Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. to order this regular meeting of the Xolo Planning and Zoning Commission for Tuesday, February the 10th, 2026. Roll call shows that all commissioners are present this evening. Uh, next we'll have have the invocation given by Commissioner Schnef followed by the pledge of allegiance by Vice Chair Wilson. If you'd like to join us, please stand. Dear Craig, heavenly father, we come before thee a planning and zoning meeting. We ask thee that thou will guide us and direct us to best help our beautiful city of Xolo to the building that we have as the planning and zoning. We love thee. We say name Jesus Christ.

Amen. If you will join me in the pledgece to the flag of the United States of America and to the for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Next on the agenda we have a new business and item A under new business is consideration of election of officers and I will turn it over to director Tascus to give us an introduction to this agenda item.

Thank you chair. Uh so first meeting of calendar year planning and zoning commission elects the chairman and vice chair. Uh this is our first meeting so far this year. So uh this falls uh to tonight. Uh essentially it's a pretty straightforward process. Uh the chair would call for nominations uh for the position of chair. Um the second would take place. Uh chair would ask if there are any additional nominations. Uh once there are no additional nominations, uh there would just be a vote taken. Uh individual who receives majority of the vote wins. Uh same process for vice chair. Um following the election of the chair and the vice chair, we would take uh if needed just a small recess so that people can switch seats uh and we can move name tags again if needed. If the current chair and vice chair retain their positions, then we'll just move on with the next item on the agenda. So, Mr. Chair, I'll turn it back to you for nominations.

Thank you, director, and I will open it up to nominations for the chairperson position. Commissioner Adams, I'd like to nominate uh Commissioner Barlo for chair. I'd like to second that. I have a second by Vice Chair Wilson. Any other nominations? Seeing none, we will have a vote for uh Commissioner Barlo to be the chairman for the 2026 year. All those in favor say I. I. Uh that passes unanimously. Move on to the vice uh chairperson position. Do I have any nominations for the vice chair position? Commissioner

Commissioner Wilson. I have a nomination for Commissioner Wilson. Do I have a second? Second and a second by Commissioner Whipple. Any other nominations? Uh we will move on to the vote then. All those in favor of Commissioner Wilson for the vice chair position uh signify by saying I. I. I.

That passes unanimously as well. Makes it easy. Uh we'll move on to item B. Consideration of conditional use permit 602-04-279 submitted by Scott Hooper of Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. on behalf of T-Mobile to allow for an 85 ft monopine cell tower located at 200 West McNeel. And I will turn it over to Miss Selene for the staff summary report on this agenda item.

Thank you, chairman and commissioners. Uh, I first want to express my apologies and clarify a point. I incorrectly spelled the applicant's name wrong in the staff report. It is Scott Hopper, not Scott Hooper. Um, so forgive me. Um, Scott Hopper of Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. on behalf of T-Mobile has submitted an application for a conditional use permit to allow for an 85 ft monopine cell tower located at 200 West McNeel. The subject property is currently utilized as a as the Arizona Department of Transportation roadyard and the Arizona Department of Public Safety Xolo office. It is zone C1 neighborhood commercial C2 general commercial. Placement of the of a wireless tele communication tower requires a CUP at this location. At the regular scheduled meeting held on June 19th, 2019, the planning and zoning commission granted a cup for an 80 foot monopine cell tower at this site. However, the tower was never constructed and that cup has now expired. The applicant proposes to lease 257 ft of the ADOT property and place an 85 foot tall monopine cell tower. There is a 15 15 foot wide access and utility easement that will be utilized by the applicant. The monopine will be approximately 473 feet from the north property line, 745 ft from the east property line, 397 ft from the south property line, and 231 ft from the west property line. The entire subject property is currently surrounded with a 6t high chainlink fence and the applicant has proposed a 40x 53t long 6' tall fence to surround the monopine and associated equipment. No additional lighting is lighting is required to the assessment out according to the

assessment outlined in the FFA 7460 report submitted by the applicant. City code section 1915.070B5A states separation from all residentially zoned properties shall be a minimum of 100 ft or the fall zone as certified by an engineer whichever is greater. From the proposed site for the Monopine, there will be two neighboring subdivisions, CK Peterson and Hugh Whipple. The CK Peterson subdivision is about 520 ft away, while the Hugh Whipple subdivision is roughly 310 ft. The applicant stated that the installation of the tower is necessary at this location because of connectivity needs, equipment specifications, and to address coverage gaps. Al alternative sites nearby were evaluated but deemed impractical by the applicant. Findings of facts. Uh Scott Hopper of Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. on behalf of T-Mobile has submitted a conditional use permit to allow for an 85 ft monopine cell tower located at 200 West McNeel. Currently, the site is pro the site proposed is utilized by the Arizona Department of Transportation and Department of Arizona Department of Public Safety. The proposed lease area of the model pine will be 257 square ft. The property is currently contains a non-public tower that is exclusively utilized by ADOT and DPS. On June 19th, 2019, the planning and zoning commission granted a cup for an 80oot monopine cell tower at this site. However, the tower was never constructed and that cup is now expired. The nearest residential property line is approximately 310 ft away with the CK Peterson subdivision about 20 520 ft from the proposed monopine. Other locations in the vicinity were considered. However, the other locations were determined to be

unfeasible by the applicant. The current zoning for the surrounding properties include North MH manufactured housing, south C2 general commercial, East C1 neighborhood commercial and C2 general commercial, West MH manufactured housing and R27 single family and multif family residential 7,000 square ft. The current land uses of the surrounding properties include North Residential, South Horn Auto, East KC Motel and Horseshoe Trailer Park, West Residential. Transmittal memos were sent to all effective agencies. No applicable comments have been received. The property was posted and letters were sent to all property owners within 300 ft of the subject property. No cell phones or no phone calls were received. After reviewing the standards for review, the zoning ordinance, discussions with the applicant, and because the request is consistent with the city of Xolo general plan, staff recommends that the planning and zoning commission approve conditional use permit 602-04-279 submitted by Scott Hopper Hooper Hopper gosh, sorry, of Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. on behalf of T-Mobile to allow for an 85 ft mono pine cell tower located at 200 West McNeel subject to the following conditions. All development shall comply with applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including federal communication commission, Federal Aviation uh administration, and building permit requirements. The cell tower or the tower shall be in conformance with the submitted site plan. No further height extensions are allowed unless approved through future conditional use permits. A new cup will be required if there is a change in ownership of the subject property. Myself, to Director Tascus, and the applicant are available for questions.

Thank you, Miss Selene. I'll open up to the commission for questions for staff. Commissioner Adams. Yeah, other than the uh additional foot, it looks like that we uh was approved back in 2019. Are there any other changes to the uh the permit that that are before us or is it pretty much the same?

It's pretty much consistent pretty much consistent with what was approved prior. As noted, it is a they are requesting an additional 5T beyond what was previously approved. Uh however, the proposed location is consistent with what was uh requested previously. Uh, and the monopine design is consistent with what was requested previously. Any other questions for staff? I have one on the findings of fact. Uh, it discusses a current non-public tower that's used by ADOT. And this may be a question for the applicant. Is that tower located near where this tower is? And do we have a height on what that existing tower is just for comparisons?

Uh so the existing tower is a lattice type tower. Uh it is located kind of on the southeast corner of the property very near to the property line uh shared with the KC Motel. When that was proposed, staff did request with AOT that that be located in a more centralized location and not necessarily right along the property line. uh ADOT felt that uh the city's request was uh not valid and so they went ahead and placed it at that front location. Because it's a state government entity, we really can't tell them where it needs to be. We were really hopeful that they would at least listen to our request. So,

and do we know how tall that tower is? I don't know specifically. No, I if I told you it'd be a guess. So just just out of curiosity, where is the fence going to be? This 40 foot fence like

so they are proposing a fence around the tower uh base. You can see here on the overhead kind of what the tower is proposed to look like with the monopine treatment and you can see the fence there along the bottom. Um go back to the previous slide. we marked kind of the general area with a star. That's where the fence location would be would be right around that. So, um, again, the the setbacks that we showed on the previous map, they're going to be about 231 ft into the property at the nearest point uh to the tower and 4th Avenue.

Any other questions for staff? Any questions for the applicant? Commissioner Adams? If the applicant would come forward, just set your name and address for the record, please.

Good evening. Uh, Scott Quinn, not to be confused with Scott Hooper, I mean Scott Hopper, 1426 North Marvin Street, Gilbert, Arizona. Um and first of all I would like to thank the chairman and members of the commission for this opportunity here and as you as staff so eloquently laid out um this has been years in the making you know co obviously they derailed this particular site it's a site that's desperately in need and in coverage for T-Mobile along with uh Verizon who's also request to potentially locate this site. So we already know that it's um an ideal location. you have a lot of undulating terrain here in the Xolo area and so this particular site provides better opportunities for line of sight to shoot to other locations and also cover some of those areas that are down the low lining areas. Um so it it is a critical site from that standpoint. Um and then to answer your question with respect to that other lattice tower uh that the um AOT utilizes um that's 123 ft and I believe that includes the height of the omnis. So the actual tower itself I'm going to guess is those are usually about 20 foot omnis. though you're looking at, you know, roughly a 85 to 90 foot tower, I think. Um, and then they also have large dishes on there. So, it's already at a point where it's probably got, I don't want to say it's structurally compromised, but you start adding a lot of weight loading to it, it's going to probably have to be structurally modified to make it work. And then what we've historically found out with a lot of the uh AOT and uh emergency control systems, they typically want to have their towers for themselves. They don't want anyone else on there. And sometimes they even look at as like a conflict of interest. They just want to keep uh you know church and state separate basically for lack of a better term. Um the monopine uh it is a little bit taller and that's because of the technology. I mean now we're trying to do more to camouflage them. So we put more branches. So it's technically the top 5T will be branches and then so you have 85 ft and then the actual steel portion will be 80 ft and then the antenna center lines will be at about 75

ft. So, if you have like an eight foot antenna on there, you have four feet um to the top of that and four feet of to the bottom of it. Um I I think that's I I don't want to go too deep in this because I know you only had like one question, but does that hopefully that answers the question or No, not really. Okay. Appreciate the

Okay. Uh so my question is it's been um yeah almost seven years since the last application and since we approved it. So in that time, I know you mentioned CO, but that seems like a long time to delay a project for CO. So what's different this time? And do we think that we can actually build it this time? Yeah. Yeah. Again, the technologies changed. Now we're truly into the 5G generation. I mean, and now that's pretty much a standard to where everyone expects that. And so now that there's it's time of the essence. It's it's got to be done and installed because the the consumers demand it. The E911 demands it. It's just something that has to happen now at this point. And previously it was T-Mobile that was going to build it. Whereas now it will be us state tower.

Yeah. And yeah, we were contracted, Sunstate Tower was contracted by T-Mobile to obviously um renew this application or get a new application um a cup approval. Um and then as that's progressed, the relationships with the other carriers, they there's there's been vested interest there as well and they they know of the importance of this particular site location. So you guys will get it done is really what I'm hearing. Right. Yes. Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant while they're up here? I think you answered my question earlier, but so are other providers then going to be able to use the tower as well? Yes. Yes. Okay. Was the question? Thank you very much, gentlemen.

We'll do a we'll do a public comment portion. Right. I think we're about wrapped up with the commissioner questions. We'll do a public comment portion and then they'll have a chance to respond to kind of all the questions that the public has. No, you're totally fine. Any other questions from the commissioners at this point? Then I will open it up to the public comment portion of uh this agenda item. If you do have a comment on this item, you can come forward to the microphone. Just make sure you state your name and address for the record, please. I'm Jackie Piles and my address is 281 North Thr Avenue and my concern is any health reasons risks having this um you know tower next to my house and also property value. Could you answer any questions about that? health risks, property value going to go down. Um, thank you. Any other members of the public wishing to comment on this item? We'll give you a chance to respond then. Yeah, go ahead. Scott Scott Quinn again with Pinnacle Consulting. Um with respect to uh health um concerns, that's something that's um over the years has been um more and more debated and that's why it was part of the telecommunications act that health can no longer be used as a consideration for the approval or denial of of a cell tower site. Um there's been, you know, um multiple studies done on it where there's been no pro proven um issues

with um cellular transmissions. It's a nonionizing frequency. So if you compare that to even a baby monitor, that's a nonionizing frequency. Um any kind of wireless device for the most part is nonionizing frequency. Um an ionizing frequency is more like an X-ray. So this again needs to be compared to more of the any kind of wireless type remote. Um and you know pretty much we're bombarded with that with I mean throughout society now you pretty much have um frequencies that we are inundated with. So it's it's unfortunately but it's here to stay. It's just it's been a part of our life for quite a few decades now. Um with respect to property values there hasn't been anything proven to reduce property values. In fact, there's probably been more studies on it enhancing property values because of the infrastructure that it, you know, allows for the obviously the wireless communications. It it also allows for internet um capabilities, potential households. Um, you know, and it it obviously creates a revenue stream for AOT um you know, and it's also very well cited. It's also camouflaged. Um I can't think of a better location than this particular location because of the ex existing vegetation. Um you already have a maintenance facility there that surrounds it that has a lot of um you know ongoing maintenance um road cover material you like um whether it's the crashed um crushed aggregate that's on there um you have piles of that and you have a lot of their maintenance facilities. So all that stuff is visible. So I think that where we've cited this where the um pine trees are is a great location with respect to trying to be sensitive to surrounding property owners property values.

Thank you Mr. Quinn. Mr. Chair, if I could add just a couple things. Yeah.

So uh related to health concerns uh this is something that we hear fairly frequently when it comes to cell towers and sighting of cell towers. The FCC has established what they consider to be uh reasonable transmission frequencies and and strengths. Um as long as the cell tower does not exceed those regulations as adopted by the FCC, um they are deemed again and we could there's a lot of people that will argue one way and there's a lot of people that will argue the other. Um ultimately if they are within or below those uh allowable limits then that is not something that we can use as a reason to deny. Um I don't want to dismiss. I understand people are concerned. Um but it's not something that we can say hey we're going to say no if they are under those limits. They have provided the paperwork and documentation showing that they are within the requirements specified by the FCC. Uh, as far as property values go, again, that's not something that we specifically get into. Um, I think the applicant has kind of addressed the applicability of the site and what's currently going on there. So, um, just wanted to kind of address and and again refresh the commission on the uh, health concerns and allowable requirements on that.

Thank you, director, if yes, Miss Tensio. Um I do just want to point out that the uh telecom telecommunications act of 1996 does preclude um the city from using the um environmental effect of the radio frequencies as a basis to deny. So that is not whether it meets standards or not standards it's not a basis for the commission to deny.

Thank you for that clarification missio. Uh, I'll bring it back to the commission for any further uh discussion or comment on this motion or on this agenda item. Uh, I'll just make a quick comment. I I actually really appreciate the site of uh this tower in the middle center of a large parcel that's already kind of a, you know, industrial service area. Um, and so as far as impacts to um, kind of the visual corridor of the highway, I appreciate you keeping it off the highway um, and um, being thoughtful about the location of this. So, I just wanted to to point that out. Um, and I'll bring it back to the commission if anyone wants to make a motion on this agenda item. Commissioner Adams, I move to approve CUP60204279 submitted by Scott Hopper of Pinnacle Consulting, Inc. on behalf of T-Mobile to allow for an 85 ft monopine cell tower located at 200 West McNeel, subject to staff recommendations.

I have a motion by Commissioner Adams. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second by Commissioner Clark. All those in favor say I. I. That passes unanimously. Director Tragascus. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, as with any conditional use permit, there is a 7-day appeal period. If no appeal is received uh by the city clerk from an uh qualified individual, this will become effective.

Thank you, director. Moving on to item C under new business. Um before we get into item C, I am going to declare a conflict of interest due to my involvement uh on the city's design team for this project and I will turn it over to Vice Chair Wilson to lead this uh agenda item. Thank you. Do I need to switch seats? Okay. Nope, you're good.

All right. Item C, consideration of conditional use permit 60204280 submitted by the city of Xolo to allow for the construction of a building taller than the existing height limit of 45 ft in height on property identified as APN21028040A. And I will turn it over to Miss Seline for a staff summary. Thank you, commissioners. Uh, the city of Xolo has submitted a conditional use permit uh, application seeking to allow the construction of a building exceeding 45 ft in height. The cup is for the proposed event center on the subject property. This property is located in the Xolo Bluff Planned Unit development uh, designated as mixed use. This mixeduse zoning permits public and civic use such as parks, recreational areas, and centers which are detailed on pages 19 to 22 of exhibit E in the technical master plan for Xolo Bluff. The approval for the Xolo Bluff PUD was granted on February 4th, 2004. Based on this submitted architectural drawings, this proposed event center is set to be located on the southeast corner of the subject property and is approximately 500 ft away from the nearest residential lot. The intended structure will be between 55 and 60 ft from its finished floor level to the peak of its main ridge line. Under the PUD's mixeduse zoning regulations, building may surpass 45 ft if they obtain a conditional use permit. Examples of previously constructed commercial establishments that received approval through cups to exceed height limitations include Summit Region Regional Medical Center at 72 ft, the Marriott Hotel at nearly 50 ft 49t

11 in, and the Hampton Inn reaching a height of 46 feet. The application provided has been reviewed and complies with all required standards. Findings of facts. The city of Xolo has submitted a conditional use permit seeking to allow the construction of a building exceeding 45 ft in height. The zoning classification for this property is planned unit development. The Xolo Bluff master plan designated the property the subject property for mixed use permitting public and civic use such as parks, recreational areas, and centers. The approval for the Xoluff BUD was granted on February 4th, 2004. The proposed event center is set to be located on the southeast corner of the subject property, approximately 500 ft away from the nearest residential lot. Submitted elevations indicate that the building height will be between 55 and 60 ft from the finished floor elevation. The current zoning for the surrounding properties include north, south, east, west plan unit development. The current land uses for the surrounding properties include north, south, east, west, vacant commercial. Transmittal memos were sent to all effective agencies. No applicable comments were received. The property was posted letters and letters were sent to all property owners within 300 ft of the subject property. A public meeting outlining the project was held on February 3rd, 2026. Uh general comments received including funding, traffic, the type of facility, the type of events envisioned, the construction schedule, and the schedule of the additional outdoor fields. No comments or questions were received regarding the conditional use permit. After the preparation of the staff report, two comments were received from area property owners. One was in support of the project. The other had general questions with no opposition to the height. After reviewing the standards for review, the findings of facts discussions with the applicant and the Xolo general plan. Staff recommends that

the planning and zoning commission approve conditional use permits 602-04-280 submitted by the city of Xolo to allow for the construction of a building taller than the permitted height limit of 45 ft on property identified as APN210-28-040A subject to the following conditions. All development shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements, including screening, landscaping, signage, and lighting requirements. Maximum building height shall not exceed 60 ft. The completion date of the building shall be no later than June 30th, 2028. Myself, Director Turassis, and the applicant are available for questions.

Thank you, Miss Seline. I will now turn it or open it up to the commission for questions for staff. Yes.

Uh vice chair, just a couple of uh things before we get into the the discussion. Uh first of all, the discussion the point before the commission this evening is whether or not the height of the building uh should exceed 45 ft. Uh the location for the building um has already been decided and determined. Uh again the question tonight is uh does the commission feel it appropriate to extend that height? Secondly in the staff report we say the current land uses of the surrounding properties includes and to the west we say vacant commercial that is true on the subject property. Uh there is a fairly large portion between the building and the property line. However, at the property line, it then goes to residential. And there's a uh open space buffer that's part of the subdivision. That is residential. And then there are the actual residential lots. The open space buffer that is part of that subdivision at its narrowest point, which is uh kind of midway up the property line along that west side. That's approximately 100 ft from the backside of the uh residential privatelyowned lot to the property line uh between the two developments. Uh so I just wanted to point that out. I didn't want people to think that this was commercial and then even more commercial. Um wanted to make that clarification. Also, um, tonight's going to be a little bit maybe a little bit different how it works because you've got myself who kind of represents the code and the the different requirements that we have outlined and then we also have city employees who are representing the project. Uh, we have our public works director Shane Hemsaw

is here. Uh, so he can answer questions specific to the project itself. So, there may be times where you ask me a question that it's a city question, but um I'm going to refer it to the representative of the project versus myself or I may answer it. It just depends on what the question is. Uh we also have a representative of the property owner here this evening as well. So, um this has been we did post the property. We did send out letters. Um, so this uh has been noticed and advertised and we may have some people here that want to make comments. So that was it. Thank you.

Thank you, director. So I now open it up to the commission for questions for staff. No questions. All right. So then I will um give me a second if anybody has any questions for the applicant. Yes, Commissioner Adams. Can I do Do I wait for him to walk up or Okay. Who's going to answer? I was under under the impression Justin was going to handle all of it. Go. Yes, I'm here. Got for you. Uh, does he need to do anything?

Does he need to state his name and address? No. Okay. Okay. So my question is hoping for a brief history on this. I know the uh city's been working on this for a while. I was hoping you just give us a real condensed version to how long you guys been working on this and and uh such.

So I believe part of the master plan Justin was back in ' 04. Um you see master plan documents from Bluff showing this kind of commercial hub area. It's uh been part of this area this development the entire time. Um even back in those documents, you've seen the placement of event center or community large event center in those documents. Um so yeah um I think the we've done multiple um kind of feasibility studies looking at what kind of venue, how big, what type, what kind of uh um events can you draw to a center like this, not only sports related but also like weddings or um other sort of events like that. So we've gone through all those studies. Um we're here 20 years later um with a plan uh about halfway through schematic design. Um design goes into another phase called design development. That'll be done the end of May and then by fall you'll have construct construction documents or final plans for the facility. Um so that's where we are from 04 to date.

Perfect. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? What what's the timeline?

Timeline um for construction are you asking? So, like I said, we're we're about halfway through schematic design, which is we're trying to really just say, okay, the footprint is the footprint. No more moving things around. We'll go into textures and colors and um bricks, wood, what is this, the inside going to start looking like um some of those other features. The site um designs will get wrapped up this next phase by the end of May. Um the like I said, the final design documents will be done probably late fall, September, October time frame. Um, but the way we've procured this project, it's a design build. Uh, we can have an early GMP or an early contract with the contractor to start moving dirt when we feel comfortable enough to do so. Um, we're feeling pretty comfortable that that could be this fall, um, August, September to start moving dirt around and break ground. And the construction period, I think it was estimated by the, um, the contractor is about around 14 months. Um, if we get another winter like we had this winter, it that we'd be great. Um, probably next year is going to be the epic snow Armageddon and we'll have but hopefully not.

Any other questions for the applicant? Director, did you have anything before I open it up to the public for

uh not necessarily? I will point we do have on the overhead uh the proposed elevations of the uh structure. Uh you can see kind of a red line going across each one of those elevations. That's approximately the 45 foot mark. So, anything that is above uh that red line, that is what exceeds the 45 foot height. Um just wanted the commission as well as members of the public to have kind of that visual in place. Um one thing I did look at today, I think most people are familiar with the auditorium there at the junior high high school complex. That auditorium I think was built back in the 70s or so. Um based on elevations that we have for that that is basically 60 ft from the ground level to the very the very peak of that roof. So most people I think are pretty familiar with that. That gives a pretty good idea when we say 60 feet. That's the maximum height that this building would be.

Thank you. Um I will open up to members of the public. If there's anyone wishing to comment on this item, you can come forward. Please state your name and address for the record.

Uh hello, my name is Peter Wolf and I live at 760 South Creekide in Xolo Bluffs. Um two questions. Um the hotels are in a industrial zone that are at 50 ft or so. Those are commercially zoned properties.

They're commercially zoned. Thank you. So, I would really like for you all to think a little hard about what is happening here at 60 ft versus 45 ft. Uh that's a 33% increase in height in a mixeduse residential area. So, it's it's a little bit of a sore thumb when you kind of look at it on the horizon. That's one comment or question to consider. Um second one is uh infrastructure and transportation. Um I presume this commission handles the review for roads, lighting for roadways and all that. It's a question.

No. So that's a city. So any questions I have on roadways, I have to go to the city council. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. Anybody else wishing to comment on the matter? Um, if I see no additional persons, I'll bring this back to the commission for any further discussion or a motion. Yes, Commissioner Adams.

Yeah, just uh a couple comments. Um, I would like to uh thank the the Xolo City Council and staff uh for all their work on this. I know it's been 20 years in the making and I'm excited as a lifelong um city of Xolo resident. I'm excited to see something like this come to our city. So, I just like to uh basically express my appreciation for the the time, effort, planning that this took and I'm excited for it. Would anybody else have any comments or a motion? I have a question for this for for Wolford. Is it in conjunction? Is it going to be extended through and conjunction with this building?

I defer that to our public works director, Mr. Hamsaw. He's very qualified.

Um the current design build contract for the actual facility is for the property only. Um we are with the if you look at the the exhibits it does show Wolfford Road extending and Road X being developed as a part of the development. Um we are actually working with our legislators down in uh the state legislature to try to secure funds. We're asking for $6.5 million in a state project to get Wolford Road completed all the way from the Wash all the way to Penrod Road. Um we're working with the team down there. Um we had a very favorable review last year, almost had it funded, got pulled last minute. So, we're hoping that this is the year we get that state funding to really get that moving first. So, we'll find out later this summer if that makes it in the state budget, but that's the plan for Wolfer Road, but yes, the the goal is to get Wolfer Road constructed from um the crossing at the creek all the way to Penrod for use for the facility.

Anyone else? Anyone open to making a motion on this? I move to approve CUP 602-04-280 submitted by the city of SH to allow for the construction of a building taller than the permitted height limit of 45 ft in height on property identified as APN 2110-28-040A subject to staff's recommendations.

We have a motion by Commissioner Whipple. Do I have a second? I have a second by Commissioner Adams. All those in favor say I. I. Uh seeing no motion passes unanimously. Director Gas. Yes. Thank you. Uh again, as with all conditional use permits, there is a 7-day appeal period. If no appeal is received by the city clerk uh from a qualified individual within those seven days, this will become effective. We need to go get Yes. All right.

Uh, thank you, Vice Chair Wilson. Uh, move on to item six. Call to the public. If there's any citizen wishing to speak on a matter within the jurisdiction of the planning and zoning commission that's not on the agenda this evening, you may do so at this time. Seeing none, we'll move on to item seven, approval of minutes. Uh item A is approval of the planning and zoning commission regular meeting minutes of October 28th, 2025. It's been a while since we've gotten together. Uh do I have a motion on approval of the minutes? I'll make a motion. I have a motion by Vice Chair Wilson. Do I have a second? I have a second by Commissioner Whipple. All those in favor say I.

I. And that passes unanimously. Uh moving on to item eight, summary of current events. And we will begin with commissioner clerk. I don't know. We'll just move down the line. My turn. All right. Just great to be here. Love being up here on the mountain and love the city. Um hope you all be safe out there. Drive carefully. Summer's just around the corner. We got lots of people coming back. So be careful.

Yeah. Uh like to welcome Commissioner McGregor. Welcome to the commission. We're happy to have you. Um also like to um thank staff. I know uh the uh daddy daughter dance was recently um held and that I've heard a lot of good feedback from that and I've been to it in prior years. It's all obviously really good. So thank you for that and for everything they do. And I He's stole mine. Welcome Commissioner McGregor. And I also want to say if he's watching to Gentry um Hatch, you know, congratulations for being appointed to the city council. We will miss you.

Thank you, Vice Wilson. Uh I'll echo that as well. Welcome to Commissioner McGrder. We like having a full slate of people up here and appreciate people willing to participate in this community. Uh and I'll turn it over to Director Traasquez. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh again, welcome to our new commissioner. Um, other than that, really no report. So, I'll turn it back to you. Thank you. Great. Uh, well, thanks for those who came out tonight. Uh, seeing no other items on the agenda, I will adjourn us for the for this evening.