobby in Washington DC to continue to keep uh our public lands open to mountain biking and building trails. and it's a great or organization and and we're a subchapter underneath them. So, uh, for those people who do know what a town designation is, it's a pretty big deal. For those who don't, then I understand it's not, but yeah, Cedar City is awarded the, uh, trail town IMBA designation. So,

that's great. Yep. Any other questions you have on anything you've looked at? Who is that lady behind you that's in the chair? You got to come up here and introduce yourself. You're a part of this team. You're the driving force behind this team. I know. I am Mari Blazard and I am the chair of the um active transportation committee. Thank you. I just have one other just for you new members. So, I've been involved with the active transportation for way too long

um since Scott asked me to serve on it. Um, but just one thing that we've continually tried to work on is the um the map the the the what the hell am I trying to say? The master plan that

the active transportation plan um it's constantly moving and for one example that we uh how important it is is that Chris Hall with UDOT is on our committee as well. Um, there was some things in the south interchange design that we wanted to incorporate and have done that would allow us to be able to take pedestrians and cyclists through the interchange uh, safely and effectively. We couldn't get that done because it wasn't shown on the active transportation plan. And so then we had to go through the process, I don't know if any of you were here, to getting that master plan updated. So then when it was updated, UD do was able to incorporate that into their plan and fund it. So, that was funding that we didn't have to come up with as a city, but yet that's how important an active transportation plan is. Um, to make sure that we're up to date. We're constantly like making sure that that's what we want to do and and we're actively working on that. So, uh, we appreciate you guys helping out. Phil, glad to have you.

Thank you. Good. It's great to be here and appreciate the I know you spent a lot of time Yeah, Ben did that all on his own. He gathered all that info for you guys and put it together. So, thank you everybody. Yeah. Any other questions? Thank you very much, Ben. Yeah, thank you. Just echo that. Thank you. I know that your committee is incredibly active and does a great job. So, so thanks for all your service on it. Okay. Active transportation. Um, next item. I'll entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. I will move that we approve the consent agenda outlined 1 through five. Second. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? I. Any opposed?

Great. Congratulations, Amber. You'll get to be here now. Oh, we need to have her give another speech to before we back. Cookies. Okay. Um, item number six, consider changes to the Shadow Co. Town Home Northwest curb approach. I mean, on this one, we weren't necessarily given a, you know, a a proposal one way or the other, right? It was kind of just a, hey, this is a problem. We haven't, we don't have anything really to vote on, right? I mean, well, I think we do come up with something.

Yeah, I think we do. And that they there was a request and we can uh to shave it down, I guess, to Yeah. How to deal with that request, right? Do we or to not?

What K, you want to take this? I I guess what I would say on this is that with what we discussed last week, um we talked a fair amount about what would be the most coste effective improvement that could be made to make that driveway better than it is today. And I think the real question is whether as the city council you're interested in spending city dollars to do that or whether we would just be giving the neighborhood permission to um make that improvement at their own expense. I think that's really the question is as a city are we going to pay for this improvement to be done? I did check well I'm sorry.

No go ahead councilman. I checked with uh Quick Cut on their curb machine. Uh talked to Travis. He said if he's up here, it might be in the three to four range. If he's not here and he has to come up for it, it would be a cost somewhere maybe between five and six. So, right. Yeah. We're looking somewhere between 300 to 600 depending on where they're at. That would that's a pretty cheap fix. That's a pretty cheap fix. And saw the way I look at it is uh we can either do goodwill and but we I don't know if it if we set a precedent fixing stuff. So, but that's that's about what the cost would be to do it. Well, it does what they've done right now does meet our current standards. Correct. Yes.

Uh I guess my question would be I'm saying this jokingly, but could we fix the same thing at the cemetery? Every time I go to those offices to visit, it's choom. It's over that curb, but I'm in my truck, so I'm good, Ken. It's all good. Um, just use the other entrance. There you go. There you go. So, based on that comment, maybe we can go back to the committee and say for 600 bucks, you can get it fixed and we we would be fine with that. And then you don't get into the precedent and you don't Anyway, and if they come back, then maybe we can consider something else. See if they want to take it on themselves. I mean, they have an HOA there. The HOA could I mean, that's a possibility.

I just I just feel we need to be careful about what precedent we're setting. That's the only thing that that's not the money is not going to break break this, but I just want to make sure what president I like your your proposal. Send it back to them. See how they react. If they really have a hiccup, I mean, it's 500 bucks, but they shouldn't be able to take it on, right? If they have our blessing, I think they'd probably just go ahead and do it. Yeah. So, would you like to make a motion to that if So, I'll make a motion that we authorize them to upgrade their own road and have them see if the community will fund that. Okay. Is that a good enough motion? Yeah, I'll second that. That gives us direction. Motion a second. All in favor? I I I.

Any opposed? Okay. Thanks for looking into that. Fantastic. hotel that would like to speak on the next item. Okay. And there's a little bit of a language barrier.

Isn't he action? Okay. Thanks. Okay. Next next item is to consider modifications to Cedar City Ordinance 26321 pertaining to permitted uses in the downtown commercial zone.

Thank you, mayor, members of the city council. There's been no uh changes since the last meeting. You know, there's a handful of changes proposed by, excuse me, the historic downtown economic committee. Uh, and the first one is to allow for alcohol drinking establishments, which is currently prohibited. Uh, to also allow for breweries, wineries with less than 3,000 square ft of production area, to prohibit convenience stores with fuel islands, and lastly, to permit electronic equipment and sales less than 2400 square feet.

Would you look at that last one, please? The table. I want to make sure that if whatever we do with this that it's correct because it looked to me like I was looking at my home computer that it's an equal sign rather than less than 2500 ft. 2500 ft. Which one are you talking about? Electronic electronic equipment sales. It's equal to 25. It does say equal. Yeah, it should be less than. Shouldn't it be less than? It's greater than greater than 2400 square feet. Yeah, greater. One is greater and one is less than. Yeah, the one below it's greater. That one should be less than. I'm just want I just want to make sure that's corrected in the table. I I think it'd be less than or equal to if you're exactly 2400. Exactly. I think it'd be 2,399 square. There you go.

Talk about winners and losers. Just a little typo. We can edit that to less than or equal to. I would say to make that part. Well, all the rest of them in the table uses are written that way. We just be consistent. I don't care which. Leave it to Councilman Phillips to catch something like that. You could always stick a soda machine in the corner and we can That's pretty impressive. Just want you to know that I do read the stuff. So, so mayor, it's up to you if you want to comment or not, but So, well, I I first would like our discussion to happen and then if there's if there's somebody that wants to add to it, then I'll we'll let them. I don't I don't

um I've just thought a lot about this. I think a lot of this makes sense if that zone stopped at Center Street. when we extend to 200 south, I think it opens up so many limitations for we have don't know what, right? Like the the gas stations, the ones that are currently there, there's two of them, they're no longer viable as a as a convenience store/g because that era has gone by for the size and everything else. So you're you're talking about one element of one element of the four item on items and then make sure you understand.

Yeah. So the the gas station item and so what ends up what will end up happening is well we can't do another one that makes viable sense to compete in today's environment. So what you will have is an old gas station with some other kind of store in it that still has the island and it's not walkable. And so do we want that as opposed to someone coming in and putting something nice in there even if it isn't a convenience store like you know like for example the Maverick. I don't want to limit the opportunities especially pushing clear down to 200 South. So, that's that's just one comment. The other is in that same area. Now, if this was were to end at at center, I I kind of get the size restrictions. If we had a brewery that came in and wanted to do a 5,000 square foot and put that in the back and dress up the front and have the whatever they do, their wine tasting and stuff, why would we not want that? With with uh retail dying basically in small areas like that, we need whatever we can get down there. And I think we're backing people into a corner by putting restrictions on especially from Center Street to 200 South. And so I would like to see some, you know, those less restrictive as opposed to more restrictive because that needs some boost if we're going to keep that in in that downtown uh that downtown zone. That's just my opinion.

So going along, let's I want to just focus for a second on the brewery side of it, the 3,000 ft² one. I mean, I get why we have the 3,000 ft in there. So, do you have another number or because the way it is now, at least how I would see it, it would kind of be like the Maverick situation. Let's say somebody came in and they wanted 5,000, but we have it at 3,000. I would hope they would come to us and say, "Hey, I I need a little bit more. Here's what I want to do." And we could obviously do it with a development agreement. If we just say no square footage, you could end up with a 20,000 square foot facility. And maybe So, is there a different number? 15 jobs. What's the big deal? as long as they have a walkable front and you know and they and it's it matches in with the downtown. Why are we going to restrict? It might be helpful to think of the some of the sizes of buildings. So like the brick house building.

Yeah. Kind of not got anything that next to it so you can visualize what's there. That's about 4,000 square feet. Correct.

In Anchorage, uh they have a place kind of like what we're talking about in the back. It's right on Main Street downtown Anchorage. So they they have a brewery in the back that you can see and tour if you want to. And they have quite a a restaurant and everything and and that was the concern that I talked about, Scott, is the 3000. The 3000 kind of concerns me a little bit. If they're going to go into manufacturing, well, uh, that would be a problem. But I think I I don't think we want to cut back the opportunity to feed people and to have stuff that because some of them might be bigger than 3,000 square feet.

Yeah. But it's just the production area. So only the production area is limited to the 3,000. The restaurant, the serving, the bar, that would be whatever you want to do. Yeah. What what we're really making it at least what we're really trying to work on here is we we want to make sure that we don't have large factory type businesses in the downtown area. Not that they couldn't go elsewhere, but it's just in the production area that we're concerned about. The restaurant, the wine tasting, the gift shop, whatever it is. So it would not be part of this 30,000. That's a different number. Whole different. It's only to the production area. That's the Well, I brought it up last week. Um like the the winery that we have downtown. You have any idea how big their production area is? Yeah. About 1,800 square feet.

Yeah. And to me, if they have the production, they're boosting they're bursting at the seams, right? They would they would love to take over the the uh hot yoga next door and expand. If the face of the of that building is conducive to what we want in the downtown, why do we care that it's 5,000 ft back there? I I don't get that. I I think I personally would be comfortable with the number around five. I I don't think you'd lose um the likelihood that they they'll still have the other pieces and it won't take a huge

The other thing to consider is, hey, we can do a development agreement if they want more. Well, someone might look at it and say, "Well, we're not going to go here because it's not going to match what we want to do." So, let's open it up and then and then and and make the restrictions on some other end uh to make it match the downtown theme is is just my opinion. The whole idea as you guys are discussing is we don't want a purely manufacturing facility, correct?

You know, that just barely has a storefront, you know, where maybe you can buy a beer or a bottle of wine. Um, so that's why that number's there. I I don't think 5,000 is really going to change things significantly. You could also think, and I'm just giving this as food for thought, as as maybe a percentage of the floor area, but but we you can still box things in even going down that road. So maybe at least 30% has to be serviceoriented or seating or something along those lines. I mean, those are just just ideas. I don't disagree with that. I mean, I don't know what your guys' thoughts are. I'd be comfortable going to changing because well, we do have to change both if we're going to do it. Correct.

We now change this one to say over 5,000 would not be permitted and up to 3,000 would be permitted or whatever that number is. Can I ask a question? Um, yes. If we were to make these changes, do we have to go through the process all over again with sketch review and Randle says I I don't want to go through that again. Yeah. I mean, you're in the same line of what we're doing. It's only if you went into a full different concept. I do like what Don brought up though about maybe if we do that we throw in, you know, at least 25% storefront or 30% retail something. I don't know. At least get you and I'm not

I'm not going to lie to and tell you I know that exact magic number, but that would keep a percentage of what the downtown is chasing. And I think what the general plan vision is is, you know, maybe a 30 40% and then we don't chase the manufacturing component. Um, mayor, when you spoke about the brick house, you're talking about the main floor and the upstairs. No, just the 4,000 footprint. Y know, I mean, another one that's pretty close to the number we're talking about. I mean, the new Maverick's 5,700 square feet, right? So, it's we'd be we're talking a number just slightly smaller than that.

Yeah. I I don't really have a problem with it going to that high either. I But I think if we get beyond that, they really struggle if you start getting a manufacturing facility in the downtown, which I don't think we want. I I would concur with that. And I don't know that probably being the only member here on the council that's been to a wine tasting place. Um I have. I've been there. Very good. It's I mean some of them are beautiful. They're absolutely beautiful and they they are wonderful additions to communities. So I don't know about the wine, but they have very good beer.

So Don, so talking through this, we could either do percentage or you could do square because if we say 5,000, we got to figure out how to figure out the retail portion because the production can be 5,000. So now are we saying the total building can be up to this much with this percentage has to be? But don't you think it'd be better if this went through? We got We give them the 5,000. We go through sketch and then they kind of depending on No, we could figure it out now. I think it's got to come. Yeah. You want to put a number on it now or wait? Mayor, if I may, what do you do do you have an idea what the percentage is at the existing winery? 5050. 5050. Yeah, it's real close to 50/50. That's a nice facility, but they would probably like to be 7030. Yeah, because they they wouldn't Well,

I don't know. They've talked about two different expansions. Like they want more seating and they want more manufacturing want that even if they're manufacturing. That's Yeah, that's a good that is economic benefit downtown. Why? I mean, why are we as long as there is a I I do agree with the idea because my first thought when you said that was well just make it say we can have them as long as there is a retail portion to it. Um but then Paul was just showing a picture that he looked up of 100,000 square foot manufacturing with a 10-ft vending machine and a 10 by 10. So, you probably do have to come up with some kind of a a reasonable um that that they would actually function as a as a retail type establishment as part of it.

Well, how about something open-ended like the the street front has to all be retail. I mean, you know, so that if they want to build a bigger building, they got to have more retail. So, then it you could end up you could end up with the thing that's in the front of the Boomer's building that's only six feet deep. You could end up with a six foot deep storefront. I mean, there's a lot of you could I'm just trying to think. I mean, let's do a percentage. Doesn't it seem more x percent needs to be Well, but then you have to say what the total square footage of the building could be because then a percentage of that would be production. I'm just trying to think how you would Well, it already says production area only in here, right?

And then we say within that 40% of that entire building footprint must be at least, you know, retail, but what you're doing there is you're limiting the whole building to 6,000 foot building. Well, I'd almost say I'd almost say you could do something more like what's a reason for it to be a legitimate retail space? Thousand square feet minimum minimum minimum. So, you could almost do it just like a minimum rather than a Yeah. I mean, I'm I think it'd be fine to say 5,000 square feet of production with as long as it's accompanied by a minimum thousand square foot retail. That sounds good. David Jones, economic development. I was

You got an idea. um just uh on the phrasing, not the percentage. Um because I I think that I don't know you you can figure that out. I would just say rather than retail space or restaurant space, just say other uh permitted uses. Um so that it opens it up to I mean if they want an electronic shop and they're I I don't know, brewing in the back. I don't know. But other retail uses. I'm just making a smart joke. But uh that that way it just leaves a little more flexible in that way. That's my only thought. So I like the minimum of a thousand square feet. Personally, I mean, can you think

I'd actually think maybe you'd do it in two ways. All frontage, you know, kind of like we we want housing in the downtown. We're fine with housing, but but we want it upstairs, right? Retail front or behind, right? So, the frontage facing the street, like all of that. and then 1,000 square foot minimum. So you want both. You want it to be the whole cuz I don't necessarily think I don't know if it matters for me. I don't know

cuz like I think about when you go like in Salt Lake and Midvale I'm thinking there's a brewery up there and what's really cool and what would even be cool on our main street if you had a winery I could imagine you making like 15 feet of it be a massive glass window that shows one where you're seeing how so even from Main Street you could see the brewery aspect of it. So, I don't want to say that the whole front has to be that because I'd be fine with them showing it a little bit of it from the front. Pretty cool. I mean, they they nice. Yeah, it would look Yeah, it's all massive copper and stainless steel. And I mean, if they want to show it off to the world from the front, that's funny. We think we're in wine country, don't we? Well, we are a pretty small town to have as many as we have. So,

I got a sample of Jack Daniels on my mission at the brewery in a dry county in Tennessee. I didn't drink any of it, but I It was a souvenir. Uh that's what they all say. So Randall I mean or Don I guess if we just said I I I mean this is a really good discussion because it's difficult to try to pin it down if we don't want to do the square footage. I like the uh percentage requirement potentially associated you know with the products and service and seating with that particular business. Uh I I I agree with the frontage too. You know, we want the frontage to be dressed up. You know, if you

But they're likely going to do that naturally. The the market will just dictate that they're going to use that for the most visible reasons to pull people in. And and if they do want to show off their fancy, you know, copper manufacturing products as a showpiece, you know, I don't think we want to we don't want to beat somebody up on that. Well, let's just say that the street has to be 75% just just has to be dressed up like the downtown requirements, whether it's production or Yeah. I mean, just I think it's already in there, right? Yeah. And then maybe it's it's just a I I what's jumping out at me is let's say 30% of the total needs to be devoted to product, sales, service.

So, would that be 30% of the 5,000 or you're saying 30% above the 5,000? I'd say 30% of the total footprint and then we wouldn't limit the size. Then we wouldn't be limiting the size. I mean there that is a double-edged sword. You could have something massive come in. It's hard for me to envision that, right? There's not any there's only a few really deep lots on the south. The rest of them are not that good unless they bought a unless they bought. The other way to do it is to just say a minimum of at front. I mean all the distillery slashrest restaurants that I've ever seen in my life

that leave, you know, no walls between the retail space and the production space. Keep all that equipment behind. They don't want to bring any of that too close to where people are, right? I mean, there's heat, there's noise, there's all kinds of stuff. So, they keep it behind. I would just say a minimum of whatever and then everything else on the back and they can choose whether they put a glass wall or whatever, you know. So, getting away from the alcohol, I'm thinking of more like a crispy cream where where it's cool to not that that's a big deal anymore, but you know, the donuts are rolling off the thing and it's people see it and it's part of the production area and people

don't go there, but they can see it. Where does this definition go? Is it because this is just a table of uses? Does it appear somewhere else in the ordinance? It does not. We'd have to put that in this information within this table. Well, I I think it could be within the table. If we keep it simple with a straight percentage, I think we could leave it here. Correct. Yeah. If you go straight percentage or square footage, that's very easy. Minimum square footage. If you start giving me a list of five factors, we're going to bring it back to you. Yeah. Yeah. You know, I I really like the minimum square footage. So do I. I think it's easiest. I'd even be fine going down to 750, but thousand's fine, too. I think a thousand square feet minimum. Okay.

So, what what if all they're doing is retail, though? Is it only if it has manufacturing in the back? Because you you might want to put in a 750 units just completely retail. But then they're not a brewery or winery. At that point, they're an alcohol establishment. That only applies to the brewery. Correct. That only applies if they have a production area. If they don't, they're not a production area. So, make the motion. Well, well, that's only one of our four out of the four, but it's still good to make a motion to modify that one piece first and agree on it. I'm going to have to tweak it when I go back and and put it into the actual uh code itself. Okay. Um so, if you can make sure you have an agreed upon wording for this, I don't have to make it up.

So, the other thing is is why are you restricting it to breweries? I mean, if Well, we're just doing that because that was the thing that was not permitted and we're trying not to allow this. Yeah, this is a greater allowance. So, do we need to open it up for others then that might come in like a I'm just using crispy cream is not a big deal anymore, but it used to be like a crispy cream because they're already fine under so that would fit under some other category. This is a use was prohibited.

We call that a restaurant. Mayor, I would move that we modify city ordinance 26-3-21 pertaining to table of uses for breweries and wineries and we increase it to up to 5,000 square ft of a production area with a minimum of 1,000 square feet nonproduction space. That work any concerns with that? okay with that which

I'm using Daviduction I guess and this is less of a legal question and more of if you're creating a gray area. So if I have a place that's I don't know what the winery numbers are now but let's just assume for example their production area is sitting at 2,000 square feet and their restaurant's 900 square ft. That would be allowed under current ordinance but not under your proposal. Right. Correct. We could also say 20% retail space. debate of going to percentage rather than the minimum. I the the I guess the concern I I have of the percentage is on the flip side of that is yeah I've got a 2,000 square foot space and I do

100 square feet. If I have a 10% or 200 square feet that's not any kind of real retail, right? That's a kiosk. You could by the way add if you make it a minimum they can go beyond that. That's just a minimum. Well that but but what I'm saying is they could do it if you did it as a percentage basis with a small building. You're right. Or I think what Randall was about to say is we could technically add one more category that says up to 2500 square feet of production space with a minimum of 500 ft of retail or don't even do the minimum. I mean you're already at the 3,000 here. So you could allow this change add the next line that's between 3001 and 5,000. Oh, and you have to have

here now you have to have a minimum of a th000 square feet of service restaurant area or sales and restaurant area. Oh, and then above 5 5,000 stays non. And by the way, your motion didn't get a second, so it died. And now we're continuing discussion. I can modify. I'll How about I try another motion? It's okay because we got other ideas. We got other Yeah. So, um, mayor, I would move that we modify city ordinance 26-3-21 pertaining to our table of uses and we make the change as shown up to 3,000 square feet for breweries and wineries.

For breweries and wineries, up to 3,000 square ft of production area to be permitted. And in addition, we add one for breweries and wineries up to 5,000 square ft of a production area with a minimum of 1,000 square ft of nonproduction area. That was that addition 3,000 to 5,000. Was that Yeah, that's the only one that has the requirement of the thousand square feet. 3,000 ft to 5,000 ft of production up 3,000. Let me clarify then what that would do is up to 3,000 square feet would not re doesn't have a minimum. So they could have no retail at all. Correct. Yes. The way that you did that motion.

I mean that's what had we not gone down this whole correct increasing that's what we would have given them anyway. So but but are we okay with that? We could amend it to say we have identified. I amend my motion. you amend your amendment and for the breweries and wineries up to 3,000 square feet, we add a minimum of 500 square ft of non-production area. I would second that motion. Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion on that motion? Any clarify? I think I think we're good. We just take all parts of it. And I apologize since I have to do this. Can we clarify? Did you change the what's the second one here? Third as you would draft it. So it says now greater than 5,000 square feet. Yeah, you may have said that. I just missed it.

5,000 or greater. Correct. Greater than 5,000 square feet is no longer not peritted. So 5,000 or greater. They can go up they can go up to 5,000. They just have to have at least 500 square feet of other permitted uses. If they do if they do 3,000 square feet or less, they have to have 500 square feet of retail. If they do five 3001 to 5,000 square feet of production, they have to have a thousand square feet retail minimum minimum. So the bigger the production, the more retail you have to have. Why? If you're okay with 500 square feet of of retail for the winery, why does it matter? Are you kidding me? Bigger.

No, because to me, it's more coming up with what what is the retail? If we want to have a retail, what's a legitimate retail size? And as long as they have that, who cares on how big the back is if we're okay with the back? Yeah. But our engineering department always says don't leave subjective things in in there like that. What is what is legitimate retail space to you may not be a legitimate retail space to Kent or to Dawn? Well, if they can sell their wares in a smaller place and have bigger production in the back, why are we making them have a bigger one where it's just wasted space? That's I think that's the the concept is not all that much anyway. So, it's not I'm done trying to make motions. No, no, you made the right motion. We have a motion and a second on the

So, this one will be voted on, but we're allowing discussion until we are finished and someone calls it the question. Well, and I and I agree. Are we backing oursel into a corner with that one? How? I'm just confused. How so? Because if let's say that 700 square feet is sufficient retail even if you have a 3,000 4,000 foot uh production because they can sell their wares in that space. Why are we making them upsized to a,000 ft when 750 is sufficient for them to sell their wares and have a dressed up front on the main street? Yeah. My my point is just what what is an adequate for us to say, "Hey, that's a good downtown fit and is 500 square feet enough to do that? Is a,000 square feet enough to do that?" What's that number?

So, are you saying you think they should both be the same number? I don't see a reason for them to be different. I I agree. I agree. So, let's just say 500. May I call the question? Okay, we have been called to question. That means we have to vote. So, debate is ended. So the motion was delet that it would change from 500 to a thousand. If you go from three thou big bigger than 3,000 you now have to have a thousand square feet of retail minimum. Minimum. If you're under 3,000 then you can get away with 500 square feet minimum. Minimum. Yep. So that is the motion. Right. All in favor you want to roll. Oh sorry we have to roll call this one because it's an ordinance. So, Councilman Phillips, we'll start with you.

I I'm going to couch this. I think we need to revisit the size because I agree if Anyway, so I'm going to say nay. I I think I'm going to go with I'd like to see the 500 all the way through. So, I'm going to say nay on this one. Oh, boy. Hi. Okay, we got two different categories. This is one. This is one of four.

I I don't know if I will. I tend to agree that the the delta between 3K and 5K is not a massive deal if we just stick with the the main goal is that we do have, you know, that downtown walkable service. I can go in, I can buy a bottle, I can taste. Now, if we were saying 10k of production with 500, then then I think we're going down a different slope where we're encouraging more industry. But between three and five, my my personal opinion is I like having the minimum. I think 500 is is probably You're too late. They already put pasted it. Yeah, we already passed it. So, but let me ask the council a question. Yes.

And I'm confused. You had three different items proposed to change with this ordinance. You were very specific in your motion on the one. I'm going to be very specific in my next motion. Now, I've got to come back and fix the rest. No, I I would not forgotten that. So, I have not. Can you Okay. Um, mayor, moving forward, I would consider that we mod or I would move that we modify Cedar City Ordinance 26-3-2 pertaining to our table of uses to make the recommended changes for Ken, can you show me the ones that are not convenient store? There's two more or three more. It's the electronic store. It is the uh alcohol consumption.

Yep. Go all the way to A. There's alcohol consumption is the first one. So I move that we make the changes as proposed for alcoholic drinking establishments. Allowing that. Allowing that. Changing that to permitted. And now scroll down. That's good. Can you just say all others as present? All others as prevented. Presented other than the one we voted on and the convenience store one. Oh, so you want to leave the convenience store one out of the motion. Okay. Actually, well, I because I do want to allow we have more discussion on the convenience store. So, second that motion. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. Councilman Cox did the second. So, we have a motion, a second to approve the others that were presented minus the convenience store. Correct. Uh, roll call starting with Councilman Cox. I I I I. Great. So, we got those out of the way. Now we'll end finish with the last one. So let's talk about con convenience the last one. Yeah.

Well, my only comment on this my comments haven't changed. I do I did have a conversation today with the gentleman that Tom Jet was referring to. So I do you know he asked me if he could come and I said yeah come to the meeting if you want to hear what we're doing. And so we had a conversation. There might have been a little bit of a language barrier. So that's why I also wanted to pull this one aside to make sure we we I just wanted him to fully understand what we were proposing here. So I mean if there's anybody else who has I think we've all made our comments, but I I just feel strongly that we shouldn't limit that because those gas stations if they can't do anything with the ones that exist, they're just going to become a store with a island out front and we could probably get something nicer if we Well, they can they can remodel. They just can't expand.

Yeah. They're not going to compete in the environment because they make their money in the sea store now, not the gas. So their margins are inside and if you don't have any square footage then then it's just not a viable option. So where would they expand too? I mean they'd have to buy additional property. I mean they don't have any more property. No, I think you could make enough property or or if you had one of those existing gas stations, then you then you already have some of the infrastructure and you could tear the building down and and keep the tanks and make it a viable option um to have a sea store. Right. I I do have one question in regards to that, Randall or Paul. If somebody was to have a convenience store, but because because our definition only includes fuel islands,

so if a person wanted to have what now 7-Eleven's model is, which is just the sea store, they don't even sell gas anymore. Most 7-Elevens, they're no longer a convenience store, then they would completely fall under something else. Correct. I think they'd just be a retailer. So then this wouldn't apply to them. This is only if they have gas stations, if they have fuel islands. on. Is that how you would look at it, too? I mean, at that point, they're just Yeah. Yes. That's That's how we would enforce it. Retail, excuse me, retail store. So, Robert, is your concern that that they would want to add and and maintain the fuel islands or they would just scratch that and become something else altogether?

No, I I think what ends up happening is is there's no money in fuel anymore. The margins are very small. Yeah. for those size, very small, especially for that size. So, their money is in the bigger retail in in the convenience store part of it. And and where they no longer can compete, they just can't. That's why they're closed because they don't have the the space for the convenience store. If they wanted to keep fuel just for a little gravy on the top and remodel it and do something that would compete with the one down the street, then why wouldn't we do that if they dressed it up and made it nice like the one down the street? But they could keep it under the correct. We're not telling they go away.

But they just can't compete because there's such a small area for the convenience store. It's just that's just a bygone era of that size of of I mean that's a different conversation, isn't it, Robert? I mean, that's a business decision by the proprietor of whatever this is. Um, I think we're not restricting his ability to do business by doing this. He's already restricted in his ability to do business. He or she, I don't know who owns that, but you know what I mean. It's

we don't want to restrict someone from expanding and making more economic benefit. And that's what we're doing is we're we're we're creating a small box. So small that it's like it doesn't make sense to do business here. So, what we end up getting in my opinion is a gas station that's no longer a gas station with an island that's that doesn't have the walking space in the downtown appeal. Um, whereas if you made it appealing for someone to come in and do something with gas pumps and a convenience store, I guess I'm just a little confused because you're using the example of the Shell station, right? Is that Well, there's the KB there, too. Well, the KB and but they're landlocked, right? Well, the one on 200 North took theirs out, too. Right. I mean, they're not the only ones that

And so now you have that, right? You have this setback thing back there and it's not it's just beyond the downtown, but you have this huge parking lot because they can't afford to keep the the tanks in the ground and everything else. So So we're not matching the appeal of downtown because we restricted, you know, we potentially get that there by not allowing something to come in and compete with the Maverick downtown. And I think I look at it Well, go ahead. No, no. I was just trying to understand your point of view. So if if we if we allow this, no, if we change it to not allow it

to not allow it, then what happens? I mean, what happens? We may have someone that comes in like uh that has something that can compete with the one down the street. There's more economic benefit on Main Street and they dress it up. Right now they couldn't do that in my opinion because the restrictions are so small right there. They would need to expand to compete the sea store the sea store square footage. So they they Sorry, but mayor, go ahead.

So if if we prohibit this use, just to be clear, they will be uh nonconforming. So non-conforming means they can continue to operate. uh were not uh pushing them out of town, but they could not expand. But they could remodel. They could remodel. Sure. In addition, if they added to their footprint, the answer from staff would be, "I'm sorry. It's a non-conforming use." That's that's what we and that's what we're doing when we say something becomes non-conforming. Y that's my point. They couldn't expand to compete with the

the convenience store piece. I think the the concern I'm no longer on the historic downtown committee, but I was for a very long time. And I think the concern was that came from that committee is they wanted to make sure that we didn't have additional convenience stores and fuel island places in our historic downtown, which includes 200 South. Um, I I understand that there are there are vacant places there, but I think the feeling was that, and I don't want to speak for other people, but we would rather have professional buildings or commercial buildings or retail of some sort rather than having a convenience store and a gas station with fuel islands. That was the whole premise behind this,

right? And I and I think, you know, I I printed out a couple things from the general plan. Uh, and just one quick one. And these are goals and policies that that our zoning ordinance we try to craft to to follow these goals. I'll give you a quick one. Talks about create a walkable streetscape that will unify the main street commercial district and encourages it, excuse me, its expansion from the downtown core into the side street businesses and historical touring areas around Main Street. So part of what we're talking about are the mix of uses. And I think the historic downtown commission's opinion is that gas stations don't quite fit that mold. And I can echo what you said last week, Carter, with the number of phone calls I got for months and months and months.

Yeah. With people very upset about this gas station coming. And that's partly where my brain goes with this. and and and I I appreciate the discussion of that second from Senator 200 South, but I I own a quarter of that land and I am one that believes in the vision of what

we're wanting to create from a walkability standpoint and support the change because I don't feel like fuel islands add to walkability. So, so that's that's where I come from and in the goals and and the the point that you brought up, Don, those of us that just went through the campaign cycle, we got hammered hammered by the public that they also agree that that's not the feel that they want to have in their walkable downtown. Um, and we did a great job with figuring out how to make kept Maverick the best that it could be. And it turned out to where, like you said, Robert, I've heard the same thing from people that said, "Oh, it ended up being not as bad as I was worried it would be, but if we're not careful, we could get what they're worried about." What they're worried about by not allowing more opportunity to have these

degrading gas stations that don't have the opportunity to do much else. I mean, we retail is not going to come in there very much because but there's a lot but there's a lot of other walkable uses that can happen in that property if the gas stations are no longer viable. But and and and the reality is, Robert, I think your argument I I I struggle with the idea that um that having a fuel island still there to compete with a Maverick and expanding the footprint of the convenience store is a model that's going to compete with with Maverick. Terrible. Terribles might think, but they wouldn't do it. They wouldn't do it with one.

That's where I was at, mayor, that I think um market pressures are squeezing that particular model of business out and we're trying to maybe make concessions to see if they can survive a little longer, but they won't. No, I I don't think they'll survive. That model's dead. So, what I'm trying to do is to create economic freedom for people to come in and do if they think it's a viable option and to do it. That's but but but your argument is saying that that you're and this is okay. This is it's fine to have a difference of opinion on it, right? That you're okay if a terribles did come into that corner. Yeah, it' be fine if like we did the Maverick. I'd be just fine with that. So,

and believe calls, but I also got the other side of it that they actually think it's better now. So, yep. I I do respect that. Yeah. Everybody Everybody has a point of view about this and that's why it's been such a struggle for us to even get it this far in the process. No, it's it's not easy. I mean, I'm going to throw one solution and Randall might skin me here, but I've seen this debate on other uses in other towns. So, the point you brought up, Scott, was we just don't want to see more, right? Is that Mhm.

was was a big angle. I've seen where we change the ordinance to say they're prohibited, you know, and for lack of a better term, there's an asterisk in there that says the existing instill they could expand. So, we're not telling you anymore. We don't want you, but I've seen that done, too. Could that be done, Randall, where even we could put it in there that say any existing within this zone could increase their footprint? Yes. Um, two things. One, we did that with signage. We grandfathered in a bunch of billboards if you remember. I remember. Um, for better or for worse, that's what we did, right? The second I didn't like it, but I remember. So, I could

The second part of that, sorry, Robert, is that um we can do that, but you may want to limit it to the parcels. They're currently the current parcel. Yeah. So, that way they don't you don't just have Maverick suddenly take over the entire block because they have a monopoly. So if the existing one if we grandfather the existing ones in they could tear completely down and build a bigger one if they had bought the lot next door. Is that is that what you're saying? Yeah. You'd probably still want Yeah. That's the fear is if they buy the lot next door now you you've run into the problem that everybody's trying to avoid. Well, most people are trying to avoid of tearing down old buildings to put in the gas station. Well, now you just guaranteed it's only the ones currently existing. But there's nothing on that 200 South stretch, you know, from Center Street that

is historic. My fear with that idea is, you know, we talk about that idea of of winners and losers. Now, you have told one person, they're the only ones that can do that. So, I I still lean more towards is it is it a use and that we feel would add to what we're trying to keep and create in our downtown from a walkable neighborhood or is that particular use one similar to manufacturing plant that we're just not comfortable? That's what we want in this neighborhood. Just like in a residential zone, we don't want a mechanic shop next to somebody's house, right? They that's all that we're doing is just saying are these uses ones that fit here and they can do that use outside of this block. But but we're picking winners and losers. We pick if we prohibit it.

Well, at least we have some options for winners the other way. Well, we do in your in your viewpoint. I don't feel that way, but you feel that way and I respect that. That's fine. Well, I think it it comes down to and Phil and I were just talking about this whether we want another gas station or not. And that's what that does. period. Period. It doesn't go any further. It doesn't restrict any other kind of commerce coming in there, any other configuration of business coming in there. It's just we don't want another gas station in there. And if we look at it from that point of view, we're not restricting anything. Everything in that third column on tables of uses that has a P is permitted in our downtown. Yeah.

Everything if it has a P. Yeah. So, um, we do have a gentleman here. I don't know if you he'll let we'll let David go and then if we're okay on discussion, then we'll allow the gentleman that's here to speak to us as well. Um, what Don suggested, that thought had crossed my mind as well. My only hesitation with that asterisk is if it's the existing business, then somebody else could buy the business and then expand it beyond what it is, if that's making any sense. And it's hard to say, well, just the existing owner. And so I just think it's it's hard to manage that. It's tricky. Yeah. It would have to be tied to the same parcel to the parameters.

Don't restrict it to current owner. That would actually be really That's my point. That's my point. The alternative to that makes it even more sticky. So I I think either way you could the can of worms is still going to be open with that asterisk as well. So the bottom line for me is government should be less restrictive, not more. And so it's a property rights issue for me as much as anything. Why are we a handful of people saying we don't want another gas station? Right? I mean to a degree there there needs to be some of that. I get it. And it's just a difference in where that line is, right? Because as a society we've said we have residential zones and we limit what happens in a residential zone and this is just another example of us saying this is a zone that we're we're going to we're talking about limiting and whether that's right or wrong. Wasn't there a several more filling stations on Main Street back in the day? There were. There were

but they weren't but they weren't but there weren't large uh fuel island places with 10 and 12 pumps. They had four pumps. They had three pumps. They had people hate but they go get their biscuit and fill up every morning. I mean it's and creates economic benefit to the city. So I don't Okay, let's go ahead and and allow our our citizen that's here to to address us is welcome to come up. Yeah. Hi, my name is Chira Ma and I own property 190 South Street across from the Can you Can you spell your name? Can you spell your name? C H I R A G. Chira Ma. Perfect. Thank you. What would you like to share with us? I I've offered to come and help him because

And you are? Oh, excuse me. I'm Tom Jet. Do you want me to spell that? Nope. Bernard has spelled it 37,000 times over the last 23 years. I'm agreed to come and help because there's a little bit of a a language barrier, some confusion. So, I was I'm sorry into the mic. Oh, sorry. I'll pull that other mic up so you have one as well. Just pull it up so that he gets one and you get one. There you go. He has a hotel that was built in the 40s.

Hotels are more and more and more becoming frational franchise types hotel. It's much harder to keep uh and maintain the smaller small independent hotels. As we get this is these are our conversations. As we get older, we look at other opportunities where we can we can retire with some dignity and and some income. His confusion is why he's been contacted by a well he can't say but a national petroleum based uh large corporation large corporation and uh he can't discuss details on it

that's fine which we respect I mean yeah he he has real heartburn here thinking that as his hotels get older it's harder to maintain and at some point. It's going to probably have to come down and not any just small company can go buy that because it's a large project just like a Maverick what Maverick endured to tear down the the existing structures on the 200 North and Main Street property and having a good viable gas stations rather than having nothing. And so his his his concern is what's his retirement going to be like

when he when he wants to sell this or do we just let it continue to dilapidate because the revenues aren't there to continue to maintain and go against the franchises. So I so I' I've said what his conversation is. So if you want to Would you add anything in your own words to that? Same. No. Okay. So, would you rather have a worn out building or some viable uh economic Well, I think we all want Thank you for coming and expressing your feelings. Thank you for helping him, Tom. Thank you. I think we all want a viable economic business. I don't think there's any question about that. It's just what is that?

Um, this is someone evidently that has reached out to this gentleman here, but that doesn't mean that there won't be other opportunities for that property as well. Um, I don't think we should for the sake of the city look at one property owner and say we've got to do this because he's had this one offer. If this is not the right thing for the city as a whole. Now, if others think it is the right thing, then that's another matter. But I still contend that we don't want convenience stores and fuel islands in our historic downtown. So, I'm open to a motion at this stage. I feel like we've had enough discussion on it and points have been made. So, anybody would like to make a motion?

Mayor, I will attempt to make a motion here. I'd like to consider an ordinance amending uh 26321 pertaining to permitted uses in the downtown commercial zone, specifically to not permit convenience stores and with fuel islands in our historic downtown. And what's the percentage there? Greater than 5,000 square feet. Greater than 5,000 square feet. Less than 5,000. less than square file. Yes. Less the other one already was not permitted. Yeah. Scott, is that uh north of 200 down to It goes from 200 north to 200 south on Main Street. On the south side. So once you hit or the north side, once you hit the south side,

and again, we're doing this by zone. So that is the current location, but if you look at the general plan, it can go broader, but that is more or less where it currently is. But that is what my motion is from 200 north to 200 south. This this this only applies to the way the chart works. It it follows the zone. Whatever zoned downtown commercial will apply. That's another problem for another meeting. We've got to get our maps to match. Right. Yeah. And in truth, the other ones that are around that are in the general plan, I think, are mostly central. The downtown commercial zone, the DC zone that is listed here in the permitted uses. Yep. Perfect. So, we have a motion. Second and a second. All in favor? We'll have to go. Roll call again. Starting with you this time. Uh, Councilman Wilki.

I I I I nay. Thank you. That was a good viable val good discussion. So, thanks for everybody sharing their feelings and um and in a good respectful way as we did it. So, good job. Be a short meeting. Okay. Okay. Um, next one is consider an ordinance amending 3510 prohibiting overnight parking on 900 North near the cemetery. I see we added some times in there. To speed this up, I make a motion to accept the Great. You can go for it. You absolutely can.

Are there any changes the chief that you would like to share with us? Good evening. Darren Adams with the police department. No, what you see is a result of collaboration with Mr. McHune and Mr. Jet or Jettin, excuse me, Jet from last week. So, we they have the dinner service which 8:00 p.m. is safe to make sure everybody's gone and then they have a breakfast service in the morning uh that starts uh at 6. So, we push that time back in the morning to make sure those those parties or those individuals could come in, take advantage of the services, and then be gone in a reasonable time. And we're doing this just with signage. Is that right? Right. We're not painting the curb. I we haven't discussed that with public works. The initial discussion was signage first. I I don't even know what we paint it.

Yellow paint the fence. Well, is yellow reserved for schools? Only school stripe it. Yeah. Signage would be I only have one question and I'm sure it's correct, but it says from the uh far west of Main Street to 300 West. So, is that where the road ends? Is that 300 West? You look at a map and looked at 300 West and zip down. It's right to the end of that road. Oh, I could just drive straight down to the caring share from my house. It's 800. It went all the way through off just past the trailer park line. Uh Outdoor Vitals has a parking lot there. It's kind of near the east parking lot. Well, Kent was going to say something. I I was going to say yellow curb is not school specific.

Yellow curbs under the MUTCD are allowed for a number of things and a restricted time zone is a place where you could use that. But I would I would recommend starting with just the signs. If we have compliance issues with the signs, we could consider other things to enhance it. Okay. Okay. Okay. Well, with these with these changes, I like your time frame to allow for their dinner. So, with these changes, I make a motion that we approve this ordinance amending 35-10 prohibiting overnight parking on 900 North. Beautiful. Second. I have a motion and a second. We'll we'll start with Councilman Schmidt this time. I I I I I Thank you.

Beautiful. That one was shorter. Now we're getting somewhere. Now we're moving. All right. Uh consider a resolution for revisions uh to the 202526 fiscal year budget. Unfortunately, there was a change. Oh, you found another million dollars. No. I'm so proud of you. But that, you know, that's Kenny's job. Usually goes the other way on revisions. Um, oh, we got another $15,000 U private grant to go to Cross Hollows. So, he wanted to include that, too. She did find more money. The other one. It wasn't a million, but hey, we'll take it. We'll take it. Is there any other changes or nothing?

No, that's it. Okay. With that, I would move that we adopt the resolution for revisions to the 2025 2026 fiscal year budget. Second. Second. Motion to second. Starting with Councilman. I I I I I motion's No, we don't want the money. Okay, now we have opportunity. Is there anybody from the public that wants to share anything with us tonight? Yes, I knew he would. Come on, Mac. Mac is leaving. I'm Roland Ga. I live at 1333 North Fairway Drive. Um I believe you all have received a petition from the residents of Fairway Drive.

We got it. Great. Thank you for allowing me to expound upon this thing. Um, we see the logic of having another north south um, connector street. We don't we're not arguing against this the extension of the street at all. But we do have concerns about the increased traffic that will inevitably come when people can travel from uh basically 200 north to u fiddlers and beyond. Um and when that happens I don't know but it is in in your plans and we think that's what is going to happen. The petition asks you to look at uh traffic calming devices um that will uh reduce the effects of the increased traffic things such as um roundabouts, uh speed humps, drainage swailes, signage. Um, I included speed humps rather than speed bumps because I think people get uh annoyed about speed bumps because of the rapid motion. It also is a little bit um uh it's harder for a snow plow to actually do its work. A speed hump uh which you climb up, travel along, and go down is a better perhaps solution to that. Um, in round figures, our neighborhood is about 40 single single family houses. Um, I got 30 responses uh uh on the petition. Um, one person said uh she didn't want to sign it because she didn't live there. And then there were

nine people not available when I canvas the neighbor. Um several of the families have uh small children and many have grandchildren and those youngsters like to play in the street um as youngsters will and thus slowing down traffic is important to us. Um, in round figures about 40 to 50% of accidents happen at intersections and 25% of all fatal fatal accidents happen at intersections.

That's according to the Federal Highway Administration and the Utah Department of Public Safety.

I don't know if you can. Roundabouts are a proven way of reducing uh providing safer access and connection uh at where roads connect. Um they've proven to calm traffic uh increase safety and they have um little impact on roadway capacity especially when concern compared with a four-way intersection. Um we would like them considered for both ends of Fairway Drive. Um we bring this to your attention now uh so that uh timely assessment of these trafficcoming devices can be made and um before excavation and construction get too far along. Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you. and and I'll um so that we don't put Kent on the spot tonight, is this something that you can take a look at and we can we can bring back and kind of talk about options at that intersection? Yeah. And uh in discussions we've had internally the idea of a roundabout there at why can't I think of the name of the street all street null or the other

at null and um you know null fairway and 100 east where that all comes together. That is something that we have had some internal discussions with as staff. Um, you know, at this point we're not building the full intersection improvements there because we're just bringing a a uh 26 foot wide, you know, double chips road up to null street at that particular location. But when that is improved to the full section, that is one option we've talked about that we think deserves to be looked at. Um, I think the same could be said at 1600 North. Um, right now that is a fully improved intersection, but uh there's no reason why that couldn't be looked at as potentially um you know because at some point in time that would become a busy intersection. Yeah.

And there would need to be some improvement made and considering a roundabout as an option there is something that I think we probably should do.

Okay. Mayor, not trying to go too far down the, you know, unagended item things, but either I don't know if we either need to bring it back for me to make this suggestion or if you're okay with me doing it now, but I think it would also be good for us if if the chief could or if we could get a traffic count done. Now I when we do ever come across and we start talking about this I would like to do us with some numbers and go off of standards and that and I think getting traffic count now and maybe traffic count after it's complete so we can compare it so we have some numbers to go with our decision would be good. That's certainly not a bad idea. And I thank you for bringing it and doing your due diligence and getting the neighborhood and and everybody uh is part of the discussion and and it's definitely noted that we will will watch this very carefully and and make sure we do what we can to to help you.

Thank you. I now know how canvasing politicians feel. Well, you could put your services out. You might get paid for it. And in fairness, Roland, let me just say in fairness, we don't know the timeline yet on all of this. Part of it will depend on property acquisition and funding for road improvements and all that. So, it could be a while, but we do know we're going to be opening up that 26 foot wide thing to to Null Street here right away. Yeah. I might add one more thing. you might consider um smoothing the curve out when when N Street makes that right angle turn to become N Street. Um

pretty sharp. It's a it's a 90° turn and I believe you have discussed in the past um uh calming that curve if that's the correct term and I believe there was money collected to do that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. Is there anybody else that would like to share anything with us tonight? Anna Clark. Ann Clark. I wasn't going to make a comment till I had a brief conversation out in the hallway. And now I am. Years ago, when I was a younger mother, we had a son that figure skated. And I remember taking him down there. He was learning his triple axle. And every time he would jump and fall and jump and fall and jump and fall and finally the coach called him over and said, "John, if you want to make the jump, if you want something to change, you have to change something. you have to change something in the approach that you're making the jump in order to land. Now, I say that because I'm I sit here and I realize that if we want things to change in this city, sometimes we have to change something. I've been very appreciative of the comments tonight that we've been willing to work to change things. But what I I realize is that if we don't change something to protect our historic downtown and we do that by ordinances and zoning or our older neighborhoods or we do something about the high density housing, it will never change. It will always be the same. And the tragic part of that is with the conversation I just had out in the hallway um that someone said, you know, uh we're going to get with a group and buy a building and I'll just tear it down. I don't care. I'll just tear it down and put up something new. And I realized we better change something how we deal with historic buildings and we allow people to renovate because see otherwise we have a community that wants our city to remain as a a warm kind of a small town community. And if we don't then the few people with the most money always win. They will always go and they will get that money and they will come in here just kind of like the Maverick and say sorry there's not a thing you can do about it. So, I'm just saying tonight we really need to start thinking about what we're going to do to change to protect not everything. I realize we've got to have business and we've got to have growth, but there's certain areas that we should be protecting so that the character of of our city

remains. If not, it will be a place we don't even recognize. Thank you. Thank you, Ann. Anybody else? Okay. Mayor, I would move that we adjourn this meeting. Have a motion and a second. All in favor? I I