Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Technically six oh, there we go. Alright. 07:00 on the dot. Let's get started. Call this meeting to order. I'll hear motions or discussion on the consent agenda.

I noticed on sorry. Did you share? The minutes on December 4, it's William Hareth, not Willie Hireth. Know where that is?

To I'm

to do

I'm Aye. Aye. Opposed. Failed to mention we excuse Ken tonight as well as Bo from this meeting. And we'll turn the time over to Katie.

Yeah. So item 3.1 is public hearing and consideration of James Whitmore's request for conditional use approval of the SAJ Lehigh RV storage located at approximate 4300 North Digital Drive. The Freedom Trucking Driving School was previously approved on this site in December 2023. The property is zoned light industrial and does not have utilities connected to the site. The plan shows that the required 20 foot setback from the property lines and the eight foot masonry fence is met according to development code the DRC had 12 red line comments which mostly include technical updates to the site but please include all DRC comments in your motion this is a conditional use and conditional uses are allowed uses.

The Planning Commission can determine if reasonable conditions need to be put upon them to minimize impacts to surrounding sites. This is a public item there were no online comments for this so turn it back to the commission for any questions.

Is the applicant president? Come on up if you'd like to share some more with us.

State your name and My my name is James Whitmore. Leave that where it is, I guess. I do have one question. You mentioned an eight foot concrete fence. Understanding that we had to get a special permit for eight foot over six foot. And eight foot is what we wanna do. So yeah. Are we already there at eight feet?

Correct. Yeah. So, yeah, according to your site plan, you have the eight foot fence called out. Okay. And we actually require that as part of our code for the use that you're doing. So No.

I really don't have anything to say. I think it's pretty well covered in all the literature that I read, and we're just requesting the use there for the covered storage. We feel like concrete fence and buildings will start to improve the way that site looks up there. The whole thing's kind of a mess, frankly. So any improvement we can do to make it look better will start to help it. That's all I have.

Any questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you. This is a public hearing. This time, we'll open the public hearing and invite anyone who would like to speak. Seeing a mad rush, we will close the public hearing and turn it back to the commission for further deliberation or a motion.

I think we have discussed this one enough times in the past. Yeah? Everything looks in order? Are you gonna entertain a motion? Yeah. Excellent. Then for item 3.1, public hearing of of James Whitmore's request for conditional use and approval at approximately 4300 North Digital Drive. I move that we give approval 20 foot setback, the masonry fence,

and

yeah. But this is this is all in order after several rounds. And, of course, include DRC comments.

Second. Motion in the second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Alright. You're good to go.

Glad to have this sorted out for you.

When will that go before oh, that's

That's it.

You're good to go. You're clear. Yep. Alright 3.2.

Item 3.2 is public hearing and recommendation of JDH Development's request for an exception for a required trail connection to a master plan trail and to meet the block length. The exception is requested due to grade at Vivian Estates Phase 2B located at approximately two thousand six hundred north and six hundred east. All code requirements have been met but the applicant requests approval for the required trail. Providing a connection through the subdivision would give the community direct access to direct trail access to nearby master plan trails on 600 East. In January 2019 the council approved the Vivian Estates phase 2 preliminary subdivision and the preliminary subdivision shown a connection that would meet the connectivity requirements.

The applicant requests removing the trail due to steep grade the code does allow exceptions to the connectivity requirements based off of grade the planning commission will provide a recommendation and it will ultimately be the city council's decision this is a public hearing item and there was one comment online. You can read that during the public comment period but turn it back to the commission for any questions.

Who's the applicant present? Tell us your name and anything else you want us to know.

Yeah. Name is Austin Cooper. I work for Giddeech Development. Can I collect

this Yeah? Yeah. HDMI.

I just wanted to show some pictures pictures that that we we took took of of the of the the development. Development.

Okay.

So just so we get a a feel of where it is. So this was this was the preliminary plat. I And as you can see, 600 was straight. Oh, maybe.

Don't breathe, bro.

There you go. 600 East was was just went straight up and down north to south. And at the time that this was approved, where this this blue square is or rectangle is, that's where the road was flat from 2600 North to that point and then started going on a on a decline. At the point at that time, it was a, it was like an 19% incline. So they we we, since then have have changed it.

Now as as you kinda saw in some of those other drawings, now it starts going down at about this point and it doesn't go straight, it actually cuts back into, the lots, here. And I did wanna show this image. Let's see. Okay. Yeah.

So this is this is a view of it right now. Some of this dirt will will be moved here but most of this is this is actually about, we're already three feet lower than the the road over here at at fifty five, or five fifty east. And this is, I mean, is the slope. So I just wanted to get a picture that the I mean, you can you can see on here, right, there's any any of the drawings show all of these, you know, lines that show you the the topo of of the it's it's pretty steep. But I wanted to present that this image to you just to show you how steep it is.

Right at the the place where the the trail would be, it's right about here. So this is about eight to 10 feet, of an incline. The the proposal for the lot and I apologize if I'm going back and forth too too quick. But the proposal would probably be that it would be fairly flat till about here. And then there'd be from there to here, there there's about eight eight feet, eight to 10 feet.

At the steepest, it is just over, 8%, which is, I think the max of the for code is 8%. So it's a little high there. Anyway, I just want to present that as kind of more information to give you guys some visuals of of what we're asking. I think as as 600 East has now become in in my opinion, I think it's now a thoroughfare as it's got a straight shot to the family park, the the soccer fields there and then also all the way down to Main Street. This could be a very busy, busy street.

So we're we're hoping for an exception based on grade and also safety is kind of what we're talking about. So anyway, yeah, I just wanted to share that with you. And, yeah, turn the time back over.

Questions for the applicant? Did Lehigh City do that road behind? K.

Yeah. Yeah. That was all all in the city. Yeah. Initially initially, we had everything I don't know if it ever got to full approval for the whole development, but we were we I think we're right there close and the high city asked us to hold off on on these last lots that are now part of 2B as they were looking at 600. And then now with 600 going in, it's kind of thrown a lot of things for loop on this project.

Just to be entirely clear, I'm sure not if this question is for staff or for you, yes?

Austin, yeah.

So this change in elevation, this slope, this was Lehigh City's doing or the applicant's doing?

Lehigh City. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. We I don't know. Gary, if you wanna jump in either one. But, yeah, we did design the road. We we coordinated with their development, but it did go through a lot of different iterations and that it ended up steeper than what was originally envisioned or at least, you know, what was there before for this section. But yeah. Yeah.

We went out, met on-site. You know, I think it you could still make it work. It would you'd probably either have to do stairs. So, anyways, it it there's some discretion here for the commission to decide how to recommend and then ultimately the city council.

Without this connection here, how would someone in the neighborhood get to the the trail?

Yeah. So, without the trail, basically these these homes here would have to go to the street that's right here and then up to 2600 and then down 600. So yeah, there's the the street access there. Yeah. So for a lot of these homes on this end, you know, not a huge change, but obviously these homes over here, it's a pretty sizable change to have to walk all the way around.

Is the primary concern an engineering challenge?

Yeah. Engineering, so the slope. So basically happen I think that's sort of very easy. What would need to happen is if we did end up doing so if we did end doing stairs, you do stairs there. But then there would need to be retaining walls. Or we slope the the lot next to it and just kinda slowly grade down to it. But eight to 10 feet, we're then into the lot, you know, fifteen, twenty feet which then makes the lot the the use of space on that lot significantly decreased. Stairs could also be a challenge. Mean, this could be maintained by the city. We will dedicate it to the city.

And if we maintain the city with stairs, a big challenge. My understanding of the way the code says in preliminary, it was agreed to that we do, you know, just just asphalt for the trail. Stairs would would have to be out of concrete. If there's a retaining wall, any of that stuff, anything additive would

be on

the Significantly. Yeah. Would increase it and and most of that would fall probably fall in the city. Right.

Yeah. Since this was a requirement, are you offering anything in place of this trail connection?

We haven't offered anything. From our perspective, looking at what has happened with 600, it feels like the city's already taken quite a bit from us. Under this plan was approved, our average usable space for these lots was I know you remember. Under the preliminary, the average of space was about 13,000 square feet. Now with yeah, sorry.

If if we do the trail, it goes to about just just over 11,000. So we lose we lose about eighteen eighteen to 1,900, usable square feet

Yeah.

Per per lot on average. If we look just at this this lot at the end here, it's really small but here it has it as a 22,000 square foot lot. Now with this one, it's at about a 17, just just under 17,000 square foot lot. So this this lot alone loses about 5,000 square feet. This is is a it's and it's I mean, it's it's big enough slopes here that we're not sure.

We're not even sure how we're gonna what what kind of home is gonna be able to go on there and probably have to do some settling with the dirt and there's a lot lot of other things. Most likely, what may need to do is combining these two lots into one to be able to have enough usable space. Part of this the CC and Rs of this development is there has to be three garages. It's getting down to where it may be hard to put a home. And most of the homes in this are in this in this development are, you know, between one point two to one point six million dollars homes.

Right. So it's a nice enough home, nice enough area that, you know, you get down to these smaller smaller lots with with now the road being pushed out that's gonna be difficult. So we might end up having to we'll probably actually gonna combine those two lots. So I guess, yeah, long way to answer your question, already kinda feels like a take. Putting the trail on this end now also makes that these these lots are smaller. So haven't come up with anything yet.

I very much take your your point. If Lehigh is financing is backing sorry I'm parsing this out in my brain Is the concern more having space in terms of lots or is it about the financial impact of putting it in?

So I mean initially looking at it from our end just from an engineering standpoint it doesn't seem to make sense. You know, we've we've looked at lots of different, iterations. We looked at putting it here. That's even steeper. We looked at putting it along the the side of this, which that's only about a 2% to 3%, incline.

So from a safety standpoint, from how to put in stairs, that that's fine. But 20 feet off of this one lot, now makes this lot unusable. The frontage doesn't meet code. In order to in order to make it fit code, have to push this lot which all the utilities are already in place. We'd have to move all the utilities and that goes I mean that go that that's just time and money and you know goes above and beyond what was what was in the preliminary so we've looked at lots of different options and and it it just doesn't feel like with with all the changes that have happened to 600, it doesn't feel like engineering it it, you know, doesn't make sense.

The the one one thing that may make sense is, you know, putting in stairs here that would deter, you know, kids or strollers from going and and running. It's a safety issue. But at that point, then you run into, you know paying for the extra material for the cement stairs, paying for retaining walls or reimbursement of some sort for you know now that 10 to 15 feet of of unusable space on those two lots.

My inclination on the situation is it would be stairs retaining walls making sure that you keep that space. Lehigh created the situation that would fall on Lehigh. I hate that, and I understand right things things happen. I I get how it how we're in the situation. I do hate simply throwing away connectivity standards. That's my initial take as I parse through this if that's that would still work for you, Lehigh footing that bill.

Definitely definitely one and we we met with this the staff today on on-site and definitely open to seeing seeing what works and what you know willing to work it just looking at it from an industry standpoint doesn't make sense and then you know

Gary's sentiments here look this is please engineer.

Okay I didn't know if you wanted me to wait for comments.

This is everyone in the room.

Oh let's let's ask. Sorry

real Do you have any other photos or angles angles of of the the grade? Grade?

Oh,

So the only photos I have are this one that shows the all the slope and then from below where this is where the trail would be from below and this is where the trail would be from above.

Okay.

Yeah. So it's just gonna show it's

Does those photos represent what you see on-site and stuff?

I haven't been out there since they've graded and done some things like that on there.

Yeah. I was actually there this afternoon when he took these. The the one that shows the really steep slope, you're looking kinda south, and I think we walked maybe 20 feet Yeah. From where the so it's so, you know, that it it gets really steep really fast.

That picture is probably taken from route right here.

Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

So you're

So little bit Little

bit further south from where the trail is proposed, but but kinda to to paint that picture of its Yeah. Yeah. It's crazy.

Where is the trail? I I don't see it in the photos. Where's the trail across the street?

You mean the master plan trail? Mhmm. On 600 East. It's graded. You can see it at the bottom there. Yeah. So it'll go All of all of this

right here. I thought it was going across the street.

And grades all the way up to the family park.

So it goes along 600. It doesn't cross

to 600. Yeah. So if we look at this, it's it's this gray grayed in here. This line that goes all the way down along the full development along phase two and then phase three eventually phase five.

You're an engineer as well. Right? Yeah. This is your jam.

I love this kind of stuff. So

here's $2.02 cents for me. I live in a neighborhood that we're lucky to live next to a master plan trail. Right? And I love it. I love the access. I live on the trail. Have a fence in my backyard, a gate that goes right under the trail. And it's awesome for me and my kids.

Yeah.

There was a huge lack of connectivity openings to that trail throughout the neighborhood. So I get really defensive of this particular use where you're connecting to a master plan trail. It sucks to lose that. It hurts the neighborhood. It hurts the opportunities for people to recreate. It makes it so those recreation opportunities are less appealing, you know, for even even for a a parent to send a 10 year old kid that much further along what is another busy road

Mhmm. Yep.

Out front of it. That's a huge deterrent. Right? Having that even if it's a staircase. Right? Which I obviously I think it would be this Yep. If it's a staircase, in fact, I think a staircase is probably the best scenario because then you're not having a kid slide real fast down that road onto a busy street.

That's not

the stairs if it's

you. It's my stairs. Honestly.

Because you'd to have a

ring all stairs. My opinion. But I hate hate to see us lose that connectivity because I live in a neighborhood where that connectivity sucks. Right? There's we live in a trail that goes literally all around. Are feet, hundreds and thousands of feet of trail. And there are there's one access point in the neighborhood. Right? And it sucks. And people don't use the trail because of it.

They're like, oh, it would be awesome to go out on the trail today, but I gotta go clear back to that point of the neighborhood to get in. Mhmm. So losing that access, I know it is relatively inconsequential. There's not a ton of homes in this area. They're not that far away really to get onto it, but I think of that 10 year old kid. Right? And that parent might say, you know, you gotta go a little further and now you gotta go on 2000 North which is a little busier or 2016.

Austin, I very much take your point. Lee Hai City did this.

Yeah.

Yeah. I'm going to sit in the red chair for just a second on that those comments Tyson because if stairs I think would be the best solution. I live in a neighborhood on a hill and we have stairs that have to be maintained and shoveled and they're a mess. Luckily we're in an HOA so the city doesn't have to worry about that. But so if it's stairs though, how accessible really is that trail? Because if I've got a stroller or if I'm taking my kids out on a bike, I'm not necessarily going to haul those bikes down stairs or my stroller downstairs and then back upstairs. So in that scenario, I'd still have to go out and around.

But I still think it's infinitely more accessible than not Yeah. Having

True.

Right? True. It But I'm just thinking some people might view it as be like well it's really not accessible for those specific scenarios but you're right something might be better

than that. It's not ADA.

It's not.

Not a requirement in our code. It doesn't have to be ADA.

No. Mhmm.

I my opinion is let's still do it. Let's put it in.

I'm with you, Tyson. This is where I really will Gary?

I wanna hear Gary's. Yeah.

Okay. I need to hear

this is just totally a bonkers idea to to consider otherwise.

So stepping back a little bit when 60s was originally put in there was a wall plan to be almost 40 feet tall right here, right? As partially paid by Lehi City and HADCO to both fund that wall. Well, since then and I wasn't part of these negotiations. But since then, they've come back and renegotiated with John Hadfield lower that wall or even eliminate it, but then also reimburse him for the loss of the value of the property. So I know that they have been compensated for it.

I don't know how much that was. I wasn't privy to that information. But I know that he has worked agreement with Hadco there on the loss of the value of those properties because it does diminish the size to bring that grade up at 2% to 1% or 2% to 1% is what they agreed to do. And so it does diminish that footprint that a house could be set on there. And it does reduce the value of the property.

So they have negotiated those prices there. As far as the 6% coming down, there is that trail that goes down 60 and up the other side. There are parts of that trail that will be steeper than 6%. So 6% isn't crazy to have a trail. Now, appreciate that coming down and t boning into 60s could be a dangerous situation there for kids and strollers and whatever else. That's why we kind of would suggest and recommend putting the trail on the diagonal there on the edge of the property where the trail will be almost dead flat. And then it wouldn't even be t boning. It would enter 60s kind of on an angle. I think it's in the package there if you have that there. Anyway, that's kind of our engineering opinion is that it should be there.

It was part of the original plans to be there. We like the idea of the trail connecting on through there and then to move it over to the other lot there right next to Lot 213. Why is there a good enough read what the other lot is there? But kind of on the diagonal there where it would be pretty flat.

So Austin, what does that do to you guys if that happens?

So putting the putting the trail here would make the frontage here not up to code. We'd have to push the lot line which means all the utilities that are coming

right here

need to all be pushed over.

Gary, what's the gist out of that?

So is this the current set of

This is what was submitted.

This is what was submitted there?

Yeah.

Know, it still could be put between the two lots where it was originally supposed to be.

And it was spaced out for that. The utilities were put in place for that.

Yeah. Yeah. It's just on on this side of utilities.

And maybe there's some engineering measures they could put along the road to keep people from going straight in, bollards, or something there.

I don't know. But is it a neighborhood maintained? Or would that be a city maintained sidewall?

Dedicated to city. The city would be city maintained.

Which I can see where

stairs then become a headache because it is an HOA and that means

And I appreciate too if there's retaining walls that adds to the cost. The stairs are expensive. An asphalt trail would be much much cheaper.

So what's more expensive to the city retaining walls maintain stairs putting in the concrete stairs or covering you know footing the bill for shifting utility lines and accommodating you know what would happen if we did this gentler you know to the original set by Lot 213.

It's a little hard to say but I'm guessing that I mean, if it's sixes, then it sounds like It's probably gonna be similar. I don't think it'll be double the cost one way or the other. Austin, you guys give He has a better feel on that.

Takes takes it for creating the situation? Is that what I'm I'm guessing Lehigh's it's footing the bill for having created the situation.

Does that effectively mean if it's between the two we'd rather have this straight. Yeah

because it's gonna screw lot sizes even if exceptions were given and whatnot.

The time it would take to move all utilities for sure as well as sharing it between two lots rather than one lot taking the whole thing and having to shift all the lots over and move everything around. It just feels like it'd be easier. But, from a time timeline and and in my mind potentially even maybe even money. I think this feels like this would be cheaper. But I haven't run any of the numbers. I don't know for sure.

How steep I mean, with these stairs there's a world of difference between, like, you know, 45 degree stairs, like, in a house versus we're up half a foot, have a bit of landing, up half a foot. What

You're dropping eight feet over 40 feet. It's Yeah. There's yeah this landings yeah ride a bike down it

the the difficulty with pushing it back further and having big landings is then potentially has more retaining wall you're going further in further into the the tall hill so you have more retaining wall

sure but I do think it creates if you've got several landings, this is more likely for parents to say, I can get the stroller upright one at a time, push for a bit. The 10 year old who isn't proficient on the bike can get up and down. Alright.

Any other questions for the applicant or staff? Alright. Well, thank you. This is a public hearing. At this time, we will open the public hearing and invite anyone. One moment. The comment. Online comment. And, Katie, will you please read that comment? Yes.

This is from Montane Hamilton. It's a shame we have connectivity standards and no reason to have those connections due to them connecting to nothing. In this case without the connection there is no good way to walk anywhere south or east without a large detour. That said there is likely not to be a lot of need for this but if we are actually planning for a future this exception should not be approved. We should be encouraging a more walkable community and once this connection is given this will lock this problem this will lock this problem in for decades.

Any pedestrian access to roads is dangerous but forcing more people to make car trips only makes this a bigger problem. We cannot continue to be hostile to pedestrians by giving them less choices and excusing cars and our lack of planning for creating dangerous conditions for them. The connectivity standards should be upheld here we have already created the situation by not connecting these roads which would have provided the connectivity in and of themselves we should not compound the problem again.

That's it.

Alright seeing no more comment I'll close the public hearing and turn it back over to the commission.

I think it's retaining walls and stairs for me.

I'm not a fan. I just think it's a maintenance issue for the city going forward like with retaining walls mean maintenance, concrete cracks, concrete. It's just it's just money that the city's gonna have to throw down the drain into the future. Yeah. That's just my thoughts on it. It's a it's maintenance condition. And it's to me, it's kind of a problem that Lehigh City created itself by having to grade the road out which we had to do to get over to 600. So for for me, I'm not a big fan of forcing a retaining wall in that's then an ongoing maintenance bill for us.

I'm torn. You know, I I understand that for me if if we're gonna have something connecting to a trail, I'd like it. I know there's no ADA standards but I would like it to be as accessible as possible for everyone but understanding that that puts, you know, the developer and the city in in a tougher spot to do that. I think at that point, I'd almost just not have anything at all but I still don't know because I do want access for some. I'd prefer if it was access for everybody.

I completely agree on it.

I said, you know, I'm not saying anything.

No. No. No. No. No.

I mean, I mentioned eight. Right.

I went like Peter.

You're looking at 8% or greater slope. Sure. Yeah. And what is ADA 4%?

In this case, it would be 8%. 8%? So, it still would meet.

So, it'd be ADA compliant. But if we didn't do retaining walls, it would take away the ability to build houses on there.

Not necessarily. I think if you look at like little little bit of

ratio, something like that. Okay. But more I also don't wanna lose the comment that our engineer made that there was some consideration to the devaluation of the property with with it that has already been agreed upon and and or received. So that part of it is less impactful for me seeing that there has been some remediation there for the developer and the loss. So to me, it's more than the value or the inconvenience for the developer. It's more about the standard of connectivity.

I don't like well, I appreciate creating costs especially that are indefinite I also don't like the idea that in a way and by no means am I looking for words to mouth I want to clear on that right but to approve this exception could be taken as Lehigh effectively saying we create a situation it's really inconvenient for us we're not gonna provide what we promised and to this community individually and what we have said we're doing as a whole across the city yeah so to to me, I see that, again, not a fan of creating an ongoing, maintenance issue, but this is this is kind of part of the could we legally not execute? Yes. But I do see it as part of the social contract of between the city and its residents.

There are I agree with that.

There are areas in the city that have also asked for this type of an exception in the past. And we have landed on, okay, you don't need to put the road connection in there, but we still want a pedestrian connection, whether that be trailer stairs. I'm thinking particularly of the area around the the new temple that's coming up. There are staircases throughout that neighborhood because of that. They asked for an exception to the standard.

And we said, okay, no road, but but we still want that pedestrian connection. So I think think there's a standard to uphold there as well. And I I always worry about precedent as well. But I I just think that we put a lot of energy into that connectivity standard and it always gets questioned. I understand grade challenges, but I also think that that standard is crucial to uphold or we will lose it throughout the city.

I will entertain a motion. I'm happy.

I don't know. Does Nicole have anything to say? I already did. Oh, no. I'll

make a motion. Go ahead. Getting in my motions after not doing the eighties

you know.

So for item 3.2 public hearing recommendation of the HADCA right and JDH I drew right through the right through it. Development's request for an exception on the required trail connection to the master plan master plan trail on Vivien Estates Phase 2B located approximately 2600 North, 600 East. I move that we deny the

Offer a negative recommendation.

Yes, forgive me. I'm rusty, right? Offer a negative recommendation with the findings that the proposed trail is part of our connectivity standards that we do not want to compromise on that it can and at 8% grade with stairs be done in a safe manner. And I'll also add note that we recognize Lehigh City created the situation and so we still have a responsibility to our citizens to meet the standards that we've promised.

I'll And second it. Motion in the second. All in favor.

Aye. Any

opposed? Was that a nay?

No. I went to ask the ace of the coast. Those habits. Oh.

Here we go.

Sorry. Reaction. Alright.

Carries forward with a negative recommendation. When does this go to the city council?

February February.

Let's see. Is it the twenty fourth, Kate? Aren't we delaying? Or in March. Oh, but we have the three, four weeks. Let's see. We changed things up a little bit with the new council. Sorry. The the city council debate over their schedule this year was was intense. Okay.

Basically, three weeks or Yeah.

Just people fight a lot of people. No.

Just it moves

forward in February 10. February 10.

I

will note for the applicant. We're a governing body that does not control the purse strings. They do. And they'll look at it and they'll determine if it's financially feasible or not or something that they're willing to take on.

We recommend. We are not a legislative body.

Thank you. Thank you.

City business.

I don't really have any. Just a reminder maybe that your work session would be next

The Oh.

Or two weeks from now. Yeah. The fifth.

We don't have a meeting next week. Right?

Yeah. That's right. So it's the fifth Thursday. And on the work session, we will cover some there'll be several trainings. Utah open public Meetings Act and then The bylaws.

We'll go through the bylaws and then we might go through some Robert's rules of order just if you guys have any questions.

Never by call. So

Is there a way to participate in that remotely?

Yeah. K.

Also, it will be recorded. Okay. I'm not gonna be here on the fifth.

I also will not be here on fifth.

Sounds like you're not gonna be here on

the fifth. I was

I mean, I can change my planning, but I was planning on driving on the fifth. But, yeah.

That's the one

I Move it. So

To our next meeting then.

It sounds

best to it work.

The open meeting one is required

drive, so I don't

have to drive. The state once a year.

What does our first meeting look like? First

meeting is This regular meeting. Meeting. Okay. I don't know if they haven't. I respect that. Saggy snowpack.

I get that. Because I'll be out

of town.

Oh, you'll be out of town on the twelfth. Oh my gosh.

I'm gone the ninth.

Let's move it to May.

Sounds great. Twenty twenty seventh.

I'll be gone in May. I'm just kidding.

Do we need to have an ad hoc meeting on a random meeting?

I'll be I'll I'll be in Los Angeles for a shoot.

So do we I guess we'd I can make for a forum to do the work session, but then Yeah. But also,

like, it's kind of an important work session.

Right? So maybe we just

Let's bump it to the February 27 if there's

Cancel work session then?

Twenty sixth. Twenty sixth.

I won't be here the twenty sixth.

Okay. No one will be.

Wait. Is that because I won't be here where I'm

Is that her check your schedule?

23 with you. 3 if I'm going. And a

I'll

together and get it scheduled. Okay. I'll send send emails, of course, but let me just note. I've yeah, I'll be missing a few more meetings than than I'd like in the next few months. Mhmm. I agree. I'm just on the

road a lot. Ideally, you would not hear

That's normal.

Yeah. So it's normal? Okay.

Okay.

I can This is the last

meeting is built. If we help hold

it and they're gone, I'll be. So if we don't hold

it, then Yeah. Yeah. But it so, ideally, you'd you'd prefer yeah. I have no questions. Here. You wouldn't be here a year

I'm I'm here.

On the okay. For the work session.

Yes. For the fifth?

Yes. Oh, gone and here.

I just need

to know if Ken

will suggest that you just bump it.

Yeah. Sounds like

Should we cancel the work session?

Here's Yeah.

What else were you planning

to discuss?

Quorum, but we're gonna be missing enough that it's

yeah. Mhmm.

Okay. Is this normally we have other people? Like, they're presenting projects to us?

Work sessions are more just for training or if we have there's no action items. So it's just more training or

If it's like a big item that's coming up that needs some extra discussion or Yeah. You know, like the downtown Revitalization. And

We had somebody come and teach us how to professionally argue with each other once.

Oh, yeah.

Conflict resolution training. Yeah. I I don't think that was enough.

That's all was trying

to convey.

What I

got out

of it.

Shooter training once.

Oh, was. That was

a that was a sober

I still have some nightmares about that. But I know.

I have to do those at work, and they're

not fun. Point blank in the

chest. Oh.

So okay. We

don't do

active shooters. I

am yeah. Unless When we add an active shooter.

Something comes out. I think we'll just end up canceling February work session.

K.

And then we we'll decide I guess we could do the bylaws on the February 10, just not the open meetings act.

Yeah.

So we'll just postpone that to Perfect. That's March.

What's that? February 12? Yeah. Okay. You said tenth.

That's a Tuesday. Sorry. That's okay. Just checking.

Okay. So very die by my calendar.

Sorry. I apologize.

I think we have another week of the

Last planning session agenda? Oh, we do.

Four four hours is definitely a thing.

Oh, yeah, Matt?

Can I move now that we run a two minute timer? For sure. Okay. No. That that was the that was there

that I did not run

a timer in the hospital.

Well, for you

I'm give gonna you crap until you

hear We're still meeting

07:00 on the twelfth.

Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. It shouldn't be that bad.

Don't chase. Don't don't say these things for you. Why would you Jesus like that?

Is it a Britney meeting or is it a

I mean, there's just a lot

of items, but they just I don't know. Just a couple zone changes.

Some of them should be

If you wanna answer. Yeah.

You hear them all catch like, oh. Zone changes.

Just let us know. Those are always new. Because that's a lot.

Just so you guys No. It's Jacob. Shady meetings are the short meetings this year.

Jacob looked at

Well, it's like spraining my ankle to break the curse. So How about

we'll put we'll put it on at the end of the agenda for the bylaws. And then we can kick

it if

we need 10:00. We'll just roll it again to the second meeting in February. How's that?

Sounds good.

Got it. Okay.

A motion to end the meeting. Motion

to adjourn. Second.

All in favor. Aye. Any opposed?

Awesome. No gavel?

Excuse me. You can.

Do you know

the history of this gavel? Absolutely. It was from

I don't. What's his name, Scott?