Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, well, it's 515, everybody. Welcome to the Planning Commission meeting for September 15th. We'll open with the Pledge of Allegiance, but Wayne will lead us in that. Thanks, Wayne.

Please follow me in the pledge.

I pledge allegiance.

Just so everybody knows, Anna from Public Works is here taking minutes for us in the absence of a secretary up here, and we appreciate you. Thank you, Anna, for doing that. Okay, it looks tonight like it's the Dallas Buckner show, so we'll get on with it. But to start, we probably need to entertain a motion for approval of the minutes dated July 7th, 2026.

I'll make a motion that we approve the minutes dated July 7th, 2026.

All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, the next thing is a public hearing. General plan amendment from Central Commercial to Business Light and Light Manufacturing at 226 North, 3325 West. Was this two and three, can they be handled together?

Yes.

And then the other is public hearing for zone change in that same area from INM2 to INM1 Dallas.

So this is a lot out in the Diamante subdivision, industrial subdivision, and the zoning out here is kind of a little bit screwy. So we have a lot owner that owns this parcel. We're working on a commercial building permit. Currently the subdivision is kind of split zoned, INM 1 and 2. And the owner of this likes the table of uses for INM 1, which is more of your light commercial business. type zone versus INM2, which is heavy industrial. And so that's what brought about the zone changes. We're requesting that we change this parcel from INM2 to INM1. And then the city's general plan out in this area, despite this being an industrial subdivision, is underlaid with central commercial. And so we're just trying to bring the general plan to match the overlying zoning.

It's just this one lot.

Correct, yeah.

The other lots around him, are they too?

Well, yeah, so the Diamante subdivision is kind of like an L-shape that starts at Highway 56 and then comes down and kind of goes west a little bit. And so a portion, kind of the south portion of it, has the I&M 2 zone. Like this EK land properties is kind of split-zoned, and these maybe followed tax IDs prior to the subdivision. So a lot of the ones that are developed have the I&M one. Pioneer floor is right there in I&M two on the east side. And so we're looking at doing a commercial shell buildings with some tenant spaces and they just, they like the I&M one more commercial business friendly than heavy manufacturing, so.

That's quite unusual to make that change from INM 2 to INM 1, isn't it? That's a good idea, but it seems quite unusual. It seems like it usually goes the other way, doesn't it?

I'm just thinking out loud. I would say for lots of this size that INM 1 is probably more appropriate. INM 2 you generally see. For an industrial park, yes, you would typically see an INM 2. But when you're in the multi-acre, this one's 1.85 or 1.95. but just for his specific use case and being basically adjacent to INM1 made sense on our end.

Makes sense, yeah. City, Kent, Don? No, I think the zone change makes sense. It's all INM1 to the north. And with the table of uses, it's certainly more conducive to what's around them. There's a batting cage over there. The INM2 is really designed for your really heavy manufacturing and it starts to exclude a lot of uses that you could allow in the INM-1, so I don't see any issue with this at all.

And the same for me. This seems like a good proposal.

So a couple things that I would note along those same lines is we may end up in the end recommending or at least encouraging the council to move the line up to that artificial line that matches nothing so we don't have split zone lots. That just complicates issues. We'll see if we can meet that requirement to do so because a lot of people don't like having their property zone changed underneath them. The general plan one is a bit more of an oddity. There's nothing in state law that prohibits spot zoning, let alone spot general planning. Even though this is all industrial through here in this industrial park, it's general planned as commercial, central commercial, which some of it might fit in central commercial, like the batting cage would be fine. Certainly. But it is just kind of an oddity, nothing that goes against what everything around it's being used for, but just kind of so you know, it'll look a little funky on a map when you look at the colors.

That's one of those results where the general plan didn't match the zoning designation, and certainly the city wasn't going to go in and enforce a commercial zone change. It's developed for industrial purposes, no curb, gutter, sidewalk. So it's probably something we should clean up with the general plan eventually. That would be my thought.

Should work out. Commission, any questions?

So in a multi-tenant complex like that, all the tenants have to abide by whatever the zoning is, right? Right.

Correct. So we're doing shell buildings. They'll come in and do tenant improvements and build out each tenant space. But where I&M 2 is more heavy manufacturing, it starts to exclude some of the more commercial business type uses. And so that's the reason for the change is so that they can have more of like an office type thing, some of the things that are precluded in the I&M 2. Like a batting cage, for instance.

Depends on how hard you hit. That could be interfering enough.

Any other questions? If not, it is a public hearing, so we'll open the public hearing. Anybody wish to comment on it? If not, go ahead. Step up here. Step up and share your name, please.

My name is Spencer Eaton. I'm the lot owner just to the north and west of that piece of property where we're building pickle and play, indoor pickleball, and roller skating, miniature golf, all that fun stuff. And so I was here just to understand better about what the plans are. So if you're looking specifically like the tenant building, similar to what other places have been used.

Yeah, we're directly across from you, somewhere where it's done.

OK. Yeah, I just, yeah, thank you. I just wanted to get a better understanding for what that property would potentially be used for, and so I was just here to learn that, and I don't have any concerns with it either.

Yeah, and INM-1 would make it more compatible with what you're doing.

Yeah, that's what we're hoping for. We just don't want anybody to know and pick a wall. That's all. Thank you. Awesome. Thank you.

So do you have a card? Do you have a card?

No, but I can give you my phone number.

Okay, great. Okay, go ahead.

My direct number is 435-773-8414. 8414. Yes, sir.

Just so you know, Spencer, there's 35,000 people watching this.

Oh, perfect, good.

That's good, that's a little advertising.

I should have sang the National Anthem. That's right. Too late. I'll be back at the next one, don't worry. Thank you.

Thanks, Spencer. Anybody else like to comment? If not, we'll close the public hearing and be open for a motion.

I'll make a motion.

I move that we approve items 2 and 3, general plan amendment from commercial central to business and light manufacturing, and number 3, zone change from INM 2 to INM 1. Second.

Thank you, Wayne. Jennifer is second. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Okay. Next items of business are the north-south mountain area, Travis, or Dallas again, excuse me. Zone change from AT to annex transition to... R1 and R21 and R22, is that right?

And CC and R3M.

All right, so that's all, oh yeah, that's all. So why don't you go through it? Different corners, but same project, right?

So, yeah, so we have five different applications on this. So we came through, gosh, I think it was 2019 or 2020, and we did an RDO out here called the Bauer, Bower Meadows RDO, and one of the things with an RDO is you get the RDO approved, but the RDO does not change the zones. You have to come back through with a zone change. We've done a couple projects out here, and we've come through and zoned different aspects of it, and now this is basically just zone change the rest of it. in conformance with the RDO. So we had several different pods. This big area right here, pod one, we're changing, all of these are in conformance with the RDO, but this big area here is changing to R1 from AT. I think this all got annexed with the, I think it was called the Cordero Project in the early 2000s. And so all of this is still zoned, annexed transition. So pod one's going to R1. This kind of sliver pod is R21. This kind of weird shape that goes around the school district elementary site and then comes down to Westview and South Mountain is R22. And then we had a small commercial area on the corner of South Mountain and Westview. and then we had some R3M behind the commercial fronting South Mountain and then this is the school district high school site and that's the school district elementary site. And then these are the valley one, two, three and four that have been constructed. Phase four hasn't but one through three has. and then Westview Drive right here. I think this is Cross Hollow subdivision. To the northwest you've got Forby Ranch, just to kind of give you guys bearings. Where's Forby Ranch again? Forby Ranch is up to the northwest. Okay. So Westview, South Mountain running right through here, and then this is the valley, then the estates, then the canyons, and then Saddleback's north of that.

So with the upcoming school district property and stuff, you're looking to put residential homes in there and make it conform to

Correct, yeah. So the RDO, I'm sure most of you are familiar with, but the RDO is essentially our own general plan for developers that have a large tract. And so we came through, I think it was approved probably in 2020. And so all these zone changes are in conformance with what had been approved back then. But the RDO, just when you get it approved, it doesn't automatically... change the zones underlying. So as we've worked forward since 2020, we've done a couple different pockets and developed different things, and then this is just the remainder of the land that we had left as AT. And so every one of these zone changes is just bringing it in conformance with the approved RDO.

The existing RDO, yeah.

Existing RDO. Yeah. Zone changes proposed.

Any questions? Commission.

Yeah, I'm just a little confused on five different zone changes proposed for one piece of property. Am I missing something here?

No, it's multiple pieces of property. So there's numerous tax IDs that make it up. So the total is probably 200 and something acres. We came through originally with a full RDO. And I think there was like 10 different pods. and we had some R3 and some R1 and R2, and then we had some stuff across Westview. And so we've kind of zoned different pockets of it, and then this is just kind of the main chunk that hadn't been zone changed yet.

That makes sense, thank you.

So how many acres is this total?

Oh gosh.

Jennifer, can you turn your mic on?

Isn't that? Oh, okay. There you go.

Take it with a grain of salt. The onyx shows it at 171.

As I'm looking at the actual RDO. It's like 170 roughly.

Okay. Yeah, I think it's 166.8 or something like that.

And then your proposed commercial, that's going to be closer to Westview. Yeah, it's at the R section. Right there?

Yeah. Yeah, so commercials at the intersection of South Mountain and Westview. And then there's R3 between the commercial and the school district parcel on the south side of South Mountain. And then we did kind of a buffering concept. So from Westview and South Mountain, we go R21. Then we go, or sorry, R22. Then we go R21. Then we go R1.

Perfect.

That really clarified it. Thank you.

Yeah, thank you so much.

Can you pull up the general plan or the roads? I know a couple people in here are interested in the road.

Yeah, let me talk to that a little bit. I know one of the concerns with development in this area is our connectivity to the commercial area up by the Main Street interchange. So the, one of the things we have planned, we are planning to build, so the project we were talking about is over the, just off the picture here. We have a sewer line that comes through this area currently. We were able to secure federal highway funds to help pay a portion of the cost of us actually building a road through there that would tie in up here by Talon Drive so that we would have a continuous route that does not need to go through the neighborhood to get traffic between Westview and the commercial area up near the interchange. We are still early in the design on this. We're expecting it to be constructed potentially in 2028. It'll be either 2028 or 2029 that construction happens on this roadway here. But one of the things we're trying to do with that design is actually have this portion of South Mountain Drive, it would actually make a bend, and this would be the through movement. that would bring traffic coming up from Westview on up to just continue up Providence Center Drive. And then this other portion of South Mountain that goes up and dumps into the neighborhood is something that you would actually turn off of the main road. It would T in here. So this is in an attempt to make sure that we're providing good access for people to not have to go through the neighborhood unless the neighborhood's their destination, right? Then they would potentially go that route. But if they're just trying to get over to Walmart or Home Depot, this would be the easy route for them to take, the natural route for them to take. So I just want you to be aware as we're talking about all of this development in this area, you know, right here is where that bend I showed is. That road would come on down this way and go over and tie in by Talon Drive.

So it would pull a lot of traffic off Westview too that otherwise might go up there. Yeah.

Yeah, so I think that will help a lot. Like I say, the federal funds are actually programmed for 2028. By the time we get through all of the process that needs to be gone through with environmental and getting our right-of-way in place, all those kinds of things. We may be into 2029 before it gets constructed, but it'll be right in that 2028, 2029 timeframe that it's done, and therefore, that would help to alleviate some of the concerns that might otherwise be present with all of this land developing.

What's the timeframe just roughly for building this kind of stuff? That's about the same 20, 2789.

Yeah, I mean, we've taken, we've kind of been working from east to west and so we're working on the last, the fourth phase of the valley. Um, and then we've had some meetings with the city. That's the first time I've seen that, but we've been in discussions with them and the school district. as far as that bypass road. But there's another kind of natural valley right through here. And so the plan is to move to that next valley and develop in a similar fashion to how this one was. And so in doing that, we just said, hey, we've got all this stuff. Let's go ahead and just zone change the rest of it so it's done.

Excellent. Any other questions?

If not, this is a public hearing, so we will open the public hearing for those that may wish to comment. Steve, say your name.

My name is Steve Holder. I'm one of the people that John spoke to earlier today. I'm glad to hear about the road because when the stuff was going to be built across the road from that, the Cordero stuff, that was one of the main concerns of the neighborhood. Now, I live up in Forby Ranch. It's not really going to affect me that much, but the traffic going through South Mountain, I know a few people up there, and that is a real concern to them. Having them go through South Mountain is not fair to that community. One thing I would like you all to consider is not zoning this until that road is in place. It doesn't make sense. My understanding is as soon as it's zoned, he can start working on it. There's really not much the Planning Commission can do. So I would recommend holding off until that road comes in there and see what that traffic looks like and see what kind of, or what type of density support. That's my opinion.

Thank you. What about the road between Talon and... like Home Depot, is that ever, it's a two-laner, is it ever scheduled for anything bigger or is it just upon development?

You know, as, I mean, along the project there where Hive Homes is building, of course they've widened that portion of it. We would anticipate as additional development comes in to the northeast of them that that would also occur. We have some widening taking place where the U-Haul project is going in. We would expect that to just continue. At some point, we as a city are probably gonna need to make some improvements on the freeway side there that likely would not be done by development since there isn't much in the way of developable space there. But yeah, it's slowly building itself out. It will handle a fair amount of traffic even today. where there aren't a lot of, you don't have a lot of conflicting traffic and a lot of need for turning movements because it's, you know, there's nothing to turn to. Throughout most of that, the two-lane roadway does a pretty good job of handling the traffic. Thank you.

Any other comments?

Ann Clark. I generally do not trust RDOs because they can come in and change the RDO. So I'm gonna ask Dallas, Dallas knows I feel this way. What you've zoned, R1 and R21 and R22, is it going to stay that way or will you come back once you, because you have the RDO and you really kind of supersede the general plan, will you come back and go hey, I think we'll put in R3? That's what I don't trust because then you've got a worse traffic problem because you've got more people. Do you see what I'm saying? That's my problem with RDOs is we give up the power and then they can come in and say, you know what, we changed our mind on this. And so that would be my question to you.

I can try to address that, Ann. So the RDO does assign the zones. So if they wanted to amend that RDO, they would have to come in and amend it with the same notifications. It would be notifications for everybody around the entire RDO if we were to change that.

I think that's what we concluded.

Is it saying they couldn't do it arbitrarily?

No, they can't. No, they'll come back here. They would have to come back here. But I just want to know, is the city going to hold to what the original RDO said? Because you always hear, you know what, that just didn't pencil out for me or whatever. And then people are thrown because I guess what I'm saying is when you zone something, people want to be able to count on that. And that's my problem with RDOs. Then they can come back. They'll come back to the city. But I just don't know how strong the city will be to say no. And people have already counted on this. Do you know what I mean? That's all I'm saying, just a thought.

Thank you. Is that the case with every zone, though? That you can come back and have a change? Isn't that the case with every zoning, that you can come back and have a change?

Well, except if, I guess you could ask for commercial, or something like that. But my concern is that we say we're going to do R1 houses, and then it becomes an R3, and we come high-density housing over and over and over again. So, yeah, you're right. They could, I guess, come and change. I just feel like... What I've understood is once the people are given an RDO, you can tell me, Jennifer, if this is wrong, they then, it kind of supersedes any of the general plan.

They are in charge. It's my understanding that it's not, that it is set. All they're doing is dividing it up, am I correct? They're dividing it up in the allotments that they had originally anticipated when they wrote the RDO. It's the same process if they want to change those down the road. If they say, oh, this is not cost effective, it's the same process as if they already have R1 property that's not in an RDO and they would like to go through. They go through the same steps. They have to notify. So it doesn't really give them more power. I feel. Am I?

Well, we did have one fail out here a number of years ago. Didn't you work on that one, Dallas? Do you remember that? It was that commercial piece out here.

Yeah, we did. That's right, we did, yeah.

Well, I know years ago there was something out at Shirts Canyon and they had, I don't even remember the developers now, but they had developed and they were building their houses. Then here was the Middleton RDO, I don't know if you remember this, and they came back in and changed it. And so one of the pods was then changed to R3 and the city said, okay, go ahead. But the developers who had originally bought there and were building houses said, now you've ruined our view of the houses we've done and everything. And that's the thing I think sometimes is we, As a city, it's almost like if you're the one currently building, you get a say. But if you have already built sometimes, it feels like, ah, sorry, you're out of luck. So just sitting here over the years, I saw that and I thought, seeing things like that happen where they change it. And even for the developer that was currently there at Church Canyon, they didn't even have a say. The RDO said, oh, yeah, I know. We originally wrote it out, as I can remember. But now we're changing it to R3, and the city went with that. And I... I just get concerned with things like that. But anyway, thank you. Thanks. Thank you.

Thank you, Ann. Any others? Welcome, just share your name please.

Paul Roland and I live on Panorama Drive just above Westview in that area. And I guess the big concern here is that we know we're gonna have kids along the way, right? And I guess we're gonna have some stopping lights and stuff, that's what I understand. So somebody coming across one side, they can get from one side to the school, is that true? Do we know how that's set and how that's going?

None of that is planned and designed yet because we don't even know what's gonna happen on the school parcel yet. At such time as there are development plans for the school parcel, then those issues will certainly need to be addressed.

Yeah, and again, I think just with Westview and generally just as traffic, people try to go 45 now. A lot of people thought it should have been lower than that, but it's just something that we wanted to be sure that we were thinking about when we're talking about, because you got a lot of people who live in beautiful places, and we want the kids to have good places to go, but I think that's part of my concern.

Okay.

Yeah, thank you.

I think the school, I work for the school district, and I would agree that they're quite sensitive to that bringing in some of that quality that you're seeking, and I think they'd be quite open to doing, you know, we have crossing guards coming out of 14, the canyon and different places, so I'm sure at very least they would consider something like that.

Okay, great, thank you.

Great, thanks, Paul.

May I?

May I?

That's on now. Okay. I'd just like to say something. When 4B Ranch was built, and I've been involved in watching this stuff through the process for almost 28, 27 years, 28 years, I guess I'm forgetting. People came in and complained that 4B Ranch is going to add too much traffic. to Westview Drive, and then we have the other one, too much traffic to Westview Drive. Then we had Cross Hollows, too much traffic to Westview Drive. I get it, but where do we, and I think we have to be cognizant of other people's rights. Is your area the last subdivision? I mean, where they had problems, Westview Drive, I mean, I think 4B has, I think they could probably add another 200, 300 homes out there. It's massive, that whole area that's being developed. I just think we have to be respectful to remember that we're not the last right to say, well, nobody else could come because we came. Because easily your subdivisions wouldn't have been in existence if we said, no, because these people don't want it. Just keep that in mind. Thank you.

Fair enough, all good concerns. Anybody else that would like to speak or respond? Sure.

I think they're saying that, Tom, and Clark. I think what they're saying is as a city, we plan, so we plan for the traffic. We don't just get a big bottleneck. So I don't think they're saying don't develop. I think they're saying as we plan the city, let's make sure that we plan for the traffic and all of the various things. And I realize it's difficult, because you have to kind of foresee things, and sometimes you can't always see how it works out. You don't see the big picture, but I don't think it's that they don't want people to come. So I just wanted to say that. I think they're more concerned about how it's gonna all work.

Good point. Can I ask this upcoming road that you have planned is two-lane or four-lane? What would that pass through there? I hoped it would be four.

What will be initially constructed is a two-lane roadway. As property develops along it, individual developments would do their portion of the widening. and put in the curb gutter and sidewalk, and it would eventually, I would anticipate, the pavement would be wide enough we could stripe for four lanes. I would anticipate a center turn lane and one lane each way on that roadway, but it would be wide enough we could stripe that differently in the future. What's that?

100 feet?

No, it's functionally classified as a minor arterial, which under our current standards, that's a 75 foot right of way. Yeah, it's not a principal arterial, which is what Westview is master planned as, it's a minor arterial.

Beautiful. Go ahead, Steve. Real quick. I'm also not opposed to growth.

Share your name again just real quick.

I'm also not opposed to growth. I understand growth, but it does have to be smart. You have to plan for it. One thing I'd like to ask, it was mentioned the Cordero Agreement. Is this piece of property under the Cordero Agreement?

No.

It is not. Okay, thank you.

It's nearby is the best we can say.

Thank you, Steve and Dan. Right there, where that yellow arrow is, somewhere in that neighborhood. Yeah, I can tell you, Paul, the school's pretty focused on development in the not too far distant future, so. Good comments. All right, anybody else? If not, we would be happy to entertain a motion if somebody wants to roll through the four, five, six, seven, and eight individually and at the same time, I suppose. Or do we need to do them separately?

I'll make a motion. You can do them together. Go ahead.

I was just saying you can do them together if you wish.

Oh. I'll make a motion that we approve items.

Before we do that, can I just say one thing here that was on my mind? I can see me voting yay on this with more information, but I agree that the concern of not having a road first does bother me. And so I'm just still a little confused. Maybe I need a little clarification. If this is approved, and I imagine development and construction would start fairly soon, even though the road isn't developed, is that correct?

Well, so yeah, with annex with the current zoning of annex transition, you can't do any development. You can't even go put one house out there because it's annex transition. So it has to be zoned. We came through five or six years ago, did the RDO didn't fall. So this is in line with everything that was approved by the council at that time and the RDO. As far as South Mountain Drive itself one of the ironies of this because and I'm glad that Kent brought that up to show the bypass because back five or six years ago that was the Hot button issue and always has been for everything we've ever done out here But the irony is that the developer that's doing this zone change that's developed out here put South Mountain Road Drive in as the secondary access as a requirement by the city and And then it's funny that as he continues to develop and sell houses, that everyone that he sells houses to comes out and says, we don't want more traffic on that road.

I just need to say I'm very impressed, Dallas. Your presentations are always really right on. And I can see this being a really, really cool thing. It's really a hard thing for me and my finite mind to sit here for 15 or 20 minutes and make a decision that's going to affect Cedar City forever. I like to think about things and I'd like to drive out through there and look around and get a feel for things. This is great and I spent my career teaching this stuff, but it's still good for me to see it. I can see me voting for it, but I'm not sure I can vote for it right now. That's where I'm standing. I think it's going to be a project that's going to go forth and it'll be a great project. But if I'm not sure, do I vote yay? I'm scratching my head over that one. So anyway, that's my concern for what it's worth. So very impressed again. I just like the idea of the road being in first. And I don't know. The future road?

I guess I don't quite understand like right now nothing can happen here and there's a road that's kind of in early stages being planned and so we're not going to have like zoning on any of this property until years from now. So like what are they supposed to do to like?

That's a good question. I don't know. That's why I'm sitting here saying I have a hard time just making a decision, you know, in 20 minutes and you make a great point, Jace, a really good point. You're involved with this much more than I am, and I respect your opinion, but to sit here and make a decision is kind of hard for me just to look at a map and say, okay, let's do it.

Is there a slide I missed that shows these five different properties, like what the acreage of each one of them that's being rezoning on?

So if we blow those up, it's underneath each of the parcels. So this one's 91 acres. That's the R1. R4 is 24. Yeah, so 91 acres of R1. If you scroll down, 4 is 24 acres. 3, if we pan to the left. 4 was the R21? Yes. The R22 is 3 that goes up. to behind the elementary parcel, that's 50 acres. There's three acres of commercial on the corner and there's 9.8 acres of R3.

All right, thank you. The city feels like the infrastructure is in place to handle this, is that correct?

Well, some of the infrastructure, as they come in with development proposals, we'll need to look at the water modeling and some of those kind of things and make sure that we've got the improvements in place that are needed. But yeah, everything is master planned to accommodate this development. Thank you for putting my mind at ease, all of you. I appreciate it.

And the way I see this is this is a long project. I mean, this is... this is 10, 20 years sometimes when you're talking this much acreage. And so I think holding the developer's feet to the city's fire is not fair and not right to do because they're not the ones putting in that road. It's the city with some federal funding that we're getting maybe in 2028, 2029-ish. so I can see your point, because we really do want all the infrastructure to be there, but just approving this just approves the start of wherever. No developer in their right mind is gonna go in and just flood the market with all these homes at once. They'll lose everything, I think.

Just from what has occurred since we got the RDO approved, the valley, which is, If we can maybe zoom back out. So the valley right here, which there's a similar sized valley right here. I think we started this in 21 and now we are in 26 and we're working on the fourth phase.

So that's a... And your fourth phase is... Getting near completion.

Yeah, so phases two and three got built this year and last year, but this took five years to build out one valley, and so if this valley moves at a similar pace, that's maybe five years.

So it takes another year for your fourth phase, then this developer is going to want to move on to something.

Yeah, it could be quicker, it could be longer.

He owns the land, he wants to use it and see some turnover, right? I don't see anything wrong with it. I would be in favor of it.

I appreciate your helping me out, guys. Thank you. Anytime. Okay. I don't know if we can vote for Dallas as fit as he is. Is there a rule against that? There's something wrong with that. I see him in the gym. He's lifting all these weights, 90 pounds. He is the agenda.

That's right. He's keeping us rolling. All right. With that, anybody would like to take a stab at a motion?

So it's one. It's four, five, six. Four through eight. Yes, sir. I'll make a positive recommendation on items four through eight as it relates to the South Mountain Area project.

Is that good enough without him articulating it? Second. We have a motion and a second. Thank you. All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries. That concludes our agenda, so I guess we'll adjourn until when, December?

We don't have that much right now.