Council Meetings - Regular Meeting

8 foot new block wall to the right of the screen there. Here we get into the existing block wall. You can see the homeowners are setting things on that block wall. you know, it's been vacant land there so long that um they've just kind of used it. Here's here's some structural integrity concerns here. You can see some patchwork, some cracking to the left, some drainage pipes coming over onto the property, which isn't of discussion tonight. Um but the applicant um just wanted to discuss this condition here and ask ask council if they'd be agreeable to allow this newly constructed 8-ft wall to meet the requirements of that condition due to those structural concerns with that existing wall. um applicant and staff feels comfortable um with this request. If um if this wall I'll go to this first photo here. If this wall were to be finished, the newly constructed block wall here. If this were to be finished and tie into this block wall to to create that a secure area along with the southern portion which is this photo. If this block wall were to extend another oh 20 25 feet or so, I'd say um and then that would seclude this use from those residents and then create an access point to this area uh for maintenance purposes. Staff staff could get behind what the applicants want to do here. So, we're just wanting to discuss that and see if that's a an option's willing to enter here.

Council, I see a couple of you ready to jump in on this conversation? Yeah, I think for me I don't have a problem with that. I think the the the reason at least as I recall for saying hey get with the homeowners was we didn't want to go put a six foot block wall or you know behind them when they got a short little wall that they have some view and some openness right um if they didn't care then then we could do it but if they're putting the block wall down at the bottom it's to me it's irrelevant I got no issues with it. Yeah, I think I would agree with you, Councilman, is that the intent was to to block them the best they can with the wall down there. Um, I mean, and if they're not responding, I don't know if certified mail was sent to them or if it was just a knock on the door. I mean, what level of service did we do to try to reach out to them, but ultimately the goal was to keep the sound

penetrating back from the tire shop, not going out toward them. So, that was kind of the goal of the wall. So my question is what level of service did we do to reach out to them? But besides that, I think the wall works if you taking staff's recommendations on extending it on the two ends. Right. Hold that question, Mitch, when we invite you up. Additional feedback, council. I don't have any issues with what's been proposed. I agree with the comments that have been made.

Same here, Mayor. I think, you know, I think the main concern was trying to have the sound bounce back towards the tire shop and that seems to fulfill that purpose. Is is that wall grouded all the way through or just, you know, like all the way grouted or just Hey Mitch, if you'll just come up to the mic, state your name and then uh answer that question then and then Councilman Co's question. Pull that mic. I think they're working again. You should be safe now. None of us were safe there for a little bit.

Yeah. So that is filmed all the way up. Okay.

And then the question from Councilman Coats on the noticing. Yeah. So, at the beginning, uh, reached out multiple times, HOA through text, phone calls, got nothing in return, and then eventually just went door to door, talked to multiple residents, some for, some against. Uh, there's a lot of renters in that area, so they were non-biased. They like, we're not going to tell you yes or no. So, they didn't give me an answer either. So, that's kind of the route that we went for. And it was over a course of about four months that we were trying to attempt to get some information. Well, and and if I recall, there wasn't a lot of people at our meeting opposed to the site. So, yeah,

I think I think this covers what we were the intent is to get the sound to stay on your side of the fence, I guess, as much as you can. Yeah, for sure. Yeah. Thanks, Mitch. Okay. Thank you.

Uh, Elden staff, have you got what you need on that one? Mike, you got what you need? Okay. Thanks. This isn't devoting, but I what I heard just for clarity on the record is that the council is comfortable with what you've done with you extending those walls. Uh, as Elden explained and providing access to that area in between the homeowners and your and you know your property and so I think what you've done is great. Council, anything to clarify on that or is that accurate with what what everyone thinks? Okay. Thanks. You don't have to stay. You're good. All right. Let's move back to ultra water efficient standards. We'll welcome our friend Doug Bennett from the Washington County Water Conservancy District who is the conservation manager. We had fun conversation earlier today too, didn't we, Doug?

Yes, we did. Yes. You'll just state your name and take it away.

Doug Bennett, Washington County Water Conservancy District Conservation Manager. Good afternoon, Mayor Staley, members of the council. Um, yeah, we we were here talking about this issue. Gosh, I feel like it was a year ago, right, when we first introduced this. So, I know there's still we're in the in the early stages of implementing it. We had to wait until we had a new impact fee study so we could determine what would be the cost to a developer to participate in this program. But we do still have some issues where we need to ensure that the municipalities and the county uh have an understanding of how the program works, how it might impact uh city operations in the planning department and the building department. So just want to go through this. This is the same presentation I recently gave to the county planning commission and we'll just talk about that interaction between the

and then you also know that this council passed the municipal resolution two weeks ago, right? So this is just they had some questions that that that we needed your expertise to answer. So from a high level I think this is good and then I think there was some feedback that I thought would be best to come through you and then if some of the council's feedback needs to come to the board then we can both take that to I really appreciate you inviting me. Thank you. Elden, you're gonna do you have to push the button or is this going to work for me for you? Okay. Yeah. So, yes, please.

Uh, so just for to refresh everybody, the intent is that we're going to be building homes that only require about onethird as much water as what we were building as as recently as 2020ish. And uh this is a voluntary program in the cities. Washington city expressed interest in participating uh where the water district like out in the non the unincorporated areas of county where the water district may serve customers directly we're requiring these standards to be used. It is adaptable to varying lot sizes. So you in most cases we think we're going to be building on smaller lots and it's going to be more suitable for that. But if you wanted to build what I call cayen style development where you're on a large parcel but you have a small uh developed envelope, this may be suitable as well. The impact fee for uh building to this standard is about $11,400. And the impact fee for building to the standard we adopted just a few years ago, what I'd call the standard standard is uh $17,200. So this is a savings of about $5,800.

And Doug, are you talking a little bit about just the acre feet of water per eru? Are you talking kind of the 67 standard versus what is this essential standard? So we went in the early 2020s we were building to a 089 standard. Then we moved to a 0.59 acre.59 acre feet. This is targeting a 39 acre feet. So about a 100,000 gallons per household. And just to make it clear, there probably thousands of of connections that you already have in Washington city that use less than 100,000 gallons of water per year. Uh the other benefit to the developer is Yes.

Oh, I was just going to ask, so we're not actually shutting the tap off when when they hit that limit, even if they sign up for this, but what does it what does it actually do to the rates? Because this this comes with its own rate structure. And I actually have a slide on that, but this uh I shouldn't have jumped in.

Yeah, there's an 8,000 gallon per month limit before you incur additional cost. Uh one of the other benefits we're all interested in trying to make housing more attainable for people that uh that are having difficulty. And so anytime that we can reduce the overhead on a new home, that's beneficial. So for a long time we pushed for homes to have both potable water and secondary water. And the idea was that our treatment plants, you know, only had the capacity to produce so much potable water. Uh the reality is our treatment plant is being built out to the point that it's we probably don't need to serve these neighborhoods with secondary water. And so my understanding from developers is that can save them $5 to $8,000 per lot not having to build those duplicate systems that we're not requiring that you suspend secondary water. If for some reason the city sees fit to deliver secondary water into these neighborhoods, then that'll be at the discretion of the city.

I just we we've had that conversation as a council. And so I just want to make sure that that Blake and and and John are listening to that too as we continue to just evaluate where we want to acquire purple pipes. Yeah. And where we don't want to. But I think I think going forward that'll be more discussion that this council will will tackle on the whether or not we want to require that or as we've talked about our our irrigation secondary plan is we we do want to be more targeted.

So the one of the concerns is and there's always typically I'd say at minimum 10% water loss in operating a system. There can be and there are in Washington County some systems that lose between 10 and 20% of their water between the source and the customer. So when you put two sets of parallel systems into a neighborhood, you're increasing the potential of losing water through leaks on the municipal system. These homes are going to have such small irrigation demands that we're just thinking it may not be worth it. the tradeoff may not be valuable enough to put a secondary system in there. Next slide.

Especially, it's not to beat it too much. That's but especially if we're not prepared now or in the relatively near future to wet those pipes, right? Absolutely. You know, I live in I then if they crack and break, it's just I think we need to be smart. Absolutely. Sure. I live in Ivans and I I have a conne a secondary system to my home that's 20 years old and has never seen water. So that's you know now they're concerned if they were ever to activate it is there enough demand as the neighborhood has changed and and would they experience leakage because it's not been in continuous use.

Yeah. I do feel like just because we brought up this topic I do have to defend us a little bit. That was part of the regional water supply agreement that was required by the district that all homes had to have secondaries. So yes, it it wasn't a city choice necessarily. It was required by the by the regional water supply group. I I think it's as and as I pointed out, I think it's an indication of how the how things change and how quickly they change and that we're able to provide much more portable drinking water. Um but obviously secondary water is what we make drinking water out of. And so in that respect, we want to make sure people understand that whether it's secondary water or portable water, it's all really valuable water in the county. Would you say it's one water?

Yes, I would. I should have worn my hat. That was for Carrie.

Um indoors, we just require the same same requirements that we have of the existing standard, but we will be discouraging the use of salt-based water conditioners in these homes. Now, discouraging doesn't mean that we're going to ask people to open their garage so we can see what kind of water conditioning equipment they have. But we do want to ensure that the builders or the developers are not packaging water salt-based water conditioners as part of their amenity package or something like that. So, the average home with a saltbased water softener is putting on average about 400 lb of salt into our wastewater stream. And whereas we're going to be reusing that water, salt is one of the big contaminant challenges of reusing wastewater. Um there are some new technologies and uh the one that we've been encouraging people to look at is called template assisted crystallization which can grab those minerals and keep them from sticking to everything in your home uh without using any salt or electricity or even having to be connected to the sewer system. So next slide. Can you uh put out information on some of those? I sure can. It's so easy to I mean they're they're everywhere, right? But

yeah, I wrote an article that I that we sent to all the plumbing professionals in town about these because very few people have heard of this technology. But that QR code on this slide, if you were to shoot that, it'll take you to this report where you can actually look at different watering water conditioning systems and what their pros and cons are. The other benefit of this, it's much lower cost and has much lower operating costs. But I know for a lot of us, the simple fact that you don't have to go push in a flatbed cart to get eight bags of salt, right, take them back to the house is is one of the benefits as well. So, okay, next slide. Yes. Um, some of the unique characteristics and I think what really help us get under a 100,000 gallons per year is that these homes will not have private lawns. They can have 2,000 square feet of drip irrigated landscape plantings, but they will not have spray irrigated lawns. Those irrigated areas, if it's on a large lot, need to be contiguous to the the home so that they're not off in the in the distance on the parcel so that we can uh manage, I guess, the uh the standard. And then if for some reason, as was pointed out in some of the developments, sometimes there's a need to uh reestablish native vegetation on the parcel and you would be allowed to irrigate that native vegetation until it became established. Next slide. Uh pool, spas, and water features. We do not allow private swimming pools on these parcels, but community pools are certainly allowed in the neighborhood. A homeowner can have a freestanding spa of up to 100 square ft. Some folks say, "Why freestanding?" Any ideas? Because when the freestanding spa leaks, you know it's leaking. Whereas if it's built into the into the earth, we have a lot of leaks on swimming pools. It's estimated up to a third of swimming pools have leaks in their shell and then

we just, you know, that that autofiller is just adding water all the time. So sometimes people have no knowledge that their swimming pool is leaking. Uh we'll have the same standard for ornamental water features of 25 square feet which is our our standard um existing in the code already. So active recreation areas what we're trying to do with these developments is encourage the developer and keeping in mind that you and your planning commission have the ability to push the development in the direction of providing these kinds of amenities, but we'd like to have a neighborhood park. So instead of creating a neighborhood park in everybody's backyard, the idea is that there would be a walkable location where people could go to and their children could play, they could throw a frisbee, walk their dog, whatever it was that they were doing. So we want the high water use intensity features to become common area features um for each uh household. So we start at 15 homes before you can build one of these common areas. Uh, our expectation is that these neighborhoods are going to be full-blown subdivisions, but there'd be a 1500 square foot turf area allowed. Each additional home beyond 15, you would keep adding 100 square ft per household to whatever scale the subdivision was. And then for each square foot of lawn area, you're allocated another square foot of drip irrigated landscape area. So 15 homes could have a park of 3,000 square ft that was half Zurich landscape and half turf grass. If the city chooses to build a municipal park there or directs, you know, the developer and the city come into an agreement to create a public park, that's not subject to any restriction whatsoever. So it' be your st the same standards that you're already using to build your public parks. Next slide. So, we do I I'm a big believer that it's fun to get wet in a

place where it gets to be 116 degrees sometimes, but the big challenge is we found that swimming pools often were going underutilized. So, um there are about 8,000 swimming pools in Washington County. The average household only gets wet in their pool 15 times in a year from survey information. Now, some people it's every other day and other people maybe haven't gotten wet in a very long time despite fishing bugs up. I have to thank you because now I have another argument with my wife. Why are we in a pool?

I I want I want families to be able to go to the pool and our hope is that we can encourage the developer to build a community swimming pool because that's going to be used used quite extensively and more appropriately. So, same thing. There's a there's a formula that establishes how big the pool is and how much larger it can get. Now, you might think we start at 15 houses in a 650 ft pool and we're only adding 10 square ft per additional household. I know, I know that sounds minuscule, but the reality is in talking to some of the developers, we actually had to establish this policy that says no single pool can be larger than an Olympic swimming pool because some of the developments are projected to be so large with thousands of homes in them that you could wind up with another lagoon style development. And while I can defend things like desert color on the basis of its density, uh the density of the housing there and so forth, the lagoon is always a very contentious issue in terms of a a region that's struggling with water supply. So we did uh we talked extensively to some of the developers and this was the solution that we came up with for very large developments. Uh we do want those if you do create a neighborhood swimming pool, we want it to be separately metered. And that way we know if that pool is leaking. We can distinguish landscape irrigation from swimming pool filling and we know if there's some kind of a problem that needs to be addressed. Next slide. Ornamental common areas be dealt with as they are now. So, um, I put the slide in just because the question may arise, but for the most part, we're doing ornamental areas with we're not putting turf grass in them. They're drip irrigated plant materials. So, whatever the city's existing landscape requirements are for streetscaping, that would would remain the same.

Now, this is where we get talk about those rate structures. So, um, pre2023 homes were using close to a quarter of a million gallons per year on average. And that's the blue bars there. That's what we would expect their water use to look like on a seasonal or month-by-month basis. When we implemented the water efficiency standards for post2023 homes, we expect them to behave more like the red bars in there. And you can see also we're projecting there's significant water savings for the people living in these homes. Does the does the red do the red bars indicate the the landscape conservation ordinance that that we pass?

Right. If you're if you're building to the standards, our expectation is you're probably going to be using about 150,000 gallons per per household per year.

The ultra water efficient or the green bars. And now I just told Councilman Belliston that there will come there will be a rate structure associated with this that only allows you 8,000 gallons per month. And you can see in the summer months that we're starting to hit in the 8 to 10,000 gallon range. So depending on how people manage their water or how they design their landscape, they may incur some minor search charges on their water for for several thousand gallons. If they aggressively mismanage the water, then it could be pretty substantial. Uh that search charge system already exists on all households where the building permits were issued after January 1, 2023. Uh, all cities are using a rate structure where they get 8,000. So, we're talking about homes that are not ultra water efficient. They get 8,000 gallons in the winter before they get searchcharged, 15,000 in the spring, 20,000 in the summer, back to 15, back to eight with the intent that that rate structure encourages them to manage their irrigation with the changes in the seasons. So, this would be 8,000 flat. Somebody asked at the county, why why 8,000? It's because your utility already has a rate structure for people that have secondary water where their portable connection is subject to that 8,000 flat tiered uh threshold. We think this not only fits pretty well, but it makes it a lot easier for your staff to be able to set up these accounts because there's already a model for that account. I just I mean and you know Doug, it's uh 8,000's an average person's home though.

Pardon me. 8,000 gallons a month is just indoor use on an average person home. No, actually uh average indoor use is about a thousand gallons per person. Yeah. I just I know on average when you average it out with apartments and all that I mean I'm saying the average my indoor use is 7,000 a month indoor because of just I have so many kids my wife like that's what I use indoor yeah it's it is about a thousand gallons per person but it really depends on the the devices that you've selected so far because I have you know six people in my house most of the time you know I'm around 7,000

what we found um from national studies is now that we have highly efficient plumbing fixtures and appliances, we're finding that that average is about 40 to 50 between 40 and 50 gallons per person per day. And we also found that as family sizes get bigger, it's not a linear relationship because you're able to have, you know, laundrying becomes more efficient, dishwashing becomes more efficient, cooking becomes more efficient. Yes. But you still have toilet flushes and so forth. So, this was all built around a model that used those expectations that these homes are probably going to use somewhere in the realm of 45 gallons per person per day indoors. And and keeping in mind, Councilman Co, it is a voluntary program. So, we're exchanging some of this potential challenge for a $5,800 discount in your water impact fee. So,

I just wanted to say he shaves his head in the shower. I was in there for like 45 minutes and all. Just throw me in. I do shave my head in the shack, but not 45 minutes, but I can't guarantee what my kids do.

And and I also want to point out the average household in in Washington County has less than three people. Now, granted, some households have nine people, some households have 11 people. And so you're never we're never going to find a perfect fit, but we already we already craft a lot of policies such as sewer rates and so forth around the the average or the norm for for the use. Okay. So how do we ensure performance? I know municipalities do not like to have to go out and do too much insurance of performance, right? You don't want to uh have to go police this. So what we're doing is when a developer comes in and says,"I want to build an ultra water efficient subdivision," there must be a specific note on the plat that says that they're they will conform to the policies and that all of the parcels on that plat are going to conform to it. Uh the language for that plat note and we had some conversation with Elden recently. The language is already prescribed and it's available on our website. We provided it to all of the planning departments. Uh we expect that building departments will ensure that the standards are reasonably being met. Now, building inspectors are um they're in my opinion, they're a force to help contractors ensure that that meas standards are being met and requirements are being met. But it's not a building inspector's job to look at every nail head at at every, you know, flick every light switch and so forth. So, we're expecting that they would just be looking for, hey, this guy has a big lawn or something, right? And I don't think we're supposed to see that. We're looking for the conspicuous. The plumbing uh fixtures are going to be typical of every home that's being

efficiency, waters, and energy. Wouldn't see any lawn. Exactly. That's what I'm saying. We would expect ation ordinance, you would see it smaller law than miracle.

Yeah. We're just expecting that the a conspicuous violation would be called out if but we're not expecting bu building inspectors necessarily to have a long checklist of things that they're looking for at these properties. Um the uh you the requirements would be integrated into the CCNR. So the developer if they're going to have craft CCNRs then they will address as CCNRs that you can't have a swimming pool, you can't have a lawn, etc., etc. If there's an HOA, and you're not obligated to have an HOA, but if there is an HOA, the water district will enter into an agreement with the HOA to get the HOA to be the first line of defense that the HOA will try to enforce these standards if they see a violation in the neighborhood. and that takes the burden off of government of having to deal with it first and foremost. Uh we talked about the excess use search charge and then if anybody wants more details about the program, all these building standards and information about the impact fees are available on our website. Uh the last slide is just a closing one. Again, I put a QR code on there if anybody wants to see what these standards look like or want to want to uh refer to them later. You can just shoot that QR code with your phone. It'll take you to our website and you can review all of this and get back to me if anyone has questions. Be it be it the uh city staff, developers, or members of the audience watching today?

Council, any feedback for for Doug? Any comments? Councilwoman Caspersonson. So, I'm sorry I might might have missed this, but did you say what the fee structure is? Is it what it is currently now for those No, our our impact fee um recent I'm sorry. I I mean for the when they use Yeah. For the excess use, what would they charge? 10 an additional $10 per thousand gallons when you go over that 8,000gallon threshold. Okay. So, it's similar to what you have now.

Right. Right. and and part of our intent, I know the municipalities were very challenged by adding all these new rate structures um recently and so we wanted to ensure that we were trying to have it conform as much as possible to the existing business practice for your water utility. How account for when you're planning the water for this area? How do you account for if they use higher usage than what I know that we're not gonna be shutting off people's water, but like if people are using consistently over that threshold of 8,000, how do you account for that and plan for that for future planning?

Like like so many other things, we plan on the average. So my house, there's just two people in my household, but we use 50,000 gallons per year and I have a garden and I have trees and I have flowers and my wife is an avid gardener. Um, so I have those things. We're just obviously very water conscious at my house. So you're always going to have so you I may have somebody that uses I wanted them all to use a h 100,000. I'm going to have somebody that uses 150,000, but I'm going to have somebody else that uses 50,000, right? And so across the board, this standard will probably produce on average homes that use about 100,000 gallons. So in supply from the supply side, we're always counting on that. Uh same is true for wastewater. We calculate what does the average home provide. Some some will flush more than others, right? Uh but they they typically pay or have the same impact on infrastructure because we build and plan everything around an average.

Can you can you talk about what the water district intends to do with the the funds that are collected from the excess search charge?

Yeah, we're well the searchcharge money is paying primarily for conservation programs. So we turn around and we, you know, if somebody goes, "Why is my bill so high?" We try to sell them on participating on in one of these conservation programs and every year the water district is pumping millions of dollars back into the community in terms of landscape rebates and so forth. The uh in the three years that we've run our landscape conversion program, we have put I think about $7.5 million in into rebates in the community. That $7.5 million is producing probably close to $25 million in economic benefit locally because customers spend more money than we actually provided as a rebate. So, one thing I like about it, it's all local. I mean, you can't outsource landscape. Your rocks didn't come from China. Your plants didn't come, you know, mail order. Not usually. And so I like the idea that we're it's it's a program that's producing jobs for Washington County residents. It's uh putting some money back into people's pockets and it's doing something really important. It's producing water at the lowest cost, in fact half of the average cost for us to go out and chase water and build infrastructure to to deliver it. That was a pretty long answer to that question.

But there are also fees that are set aside for cities to apply for for conservation projects. Um there there was some money because cities adopted the search charge not simultaneously and so Washington city and others started collecting from your customers. You passed you passed a policy and you started collecting those search charges for the water district. Now when I came here somebody had already created that policy but I found that some of the agencies had not yet completed adopting it. I thought it was unfair that your citizens had already been paying it and some of the other communities hadn't even started yet. And so what we did is we took all that money and we did an accounting process and we reconciled and we said, "Washington, your residents put X dollars in and we will give it right back to Washington City for conservation projects in Washington City."

We're working on that and we are we are funding your study using those monies. We're funding the study of city facilities and their water use. And we're also um helping fund um funding I'm funding one city's uh extension of their um the tool we use to communicate communicate with customers about rates or to turn off their water when it rains. And so we're trying to push that money right back into your city. Okay, good. Council Ivy, just taking it all in. Mayor, drinking it in. Drinking it in. Council Bellist, do you mind emailing this presentation to us? Oh, not at all. In fact, I emailed it to Elden. I don't know if Elden, you can

It's hit my inbox already. It might might already be in yours. Yeah. Is that okay? Can Can the city staff forward it to the council members? Yeah, I just hit mine like simultaneously standing up, Doug. I just popped up. So, if you would, sir, if you would forward it to your colleagues. All right. Councilman Henderson, Councilman Coats, anything else you'd like to add? Questions, feedback? the the district greatly appreciates your support on this and and your partnership. Okay. Thank you. You make a difference, Doug. Thanks for all you're doing and we're glad you didn't stay in Las Vegas and retire. We're glad you came up here and shared all of your knowledge and best practices. You're making a difference in our community.

I'm loving it here, mayor. We love having you here. Thank you. All right. Next item of business. This is uh a requirement for covering loads uh which is a ordinance that's been worked on by council member uh Kim Caspersonson. Jeremy graciously offered to present this. I wish I was Is that shoulder still in in uh in in socket there or

I wish I was as passionate about this as Doug is about water conservation. I'm happy to to discuss it. This comes out of some public comment that we had in the Sunrise Valley area with uh trucks that were that were causing problems uh on the roads. So, this is this is for your thoughts and and determine if you want to to enact it and and beat it up a little bit, but but I thought we'd at least bring it to you for your consideration. Councilwoman Caspersonson has been a driving force behind this, but essentially she's been working with the city attorney on the ordinance or

I don't know that would claim a lot of credit for this. Most most of this has been has been me, but he reviewed it. But yeah, I don't know that he wants to take credit for my for my work. His would be his would be much longer and better. So here he is. Um, essentially right now the state law already requires that trucks that have loads that are above the the rails of the bed be covered. And we also already have laws that say that you can't you're not supposed to have rocks and debris fall out of the trucks. The problem is um I think we saw a lot of really good compliance after we talked initially to the to the truck drivers, but often now we're seeing trucks out of compliance or we're seeing we're seeing things that come out of out of trucks. You you have to actually physically watch those rocks come out to to enforce that. So what this particular ordinance does is it takes that a step further. We go a little bit u further than state law. And if you go down to um 528B, it shall be unlawful for any person to operate or permit to be operated any vehicle within the city transporting sand, gravel, rock, soil, aggregate, construction materials, or any other loose material unless such load is securely covered. So basically, we're saying if you have any of these things in your truck, trailer, flatbed, whatever you have, it must be covered. And it reply it applies to all loads regardless of whether it extends above to or below the sidewalls or the bed of the vehicle. So there's no there's no height exception anymore. And then securely covered is the load must be protected by a tarp net or other covering device that is a sufficient strength and design to prevent any portion of the load from escaping and is properly fastened with it withstand normal vehicle operation including wind and traffic conditions. We don't allow any of the contents to be spilled, blown, or otherwise released onto the street, sidewalk, or public or private

property. And if they do, it be it it becomes a public nuisance and and they're cited not in traffic code but with a with a city um misdemeanor, class B misdemeanor. So that's that's the question. It would allow our our officers to to pull over and and checks on any vehicle whether or not they could see that that debris extending above the bridge. So, does that want to be a little more difficult? But it would we talked about a lot of different items, meaning we could pick certain streets, but all that became quite difficult. It would just be any street that was in without in Washington city would you would have to cover your loads proposal. So, I have some concern on going that level and it has to do with I'm just thinking of a scenario that I would be in is if I rented a trailer or got a trailer and loaded it with rock or wasn't spilling over like you can get tall trailers like but then all of a sudden we're required to have tarpet. It just doesn't make sense to me that you tarp that. I just feel like it's an overreach. Now, if you're above the rim with dirt, yeah, that makes sense. you should tarp those things. But if you're getting rocks and gravels that the only concern is it's spilling out and it's not above it, what does it matter? If it can't spill out, then I I don't see the need in it.

Yeah. I I after the public comment from we had um I thought I just reached out to THAAD and Jeremy to see if there was anything. I have followed trucks where it was just bar it wasn't like over the rim but it's just barely below the rim where you could actually see the you know the dust and dirt and the and everything flying everywhere but and so it just I didn't really I just thought it'd be good to have this conversation to see everyone's input on it and rather than reach and having individual conversations with everyone I thought it would be good to go over this as a group and just kind of get everyone's take on it and see if this is something we want to move forward with and if it would be a good idea, if it wouldn't. But just based upon the experiences that I've had, I have seen, you know, that everyone was talking about and just wondering what we c what we can do and if there isn't.

I agree with you. I've seen those issues, too. Um, but with how this is written, it feels like it's 100% every trailer has to be covered all the time, and I think that's too much. Is there something in the middle? Maybe. But I just I'm uncomfortable saying that because of the scenario I just brought up of you know even you get those large dump trucks but if they're full of rocks doesn't need to be tarped. I mean if if it's a rock and it's not above the rim it's fine. It's not going to but if it's above the rim then yeah it should be tarped like state code requires. But if it's a different material if it's dirt I'm I mean dirt's usually the stuff that blows out. So, I have I guess maybe two concerns. One is, you know, we've had to go back and revise things because state code changes on a regular basis. And if there's a state code that already says that things need to be covered, then I don't know that I want to go try to have to chase that uh you know around in the future if they make revisions to it. Not that it's likely that that would happen, but um maybe I maybe I missed it, but like this to me is I get it for construction trucks and construction loads and things like that, but if I want to go throw a load of dirt in my truck, it's not really set up to tarp, you know, and and so I don't want to have to I don't want Joe homeowner that's moving some stuff on a, you know, once or twice a here having to deal with, you know, potentially getting cited, not being tarped.

Well, I I for one really appreciate like the intent behind this legislation and the initiative for it, and I think we all do. Um, and we all heard the it's not the it's not the oneoff homeowner, but I think what the big issue and and I've seen pictures even recently of big trucks with dirt up to the rim and they just bumbling down the road and the dust and the debris just So, how do we enforce that on a state level? And if this if we're not able to force it, how do we enforce it on a on a local level? And so I think that's why I appreciate the way Councilwoman Casterson is bringing this forward, you know, to to to tackle the tough conversation and to coordinate with staff for the benefit of the community.

Well, I think it would be important to say, do you have that available on your computer to talk about what the state code currently I do, says no. Um, there is a state law. The quickest answer to your question, mayor, would be just instruction from this body to tell the police to start citing people that violate the state law because there is a law. I'll read it for you for those that are listening. It's in state code 72 of the transportation code, chapter 7, protection of highway acts, part 4. Pretty sure I have that one bookmarked. That's right.

Part 409, subsection six. Any person suspected of operating a vehicle with an unsecured loan on a load on a highway may be issued a warning as the state's classification within this. Any person who violates this section of guilty of an infraction if the violation creates a hazard but does not lead to a motor vehicle accident. Is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if the violation creates a hazard that leads to a motor vehicle accident. four is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if the violation creates a hazard that leads to a motor vehicle accident that results in serious bodily injury or death. Subsection C says a person who violates this provision shall be fined not less than 200 for a violation or 500 for a second within 6 years of the previous. And then subsection D, a person who violates a provision of the section while operating a commercial vehicle shall be fined 500 for violation or a,000 for a second. And so existing state law that can apply to the most commonly cited situation, which is they were behind a commercial truck that was dropping stuff, right? And I think an instruction from this council to the police department that says go find every one of them and sight them all for the first violation. We have that.

Does it have to be dumping stuff out or could it just be dust? Has to be an unsecured load. So that creates a hazard. what this I mean what's that standard of what creates a hazard because I mean when we talk about country specifically just the amount of trucks that are and I know that I've we've talked to some excavators down there and they're saying look my guys won't be working for me the next day if they're running with uncovered loads so a lot of them are doing it right those that are not doing it right and it's causing more and more mess and I don't I mean I just don't know how you meet that standard of how when they when they site

uh there's there's a good legal argument as to whether or not the facts observed by the officer creates a hazard. Once there's a car accident, it's pretty clear. The other thing the state code doesn't do is it doesn't address those situations where there's a cover and it still creates a hazard. What the the concept proposed for city code does is it treats it more of like a nuisance than it does a vehicle motor vehicle hazard. So the state laws written to find those people that are creating motor vehicle risks, right? What we've been hearing are people that feel like is just in the neighborhoods as to the things that they leave behind as they pass by 50 times a day. And so the city one I talks more about nuisance type effects of the heavy haulers. The state one talks about the traffic type effects. Both of them are going to need something from this council to instruct our law enforcement department to go stop people and cite them. Right.

Are there any exceptions in state law? Because I I really like the way this and I I appreciate Councilwoman Caspersonson working on this. It really it really goes to, you know, commitment to try to really affect one area that's really been overburdened by this. the exceptions listed in section K authorizes city, county, state vehicles engaged in roadway maintenance and then there's a you're talking about the city code or the

city code and then agricultural. Is there anything like that in the state code that would that would I mean it'd be pretty senseless to have a dump truck that's working on the is it or is it senseless? I don't know. I guess I'm just asking are there exceptions in the state code? This is one of those standards that the state has not said can be violated by cities or counties or state. It it applies to vehicles that are carrying a load. Yeah. They can't cause a hazard. So even if our even if our city trucks were out engaging in road maintenance, but they were kicking rocks onto the road that were breaking windshields were not accepted from that.

There are there are some exceptions for types of haulers. Um, ice salt is one of them, right? Hot mix asphalt is another one. There's there's exceptions for certain types of but no, not not for types of operators. I think I wrote this sort of to the extreme to to point that out. If everybody has to cover every load, then you're going to eliminate a lot of the, you know, well, I didn't know it was going to fly out and and and you're going to you're going to take it to the extreme. Yeah, you're going to cause you're going to cause extra work for individuals and for businesses and everybody else, but you're going to impact the nuisance in the neighborhood. So, that's the balance. Where do we want to find that balance? Um, we have a lot of people who are below the rail, but if we're, you know, it's on a windy day and they're they hit a bump and all of a sudden stuff goes goes flying out and 10 of those do in a day, then we have to sweep sweep the streets again. So, where are we going to balance that nuisance with the neighborhood versus, you know, the time that you have dirt in your own personal pickup truck and don't want to put a tarp on it? So, that's that's the discussion.

Not even me, right? Like my concrete guy has a a trailer that he runs his puts his skid loader in. It it's not set up with a tarp, but he'll sometimes if he needs some fines, he'll go get some fines in that trailer to go back so he can prep for a uh you know, somebody's patio or something along those lines. And it's it just he would have to go have his trailer modified to be able to put a a tarp on it. He'll have some fines fall off of that

maybe. So we're saying we we so don't want that to happen and end up in our neighborhoods that we're willing to make to make him figure out how to tarp his load. That I mean we're taking it to the to that extreme to say that it's such a nuisance for some of our residents that we're willing to do that. I'm just I'm arguing devil's advocate. But the but the nuisance is the big heavy trucks more so. I mean, I see the point of the council members, but the but the the motive behind the policy is that you've got heavy dirt haulers coming off country on Washington Dam Road, causing a nuisance of debris falling over and dust in that area. And that's really what we're trying to target. And how do we help that?

Does state code already apply to that? then why can't we just enforce it? So that's the question I think to to thad the nuisance versus the so like accident and I think I think it's more of a nuisance because it negatively affects quality of life for the residents and it also requires us to go in and sweep it up and clean it up. So I think that's kind of where we need to grapple with this healthy conversation. I have no problems with instructing our law enforcement to say, "Hey, pull somebody over and give them a warning or or pull somebody over, especially if they're Do they have teeth to do that way's written on nuisance stuff?"

You can always give somebody a warning based on this law and be fine because you're not citing them. You're not finding them, right? You can give them warnings based on the state law. The state law has three categories of infractions. The first one is when it creates a hazard. And so really the question is determining what a hazard means. Um the state the state law is written in a way that if I'm driving down the road with three mattresses in the back of my truck and one of them blows out, it doesn't create an accident, but somebody has to steer off the roadway into the median. I think they could say, "Yeah, THAD caused a hazard with mattress. Let's sight it." Right? So it's not dirt or rocks or anything. It's something else that came up to my vehicle. I followed a guy just yesterday. His his Yeti cooler flew out of his back of his truck because his tailgate was down. I have to run him down and said, "Bro,

go pick up your cooler." And we see ladders in the roadway. We see it could be a bucket of nails, right? And so the state law is intended to make it a crime for anybody who's hauling stuff that ends up in the roadway that creates a hazard. And like if if a truck driver was having dirt just, you know, flow out. I don't know that would that would really well those cause accidents too sometimes depending on what they're losing. But I think the complaints you're building are more things like fugitive dust type stuff. Yeah.

Well, on that you bring that up. Fugitive dust even with those tarped dust comes out of dirt, right? So I see them all the time. They tarp them and then they're not 100% covered and the dust still comes out. It helps, but it's not 100%. So, are we finding them at that point, too? Like, you could be, but it's kind of like it's still just dirt that creates that is it's a dirty business to haul dirt. So

is there's been enough law on this area that if you really want to change behavior, you need to just make issue a directive to go site people, right? To make them start feeling it so that they'll change their behavior. And until you do that, a new law that you know focuses on nuisance, if we aren't enforcing it, I don't think it's going to change behavior much. So would they actually get um if they gave them a a citation with the law now, would they actually get a misdemeanor B for not misdemeanor B under state law is when it a hazard that leads to a motor vehicle accident? I was just

state law says they can be issued only a warning. Officer can choose to just warn them. Um but then it also says when there's any of these three categories, it's an infraction, a B, or an A. Yeah, because I I didn't really want to have if they weren't covering their loads either. We can pass a really good nuisancebased code, but if if we aren't actually using that as in an enforcement tool to change behavior, I don't know that it's going to change behavior much. Eric, can I make a comment? Go ahead, councilman.

I mean, I agree. Uh we've got an issue with those big trucks, you know, bellowing uh dust and things, but like Councilman Coat said, that's that's not really a tarping issue. That's more of a wetting of the soil issue. You know, if they don't wet that soil when before they load it, then it's just fugitive dust regardless of whether it's tarped or not, cuz those tarps are nets. They're not actual tarps. The other thing is I would say that way more than 50% of the loads I I would even say the vast majority of loads that are carried around town all day long whether it being a pickup truck, a dump trailer, or even a dump truck. If you look at all of those together and the, you know, many trips a day in our city, the vast majority of those would not need to be covered. Like for instance,

times in a week where I take one of my dump trailers and I go get a load of 2x4s and that's considered a construction material. There's no way on this earth that a 2x4 is going to fly out of the back of my trailer. It just doesn't need to be tarped, you know. on the vast majority of loads every day or it would make no sense to um tarp lo those, you know. So, I think it would just be a huge burden, you know. I mean, to you imagine how angry people would be with the city if every day they had to tarp something that common sense said we need no tarp here. you know that they have to tarp something every day in Washington city that needs no tarp. I mean even when Councilman Belliston said I mean according to this even if his concrete guy was carrying his skid steer in the back of his dump trailer he would have to throw a tarp over the top of the skid steer to keep it in the dump trailer according to this when I read it. So, I mean, I just really like the thought because we have had some issues with it, but I just don't see this being practical. I'd rather just enforce the state law, you know. So,

wondering, um, we've talked, we've mentioned several times that the police would like guidance. Um, I think it'd be important to have a conversation with what they feel the tools they already have and what they need if there's enough, you know, because of the problem that's been mentioned several times, the isolated area. But knowing what the police want and need might help direct what we need to do here because I I I can see both sides very clearly. We want to have everything available, but we always want to lean towards teaching behavior, not sighting, you know, and and there's some obvious sometimes when covering loads does does not make sense. But I guess what I'm saying is it would be nice to know what the police feel like they need, what they have in their own words, what they have now, maybe what they need going forward to affect the change that we'd like in on country way. you know, I I appreciate that um feedback and I I know whenever we've reached out to Chief Williams and our WCPD of, you know, areas that are having concerns, you know, sometimes it's, you know, safe routes to schools or an area where people are speeding a little bit. He's very responsive. The PD is very responsive. I wonder if a start and and I want we want to be respectful to like what we're trying to accomplish here because I think we all agree that we don't want nuisance and fugitive dust down in that area. What if we started with giving some instruction to Chief Williams and the PD to monitor that area and if they see some of those heavy trucks with uncovered loads to start issuing warnings and then kind of tracking that and getting some feedback so that we can because really the goal none of us want to really find people. We just want to improve behavior so that it's more so that it doesn't

negatively affect any more those neighborhood neighbors down there. And so it's not also a burden to, you know, Blake Fonsbeck and his crew. They're trying to keep the streets clean down there. So maybe maybe that's where we start and then, you know, we we kind of keep this on the back burner in case we need to, you know, modify and move forward a little bit. Jeremy, your thoughts? They all work for you.

I think that's a really good idea. Now, I I would say that the feedback that I've heard is is the residents are a lot happier because of the street sweeping, the extra street sweeping that's been done. It's really tough with that many trucks that are loaded to not end up with some of that on the road no matter how try to enforce it. And so I think it's a combination of both. We're getting better enforcement, but we're also we're getting a lot better sweeping. And so I think the residents for the most part have have seen improvement, which is good. But we still get pictures. You know, residents know what the law is, so they'll still send us one where the it's above it and and we still need to do that. We can't have can't have enforcement down there all day. And even if we did, the the dust that's Anderson said has to be swept up. That's just what we're dealing with.

Are we asking them to take pictures with like the license plate or the truck number? Well, and that helps.

We we could send them a letter, but but I don't believe we're able to enforce off of that. I I can't enforce a speeder just because you send us the ticket, but we understand. But I know like on the the landfill side, if we ever see a truck that has a spill, take a picture of the license plate or the truck number, Republic deals with it. It's like I've multiple times taken pictures while I was driving. I shouldn't have, but they're going down the freeway and the stuff's flying out of the the garbage truck. I'll take a picture and send it to Republic and they'll they those guys get written up for that kind of stuff because they're not closing off their that they're not they are supposed to close off their their trailers. Mayor, it also makes sense that we stay in touch with the key haulers in that area. I think we can identify

identify three three or four of those companies and stay in touch with them because what I heard from one of the major haulers there is that they agreed that it needed to be complied with because they were sensitive about the problems it was creating. And maybe just some phone calls to the right people could affect a big change as well in that because you're right, the citizens out there that they seem well, they're going to share it because it has that impact for them. But and we've gotten a ton of pictures from residents. I feel like every time they see it, they'll

they'll send it to this group that that we're on. And so I appreciate this conversation. I know I just feel like we should not forget about like the issues there and just be mindful of it and and you I I appreciate the the counterpoints that you brought up because it's true like you try to fix a problem but you can oftentimes create more problems by adding more rules and regulations. And so I feel like the conversations that we had about trying to figure out a way that we can maybe reach out and see if those commercial trucks can do better with covering those loads and just being mindful of that area out there.

I like it. Very professional. And if we can't, this is the extreme position, right? We can we can maybe make it so 2x4s are exempted, but but this is the extreme position, but not skid steers. If if people will comply and they'll help us with our streets and they'll help us. Are you sure that I'll admit I have gotten fined for not covering to take to the the landfill. So, I mean it does make a difference.

The landfill has an interesting role because they have to look at every load and they're instructed by state law now to apply a fine if it shows up uncovered. And so, you know, Thaad with a flatbed trailer full of tree branches with eight ratchet straps versus, you know, Kim with the same trailer but three tarps. Like, is is one of those more covered than the other? And so, there's there's interpretation there. I think if the city wanted to just really target these haulers of soils and and and rocks, you just take that proposed one, remove the construction materials, make sure there's an exception for anybody hauling garden mulch and we would be good to go and 2x4.

We know that rocks on a Saturday in Craig's truck commercial that we can just get rid of, you know. I think garden challers like me probably need a rule too because that that can blow out and be a problem every is wonderful but if Chief Williams is here he'd tell you we there's no way we have enough officers to enforce on everybody right people have to comply we we have to get 90% compliance have to put something in place that makes sense and that people can can comply when you you heard kind of the marching orders keep working from public works angle keep identifying the hollers PD with the warnings. I think those are the feedback that you you've got.

I appreciate the discussion because I think it also helps me when I get comments from residents to be able to answer them and say, "Look, the care and they are looking at it and they are looking at all the options, right? We we have looked at it. We've had discussion and we continue to do that." So, I appreciate Okay. Anything else, council? Anything else, Councilwoman? My my final comment, mayor, is I appreciate her bringing it forward because it's something that need to be retalked about and it needs to be probably retalked about again in a couple of months, four months and maybe just continue to try to work on that situation out there. Okay. Get a bridge built. Well said. Anything else, Mayor?

Mayor, it's Chief Williams. I just want to let you know I am online. and I am attentive to what's been said and um again, we're doing the best we can with the resources we we do have. I don't think that it's a necessarily a law issue, but just a resource issue trying to be in all the areas with all the different things going on at once. So, again, we'll keep dedicating officers to these problematic areas and these issues um the best the best we can with the resources that we do have. So, um I do like the the I know when this was brought up um early on in discussion, I was part of that discussion with Jeremy and and uh I I do like the fact that um Councilman Henderson brought up it it's you know to combat that dust is not a tarp. It's the wetting of the material to keep that from blowing and getting caught in the wind. So, um but yeah, we're we'll keep doing the best we can and we're not we're not blind to it. we're not ignoring it. Um, but we'll we'll pay more attention to it as well. So,

thanks, Chief. Thanks for being online and being being involved in discussion. And I think what I'm hearing is we'll keep uh addressing it from all angles. Okay. Next item, final item of uh the the workshop meeting. We do have a hard stop at 5:30. This is a cell tower project and economic development director Rusty Hughes will present to the council.

Good afternoon. Um I'm I think in your packets you received the briefing document and some some photos and I think Elden's going to pull up the site. If you have any questions for me, I'm happy to answer those. council, you've you've seen the the site, you've seen, you know, the design. Um, questions for for Rusty. Would you like her to give a kind of a summary? How did the site get determined?

Um, so there it's determined by the need and the lack of coverage in certain areas. And they they usually need about it's it's a mile, it's a half mile or a mile, I don't remember exactly, proximity from a certain point. And so there were several sites that were looked at. They looked at the um the the water tower site. They looked at different um locations along this park. And then ultimately this was determined um to be the best. We we we visited on site with parks department. Um this was the best due to some underground infrastructure in some of the other sites, some lack of some overhead infrastructure in other sites that would have met it problematic. And then the intent behind this is to add a tower that um can accommodate several cell users. So it won't just be one. So they're trying to minimize the amount of towers that we have in the city while still providing cell coverage for residents and for emergency use and and for inspectors out in the field. All the above.

Can you show us the what it looks like so the public can everyone can see? we see the site, but what it would look like. And they actually have um submitted several. This is their stealth tower is one of the options. Um want to scroll to the next one. This is the standard tower that you probably have seen around town. What did you call the first tower? It they call it a stealth tower. Stealth because it looks like a sign. It looks like a city, a monu monument. What the height on that again? Uh it's 85 ft. So, it's a tall sign.

So, it's more of a monument. They they can add something because it's in it's near a city park. It's on the outside of the city park. Um, you know, they're making they're suggesting that maybe you add something that is kind of a reference back to that city park with the city logo. Um, this is the regular self cell tower. And then there's one more. This is also a version of a stealth tower. Or they can look like make it look like a pine tree or a um or a palm tree. Did you know there's a lone seoia tree up at the base of Pine Valley? No. Yeah, there is. It's a redwood. You know what I'm talking about. The road's a little rough. Oh, yeah.

There'll be others soon, right? No, that it was planted a 100 years ago. Okay. So tell us again who's asking for this and what is the benefit to the city other than just the residents having cell coverage. So, it's it's Anthem Net who's asking for it and the the you know the ma the main benefit is for residents um and and people to have um benefit and then the benefit or sell coverage in this area and then the the I guess the arrangement with the city since it's on this part that the city owns most recent site Rusty it is

that's not what was submitted with the the agreement down on the Yeah. So they could get easil easy access into it there. I I think they need to edit that because that's where there's some underground infrastructure where it won't work. This is their site. So they they probably they had originally looked at that. So maybe that was something we need to just have edited in the in the agreement. I didn't notice that. I I appreciate you sending me a copy of your edits. I didn't see that. I got the agreement. Exhibits empty of exhibits. had a new map that showed it. Or maybe it's an old map right by the parking lot.

Yep. That that is one of the locations that they looked at. So, why didn't the water tank site work there? I'll be honest, I'm having a hard time putting a cell tower right there against our park, against our ridge line that we've been protecting for years, and now we're going to throw a cell tower in the middle of it. Um, so the the water tower site didn't work. it didn't um it didn't have the access around the cell tower and in addition there's some overhead transmission lines that obstructed the be the ability to raise it there.

Councilman, the public park issue also has some legal challenges. the I put a lot of red on the draft because it contains a lot of language like you know their opportunity to acquire the site at some point and and because the land that it's on is 7 acres inve some of the things they like to have about private sites we just have to demand come out of the public park site that they can't ever own. We also have to limit the amount of renewals because it's a public someday the city council might prefer to do something else there than a than

not the HOA for Coral Canyon. Um have they approved this because it's they confirmed it during my review. I went and reviewed the Coral Canyon CCNRs and two areas exempted from the CCNR um provisions are parks and then the open spaces that they left in those wild areas. So, we we brought this to you, if you remember, we brought it to you in a originally in a closed meeting because of land purchase and and the council want us to at least move forward to this point and find a suitable site. If you remember, because of a suitable site, we never talked about specific

that's what we're here for. But this isn't staff driven. This is driven by the industry industry. This discussion is exactly what we want as staff. Do we want to spend more time on agreements working on? Do you want it? Do you want it in the park? Do you want it on the ridge line? And if you do, which three do you like the best? Tell you right now, I do not want it right there. This feedback weed from the group protected that ridge line for so long. And then we're going to put a cell tower on it. I mean, lack of service right in that area. My office there. It's bad

and it's not because of the It's bad because the cell tower that's right next to my office is a different provider than the provider I use. But there's a cell tower right in my office and I have horrible cell service. I have to use a booster. But that's because of the who's owns the tower. Well, I don't I personally don't have an issue with it right here. Especially if we did like the stealth design and put our logo on it or something along those lines. It's whole area is got a pretty bad coverage. Right.

And and I don't understand like cell towers. I like But it seems crazy that we're on top of a bridge and then we're still going 80 feet. A lot of times you can be like the one we did out in the fields was 80 feet but it's down in the fields. Like why are we why are we putting such a tall tower ridge be a question for them. But

discuss the height with with Doug. Um asked if we could reduce it down to you know 60 foot at 80 85. I don't have a problem with reducing the height, right? But I I I would think it still needs some I don't know how the cell works, but you know where it's at right there, it gets pretty dang good coverage everywhere, especially, you know, down into the Sandy Hill side, too. I'm not sure if this is the reason, but our family has a cell tower and a lot of it is the height so other companies can attach to it. I don't know if technology is still the same, but

I know that that also creates a a much stronger revenue stream when you have more than one company on the on the tower. So what did they tell you, Elden? Yeah, that was some of the purpose to go 85 foot to be able to collocate four rings there. If they reduce it down to 60 65, they could get two and then have to to do another tower somewhere else to get an additional two. I mean, we want our residents to have service because nobody's using landlines anymore, but what again? Why I I just can they relook at the site by the water tower where there's already some that's not a Blake is shaking his head? No,

just there just isn't room on the city parcel next to the water tower. There's not roomate space on private. That's not our deal. We We certainly can send him off to go look at private again. I think the city owns some some interesting property right in on that ridge and that's why they were working with us. But and then what are the terms? I mean what do they Rusty can talk to that a little bit. Um actually I I'm not ready prepared to talk to that now because we're just trying to get some feedback but um they they I mean they are they are offering a lease. What which term are you asking about? Well, I'm just saying if they want to put a cell tower on city property, what do they how are they wanting to pay for it? What are they want? How much are they wanting to pay?

So, the agreement they proposed was a 36-month due due diligence period to decide if they want to do it, which would flow into an up to 40 years lease time. The first payment would come in as soon as they've actually built the tower for,250 a month. And then that has an escalation to it overtime and the 40 hour or the excuse me, the 40year could then be reapplied again. they would have a right to do that at that time. Uh so I'm pushing back on that because it's in a park. I think that the we as a public entity can't probably can't commit a public park that far out. And so I'm pushing back to to get some renewal periods. That is common language.

Do do we have like a I'm seeing Rick back there. Do we have a te like a power line pole that you just have? I don't So, you might be able to locate it open by you've got your your new trail head that's got a got a uh station on it that's kind of got some and also transmission poles. Maybe one over there would be a little little easier to swallow because of the stuff that's going on there. I don't know if it would serve that area any better, but it is elevated. What area are you looking at? the new trail head that's up there and has has transmission lines and a and a transmission state a substation.

That's that's one of the areas that I think you had suggested earlier that they looked I think it falls outside of their proximity to be able to provide that cell service. I think that's pretty low rent for a space of property. And I mean if you took the the standard that a lot of people use is 80% of the cost of the value of the land. Not we really are in the early phases still looking at the agreements. But but we didn't want to spend a lot of staff time and money on it unless if you didn't want it there then then let's let's not let's not keep going. Yeah. If it were there, Councilman would monument sign or the others if it were

if you did it if if you did it that stealth design and put our logo on it and did some did something cool. I mean, you could put a America's 250 logo on it this year and maybe a different logo next year, right? But I don't have an issue with it um if it's aesthetically treated. Oh, Blake, come on up to the mic. We'll extend this mic up to you. Sorry to but um the cell tower hold that up a just a little cell tower lease we just renegotiated up at the parks yard. We're getting 3,200 a month for that one. Okay. So anyway, and it has a 3%

escalation. Yeah. Anyway, that's good when I heard that. What other feedback do you have, Blake, while you're here? Um just that yeah the the water tank it's deceiving from a distance because it looks like you've got flat land there but the the land is all built up around the water tank and it's very we have a lot of water lines underneath and then the power has power overhead with it and so there's it's just really encumbered with everything but um it just didn't didn't work. We looked at it very extensively and it just didn't work. So, um, but I just when I heard that amount, I was like, they would.

Yeah, that's helpful. Coun um, stay close by council and stay close by rest council. Just the rest of the council feedback on this. Just appreciate those that spoke up. We the staff is looking for council feedback and direction. So, this is your opportunity.

Well, I mayor, I'd like to see him put a cell tower somewhere if it can improve cell service for our residents. I there's nothing more annoying. Like you said, mayor, hardly anybody has a landline anymore. And I hate being in neighborhoods that you can't get your cell phone to work well. So, I mean, I, you know, I'm I'm in favor of one. I I guess I'm a little neutral on the site. I think I'd rather have them find a better site, but of one, too. I just don't like this site.

Really like the site either. I've been at that park many times and I don't feel like it would I just don't feel like it's the best place. I feel like if we can find a different spot or if they can find it through a private entity would be better than that spot. Councilman Ivy. Well, I'm I'm listening to the the council's comments and for me I'm probably a little more indifferent on the location. You know, I've we've had one family for a long time and so it's not as intrusive to me, but but I respect what if there's a better location, I think we need to to find it to make everyone feel more comfortable about it. I can go either way.

So, I have a question then. if and and I don't have a problem having them go back and look are there any other sites that would are acceptable for your coverage ratios and all that but if it comes back and says hey we've gone and looked and we've looked at this site and this site and this site and this site and you know really not too many alternatives here question at that point is do would we rather have better cell phone coverage or or turn it away I mean I you know I live over there and it's a pain in the butt I work on my phone. So, you know, I my phone and and my ability to talk to people is critical. And it's it's funny when it's when I'm at my house and I say, "Hey, I got to move 10 feet over here so I can get better coverage." Right. And that happens. So, I mean, I don't know that there's in my mind, I don't know that there's many other sites around.

So, Rusty, I just I love that you're taking this feedback, right? And you and I'm not I mean I'm not sure how you drew the short end of the stick on this. I mean we should have you know Did you see her look at me? You know that's how she drew the short end of the stick. Complicate it further. You're a trooper. Say that again. Can I complicate it further by saying we should um try to see what residents in that area think about it in that HOA? I can. Let me let me help you out. council woman put on the ballot or just have a public hearing for them.

So, what I'm hearing is there are some that don't like that location. There are some that are indifferent to the location. Um there is a consensus that there's need for better cell coverage. They the council would like to see them consider other locations. And it also sounds like what they're offering us is about a third of the going market rate. Is there any other questions you have in terms of seeking council feedback? That's what I've heard from the body. I would appreciate just a straw poll. Do we move forward with this side or not? Because I that still doesn't give me enough. I I don't want to spend a lot of staff time if if the council eventually

we're going to go with a straw poll. We don't have for if you're in favor of the site straw poll. Do you have something before we do this? This was a fun little exercise that I was going down, but go ahead. So, exploring exploring city sites. This I was just looking through. This has been a several month process and looking for something within the proximity. This is our fourth site that we've looked at. So, I think we have likely exhausted city owned sites. Um like um city manager said, we can always send them out to to the

actually rather than like a vote straw poll, I'm actually just going to go from my left to my right. And if you would just give your final feedback on on the site and what it might look like so that Jeremy can tally what might be termed as a straw pole. Councilman Belliston, your feedback. Like I said, I I would rather have the coverage for our residents and the people that need the coverage. Um this is a site works for for what they need. I again I don't have an issue with it. Okay. Thank you, Council Henderson.

I think I would, you know, if we have to say yay or nay, I mean, I'm gonna side with the idea of better cell phone coverage because that's just annoying. So So I'm I'm good with it. Make it a palm tree and I'm a definite yes. Councilman Coat, I'm a nay at this site. Councilman Ivy, in my opinion, I think the pros outweigh the cons. So, I'm in favor of the site. Councilman Caspersonson, I'm a nay and I think we should hear from the residents who live up there. I love it. It is my privilege to be the mayor and not vote on this. Just summarize.

I'm hearing that we'll move forward. Correct me if I'm wrong. We're going to have conditional use or some something to That's correct. There'll be a conditional use permit which will have a public hearing go to but I'm saying we should do it before we get to that point so we can hear from the residents. So Elden with with the nonvote with the non vote mayor consensus take any action in work session anyway.

Elden, will you just pull up the city map? I I would like to maybe ask for another nonvote as to just where within that park area you would most have comfort with staff looking at. Uh so you'll see there where on the on the far east uh kind of flank there is where Rusty proposed it. Down on the very low flank is where the exhibit proposed to me. I would maybe propose one up on the upper flank. You see the upper parking, which isn't as commonly known by folks, but maybe you could fit one of those stealth ones more on the west side of that Elden towards the west end of that parking and maybe in there. So, you're you're not close to either edge. Maybe you have it be a stealth structure that's not as visible from either room.

Land planner.

So, I don't know if any of those work works for their site because I've done a few cell tower layouts, but um so I think you you'd have to work with staff. I mean, I don't like anywhere up there, but if we do, if you know, if it I don't have the votes to not put it there, I would say at least make it aesthetically pleasing. They're notorious for putting chain link fence around. It should be a standard block wall that meets the Coral Canyon HOA, all those requirements that go into hiding that. But I don't I think any of them I like your idea that of going there. I just don't know if it physically works with the size because usually they need like 60 by 60. I don't know that I don't know that the one presented tonight works either because they they're part of the part of the packet I reviewed includes an easement and access right away and I don't know that know how that works across the the play and the park areas. The the other concern that I heard in the past was when we put up our antenna, I got a lot of complaints from the HOA about the clubhouse looking right at the antenna. And now we're putting a big old pole up there, too. Just I remember them telling, "Hey, why did you guys put this antenna here that we put up for our radios to monitor stuff?" And

we can put our city logo on it and they can look at our city logo. I think those are options. Yes. is instant because even those antennas like the one at the golf course we got a lot of complaints and now two years later you don't even see it like so it is when they're new and they're in sight they weren't before they're really obtrusive but after a while they become part of the landscape and I agree with you right so when we look at we did the pole down in the fields that was a 60footer I think and that one you hardly see it I think it looks fine but where we're sticking it on top of a ridge that's where I get like Really? Do we want to put that plus 80? Five. 85. And then 85.

I think it gives them They like it on top of the bridge because it gives them the most cover. Oh, I get why they're doing it. I mean, but there's other locations they can go. It's just harder, right? This is an easy route. Any location they put it on, they have to come back to you for a conditional use permit. So whether it's on our property or somebody else's, that's going to be up there on the ridge line if they found another. Yeah. But in the center of Coral Canyon. Yeah. I don't know. I'm just saying. I would like I would I know they've beded them, but there's other locations. They just might not be as appealing, but it might might not be as appealing to them, but it might be more appealing to the general and still serve what they want. But I don't have that information to know. That's a great final word. Thank you, Rusty. It's 5:30. We'll call for a motion to adjurnn.

So made. Motion by Councilman Ivy. Second by Councilman Bellison. All in favor? We will reconvene with working mics at 6 pm.

is Wednesday, April 22nd, 2026. We are in the council chamber chambers at Washington City Hall for our regular meeting. Our meetings are streamed live and archived at washingtoncity.org/meings. As is customary, we like to start our meetings uh with a prayer offered by the interfaith council. And this evening, I'd like to invite Laura Fairchild of the Bahigh faith to start off our meeting.

Thank you so much. Uh this is a wonderful time in the Bahigh world. It's uh the second day of a nine-day festival called Riddban or Rizbon depending upon which language you use. Uh tonight I'd be honored to share a prayer for humanity. Oh thou kind Lord, thou hast created all humanity from the same stock. Thou hast decreed that all shall belong to the same household. In thy presence they are all thy servants, and all mankind are sheltered beneath thy tabernacle. All have gathered at thy table of bounty. All are illumined through the light of thy providence. Oh God, thou art kind to all. Thou hast provided for all, dust shelter all, confer life upon all. Thou hast endowed each and all with talents and faculties, and are all submerged in the ocean of thy mercy. Thou art the mighty and the powerful. Thou art the forgiving and thou art the one who overlookth the shortcomings of all humankind. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Lara. We we appreciate you and the interfaith council and setting the tone for these meetings and we appreciate even more the uh the service that you provide in faith throughout the community. So, thank you very much. I've asked Council Member Brett Henderson to lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Please follow me in the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge to the flag of the United States to the Fathers. Council, we do not have need to go to a close session. So I will call for a motion to approve the agenda as outlined. So mean. I have a motion by Councilman Belliston. Second by Councilman Henderson. All in favor? I.

The agenda is approved unanimously. We do have some announcements and the first is the reading of a proclamation for Arbor Day. And before I do, Paul, do I see Paul Walker? I think he just stepped out. How many years has Washington City been a Tree City USA member? We're going to go with 1617, something like that. I don't know if it works as well as that 67 thing my kids used to do a few months ago, but we're going to go with that. And I will read the official proclamation. Whereas in 1872, the Nebraska Board of Agriculture established a special day to be set aside for the planting of trees. And whereas this holiday called Arbor Day was first observed with the planting of more than a million trees in Nebraska. And whereas arborday is now observed throughout the nation and the world. And whereas trees can be a solution to combi combining combating climate change by reducing the erosion of our precious top soil by wind and water. cutting heating and cooling costs, moderating the temperature, cleaning the air, producing lifegiving oxygen, and providing habitat for wildlife. And whereas trees are a renewable resource, giving us paper, wood for our homes, fuel for our fires, and countless other wood products. And whereas trees in our city increase property values, enhance the economic vitality of business areas, and beautify our community. And whereas trees wherever they are planted are a source of joy and spiritual renewal. Now therefore, I crest daily, mayor of

Washington City, do hereby proclaim Friday, April 24th, 2026 as Arbor Day in Washington City. And I urge all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands. And further, I urge all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart, promote the well-being of this and future generations. Dated this 22nd day of April, 2026. That is done. We all love our trees. Now, you know, they provided this official proclamation to me. By by signing this I I I am not necessarily agreeing with the term climate change just for the record but uh we do have a interesting climate here which this past year has been severe drought. Um announcements. Uh the rest of this week, the council will be participating at the Dixie Center at the Utah League of Cities and Towns uh doing training and and learning to to do our duties of representing citizens the best we possibly can. But uh more important is we have cotton days coming up next uh next week and that celebrates the uh resilient founding of of what we now call Washington City which is also called Utah's Dixie as part of what was called the cotton mission. Um you can go to washingtoncity.org and search or you can go to cottondays.org or for a full listing. But the events will start on April 29th and go through May 2nd on April 29th at 6:30 p.m. There will be a Wills Park kids jam session. If you haven't been to

the new Wills Park yet, go see it. It is amazing at how much it's being used and the value it adds to the community. On April Thursday, April 30th, Friday, May 1st, and Friday, May 2nd, there will be a new musical that tells the story of Washington's commitment to youth and the building of the addition of what was called the old gym, now called Heritage Hall, onto the back of the sandstone uh schoolhouse, now museum. Uh that building is also of sandstone, built on a lava rock foundation. It's got a remarkable story. The play is called Side by Side. They'll have those three evening showings plus a matinea on Saturday at 2:00. Um, search that up on cottondays.org. There's a QR code there that will give you tickets and they are free. And I can tell you um the uh the play was written um by some of our talented uh local residents and it's performed by locals and it will just be a a wonderful uh date night or evening out with friends. Um in addition Oh, go ahead, Councilman.

I understand one of the stars of that play is present tonight. I I see this. Uh does he play? Would would the star of playing Miller Iverson please stand? We'll give you a round of applause. We will take a hand wave for for just a teaser about this amazing play. you know, when when Washington City wanted to um expand onto their schoolhouse to build this this amusement hall because, you know, the youth needed a place to recreate and the community needed a place to gather. The Bank of St. George at the time wouldn't sign off on the notes despite uh notorized signatures from almost every resident in town as um they called Arthur Paxman Patrick Henry because he was relentless in trying to get that built for the youth and for the community. Ultimately, the concession was that if you could find three property owners with enough assets to secure the loan, then the bank would fund the other half, partnered with the school district to build this this amusement hall. And so Arthur Paxman, who was a state representative, Calvin Hall, who was a store owner, a bishop, and a mayor, both signed off. And when they needed a third signer on that to make it happen, who would back the community, when he when he and Eie Iverson heard that it was for the benefit of the youth and they had a big family, he and Eie became the third signer. And so now we have brought life back into

that uh that amusement hall. that's now Heritage Hall and it is just a wonderful addition reintroduced back into the community. If you want the details and the fun stories and and the nuances of the story, go to the play. Trust me. Uh on Saturday, May 2nd, it will start off at 7 a.m. with the Lions Club breakfast. At 9:00 a.m. we will have one of our three annual parades starting at the lineup by the uh library down 300 eastbound, excuse me, westbound on Telegraph and it will end here at Veterans Park. Immediately following the parade is the Cottonfest at 10:00 a.m. There will be historic city tours, a car show, a tractor pole, balloon rides from a tethered balloon at the Nison Block, and that evening will culminate with a 900 p.m. drone show at the community center. So hopefully you'll um make a point to be involved in some or all of that those activities. That was a mouthful. Might be the record for announcements. Is there anything else council that I may have missed coming up within the next few weeks? Okay. Next item on the agenda, declaration of abstensions and conflicts. Any abstensions or conflicts this evening? None. Next item is the consent agenda consisting of approval of the minutes from the city council meeting 4826. And that's it. I'll call for a motion on that item.

Mayor, I'll make that motion to approve the consent agenda as outline. I have a motion by Councilman Bellist. Second. Second by Councilman Coat. All in favor?

Any opposed? That is approved. The consent agenda is approved unanimously. We do have uh three public hearings that um will follow um a motion. Um two of those I will run concurrently, although they are notice separately because they have separate tax IDs. I will also make note that the recorder informed me we did not receive any online public comment on any of the items requiring a public hearing this evening. Item 5A is a public hearing and consideration to approve an ordinance accepting the annexation petition known as Adam's edition. City recorder Tara Pence, are you presenting or is Elden? You're right there. You're usually up in your office. Take it away, Tara.

Right. All right. So, as you said, this is the public hearing for the formal acceptance of the Adams addition annexation. The request is for approximately 140 acres located in Washington Fields. It's along the along 20 East and a second parcel extends to 3090 South. The petition was submitted in accordance with Utah State Code and was accepted by city council in February. Um since that time, we have verified that all statutory requirements have been met and it's been certified and to be complete on April 7th. Um, tonight's public hearing is the final step in your review process. Um, once you consider the formal adoption of the ordinance, we'll do the final steps, which is sending it to the lieutenant governor's office and then we can record. Um, staff is recommending that the application come in with a residential agricultural zone of RA1. Um, and if do you have any question? I do understand that it probably will not stay that, but that's what we're asking for at this time for this parcel. And Tara, u just for the record, that's typical for that to come in with an RA1 zoning because of the it's the most consistent with the current use.

Wonderful. Um council, any questions for Tara? Okay.

Okay. Seeing none, I will um at this time I will um open up the public hearing for anyone who would like to speak um to item 5A, which is uh an ordinance accepting the annexation petition known as Adam's edition. Seeing no one come forward, I will close uh the public hearing. Um, is the applicant or the applicant's representative here? Would would there like to be any uh present any um would you like to say anything to the council before we have further discussion and or a motion. Jason Smith representing the applicant. Um we just like to say that we've been working with staff um looking at at potential uses and and uh they've done a great job. We appreciate them. Um we appreciate the opportunity to to bring this this par these parcels into Washington City. Um it's been a long time coming and and we just we're happy to be here.

Thank you Jason. we appreciate you and you have been in this chair as a plan commission chair uh many times. So um it's good to see you here this evening. Um just before council you have a further discussion on this. I um I'd just like to say a few words about Larry and Marsha. I'm sorry I might be a little bit nostalgic tonight, but I um I knew both of them and and loved Marsha and appreciated Larry. I can tell you that uh when I first ran for council years ago, Marsha probably 12 years ago, Marsha reached out to me and um and asked if I would bring a sign and put in her yard. And I did that. And um I just I just got had a really good relationship with her. And then I had some really good interactions with Larry. And I think the best way I would explain Larry Adams is a little bit like my my grandfather Woodro Staley. They were both men for their time. And I think if you look back to this heritage of family generational farming and what they made grow out of the desert, you know, the work that they did to build that that flood irrigation canal and taming the Virgin River and and Larry Adams was one of the last of his kind. If I have a regret, I think it's that I didn't sit down with him and take in more of that history. I think there's a lot of things that um that maybe will be have been forgotten. So, I'm relying a little bit more on Dennis Iverson now, but but Larry Adams is certainly one of those stalwart pillars who understood water, who understood land, who understood how to

make things grow. And um and it's it's quite it's this is quite the monumental time for that 140 acres that has been in the county appropriately being farmed to come into the city. And I can promise you this, Jason, and those that you represent that we will do our best to to help you get the highest and best use of those properties so that everyone feels good about it. The the the the family and the residents and the city all all work together. That's a lot. I need to be quiet. Council, further discussion and or a motion on the Adams annexation petition. Mayor, I'll make a motion that we approve. We close it already.

Sorry. Mayor, I'll make a motion that we approve the the annexation petition known as Adam's addition. Yes, you've heard the motion. Further discussion. Have just asked one question, mayor. Yes. I'm super excited for this. This is a long time coming. My only question would be can we get an explanation of res residential agricultural and if it would be more appropriate just to bring it in as agricultural as its historical use. Elden, are you asking what type of uses that entails or

Yeah, just so we've got a motion on the table and but we have a question. So, you okay with that, Councilman? For sure.

Yeah, great question there. So, residential agriculture, um there's three different zonings. It starts out at RA half is the smallest uh lot size there up to the RA2. And with that um um brings the the residential use. So for every 1 acre of land you you could have one acre one parcel which would provide one residential unit there. Um, in regards to agricultural use, they've been using that land um, agriculturally, which we encourage them to do for as long as they want to. Um, if they wanted to develop it and and not do a zone change, if council approves this, they'd be given the RA one, which would then give them those uses. Each partial parcel would need to be one acre in size. our our discussions with them are, you know, that they've been working the land and putting plans to paper and um I don't think it's going to stay RA1. It's just how we want to bring it into the city allows them to use it as they have been and and set them up for future change if they so you desire.

Thank you. And so just to clarify, Elden, I think what you're saying in is because of the current use, we'll bring it in as RA1 allows them to keep farming, keep using It does give them some entitlement, but what you're saying is it's likely that this will come back with general plan amendments and zoning and go through that entitlement process. That's correct. Wonderful. And that's the appropriate way to do it. Correct. Council, there unless there's further discussion, there is a motion on the table. Is

Yeah, Mayor. This I mean this has been in our annexation plan for ever, right? We knew it was coming in. So, it's good to see finally see it in the city to where we can actually put um some plan to it when it's in the county property, but you know, we can't do the the infrastructure planning appropriately. Right. So, I'm happy to second the motion. Got a second on this motion to approve the uh the ordinance for the um petition known as Adam's Addition. We'll go roll call vote on this beginning with council member Belliston Henderson Coats. Hi Ivy. Hi. Caspersonson

I

that is approved five to zero. As I said uh I'd like to run items 5B and 5 C uh concurrently. I'll read them both. The really the only difference on there is the tax ID and then I will open and close the public hearing on these items concurrently. Item 5B is a public hearing and consideration to approve a resolution declaring eminent domain of certain property along with all associated rights in that property known as Washington County Tax IDW-5-2-36-111. Property location is approximately west of Southern Parkway and north of St. George, excuse me, north of George Washington Boulevard, Washington 84780. And item 5C, public hearing and consideration to approve a resolution declaring eminent domain of certain property along with all associated rights in that property known as Washington County Tax ID or tax parcel ID W-5-2-36-118. Property location is approximately west of Southern Parkway and north of George Washington Boulevard, Washington, Utah 84780. City Attorney Thaad Sigmiller will present to the council, then I will open up a public hearing. Mr. Segler.

Thank you, Mayor. I've scanned the gallery um just to make sure that any of the folks I know related to these parcels haven't appeared. I don't see them there today. Yes, they they are. Is there one here? Three.

So, I missed I missed this one. Thank you. I missed your line. Um, in this week, uh, the city has had contact with both of the property owners. Um, we have a offer in writing from the attorney for one of them and then an offer and email from the representative of the other. Neither of those offers has been weighed or responded to yet. Uh the intent will be that I will meet with Jeremy and the public works director to talk those through and see if they're offers that we can accept. Tonight's hearing is a mandatory public hearing from state law. Anytime that a municipal body wants to exercise the eminent domain power, the state legislature has said that you can only do it if you will meet certain notice and time elements. Some of those notices were a couple weeks ago, Marin and I were sending letters out to the landowners giving them packets about their rights and about the process from this unbudsman, the property rights unbudsman office. This hearing is another statutory step that we must complete if the city is to file an imminent domain matter. Um, to keep the to keep the process moving forward, I ask that the council will approve the resolution tonight. But I did want to give you information that we have received communication this week and offers that might settle the case before we even file.

Okay. Have you got any questions for me, mayor or council? The question is just clarification. If you if you uh reach a settlement with those offers, then it makes this imminent domain no one point. Is that correct?

Correct. And that would be my preference by a large margin. Um the the sticking point has been price. uh the city's required to obtain an appraisal. The city did obtain appraisals in February of 2025. The land owners don't necessarily agree with those. In both cases, the city has been willing to and has paid for a second appraisal in one of the situations and and the state law requires that we do that before we can exercise imminent domain as well. And so in the one case, the price seems to be resolved and some some other elements such as and this is this is a parcel of land from which the city just needs a roadway or access pipes and and service elements. The piece of land that is probably the farthest away from settlement is the one where the city needs seven acres for three water tanks. And so that one's part of a 10acre parcel. So there's some complications there because the feeling and it's and it's a legitimate feeling is that by taking seven acres, you've left them with three that maybe don't have the same value, right? And so the offer today was for the city to buy all 10 of those. And and again, we'll weigh that in our little our little committee that'll review those things. And so our goal would be to settle them all. Now, if that happens, there'll be a settlement agreement that'll talk about payment. It'll talk about the transfer of lands. And if those occur, the city won't need to file imminent domain. And that would be our our uh majority preference by a long shot.

Okay. Further questions for the city attorney? Just a question, mayor. The the uh those that are here representing this, are they do they own both parcels? I believe so. The parcels have different owners. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. I'll sit down and you can let the the other speak.

Wonderful. At this time, what I'd like to do is open the public hearing for item 5B and 5C in regards to the Washington County tax partial IDs I read when presenting this these items. So at this time I will open the public hearing um and invite anyone wishing to speak to this because there is not an applicant. This would be um anyone directly affected opportunity to speak is during the public hearing. So um this is the council's opportunity to listen. Um most wellspoken public comment can be done within about 3 minutes or so. Um and we uh once the public hearing is closed then uh either uh myself, council or staff would answer any questions. So the public hearing on these items is now officially open for anyone wishing to speak to these items. Yes, come forward if you'd like to speak and then just state your name for the record. Hi, I'm Terry Cipher and I am the owner of the 10acre parcel and where the city would like to have seven acres. Um I I think the um attorney kind of explained this situation fairly well and it's exactly what he says is you know I would prefer to sell the entire 10 acres because being left with that small parcel um just is not an ideal situation and and in an earlier correspondence the city did make an offer to purchase the full 10 acres. Um, but some some of these points may be moot if we can come to an agreement. Um, but if

if we can't, I I have some issues with the imminent domain. Um, you know, I don't feel like it's really being used appropriately because like like has been indicated, there will eventually be three tanks on the property. But the current plan is only to build one tank with another one approximately four to five years down the road as you know that's if the population growth what happens with population growth and then there's a third tank that's supposed to be built again based on population growth. And so, you know, I don't have any issue with the city coming in taking taking enough land to build the immediate need of the one water tank. Um, but I I just have an issue of the city taking property that may never be used. Um, you know, the property has been in my family for over 50 years, and my vast preference was to to hang on to it. Um, so I was just looking through my notes. So, yeah. So, anyway, I think under the under the rules of imminent domain, and I've talked to an attorney about it, and he he said that you can't take, you know, you can't take for future projects that are potentially speculative. Um, We've already talked about the damages of the remainder of the property and and that's another thing, you know, part of the offer was for seven acres. Um, and you can see on the map as it's laid out that the three acres are that the three tanks are over on the west side of the property, but you're also requesting my whole east side border. and I put an email exchange um through I think it was the consultant

that the city was using and I just got the response back as well we were taking those uh because we didn't want to pay damages on that section of the property and and again I don't think that's a proper use of imminent domain um to avoid damages. It's just for actual public need. The the third third one's a little more sensitive. Um, you know, there's adjacent around my property is bordered on two sides by the BLM land and it's at the same elevation levels as my land because it's all along the hillside. So, I never understood why the city wouldn't just go to the BLM to to use that land. And in fact, you know, I was told by a consultant and I also have an email exchange that that said, you know, basically the city doesn't want to deal with the BLM because it was too difficult and that, you know, after holding on the property for 30 years, that really is very hurtful that somebody decided it was too much trouble to use BLM that's just sitting right there instead of taking my property. and and then you know again my understanding is the city doesn't have full approval for the project. I think there's maybe an issue with the Department of Transportation of getting I think the pipeline needs to go down along the the highway corridor and my understanding is is that the city hasn't obtained that uh access yet and so you know again is the taking of my land premature um is is also a concern but it anyway those are the points and you know I have a partner in the land and you know We decided probably in everybody's best

interest if if we could just settle on the full on selling the full 10 acres. Thank you, Terry. Is there anything else you'd like to say? And I'll have Thad or or the city manager or the public works director respond to some of those that you brought up once I close the public hearing. Is there anything else you'd like to say? No, I think that's it. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you.

Okay. The public hearing is still open for anyone else who would like to speak to items 5B and 5 C. Seeing no one else come forward, uh I I will now officially close the public hearing. Thad, you probably took more notes than I did, but if you'll just uh maybe address some of the the the comments that that Mr. Cipher brought forward. Yes, I'll do my best. Uh, and I would just ask that mayor if you would allow Mr. Cipher at least another chance to stand and speak if after I'm done or after the council's done. Absolutely. Happy to do that. I I don't I don't wish that the process for close them out if if he'd like to say something else.

Fair enough.

Um, a couple of points he raised. One was the ride of way down along the Southern Parkway. It is true that initially when a negotiation started through the public works department consultant that the city was attempting to acquire permission to bring water lines along the power utility corridor down there during the but but that was resolved during the time when UD do was contacting the city for rights of way across city land along the northern corridor. we were able to raise the two issues at the same time and and we've got confirmation that the city does have the right to connect the water system down there. So, that one's been resolved. One of the things that's unique about this this particular taking is it is it is almost exagent at this point that the city bring online more water storage for the culinary water system in that pressure zone. That pressure zone is one of the fastest growing in our city. It includes the Long Valley development as well as other development around Stukie Farm and even down even farther south with some of the commercial. And so it it's it's an understatement to say that public works feels like the attorney hasn't moved fast enough. And so and so this is something that that is really needed. Um and so this is not a day too soon as far as this hearing. It is also true though that this 7 acre parcel will hold three water tanks and the city does not intend to build each of the three at the same time. And and there's a reason for that. The city does intend though to build a pad designed and graded and studied and prepared for three. and the city does intend to build infrastructure up and down the the the access way that it's obtained for all three. And so it's my

legal opinion that that's well within a public purpose and well within the public need requirement for imminent domain. Uh part of why we're not building all three is because having too much storage on a system also has its downsides and also because funding for storage tanks comes in as as growth happens and it'll allow the city to pay for these as funding comes in as well. And so so there's reasons why Mr. Cipher is not incorrect in what he stated, but there's reasons why um it's my opinion that this this is safely within the purpose of eminent domain. I think the hardest issues are also what he described, which is this is a 10acre piece that they've had their own dreams and plans for. Uh it's a 10acre piece that the city didn't initially ask for because we needed about seven for the roadway up in and then for the for the actual tank sites and then to remediate and control the lands around them. And so that's probably the hardest part is dealing with those issues that are sight.

Thank you, Thaad. Uh Blake, uh could you come forward for just a moment? Um can you just speak to the selection of this location as opposed to Bureau of Land Management property and um just maybe even developability of of the parcel based on the the the height and the hillside. So when we um go back just a little bit when we built the the Long Valley tank um that's on BLM land and as we were going through um negotiations with them um they said this is the last one we're going to let you build on our land on the BLM land. We're not going to let you continue to do these. And so we felt like the door was shut there. And so we didn't had to look around for where where could we build because we had to be at this elevation. And so so this was this was the the place that we um found that was met all those conditions. Um so part of that was because we were told by the BLM that they weren't going to negotiate and work that out with us um to build more tanks. Um sorry I got something in my throat. So um Anyway, um one of the other things I wanted to mention is that is correct. We will be developing the um the pad site for all three tanks. Um thank you because and that will require blasting. We will have to blast all those three. That's why we need the whole the whole area. um once you put up a tank, you don't really want to put blast do blasting next to it. So, we have to do all of that at the first all of the geotechnical everything for that site. So, we'll basically building a pad. Um these tanks are going to be buried

mostly mostly into the hillside. Um so, it won't be there will be some visible the very front, but most of it will be into the hillside. And so all of that blasting will need to be um done to be able to excavate that out and create a pad. So that's why we needed the seven acres. The the um the area that we're putting where we picked the seven acres was because that was the ideal location based on the elevations, based on the slopes, based on the material that we were going to have to remove um and and those kind of things. So, it was really based on on the actual this is the best for this for the tanks, not it wasn't an option of okay, we can move them over here, we can move them over there. There's just a there's kind of a a slope and a little bit of a flat area there that that really helps with with the the building of the tanks. So, those were kind of the the three things that mentioned. So, we um and yes, uh getting the um water line in. If we weren't able to do the the water line down like we've we've been able to get, we would have gone down George Washington Boulevard and would have been longer and and more difficult, but we we still we just have to do it to be able to provide water for this whole area. Pressure zone.

Thank you, Blake. Thanks.

Uh Mr. Cipher, just want to give you a courtesy to speak to again if you'd like to. Uh, council, I will now turn to you for a motion, further discussion and or a motion on items 5B and 5C, which um are resolution resolutions declaring eminent domain of certain property along with all associated rights in that property. Actually, I'd like I'd like for those uh motions to be made separately even though we ran them concurrently. Uh motions made separately and voted separately. So, if I'm happy to um you know facilitate discussion and or questions to staff, otherwise I'm happy to entertain a motion on each individual item. Mayor, I think it's fair to say that nobody likes the idea of imminent domain, but but it's there for a reason. And the reason is because when you do have infrastructure projects um that that serve the the community as a whole, you know, you're limited, especially around here ge geographically, you're limited as to where you can do things like that. And so, um, I I know that, uh, I've struggled with this one over because with this has been a topic of discussion for quite a while now, probably more than a year at least, right? Um, but with that, I'm I'm happy to make a motion. Uh happy to make a motion that we approve a resolution declaring eminent domain of certain private property uh along with all associated rights in that property known as Washington County Tax Parcel IDW-5-2-36-11. Heard the motion by Councilman Belliston.

Second. Second by Councilman Coats. We'll go roll call beginning with Council Member Henderson. I Coat. Ivy. Caspersonson. Hi. Bellison. Hi. Item 5B is approved five to zero. Think that what I'd like to say I'm going to offer the motion in just a second, but I'd just like to say we hope that we can find a financial resolution to this before it goes to eminent domain. We we hope that we can reach that. This isn't an easy decision. We've had a lot of discussion about it. We know you're good people that wants the best for your investment and we need it for the city though. So, I hope that we can get there. But I'm prepared to make that motion. Mayor, go ahead. Councilman

motion to approve a resolution declaring eminent domain for certain property along with all associated rights in that property known Washington County tax partial ID W-5-2-36-118. The property location is approximately west of Southern Parkway and north of George Washington Boulevard. There's a motion on the table by Councilman Ivy. Second that. A second by Councilman Belliston. Roll call. Because this is an ordinance starting with council member Coats I. Ivy Caspersonson Belliston Henderson I.

That is approved 5 to zero. Next item of business is item 6A. This is consideration to approve a request for extension of time for Sienna Hills Plaza Plateau PUDR. Community Development Director Elden Gibb will present to you on this item. Council, thank you. Mayor, Council, this is the location of the project here on the screen. This was approved back on March 27th, 2024, which has a sunset of 18 months. That expired. The applicant then exercised ordinance which allows them to apply for a six-month extension which which staff approved and that expired and they are now asking for their last sixmonth extension if approved by council will expire this September 27th. That concludes staff report. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have at this time. Councilman Colts, Elden, have they submitted anything for this project? Like, do we have construction plans done or is it just what we went through on council?

They submitted a pre-plat. Uh, the hold up on this was access to the site. Phase six of um this development before them, the the coal west um has brought them right away. So, they're ready to move full steam ahead was what I was told. My concern if they haven't submitted construction drawings. I mean, they're not even close, but it's my only concern. I ask a question. Seems like uh you know, a few years ago uh when this group had had come in, there was some agreements as far as finishing the main road right there or partially finishing it or something. I think it was Grapevine Crossing North.

Yeah. Can we get an update on that maybe or about Highland Parkway, the one that drops down into um Yes. And and connects into because this, as Councilman remembers well correctly, is that this, as I recall as well, this was part of a larger development agreement with with separate parcels and and and some of those developments may have been parcled off. So, we just want to make sure that those agreements are still valid and still in place for not only the roadway, but also for just the the the flood mitigation and waterways.

Yeah, great questions. So, this development sits up top on the plateau. Um, just for clarification, was this part of the the stuff down below? I thought it was I think it was all combined together. It was a different application. Okay. Yeah, this was not part of that development agreement. I'm not sure who that is, but uh are you the are you the applicant? I Yeah, I'm the applicant on the video. Sorry, I'll wait for my turn to talk, but

Okay, thank you. Um John Hinky or Thaad Segmler, do either of you have any additional information on on this item and and prior uh commitments? Mayor, as John's approaching the the podium, I'll just I think identify that voice as Tate Murphy, one of the one of the applicant representatives on past items for these issues.

Yeah, good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, yeah, we have the different parcels, the one up on top behind Solus and stuff. Then we have the the lower lower developments and stuff and part of that is tied with the grapevine crossing road north extension across. Um we also have the drainage issue from the previous recreational bulldozing up there that relocated the drainage way to not where it's supposed to go. We need to get that back into its original location and stuff like that. And so we're still trying to work to get a lot of those things in place. We haven't made any progress in in actually getting to any of those pieces taken care of.

Don't go far. John, stay close by. Questions for John. So, let me ask a question. I It sounds like these two maybe development agreements are different. I think on the other development, uh, has that been sold to someone else? Did did the obligation to finish that road is that part of that sale? Does the new owner inherit that obligation or that maybe?

Oh, so there there are separate parcels of land. The one that's identified tonight for the renewal of time is not the one subject to a development agreement that requires Grapevine Crossing Road to be finished and the wash to be remediated. However, it is the same owner. It is the same entity and owner that the city's dealt with on both. And with this owner having sold a portion of the project subject to the development agreement, um I would just state on behalf of the city as the attorney that I seek clarity from this owner as to their intent and timing of when they intend to cooperate in the the promises they made in the development agreement on the lower parcel. And if if they're not willing to reaffirm those promises and give the city intent and clarity, um that that might be grounds for them to maybe not not merit a a renewal on the sheets.

Thank you, Thad. Um I'm told it's Tate Murphy. I I think I I remember Tate. Um is that is that you on the line? Yeah, sorry. I wish I could be there in person. and I was in a different uh council meeting earlier today uh in northern Utah. But yes, so did did you hear did you hear um that our city attorney clearly just address those?

Yeah, I I'll give a quick update. So we are working with a new buyer on the multif family piece which I I know staff has has communicated with them on that. Um we are still under full intention to develop or improve the the wash, relocate it and for the portion of Grapevine Crossing um as part of that contract with that buyer that was also contemplated when we sold off the commercial piece. Um and so the intention is still to do that. It's just been been lagging the the product that we wanted to to put there. um it didn't quite work. And so we're we're working through that process and hopefully something should be back in front of you here in the next uh I would probably say two or three months for that multif family piece that will be associated with that wash and grapevine crossing. Um we've been working with Sitla to to understand Grapevine Crossing. According to our understanding and speaking with Aaron over at SITLA, that roadway was just approved for construction drawings within the last few weeks. So it I mean even to that extent it has been working through. I mean we offered a plan and we drew up construction drawings for Grapevine and then turned those over to Sila and Aaron who ran them through the city. So it's not like nothing has happened. Um Sila has been working with the city to get that approved and we're working with them closely. um depending on what's happening with the adjoining uses and if those sell to to try to work as a team on those pieces. So obviously um lot of moving pieces with with that lower portion that's connected to the development agreement. this upper portion that we're here for tonight. We submitted a preliminary plat immediately after the reszone and um we're told that because of the access and and that solless hadn't recorded its final phase

that we needed to wait until that phase was recorded and that road was dedicated. And so we're I mean we we've already staff's already reviewed that preliminary plat back about a year and a half ago. Um and so we'll obviously resubmit that immediately. Um this was not part of that. Um this is something we are looking to to develop immediately up on the plateau with these um you know larger larger lots up there, but we are still working through the the lower portion.

So T, I appreciate that. Um, I think what what we're looking for, as you recall, your original entitlement on the on the two projects below, the commercial and the residential multifamily, the development agreement was was a big part of that approval and and it did take some time and and that development agreement gave some pretty clear commitments from from your organization. So, I think what we're looking for as a city with my assistant public works director, my city attorney, we we need some clarity on the intent to continue to participate on the road improvement of Grapevine Crossing North and with the drainage. I mean, I can I can ask, you know, public works or this the legal office to to to give some ideas unless you have some ideas on how you can give this council some assurance on that before they give you an extension on this other project.

Yeah. I mean, like I said, we'll be bringing a project in front of you here in the next couple months for the multifamily piece that'll help facilitate that. um that that road was just approved. So, I'm I'm getting those plans from SITLA to to start working through some some initial bidding on those that I mean those construction drawings were were with the city for the last oh at probably six or seven months on that road. Um so, I mean it's not like nothing has happened there. I do agree that we wanted a lot more to happen quicker. Um that being said, I mean this is a different piece that we're talking about. Um, and so I'm guess I'm a little confused that that a separate parcel that's not part of this development agreement could be held to the standards of that development agreement, but I I guess I don't I'll lean on on you, Thad, for for that. Yeah, I don't I apologize if it sounded like I was holding the upper partial to the developments of the stand the standards of the development agreement. I understand that tonight you're asking for an extension of time on the basis of inactivity. My viewpoint is the city is deserving of your your provision of assurance that you're going to contribute to the obligations within your development agreement down low. And if you're not able or willing to provide those, I think the city council can consider that when they decide whether or not you should merit a a continuation of time, an extension of time.

Yeah. And and we we absolutely are. We're going to abide by that development agreement. It has been delayed. we will be bringing a project back in front of you guys. Um, and I mean obviously it will help if if certain projects on Bellis and Sitla land happen. Uh, that'll that'll obviously um help things go faster and we've been in very close communication with SITLA on that and the design of that road.

So yeah, from from my viewpoint, I was trying to communicate maybe to just make it simple. Should the city council extend time for a development partner that hasn't fulfilled their duties so far? Sometimes it's okay to sit in the silence, isn't it? Councilman Belliston, I have a question for John. If you got a second,

Mr. Hanky, here your pleasure. Um, so one thing Tate brought up was that he's been held up by the city for the North End of Solace recording for him to be able to submit or for for him to be able to get approval. Um, is that the case? No. Um the roadway down off of there has been in litigation between I my understanding I haven't been a party to the litigation or or council on the case but my understanding is Mr. Tate's entity and the co-est entity have have had some disputes about that roadway. So I do

we're trying to access into the piece. We didn't have access to this piece. Yeah. there wasn't legal access into it and and the city's position is you can't record a preliminary plat or or move forward with a preliminary plat if there's no legal access to the parcel. And that was that was part of that was uh solless uh phase six which has been complete for probably three three four months now. So there was there was a time that yes, you know, the solos development was working through all of their phases to get back there in that that final phase is the that I know they were working on it, but um

at no point was public works holding them up in regards to the sol development development. The hold was administered by the city, but it was because of a lack of legal access. So So story than than than us holding. Look, I just want to make sure that if if the ball was in our court and we were holding something up arbitrarily, I don't think that's fair to the applicant. But if it's a legal access issue, then animal that's out of our court. And I get that.

Yeah. I one one other item that was stated that I would like to make a correction on is the Washington city hasn't received any construction plans for great vine crossing north. Nothing has been sitting with the city for six or seven months. We have not seen anything as of this time. So c could they have submitted their construction plans on this parcel for review? We could have reviewed them. We would not have approved them until you had legal access. But you could have gone through the process and cut off some time. We could have gone through grading. We could have gone through construction. But they would have sat without my signature on them until they had legal access, which was

We were told we couldn't do a grading permit until we had preliminary plat. Is that not true? you've you've had your preliminary plat so you could No, we couldn't get our preliminary we couldn't get our preliminary plat until we had access to the property is what we were told. This is just for the reszone the extension is is what it was conveyed to us.

Mayor, I'm ready to make a motion if we're ready. Thank you. Uh, council, at this time I'll turn to you for further discussion and or a motion. I'll make a motion that we deny the request for extension of time because there's been ample time to get the process going. You've heard the motion by Councilman Coats.

I'm looking for a second. Yes. Sorry. I should say you've heard the motion. I'll second the motion. Right. We have a motion by Councilman Coat, a second by Councilman Ivy. I think I would like to go roll call on this particular item. Uh this is a motion to deny. So an I vote is to deny the request for extension. We'll start with council member Ivy. I Caspersonson. Belliston. This is a tough one for me,

I guess. I Henderson. I Coats. Hi.

Uh, the request for extension of time is denied on a vote of 4 to one and the U as per the reasons stated by council member Coat. Councilman Coats. We'll move on to item number seven or section seven. We've got a number. Are you ready for this, Elden? This is This is some code cleanup and improvement. We're going to we're going to make good time on this. Okay, we've we've chewed on this in work session, so we know what we're doing. We're going to do our We're going to do our 400 meter repeats. Item number seven, this is consideration to approve an ordinance amending city code title 4-6, swimming pools. Not even going to say it. We know you're up on these next five or six or seven items. Thank you, mayor. This is pretty cut and dry here. Asking to replace the fencing of swimming pools. As shown here, it states 4 D 4-6-1 pool fencing shall be provided as per international Utah State Pool and Spa Code. And my KCOG building officials here to address any technical questions.

Council, any questions? Further discussion and or a motion? Make a motion to approve an ordinance amending city code title 4-6. You've heard the motion by Councilwoman Caspersonson. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilman Henderson. Ordinances. We're going to be roll calling beginning with Council Member Casperson. I Henderson. Hi. Coats. Hi. Ivy. Hi.

That's approved four to zero. Item 7B. consideration to approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-8A-9 and title 9-8B-8 internal accessory dwelling unit. So this was discussed in work session um comments were taken into account um specifically um to exclude homes that are in the nightly overlay rental zone to not have to fill out a deed restriction. That has been added into that and we can I can point that out here in letter C. It states, "As a condition of securing a building permit or an internal accessory dwelling unit in accordance with this chapter, excluding those areas that have been approved for nightly rental, the property owner shall record against the deed title to the subject property a deed restriction." Um, and I'm happy to go back through this if if would like to. Okay, we'll continue on. Uh, on April 15th, the planning commission reviewed this and recommended approval with the comment to clear up the confusion regarding the need to avoid the appearance of multiple front entry doors. I would like to review that real quick, make you aware of this change. This highlighted area here in two states, internal accessory dwelling units shall be compatible in design with the primary residence and contained entirely within the building envelope and roof line of the primary structure attached externally with a wallto-wall connection. Exterior doors shall be secondary in scale and positioned to maintain the

single family character of the street facing fake aid. Comments, questions, questions for Elden on this discussion on this item. I think it looks very close to what we talked about. I think it's exactly right. I'm ready for make a motion if you're ready, mayor. Further discussion? If not, Councilman Ivy's ready to make a motion. Approve an ordinance amending city title 9-8A-9 and title 9-8B-8 internal accessory dwelling unit. You've heard the motion to approve by Councilman Ivy. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilman Belliston. Roll call. Beginning with council member Caspersonson. Ivy

Coats Henderson Bell. That is approved unanimous 5 to zero. Item 7 C. consideration to approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-7-6, title 9-8A-6, and Title 9-8B-6, modifying regulations. Thanks, Mayor. Uh, the planning commission also heard this and um made the comment to increase the shade structure on the sideyards up to 14T. They found that to be in conflict. that comment was noted and also incorporated into here. They felt that we're in a day and age um there's there's homeowners out there that would want to cover their RVs on the side of their house is where that comment came from. That's been incorporated in. And then also um the um backyard area was increased as discussed in the work session. pull that up here. You can see those red line comments. We bumped up the R110 to be included in the upgraded percentage of 50% in the backyard combined total to 70% as discussed in the work session. Readjusted the R112 and the R115 to allow them more rear yard coverage as well. On April 15th, the planning commission reviewed this request and recommended approval with the one suggestion to increase the height to shade structures in the sideyard. This concludes staff report. I'm happy to answer any question have at this time.

Questions for staff? Further discussion including consideration of plan commission's recommendation. I can make a mayor. Go ahead, Councilman. Um, I'd like to make a motion that we approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-4-8 and title 9-14-3. Um, one up. Yep. Did I get ahead of myself? We'll get there. You're going to do both of them. Are we on? Yep.

Okay. I'd like to make a motion that we approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-7-6. Title 9-8 A-6 and Title 98B-6 modifying regulations including the suggestion the planning commission. I have a motion to approve by Councilman Henderson. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilman Coats. Roll call beginning with Council Member Ivy. I coat. Henderson. Belliston. Hi. Caspersonson.

That's approved unanimously. 5 to zero. Item 7D, consideration to approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-14-8 and title 9-14-10 accessory buildings. Uh, this is a clean up to those items that were just approved. These now conflict or have conflict those previous codes can just appeal them and we'll abide by those the codes that we just discussed would be the new standard. So there's no conflict. That concludes staff report. Planning commission did review this and also recommended approval on April 15th. And I'm happy to answer any

Councilman Henderson, you make that motion to make a motion that we approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-14-8 and title 9-14-10 accessory buildings. Have a motion by Councilman Henderson. Is there a second? Second that, Mayor. Second by Councilman Ivy. Roll call beginning with council member Coats. Hi. Henderson. Hi. Belliston. Hi. Caspersonson. Ivy. Hi.

That is approved unanimous. 5 to zero. Item 7E. This is consideration to approve an ordinance for zone change Z-26-07 from C2 to C3 located at 550 East Point Boulevard, Elden Gibb. Thanks parent. This is the location here. As you can see on the site plan, it's currently zone C2. Uh we're proposing it, the applicant is Washington City. We own the land. We're proposing to change that to C3. This is how it currently sits. Um the reason for the zone change is is to make amendments to a to the billboard there, which is the uh later on in the agenda in the conditional use. So we're asking to change this zoning to C3. Reviewed this request and recommended approval. That that cons that concludes staff report. I'm happy to answer as you may have at this time.

If there are not any questions for staff, I will entertain further discussion and or a motion. Mayor, I'll make the motion that we approve the zone change Z-26-07 from C2 to C3. We have a motion to approve by Councilman Coats. Is there a second? Second by councilwoman Caspersonson. We'll go roll call beginning with council member Henderson. Elliston. Caspersonson Coats. Hi.

That is approved unanimous 4 to zero. Item 7F, consideration to approve an ordinance for zone change Z-26-08 from C3 to I1 located at Ara Parkway and Hilton Williams Drive. Community Development Director Elden Gibb. See here on the map as Rusty smiles from the crowd.

We'll pull the location up here. This is the most southern western part of Washington City adjacent to our neighboring city. As you can see here, it's currently zone C3 and proposing to go to the I1 use. The general plan is industrial supports this zone change here and current or uh surrounding zoning is the AR Southwest Logistics Center uh to the north and east and St. George City to the west. The I1 request is for the purpose of creating a development that blends in with the surrounding uses which include warehousing, light manufacturing, fabrication of goods, wholesaling, service and other similar commercial establishments. Currently in the C3 zoning, warehousing and that light manufacturing is not allowed. So that that's the motive here is is to get into the those type of uses. Um staff has no concern with the proposed changed as outlined and on April 15th the planning commission reviewed this request and unanimously recommended approval onto the city council. Landowner does own adjacent property and this would be a phase tying into that existing development. So it will look and feel as the surrounding uses there. Um if you've driven on Airport Parkway there, phase one to the south uh currently sits pad lots. Um so so it'll look and feel that similar nature there. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have at this time.

Any questions for staff before I invite the applicant to come forward? Ready for a motion? Um can yeah if you don't I see the applicant if you wouldn't mind just introducing yourself and just giving us a little bit of an update and some background here. It's nice to see you.

Good evening mayor. My name is Kurt Gordon with Desert Kenya's development. Thanks for letting me come up and talk. We're excited about the possibilities here. Uh as Elden explained, this is part of our larger Desert Kenya's business park. Um, and we wanted the zone change primarily because of what Ellen just said that that we feel that C3 is more geared toward retail um, hightraic uses and and we've we feel that to be more competitive in the market, we we would like to request this industrial zoning. So, we would appreciate your support. Happy to answer any questions or concerns you have. Thanks. Council Coats, did you have a question for Mr. Gordon?

I don't have any questions. I think this fits within the I mean it's next to the airport fits with the other zones adjacent to west and east of it. Council Bellson.

Well, I was just going to say when when the annexation was done, um there was a lot of talk between whether or not that whole annexation was going to come in as industrial. Um because initially that's kind of where the council was leading. Um, but we zoned it C3 just so that we would have at least some interaction, you know, as things did come forward. So I I don't see I don't see the industrial as being inconsistent with what property was ever uh originally contemplated for. So So Kurt, you you followed this property from the beginning of the city's involvement on the parcels to the north. So, you've had some good inter um you know, good perspective and um just is there any other updates you want to this? I'm confident the council is going to approve this, but is there anything you can tell us about what you're doing down there, what your plans are, and you don't have to you you know land use well enough, but just more out of curiosity, can you give us any more updates on what Desert Canyons and what you and your partners are doing there?

Sure. I mean, so so Desert Canyons is a 2500 acre master plan community. We have it's a mixeduse development in primarily in St. George. Um this is a this would be an important uh this product type would be an important mix in our in our development. Um and uh I I think that we have we've been in discussions with some uh some I guess some Fortune 500 companies that we feel that we need to have this kind of zoning to be more attractive and competitive in that in that arena. Um I I can't really say more than that, but it would it would really be helpful to us to to attract um some some really good users. So, we appreciate your support.

Well, and please keep us po posted. You know, Rusty, and I do think it's exciting that the access is there right now, and so maybe the timeline was a little accelerated from what maybe some of us had thought years ago. Right. Right. Thanks, Mayor. Quick question. Yeah. The uh the future roadway connection that you're showing right there. Yes. That it looked like the infrastructure is already in and it's pretty much graded and roadbased now. Yeah, we've we've actually been partnering with uh with the developer to the to our east on the construction road. We've paid

significant portions of that. We have to take our the rest of the construction drawings have been approved by the city. Um and yeah, we'll be intending to to push that road through and and do construction. I also ought to say that we're we're preparing a preliminary plat for this. Wonderful. as well. We don't, you know, we don't quite have that ready, but we intend to submit a preliminary plat which will help us with the construction and and tie in that road to the airport park. Time frame on when that road would tie in. I think within the next year, but like you say, it's it's pretty much halfway done. All the subsurface uh work is done. It's just the the surface improvements there. They just got it roped off.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Just curious. Thank you. You know, Councilman Bellison is a bit of an airport junkie and and a bit of a development junkie, so this is right up his alley. Um, is there someone who would like to make a motion on this item? If there's no further discussion, I'll make a motion that we approve zone change Z-26-08 from C3 to I1 located at Ara Parkway and Hill and Williams Drive. I have a motion by Councilman Coats. Is there a second? I'll second that. Second by my airport and development junkie, Councilman Bellaston. I'm sorry for these roll calls, everyone. I know it's a lot, but I think we're starting with Council Member Bellaston. Casperson Ivy

Coats. Hi, Henderson. That's approved. Five to zero.

Thank you, Curts. Nice to see you. And our last item of this ordinances section is item 7G. Uh this is consideration to approve an ordinance for general plan amendment G-25-07 from very low VLD very low density and low density to low density medium density and community commercial located at Antigua Lane and George Washington Boulevard. um on this as the others. The public hearings occurred at the planning commission level and the city council is aware of that feedback that has come. Um community development director Elden Gibb will present to the council on this one.

So here's the location here, Antigua Lane and George Washington Boulevard. This first exhibit here, the red, the applicants asking to change approximately 5.38 acres of neighborhood commercial to SECOM. And then just the the uh darker red or to the north there, change approximately 4.38 acres of low density to SECOM for a total of 9.6 9.76 acres of commercial. So just asking to expand that commercial there. This next exhibit, the applicant's asking to change approximately 1.43 acres of low density to medium density and 2.39 acres of very low density to medium density for a total of 3.82 acres. And then also change approximately 4.36 acres of very low density to low density. And just to the north of this, the applicant's proposing to change approximately 4.36 acres of very low density to low density, which creates a uh buffering, tapering, a gradual effect from the very low density to the proposed community commercial there. This next exhibit, you can see how the land currently sits and how it would end up if approved. On the left, current general plans on the right. Um, low density carries a 3 to four density per unit acre ratio and allows

for the R110 and larger zoning designation. And that's in on the left hand side. That's the yellow area to the north. Medium density, which is the orange area or the middle section, carries a 4.5 to6 density unit per acre ratio and allows the R2, R16, and larger zoning designations. And then the SECOM area is considered mediumscale commercial intended to provide day-to-day commodities for surrounding residential uses. And this area allows the APC1 and C2 zoning designations. The surrounding general plan land use designations are very low density to the north and west, low density and not yet determined to the west, secom to the south and not yet determined, and very low density to the east. Staff has reviewed the requested change and is comfortable with the proposal as it feathers the existing uses of very low density into the proposed SECOM areas. Furthermore, staff feels that Antigua Lane will help transition between the existing residential and commercial uses, kind of create a natural barrier between the two. The planning commission has reviewed this request and they unanimously recommended denial of this proposal and that was due to the size and type of existing commercial currently shown on the general plan being sufficient at this time. The planning commission also had concern that the commercial footprint and type is if the commercial footprint were expanded, the transition from very low density to the SECOM would be minimal. That concludes staff report. I'm happy

to answer any questions you may have at this time. Council, what questions do you have for staff? All right, seeing none, is the applicant are the applicants representative here? I'll invite you to come forward and the public hearing already occurred. So, we'd like to speak to the council on the applicant's behalf in regards to this property. Yeah. So, as as we

and we know you and you I'm Jason Smith, Rosemary Associates. I did it once already. forgot that I had to do it again. Um, representing the applicant um, as we reviewed this parcel um, and going through it for some time and reviewed it with staff and and we we did look at um, a big thing that was important to us is we did look at the the access. We're talking this borders arterial and and a future collector road. Um, the corner The southeast corner would be the first full use intersection off of off of um from SR7 from that interchange. Um as you know we there's also a that's this is the second second access for uh the the development in in Long Valley um that will be coming through there. So you'll have a significant amount of of traffic there. Um and so we felt that that

within a couple years about give or take could be up to three but in most I think there's a 1500 unit threshold so it's moving along um and so in looking at that

also um the is working with it a regional developer that um is is funded and and can can move forward on Um and so those are kind of the reasons that we we are proposing the commercial um being large that size. That's this that was suggest suggested size by them. Um and so those are kind of the things as you know George Washington Boulevard um will in in the next year and a half will connect from SR7 to I-15. Um so that will be a road that will be used significantly and so we feel that it's better to to use commercial there and and those are the and with the input of of the regional developer that's the reason that we are going with that size of a of a CCOM. Any questions?

Council questions in regards to this application for uh Jason Smith. I don't

Thank you. Um I don't really have any questions, but I ju just maybe a comment and you know after um I was at you know I typically attend those uh planning commission meetings. I was I was there for half of it last Wednesday and then I had to leave, but I did watch the whole thing. And um so I think there were some good points made on on both sides of this. Um just to let you know where I'm at, I don't have any problem with uh the changes to the residential. I tend to kind of come down um in agreement with the with the outcome of of of what the planning commission talked about. they, you know, they talked about not really any compelling re point to change the general plan and to move commercial, you know, up up that far into the residential. So, I tend to kind of agree with the conclusion that they came up with. So, but the residential stuff, you know, I don't have any issues with making those changes. So

further discussion on this particular item any qu any additional questions for the applicant I say for you know for those that care the nine 10 acres give or take is the size of the lens project in the fields um you know just inside St. just lying there. But um give or take that's 10 acres. So mayor, I think there are some people here that might be here to to speak if we could um give them time to speak. Would that be a possibility?

Yeah, I think so. And uh I think I'd also like for our economic development director to be able to speak um to this item as well. Um if you're here for this particular item if you'd raise your hand. Okay. So we are familiar with the item. Um we we've watched the plan commission meeting. Um there's not a there's not a the public hearing has officially occurred. It is a courtesy that that I typically offer um as mayor to uh residents to to speak again. So, if you could be succinct, to the point, and not repetitive. Succinct means about 2 to 3 minutes. We value you. We're glad you're here. This is part of the process. Um you can either, you know, um have a couple people speak or or if you have different topics, you know, bring those up. This time I'll invite anybody, you know, wishing to be to be brief and and clear on specific points that maybe points that we didn't hear at the planning commission or additional points. And if you'd state your name for the record, my name is Frank Linhard and I live off Galilee Galilee way that just immediately uh adjacent to this property. I agree fully what you mentioned that the I don't really have any issues with uh and neither did many of my neighbors that changing the residential because they're all homes but expanding the commercial into uh goes against every planning principle that I've ever been involved with. I spent many years on planning commission in hurricane and mayor in Apple Valley and but in commercial right next to it single and that type of commercial right next to it goes against every every

principle I know of and I certainly wouldn't want to live right next to that if that happened and we appreciate you be be uh considerate of that. Thank you Frank. Thank you.

Anybody else has a different uh point to make on this particular item? Hello everybody. I'm Ryan Taylor. I live on Noble Drive just down at the end of Galilee. And uh just my input on it, I don't think that the commercial should be right up against the residential. Uh to the west, there is no feathering between the commercial and the residential at all. Um, and I just see all the extra traffic going into Galilee. It's gonna be a big problem. And that's about it. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Last call for anyone else with another view on this particular item. Okay. Thank you. Um, Rusty, I'll invite you to come forward. Um, I think I cut you right in the Um, if you would I know the council's talked about identifying expanding commercial and so do you want a drink. I'm good. I I have allergies. I should should be okay. I'll still eldance. Thank you. Yeah, still Elden.

Um, yeah. Thanks. You got me. Um, yeah. So, I appreciate I appreciate um the opportunity to kind of put this within context, not just for the council and mayor and the staff that are aware of some of the changes and transitions in our cities, um but also for the residents. Um so, we have about 2,300 homes in Long Valley. There's no commercial in Long Valley. So, um this will eventually connect through and those um those those residents will be driving all the way through to St. George right now to invest in St. George with their tax dollars. Um there's also residents to the south that are turning left. We have installed several signals. Um this is an 85 foot rideway. George Washington is um uh planned to be an 80 foot five foot rideway. So, it is planned to be a a large a large um arterial, a minor arterial, and it will connect to the east in St. George. So, that traffic's going to pick up. That that um construction is already underway, and it should be completed by they're estimating July of next year. Um the council has asked for opportunities because the history of Washington City has been residential. We're about 98% residential by permit over the last two decades. And part of the problem with traffic is everybody having to leave to get goods services and have and and attend their their school and jobs in St. George. We're all part of the problem. We all do this every day, right? And um so there there is a demand. While while it is it is difficult when um commercial is next to your home, I have a lot of commercial next to my home. um it is um it it does have to feather some way and so I think the developer did make a good attempt um by reducing with that medium density housing. They are asking for a larger commercial because they're working with

a commercial developer that has some some there's a lot of interest here with the Wheels Park opening with those two connections on both sides coming on Star and Secom on the other side Star Nurseries to the south and then um and and I I will also note that we haven't had a general plan update in about nine years and we've been through a a large growth um or unprecedented growth in the last say five years at least. So um it is Can I Can I interrupt you just for fun just to keep it light? Sure.

Um a few of us were at a community meeting yesterday and it was pointed out I think chief was it I think it was give credit to the police chief here. He says, and I even hate to use the G word, which is growth in in Washington city, but he said we're adding the equivalent of enterprise yearly. And so, you know, it's providing goods and services within our own tax base becomes critical. Anyway,

well, and and I will say that um we all report to the Washington County Conservancy District as far as development agreements and plats. We're we're trying to be mindful of that. And so there's these reports, but if you analyze that growth, it's really moving east and and north along I-15. So what was the commercial center and and the population center in St. George, Washington City is part of that and it's moving east. And then we have um homes moving in also um to the to the east of Washington in hurricane as they expand. And um I guess from my position as economic development director when I first got here and I looked at what was generally planned to be commercial I see a lot of residential underneath what was previously our general plan. We have areas where we had 10 15 acres that came in as PUDS with residential saying well we we'll build the commercial next and now that now now we have small pieces of so if there's there's an opportunity to reverse this in areas where we have the infrastructure in place we have the demand um then then then we've been asked to look at that as staff and so this is one that um staff has reviewed carefully we've all um taken a look at it and we are supportive of it here. While it may not um it may be difficult when you live next to it, um I do I do um believe that this developer has a very good reputation for working with cities and they've also discussed, you know, being flexible with that with that commercial. We are at the general plan stage. So, we've talked to them about doing maybe split zoning of PUD and and just being really mindful of the residents nearby to bring something that would be a really good fit there.

Thank you. Questions for Rusty? Thank you, Rusty. Uh would the applicant or the applicant's representative like to say anything else uh at this time? You have that mic there, Elden? You know, you should have been here earlier. Our market going crazy at the beginning of our workshop meeting. Can you just remind us your name for the record? So, my name is Lance Richards. I represent the Chararma family who are the owners of the property. Okay. Um, I just want to kind of reiterate what Rusty and and uh

um I forget my engineer's name.

Jason. Yeah, Jason came up and said, but anyway, the we believe that the uh you know, George Washington Parkway boulevard uh is designed and uh projected to accommodate much more traffic than uh you know over the next years has has been reiterated, but that also more enough that you know it it doesn't really justify to have just neighborhood commercial on a corner there. We believe that the future projections justify a larger development of of the nature we're proposing and then also with all the development to the east that's coming down from the Dr. important than the 2,300 homes and to pro be able to provide the service commercial uh which the developer we're working handinhand with uh has their own following of of service commercial and again they're very well funded and uh have a good reputation as Russy said working with cities and uh working through uh issues that and provide very qual they've been in business for over 50 years and provide very quality uh developments and so um yeah and then just being bordered by the three streets and the two the collector and the two art and the other arterial then you know we believe uh is a justification for the expansion of the site which the developers requested this size

any questions for the applicant thank you Lance thank you

all right council at this time I'll I do have another question for uh Elden um This is a general plan um application, general plan amendment. So, obviously, we're not getting too deep into the, you know, end uses. Um, is it appropriate if if the council so desires to consider a PUB general plan, PUDC general plan uh designation that might bridge the gap or or not? on a general plan land use perspective, I I I would like to stay away from that as if we could. Um, you know, if we identify the neighborhood commercial or CECOM, that then identifies the type of uses that could then follow and and channel into a PUDC zoning, which we could then get specific. um it'd be easier for staff to navigate if if we stayed out of the general plan PUDS because then we don't quite know the type of uses that that the council is on board with. Um so that that would be my recommendation.

Okay. So we have the neighborhood commercial versus the community commercial. Correct.

Council Bellson. So the challenge you have in doing PUDs or commercial is if you're doing a PUD for residential, it's easy to say, well, I'm going to build a house here and a house here and a house here and a house here. But commercial is so uh enduser specific that it makes it really challenging unless you have all of the end users assembled before you go do do the design. Um, and the way the PUB rules are is you pretty much have to have the design to come in on the front end to even be able to go move forward and seek those end users. So, I I think uh on commercial it really really is better to try to stick to straight zoning if at all possible. Um, now certainly if somebody has a project they want to bring in as a PUD, great. But, um, especially on a 10acre site like this, I just don't it's so hard to try to cut and dice it for for different end users that are going to be that dramatically different from each other. Is there anything that you you don't have to, but is there anything you'd like to say about end user at this time? I know. I know that's you do not have to answer that, Lance, but grab the mic there.

Thank you. Can you hear me? Okay, there we go. I uh one thing I did neglect to say that I would like to say, I know one of the concerns with the neighborhood was maybe the size and scope of some of the users. Um we're not necessarily working with any one large user box user at this moment or time. We have no intention right now dropping a target there or anything of that nature. It's so this is more uh service commercial oriented is as I understand it this developers that's his his intended use and that's about as much as I can say with regards to the uses. they have a following of users. So, you know that uh that follow them typically into some of their developments that would be more, you know, medical office or retail commercial oriented historically with this developer. Okay. All right. Council, uh, I'll turn to you for further discussion on on this, uh, multi-layered, I think is maybe the way to put it, general plan amendment. Got a lot to consider. This for me is challenging because I feel like it is a good proposed use with the commercial next to the George Washington Boulevard, but I do feel like on Galilee Way with that commercial pushing into the the residential area, I just can't picture how that will be and how that will impact the community members there um with the the concerns that they've expressed. And so it is it's a challenging

on Galilee way you would have in this proposal a medium density. So you would have homes backing the community commercial and fronting Galilee the corner would uh a double frontage lot. Yes. I assume other than the corner correct? Yeah they'd front Galloway. You're correct in that.

Jason, if you'd like to clarify anything there.

Yeah, Galloway Gallowy Way would remain a a residential street in nature. Um the the plan is that all commercial would be going to George Washington Boulevard. there wouldn't be any I mean you can't say there wouldn't be any but there would be very little traffic moving into the neighborhoods. They would unless they lived there um the traffic would come from George Washington Boulevard um 90% of it or or more. Um and and yes, so Galley Way is is a residential street. You would be have houses on both sides of Galley way all the way through there. Great. Further discussion and or motion on this item. May I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion that we approve condition uh pardon me approve an ordinance for general plan amendment G-25-07 from BLD and LD to LDMD and CCOM located at Antigua Lane in George Washington Boulevard. You've heard the motion by Councilman Belliston. Is there a second? Seeing none, the motion dies for lack of a second. Turn to the council for further discussion and or a motion. I'm going to ask a question to staff. And I was just and I don't know if this is right because my app doesn't always update, but it looks like the same property owners. Oh, piece to the west as well. That correct? Or at least one of them?

The one the one to the north. You are correct. There's there's two pieces here. Um this is the piece that they currently own. So there's no intention to general plan that right now at all. asking about the one to the west that's not general planned. It's not yet determined. That is a different owner. That's there's an attorney in town. Um well there no not saying I'm not looking at the county website but it looks like capital funding Ltd owns square. Maybe I'm wrong.

Sorry Jason Smith again. Yes there are there two parcels there. So the parcel that abuts George Washington is not capital funding. The other is it is basically the extension of the road that is there now and the intention now is to leave that as residential. Um but it's not part of this application. I understand. Yeah, it's not part of the application but the intention is to leave it as residential. if if we need to culde-sac it or or so that we don't have through traffic going there. I I don't think that the applicant I guess I might speak in out of term but I don't think the applicant is would be opposed to that and we're not talking where that is on the

need to cause more

discussion but I just noticed that it was owned by the same owners and and the reason for my discussion is because it was asked I mean the reason why they're the thing I'm struggling with is what councilwoman Caspersonson brought up is the commercial extending so far north. So, is there another way to to get the 10 acres and not go so far north? Because I think that seems to be some of the concern is how far north the commercial is. So, and I don't know the footprint of the like I don't think we've been shown that, but I'm just trying to come to a solution. Is there a different way that affects that? And and then also the feathering effect we always like to do between commercial, but at some point you have to transition. I believe I mean my house has commercial right behind it and it's going to be our I mean I'm an R18 and it's going to be right be is commercial. So there's no real feathering there. It just transitions. But that but that one's been general planned that way since I bought my house 10 years ago, too. So that's why I'm trying to find a compromise if I'm I'm struggling with how far it's going north, especially past that property line that kind of shows the back of the lots on Galloway. got Galilee way

mayor. So, one of the uh residents that lived close by made a comment that that I kind of stuck with me and it kind of goes along maybe with what the mayor is saying and and I know uh Councilman Belliston talked about it just a little bit after the mayor, but uh that resident said something like uh you know, if we could see what was going in there if it was a really soft commercial of some kind, you know, like I I think she even said something like the uh retirement community that's down in Stuki Farms, you know, something like that. She said, "If we could maybe see it, then maybe, you know, and I thought, well, you know, that's, you know, there there's something to be said for that. It's just a little bit of the unknown being pushed so far north into that neighborhood." And I think that's kind of what the planning commission, you know, as they had their discussion, I think I kind of felt kind of like that, you know, it's like, why is it getting pushed so far north? So, you know, I mean, if if you were to come in and say, okay, it's going to be, you know, this kind of commercial, and it was really soft, and the neighbors were like, okay, yeah, that's not that's that's not too bad. Then, you know, maybe it's something I I would consider more. But I mean, at this point, I'm kind of tend to agree with the planning commission. There's not really been a compelling reason to, you know, and I want commercial just like because it pays the bill. But sometimes, you know, when we're looking at a specific property, is it the right thing? Is it not? You know, I'm just tending to agree with the planning commission on this. So I have a question for Elden and maybe so say just hypothetically that we left the I mean the neighborhood commercial I'm I'm I'm not opposed to switching it to CCOM. I don't think that's a problem in my mind. It's just how far you go. So

if you left that, kept the rest that medium density and then low density, but then they came in with a a PUDC SL and PUDR and did the whole thing as a PUD and those boundaries kind of shifted with that. Can they do that or does it or does it get held right at the commercial general plan? It it's a bubble. Uh it's approximate. Um so I I would say there's some flexibility there. Um it it it won't be held to this specifics. Um, you know, as long as we're hitting close and bubble map.

See, I'm more inclined to be opposed to that is, okay, leave the boundary where it is for says neighborhood commercial now, change it to CCOM, do the rest medium density and then low density and then if they want to propose more commercial, show us your plan. But I understand what you're saying, Councilman Belliston, but with the Well, no, I I brought up the Linds project, you know, earlier is sometimes, you know, on a project, like if a grocery were to come in because of the parking field, they do need some depth to it, right? Shallow it up. Don't disagree with you.

I don't think that's a an offensive use. I mean, if I had a lens next to me, that saved me a lot of travel and I'd be thrilled. Lyn's next to me, but I don't like shopping at it. It's across the border and with you. I would rather buy from something in our city, too. But we haven't given options for uh projects like that in our city.

I I I I agree with you. I'm just it it is a concept. I And and the goal is to get some commercial, make it fit within the neighborhood. So, how do we do that? the way it's proposed. I don't I think there's got to be some more showing of what the plan is before we just general plan it. But that's just where I'm at.

And and to get there, we we have to have a general plan in play. Next step will be to show you the specifics. I wonder if like there's there's appetite to pass it and maybe rather than trying to redesign it, you might think about tableabling it and ask the applicant if they'd be interested in bringing back matches your kind of the some of the comments. My other question is what if we don't do a general plan and just speak to this but because if you're going to submit a PUD you just go with the zones you have and you submit a P and PC over the top of it and show the plan if you have

well I guess my question is is on what that question is how if I have P if I have residential zoning I can't I can't PDC it. I've got to have commercial I've got to have commercial, right? Before I can PDC it that was the question I had for Elden. Can't you just because in my mind it's a PUD close residential commercial. We need to get the general plan in place first. Currently, it's entity the homeowner the the neighbors are expecting residential to come in. That's what they bought into. It showed loaded

the difference above the existing endcom. Correct. Yeah. So, we're just we're asking to, you know, and I know you understand this, we're asking to change that. So, the next step would be Jason and his team will come in and and show the plans either straight zoned with a conditional use permit or a PUDC. I guess the question I have is what is a a reduction? I mean, how far how far south do you want the commercial line to go?

I don't know. I just I don't like going above the residentials right now. You see how just I don't know if that's 50 feet or whatever. Uh it looks like 50 feet above that where the res Can you zoom in? That section line is that section? Yeah, just that property line right there. I've just that's that was some of the comments is there the commercials encroaching into the residential. So that's where I've just kind of been like, "Yeah, I could kind of see their point." Then we have to line up a road, you know, for the medium density and it's going to be a little weird.

Well, the the road would remain straight. The all you're doing is you have you have larger lots and then as you go through that intersection, your lots will be a little bit shorter is all you're doing. That the road the road would remain straight and and Galley Way would continue straight. You would still have houses running on both sides. You would just have similar to what's in front of my house. My house is 1500 square feet. Across the street is 8,000 square feet. It's Yeah, I don't have a problem with the res but I'm just trying to that's the only reason that we are it's a it's a square lot is what it is instead of having a a narrow deep lot.

Yeah. But if I mean if that if if that makes you more comfortable, we can look at that and and and realign it and and look at that. I just know that was a comment we got from the public. They were concerned. That's fine. I I just looking at the design, it's I I don't know. I don't I hesitate saying that it it doesn't change anything as far as as because it does but it doesn't change your your frontages of your lots are still residential streets are still fronting residential streets. I'm not disagreeing with

so and I'm just it's just a the medium density is a smaller lot and so that's why that line came up is the that's the only reason that's the reason it's coming up and and the develop the commercial developer has requested this acreage and so that's that's the that's the reason but we can readjust it I mean if if if it's that line we can readjust it to to the parcel line and let let's have that discussion a little bit. Council, do you want to try to tackle this tonight or do you want to try to I think it's a discussion for both the applicant and the council. Do you want to try to tackle this tonight or do you want to try to address it in a couple of weeks?

Mayor, I might give a little legal opinion. Um, interesting to note that Washington City Code does not have any section that talks about the general plan. The general plan is a document required by state code and it and it states I'll read in 10-20-46 quote the general plan is an advisory guide for land use decisions the impact of which shall be determined by ordinance by ordinance refers to actions from this legislative body and so this legislative body gets to determine the impact of the general plan the trainings I've received in my years uh over municipal land use and zoning rules is essentially the state when they passed law to allow cities to adopt their own zoning. They said in conjunction with the right to do your own zoning, we're going to ask you to do long range planning. So there's some degree of of land owners being able to expect what might be coming. But it it's ne I've never been trained that the intent of the general plan is to set hard and fast lines as to what what it's going to be in the future and that that those type of decisions are really what the legislative body's role is towards the the land owners and the citizens is to help decide, you know, where those lines should be and and and how. And so I think you could I think you could pass a general plan amendment tonight and have a comment in that motion say, but you know, depending on the use and the zoning application, we we reserve the right to adjust these lines in in places that might make more sense once we have an idea as to what's coming in. room within the state law and the definition of a general plan for the council to to reserve some space there to to maybe suggest that lines change at the zoning level based on what's coming in. I haven't given that legal opinion very often, but in this case, it feels like there's there's enough lines and close

enough, you know, variances that maybe that would be something that could help the council feel find some comfort for a motion tonight. Did you have something to add, Jason?

If it makes the council more comfortable, we're happy to move the line to the the partial line um and to the partial line for the CCOM and just move the the medium density down. Um, yes, that would that would make it so that only only the the property owner would be the only person that abuts his own his own the commercial. There wouldn't be any.

So, the awkward silence is killing me. So, I'm I'm ready to make a second motion. I'd make a motion that we approve an ordinance for the general plan amendment G-25-07 from BL and LD to LDMD and CCOM located in at Antigua Lane and George Washington Boulevard. If we move the ENCOM the north incom line down to the to the property linecom

that's what I meant down to that uh north property line. There's a you have a motion on the table by Councilman Belliston. Is there a second? Second it. Second by Councilman Coats. We'll go roll call. I'm going to change it up on you guys. Beginning with Council Member Ivy Caspersonson.

I Belliston Henderson Coats. All right. That is approved on a vote of 4 to one modified as uh described. The next item of business and then we'll take a brief recess is item 8A. This is a conditional use permit. This is consideration to approve conditional use permit C- 26-03 for an off- premise sign located at approximately 550 East Buista Boulevard. Washington City is the applicant. Community Development Director Elden Gibb will present only because the planning commission rather than approve it recommended approval to the council. So here you go guys. Thank you mayor. Offremise signs are allowed in C3 zoning. was currently approved uh earlier tonight into the C3 zoning designation and Washington City is um asking to make modifications to this sign here. It's how it currently sits and this is what it would end up looking like. You can see that there is a V type

tonight. That exact image will may not be on the board. No, but Elden Messi's in Sandy tonight playing good timings. I know. We should be up watching the soccer the football game.

You see there the Vtape Vape display to position the face of the sign towards I-15. The height is a maximum of 50 foot and digitizing the display up to 672 square ft. All of the U dot requirements will be re um followed and adhered to as well. The planning commission did review this and recommended council to approve this. I'll uh conclude staff report and answer any questions you may have. Questions for Elden? I'll make a motion.

Thank you. to approve conditional use permit seat 6-3 for an off- premise sign approximately 550 East Bonav Vista Boulevard. You've heard the motion by Councilwoman Caspersonson and I'll third it. Second by second by Councilman Belliston. We'll go uh roll call vote beginning with Council Member Caspersonson.

I baston Henderson Coat Ivy. That is approved unanimously. Five to zero. We'll take about a 5 to 10 minute break and then we'll come back and tackle um a res a few resolutions. The biggest one being the budget and we'll be uh be out here before midnight. We're adjourned for a few minutes.

Put it that way. We're going to move along with item 9A. This is consideration to approve a resolution accepting the 2026 2027 tenative budget for Washington City and setting the public hearing date. Finance Director Brian Brown. Thank you, Mayor on Council. So this year is our first year in our new system and with the budget system, most of the reports you see in this presentation were created from our new system. The sad news with that is I don't have any big scary spreadsheets that will break or not work. But the good thing about that is we are more efficient with this new system. We do start the budget capital budgets in November and the operating budgets in January. And with the capital budgets, we um ask the departments to bring projects that they're only 80% certain that they will complete. And also with this budget, we estimate that the building permits will be two uh 730 219 north of river and 511 south. In this bus budget, we are also um there is an increase for health premiums of 4.6%. But with the um rebate that we receive, it's actually a net of two actual increase of 2.4%. And then the other thing we usually um present with the budget is the percent coverage for the community center and golf course. This the fivey year average for the golf course is 67% of percent coverage. The in 2025 there were 63 they covered 634%

of their expenses. And the golf course, the 5-year average is 122%. I mean, excuse me, 105%. And this last year, they're at 122%. Just to briefly go over our population here, this graph shows the population and the per um percent change population, also the building permits. The highest year you see on there was in 20 202122 and we received we did about 923 permits and this year we're right on track to do about the same. Just um these are all high level reports. So just a summary of the budget. The current budget is 139 million and the um tenative budget for next year is 136 million and the general fund makes about 25% of that budget. And the capital outlay in the um tenative budget is 49 million. Some of the projects included there are the canal trail, Mil Creek Trail, Pine View Trail. There's some projects for storm drain and power is doing the grapevine sub and the AMI meters. So those are some of the key projects in this included in this budget.

Ryan, I see a 0.1% capital project for public safety. That is their debts. I'd have to look at that. That's okay. I'm just being a smart elic.1%. It's actually probably vehicles. That's what that is. Okay. Cuz they do budget for vehicles and new equipment. And those are capital expenditures.

That's to replace that Mustang with a brand new Mustang. So, kind of just to jump in the general fund, you can see here's the general fund revenue expenses with the next year's budget. The property tax we estimate to increase by 6% and sales tax by 19%. And as far as expenses go, the big expense down in that line was um capital outlay and that's for some um items when you take care of city hall and also the for it. Now this graph shows a breakout of the enterprise funds. What enterprise fund? The enterprise funds act like businesses. they collect user fees instead of um rather rely on taxes. So the enterprise funds are water, sewer, power and electric. And here you can see their um revenues and expenses for this budget. And also part of the budget we do budget for RAP tax items. And so here's a summary of all the RAP tax items budgeted for next year. As I mentioned, and create um cost are up 4.6%. So that's about $175,000. We did receive a rebate of $83,000 this last year. So with that $83,000 are the net increase will be $91,000. That's where we get the overall increase of the 2.4%. So kind of the next steps with the budget right here where we're setting a tenative budget. The next step will be to have a public hearing on the 13th and then adopt the budget on the 27th. Does anyone have any questions regarding the ten tenative budget?

Your slides in part of your in the presentation in our packet you know is his slides in our packet. I think I included them. If not I can share them with Would you just send them to email. Yeah, I thought I added him. Okay, thank you. We got it.

All right, council. We we had the budget meeting last work session. We went through these same slides. You uh disclosed some blood out of Brian and got some concessions in the budget. looking mostly to this side of the well actually all five of them ganged up on you pretty hard I know um this is a tenative budget we're looking to set the public hearing for looking to approve a tenative budget and set the public hearing date for 513 this is a time if there are other things you want to address but it's not your last opportunity as you know you all been through this budget process at least three or four times or more

I had a question for Jeremy what are Are we doing repairs on the elevator in this city hall? Yes. Uh it's come to a point where we can't get parts for it anymore. It's old enough that it has to have major new major replacements. Yeah. Same thing is happening with the the elevator in the building across the street in the annex building, but we're not repairing that one right now. Um because we don't know exactly what we want to do with that building long term. So that one we're just crossing our fingers. We might be able to use some of the parts from this elevator to keep that one running where this is our our main place, the elevator here. The elevator in the annex buildings, it's marked employees only, so it's not used as much either. Correct.

No, I mean this one this one has to be redone as according to our maintenance people. It's time they have to be certified every year. And like like Brian said, we had to mark that one um employees only and so we don't have the public go upstairs and here we do. We have to have the public in both both parts and so it has to be redone. So the inspections for ADA that just seems that surprises me because it's what 25 years old 20 almost 30 1997. No, I've been in buildings that elevators are like 80 hundred years old sitting.

Yeah, I think at some point the parts have to be replaced. I don't think they last 100 years without replacing parts. You you may need to go ride this one. Um it fills its age. Have have some better explanation if you'd like before we pass the budget. But it's fine. And it just seems sad to me that years. They wanted this a couple of years ago and I've held them off for and and the only reason why I brought it up because it was 115 or what it was. It was Can't find it now, but it was it was more than I anticipated is all. So I was like, "Oh, what are we doing?" So it sounds like we're replacing the whole thing.

15,000 is actually cheap for elevator if you're replacing the car and everything. I don't know that they're replacing, but I think they're replacing all the guts that on the the elevator itself. So, I'll find out make sure for you, but I don't I don't believe the whole car has to be replaced. Just pulleys, gears, motors. Reasonable. I don't know what's in an elevator. Council, if is there further uh discussion on the tenative budget? If not, I'll look for a motion to approve the tenative budget and set the public hearing date for May 13th. Second.

Have a motion by Bell Councilman Bellison, second by Councilman Coats. It's a resolution. So, we'll go roll call vote beginning with council member Belliston Anderson Coats. Hi, Ivy Casterson. I

the tenative budget for 2026 2027 fiscal year has been set along with the May 13th public hearing date uh unanimously 5 to zero. We'll move on to item 9V. This consideration to approve a resolution for a public defense services agreement with Nelson Nilson Legal Group PLLC with S. Ryan Nilson. Attorney, thank you for bringing this to the council. Give us an update background and your recommendation. Thank you, mayor and councel. Uh we are at the point where our public defender is has worked for us nearly as long as the elevator has and 20 plus years and he has given us notice uh that he would like to resign from that position. Uh resign is probably not the right word. He he he does not wish to enter into a new term of of contract with the city. His reason is uh an exciting opportunity for him. He has taken a private job in a in a prestigious criminal defense firm and has work hanging out of his ears and just doesn't have the time to take it on anymore. Uh we we talked about potentially bringing him to a city council meeting and recognize him in city council meeting, but there the the defenders frequently do work on Wednesdays for the district courts where they have many cases. And so we plan to recognize him in court in his last day of court. uh we've worked to get him a a a uh momento of memory of Washington city and to recognize him publicly in that forum. He did with his new job ask that we fill his position as promptly as possible. Uh we we did quickly get it out for RFP in into many locations and for the first three4s of the time period uh we weren't getting the response we were hoping to get as far as just quantity of applications. Thankfully towards the end we got quite a few more in your packet. You've got a summary of those. Uh Mr. Nelson who was selected by the committee

is he and another applicant met the same low bid and so he tied for the for the low bid with another applicant. Uh the the low bid was essentially the same that the current defender has had the same structure the current defenders had

and and so that they would just continue that. you've got in your packet a historical expense each year as to what that that structure has been costing the city. And so I provided that so you could compare the the the net total of this proposal to the other ones that just proposed the net total each year. And so he he had the he tied for the lowest bid of all the proposals. Mr. Nilson maintains a home in Washington city within a mile of the court. uh maintains his professional office within three miles of the court and he has a reputation for being a a a a a professional and ethical defense attorney and so he's who we recommended for to for the contract in the next position. Have you got any questions about the process or Mr. Nielson? Because it was a public RFP with attorneys and law firms. We also wanted to finish it with a public meeting and so that's why we're here before you today is to finish it publicly and properly.

Very good thing. No questions for you. Thad, I'll turn to the council for comments and a motion. Mayor, I I to make that motion. We just continue to grow and change and move forward, don't we? Make a mo motion to approve a resolution for a public defense services agreement with Nielsson Legal Group LLC as Ryan Nielsson, Attorney. Second. There's a motion by Councilman Ivy and a second by Councilman Belliston. And we'll go roll call beginning with Council Member Henderson. I coats Ivy Casperson Bell.

Hi. That is approved unanimously. Good work, Thad. Welcome, Ryan. What's the What's the parting gift? A Washingtonop and a dowel puzzle. That's a really good idea. Uh we've actually got him ad just teasing there. There's a couple of those from some of these recognition and awards companies, and I left it up to the court staff. They chose to get him a ceremonial um gather

that'll identify his time years of service and have a have a message of thanks from Washington City to him. So hopefully it's something that'll put on his desk and help him remember the time that he helped Washington City Justice Court. Wonderful. Next item, surplus. This is consideration to approve the surplus donation of a Mustang police vehicle. Jeremy Red, tell us about this. This is a fun one. You know, we don't often come to you every time we get ready to sell a vehicle in our city. This is a fun one. um in 1986 or we have a 1986 Ford Mustang that we inherited when we took over the police department from the county and I think it was something that that we used in the beginning of our department. Um it's something that's no longer in service. It's been just in storage collecting dust and and uh experiencing ongoing deterioration as our as our chief mentioned it. But the reason I brought it to you is the city has an opportunity to uh help one of our sister cities, Leverkin. they they would like to acquire the vehicle for for their purposes. They they have the staff and the inclination and the excitement to work on it and and use it in some of their uh events that they have. And we think that that's a good repurposing of this benefits the public and uh create some goodwill with Leverican City. But I wanted wanted this council to be able to be the ones that that declared it surplus. We we would be happy to just gift that to our friends at Leverican and not not ask them to try to come up with a cost and and pay us for that if if you're so inclined. You want to say anything, chief, or

but um so Chief Nutelli with Leverne and PD um is a race car driver. Um and he also their PD along with their city do an annual car show um that includes the youth and different uh you know supporters and different things with with car enthusiasts and uh the the Mustang has been part of our not we we've never used it and well I have pulled some people over in it officially. Yeah. Okay. Not in a Camaro because you couldn't catch it.

Yeah. Well, maybe we need to put them on the line. Um, I did there is a little bit of a story because we would use it in PR events, so the parades and everything else. I do remember one time I was in the in the parade with it coming down Telegraph and uh, of course there's a little bit of a, you know, it's an old race car, right? It's Mustang and people want to hear the those tires spin a little bit. And so I gave it to him one time, you know, and then I was reprimmended by Chief Keith. He says, "Don't ever do that again." Well, that was a citizen asking that time, but then our previous mayor was asking me the next time.

In the next parade, I took it through, you know, and I did that again. And uh I was like, "The mayor wanted it, so I had to oblige." Right. But it it's just it's uh recently it's just been sitting in parking lot. I thought we could get some more use out of it, but now it's just got some engine problems and stuff where Chief New Chutility is kind of a mechanic on that side of stuff as well. So I think it would be a good benefit for them. So

I don't know if you guys recall, but when I did the remodel over the grand opening over a Zion Harley, they brought out a Fox body Mustang cop car. It was a former cop car that they had turned into a drift car and they have that going like crazy over there. So I imagine this is what Chief's going to do over there in Leverk. I hope I mean sure I'm sure he has some restraint from his city officials as what he can do with it. But I'm sure there's a lot of enthusiasts that do want it because it is it is that nostalgic car. When I saw that video I texted Chief Williams because I was afraid that that was our car. So, it's one of those I thought it was, too. I think he's learned his lesson by now. So, forget

it's one of those 80s asking. It's It's one of those 80s body styles that's forgettable, right? But it's got a big motor. Is that what it is? It's got the 50 L in it. I I So, it's the 86. On 87, they changed the body style to the fastback, which that's what I wish it was. If it was a fastback, then I we would be keeping it, but it's that Fox body style. So, it's like, yeah, we can part with it. We've had it long enough. So, do they change out the WCPD decal? So, right now it says police in Washington City, but I think before we make any exchange, we would remove all the Washington City logos on it. So, what do you think, council? Can I ask a quick question? Just just uh

so I know we had our own police force when Chief um Chandler was the chief, Brent Chandler, and then we went to county When did we change from Chief Chandler to the county? Do you have any idea? Was it around 88 or I don't know the exact dates but even in between there we had a part-time okay um public safety um department that that did court and they would if you know Ruland Jones um Nate Brooksby was part of that part-time force at the time and so just to make Councilman Henderson feel old I was six when that happened. just remember getting chased by you were 16.

Chief Chandler and I had to hide in the bushes downtown here somewhere to get away from him at midnight. So, I probably shouldn't say that. Never. No, kids. I never did that.

There's the There's a picture of it with the old the older decals. So, those aren't the current decals on it. I did update it because I thought, again, being a Mustang, our our school mascots are Mustangs. I thought we could really do something with this. and it just never. So, a part of one of the projects I had um as a patrol officer, I can't remember. So, it's got a different light bar on it, the different wheels. We do have the original wheel still down at the city yard, but I took it on as a project um to get it because it was sitting over at our old building and it it didn't run. It didn't do anything. So, I took it on as a project as a PR car and got new wheels on it like Tunx actually did the engine work to get it all running again. Rulan Jones updated the lights and stuff on it so we could use it through parades and everything. So, I've spent some time with the car, but I think they'll spend some more quality time with it. So,

thanks, Chief. You're welcome. Who would like to make that motion? I'll make a motion to deny the Show that picture again. Where was Where'd it go? I'll make a motion to approve the surplus donation of the Mustang police vehicle with the with the condition that uh I guess you it's not driving right now, is it? So,

how about with the condition they come pick it up so we're not paying to fall over there? They got to come get it. Fair enough. Is that okay on your motion, Councilwoman? Yeah, I think. Is that okay with you? I've got a We have a motion on the table by Councilwoman Caspersonson to be very generous. Will someone support her and second this motion? You're too late. Councilman Bellison beat you to it. He can't raise his hand. He has to. I second it. I

Any opposed? It's unanimous. The Mustangs going to LA. Verken. Report of officers from assigned committees. Starting on my left with council member Bellaston. It's a big week. It was a big weekend for you. That's not an assigned committee. That's um I don't think I don't think I have any reports from committees today. Councilman Henderson. Don't have anything. Mayor, thank you. Councilman Coats.

Yeah. One quick item from the solid waste board. There's a new program about that we're doing with batteries. Uh I know I presented the one with batteries, the small batteries, but the the landfill actually found a group that will take the batteries for free. The only cost to the landfill is like packaging them up, but they'll come pick them up. So, if you have like the electric scooters and stuff, they'll take them. They'll take those batteries. Avoid fires. Yeah. We just had too many fire issues um that come and most of the time they're from the batteries. So if you have those scooters, you can drop them off at the landfill. You just got to notify them and that's pretty much my report tonight. It's actually really good for that information to get out to the community just kind of so they know. Thank you, Councilman Ivy.

Just a couple of things. Um we did have hillside review this last week. So we've got three different items coming there. And uh probably the main thing I'd like to talk about, mayor, is our visit that we had with John Curtis and with the city of Hurricane and the county. We met out at Dr. Horton and we talked about um the importance of that purgatory bridge and road alignment that would actually connect SR9 with SR7, giving us a vital connection right there. And uh I thought the uh discussion was very good. Um, Senator Curtis was very receptive and he giving us some guidance that we need to be prepared for for next year before before this time next year. But, um, and then yesterday at NPO, I I stressed to the entire group that, you know, this is an important project for our city for Hurricane um, and for the county and they seemed very supportive of that. So, we're going to try to get that get some federal money to go with some local money and we do have some

state money and state money to go with that as well. We do have money to do a partial design that we'll get started with sooner than later, but it was a really good meeting and we will stay on that and hopefully get that done just as quickly as we can. You know, the only thing about that is Hurricane B brought the senator a bag full of pecans and we didn't bring him anything. So he was wearing a cotton shirt. Fair enough. They were look arguing over who would be eating those on the drive back up north. Councilwoman Caspersonson,

I wanted to mention this during the budget talk, but it was it went quicker than I was able to to ask about, but um in the planning commission, there were some parents who had expressed concerns with the skate park and crossing the busy road. And so I wonder if there's anything that we can do. I know there's a crosswalk there, but I noticed that oftentimes the cars just speed right by. And so I was just wondering if there's anything that we can do to make it a safer crossing for kids.

Blake can give us an update. We might lose the counterbalance to this room, but we're if you could give us uh respond to that on to Councilwoman Caspersonson and then also I know in our capital budget we've got five traffic signals planned. If you could just talk to those as well. Okay. There are some of those as you remember. Just left my you know phone that had all those listed but I got it.

I sent that to you the other day. Um, so you're talking at Wheels Park. So, we did paint a crosswalk across there. We put the crosswalk signs um up as well as put in the no parking on on the one side of the street so that the sight distance would be better through there. Um, but that's right now that's about really all that we we have. Have you seen other cities where they've done s uh lights? Have you? And what is your perspective about the signs that have the lights? You're talking the crosswalk signs that flash when they push the buttons. Yes.

Um they they are used in various locations. Um they're tough with a five lane road. It's kind of you need something people see something on the side, but with that big of a road, it it it poses some concerns. Um you may have to do if you had to do a crosswalk with flashing lights, you'd probably have to do the larger overhead ones like they have. um by Utah Tech on I think it's first for South um where they push a button. So they're you know probably um that would cost probably close to 200 $250,000 to put in. Um but that's possibility. I think we'd have to look at the the warrants and see how much how much how many people are really crossing there. Um, it seems like a lot of people are driving in, but I don't know if there's a lot of people crossing right there yet. That's something that we can do the studies and and see they warrant that type of action.

I think I think that's an answer and it's it's sometimes a hard answer for parents and residents. We get the same question on Main Street. Can't we put crossing signals on every one of the Main Street crossings? And really it it it warrants it depending on how many people are crossing the road. You you and and I recognize that everybody is precious and important, but if you don't have very many people crossing, it doesn't warrant it and it actually makes it less safe for everybody. And so it we we tend to stick to those warrants pretty carefully and and we can watch that. The other thing that will help that is someday there will be a light at one of those intersections and that will help break the traffic so that then the kids can cross the road too. But but yeah, it's

it's always a tough one because everywhere a kid crosses a five-lane road, it it can be dangerous. I think I think in in that regard, given how many kids are are at that place down there and the fact that kids don't think to look both ways and, you know, people get texting on their phone and doing screw ball things like that, I I mean, I just see that intersection as being one that we're going to have to hit pretty quick. It all depends on how many people are actually crossing. You know what I'm saying? It it I mean I can't say because people are texting or I know I mean you have to admit there's a lot of kids that are going to and from that park right now.

I will admit tons of things. But I will also say that we start putting in if we start putting in overhead signals where they're not warranted, we will have 50 tomorrow come in and request them. So we we deal with a lot of requests is everybody feels like where their child crosses either to go to grandma's house or go to the park. So we have to make sure that there are actually enough people crossing to just right so that we have something to say no on the other requests. Understand?

Are we to a point where we would would start a warrant study or we have to are we at that point or not there yet? I think we're a little bit from that just because we just put in a crosswalk and and the signage, but we can certainly monitor it and do a study periodically and see as we're getting um we're going to in a month or so probably start getting into the hotter season and and I don't know how that'll affect it. And so we want to be able to find it at the right right time. But we, you know, certainly I can have Paul go out and look, our city engineer go look and see if he's he'll he can do an obser observation for a little bit and then we can decide if we bring traffic counters in. And um we do have a little problem right now with um the traffic counter that we had. It had a camera system um as well as a a counting system. So that we were counting pedestrians with the camera. So you have to physically sit and watch it, but the software company um put uh supporting that system and so we're we're trying to buy another one right now um and get that updated so that we can count the cars and the pedestrians at the same time.

What's your thoughts on the orange flags that people carry across the road? You put a high are they effective? Is it just a distance trying to keep them?

It's it's really they become I we had these when I was in Bigham City um implemented them and had them for a while. They they become difficult because everybody takes them to one side and then don't bring, you know, they don't sometimes don't come back and then people take them and throw them off down the roadways or do other things with them. And so it it becomes quite a a hard thing that way. And then you also create a false sense that that flag will stop a car going 40 miles an hour. Um because people grab that flag and they think

I've got it. I've got and nobody can I've watched people in that they would just boldly just go march out into traffic without looking either way. And so they can be actually create more of a hazard um because of that. Um, in all of those cases, it really, even with the lights, people should watch both ways. I mean, that's that's a thing. And it's hard to get kids sometimes to do that. Understand that. But

on the east end of the general plan amendment that came through tonight and George Washington Boulevard, so about halfway from the Wills Park to the Southern Parkway is where the traffic light will be built or planned for. Um, so as that development starts to go, that'll bring a light and that'll be the safest place for those residents and youth that want to cross is going to that light and then going across and then back down.

Yeah, there will also be when that develops down um by Camino Rial that you know we've had things come in there there will eventually be a light there you know when George Washington creates some breaks and that's that's important with that as well. But yeah, it is is definitely something we'll we'll keep an eye on and do do what we can with that, but it's it's just um we try to be careful not to just put them up wherever anybody, you know, requests them. Yeah, I appreciate that. I I feel like the to keep an eye on it would be good because I do I have in the time that I've gone there, I've seen a lot of kids

Yeah. scootering, riding their bike. I I I see kids come and go all the time from there crossing that road and so just in the what I've observed. So, okay. Yeah, we we'll definitely keep more of an eye on it. It's probably always a good idea to remind parents to remind their kids. Yeah. to work with them on safety and how to tr how to cross and where and uh and always talk about that because that's really where the I think most of the good can be done is in parents teaching kids those important things and then hopefully they'll observe them every time.

Yeah. I I recall growing up, and this isn't to dismiss at all, my parents said, "Yeah, you have the right away, but the car wins." And so, so I remember that pretty heavily. But, um, it's a good reminder for all that way and drivers as well is to really you're you're entering an area that there's there's kids and you should to pay attention to that. um the traffic signals that we have uh and I'm going to probably miss one or two um but uh in the next year's budget um we have uh Harvest Lane and uh Merrill Road um we have Buena Vista in Rio Brio and excuse me um that's the Windco um

and that's another one where those residents are talking about crossing you get to boilers park. And so that's the feedback that we've given them to go to the light when the light's installed, cross safely, and then go to the park. Um, grape vine. Thanks. Yeah, the grape. There's a the grapevine uh crossing there. Um, if the uh big box goes in, it was it was on the sign in the council meeting. And then is there one on Washington Parkway? And then is that are we taking out the inter we taking out the roundabout then? That's what's that? No, I don't think we want to do that. I thought we talked about that. Not doing that.

What? I I missed grapevine if the big box goes in. I thought we were still keeping the roundabout. No, the roundabout. Well, we if we don't have that, it would we could handle the traffic, but if that comes in, it will it goes to 2032 um before it starts to have issues and then at 2042 that's without the big box. Um and so we planned on the that one as well. We we can bring you more certainly we can I thought we talked about not doing that. We did when we didn't know anything about what was going in there. That's such a pretty roundabout, too. It's hard to lose that.

Yeah. Um, was there one more? I think there was one more. That's all I have. Okay. Yeah, I gave you the the list the other day. Four. Yeah. Okay. Anything else? Thanks, Blake. Okay.

Anything else, Councilwoman? I just uh would just remind everyone about um midyear conference tomorrow and Friday and cotton day is next week. Go to the play, get your tickets. Next item, city manager report. Well, I'll be brief because of time, but I I've been to the city manager conference the last two days and I will tell you Washington City is the talk of of the state. I mean, I can't tell you how many managers have gone out to our Wheels Park. They're amazed by it. Vendors, I mean, it's it's pretty incredible. So, um, again, just to just to give you a lot of kudos for that that investment in that park. It's it's it's something that a lot of people are looking at and I don't think anyone will be able to replicate it, but but they love it and they think it's fantastic. We even got a shout out from St. George City as they were welcoming everybody into our to the city and they did appropriately tell everyone that, hey, not everything great down here happens in St. George. you got to go check out Washington's new wheels park. So, I appreciate John. They're good friends.

They are they're they're doing a good job, but um we're getting a lot of a lot of interest from all over the state and the region. So, just leave that out there. We do not have a closed session. So, I will thank you all for doing the work tonight. This is a we we put in the work tonight and today. So, good job. I call for a motion to adjourn. So all in favor?