Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Excellent.

All right, we should be all set. Do you want to go grab it? Yeah, that's perfect.

All right, I'll call us to order. Um, welcome everybody to planning commission for March 11th, 2026. Um, we've got Commissioner Mendenhal, Commissioner Woodward, myself, Vice Chair Patterson, and Commissioner Adamson. So, thank you everybody for being here. Um, we are going to start with a quick thought and legislative prayer from Commissioner Mendenhal and then we'll stand for the pledge of alle pledge of allegiance. Yes. Got to enunciate there. Our heavenly father, we are grateful to be here in this beautiful city and serving here and the opportunity to to serve them the citizens of Centerville. We're grateful for thy blessings that are poured out upon this area. We pray, Father, that thou would be with us and bless us in our deliberations that we think clearly and work effectively and remember the the purposes for which we're we've been asked to serve. And this we pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. Okay. I aliance 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.

All right. Thank you everybody. Let's start with business item number one, the public hearing conditional use permit for a home occupation. Miss Dwise.

All right. Uh thank you planning commission. As you know how I like to report is that um I give a brief overview and hope that you have read the staff report. So, the applicant has submitted a request for a conditional use permit for a home occupation to conduct a um home consumption and food and homemade food bakery in the Florentine Villa Special District of Centerville. Um while Miss Stacio

SATA Well, Miss Staca's home is located in the Florentine Villa Special District. This district is designated for detached single family dwellings at a density of four dwelling units per acre. So, the reason why I pointed this out is because typically a home occupation is only allowed in the residential low area. So to be able to um kind of qualify this as a home occupation area, we just looked at the standards of what is considered um residential low and to see to make sure that it aligns with that area, which it does. Um accordingly, this request has been reviewed the criteria applicable to the residential low zoning districts. So the code requirements for review um number one for home occupations um or sorry for home occupation applications to be approved there are four requirements that need to be met. Number one no employees other than the person who resides on the premise. She has met those requirements. Number two no alteration to the residential character um of the premise or unreasonably disturb the peace and quiet of the neighborhood. She's also met that as well. Number three, um, no promotional meetings shall be held more than one time per month. She has met that requirement. Number four, not cause any demand for public utilities in access of the necessary and customary provided for the residential use. She has also met that. For a conditional use permit application to be approved, there is a list of requirements that need to be met. Um, number one, will the proposed use be detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the

vicinity or inuous to the property or improvements of the vicinity? No, it will not be. Is the proposed use compatible with the provisions intended in the general plan? Yes, it is. So, oh, and then number two is the proposed use of the particular particular location necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood and community? Yes, it is. Does the proposed use comply with regulations and conditions specified in this title for such use? Yes, it does. Uh so in summary based on these findings staff recommend approval of the application should any business operations and activities deviate from these conditional conditions listed in the staff report then the conditional use permit um should be examined and have the potential to be re revoked per CZC 12.2100. Thanks.

Excellent. Thanks Miss Dis. Um any questions for staff from the commission? I think uh just just one thing to to note and perhaps a question when it comes to the conditional use permit. Um one of the aspects that was discussed in in reviewing the packet uh was related to the the potential traffic and parking impacts that those would generally be light. Uh and I would just want to make sure that under the conditional use when we're talking health, safety, and well-being that uh should the business be generate traffic in excess of what we would consider that threshold of well-being that be accounted for.

Yeah. Um so a comment to that. Thanks for bringing that up. Um I did communicate with the applicant just making sure that absolutely no street parking would be um permitted and actually in the Florentine Villas report um back and forth between the HOA president um they also indicated hey no street parking is allowed in terms of um like um picking up and dropping off. she did not expect, and she can um speak to that when it's her turn to come up, but she did not expect for um that much traffic to be generated. Um and she said that she would also schedule it to be staggered, so then no access would be waiting or coming back and forth often.

Okay, any other questions? All right, so who is going to speak for the applicant? Come on up to the podium. state your name uh your your where you live and just kind of tell us about your business.

Sure. So, I am Stacia Liki. I live in the Florentine Villas just a stones throw that way. Our back fence backs up to the Centerville Library. So, we're right there. Um the business that we are starting is called Better Together Bakery. It is with me and a few of my children um who are teenagers. So, we are doing this as an um attempt to help them kind of earn some of their um fees toward their different athletics that they're all involved in and have them um participate in contributing to that. Um so, we do cookies and breads um and occasionally some custom things, but mainly cookies and breads.

Perfect. Um so that you you understand our questions are going to be oriented simply around any detrimental impacts because by default generally conditional uses are sort of a yes but let's just make sure that it's not going to cause any problems. Sure. That's one of one of the ways to view that framework. Okay. So um I have a couple questions for you if that's okay. Parking's been addressed. Um you're going to are you going to take deliveries or are you going to be going out and getting the stuff? Are you as far as the like the supplies to make? Um, we're going to go and do the shopping ourselves. Yeah. And then are you going to have any out outdoor storage? No.

Okay. Um, any different equipment than what is usual in a residential zone? Like what are you going to be baking in just ovens? Yeah, we have a double oven already in the kitchen and that's good enough for the the size that we are are wanting to be at. Okay, those are all my questions. Absolutely. Go ahead. Okay. So, I read in your CCRs that you can't have signs, and that was sort of addressed, but I just wanted to verify you. You're not planning on putting a sign. Okay. Correct. Yep. No signs. Okay. No signs. Um, also, how are you marketing to your neighbors? Um, we have I'm on Next Door and Instagram and Facebook and word of mouth and yeah, a neighborhood group me. Uh, that's cool. Yeah,

I think it's very cool what you're doing. Um, so I was looking at state requirements and I like your label by the way, but you don't have You're welcome. you don't have a net weight listed. Um are you going to list that the So under the my understanding is under the home consumption homemade food act the weight is not required but it is for cottage bakery but we're not doing the cottage. Okay. So you're not going to be considered that. Okay. Yeah. All right. And then I just had a question. Um you don't you're not required to have one, but do you have a food handlers permit? Yes. Um myself and the three kids that are participating all have food handlers. Awesome. I think it's fantastic.

Thank you. Those are my questions. We're excited for you to get into business. Thank you. We are too. Yeah, especially with your kiddos. You're teaching them good things. Great. Thanks. Yeah, it's been fun. Only a little bit of twisting of Always a little bit. That's so rare. will probably increase this time. All right. Any further questions for the applicant? Okay. I wouldn't say a further question, but just to kind of follow up on my question to to Sydney, and I think she answered that well, and it seems like that's already been explored, but

recognizing the very kind of slow speed nature of this neighborhood and low traffic. Uh we just want to make sure that that that level of traffic continues to to be that way even with your use. It sounds based on what you're saying that uh this would generally be pretty limited and that you're going to take that time to schedule. Just want to confirm that. Correct. Yeah. So we have scheduled staggered pickup times. Um we also offer delivery and most people opt for that. So we deliver to South Davis County. Um and now that we have a couple kids with licenses, they handle that. So there's really minimal traffic to our house. Great. Thank you.

Yeah, you can grab a seat. So, um, we are see. Well, um, yeah. Um, sorry, I got distracted. Let's, um, go ahead and take it back to the commission. Um, do you guys have any further questions or debate? Do you want to go into the public hearing for an administrative decision? Isn't this administrative? It's required by code of Oh, is that required for conditional use?

Yeah. Clearly, I'm not I'm not firing at all. Um, I'm going to open it up for the public hearing. Uh, anybody who wishes to come and provide comment can come to the podium and we invite anybody to do so.

Perfect. Excellent. Seeing seeing no other comments, I'm going to close the public hearing and then I'm going to take it back to the commission for further discussion. I have no concerns. I think it's fantastic. I am open. Who would like to make a motion? I will. Oh, we had a Sorry, I don't want to make I just had a couple um suggested changes to the conditions if you're inclined to go that direction. Okay. Um on the first condition says this conditional use permit approval shall not be transferred to another and rather than similar user because I don't we don't want to argue about similar it really shouldn't be transferred to anyone another user.

So if we could just say shall not be transferred to any other owner or operator. Sure.

So this this is a you know since it's in a home some conditional use permits we do allow transfer. Most of them we do, for instance, businesses, but in a homebased occupation, we typically do not allow that. We want to know who we're dealing with. They they could get, you know, an amendment, but and then on number three, any changes to this business model, and rather than will, I would just say any changes to this business model adding or any conditions of approval shall require review. So, not just the business model, which is something we don't always know about, but really if you're changing the conditions of approval, like parking, things we've talked about today, you know, impacting the neighborhood, then that would need to come back. And then on condition number four, just saying that if they deviate from the conditions of approval, um, I would suggest we just say the conditional use permit may be revoked under 1221100. Often times, we work with property owners and businesses. We don't automatically I don't want to bind the city to say one deviation and we have to revoke it. We need to follow our own code and our code enforcement. So if we could just say may

Okay. Can I ask a question Lisa? So number one the way that you phrased it I was curious about why not just take out similar and and leave it that way shall not be transferred to another user unless approved by the city. Yeah. And I was just trying to be consistent with what we're So in number two we say business operator but understanding with a homebased business the operator has to be a homeowner. You have to live there. Well maybe not the owner. So anyway that's why rather than user the operative term I believe operator the business or the owner of the property. Okay. Because otherwise if you rent it out then it essentially would pass to the tenant. Is that what you're saying? Um I'd have to look

how it reads. I don't know if it says you have to own the house or live in the house to operate the homebased occupation if you reside. If you reside, okay, so if you reside, so that would cover both if you know, let's see, shall not be transferred to I guess you could say operator, but so do we want to cross out similar or do we want to put business operator? I just kind of like ending there. The conditional use permit approval shall not be transferred to any other

and then it just sticks with Um I I'd probably say if you're worried about owner then I would just use operator because we do use operator in two other conditions. So that might be consistent we want to say that. Sure. To any other operator business operator. Why don't we say that just the same language to any other business operator unless approved by the city. So, at that point, they could potentially come in and it' probably be an amendment. If they wanted to transfer it to someone else, we'd we'd require them to amend the conditional use permit.

Right. Okay. Great. Thank you for those suggestions. Um, I'll take it back to the commission. Anybody want to start? I'll make a motion. Very good. Can you pull that paper down a little bit for that page? There you go. I hereby make a motion for the planning commission to approve the conditional use permit request for Stacia Lecti Liy

Liy for a home occupation business use to operate a homebased bakery in following the home consumption and homemade food act as located on parcel 02-196-000032 known as 86 South Florentine Lane for the business Better Together Bakery. This home occupation use is subject to the following conditions of approval. One will make a change. It shall read, "This conditional use permit approval shall not be transferred to another business operator user unless approved by the city." We're taking out user. Sorry.

Okay. We will just take out similar user and we will replace that with business operator. Number two, we'll stand. Three, we will say we'll change that. Remove the word will. Let's see. Any changes to this business model or or conditions of approval or conditions of approval shall require a new review of the conditional use permit by the planning commission. And number four, uh we will change the word shall to may be revoked instead of shall be revoked. Very good. Nice work. All right. I have a motion on the table. I'll second the motion.

I've got a motion and a second. Any discussion? Hearing none. I'll start uh down here with Commissioner Adamson. I I I I I. And that is unanimous. All right. Congratulations. That's one hurdle. Thank you guys so much for your time. Yeah. I did got a couple samples here. Just leave them. Absolutely. That would be would be awesome. They're under $50 and we've already made the decision. Sounds like a joke, but that's actually good to have. Anytime you want to stop by. Thanks you guys. Good luck.

All right, let's move on. Uh you guys start Mike and I'll keep working. I'm going to open up uh business item number two, the public hearing on zoning code amendments. We've seen this. Is this three or four? Uh the history I think it's four. Yeah, I think we're at four. It's an important topic, honestly. So, it's it's going to be fun to go through. So, um Mr. Eggot, I believe you're going to lead us out on this. Yep. So, I'll turn the time over to you.

Appreciate it. And I'll do a background and then defer to Lisa when we get into the language and the discussion there. But to give a background on this um as you have in their packet, I went more comprehensive. I'll give a quick one. This discussion started mid year 2025 and and continued through different levels of leadership, staff leadership, uh some mayor and council members, even residents of the community and obviously Weaver Basin Water Consery District discussing water conservation programs and resources that are available to the city and residents of the city. One of the key ones that has come up frequently is, hey, I'd like to flip my front yard into more water conservationbased landscaping. How can I do that? and we basin water conservancy district would say can't because your city doesn't have an ordinance that allows for that. So that that's the the premise of it. Obviously given the nature of our our water um challenges even going throughout this winter and coming that's only put more pressure on this discussion as you can imagine. So, so that that led to back then even the start of the conversation and at the time we presented a first draft amendment back on October 8th, 2025. Had some discussion and presentation to the planning commission and the request was that we um contact Weaver Bas and Water Conservancy District and asked them to come and be here for the October 22nd meeting to answer questions, further clarified details, those sorts of things. That was accomplished. They did uh attend the next meeting on October 22nd. Um, Representative John Perry was present to answer questions of the commissioners at that time. And after the discussion, uh, we we talked about how to align their commentary and some of the planning commission comments and still, I guess, um, clarifications or needs for further clarification within the actual language. Um, and then, uh, the the decision was to also set up for a public hearing when it was ready to come back. So, we did some more work on that throughout the month of November and then scheduled the public hearing for it to come back on December 10th.

Uh, and I think actually the direction from the planning commission was to give it adequate time about a month's time to really try to flush out better language and better meet that demand. So, that's why again we waited until December 10th. Then we held the public hearing on December 10th. Um, I I don't think any residents that were present really to communicate. I don't think anybody really said anything in that meeting that I can recollect, but anyway. Um, we did then discuss internally with the planning commission the updated document. Um, and there was a a a a feeling or a consensus that we were getting closer to some of the the water conservation goals we were trying to reach, but there's still some things that were were hurdles. And I think we even started to peak into other issues within the landscaping con where as staff were like, whoa, let's let's kind of stay in our lane for now. that that starts to go into other areas that would be better for a future discussion. And so the direction was to further work with the water district to work closer with the guidance of the city attorney in the interim and bring it back to the planning commission at such time it was ready to do so. And then clearly we went to the holiday cycle and you know going into December coming out of January. Um and then in about I don't know maybe a month ago or less Lisa you you worked on an updated draft and and I will say this and maybe Lisa doesn't want me to say this. Lisa spent almost a whole week of work on updating this ordinance, just so you know.

It was multiple days and hours. I remember her telling me. So, she really dug into it deep. She looked at state code. She looked at water district standards, a lot of things. She looked at even some of the evolution that that had have been discussions during the legislative session that we were dealing with on these topics and how they would align into what we're trying to accomplish. And also I think she was getting a pulse both from um city council members as well as residents throughout this time to better understand um the need and the import of getting this done as we go come out of the winter that we haven't had the full winter and identify if we're ready to consider or discuss the reality of of this kind of language. And so um I think she's done a great job. But I think she I I I take no um I have no issue or concern with with her going at it very clearly with very clear legal terminology and guidance and and understanding of the code as well as all of her history knowledge of the previous landscaping ordinance and how it came to be and and she made a very astute interesting comment before the meeting started that this is taking some sections of code 180 degrees away from where they previously were. So because of elements really that are outside of control that are naturally driven, the code is has had to be at least looked at from a completely different perspective than maybe we would have liked it to be seen for the beautifification of Centerville City. But now we're dealing with a very different environmental cycle and challenges. So we need to be sensitive to that and and flexible with that reality. So um that that version of the code is found in your packet. It did have some implications and and impacts to um the the Centerville Municipal Code in 11.02, which is park strips. There are some things in park strips that were very rigid about wanting certain types of planning and and use and clearly you don't want them to contradict. So, so

those amendments have been also brought into that code. Um and we felt like because there was significant very significant change to these ordinances that it would warrant a public hearing. And so that's why we scheduled it for a public hearing tonight. It made sense to do so in light of the significant changes to it. I will note that I did provide this draft to um the we water conscency district, John Perry and David Rice. David Rice did check with the state. They had a minor question. Um he sent an email to Lisa and I and Lisa quickly addressed it and he said, "You're good to go. That's great. Thanks for telling me." So, we do have that confirmation from them that the version that's in your packet would fly with them for us to be within programming expectations. So, um I did also invite them to be here tonight, but they're not here. So, that that I guess tells tells us the comfortability they have with what we've provided to you in your packet is what I would take that to mean. So with that introduction and then and then I guess I will just say the attachments obviously are all those same background documents that that the count or the planning commissioners out there with us backing those discussions had and obviously the the two new planning commissioners. This is new information for you but it's it's consistent with what has been in every packet prior to and helps outline the state codes and the the water conservation programming that the state of Utah has provided. So with that, I think that that's the intro I would provide and I would defer to Lisa now to to start to dig into the actual code amendments and and commentary and I think she wants to go page by page. So I'll turn it over to you Lisa and see how you want to proceed

word by word. I take cues. Yes. Well, thanks Mike. That was a great introduction and I think helpful to have that history for our new commissioners as well as the rest of us because it's been a while. I had to reread it again today because as Mike said, I did spend a long time with this partly because we have an ownorous landscaping ordinance that has been amended throughout the years. And then what we're trying to do with this, as Mike said, is really do a 180 where we're saying, "Hey, we've been requiring lawn in parks groups.

We've always required that and now we're saying no, we don't." You know, so in order to have our residents qualify for this incentive program, we have to make a complete policy change, which is no lawn in the park strip for new development. Okay? So that's the way we need to educate and be pushing it forward. It doesn't mean we're going to go rip up lawn in the park strips. And so I did spend quite a bit of time and a half of a page in our code which will now sort of have a separate nonconformity standard just for this landscaping saying hey we really don't want this to be triggered by you know minor things because I think that's what the planning commission was concerned as well as staff. What if somebody puts in a new deck? Do they now have to go and rip it out? What if they put in a pool? What if they change the electrical? What if they get a permit? No. My idea is if you completely demolish the home and rebuild a new one, that's new substantial new development and you need to take the lawn out of the park strip at that point. Um, and then the other standard that I put in there is um or you double the size of your home. And we can talk about that one when we get there. But essentially, I think that the other thing that was very problematic in our code is that chapter 51 really is dealing with commercial landscaping. We do not regulate, we do not require landscaping standards for single family homes. So, we now had to deal with a commercial only landscaping code and add in some single family landscaping scaping regulations. And I thought about adding this somewhere else and saying, "Wait a minute, let's put single family in our residential zone." But the more I played around with it, I thought, let's just So, it may seem awkward, but I

tried to be clear about we're talking about every other kind of development other than single family. And then when we're talking about single family, this is where we're going to regulate it. So, I can explain some of those, but I appreciate all the concern and discussion that the planning commission had because I think these are things that the council will ask as well as, you know, the residents. But right now, you know, staff has been asked. It's a priority of the council to make sure that Centerville residents can qualify for these incentives both for, you know, because that's what our residents want to do, as well as conserving water, which I think the council would like to encourage water conservation. So with that, we'll start with page one. We have 16 pages, and there's some more changes than others, but they're very repetitive. So, um, page one is really just saying and restating because we already stated in our purpose section that we want to promote water conservation, but it was highlighting drought tolerant plants. So, I just took out that purpose and added two more that say no, I like the term water efficient. The state law refers to in two different sections water wise and water efficient. I decided to pick one which is water efficient. So, and that is the language I believe used in the land use act. Um, so we're going with water efficient. You can change it back to water wise if you want. Um but anyway and then also saying look this policy change a specific purpose is to qualify eligible properties for incentive programs. So when people say why does centerville not like lawn we are not against lawn but we are in favor of want to encourage water conservation and also these incentive programs. So

in the scope section and and we could tweak this a bit but I decided to just be very clear and mention every other kind of use other than non-s single family. So saying here in the scope that these provisions apply to commercial industrial public facility mixed use multif family residential projects any kind of building any zoning any subdivision blah blah blah. So, we could even add to that if you want. And any other non-s single family developments, but I think we've covered them. And and then but then I had to add a new sentence because this chapter didn't previously apply to residential. So now we're saying single family residential properties are subject to the lawn and turf restrictions in 1251 065. um and they're encouraged to comply with the waterwise regulations in 075. So since we refer to those a lot, I decided let's highlight. So I took the lawn and turf restrictions and made it its own section so we always know where are those turf and lawn restrictions. So it's it's its own code section. It's not in this it used to be in a very lengthy section, you know, three pages in. Um, and then I also made our water efficient landscaping its own section of the code. So where are water efficient landscaping standards? 075. So I think for staff it'll just be easier to implement. Um, and this is the scope. I just wanted to clarify. We can talk later when I talk about non-conforming uses. A nonconformity is an existence on a lot or parcel or building that was once in compliance with the code and then we change the code and now it's not in

compliance. And under non-conforming use law, you don't have to fix it right away. If you if we decide to change the rules and you were compliant, you don't have to fix it right away. But if you do something to tr like you come back to us for something like a permit or you know something like that then we require you to bring it up to code. So anyway, but I wanted to clarify because non-conforming use provisions don't exempt you from code requirements. They basically just say we are going to allow you to exist up until you change or decide to change. So you're not exempt. We're just saying you may continue to the extent permitted because the other uh policy consideration is that we will allow nonconformities but eventually we want our policies to be such that they will get corrected over time. So I didn't want to imply there okay landscaping plan required. This is another commercial versus residential fix that we had to do because commercial properties do have to provide a landscaping plan with their site plan generally. Um residential we don't really want to. So I divided this out and said look a landscaping plan is required um for any kind of commercial industrial etc. And a landscaping plan shall not be required for single family residential development. We don't require unless it's a PDO or PUD. We don't get into what you put in your front yard other than requiring previously that it was lawn. So, and then I kind of punted I don't know if you can turn the volume down a little. I know I speak loudly anyway, but uh

I did put in here that okay, so a landscaping plan is not required for single family residential,

but I was thinking but somehow we need to know they met this. So, I just stated that those applications have to show compliance with these lawn and turf restrictions and the area percentages. It's kind of vague and I'm just asking to let staff figure out in our application process what we want that to look like, but I'm just putting that in there because we're going to have to I don't know, probably make sure that they comply. Um, okay then. the second page of the landscape plan requirements. Um just saying, hey, we have these water efficiency requirements. And so in the irrigation and watering plan under the landscaping plan, I'm just highlighting don't forget that stuff. Don't forget to show us those new compliance regulation compliance. Um and then also stating that yeah for properties that over more than one acre again just these commercial projects they have to be um prepared by a licensed landscape architect which starts getting expensive. So

okay where did you just read that one acre that is in B landscape architect approval.

Oh there it is. Okay. I wanted to make sure we were in the same place. Okay. Thanks Lisa. Um, okay. Then waivers. This is something that we've added I think in our PDO, but I added the planning commission can wave certain landscaping requirements, but my concern is always that we don't want to um inadvertently approve a landscape waiver on a plan on page 127 that we didn't really see and was not highlighted. So I'm adding this sentence that says such waiver any kind of waiver that the a landscaping waiver that the planning commission approves must be specifically requested and approved in writing by the planning commission. So if we didn't specifically say this is waved, it's not waved. That's what we're trying to say there because we we missed something. Um and then And I thought this language was confusing that the application has to show that the waiver will be in that language. Feel free to ask any questions like if you guys have questions along the way, we can deal with them as we go. Okay. Um Okay. So now we get into our landscape guidelines. So I did add that landscaping now should be used to promote water conservation

through this water efficient landscaping. So adding that to our considerations. Um and then also realizing I do see this typo on planting here. I'll fix that. Yeah. Right here. And grass. There's no eye. Um Oh. Mhm. I know. Lisa, I actually missed that one.

I know, but normally I would catch that. Um, so this is the other thing that was interesting and I had to think about is we used to talk about drought tolerant and we talk about zeroscaping and hardcape and ground cover and you know landscaping and then there is a different reason for some you know like landscaping versus hardscaping. You know Mike and I struggled with trying to define those but anyway I think I wanted to just emphasize that now In this code, when we say landscaping, we mean any of those things, any and all because we are now embracing more water conservation kind of design, which I think incorporates all of those. And we're also looking not only, you know, at the types of plants, but I like the term plant cover because if you look at the Liber Basin incentive program, you can't just rip up your lawn and put in gravel. you rip up your lawn and you put in live plants, it's required and and then that plant has to have a certain coverage. You know, you can't just have one tiny, you know, eight tiny little plant, but we want plant coverage. So, I'm trying to introduce that concept as well. Um, also, um, as we learned from the city engineer, there's a difference between detention and retention.

We keep talking about that. I still don't I mean I'm trying to get it but so anyway whenever we say detention I always add and re or retention. So you'll see that that's for Kevin. Yeah. No wonder about that. And then this artificial plants I just deleted it up above in the introduction because it's actually a regulation. So rather than putting it into the introduction add it to the regulations. So that's in

four. Okay. Then we get to ground cover. And here's where we do say, okay, because Mike and I were talking, we had we'd say vegetation or non-organic. Anyway,

we're just trying to use clear language. So anyway, I just said unless otherwise provided, which means lawn and turf restrictions, we want, you know, vegetative ground cover, hardcape, all of that. Um and so that because here this section used to be talking about public rights away and all we wanted was lawn. So we had to work on that and say okay except as otherwise provided because the last of that says wait a minute you can't do lawn and turf in the park strips go see 06

um low water usage. So this was um a suggestion from Mike about drought resistant shrubs and trees that we don't actually maintain a list. We should have the professionals just refer to a professionally accepted list which has been um established typical planting standards for the western United States. So I think that's fine. Also defined in state code. You'll see that new reference to the 1020 reference. Um and then also again referring to our water efficient landscaping. Okay, without further ado, let's get to 065.

Yeah.

So parts of 065 were sort of spread out in our different sections of the code and I decided to just collect all these turf restrictions so Weaver Basin and you know residents and You can just point to this and say, "Okay, here are the rules. Rule number one, park strips." So, we want to designate what area of the property and what zone because there's different rules. So, that's how I allocated it. Park strips, all zones. So, in any zone in the city, no law in the park. Um, oh, and then but I was thinking about, so in title 11 on streets, we define park strip. We all know if there's a sidewalk, the park strip is the area between and the curb to the curb side of the sidewalk. Okay, that four feet whatever it is, that's the park strip. But in our streets provision, we say if there's no sidewalk, this whole eight feet is considered the park strip the you know from the curb to because typically the city owns 8 ft into your lot. That's where the rideway goes because we want the sidewalk on our property. So the park the curb and gutter the park strip and the sidewalk are all generally on city property. You own that sidewalk. But if you don't have a sidewalk, we still want you to take care of that whole area. But I was trying to think if we say no lawn in the park strip and we're now including 8 feet, we don't really want 8 feet of gravel or what whatever. So anyway, I decided to handle that by excluding from our definition of park

strip. If there's no sidewalk, these regulations don't apply. and Weaver Basin and the state. I did talk to the Weaver Basin guy about this idea and he seemed to be okay with it. Okay. Yeah, that was my question. This is so limited. That's fine. But they don't realize like in Centerville in our historic district, we have a lot of areas without sidewalks. And I just thought, you know, that like let's say somebody demolishes their home and rebuilds a new one and now we have 8 feet of something that doesn't meet the rest of the neighborhood. So it was I don't know it worked

well it it makes sense because then you're not restricting it's a restricted space a width of you know that's their other requirement anything walk it makes sense but yeah now that it's yeah then you're you've got a big area that you're watering which is not Yeah. So it makes sense that we were water be okay. So that's what I say no lawn in the park strips but for centerville if there's no sidewalk you don't have a park strip. Yeah. for this chapter. Okay. Number two, narrow areas. So, this is the the state says if you have an area that's less than 8 ft wide, you can't put um lawn in that because it's just too hard to to spray.

It's not efficient. So, and what do we say? No monitor in any area less than 8 ft wide in any zone of the city. Clear? I think it's clearer than the language Weaver Basin gave us because I it made it sound like if any area included something that was 8 ft or less even though it went out to 50 ft. Right. Yeah.

Well, I tried to close that down and say no, it's just the area. It's just that triangle that's less than 8 ft. Okay. Number three, front and side yards of single family residential lots. So, in order to qualify for this program, which more restrictive than state law. You can only have lawn and turf shall not exceed 35% of your front and side yard landscaped areas. That's just a single family requirement unless you have a tiny 200 square feet of landscaping and you can build a whole thing,

right? Tiny. And then number four, total landscape area, not just front and side for commercial, industrial, multifamily, basically anything other than single family. So single family, we're just looking at front and side, but commercial and everything else, we're looking at all of your landscaped areas together cannot exceed 15% of the total landscape areas. So, um, again, I think that one's more restrictive than state. I think state's 20%. Yeah. Okay. Still, everybody with me?

Okay. So, this these next two, I guess it's more than half a page. I think the planning commission was very concerned with, you know, when does this apply and when does it trigger to have somebody rip up their park strip that's in lawn? So, I have an effective date here just so it's clear in our code and we may eliminate that someday. But rather than just saying the effective date and making somebody go look it up, um I just put it in here. It's going to be May 1 if if adopted by then. Um any development after May 1st is considered new development. And new development means you're making an application for something new or you are amending something. So with vested rights or you know that's whenever you come in for an application that's new and then nonconformities um I did go back and forth with a couple different ways to handle this but I think we just what I like to do is say look we already have a chapter of our zoning code that deals with nonconformities and I went there and it specifically says lawn or landscaping If you don't comply with landscaping, it's considered an other non-conforming.

So, we have we can have a non-conforming use, you can have a non-conforming building, you can have a non-conforming lot, and if it's not one of those, you can have an other non-conforming. So, landscaping is other non-conforming. And in order to avoid staff having to do all that research again to figure out what kind I just said, under our code, this is other non-conforming. So you can just go right to 12.22.080. And for non-s single family development, which is all this commercial, I just said we're just going to follow exactly what's already in our code because it's an other nonconformity. So, if you have a commercial property and anything in 08 that triggers um it just says you have to bring it into compliance if and when the new development triggers bringing it into non into compliance under 12.22 nonconformity. And under that 12.22, 22. A commercial business would be required to rip out their lawn if their application or new development increases the building the square footage by increases it by 30% or more or they increase the value of the building or property by 50%. um they're issued a new certificate of occupancy and Mike and I need to review what we mean by that because typically turning over a building to the same user and the same use just a new owner doesn't trigger bringing it up

if if so we would completely eliminate any resale value of commercial property in the city um or a change in the use occupancy type. Now, this is if if you wanted to use your warehousing and you now want to use it for a nursery or a school or a dance studio, now you might have to have fire thing. Anyway, that's a different use type.

So, those are fairly substantial changes. And so, that's commercial. with single family. Um I just said that um they're required to bring in within a trigger if the new development involves the demolition of an existing single family dwelling and the construction of a new home. So if you just decide to demolish it because you want to resell or whatever, you can still leave the lawn in. It's just when you start building another home, then we're going to convert it to the new standards. Or if you the remodel or expansion increases the total square footage by more than 50%. Those are discretionary lines that I've proposed. You I would suggest keeping A. you could eliminate B or say 75% but it seemed like substantial you know if you're doubling the size of your home that's pretty substantial

and 50% does line up even with like flood damage so in my previous life I I did the flood plane administration and FEMA has said 50% damage on the structure that has to be rehabilitated triggers that has to be brought up to current code that's actually FEMA's standard as well we do say more more than 50% so So that's consistent% and that's what FEMA says. It's more than 50%. It's either 50% valuation or Yeah. or 50% impact of the structure. Okay. Yeah.

Um and then to appease the planning commission, I said the construction or reconstruction of a garage, a barn, a shed, or other accessory structure to the primary dwelling shall not be considered new development triggering compliance. And we could add other things like or adding a pool or yeah, you know, changing a fence. But anyway, you get the I mean, this is even more substantial than a pool or others. So, Right. Right. I think we've said it in two different ways. So,

I think it's good. I it's a I typically don't like to create an exception on rules because for non-conformity, but I think this one is so unique in terms of, you know, you know, a lot of people want to rip out the park strip and a lot of people like the lawn. So, this is one that's going to say, "Okay, we're not those of you that like the lawn, we're not making you take it out right now, and we're actually probably not going to take it make you take it out for the life that you're in that home, but new new development. If you're going to build a new home, then you can't." Okay. So, that was the biggest change. Um, and then 070 I was just trying to clarify some things.

Let's see. A1 and A2 were I'm a little unclear for Yeah. So, yeah. Yeah. It says 50% of what? So, I just say 50% of internal landscaping has to be live. I think some of these things on commercial we may want to revisit, but really remember 50% of 15% of your site. So, it's not a big number.

And again, just I have we had to emphasize throughout that whatever we used to be talking about in our landscape ordinance now excludes park strips because we have completely different rules. So, you can see excluding park strips and continual reference back to these new standards. Um, same thing. We'll see. Can't do that. 065 and 075

buffer landscaping. Oh, buffer landscaping. And I'm sorry I went outside the guard rails of water wise landscaping, but I did want to clarify this because buffer landscaping is really only between commercial um like if you have commercial high or medium towards a residential um or if you have residential high to residential low. It's not residential medium to low. So anyway, I use this new term called the source zone because it was always sort of unclear too who has to do this.

Well, the more intense zone. So that's what I'm saying is for commercial industrial or non-residential property, meaning you're the source zone. You're the one that has to provide this buffering

um abuing a residential zone has to provide the following. And then also on the other one clarifying making it clearer for staff as well. This is the commercial standard and this is the residential standard. And then for high intensity residential property source of you know the intensity that needs to be buffered um abuing a low residential then you have to have it's not the residential low that has to provide the buffer. Okay. Um, and I'm on the top of 10. Let's see. I just added here to the extent possible. We're still talking about um single family or well, no, this is actually commercial. The city already adopted water wise landscaping the first round of state law a few years ago and it was not mandatory. It just said look these are our water wise. Well, it turns out it's still not mandatory.

So I I didn't change that. It just says look we encourage you to do this in in your um creating water efficient design. Now some things are mandatory which we put here but the water wise are I just want to highlight that these are shoulds. It's not required. I was surprised, but it's not required. So, I didn't change that. Um, okay. I think we can go to on the bottom of so see here, water efficient landscaping. Mhm. We already had all of this in our code, but I deleted it here

and moved it to its own section because you can see it's subsection H of how many pages into this section are we now? Oh my god. One, two, three, four, five. It's on the fifth page of one section of code.

So I took it out of that and created its own section 075. Um, and so these are really these are just if somebody just wanted to print off one section of our code, this is also what's nice. We can just send them to a link to this one. Here's our water wise. We encourage you to comply with this section and they don't have to read five pages of stuff that may not even apply, especially the residential. So, we're saying in here, we want you to we encourage you to use water efficient landscaping practices. uh you can save water, you can save energy, you know, on with using these kinds. Um most of these were already in our code. So no use of culinary water for irrigation. I did add single family though very clearly that you do have to comply with lawn and turf. Um and you are encouraged to comply with this section commercial. you have to comply with the rest of this chapter and are encouraged to comply with these provisions. Um, lawn and turf restrictions though are mandatory. And then here's the water efficient design, landscaping design under F. So number one, the 90% already in our code. Number two, rock or mulch already in our code. The only thing I added there was the sentence that says the use of rock or mulch in the park strip is restricted by city ordinance in our street standards because our streets department doesn't want mulch in the park strip,

right? Because it it rains and it goes right down this the gutter into the storm drain. They also don't want the super tiny gravel because that's even worse that flows off and then gets into our storm drain. It's even harder to get out. Um yes. So, I can't remember where I read it, but in here, don't we use the word bark somewhere, or is it just mulch? I thought that I read that somewhere in all of our reading. Bark. There may be bark. Is there bark? So, my question is, okay, plunderers, wood chips. There we go. Bark. No, there's seven instances of bark excluding park. Okay. Yeah,

seven. Okay. So, I did I did read it. Okay. 16. So my question is then with that when you say mulch, how are you defining mulch? Because if I'm a homeowner and I'm swapping things out, I'm just wondering what exactly do you mean by mulch? Do you mean those things below? I'd probably look it up in the dictionary. It's not defined in here. But yeah, I did actually look up I'm like because I remember thinking what's the difference between the mulch. Um, so are you saying bark is okay but mulch is not? Is that what the is? I didn't think so.

No. Um, and let me go to what we said in then we have to also look at what we put in title six. So in there we say okay in title 11 we say the use of concrete asphalt coarse wood or synthetic pro products such as bark, mulch and wood chips or any other material is prohibited within the park. Right. Okay. So um so the first part is like a general and then it becomes

mulch can either be natural or synthetic. It can be recycled. It could be, you know, but it's basically that little stuff made out of plastic or real trees or recycled branches. Yeah. So then I guess my further question would be, do we need further clarification where you're stating mulch or are we accepting um what that means lower when you have it all defined? Um I would if if you I guess my sense would be that we don't need a definition of mulch or bark but we can argue you know I

well I didn't mean the definition but I meant are we saying that that's the same thing there do we need to say mulch or bark well people have different ideas of different things so in our title 11 we say both I mean maybe bark is specifically treebased plant I you know and mulch I don't know mulch may have dirt or

other things I remember looking up the definition I don't remember but you know they're people may refer to one or the other but they're probably different things so I guess I didn't get my question answered or I'm not speaking clear enough go back to that where she says the use of rock Where is it? Well, actually, so we should say rock, bark, mulch, or other

products in the par is restricted by city ordinance, go to 11.0202. This is just saying, hey, this isn't trying to regulate it. It's just saying go over there because it is regulated. So that was my question. That's what the code's doing. Use of like Yeah, let's be more That's perfect. That's suggest. the use of rock, bark, mulch, or other materials in the park strips. Yeah. Okay. Perfect. Does that get it? Okay. Yeah, that makes it more clear for me. Very good. Is this is this paragraph two that you're looking at? Yes. Yeah. It seems to be conf seemed to conflict it or maybe I just don't well because what this is saying is

rock or mulch or any of these things like in regular planting areas but the where we have to make the distinction is in the parchment in the park we don't want those things but in flower beds and other areas great right okay Um, and that's why I wanted to add that sentence because it's it's encouraging rock or mulch in planting beds, but then I was like, wait a minute, but you can't use rocker mulch. Right. Right. Exactly. Trying to go 180.

Okay. Soil scarification, soil amendments, and irrigation systems also all just previously in our code. What we did add is and throughout this reference to water sense labeled smart irrigation control systems which is basically just um a certification for irrigation control systems that save water. And so when consumers go to the store, they can say, "Oh, that one's certified to save water." And and also like the state of Utah will give a rebate. They use that same term water wise. And so if you buy a certified water wise smart controller, you can submit a rebate to the state of Utah and they'll give you money back. So anyway, we're just using that similar language. It doesn't mean you have to use well for I think it's just saying example just you know use this. That's what we're recommending here. Um, and then number six is still is also it currently in our code, but I just wanted to highlight that 7 through 10 I added because I went through what we were basing. So, Centerville is saying we want you to be able to get their incentives. So, we're adopting the ordinance that will allow you to apply, but when you apply, they want something a lot nicer than you would think. And so I'm trying to add some of what Weber Basin is expecting and that's seven through 10. This is specifically what they recommend um to be water wise uh water efficient is that so if you have a drip system you'll know that each emitter has a certain you know gallons per minute and they're saying that a low you need a low volume system which is

rated at five gallons or less. Okay. So when you're looking at I mean that's a lot. So, but anyway, five gallons or less is going to be your low volume. And then they also say though that these micro spray and bubbler and soaker hoses, just to help educate people, those are actually not water efficient. Um because the sprayers, you're losing, you know, it's evaporating and the soers are probably emitting more than that five gallons per minute. So, you think you're being water wise, but you're not. But you're not.

So, I thought that was good advice. Uh number two, overhead sprinklers um used for your lawn should not be on the same valve or zone as your drip irrigation. Obviously, because drip irrigation has to run for at least a half hour. You know, they're very low flow drip emitters and you don't want your sprinklers going your lawn's going to die or your plants are going to be over watered. Good advice. Um drip irrigation system should be installed with the filter and pressure regulators. Um and then also in addition total landscape area should have at least 35% plant foliage coverage or the plant's maturity. This is where I was saying the plant coverage. What and this is what this is what Weaver Basin wants. Just remember these are all optional and you know maybe you don't want this. You're like no we don't want to get too requiring but we're not. We're just saying hey these are

encouraged. So let's give our residents, you know, the information which is, yeah, we want 35% plant foliage coverage at its maturity. And then they also say, and by the way, those annual pansies, we're not going to count those. Yeah. So, yeah,

made sense to me. um watering times that was somewhere and I just pulled it back up to make sure that it's also regulated in our water in title nine but let's just remind people because so often we're asked oh where's our regulations about sprinklering and it is kind of hard to find in our code so because it's under sprinklers not water restrictions again just really matter what what you're searching for and what terms you Um, and then the state law I just our previous code had the reference which I like to remind staff and you know hey the state has water efficient standards in the state code. So you might want to go look at those. That's all that is. Um, did you have another question on

I did I did. So you said you're like 7 through 10 on that page that you just read, you're trying to incorporate the weaver basin thing, right? Weaver basin thing. So to that point, not that I want to die on the mulch and bark hill, but it seems that I am. Um so in their document that that was sent over um page one of three under the program process so it states that there is a usage of bark and mulch but we say no. So that contradicts is that going to be a problem at all? You can use bark and mulch just not in the park strip.

Okay. So maybe go up to two. We do say we use the same Weber basin language that says, "Hey, if you're going to use um rock or bch or or mulch, we recommend you use at least three to four inches to prevent the weed growth. Um and that, you know, those areas still need to be permeable to air or your plants are not going to." So, um I guess I'd have to pull it up, but I was just when we were reading that, I had read previously, um it just seemed like there was a contradiction in there. Maybe I misunderstood how they wrote it or

in in theirs. So, go to their I think their landscape line. Go up, Sid. Right. Up up up up. One more. Go down. I think that one

page what page? page uh one of three under program process. I don't know if this is the document or not. Let's see. Okay, program process. Keep going. Somewhere right in there. Hold up. No, let's see. No, go go go down a little bit. Go back. Sorry. The other way. The other way of what you're doing. Okay, stop. Somewhere here. Let me read just a second. And the final product which includes mulch, bark or rock. So

where is that? It is the second to the last bullet point photos of each step. This includes grass before removal grass irriation system and the final product. This is the second to last bullet on page 77. Yeah. So maybe I'm misunderstanding. Oh, well yeah, that's true because we bas allows bark or mulch in the park for their program. Centerville City does not because our streets department says no, we don't want that. Okay. So that's the difference. We're incorporating all of the stuff that we want that we accept.

Okay. And I think as staff we have on our to-do, which sometimes these get put way at the bottom of the list, but I I think we need to have another conversation with the streets department, which I had, you know, they know we're doing this and I said, "Look, you got to do you want to stick with what you have because if we're ripping up or we're not allowing any more on, we need to broaden our list of things that they can put in there." But we didn't want to go there with this round because it's anyway I think we can get there. Bark is not a great thing living next to bark. The initial near me and it always blows in my yard. Yeah, we like it the way it's so I didn't want to

Thank you for that clarification.

Okay, then I think that is it for that one. And then I'm just making similar changes. Well, I I wanted to suggest changes to the title 11 so we're being consistent. So I added to title 11 under our definition of park script. Again, hey, remember our definition of parks, regardless of what we say here, for purposes of the landscaping section, it's not a park strip. Um, and then we had to add the entire first paragraph sentence there because we used to require mostly lawn, but now we don't want any lawn. So, go look at the landscaping provision. It's basically referring back.

Okay. Um, yeah. Complete policy change from green. Okay.

All right. I think that is it. As Mike mentioned, um, we sent this over to Weaver Bas. I did talk to Dave Rice. He had gone through it, had a couple questions. He said, "We're good." And then he sent some, he had forwarded to the state, I think. Um, and they said they're fine. this they had a question about whether this included our public facilities at one and I said yes I'm trying to list everything um in here and he said okay because I think they just I said they want to make sure they were included or that they were not because you know then there was this question about schools but anyway I just said yeah public facility zones are included all zones

all zones so all zones so I I think if this is adopted then residents would be eligible for the incentive program which is the main goal. Nice work. Yeah, that's a lot. That's a lot. Well, it was Yeah, I thought about just having two different chapters in our code. This is a mess, but I think we got there. Well, the heavy lift is apparent. So, nice work. Any questions for staff from the commission? No, I have a couple comments. I don't have any questions. Okay.

I just want to say seriously, Lisa, you nailed it. That is You did a masterful job incorporating our concerns and our questions and clarifying definitions. It's I'm very black and white basic visual person. I don't do legal ease or legal speak, but this all makes sense to me. Now, I appreciate you using water efficient. It makes more sense in my head than water-wise. Um, and I think that everything in the code, the rules, the language is clear. I I really like it. Well, thank you. I want to thank Mike and Sydney. You know, obviously Mike did most of the base work on this as well. Was helpful.

Thank you, Mike. I'm like, wonder how this Yeah, you can tell that's a lot of work. Thank you. Credit to be had all around. Yes. Okay. So, we're going to open it up for the public hearing. Um, if anybody wants to provide comment, please come to the mic. State your name and your address. Three, two, one. No, got to go to seven. And seeing that, I'm going to close the public hearing. Uh, come back to the commission for discussion andor a motion. Um, let me just look at my notes to see if there's anything you might want to change. I think there was just that one suggestion

I have Lisa on one thing on p on section 8 this is just a I wondering if it's a typo I don't know what it is okay section eight under that large paragraph or large a there you got three oh yeah eyes's oh yeah okay okay I noticed that

I will say I don't know what if you've noticed a difference but our we have our municipal code online and as part of their software they have an ordinance creator and this year I decided to finally use it. It's it's great. It's not that user. It's not like Word, you know, it's but and you can't change what it looks like when it comes out like this is what it's going to look like. But if we adopt this, all we have to do is push a button and the whole code is just change. You don't have to take from a word document

and peck it into your, you know, HTML. It's just done. So anyway, I will check, you know, and and numbering is one of those things that I've been struggling with because it won't sometimes I just have to trick it, but I'll I'll make sure on the final, you know, to go back and fix that. So if we could say we have but for the record say we have a typo on page four regarding plantings and then we have a numbering issue under 07

we wanted to make that one suggestive change about bark and mulch Here it is on page 14 section F2. The use of rock, bark, mulch, or other material in the park strip is restricted by other city ordinances. I think that's it for those three changes. And we didn't we did not provide a model motion because I wasn't quite sure how it was going to go.

So if you're looking for any conditions or even finding guidance, you might we might have to have staff help out unless you have some ideas. So that that's why I wasn't quite sure where it go and how it won't lead the discussion. So that's reason for that.

Well, I'm fine. I mean I I'll make a motion. Um, I make I make a motion that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council. Um, that we grant to staff uh scriveners authority to make changes as necessary to their non-substantive to smooth and catch knits also as discussed uh along with the modifications that Lisa just listed for the reasons that it's a good ordinance. I second the motion like that. Well done. Okay, we have a motion in a second. Any further discussion?

All right, we'll start down here with Commissioner Mend. I I I I I That's unanimous. Good job. Have you left? Great work. Done. Awesome. Stage two. All right, Mr. eggot. Let's uh move on to the update. Yeah. So, uh step four, I was thinking about it. I'm going to have tomorrow I'm attending a a um legislative report summary. Um so, I'll get some more findings and hopefully report a little bit more efficiently to the planning commission. Is that the leagues or is that a different way? It's I can't remember which one I signed up for. I think I've seen a few. Might be the leagues. There's one at noon tomorrow. Yeah.

So, that Yeah. Is that the one that leagues? Yeah. So, I'll be at that one as well. Sounds like Lisa will. Um, it as far as kind of the sentiment I think from the league relative to land use, it wasn't a hyper regulated year. The biggest thing will be there's some some unique findings to how the planning commission behaves and and should and shouldn't behave relative to conversations outside of the planning commission. So, there's some behavioral corrections that the the legislature intended relative to planning commission commentary outside of the planning commission, which was interesting.

And there's some land use changes. I believe the detached ADUs did get approved. So, we'll get a verification tomorrow and that. But over 11,000 square feet. Oh, no. So, they changed our 11,000. That was 10 before. It was 10,000. No, 10,000 square feet was Okay. Because I had heard 11. Yeah. Well, that's perfect cuz most of ours are 10,000 was the minimum cap. Oh, you meant for the lot size. Yeah. Lot size. Yeah. Lot size. That's a big house. Yeah. Really, really nice mother-in-law house.

So, clarify that will, like I said last time, lead to us having to then have some kind of a code in place. There is a deadline that that code has to be in place. I think it's November 30th or something like that to give us plenty of time. Might be October 1st, but something in that area. Um, a good news piece, at least for me, thank goodness they did this. They moved the moderate income housing reporting process from Department of Workforce Services, um, Department of Housing, and it's now being relocated to the Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity. As a result, they'll have to create a whole new staff and a new department. And so, the reporting requirement this year is tabled. So, that's a good thing. It's really good because we need to get our general plan approved. So I have something to work with when I'm reporting and not just continually punting the general plan is the reason I don't have good reporting features. So that's a a good win for our city having that available or or having that I guess paused until next year. By then I'm very hopeful and optimistic we will have a general plan in place that will have housing features that I can then use for my reporting. So So that's a good thing. But uh that's pretty much all I kind of want to get into. I think I'll have a a more in-depth report, especially the things that affect the planning commission at the next meeting. I also think that they went into a little bit more on training. Again, there's some things that are now expectational guides on training where you still have to get your four hours a year, but now there's some even further guidance on what that training should look like. So, I'll get more specifics in terms of future meeting.

That's what I done. Oh, and then uh I believe we don't have any agenda items for the meeting on March 25th. So that will if if the planning commission is comfortable with it, that would be a cancellation notice if All those in favor say I. So okay, that's all I have. That's pencled out. All right, so let's move. Thank you, Mr. Let's move on to the minutes. Um in the review of the minutes, did anybody have any suggested changes? I didn't see any. I do. Yes, please. I think on uh on that second page, line four and five, I'm not sure that reads correct. Says removing the vehicle and Centerville City Planning Commission.

Wait, what? Page second page four and five. I I think that just got somehow slipped in there. I'm not sure. Vehicle rental. So, it should be I think it's vehicle vehicle and equipment rental. You're right. Centerville City Planning Commission. It's like a header stuck somewhere. Yes. Good catch, Paul. Yep. Well done with that. I'm okay with it. Oh, I see. Yeah. There you go.

All right. Um I will take a motion. I'll move that the minutes for the meeting of Wednesday, February 25th, 2026 be approved as as amended. Right. I've got a motion. I'll second. I've got a second. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. We are poised for adjournment. I'll take a motion. Let's make a motion to adjurnn. Okay. I've got a first and a second. All those in.