Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everybody and welcome to the March 17, 2026 uh Everett Planning Commission meeting. Maya, if you would please take the role. The chair recognizes that Commissioner Finch is absent uh this evening for illness. Comm uh Chair Shelby here. Commissioner Chatters here. Commissioner Ballard here. Commissioner Sullivan here. Commissioner Ritlage here. Commissioner Welch here. Thank you. Uh, vice chair, would you like to read the land acknowledgement this evening, please?

Be my pleasure. Chair Shelby, the planning commission wishes to acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the hopes people, and their successors, the Tleup tribes. Since time immemorial, they have hunted, fished, gathered on, and taken care of these lands and waters. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water. We will strive to be honest about our past mistakes and bring about a future that includes their people, stories, and voices to form a more just and equitable society.

Thank you very much. Uh the approval of minutes from our February 17th meeting. Does anybody have any changes they would like to make? I have a correction I'd like to offer Chair Shelby. Um in the final uh well the second to last sentence on the first page uh clarifying that Commissioner Chatter's move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 25-03. Any objection hearing? None. Clarification accepted. All right. Uh reports from commissioners.

Yes. Oh, Commissioner Welch. I'm going to apologize quickly to you because I'm as a planning commissioner I've taken the before I became a plan commissioner I moved to eert to invest in my home and invest into the ADU ideas as I've invested in my detached dwelling units in my home I went through the permitting process that's why I apologize we just had an email recently um when I look at the code and I look at how it's being processed by other departments, not planning, but other departments within the city. I look at our impact fees. So, for the traffic impact fees for a detached dwelling unit, if you build one, your traffic mitigation fee is waved. If you build the second, traffic mitigation fees are engaged. So, I was charged

for both two,

which in the long scheme of about a we'll just say roughly half a million dollar project, 3,500 bucks is not a big deal. But when we're encouraging and I think this commission has really worked hard, I think staff has that we want to encourage development and for the other parts of the city that seem to want to throw a hurdle by the way they read in to the code does not seem to be behoove what we've been working so hard for. And then the responses I got. I'll public works director probably should have a conversation but because engineer was rude but um I just feel like the city probably needs to in my opinion get together because we seem to not be going the same direction. Um, it's a small thing, but it's a big thing when it's easy for me to finish this project and then take my next project as a small someone who's just starting this process. All we're going to get is the big developers if we don't help small developers out. All you're going to get is the institutional guys who can eat the cost cuz just an extra 3,500 bucks is still money out of my pocket um and other people. And it's also not evenly put along. I can go down the street to another double ADU, which is now done, where they paid zero traffic mitigation fees because I can see everybody's permits in the permit portal. Uh, so it would be great if the city, you know, in the Navy is called a standown. Maybe have a standown, get together, and make sure that everybody's on the same page. Because personally, I don't think we're all we all want to see development, smart development. But when you put little hurdles up, it's easy for all of us to all of a sudden say, you know what, it's not even worth this much. Cuz if I'm going to get a hurdle over this, I'll just take my money to another city. I'll go to Arlington. I'll go to Mary'sville. I'll

go somewhere else and develop my next group of money. Uh so that I'm sorry I decided to get on my soap box and make that a statement because I think that's not what we've intended nor what you guys have intended. Personally, I don't know. I'm not going to read into it, but I just had to put that on the record. I'm done. Uh, staff comment.

Good evening, Chair Shelby, Planning Commission. I'm York Stevens Wajda, planning director, uh, long-range planning manager Alisanne Wetszel with me this evening. Uh, uh, Commissioner Welch, thank you for bringing that to my attention at the last meeting and following up with some emails. And today we have begun and that did trigger a good set of conversations uh between and within departments. Um I think you got some communications and some clarifications and some corrections out of that. So there was some combination of uh intended uh calculations that may be could be done differently i.e. Should we exempt the first one and continue to exempt it if there are more versus bringing in the full amount when there's two? Um, just the briefest of background on that. It deals with the trip generation and we have an exemption for under 10 trips. So, if a project is going to generate fewer than 10 uh 10 trips, then it is exempt. I think one ADU creates like seven trips. The second one is 14. And so by exiting the exemption is uh in the methodology why that triggers both that is worth some thought and worth some review. There were also some accidental errors brought to light as part of that as well with the fees. So we are definitely I think have fixed the errors and corrected the fee amounts for those traffic impact fees and we are having conversation about uh what's the best way to uh actually do the methodology of those fees while balancing state law that mandates a maximum of 50% of uh the impact fees for an accessory dwelling unit than the principal unit needs to pay presumably across some number of those two at least. Um, so we are working on it and I do appreciate uh you bringing that to our attention.

The the other thought I had is that if the unit being built, whether it's a a dwelling unit or a house, if they're within the you don't have to provide parking, then what does that do to that idea of a trip count? If I don't even have to provide if the builder doesn't have to provide parking, are you even generating trips now? Right. just as a thought. I mean, it's kind of unfortunately a rabbit hole can actually go down pretty deep if you're not careful, but um just as a thought.

Thank you. Uh couple other updates on uh work items, critical areas. Uh continuing to package that up for the council. Uh aiming for the first three weeks in April. Um the last couple of weeks in March are day meetings, short meetings, not appropriate to get into a complicated topic like that. So that's our target. uh to wrap up the ordinance and the memos as we're starting fresh with the council and need to bring them back from square one and there are a lot of squares in that one. Uh so expect to see a little bit more uh energy around critical areas coming up outside of this well in this chamber but with different people sitting in the seats. Uh we're working on a specific amendment request also known as docket cycle for this year. Um we last did one with the periodic update. We're looking at a call for specific amendment requests and that is uh from the community. Uh a request to change a development regulation, a zoning on a parcel, part of the comprehensive plan, a policy, a map amendment. Any of those things are fair game. Uh we have a website up with the process, although we're doing some tweaks to that process right now um on how an annual cycle differs from the periodic update, which was the last cycle that we did. Um we are also opening that call to departments within for updates. The main per reason for this is the comprehensive plan can only be amended once per year. So it's an intent to bring all possible changes into uh one package and all of that will come to the planning commission I think June we anticipated. Uh and then looking to get that through the council by the end of the summer before they go into the budget process. So, expect to hear uh little briefings in the next couple of months and then we'll have uh full agenda items and a recommendation from

the planning commission on whatever that package is later uh early summer. Uh we are kicking off a couple of pretty significant projects uh this month. I would say sub area planning for the Casino Road station area South Everett. We're not exactly sure on geography. you want to uh think about that with the community members and stakeholders and everything. Um this is co uh uh we're starting with a scoping process now and starting to build our lists of stakeholders that we want to engage and starting to have communication or uh conversations within the city and within the neighborhood. Uh so expect to hear a steady drum beat of information on that. Uh and then eventually a sub area plan would come through this body for recommendation as well. This is going to be a year-long minimum process. So, it'll be uh a long one, but one that we're really excited to dive into. Another one you may have heard if you attended, watched, or heard about the mayor's state of the city uh speech two weeks ago, annexation. We're uh starting to explore potential annexation to of the city's designated annexation area uh south of the city, looking at the mariner neighborhood. uh I think mostly the portion west of I5. Also considering some other uh portions of the city's annexation area uh and beginning conversations with Snowomish County and other um affected agencies there on the more administrative and smaller side but still exciting pre-approved plans. We've talked about that a lot in these chambers. Um we uh continue to have requests from a from many different areas on that. We thought we found kind of a easy way to pilot it. Uh we're picking up a couple plans that other jurisdictions had already run through

their pre-approved process, maybe three, maybe a few more than that to start. Uh we will bring it through our uh reviews. We will give it a basic designation, which is a process that already exists. If you're a builder of many of the same type of units, say in a subdivision, you can get a a building plan set registered as a basic and then you can use it over and over without having to get it reviewed over and over. So, we'll use that same infrastructure on the permitting side uh for the basics and we will have a small selection of uh accessory dwelling units or small homes uh detached small homes that uh that we will offer. um haven't seen huge utilization of that in other jurisdictions. We have heard anecdotally that it's a good way to get people interested in the concept and maybe uh visualize it a little bit better. Maybe they they get into the idea with that but don't wind up actually using it or maybe uh maybe they do. Uh Snowomish County has started a very similar project. So we're also exploring the idea if there's value to having more of a regional program. Most of what gets preapproved in these plans is building code, which is common throughout Snowomish County or just about everywhere except Seattle has some different building code than uh most other cities. Uh but otherwise, it seems like if it's pre-approved in Everett, then it would also be generally preapproved in Snowomish County or Lynwood or other cities. So, we're in conversations with other jurisdictions on that and uh we'll see how the pilot goes and may expand it from there with more designs, open calls to architects to submit plans uh and even other building types like small apartment buildings or forplexes or things like that. We'll keep you posted as that evolves. And um yeah, and then lastly, Alisanne is working with the historical commission on uh

potential updates to the historic preservation chapter of municipal code and how they do design reviews and how we administer historic overlays and the ever register of historic places. That's going to be another uh fairly lengthy and involved project. Um but another area that needs some cleaning and uh we are likely to be working with parks on some work around tree canopy. Um parks department received a grant uh for some work updating both the chapter 8.40 which uh regulates trees and rightway and public property like in parks. And then uh we're also looking at our landscaping code and where that involves trees with an eye towards uh getting better outcomes with tree species and locations and amounts. It's a it's a a set of regulations that hasn't been updated in a while and could use an arborist's eye, I think. So, we'll keep you posted on all of those. Um reading through all of those makes me think it's probably time soon for a work program discussion. maybe this filled out a little bit looking forward at planning commission's expected work over the next year. So, we'll tee that up uh potentially for our next meeting. Uh if that works, that's all I got. Thank you. Any questions?

A quick question. Did we see any legislation pass or that will pass because the governor hasn't signed everything yet that if that affects anything we've recently done or that we have to we're going to have to go relive here real soon or that but you're that's a kind of a weird question maybe it might come at the next one I don't think they focus too much on planning this time

this current session no but last session yes there is the to legislation that will require updates in 29 I just participated in a panel conversation with commerce last week and um put it nicely, commerce is making it not easy.

I don't know. I mean, it was really interesting because the panel that I was on was mostly suburban communities and we had already done a lot of the changes and everything and they want to put in FS and we're going we don't have FS and we're not going back to FS and um some of the other things and so I mean all most of the other jurisdictions were very nervous and they started out the the discussion with introductions and said three words about how you feel about this And my three words were business as usual. And everybody else was like, "Oh my goodness, this is really going to be difficult." And so, and because it applies to BRT, that's where the suburban ones were coming in for a lot more than light rail and everything else.

Yeah, that's last year's 1491. That'll be a big piece of work that uh well it is mostly business as usual because we knew that was coming and worked it into the periodic update for the most part. There are some um there's some details about um percentages of affordable and some of the other things that are available in there.

Four bills that that we're looking at that did pass the legislature. There's 1974 on land banking authorities authorizing land banking authorities. Uh there's one on factorybuilt housing and uh the regulatory framework for them. There is one on an express warranty for condominiums in small condominium buildings. I'm I I we continue to run up against the condo liability problem and I think that's a major problem for Everett with most of our development capacity and multi-story buildings. If we want to have a hope at maintaining a a significant opportunity for home ownership in the new units that are developed, we've got to solve the condo thing. Um the legislature keeps ticking away at at little bites at it and there was another one this year for those smaller buildings, I believe up to 12 units. uh that will help there. And then the last one was a little bit of a change to um procedural completeness around permit processing that is uh 2418. So we'll do as some of the uh reviews of the session come in. Maybe we'll do an agenda item on that too to to keep you up to date, but I don't think there was much more exciting beyond that.

Might just want to double check. Yep. Okay. Any other questions? All righty. Uh, is there any public comment tonight uh that is not on our unfinished business? Everyone here to make a public comment is for the public hearing. Nope. No comment. Alan, that's over to you for our unfinished business presentation.

So, here's the Zoom. Sure. get held on. Okay. Um, as you know, we have been talking about manufactured home communities since August and we've had a variety of updates in that period of time and now we're ready to put the icing on the cake. So um we've discussed this in a variety of forms but basically this is in keeping with the goals and policies that we were adopting in that were adopted in the Ever 2044 comprehensive plan through the urban form element and for through the housing element and then there was the action plan at the bottom of the screen that said that we would implement a mobile home park zoning overlay. We looked at a zoning overlay versus a zone and opted to go with a zone instead of an overlay. So, um, we are proceeding with that tonight with the purpose of preserving affordable housing and manufactured home communities in the city. The difference between a manufactured home community and a regular subdivision is that the owners of the dwellings own the dwelling and they pay property taxes on their dwellings, but they pay rent for the site. They don't own the ground that their house sits on. So, the property owner collects rent for each site. They pay for property taxes for their land and improvements. They take care of trash, sewer and water, community maintenance, landscaping and other amenities. And that varies by

community depending on what type of community it is. So, one of the things that we looked at in this process was how many of the units in the different parks were owned by individuals who lived in the park. And as you can see, there are three parks, Broadway Terrace, Holly Drive, and Pine Street Mobile Court that own a grand total of two out of the number that are there out of the almost 60 that are there. So we because we are looking at protecting home ownership, we are not moving forward with those three to be in the zone. But on the others, there was overwhelmingly owned by individuals in the communities. So, what we are proposing to do tonight is change the seven mo manufactured home communities from the zoning that is in the right hand column to the neighborhood residential manufactured home home community zone or housing community zone. I think we've changed this about six times. I will fix that because we've used home throughout the three that are not I just explained they will maintain their existing zoning as shown in the right hand column. So the proposed new zoning map shows that the zoning for those as manufactured home communities. And in the back of your packet there are the actual individual zoning maps. I did not include them all in this presentation,

but it limits those to the property lines. The only one that looks a little bit unusual is um Fairway Estates and Loganberry mobile home communities because they are right next to each other. So it forms a backwards L. So then in order to do this, we are changing the code. We're changing five sections and deleting one. So, in chapter 1903, we are adding the manufactured home community to the list of zoning districts that we have in the city. We're adding a purpose statement that basically says that we're protecting affordable housing and manufactured communities to provide um owner occupied detached housing. And that is item number three on page six of the 54 you have in front of you. Chapter 1904, we add the definitions for manufactured homes in accordance with the Washington Administrative Code. 1905, we add uses and development regulations for the manufactured home parks and we provide for reszones and change of use. In 1913, we prohibit the establishment of new parks, but we replace provide for replacement of units on a one forone basis. And that we are requiring that once this goes into effect that we will place notice on title of the site and the units that they are in the neighborhood residential manufactured home community zone. And 1502 re any reszone from a neighborhood manufactured residential neighbor manufactured home community will be a rev 3B process. And that's all outlined in 1502. What that means? Don't ask me. I don't know.

Um, and then we are deleting title 17 the for the EMC mobile home parks which had all kinds of wonderful useless information that our building officials did not even know existed. So that's where we stand on this. I'm open to questions. A quick question. You you said we're not going to establish anymore. Just cuz I in the areas that we may be annexing, are there any existing in the county in those areas? Just we'll we'll end up converting those to a zone at We'll have to when we go to annexation, we're going to have to look at what's zoned there and they have an overlay in the county. Oh, yeah. And what's zoned there for everything.

Yeah. And then we have to say, okay, this is approximately a manufactured home park. Oh, so we have this lovely manufactured home zone. We're going to go you go from overlay to here provide and I imagine that will be probably done in a similar format where we look at the ownership levels in that community but it doesn't violate that because it's already an existing it's already existing. That's all that's right. I was just double checking it doesn't violate because it's already existing. and one other one. So someone there is the option for the property owner to eventually if they there's steps to no longer be zoned that way.

There's there's state regulations that they have to follow as well as they'd have to go through the rev 3B process and show that they are financially unable to maintain and operate a park. And none of that requires them to basically kind of slum lure people out because I didn't have a chance. I forgot to go look at the state law and make sure like they not approving things, not doing things. No, they if they start doing that then the owners of the park can go after them for not maintaining it in accordance with their contracts. I I just want to make sure. Yeah, thanks.

That is one of the provisions we adjusted from uh last month's meeting. I think a lot of it was due to the comments from the planning commission. So that was great feedback. We also added the notice on title from the from the last meeting. Um on page eight of the packet, this uh C res and change of use includes the criteria that would need to be met in addition to any other normal resone criteria if uh a property was to exit the manufactured housing community zone. uh circumstances beyond the control of the property owner have changed resulting in no reasonable economic use of the property under regulations applicable to the NRMHC zone. So give that some thought and make sure that sits well. Um circumstances beyond the control we were looking for. Uh if you just stopped renewing leases and you're not making money anymore, that's you did it right. the owner.

That's one thing I was worried about. Yeah, if there is I I'm not exactly sure what the circumstances. Uh the world has changed. Nobody is it would need to be demonstrated by the applicant to the satisfaction of ultimately the city council with the planning commission on the way and staff on the way to that. Uh, I was just going to ask because since it's a 3B, would that go to the hearing examiner first for the like initial determination of no reasonable economic use or does that come to the planning director?

Um, it always comes to staff first for recommendation 3B. You're right. Not planning commission hearing examiner. Thank you. So, an impartial hearing examiner would be the first step and then the city council would be the second step. And then on the notice on title, uh, is the city covering the cost for the recording for the initial notice? It's like we're doing this to the property owner, right? Like they they're not electing, right? Because none of them have. So there is a fee associated with that. I assume since there's language to shall we should cover that. As a taxpayer, I would say yes, but I don't get to make that call. I'm sure

it's not written either way in the regulations. Um, so let let me do some thinking. It it does seem like it would be fair for the city to cover the cost since this is the city initiating. Um, maybe that's something that we could record as a batch. Also, it'd be a little bit simpler. U, but let me check. I'm not sure the rules on that.

I move that we open the public hearing on this topic. I I think you were done with your presentation. I So I move that we open uh for public hearing on this topic. Second. All right. Uh we'll uh have a public hearing. Any discussion from commissioners real quick before we open it for public comment? Oh, we have to call roll for that motion. I'm sorry. Would you call the role? Ayanna. Um Chair Shelby. Yes. Commissioner Chhatters, yes. Commissioner Ballard, yes. Commissioner McKenzie, yes. Commissioner, yes. Commissioner Welch, yes.

Thank you. Let's try that again. We'll get there from here. Uh, yeah. Any discussion? I I would like to hear from the public before we discuss further. Anybody for comment? Diana? either's choice. Okay. Um would Miss Connie Russell like to make a comment?

Uh comments the night. Uh just as a heads up, um going to need your name and your city of residence. You'll have three minutes. Uh we're going to try to use the comment uh timing system. You should get a blinking green light up here and over there uh at one minute, uh blinking orange at 30 seconds, and then a beep at the end of your time. Thank you so much. Okay. Um, good evening members of the planning commission. My name is Connie. Do you need my full name? Connie. I live in South Everett and um, I'm here tonight to discuss zoning, housing, affordability, and the predatory practices of private equity in our community. Those three ingredients work together to drive up cost, limit supply, and transfer wealth from residents to investors. For several years, I have been watching a national crisis unfold regarding communities of affordable housing being bought up by predatory investors. But tonight, I want to highlight the situation at Lil Abner Mobile Home Park in Sweetwater, Florida. For over 50 years, Lil Abner Mobile Home Park was a stable workingclass community. Now, following a massive private equitybacked 110.5 million redevelopment loan, the park permanently closed as of late 2025 following a year-long legal battle and forced evictions to make way for a new highdensity residential development. Over 900 families were displaced with residents facing forced removal by sheriff's deputies on October 2025 after redevelopment plans were approved. The Little Abner community owned their homes but rented the land. When private equity took over, they didn't just manage the park, they reszoned it to maximize returns. Zoning is a mechanism used to either transform affordable and unsubsidized housing into high-end developments or a mechanism used to

protect a vulnerable community. In the case of Lil Abner, the developer successfully reszoned the 105 acre property from a mobile home park to a highdensity mixeduse urban redevelopment area. Permanent eviction due to redevelopment can happen in Washington, but with much longer notice periods and specific statutory requirements. This isn't development, it's displacement. Predatory firms are not investing in the residents. They are buying the land to cash out. Analysis reveal a pattern that when private equity buys a park, they extract maximum profit from low-income residents who cannot afford to move their homes. For Washington residents, if your home is too old to move and the park closes, you may still face losing your investment despite state assistant funds. I am urging this commission to look beyond the tax base increases and consider the human costs. We need you to use your zoning power as a shield to protect our vulnerable residents. Please protect the residents, strengthen the zoning requirements, and stand against the destruction of affordable housing. Thank you.

Would Ken Pearson like to make a public comment? Den Pearson, Fairway Estates, South Everett. Uh, dear Director, uh, Stevens, long-term planning commissioner Russell, planning commissioners. I'm speaking in support of the manufactured home park uh MHP zoning designation uh for Fairway Estates of 55 and older community and six other manufactured home parks in the city of Everett falling under the new proposed code amendment abbreviation NR- MHC. Fairway Estates has 171 mobile homes with 253 voters. Onethird of the residents are single, meaning widows, widowers, veterans, disabled people with caregivers. And the other six manufactured home parks, Creekide Mobile Home Park, Lago de Plata Villa, Loganberry Mobile Home Park, Mobile Home, Mobile Country Club, Silver Shores Senior Mobile Home Park, and West Mobile Home Park. In total, another 826 manufactured homes. Therefore, we're discussing when you add in fairway approximately 1,000 manufactured homes with approximately 1,500 voters with similar demographics who may be displaced if the panning commission does not act to protect the vulnerable population from becoming homeless. Why it matters? because of actions like some uh in our case here, a private uh equity firm owns

our park and as such they demonstrate that they hold these parks for a limited time and what they play tend to do is to place it for sale for the highest and best use of land. Most of the time this goes to acquisition by apartment, condominium or commercial real estate developers who immediately seek zoning rechanges as we've heard earlier this evening to accomplish their goals for building apartments, condominiums and commercial space. The immediate downside of this is that we've taken approximately 1,000 lowincome affordable housing units out of the city of Everett. Currently, the city does not have the property to build 1,000 new homes, um, manufacturing homes. Additionally, we are currently facing a low-income housing crisis in the city of Everett, across the state of Washington, and across the country. We would be exac exacerbating the crisis if action were not taken by the commissioners, the city council and the mayor. What we are asking is one to place a recommendated uh recommendated in our MHC zoning districts for those seven places. uh and most importantly number two to give security to our low-income seniors to live out their remaining years without fear of becoming homeless. When you listen to these owners and hear this the fear and the stress that they are under some wishing that they should die rather than become homeless and dependent. You will help preserve their equity and allowing them to their places not to become work worth worthless. And lastly, retain these vibrant city ever of ever communities for our citizens who contribute so much to our city. Thank

you. Thank you, sir.

All right. And to our online participants, would Miss Debbie Niholm would like to make a comment? Miss Debbie Niholm. All right, moving on. Would Miss Debbie H from Fairwood Estates like to make a comment? No, thank you. Thank you for answering, Miss Kathy Brown. How about you?

Uh, yes. Hello. I am also from Fairway Estates and uh I second everything that Ken Pearson stated. And it is so important that we get this zoning in place because all of us have a fear that the Carile group who owns our park might sell it and sell it to a developer where it would be developed into something else and we would lose our homes. So that's a a huge concern for all of us. So, we're hopeful that all of you will um I don't know if vote is the right word or recommend that we get this uh new zoning specifically for the manufactured home parks and it would really um help alleviate a lot of our fears. Thank you.

Thank you. Would Kay and Ray like to make a public comment? K and Ray. All right. Thank you all. Thanks everybody for your comments. Commissioners, are there additional comments from the public or does that conclude the public comment? Any other comments?

We we need this. Thank you. With that, I'd like to motion to close the public hearing on this matter. Second. Would you please take the role? Commissioner Shelby, yes. Chair Chatter, yes. Close enough. Yes. Commissioner Ballard? Yes. Commissioner Sullivan? Yes. Commissioner Rutled? Yes. Commissioner Welch? Yes. Thank you. any additional discussion.

I I want to I want to mention what happened in the Delta neighborhood when um the low-income housing there was closed. One of the main comments I heard from the community was about the devastating impact of removing access to that affordable housing where there was no alternative available in the market. And I know that EHA is working to produce additional housing um to make affordable housing, but that is a long process and that does not fix what happened to the families that were displaced at that time. And I see this issue as similar in a way because it would produce a similar impact on yet again a vulnerable population where there is no alternative in the market at this time. And I my concerns were around whether or not the language would have some incentive for the property owner to allow it to be dilapidated in some way where they could, you know, excuse, oh, you know, we we're we're no longer viable. And I think that the language choices that the staff has made and is recommending resolve that issue. Um I think it's it's necessary to preserve this housing for this population and I will be supporting this uh resolution once we get to the point of suggesting it.

Any additional comment? Um couple questions. I was looking at what constitutes a manufactured home and I'm looking at that uh 1913 270 B I guess it is and I got two different things for what a manufactured home is both one and two want know what the we're just going with the state language okay because I mean the idea of saying that it's something that's got a concrete from the bottom to the of the home to the around. Hopefully that's not the pad.

The pad and the type of construction of the actual unit, but we were literally just using the state language because we didn't want to change any of it because we were using the state language for other parts of the the bill of the legislation. And nothing stops someone in the event of a something catastrophic happening to the motor home on the spot. So with this overlay, they will always be conforming, right? It won't like to replace it fully, right?

It will never be it wouldn't be because they're non-conforming with a a newer or whatever as long as they're within a they meet the state guidelines for a mobile home. If some, heaven forbid, some catastrophic event happened and they had to replace 10 homes or whatever, it's in the one for one. The setbacks all currently meet the setback standards and so that we have so that would all stay. Just making sure if something happened that everything is considered conforming that we have no issues there. No. All right. Thank you. Appreciate I mean, there's a potential that they may have to upgrade sewer or water or something if they were, you know, underserved at the moment. Understood. Yeah. Thank you. But we have no control over that. I got you.

I just want to make a little social note. I do find it interesting that people who live in a mobile home have to pay property taxes. They don't physically own the property that it's sitting on. And and and a loan for a mobile home is just like buying a car. Mhm. It's not a It's not a mortgage. It's not a mortgage. I just find it interesting. That's That's so No,

any additional comment? No. There is, I think, a um resolution presented to us from staff. Uh any comment on that? I make a motion that we approve Resolution 26-01. Second. Would you please take the role? Chair Shelby? Yes. Commissioner Chatters? Yes. Commissioner Ballard? Yes. Commissioner Sullivan? Yes. Commissioner Rage? Yes. Commissioner Welch? Yes. Thank you. With that passed, I don't believe there's anything further before us tonight. So, that's it everybody. See you all in April. Oh, we're going to use the GB.

Yes. Done.