Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

2025 regular meeting of the Franklin County Planning Commission to order. Will staff please call role and announce whether or not we have a quorum. Mike Corales here. Mike Vincent here. Remy Daroo here. Mark Dutder here. Manny Gutierrez here. Stacy Knifton here. Melinda Diddier here. Chairman, we have a quorum. Thank you. I will now lead us in the pledge of allegiance. I

pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. I will entertain a motion to approve the agenda for tonight's meeting. Second. I'll make the motion. Has been moved by Commissioner Daroo and seconded by Commissioner Dutder. All in favor signify by saying I. I.

All opposed. Motion passes. I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes from the July 1st, 2025 meeting. So moved. I'll second. It's been moved by Commissioner Knifton and seconded by Commissioner Gutierrez. All in favor signify by saying I. I. All oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. Will staff in attendance please introduce yourselves. Chairman Jim Bellammore, Planner 2. iPhone first.

Uh Sam LB, planner one. Rebecca Gilly, um administrative assistant.

Thank you. It is now time for the public hearing portion of our meeting. Good evening and welcome. Here are the ground rules for tonight's hearing. First, in-person public testimony will go. Each person will be called up to speak during their allotted in-person public testimony section. Please state your name for the record. Number two, emailed comments received during the public hearing will be read into the record by staff after the person in-person testimony section of the hearing. Three, all comments shall be addressed to the planning commission and should be relevant to the application. Four, each speaker shall have five minutes to provide testimony and speak into the microphone. Please avoid repetitive comments. Please be respectful of each other. avoid personal attacks or disruptive behavior. Are there any questions regarding the public hearing ground rules? Turning for a moment to our commission members, let us keep in mind that we are prohibited by law from communicating with members of the public on the subject matter of these hearings except in these hearings. We also may not participate in a decision in which there is an appearance of conflict of interest to the average person. So let us take a minute to consider as to the matters which are before us for hearing today. Whether we have had any exparte communications, whether we have had any ownership interests in the property, whether we have any business dealings with proponents or opponents of the matters, or whether we have business associates or immediate family who may be either benefited or harmed by a decision in these matters. Are there any commission members who have a declaration at this time regarding any of these items on the agenda? Let the record show there were no declarations. Is there anyone in the audience this evening who would object to any

commission member hearing any of the items on the agenda? Let the record show there were no objections. The order for the hearing shall be as follows. The planning staff shall provide a staff report. The commission may ask questions of staff. The applicant or applicant's representatives presentation. In-person public testimony. Email public testimony read into the record by staff. Final staff comments. Closed public testimony and planning commission discussion. Deliberation of the proposed action. Are there any procedural questions before we begin the public hearing? Item one is a public hearing for file CUP 2025-3 SEPA 2025-12 Heinen Brothers gravel pit asphalt and concrete batch plant. This is a renewal conditional use permit for an existing gravel pit and asphalt batch plant operations on the subject property which has been in active use for over 20 years. The operation will remain consistent with the practices employed during this time with no significant changes to the scope, intensity, or nature of the activities. A temporary concrete batch plant may be used periodically. I declare the public hearing for CUP 2025-3 SEPA 2025-12 to be open at 605. May we have staff present the staff report, please?

Good evening, commissioners. I will present um CUP 202503 and SIBA 202512. This is for um a renewal conditional use permit for the Heinen Brothers um gravel pit and asphalt batch plant as well as a temporary concrete batch plant. Um the project is located at um 500 East Elm Road, Pasco, Washington. It is currently zoned agricultural production 20. The comp plan designates this as agriculture agricultural and mineral resource lands. Um the property is approximately 200 202.23 acres in size. Um as mentioned earlier, this is a renewal cup since their original cup back in 2003 and 2008 expired um last year since it was originally given a 20-year expiration. um period from when it was done prior. Here is the location of the site. Um like I mentioned, in 2003, the Franklin County Board of County Commissioners signed and approve a resolution approving the rock and gravel pit in the AP20 zoning district under a CUP. This CUP was given an approval timeline of 20 years. Um and it mentioned in one of the conditions that um after uh 20 years a relication shall occur for continuous use of um the gravel pit. In June 30, 2008, another cup was approved to add um an asphalt badge plant and concrete badge plant to the location. Under conditional conditions of approval number 12 of that resolution, it states

that all conditions um as stated in the previous cup which was in 2003 shall also apply and um the approval timeline will match the same approval timeline of the previous CUP. Here is the um the county's uh Altex map. It's a llines of long-term commercial sub significance. And as you can see in the blue location there, that's the site. Um there's two locations that are designated as natural resource lands within the county in the location. Here is also um a site aerial with um an overlay from the DNR approval, which you can also see on your packet. Here is the mining site and these are the two crop circles that are designated as natural resource lands. Um the mining site and the gravel site is not located inside these designated mineral resource lands. In the Franklin County 2018 to 2038 comprehensive plan, it um identifies mineral resource lands inside the county. In 2008, the plan identified resource lands of long-term commercial significance. It is the same as um designation of agricultural lands like you saw earlier those crop circles. Um in that in the comp plan uh the Heinen Brothers gravel pit which is this gravel pit has been permitted and uh prior to the 2008 comp plan and existed prior to that. Thus, um the county actually um designates this as a permitted mining site and um a mineral resource designation. Under the Franklin County comp plan, it says that um under the goals of the mineral resource lands, goal number four

states that Franken County will conserve mineral resource lands for productive economic use to help maintain a stable, coste effective source of needed construction materials. Under policy of number one of goal four, it says that the county will encourage the retention and protection of long-term mineral resource sites of commercial grade aggregate for new developments, roads, and other uses provided mineral resource sites can be identified and cited consistent with planned policies. On July 14, 2025, a SEIA MDNS was issued by the lead agency, which is the county. Comments were due on July 28th. Uh we received comments uh from multiple agencies, which we'll uh talk about in a little bit. These are the findings and um mitigation measures that the county determined appropriate for this project. Best management per uh practices shall apply to minimize dust during construction, such as watering the site in accordance with the Franken County's clean air and dust control ordinances. The applicant shall meet and comply with all necessary or applicable permits or standards required by the Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Compliance with the standards laid out in the DNR approval of the plan shall occur at all times. The applicant shall meet and comply with all the necessary air and water quality standards as required by the department of ecology. Compliance with these standards shall occur at all times. Storm water shall be retained on site. Avoidance of um the disturbance of fenigenous hawk in the area. Operators will need to maintain a hazmat safety program per MSAW. An inadvertent discovery plan shall be

prepared and implemented for the product project through all phases of ex excavation work. There shall be a clear area or fire break of 20 ft maintained around the pit area for emergency purposes. There shall be an approved access lane that shall always be passable. Here are the comments for the sea from um lead a from the agencies. The Confederate tribe of the Kville um reservation commented on August 14 stating that they recommend um an IDP or an inadvertent discovery plan for cultural resources for any of the ground disturbing activities or continuence of any ground disturbance. Washington's uh Department of Ecology mentioned that um if the applicant that that the applicant must determine if waste produced at the facility or project sites are dangerous and if so they need to follow regulations per whack. Um a review of the aerial imagery says that there might be a potential wetland staff reviewed um our GIS and uh our critical areas within the area. Um and this has been in existence for 20 years and um like uh ecology said that it might be an artificial wetland and we agree with that. There's no wetland in the area of the project site. Groundwater permit exemption is not available for proposed projects as a municipal water supply. um they will need to contact um Skiibbid to get um municipal water contract regarding this. Uh Washington Department of Transportation South Central region gave a comment regarding access to US 395. Um it says that access is not allow um

no direct access to US 395 from the site will be allowed. Access to and from site will be via East Elm Road and beyond limited access boundaries as established on East M Elm Road. No vehicles associated with the quirary site may use the deed approach approximately 600 ft south of US 395 and East Elm Road intersections. During operation, the developer shall install 48 in truck warning signs when the pit is being actively used. Uh, all loads transported on the washd right ofway must be within legal size and load limits or have a valid oversize and or overweight permit. It is the applicant's responsibility to keep and maintain US 395 free of debris. The Confederate tribe of Warm Springs gave a comment in July 25 saying that um they are deferring to the Yakima Nation for this um project, but we did not receive any comments from the Yakima Nation regarding this. um even after the previous meeting was rescheduled. Skiibbid gave a comment regarding the um project stating that the irrigation water comes from the owner's irrigation system. Um, Skiibid says that the applicant needs to contact them regarding um the water if water is needed for crushing or operations and um a municipal and industrial contract must be obtained from the US Bureau of Recommendation for those purposes. Franklin County Public Works Department commented um and asked for an approach permit to the uh Franklin County roads per the county road approach policy. Any utility extension crossing um will be

addressed at the time of the application. The planning and building department added comments for this uh proposal. staff has determined that the pit area shall be no greater than the DNR permitted pit area, which is 87.3 acres. The applicant shall apply for and receive a county business license on an annual basis. This shall be obtained within 30 days of the CUP approval if not already obtained for the year 2025. All blasting on site shall be in compliance with the required state and federal standards for Franklin County Code 17.66.14 A1. There shall be a sub a substantial fence with suitable gates completely enclos enclosing the portion of the property in which excavation is located and such fence shall be located at all points 40 feet or more from the edge of the pit site. Um, per Franklin County Code 17.66.140A2, whenever production in any area of the gravel and sand pit has been completed, all plants, buildings, structures, and equipment shall be entirely removed from such property and stockpiles shall be removed or backfilled in the in the pit within one year of such completion. The owner or applicant shall take measures to rehabilitate and reclaim any area that has been deemed complete per the DNR reclamation plan. The planning and building department did not receive any comments from surrounding property owners or residents within the count the county for this project. Um, regarding the recommended findings of FA uh, fact, this proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the county development regulations,

zoning, and the applicable comprehensive plan. This is currently um under the comp plan land use designation of agricultural and mineral resources lands. Um, the county designates this lands as AP20 zone. Stone quaries, sand and gravel pit requires a CUP under the AP20 zoning district. Asphalt or concrete ba concrete batch plant requests a cup in the AP20 zoning district per the land use table. The applicant has applied for a cup for the renewal of the existing gravel pit, gravel and sand pit, asphalt and concrete batch plant on this property. This proposal will not adversely affect public infrastructure. Um the comment from public works department stated that um the proposed use will not have a significant impact on the country the county road system. This proposal will be constructed, maintained and operated in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity. This gravel pit has been existing and has been designated as a mineral resource land in the uh Franklin County comprehensive plan. Uh the renewal and of the gravel pit, asphalt batch plant and concrete batch plant is consistent with the already existing character of the gravel pit in the project. This project will not generate excessive traffic, noise or light that will interfere with res residential or agricultural activities on surrounding properties. The location and height of the proposed structure and site will not discourage the development of um permitted use on the property. Since the surrounding area will remain unchanged and the resultant depression due to mining will not be visible from the public roads or areas, it will not affect any of the surrounding um

properties or the general vicinity. The operation in connection with the proposal will not be objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust or flashing lights that would be in oper that would be the operation of any permitted use within the district. The proposal will not endanger the public's health, safety or general welfare if located where proposed. This gravel pit um and asphalt and concrete batch plant has been in existence for 20 years and um this will not have any negative impact on public health and safety and general welfare welfare. Um for the suggested conditions of approval uh we wrote the uh conditions per the SEIPA MDNS. Um it is just mentioned again on all the seven conditions on here. Under the CUP they must comply with the requirements of the Washington Department of Transportation South Central region regarding the US 395 and access to that um highway. It shall comply with the requirements of Franklin County Public Works Department regarding approach permits. It shall uh comply with the requirements of Franklin County Planning and Building Department as mentioned earlier in the comments. Uh any discontinuence or abandonment of the approved use for a period of one year shall make this conditional permit approval null and void. Um any use of this uh proposal or this project other than what's approved shall deem this cup null and void. The site shall be maintained at all times as to not let the land become a fire hazard or accumulate with debris and weeds. It shall comply with the Franklin County fire code. It shall comply with the right to farm ordinance within the Franken County. It shall um should there be any archaeological materials or human

remains they are required to stop and report it to the department of archaeology and historic preservation or DAP. Um this is uh an important uh section of the conditions. Um future in expansion of the site is not allowed due the pres due to the presence of natural resource lands surrounding the permitted pit area. As you saw earlier in the um in the earlier slide it there are two um crop circles that have been designated as natural resource lands. So unfortunately it's not able to expand in the future. Um, nothing in the cup approval shall be construed as excusing applicant from compliance with federal, state or local statutes or ordinances. Um, under 19, I added this one. Um, this CUP shall have no expiration date to comply with the goals and policies regarding the mineral resource lands in Franklin County comprehensive plan. The original cup back in 2003 was given a 20-year expiration date because this land has not been designated a mineral resource land. Um, it was not designated until 2008. But now that it has been designated as a long-term commercially significant mineral resource land and the Franklin County does um the comp plan does state that uh the county shall try its best to retain any of the long-term commercially significant mineral resource lands. Um we are not setting an expiration date for this cup. um as long as the DNR um as long as there's still gravel available for them to mine and they still get DNR approval for this. Uh number 20, it's in uh in accordance with the county's zoning. Any special or conditional use permit may be revoked by the county board of county

commissioners. Number 21. Um this permit shall apply to lands described and shall be above mentioned uh for the above mentioned individuals and or his heirs and or assigns. Number 22. By accepting the issuance of this permit, the permit holders agree to accept full responsibility for any and all operations conducted or negl negligence occurring at this location and any incidents that occur on the surrounding properties caused by the operations or negl negligence at this location. Here is the suggested motion by staff. Um I move to forward CUP 202503 uh CPA 202512 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendation based on the six suggested findings of fact and 22 conditions of approval. Thank you.

Does any commissioner have any questions of staff? I was wondering if you could go into more detail about that um open-ended permit.

Yes. Uh so um I can go back to that section of the uh slide regarding the comp plan. Um, under goal number four, um, it's determined that the county, Franklin County, will conserve mineral resource lands for productive economic use to help maintain a stable, cost-effective source of needed construction materials. And under uh, a policy under that, it states that um, the county will encourage the retention and protection of long-term mineral resource sites of commercial grade aggregate. Um since this uh gravel pit has been designated as a long-term commercially significant mineral site, um the staff uh Wes the director and I have discussed this and um per in order to comply with the goals and policies of the um Franken County comprehensive plan. determined that um we we we we're not going to put a timeline like prior of 20 years to this permit and we'll leave it open-ended with a caveat that they need to continue to comply with the DNR requirements for the gravel pit and approval and um as long as it's still capable of producing resources to provide for the county um we're going to keep the cup going. Does the applicant or applicants representative wish to speak or give a presentation? Uh the only really question or or I guess uh thing I was going to clarify was it on the application it mentions I

don't know um it says gravel pit and asphalt plant. Um it really should say gravel pit and temporary asphalt plant. Um we've only run an asphalt plant about two separate times for a few months. Um it was for special projects on Highway 395 uh when they were repaving part of the road. Um it's not really something that fits into the the pit in our business model. Um so I just wanted to clarify that that we have no intention of running a permanent uh asphalt plant like this might lead on to believe. Um anything would just be temporary. The only reason why it's included is because uh when we did those couple asphalt jobs, we had to get a separate uh permit. And with this one being open-ended, we just wanted to include everything into one so we don't have to come back and and do some more permitting if the opportunity arises for an asphalt um job. But uh that's all I had unless there's any questions. I have a quick question and maybe just for clarification um and and I don't know if you can answer this or staff um on the comment made by u the South Columbia Basin Irrigation District is there a requirement to pursue uh an industrial contract for um from the Bureau of Reclamation for water usage.

Um I discussed that comment from Skiibbid with Wes. Uh Wes said that this is industrial use and um be uh under the exemp well they are able to have up to 5,000 gallons for industrial use. So if it's any more than that then they will require um a municipal and industrial contract with SCIBID or uh with the Bureau of W but since um under the exempt well it is approved for up to 5,000 gallons.

Okay. Thank you. I have a question for Mr. Heinen. I was just um interested and just sort of curious. It shows that the permit map um acres is 87.3 and this disturbed acres are 61.4 and reclaimed are six. So what does that mean reclaimed? And um do you do you see um like will there be a request for an expansion since there's only 20ome acres left to mine?

Uh so the to the reclaimed part that was a part that's already been mined and so for you know to comply with DNR standards we have to bring it back to some sort of natural state. Um I don't have the exact acres um but as you can see that's the the main parcel that it's located on and then what we currently have uh per DNR as as of today what we are able to mine um based on the I think it' be the the yellow line there which I think's 82 acres um I think 61 of that is what has been been disturbed already and has been

Thank you. Any more questions? Thank you. Is there any in-person public testimony? Is there any email testimony? Does staff have any final comments? No. Chairman, I will entertain a motion to close the public comment. Mr. Chairman, I would move that we propose to close the public comment. I'll second. It's

been moved by Commissioner Vincent and seconded by Commissioner Diddier that we end public comment. All in favor? I.

All oppose? Same sign. Motion passes. The public testimony portion of public CUP 2025-3 SEPA 2025-12 is closed. Is there any discussion from the planning commission members? Seeing none, I will entertain a motion. Mr. Sure. I move to forward C 2025-03 2025-12 board of county commissioners with positive recommendation based on the six suggested findings of fact in 22 condition.

I'll second. It has been moved by Commissioner Knifton and second by Commissioner Ddier. Is there any discussion? May we have a roll call vote, please? Mike Corales, yes. Mike Vincent, yes. Remy Daroo, yes. Mark Dutder, yes. Manny Gutierrez, yes. Stacy Knifton, yes. Melinda Ddier, yes. Chairman, the motion has passed.

Thank you. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item one. I'll move that we close the public hearing on item one. Second. It's been moved by Commissioner Diddier, seconded by Commissioner Vincent. All in favor signify by saying I. I.

All oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. Public hearing is closed. Item number two is a public hearing for file CUP 2025-7, Lone Pro Ranch Relocation of existing cattle harvesting facility. This application is to allow for the relocation of existing cattle harvesting facility previously permitted under CUP 2024-8 to a new parcel number 122-710-030 southeast of its current location. Moving the facility to this new location will allow for a more conducive environment for surrounding residential neighbors. I declare the public hearing for CUP 2025-7 to be open at 6:32. May we have staff present the staff report, please?

Good evening, commissioners. I will present CU 202507, the relocation of an existing cattle harvesting facility for Lone Crow Ranch. this um the project proposal uh the new site will be located in at 430 Ferguson Road, Eltopia, Washington. It is currently zoned AP20. The comp plan uh use is designated as agricultural and the property site is approximately 42.53 acres. This conditional use permit has been previously um permitted under CUP 202408 and is being moved to a new parcel southeast of its location. Um moving this facility per the applicant will allow for more conducive environment for surrounding residential neighbors. Here is the new proposed uh property where uh the the new uh harvesting facility will be moved. Here is the site plan submitted. The proposed um processing location will be located in this building here and the proposed lagoon will be in this area. The existing cattle harvesting facility was previously approved by the Franken County Board of County Commissioners under resolution 2024-200B. Uh the resolution was approved and signed on August 28, 2024. The existing cattle facility harvesting facility is located on parcel 122-700-015. Um, the previous cup was to allow for the construction and operation of a cattle harvest facility which could process up to two 2,000 heads of cattle

per year. This parcel has recently been shortplatted in 2024 and the facility is located in a 2acre lot with a new parcel number 122-700-016. Here is the current location of the cattle harvesting facility and here is the proposed site of the new um cattle harvesting facility. Um the applicant actually came in uh to ask if they can move the the cattle harvesting facility um without going through a cup, but per discussion with Wes. Um because it's a new parcel and it's a far enough distance from the original facility, we required a new CUPB applied for this project. Uh due to lack of water uh sewer system in the area, the proposed cattle harvesting facility will require an affluent lagoon. The design, location, and operation of this lagoon will be subject to review and approval by the Venton Franklin Health District and other applicable regulatory agencies to ensure compliance with public health and environmental standards. In their narrative, the applicant emphasized that the relocation of the facility would improve operational efficiency and promote better communication with neighboring land owners. While the numerical change in residential proximity is minimal, staff finds no evidence that the relocation would result in a significant increase in nuisance impact. The proposed site remains appropriate given the rule setting regul regulatory oversight and agricultural nature of surrounding uses. Um here is a 34 mile radius of residential homes um surrounding the new

site. Um I believe per the staff report I noted uh that there was um one or two residential home increase from the original uh distance that was um where when it was up here originally the current location of the project. The Franklin County Public Works Department commented that um there will be no significant impact on county roads. An approach permit will be required to access um county road per the county road approach policy. Um Franklin County Planning and Building Department commented that building and or grading applications are required to be submitted for um this permit. Setbacks of any structure on the permit will need to comply with the Franken County um fire code setback standards. The construction and use of a lagoon for effluent must be permitted constructed and its use approved by the appropriate agencies and um an odor and fly control plan shall be required due to the fact that an open lagoon will be used for effluent. the Franklin County odor and fly control plan um as the as detailed below shall be adhered to. Um it talks about that um the guidelines of the uh odor and fly control plan were adopted for use by the existing county planning commission in reviewing new operations and existing operations wishing to expand uh that require a cup. Um they shall comp uh the guidelines state that sorry I repeated the same slide. Um

Franklin County understands the importance of managing odor and nuisance issues to a reasonable extent as they relate to livestock and poultry operations. Per county resolution 2001238. SUP is required for cattle harvesting facility and um per the odor and fly control plan it states that the general policy of no livestock operation can be 100% odorfree. Zoning should be used to avoid conflict where possible. Um elimination of odor from livestock and associated facilities is not realistic. Odors of some sort will always be produced and are usually released to the environment. um selection of site. Many operations are already situated close to neighbors and major roads. Such farms should be examined to identify potential problems and ways to avoid them by modifying the collection, processing, storage, and disposal of manure. This is especially important when considering the upgrading or expansion of an existing site. Sometimes it is better to abandon the site and invest remodeling or expansion money in new facilities at a better location. The planning and building department received one comment regarding this proposal from Brian Jones. Um this is received by via email on July 29th, 2025. Uh Mr. Jones said that their land is just west of Lone Crow property shown on the map. the lagoon and potential smell and flies could affect their property and they are concerned. Uh the proposal is in accordance with the county's goals and policies under the development regulations and the comprehensive plan. The compreh comprehensive land use is agricultural. This uh the zoning code designates this as AP20. Constructing of a cattle

harvest facilities uh requires a cup under the AP20 zoning district um in the land use table 70-1 under slaughter houses or andor stocky yards. Um the applicant has applied for a cup for the relocation of the cattle harvest facility to this parcel. The proposal will not adversely affect the public infrastructure per comment from public works that it will not have any significant impact to the county road system. Uh the proposal will be constructed, maintained and operated in harmony with existing or intended character of the general vicinity. Uh the existed and existing and intended character of the immediate area is agricultural. The proposal will not impair the ability for agricultural activities to continue, nor will it have a negative impact on the intended character of the general vicinity. Odor complaints shall be addressed by the applicant and minimized as possible. An odor and fly control plan will be required by the county. The location and uh height of the proposed structure and site design will not discourage development of the permitted use uh on the property of the general vicinity. Uh the proposal shall not exceed the maximum building height of the AP20 zoning district of 35 ft. The operation in connection with the proposal will not be more objection objectionable to near nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, and or flashing lights. Franken County has a right to farm ordinance which which states that agricultural activities conducted on farmland and forest practices if consisted with good agricultural and forest practices are presumed to be reasonable and shall not be found to constitute a nuisance unless the

activity or practice has a sub has a has a substantial adverse effect on public health and safety. The proposal will not endanger the public health safety or general welfare if located were proposed. The proposal will not have a negative impact on public health safety and general welfare. The public uh the project shall comply with health district and public works standards regarding health and access or safety standards. The proposal is required to meet or exceed all sanitary requirements for operations of a C commercial cattle harvesting facility as required by any licensing or approving agency. Um suggested conditions of approval. Um they must comply with requirements from the Franklin County Public Works Department. They must comply with requirements from the Franklin County Planning and Building Department, including having an odor and flight control plan. Uh per C Franklin County Ordinance number 5-207 as amended um it prohibits the accumulation of irrigation water on the county roads outdoor lighting and uh at the facility and all structures shall be shielded. Any discontinuence of abandon or abandonment of the approved use for a period of one year shall make this cup null and void. The site shall be maintained at all times to not become a fire hazard. It shall be uh shall comply with the fire Franklin County fire code. Um it shall comply with the right to farm ordinance in Franklin County. Any future expansions and improvements at the site shall comply with the submitted and approved site plans. Nothing in the cup shall be construed for from any compliance with any federal, state or local statutes,

ordinances or regulations. Um any permit any CUP can be revoked by the board of county commissioners. This permit shall apply on the described lands and shall be for the above named individual and or his heirs and or assigns. Um, by accepting this permit, the applicant accepts full responsibility for all operations and negligence, including those of the surrounding properties. And the suggested motion by staff is that um I move to forward CUP 202507 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendation based on six suggested findings of fact and 13 conditions of approval. Thank you. Does any commissioner have questions of staff?

I have questions. Um during the course of of the year that the existing facility has been there, has the um planning department received any negative feedback as far as the public? Um we check for code enforcement um in our uh any code enforcement issues that was submitted. We did not find anything from uh any submitted ones. Um we ask that if there's any issues regarding um possible um non-compliance with the code or with any condition existing conditional use permit that they submitted via um code as enforcement forms and we did not find any existing ones since the original one was approved.

Do you do you know of any um negative comments that USDA or the health department have received? Um I am not aware of any of those. Um the Benton Franklin Health District did not comment on this cup during the comment period, but we did not usually if um it's past um the comment period for the packet, we still receive any comments from them, but we did not receive any comments since the comment period started and until this moment we haven't received anything from them.

Um what will the disposition of the existing facility be? Um I believe they are moving the uh facility from the original the existing site to this new one and um I believe they don't have any plans for what will be used for the existing facility right now but the applicant can't answer the question regarding that. Thank you.

I have a question. What's the reason for the for the move? Uh when the applicant was uh talking to us, they said that it's closer to where their facility is. Um they're the current the um current location that they're proposing to is where their staff is located and where their cattle are being um placed and it's just a further distance to bring them from one place to the next. Okay. Thanks. Any more questions?

I do. So, I'm I'm a little confused. Um, so the original conditional use permit was separated in distance from the entire operation.

Yes. Uh, I believe that um when the applicant I I think the applicant is here um they recently purchased this property and that's why they're moving it to this new location. when it was originally um on the north uh its current existing property uh that's where they're doing their operations, but now that they have a newer location, that's um where their admin building is and where their current um uh cattle are, I uh they're they're moving it closer to where they're currently at. Um, so, uh, I just want to also add that if the planning commission and the board of county commissioners does not approve this cup, they're not planning on doing anything with the existing CUP. They're going to keep operations on that already approved um, cattle facility.

Okay. So, the under the original CUP, then the cattle were originally where the original facility is. Yes. And then they shortplatted that and they were moved. Uh yes, and they shortplatted that. So they split off the cattle facility um and split it off for two acres to just have the cattle facility on that two acres. So it was it was that still in within the scope of the original cup, I guess, is what I'm asking.

Uh the original CUP only covered the cattle harvesting facility. So even if they split off the two acres to have that cattle facility split, it's still within the scope of its cup since uh the operations didn't change. It's just the size of the um the parcel that changed. Okay. Thank you. No more. Does the applicant wish to speak? So, I can tell there's a little confusion with, you know, how Let's do do your name and address first.

This uh my name is Cody Joseith uh representing Lone Crow Meat Processing, which is actually the one that turned in the um CUP, not Lone Crow Ranch. Just I don't know, technical whatever. Um, and so you're asking about the the 2acre parcel that the existing cup is on. From my understanding, this is a completely new cup like doesn't have anything to do with the old one. When I came into the county, my thought was I said, "Hey, we don't really want to use this 2acre piece. We have some neighbors around there that don't want it to be there and it's easier to move it down here now. This is now an option and the neighbors were happy about that. It's easier for us to manage that existing 2acre piece is you know a good half mile from where the entire heart of the operation is located. So it was really a uphill battle literally to manage that. So, and we were going to end up with, you know, a handful of neighbors up there that were going to be, I mean, not the world's happiest with the facility there. So, we decided to move it. Uh, that's an option now for us to do that. So, we decided to go ahead and do that since we own the entire parcel now. And I don't know if that kind of somewhat addresses your uh your question.

It it does. Um, I guess is it question? Yes. Yeah. Okay. I guess my other question was I was just wondering what you're going to do with that existing facility. Well, there isn't actually a facility there. It's just a twoacre piece that has a cup on it. So, there isn't there is nothing there is nothing up there. So, there is not a facility there. Oh, yeah. They haven't constructed. So, so did that expire then? Uh the cup is still existing. Um no they have like a year or something.

They have a year to um do that but since the cup was in um August and they submitted uh this this new cup um that technically puts it on hold based on the determination of this cup. Uh, the other thing I'd like to mention too is when I brought this to Derek, who is the, um, the planning head at the time, um, when I brought the application into him, he said, "Well, I just want you to put a headcount on this application. It doesn't I just need an approximate, you know, whatever." I said, "Well," I said, "That's a really hard thing to gauge on a facility that I don't even own. I haven't built it. I don't know." He said, "Well, just put what you feel like it's going to do." I said, "Okay." So, in the original CUP, which I think is in your guys's notes on page, can't tell my PDF which page this is, but it's probably towards the bottom. I guess somewhere between page 40 and 42. The very bottom, you can see when I brought it in, Derek had me just write something and I put approximately 1 to 2,000 cattle a year and I put depending on demand. So, he said that that wasn't going to be a binding thing to the permit. And then the permit ended up with a 2000 head cap, which is not either the way I worded it or the way it was intended when Derek had me write that on the original cup. Now, there's a lot of facilities in Washington that do over 2,000 head a day, multiple like five, six, seven days a week. That's not what we're going to be doing. But if a rancher calls that has more volume and says, "Hey, can you guys process over the next 4 months? I got 400 beef that we'd like to bring to you." I don't want to say, "Hey, you know, uh, let me just go through another 9 or 10 month cup process to see if I

can get those cattle killed." And they'll be way long gone down the chain by then. So, I guess the, you know, we're already limited to the size and the constraint of the property and everything else on the headcount basis anyways, but I guess the the the 2,000 head cap on the original permit, this is a completely new permit from my understanding. So, I would like that to not transfer into the new permit. So, so you're saying that your your new permit application still reads the up to 2,000 head?

Well, the old one did, but this is a new one. And there's no we didn't talk about this is an entirely new condition. Right. Right. I got that. So, that's what I'm asking. Your application for this entirely new cup, what what's the number? So staff um it will uh transfer 2,000 head uh the the original wording it um it will basically transfer the cup to this new um to this new parcel um which would cap it at 2,000. So if the planning commission would like to increase that cap from 2,000, we can increase that and add it into the language. Is that what you're asking? Yeah.

To what? uh market demand within reason of my property. I guess is that something we can do or do we need a number? Um we need a number. I mean, I don't see any way a guy could ever go over 5,000. 5,000 it is. Can we just put it in? Uh we can add that as part of the record and add that as a record and include it as um an additional addendum for the Okay. County commissioners. Would that be an additional commissioner of approval? Um, we can if if the planning commission would like to add that as a condition of approval, we'll increase the conditions. I don't think we need a condition of approval. It's just being put in at 5,000 and we're going to vote yes or no.

Okay. Interesting. Thank you. Yes. Did you have something to add to I guess or if I could answer? I don't. I'm good. All right. Thank you, Mike. A question for staff just to clarify that the this is going to be a transfer. So the other parcel, the old CUP will disappear. Yes. U if the planning commission and the county commissioners approve it, it will completely disappear from that parcel.

Now, just a little history, I'm sure everybody remembers, you know, that this was kind of turmoil, right? And it seems like it's pretty nice that he's moving it to a non-turmoil area now. It's kind of a win-win, I think. But anyway, um, any more questions? Any more inperson public testimony? Come on up. Is this for or against? We're going to find out pretty quick.

You'll find out soon. I'm Brian Jones. Uh, I own some land uh uphill from where the lagoon will be and I'm concerned with the smell that the flies and the and the visual of it because we're about 50 ft higher than they are and we'll look right down on the on the lagoon. So, I'm really concerned with the operation, not the the kill facility because that's going to be inside, but I'm concerned with the lagoon.

How far away are you? Maybe a quarter mile, half a mile at the most. Thank you. I have another question that I just thought of. So for who? I'm not sure. I guess it might be for the applicant. And it was concerning the was so was there an a lagoon built on the original? Nothing. Oh, nothing was done. It was just left. Okay. Basically, what happened is that we decided to buy the whole property together

and then to move the Gotcha.

The lagoon is going to look pretty minimal as far as flight.

Thank you. Okay. In regards to the lagoon, I would imagine that they have to have some type of plan for their affluent. Correct. Yes. Whether it's composting or how's that being addressed? Is that uh so um they will need to get approval from the Benton Franklin Health District and whoever um it's the same as the prior um cup. They will need to engineer it and design it in the way that the health district approves of it. So um and also not just that they also need to com uh comply with the fly and odor control plan with the county and they need to have that existing for that lagoon specifically.

There was a mention staff in there a couple of times on the uh regulations stipulations on the fly and order control. Does that come with the engineering plan for the lagoon? Is that a requirement or a pre- requirement?

Uh so it will be required by the county. they need to submit that um with the um so once they build the lagoon um and then submit it to the health district um and they submit a building permit with this um cup part of what we're going through right now is any building permit that has a cup um especially if it includes a flight and odor control plan they need to submit that before we can approve um the the building permit itself. So any kind of um like this one before so once they have the cattle harvesting facility and then the grading for the lagoon um part of the conditions before they final and get approval for any building permits they need to have that completed and sub uh submitted and approved altogether before we can even final them. So it's an additional condition to building permits as well. So they won't be able to build it if they don't have it.

Got it. I got a question for Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, we should and when you answer, come up so we can get it on record. My question for you, you said you're about half a mile away from this destination of where the lagoon's potentially going to be. I think that's about right. What's your elevation as far as um being higher? As you stated, we're probably about 50 feet higher.

50 feet higher. Okay. Right. So, I'm assuming the engineered and plan on the flight and order control will have something stipulating the uh distance elevation because obviously thermos carry up early and down late, right? So, there's got to be some sort of um stipulation in there that really minimizes that. Yes. And um if uh part of that we can also the commissioners can also add that as an extra condition if you want um add any additional condition for requirements as you see fit for this. Are you the only uh neighbor within that proximity? I think so.

Thank you. the my sister-in-law has the lifetime occupancy of the house that's up there by our property, but any more questions? Any more in-person public testimony? Any email public testimony? No. Does staff have any final comments? No final comments. Mr. Chairman, I will entertain a motion to close the public comment. Move to close public comment. Period. Second.

It's been moved by Commissioner Daroo and seconded by Commissioner Vincent. Uh, all in favor? I. All oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. The public testimony portion of the public hearing for CUP 2025 is closed. Is there any discussion from the planning commission members?

I just have um some discussion. Perhaps I would feel more comfortable if there was um if it was stated, you know, specifically somewhere in either, you know, our motion or um somewhere that says up to 5,000. I think it's going to be in there, isn't it? You're

um we can add a suggested motion. Uh, I can edit this um to state that I move to forward CUP 202507 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendations based on six suggested findings of fact and 13 conditions of approval amending the um cup to increase from 2,000 cattle heads to 5,000 cattle heads. I can add that as a motion on the screen. Thank you. Okay. Any more discussion?

Like you said, I Mike, this is a kind of a win-win from when we approved the the original CUP because it's pretty contentious with a lot of people uh showing objection that CUP, but this seems to be a lot better situation.

I agree. Okay, with that I will entertain a motion. I move to forward CUP 2025-7 to the board of county commissioners with the positive recommendation based on the six suggested findings of fact the 13 conditions of approval amending the original language to increase cattle head count from 2,000 to 5,000 heads head that there's no there's no S Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. No, your first take the S off. Take the S. There you go.

Okay. I'm not even sure I would put the word cattle in front of that either. Yeah. Because does it don't you Yeah. slaughter other Yeah. animals. The 5,000 head or that it works. Okay. Yeah, that's it. Okay. I will second. Who said that? Manny. It has been moved by Commissioner Der, seconded by Commissioner Gutierrez. This is Is there any discussion? We got that. May we have a roll call vote, please? Mike Corales, yes. Mike Vincent,

yes. Remy Daroo, yes. Mark Dutder, yes. Manny Gutierrez, yes. Stacy Knifton, yes. Melinda Dier, yes. Chairman, the motion has passed. Thank you. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item two. Second. Been moved by Commissioner Knifton, seconded by Commissioner Derutder. All in favor signify by saying I. I.

All opposed. Motion passes. The public hearing is closed. Do we want a break or are we going into three and four? Keep going.

Okay. Item three is a public hearing for CUP 2025-8 Albert Hickman D AU. This application is to allow for the construction of a detached accelerated acceler accessory dwelling unit to provide sufficient housing for the applicant to care for their aging parents. The D AU is approximately 1,200 square ft on the main floor space. I declare the public hearing for CUP 2025-8 to be opened at 7:07. May we have staff present the staff report, please?

Good evening, commissioners. I will present cup 202508 for a detached accessory dwelling unit. The detach accessory dwelling unit is lo going to be located at 170 Brewster Lane, Pasco, Washington. It is currently zoned RR5 and the comprehensive plan use is for rural remote. The property size is approximately 5.42 acres. This conditional use permit is to allow for a DADU construction to provide sufficient housing for the applicant's care of their aging parents. The detached ADU is approximately 1,200 square ft in um main floor space. Here is the location um an aerial of the property. The applicant also provided a site plan which shows the location of the following features. the existing house, the existing garage and parking, the location of the proposed DADU, the location of proposed new septic tank and drain field, the location of the water line, the distance of the proposed detached ADU to property lines, and the lot dimensions. Here is the submitted site plan by the applicant. Here is the existing home and this is the location of the proposed ADU. Um the purpose of the detach of the detach accessory dwelling unit under the Franken County Code is for the care of aged parents, aged relatives, disabled children or disabled relatives. Per the applicant's detailed narrative, this DADU will house their aged parents. Uh this proposal is consistent with the overall intent of the RR5 zone and the requirements for the detached accessory dwelling units. Per review of surrounding properties, there exist um a detached accessory structures including detached shops and

or garages in the immediate vicinity northwest of this property. There can be seen a parcel having a DADU on their property which is uh 51 Weisner Way. Um approval of this DADU is consistent with the built environment of the surrounding properties in the neighborhood. The proposed use is in accordance with the goals and policies of the county Franken County comprehensive plan. Staff received no public comments during the notice period. Basin disposal gave a comment on August 25, 2025 um stating that they have no ex objections regarding the proposed application but they would like to highlight that um a few considerations regarding waste collection services. Um, one of their requirement is a uh different addressing for this accessory dwelling unit um for uh garage uh garbage services um and billing of the ADU. And um they also included service fees in accordance with their um Franklin County tariff G18 depending on whether a garbage cart can be safely accessed via an improved access road. Um, private driveways do not meet this definition. The Benton Franken Health District commented and uh stated that uh they meet usable land requirements under the Venon Franken Health District and they don't have any objections for the DADU. public works commented um that an approach permit is required for this uh project and um any utility extension crossing um the Franklin County roads will be addressed at the time of application planning and building the department added um comments that says that um before construction of Franklin County building permit is required um the DAD

shall comply with 2021 international building code standards. The detached ADU shall not be sold separately from the primary dwelling unit. Application will need to follow the provisions of um Franken County Code Chapter 17.66.060 under accessory dwelling units detached. Any de deviations from the submitted site plan or building plans shall be submitted to Franklin County Planning and Building Department for review. This proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the county's development regulations and the comprehensive plan. Um, a DADU is required uh requires a conditional use permit under the Franken County Code. This proposal will not adversely affect public infrastructure. This proposal will be constructed and maintained and operated in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. The location and height of the proposed um structure will not discourage the development of permitted uses. Um under the RR5 zone, the maximum building height is 35 ft. The operation um in connection with the proposal will not be more objectionable by nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights. Uh the proposal will not endanger the public's health, safety, or general welfare if located were proposed. Um under suggested conditions of approval, they shall comply with Franken County Public Works um requirements. They shall comply with requirements of basin disposal. They shall comply with requirements of the Franken County Planning and Building Department. Um all the other conditions are the same conditions that we've put in um with other cups uh with detached

ADUs. The suggested motion is um I move to forward CUP 202508 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendation based on six suggested findings of fact and 15 conditions of approval. Thank you. Do commissioners have any questions? Does the applicant wish to speak? Not here. Is there any in-person public testimony? No. Email public testimony.

Does staff have any final comments? No final comments. I will entertain a motion to close the public comment. I move to close the public comment. Second. Been moved by Commissioner Diddier and seconded by Commissioner Dutder. All in favor signify by saying I. I. All oppose. Same sign. Uh public testimony closes. Public testimony portion for public hearing CU 2025-8 is closed. Is there any discussion from planning commission members? If not, I will entertain a motion.

I move to forward CUP 2025-08 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendations based on six adjusted findings of fact and 15 conditions of approval. Second. It has been moved by Commissioner Gutierrez and seconded by Commissioner Ddier. May we have a roll call vote? Mike Corales, yes. Mike Vincent, yes. Remy Daru, yes. Mark Derder, yes. Manny Gutierrez, yes. Stacy Knighton, yes. Melinda Diddier, yes. Chairman, the motion has passed.

Thank you. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item number three. Second. It's been moved by Commissioner Dutder, seconded by Commissioner Vincent. All in favor signify by saying I. I. All oppose. Same sign. Motion passes. Public hearing is closed. We're noisy. Next time. What's that? It was his second. But

item four is a public hearing for file CUP 2025-9 Matthew Wood D A DU. This application is to allow for the conversion of an existing home on the property into a detached acceler accessory dwelling unit to provide sufficient housing for the applicant to care for their aging parents and to allow for the construction of a single family home on the property. The existing home to be converted into a D AU is approximately 1325 ft in floor space. I declare the public hearing for CUP 2025-9 to be open at 7:16. May we have staff present the staff report, please?

Good evening, commissioners. I will present CUP 20250 for a D AU. The DADU is located on 131 Basin Slope Road, Misa, Washington. The zone the zoning for the property is RR5. The comp plan is rural, remote, and the property size is approximately 5.42 acres. Um, the conditional permit is to convert an existing home on the property into a DADU to provide housing for their aging parents. This will also allow for a construction of a new single family home for the applicant and their family. Um the existing home proposed for conversion is approximately 13 thou uh 1325 square ft in floor area. Here is the vicinity map, an aerial view of the property. The applicant also provided a site plan which shows the location of the existing house to be converted into a DADU, an existing garage and um parking, the proposed new single family home, proposed new septic tank and drain field location, uh location of water line, existing and proposed structures to property lines, lot dimensions, and the skiid canal rightway easement. Here is the site plan submitted by the applicant. Um the existing home is right here and the applicant is proposing a new single family um home on this uh area. Um per Franken County Code 17.16.020A, it states that only one single family dwelling is permitted in the RR5 zoning district. Um, the existing home on the property is already considered a primary residence and construction of a second home is not allowed under the code. The county may allow the existing home to

remain temporarily during construction of the new primary home with the condition that it be demolished prior to final inspection and approval. However, the RR5 zone allows for accessory dwelling units on the property alongside the primary home. The existing home on this parcel has a floor space of three uh 1,325 square ft. Per the county's um assessor's records. The parcel is um actually I was wrong earlier. The parcel is 7.28 acres in size. Uh both of these meet the conditions under FCC 17.66.060 060 accessory dwelling units detach since the lot size exceeds the 2acre minimum requirement and the existing home is under 1,600 square ft maximum size for DAD use. Staff noted that requiring the applicant to demolish the existing house under the conditions that only one single family residence is allowed in the RR5 zone. then apply for a CUP to allow for construction of a D-AD on the property for the same purpose and nearly the the the exact same dimensions is not practical. The purpose of um a detach accessory dwelling unit under the code is for the care of aged parents, aged relatives and disabled children or disabled relatives. Per the applicant's detailed narrative, this existing home will house their parents. The applicant and their family will move into the proposed single family home. This proposal is consistent with the overall intent of the RR5 zone and the requirements for a detached accessory dwelling units. A review of the surrounding properties shows that detach accessory structures including shops and garages in the immediate area exist. Approval of the DAD on this site is consistent with the built environment of nearby properties.

The proposed use is in accordance with the goals and policies of the Franklin County Comprehensive Plan. Staff received no public comments during the notice period. Skiibbid commented on August 15 that the proposed septic system for the new residence is uh drawn very near to the right ofway line and the applicant needs to ensure that during construction those drain lines stay off the rightway. The applicant contacted me um last week telling me that they did contact Skibbid and Skiibbid did go there to stake their um easement so during construction they're aware of where the Skibbid easement is so they don't encroach upon it. based on disposal gave the same comment from the earlier um CUP and the ADU that they don't have any objections about the application and that um um a new address will be required for the ADU um and the um service fees will be assessed in accordance with their tariff G118. Benton Franklin Health District commented on August 19 saying that they've reviewed the reference CUP and um it appears to generally meet all of their uh conditions. The Franklin County Public Works Department commented and stated that an approach permit will be required. Um, Franken County GIS and E911 commented on August 19th saying that the property owner can apply the current address to the new home if they wish and the property situs address would remain the same. We just need to assign a new address to the current home which should follow the address alignment of the road as best we can. In this case, this new address will be 129 Basin Slope Road. Staff um adjusted this under the conditions of approval. Um so um what will happen is uh the new proposed

single family home on the property will have the address of 131 and this existing home that will be converted into a D-ADU will have the address of 129 Basin Slope Road. Uh planning and building department staff commented that um existing structural structure shall be recognized as a detach accessory dwelling unit under the provisions of the Franken County Code. Since the proposed DADU is already an existing structure, the applicant shall obtain all necessary permits for construction of the proposed single family dwelling on the same parcel. I would also like to add that the applicant does have an existing building permit for the proposed home. And if the planning commission and the board of county commissioners chooses to reject this application, um the condition upon which the building permit for their new home uh will state that this existing home that they're requesting to be converted into a detached ADU will need to be demolished before a final will be approved for their new home. Um, the DADU shall comply with the standards of the current state and 2021 international building codes. The DADU shall not be sold separately from the primary dwelling unit or other existing structures. Applicant will need to follow the provisions of the Franken County Code Chapter 17.66.060. Um, any deviations from the submitted site plan or building plans shall be submitted to Franken County Planning and Building Department for review. This proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the county development regulations and the applicable comprehensive plan. The proposal will not adversely affect public infrastructure. The proposal will be constructed, maintained, and operated in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. The location and height of the proposed

structure and site will not discourage the development of permitted uses on property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof. The property in connection with the proposal will not be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district. The proposal will not endanger the public, health, safety, or general welfare if located were proposed. The suggested conditions of approval um they must comply with the requirements of uh South Columbia Basin Irrigation District. They must comply with requirements of Franklin County Public Works Department. They must comply with the requirements of Basin Disposal. They must comply with the requirements of Franklin County GIS E911 addressing which involved the change of addressing of the um the DADU and the new proposed single family home. Comply with requirements of the Franken County Planning and Building Department. Um all the other conditions of approval uh are the same as the previous ones. um suggested motion. I move to forward CUP 202509 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendation based on the six suggested findings of fact and 17 conditions of approval.

Thank you. Does any commissioner have questions of staff?

I have a question. Uh so the DADU is constructed and then the existing home is torn down. So, um, so the existing home, there's an existing home right now that's, um, 1,325 square ft. Right now, as of this moment, that's considered the primary home on the property. The applicant would like to construct a new house that's bigger than the,300 square ft home. And um to be able to do that, they want the planning commission and the board of county commissioners to consider their primary dwelling, the 1300 existing home to be a DADU. So they won't be constructing anything new. They're just changing the label basically of the home.

At the end of the project, there'll be a new DAU and then provision for a future. No. Um so basically um what the uh commissioner what you are approving is for the existing home to be considered a DADU. Um other than the the proposal for a new single family home that's going to be built. Um there's nothing else that's going to be built in the future. So they won't be able to have a future DADU because they already are considering this existing home as a DADU. Are there two homes at the end of the project? There will be two homes, but um one of them will be considered a DADU. Okay. They want to live in their existing home while they're building their new one, basically. Yes.

Yes. Yes. And then while they're building their new uh once their new one is built, they're going to move their parents into the existing home right now. That's why it will be considered a DADU. Thank you. Any any more questions? Does the applicant wish to speak? name and address.

Matthew Wood, 131 Basin Slope Road. Uh, just to clarify, the current home 1325 ft. I live there with my wife and six children. We have applied to the county to build a new home on the property. It does not exist yet, but by the time this is done, if this motion is approved, we'll have a DADU, which is the current home we live in, and a new home, which my wife and children and I will move into, and then my parents will move into the current home that we live in. Other questions? Great. Thank you.

Thank you. No more in-person public testimony. Any email testimony? Staff, any final comments? No final comments. I will entertain a motion to close the public comment. I move to close public comment. Second. Commissioner Ddier has moved and Commissioner Vissent has seconded. Uh all in favor signify by saying I. I.

All oppose, same sign. Motion passes. The public testimony portion for public hearing CUP 2025-9 is closed. I will entertain a motion. Chairman, I would move to forward CU 2025-09 the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendation based on the six suggested findings of fact and 17 conditions of approval. I will second. It's

been moved by Commissioner Vincent and seconded by Commissioner Gutierrez. May we have a roll call vote, please? Mike Corales, yes. Mike Vincent, yes. Remy Daroo, yes. Mark Dutder, yes. Manny Gutierrez, yes. Stacy Knifton, yes. Melinda Diddier, yes. Chairman, the motion has passed. Thank you. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item number four. I move to close public hearing on item number four.

Second. It's been moved by Commissioner Diddier, seconded by Commissioner Vincent. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. All oppose. Same sign. Public hearing is closed. Other business done. Administrative none. Public comments. None. Meeting is adjourned at 7:30. Thank you. Get out of here. We recycle. You What do you do with the paper? Maybe was long. Right.