Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

bag. I feel like you should move them to a more prominent place where they'll be captured and wide screen rather. I have them hidden behind my

Okay, we are streaming. Okay, I will call to order this Thursday, December 11th, 2025 meeting of the Moab City Planning Commission at 6:07 p.m. Uh this is our final meeting of 2025, which is pretty crazy. It's also our final meeting with our planning commissioner, Miles Loftton, who will be abandoning us for the higher skies of elected office as he uh resume uh takes on his role as a newly elected city council member um come January. So, Miles, we're super sad to see you go, but of course really excited for your next adventure and that you will be representing um all of us Moab residents at city hall.

So, we'll say more, I'm sure, uh by Thank you. Um uh in attendance this evening we have city staff Johanna Blanco, Kelsey Garcia, Corey Sherliff, and Alexi Lamb. Uh we have all five planning commissioners in attendance. Miles Loftton is here remotely. Um and then we have uh a citizen in the audience uh who an applicant.

An applicant. All right. One of our applicants is here with us in the audience. Um which I imagine they will introduce themselves when the time comes. Um, okay. First item of business, citizens to be heard. We did receive something. Um, citizens to be heard. Nope. I apologize. This was just an email from Planning Development Services. Uh, we did not receive anything for citizens to be heard. Correct.

Okay. Um, and I don't believe we have anyone here for citizens to be heard. Our audience member is here as an applicant for an agenda item this evening. So, we will move on to item number three, approval of minutes. These are minutes from our last meeting on December 1st, our special meeting on December 1st. Um, if anyone has had a chance to read those, any amendments, additions, clarifications. I know there's two little things under the water shortage response plan section. Um, it mentions that Miles uh made a motion but not who seconded or what the overall vote was, but those pieces seem to be missing.

Oh, yep. And then um under the land use code update section. Just wanted to double check um Corey that you were okay with the word inadequate in there of uh the sentences. He Corey explained that the consultants produced an inadequate first draft of the code revision. Wonderful capture. Yeah. Yeah. I don't think that adequately captures no what the discussion was nor what you said, Corey. Thank you. I think that's a good flag, Carolyn. Um, yes. Uh, that water shortage plan did pass. I don't remember who seconded. It may have been Shaye.

Pretty sure it was. But but we we have a recording that can be amended. Um good catches, Caroline. Yes. Um if someone would like to make a motion to approve the minutes with those two amendments. Um just make clear what we need to add. We can get those um get those fixed. What would be the proposed amendment for the language change for the land use code update? I would just say to clarify the language that

yeah the the the word usage uh will be amended to reflect where module one of the consultants submitt word smith it don't want to quite do it uh live live um but we'll essentially inadequate is not correct correct um It may, you know, there may have been elements of the module that were not consistent with where we were going, which if you're putting that one word, I could see how that could have been through some auto systems in a synonym. Um, but yeah,

if you would give us the liberty of amending that uh as staff, I think we'll do that. Okay. Unless you I we can come back to this. We can also come back to it and I'll word Smith it exactly by the end of the meeting if you'd like that. Oh, I think just giving staff leeway to make that correction so it adequately reflects reflects what was said on the record. Thank you. That's a really great catch because that is Yeah, we don't want in any way that's that sounds much more severe than I think it is to actually have or that there was some sort of mistake on the part of the consultants which there certainly weren't. Yeah.

Okay. Well, I can make a motion to approve the minutes um with amendments of the Moab City Planning Commission special meeting from December 1st, 2025, adding the details of the vote outcome for the water shortage response plan section and making some amendments to the language under the land use code update section. Um in the second sentence uh per staff guidance about um the initial summary from community development director shirtless about the consultants work. Okay, we have a motion um to approve the minutes with a couple amendments from Caroline. Is there a second?

A second. Okay, a second from Shaylee. All in favor say I. I. I. I. All right, minutes approved. Uh, with amendments noted. Good catch, Caroline, on both of those things. I think my eyes skip over some of that sometimes

when I'm reading. Um, all right. Next is our first and only action item of the evening. 4.1, a public hearing and consideration and possible recommendation of approval of a development agreement for 57 West Cane Creek Boulevard, parcel 0100001 02000 between Amasa Holdings LLC and the city of Moab. Uh, city staff, take it away.

Okie do. So today we're looking for a recommendation to city council on this development agreement. A little context about the parcel we're talking about. Um the property owner is Amasa Holdings. Um it's at 57 West King Creek. It is in the R3 zone. Um our applicant today here is Amanda Dylan. Um and they are proposing uh around 88 units. Um so we started drafting this agreement in August. Um right now the project is working its way through DRT um to get their preliminary plan and their preliminary plat um up to our standards and then it'll be seen by you all. Um and then they're also simultaneously working uh on their final phase one plan and plaque. Um, this project has already been awarded funding for phase one and phase two um, in the form of low-income housing tax credits. So, getting into the meat of the agreement, here are the city concessions. Um, uh, five foot uh, decrease in the setbacks. um an alteration of the parking calculation to allow one parking space per unit. Um normally this would be one for single bedroom and 1.5 for all of all other makeups.

Um they also have a waiver of the usually 33% AEA ae requirements. Um, and we're exchanging that for the low-income housing tax credit affordability requirements. Um, they also in the agreement, we've come up with a custom process and plan that more closely mirrors the master plan development process, although it's not exactly the master plan development process. And in return for those concessions, the community will be provided uh 50 units in phase one. Uh uh 38 units in phase two. And then in phase three, uh they have the option of up to 12 condominium units. And you can see the uh area median income rent restrictions on each of the units in phase one. And then in phase two, um although they're not listed out by type, they will all be below 50% area median income. I'll give you a moment on this one. Okie do. Um so the custom process mentioned in the city concession this is um the preliminary plan and the preliminary plat that's the general feasibility of uh the division of the plat uh town home plat and then also the plan that's going to be seen by you and that's going to have a public hearing. So that's when the public can really come and give

their feedback when we're talking about the whole of the development. Then as the phases come, uh that'll be approved administratively. So it won't be coming to you guys. um the development agreement. So the one that we're looking for a recommendation on today will be for the whole project and then specifically also for phase one and then when phase two and phase three are sold to different uh parties they will also uh come back for specific phase agreements. This is the conceptual plat. This is pretty similar to the um preliminary plat that'll be coming to you guys uh sometime in January. Um so I'll go over it just a little bit. We've got um phase one here is where a new building will be. And a new building will be here. And this parcel is parking. And then this guy is being rehabbed.

Um and then so that's phase one. Phase two, oh also a clubhouse over here. Um then phase two involves uh rehabbing all the other uh units that are pictured here as well as a new building. And then phase three, the final phase of this project is going to be filling in these corners. Um oh, might have been easier to explain it on this one. Um, this is their conceptual plan which shows all of what I just walked through along with their uh, parking calcs on there to show the feasibility of fitting everything onto this site.

There reason this wasn't Yeah. egg. Yeah, I got this um just a few days ago. This uh plant, what is blue and what is purple? Blue is phase three. Uh purple is phase two and red is phase one. Is there a time frame they have to remain in those AMI limits?

Uh 50 years. Okay, I'm gonna move on. We can come back to that. Uh sustainability. Sometimes in our DAS, we see um lead standards being followed. Um they are going to be following Enterprise Green Communities um requirements for sustainability. Um so walking through the concessions that the city's going to be giving. Uh the reduction in parking and setbacks um allows the developer to fit everything on site. Um the rent limits imposed by those uh LITC um restrictions are probably going to have a similar effect to what the AEH requirements would be um as far as providing housing for local people. Um we we know they're not going to be second homes. Um and then the third bullet here is just about the complexity of this site. They had to go through town home pladding um on top of town home pladding and have a very dense interesting site here. Uh so that's why we made their new process. Okay, that is the end of my brief. Um, you can ask me questions or we do have the applicant.

Yeah, if you're collecting, do you want to come up? Yeah. Um, we did form the open public hearing. Not yet. Um, not yet. I will maybe have the applicant present and then we can open public chat and close it. Um, Yes. Quick, definitely keep the slides up, Joanna. Okay. Uh,

I also, just for what it's worth, um, I think I'm going to recuse myself from this decision because my company had been approached by them to do some of the re renovation of some of their units and otherwise. Um, so I think it would be appropriate if I didn't vote on this item. Uh, cool. That may present an issue because I was maybe gonna see if Shaye and myself should recuse ourselves as well.

Oh, no. If if not refuse probably just note that uh give group has entered into um it's a it's a joint partnership with the Moab area community land trust for our tract K. It's also which is with the LITC. So the application included units out at Aoyo Crossing um under Mult and then also the Amasa property that we're looking at right now. Uh Shaylee and I have zero financial interest so I think it's appropriate for us not to recuse ourselves but I do just want to note that for the record for the discussion then um

I was going to say as mine does cons contain some financial interest I think it's most appropriate that I do recuse myself. I agree. Yes. Thank you for the three of you being u very prompt to that element in the front of this item. So that that's really helpful and the disclosure item is satisfactory for that if you're not turning immediately. Yep.

And I have no financial interest, but we are both on the board of directors for the Mi Community Land Trust um who is partnering with with uh Give Group on another half of this project. So um okay, I that said, if you want to introduce yourself, um just make sure you're speaking into the microphone so our notetaker can hear you and the public. This will be recorded. Um, your name, who you're with, little background. Um, you're welcome to say whatever you feel is helpful.

Great. Yes. Um, great to be with you. My name is Amanda Dylan. Um, I first off want to just thank um, Johanna and Corey for all their hard work. Um, I feel like our conversation started before August of this year, so really appreciate everything they've done to facilitate this process. Um, I'm here on behalf of uh Give Development, my employer, and Developed by Women, a nonprofit that I'm the board chair of that I started with another give employee. Um, Gives um kind of mission is to build communities that really um try to promote affordability, resiliency, sustainability, and kind of interconnectedness. and developed by women's mission is to essentially elevate women into roles of owners and decision makers in the real estate development space because we feel that when women have a seat at the table, our communities really thrive. Um so Amas Apartments, uh you've gotten a little bit of a sneak peek uh at at kind of the um proposal. Um oh, you do have here.

Perfect. Um so uh this uh project for us started uh back in early 2024 when we acquired the property. Um we acquired it from uh owners who had developed um 36 affordable houses uh town homes there back in 1995. Um, so one of the first things that we wanted to do was get out into the community and um, let the residents of the units themselves plus the neighbors um, know what our vision for the site was going to be. Um, and so we brought poster boards and pizza and um, music and games to them and got input on our early site plan at the time and then just some broad goals um, and mostly got um, positive receptivity to the ideas. A lot of people um said that the grass there in the middle where we're going to be uh developing hoping to develop 44 units um is a big use of water that could be spent better. So they were kind of happy to see a better use for that grass. Um go to the next one. Um so Amas Apartments um it's going to be building diverse forms of affordable housing. So, as Johanna has already kind of presented, there are the first two phases which are rent restricted for 50 years. Um, and I should say that will extend the affordability period on the current 36 units there. That is set to expire in 10 years. So, um, we're adding 40 years to that affordability. Um and we will be setting aside various units in those housing units for um people with disabilities um formerly unsheltered as well as victims of domestic violence. Um we're also going to be adding a clubhouse to the property, a playground, which we looked back at the original um development for these units and there I think was supposed to have been a playground here.

Not sure if it got put in and removed, but we're going to be adding one. Okay. Um and then a leasing office. Right now the property is managed by um someone who also works at Huntidge just down the road. So we think it is going to be a more successful property if someone who manages it is actually on site. Um we're aiming to have it be efficient. It's going to be all electric. Um give has been building all electric since 2016. Um and so with that it'll have a carbon neutral impact on the immediate environment. We are going to aim for net zero um through a large solar array both on the roofs and over car ports. Um and we're also designing the project uh the new construction in particular to have a passive active design with a really efficient building envelope, centralized systems, EV chargers and then enterprise green communities and energy star standards um which uh is kind of the standard for litec projects. Um, lead is often uh very cost prohibitive and um most uh projects that get Utah Housing Corporation tax credits use the EGC and Energy Star standard. Um we've also been working with these partners in the community to um basically work with um the community as early on as possible. We had some even design conversations with Sea Haven about what makes a unit feel safer for someone who might be a victim of domestic violence um and have been working with both Hassu and the Moa Valley uh multicultural center. They will be working with us um to get set aides uh filled for those disadvantaged populations. Um this is just Johanna's uh site plan. So this kind of shows um just to give an overview again, phase one is in red. Um

so rehabbing six units um and then building 44 in those uh two buildings in the front and then the clubhouse and the leasing office are over there to the right and the playground would be just to the right of that. Um phase two will add eight um units to that other kind of half circle onto the left rehabbing the remaining 30. And then um in the future we would like to um build in those corners a for sale affordable product. Um that's the goal. Um this is just in case anyone had questions about what EGC entails. This is kind of like a backup slide in case anyone wants to know more about it. Awesome.

Thanks. Yeah.

So, I I appreciate the slide. Uh I remember when you all were first contemplating this doing the community meetings. Um our director, our executive director of the land trust attended the meeting. Some people that I know I appreciate you blurring the children's faces out too. I know those kids. Thank you for doing that. That was really nice. Um, but I know that they the overall remarks were that they were pleased that you seem to be one really responsive to the neighboring community. We know that obviously people want housing, but the idea of having a larger product built in your, you know, across your fence line is something that can obviously cause a little bit of like discomfort sometimes with the adjacent neighbors. But it seemed like uh by and large I think you headed off those concerns really well by actually talking to people, tweaking your site plans a little bit and m and making that. So I just want to note that that I was really impressed with that sort of how you started things. And I think that was really really smart because I think you know there's 10 neighbors on Hundreds that could have totally gummed up the works here for you. And I really think that you all went about it right by approaching them and seeing what they wanted and what their concerns were first before really getting too far down the line. So, um, frankly, well done. And I'm excited. I was really excited that that you all did that too because I do think we need obviously more projects like this that has been sort of a I don't think waste of space is a good way to describe it but yeah it's it you know it's it's outdated as far as a use of that very nice large parcel that is close to things hopefully walk more walkable in the future as we sort of get our trails back and things figured out but um I mean incredibly important spot particularly for our seniors, low-income populations, disabled populations, and like you said, um, people that are served by those various nonprofits that

you've been talking to. Um, so I will go ahead and open the public hearing at 6:32 p.m. We'll leave it open until we're done with the discussion just in case anyone shows up or we get any emails. Um, yeah. If folks have questions for Amanda or obviously I'm excited because I think affordable housing is a big issue. Um, so I'm super excited about what's happening there. I from the moment I moved here I was like why is there a giant patch of grass in the middle of this apartment building? Um, I'd say my only question is I I understand the need for reducing the parking. Um, and that on on average, even on a fourbedroom, you're going to just have a larger family that may only be able to afford one car. Uh, I do think that we're having similar we're having some parking concerns coming up at a Royal Crossing and some other locations around town that we that I've been noticing. And that would be like the one question is where would a second car even go

because there's not really, you know, parking nearby. Um, and and to say that they're not going to have second vehicles, I think is pretty unrealistic in in Utah. Um, and what's the like what would even be the enforcement? Are they going to have like numbered spots? You know, how do how do you prevent that? So that would be my one question since

Yeah. No, it's a great one. We um deal with the question of parking a lot. Building in Salt Lake, we tend to build in transit oriented zones out there and the city often allows for parking reduction and we get um this question a lot. So it's I think it's extremely valid. Um, so the the requirement uh would be that I think the bedrooms or the units have two bedrooms or larger have one and a half parking stalls. Um, so it would be a permitted system and so people would have like hanging permits in their car. Um, and so of the total um, spots that we have available, everyone would get one and then I think it would be like a lottery system for those kind of additional half ones. um we haven't figured that part out, but we would do something um that you know seemed equitable for everybody. Um and and in terms of um what we've seen in Salt Lake um is that um since the property is going to have several uh units that are at the 25% AMI, which are also um what UHC considers um units that are set aside for the formally uh unsheltered, those populations don't have cars quite as often as populations in the higher AMI bands. It's not to say it doesn't happen. I know a lot of unsheltered people live in their cars. So

yeah, I was going to say Moab might be the might be the one place where that doesn't necessarily hang true. Yeah.

So So um yeah, essentially um you know the the the property zoned um for I think like depending on the acreage you look at of the property like around 98 99 100 um units and I think because the way that it was laid out initially isn't the most efficient design. So, um, we want to make sure that we can add as much affordable housing in such a centralized location as possible. Um, especially with the beautifully redesigned Cane Creek Boulevard, the complete street. It's so close to downtown Moab. Um, we feel like people could walk. Um so uh that was kind of the compromise is having basically one unit or um one bedroom and then one and a half for um the larger bedroom units with the exception of the corner um parcels which uh we have asked for just one stall. Um so that's kind of it was just to be able to to build to the density um that the site already allows.

Yeah. Yeah. I'd love to highlight what the last thing that you just said is it's only for phase three and they are providing a space. So maximum we're losing six bases. Yeah. If if they were to build all two two or more bedroom um otherwise they would be following Yeah. code. Yeah, that makes sense. And is there my brain isn't working right now. There's still parking there is still parking along Cane Creek. Yeah, a little bit. So, yeah, if we were to go back to the site plan, you would see that as this development does actually

um extend up and around beyond the King Creek frontage on Aspen and I'm forgetting the other street. Hundred right there. There will be, I believe, public parking Yeah. up into that section of the neighborhood that will have access to those sites, but not on Kang. Not on Kang Creek itself. Correct. Yeah. Because at least I think Shayla you're saying there are a few little stretches of like Yeah. And I think those are there's one beyond Aspen. There's one Yeah, there's one in front of Bridge. There's one. So yeah, I think on this we'll call the Arctic stretch. I don't believe there are any of these bold outs, but there are some in proximity.

Yeah, but I mean it's it's Matt, you know, there's a lot of I would say there's a lot of through traffic on King Creek. Like obviously with the food bank, with Episcopal Church, with all of that, too. There's I mean it's literally we have like a drive-thru food bank that's right across the street um from the apartments. So um there's a lot of vehicle traffic there. But I think the safety of the new road redesign and updates is really helpful for that. Makes it much more walkable. There's no longer like death sidewalks like there used to be where the sycamores were like growing up through the sidewalks and you're sort of taking your life in your hands. That's better now. So, um,

will there be visitor parking? That's the other concept I have. Yeah. I I I can't You go. Please answer, but I cannot envision an apartment complex that does not have visitor parking if they have tagged permitted parking. Yeah. So, um, we like essentially we're building additional parking right in front of the leasing office and clubhouse. Um, and then phase two will also build additional parking. So we are in an addition. So we are adding um additional parking to accommodate guests. Um I think it would just be about again how that permit system happens with at least one unit having one permit and then some kind of lottery system for those like excess parking stalls.

Yeah. Um and then uh just having I've I've spoken to some of the neighbors who live on Huntridge. Um, I know people who attended the meeting and everything and I the things that they mentioned that they were excited seemed to be part of the design or were happening. I don't know, Johanna, could you pull the like the rough strap site plan up again? Mhm.

were I think the fact that there was parking on the back of the lot that the larger new buildings were more King Creek side and less neighborhood side so that it wasn't like you know peering down into people's backyards with the larger new structure which seemed very very popular very important really well shielded lights so same thing so there weren't lights going into people's houses or backyards in the adjacent neighborhood and then just lots of I know you don't have landscaping plan on here, but lots of vegetation, particularly along sort of that that back side. Is that still kind of all in process?

Yes. And actually, um, we did a little bit of a redesign with our, um, parking lot um, kind of the right, it's hard to indicate really, but the Yeah, right there, right north of your mouth, right there, there's a lot of um, kind of established large juniper trees there. And so we oriented our parking lot a little bit up in the attempt to save those uh because they created a great buffer and shield between behind those properties right there. So we did adjust design based on some of those comments and conversations that we got had with those neighbors. Um we also since acquiring the property have changed the lights and shielded the lights on the back of the existing units. For some reason, the lights, they're dark sky compliant, but they're like on the second story of the building. And so, they really, they even sent us a picture once and they're like, "You could have a soccer game back here like in the middle of the night." Um, so we put some additional shields on that. Again, just trying to be as responsive um as possible to their concerns.

Great. No, that's really that's really great. I just wanted to see if all those were sort of still captured because I know that was part of some initial discussions um with neighbors again, which I think is really great. Those it's it's amazing how simple sometimes the friction points are to solve potentially with with larger, denser, affordable housing and adjacent established neighborhoods. It's not it it it's not always that hard, I think. And I I just I hope this is an example of how on the new developers side and how on the existing neighbors side like there really is room to make it work for everybody. So yeah, that's cool. Um yeah, other questions from other planning commissioners, comments, anything about the project? Awesome. Yeah, I love the the thought going into it um and the the intentionality of all the conversations you've had with residents, neighbors, and local nonprofits and the kind of intention to serve really specific marginalized groups in our community. So, that's really exciting to see as well as the, you know, the all electric and solar um components. I was wondering about the units that will be rehabilitated if current residents will be able to stay in unit during that process or if not if there's a temporary relocation plan.

Yes, it's a great question. Um, and I was actually at the property today talking to some of those residents. Um, so we have two units that we've kept vacant in that building. There's six units there and we've held them vacant now for feels like almost a year. Um, and the thought is that we would rehabilitate those two units and then um ask the the residents and the other four, do they want to move into the newly rehabbed units or do they want to move out into um short-term rentals and then moved back into their exact unit. Um, so I was able to connect with two of the four residents today and they didn't have it uh they you know it was all new so they're they didn't have a decision made up but the plan ideally we don't dislocate them at all and we're able to do somewhat of a staggered kind of you don't have to move out somewhere for like maybe up to two months and then move back into your unit. You could just move into a newly renovated unit but some people are attached to their particular unit. So, um we are planning to uh if they choose relocate them for right now it's about 6 to 8 weeks on renovating each of those units and trying to do it as um tied together as possible. So, um we may have to relocate some of them, but they also have the option on moving into the newly renovated ones,

but you'll hold the existing tenants as like first priority on on new units. Yeah. Yes. Um they Yeah. their lease basically will stay intact. So, it doesn't change at all. Um, their rents actually may come down slightly because right now their units are 60% AMI and the highest that we'll have is 50% AMI. Um, one of the residents I spoke to today said she was like, "Are you guys building bigger units?" And I like she's in a two-bedroom and I said, "Yes, we have three and four bedrooms." So she so there I can see some people even wanting to move into a larger more familys sized unit.

Will that disqualify anyone with the lower AMI from like if someone's at 60 for example and it goes to 50 will no. Yeah, we looked into that. Utah Housing Corporation um has a policy that um we can't kick anybody out even if their unit AMI qualification comes down. Um, but obviously it would apply to whoever comes after them. Okay. Thanks.

I'm Yeah, I think I I like that you're giving residents the option. I because I'm I would be one of those people who's like, I really like my existing spot. Let me go find somewhere else so I can have my like exact little out the back window. So, I feel seen. So, we are um talking about the plan a lot. I'd love to bring up how we're going to the process moving forward. Sure. How um when it's time, we will fully evaluate uh the plan here

um and have a chance to ask even more questions at that time.

Correct. Um so the red box that we have here uh will be coming to you all. um just like the DA um the preliminary plat and the uh preliminary plan and then all of these finals for phase one, phase two and phase three will just go through the development review team and then be issued a rec record of decision uh from me to move then on to building permits. um along with each phase down here at the bottom you can see they're going to be um also um negotiating uh subsequent DA and um improvements agreements with all the phases as well. Is there any questions about the process? I I did want to highlight this and I this is something with we've developed inhouse this little flowchart um but the amount of time we're joking about tattooing this on our heads because we bring it up at nearly every meeting

because it's such a useful tool to understand how land use rights and the approval process works for most things but what we're doing and in this DA what the function is two-part one it is authorizing uh the development to act uh with the concessions basically securities of the development, securities of the city of what the layout and product that we're actually getting. But it also establishes this very custom process which is amalgamation of a couple of our processes, a planning exercise process, plan approval process, which the most kindered one we have is similar to a master plan development, but that master plan development that we have is is quite robust and and can honestly be quite clunky in a lot of ways. So what we've done is actually with our master plan is sophisticate it to a little bit more of an administrative point to not have each phase be so burdened coming back through an overly robust public process for something that is administratively applicable meaning it's already been approved. The reason I I kind of was saying hey let's do show this really quick as we're tying up this DA approval is where the public's voice matters. So this is obviously the public hearing to establish the DA that establishes this process. So as this goes to city council, the the ability for testimony isn't gone, but it definitely has changed from the public hearing side. But at that point, this process and the standards that would be applicable, which are in the DA, they're noted in particular by site, uh will be administrative at the approval of this DA. Therefore, as it comes to planning commission for the approval of the preliminary plan and preliminary plat, that is the last time the public and the planning commission will see this as it progresses through its approval phasing of each final phase for for entitlement and construction. Um, and that's often when we get way down the line, public's like, I never even heard about this. Where is this happening? We're trying to

balance a elegant and clean way for these applicants to move as quickly as they possibly can while still obviously trying to maintain process. So this is kind of this is the big overture for the remainder of this project for more or less. Um so and and on that note like uh Johanna said this will be coming back for you both for plan and plat um to walk through the specifics of the plan to ensure they meet our standards. Um, that being said, there's still both great securities for the developer and for the city. If as the project evolves, which it inevitably of course will and changes within that, all of those amendments will come back to the original authorizing body. So nothing that go nothing will be built that hasn't been seen by this body in a final form. So phase three, if if everything goes to plan, you won't see it. it'll just go as it's been conceived within preliminary. Um, but if they with phase three do want to change elements, whether that's in the phasing development agreement or improvements agreements or the platting locations or even just the plan content, they will come back for amendments uh through through this body. Um, but that was kind of the again big note is it's it is a custom process. So, as long as we're recognizing that, it's very much how we hope to approach many of our new uh policies and procedures with our land use code updates. So, this is a great opportunity to work with give what works from a lending perspective, what works on a more dynamic level with the developers. I know we didn't make it super easy to get to this point with GI, but they were a really good partner in having us

work through and do the customization of. So, appreciate the time, but that was my big the tea off that this is this DA is doing two things at once. This is the other thing. That makes sense. Thank you. Good question. And I'm completely blanking on what it was. We are talking about oh uh difference in terms year terms between what ah requirements would be and the litec sure litech is 50 years ah would have been

yes and so that that's a great distinction here is that the when we're talking about the ex exchange or concessions here um we're moving from what was our use parameter by right our standard zoning ah not a um negotiated aeh contract which often have year lengths and those types of terms uh the what we'll call use parameter or permitted use by right ah doesn't have uh similar restrictions it's only as applicable as the use in which it's um operating

um so in this case we're we're moving from ah to lysc which is kind of like saying we're moving from attainable housing to affordable housing as far as the restriction patterns of ah to something that's more kin to a pad. Yeah. So, this project is much more like a pad. We're just getting rid of the duplicate uh restriction for occupancy because it's already contemplated in a much more robust way with the litec. So, um ah typically doesn't have a deed restriction length. It's only restricted as so long as that use is

uh on the property. Yeah. Unless we, you know, with some of these other groups where we're negotiating a contract for a like our former blue bison that was a DA ah that had terms of that restriction in it. Um, so cool. I don't know that wasn't super clear because it is messy, but that was a great question. It's great. Any other questions for city staff or the applicants? No, I think we're all asked. All right. Thank you for your presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Um, wonderful. Johanna, could we get a absolutely copy of that presentation? Yeah.

I just want to like look closer at everything just because we didn't see the potential site plans that um all right. Oops. I just closed out of my agenda accidentally. Hold on, y'all. Gosh d is where now I'm struggling. Did we open it for second comments? Okay, I thought so. We opened it. Uh that said, I will close the public hearing now at 6:53 p.m. Uh we can have some further discussion. We can ask more questions obviously um now that we've seen the presentation. Joanna has something to say.

Oh, it's excited to say. Yeah,

sitting there excited. Um but uh the this would be consideration and possible recommendation um to approve this item if if folks are all right with the development agreement um as it stands as explained future questions as usual. We can also take um action at a later meeting table it if there are things we need specific direction to city staff for additional information. Um but otherwise this is in our hands. Uh this is a public hearing. This is a development agreement. We are not the final authority on this because it's a development agreement. So this is a recommendation to city council.

I'll go ahead and make a motion to Miles doesn't want to do it one last time. Do you want to do it Miles? He's Well, I'm technically recusing myself so I can't make motions. I know I'm just giving you a hard time. Uh you you are allowed to ask questions though Miles if you have any questions certainly um in the discussion but just uh as you've recused yourself um don't honestly you guys hit most of my questions what the difference between the lit restriction and the ah restriction was going to look like and why we were willing to give that up was one of the top ones and that got answered. So uh I appreciate the thorough discussion and yep.

Cool. Well, sorry you're missing out on this one, Miles. We'll have uh somebody else take it away. Um I will go ahead and uh forward a positive recommendation of approval of the development agreement for 57 West Kane Creek Boulevard, parcel01-00001-0200 between Amasa Holdings LLC and the city of Moab, Utah with no modifications. No modifications to the Moab City Council. Okay, we have a motion uh for a positive recommendation from Jill. Is there a second?

I'll second. Okay, a second from Carolyn. Um any further discussion? Okay. Uh all in favor of the motion on the table, please say I. I. I. Okay. Motion passes four to zero with Commissioner Miles Loftton recusing himself. Um, great. Thank you, Randa. Thank you. Looking forward to seeing seeing things progress. I know. Looking forward to it. All right. Next discussion items. Uh, 5.1 discussion of the wildland urban interface. Once again, I assume this is Alexi time. Woo. Come on up. Woo.

It's the WOOI. It is the WOOI. Woo. There's gonna get all kinds of Alexi time, guys. I'm running low on candy. I have plenty of Whoppers. Oh, I haven't had a Whopper in a Whopper 10 years, probably. Yeah. Feeling those. Hey, I'm gonna have really dry mouth though after if I remember Whoppers correct.

They do kind of give you a dry Oh, thanks. Thanks. Okay. So, what we are going to go through today is the the state has different requirements to be prepared for wildfires. Um, the wildfire community wildfire preparedness plan is one that'll be going to city council in January. Uh they also passed HB48 in the last session which is requiring us to adopt a state code for the wildland wooi the wildland urban interface and also a map to go with it. So the structure of this is I'm going to try to do a little like crash course and what what the components of this are and then we'll have a discussion about what we want to do. Uh okay just to illustrate urban wooi wildland this is a little ambiguous and this is probably where a lot of our discussion will be because where exactly is the wooi like the interface of the two what counts as a space between is um kind of flexible so it is somewhat clear what is a wildland what is an urban but not exactly where you're where our wooi is uh h48 also O designates a number of responsibilities to different groups. Uh the Utah DNR um is going to create a map uh of high-risk properties in the state. Those are uh on the structure exposure score which we'll look at later. Uh things that are rated seven or above or at least that's their recommendation. Now there might be some variation based on whether on the ground knowledge matches the state maps. Uh associated with that is assessing properties annually uh and then assessing a fee to high-risk property owners uh to pay for

the assessments and the WOOI program that they're initiating. Counties would collect those fees that were assessed by the state. They also can cover their own costs with those fees. And then for properties that are in the county, they need to adopt the WOOI code. Grant County has already done that. Um it's already on the books for them. and also create a map of which properties are affected by that. The recommendation by the state is a five or greater on the structure uh exposure score and then enforcement. The city responsibilities are basically the same. We need to adopt the code which we haven't yet. We need to create a map of who is included in the application of that code and then we need to enforce it once we have it. residents um if they're on the state high-risk map, then they will be responsible for those fees and also having their property assessed. They are allowed to decline having a property assessed and if they do, they'll pay the highest fee. The city um map here um would have requirements for people who are owning these properties and building things on them. So residents or anybody who's trying to construct something on one of these new properties, new construction would meet the code. Existing construction requires defensible space. And then we'll talk a little bit more about their other obligations. Uh as a background for where we're going with this um is trying to talk about some of the factors of wildfire risk. So hazard and vulnerability. Um and then under that some kind of subsets of like the actual likelihood of having a fire and the intensity of that fire which is especially relevant to us because we have a lot of rocks and kind of sparse vegetation. So in some places our hazard is relatively low. The odds of having an intense fire there um are not high. Now we do have some exceptions to that and

we'll get to that with the maps. Uh vulnerability is more looking at the actual property um and is it close to where that fire might be and also how is the property built up so it would be exposed to a fire if one were nearby. So that gets more into uh landscaping or how the actual buildings are constructed. Okay, getting a little more in depth on the construction side and then we'll talk a little bit about the landscape side. um the actual code. So this is the state code that they are requiring us to adopt. It's not something that we can modify. New construction needs to use fire rated construction materials. This includes things like the roof, the windows, siding, decks. Um pretty much all aspects of this, including the vents. Um yeah, I'm thinking like there's also

Yeah. doors, projections. Um yeah, when you're thinking about shell of a primary structure, the framing of that typically that is what's included,

right? And anything like fire arresters, things like that for chimneys. So it includes pretty much the entire envelope with some kind of fire rating and it it progresses as you are at a higher risk. Uh it also requires water supply in specific proximity and access in specific proximity to these at risk properties. It also requires defensible space uh during like before somebody can occupy it and then continued management of vegetation for existing construction. Uh it does not necessarily have to come into compliance immediately. If there are unsafe conditions, those may need to be corrected. Uh depensible space is also required. You wouldn't have to move out, but you would have to implement it while you were there. And then there are also some things.

What does that mean? in the defensible space. Yeah. Next slide. Okay.

I'll get to it. It is basically a perimeter around the house that uh you reduce the risk of a fire spreading to your house. So reducing vegetation. Uh so they would be required to manage the landscape which would be you know a lower cost thing than necessarily changing your roof. Uh roofs. However, if you did do some kind of re-roofing that would affect 25% of your roof in a given year, you would have to replace the whole thing. If you added anything new or did other new construction projects, that particular aspect of the building would need to come into compliance. Like, if you were redoing your siding, your sighting would have to um if you're redoing your windows, your windows would have to. So, it wouldn't necessarily bring your whole structure into compliance. If you redid your roof, you don't have to also do your sighting, but if you touch it, you would change it. Uh, and then you need to add fire arresters, like something to catch sparks um from anything that's basically flammable on your property, like if you have a chimney, from a fireplace, a barbecue, a fire pit, something like that.

So, this would be triggered by making like pulling a building permit for your roof, for your siding or something, not just from that annual assessment cycle.

Yeah. So, the sorry, I'm going to go back here. Um, with the different levels of this, um, the only thing that the Utah DNR map would trigger is doing those properties and assessments. In order to have to do the WOOI code, you would have to be adopted or or identified on the city map. So, we as a city would identify who has to go by this code. The state would like for our map to include the properties they identify on their map because they would identify the highest risk and we're doing something a step lower. Uh, however, their map is hasn't been released yet. So, we're not sure if the things we identify will be on their map, but we could also update later. Part of the code is that you would regularly update your map. So, if we adopted a map that didn't reflect the state, but we later wanted to update that, we could. So we would be adop we would be choosing which properties have to do everything and it would be triggered like you said by a building permit. Uh okay defensible space. So this is the landscaping aspect of this. Um there's a lot on here. Essentially, the state code looks at your level of risk and then increases your distance of defensible space depending on that risk. So, at moderate risk, you would need 30 ft of space that has reduced vegetation. Your trees need to be farther apart. They need to be pruned partway up the trunk in order to reduce the risk of fire spreading. uh if you're at a high risk 50 feet extreme risk 100 feet and or it could end at the end of your property line because not everybody would have 100 feet between their house and their property line. So this would be basically how you would

first treat your landscape. If somebody had to come into compliance with this code, they might have to remove some vegetation and then from there on out they would need to maintain it to that level. uh if they were also identified in the state map, then the assessor would also look at this and that would be part of their annual assessment to make sure they're maintaining their property in line with the WOI code. So, this would supersede the landscaping ordinance.

Uh that would be part of something we can decide. Uh there are some cases that where the landscape code could conflict like with this. For example, if you were on a small property and you had big trees in your front yard, they might be too close to your house. Uh, in a lot of cases, because the landscape code is relatively flexible about where the 25% of your vegetation would be, um, it might not conflict, but essentially we would decide or we could have them go through an exception process and then they would say, you know, in order to have defensible space around my house, I can't follow the landscape code. I was just screening buffering uh where we have mandatory intervals of vegetation particular along the perimeter. So that's kind of the street trees is what we were alluding to. But yeah, I think that was well captured.

All right. So, what we've got to work with this evening before we get to maps is we have differing levels of risk and differing like different tools that we can use to try to match with that level of risk and we need to decide which tools match which level of risk and that will determine where codes apply for us. So, high-risisk this is not something we control. The state adopts that map and they will designate those properties. Um, as we talked about, that's the assessment and the fee. Um, the city map, we do get to choose. We do have to adopt the code, but we don't have to designate any particular properties to comply with the code. So, we get to make a choice there about which properties are appropriate for that level of risk. Um, if the WOOI code is addressing the risk that we're seeing in our city. And then we also have no requirements from the state on moderate or lowrisk properties. uh but we are allowed to do something there. So if we think that there's some level of preparation that is appropriate um but it's not the state where we code then we can adopt our own code. Um we can also obviously provide education to people which is already happening. So now we get to the discussion in the maps. Um this is a structure exposure score that the state has developed and I'll pull up their online interface in a minute. Um, we have the city limits of Moab there. The stuff in the middle that's white is not considered at risk. And then as you get into the darker orange, it gets up into higher risk. Um, there are some things that seem not quite in line with the levels of risk that we see around here as in it shows um lower risk along waterways because there's water there, but that's actually where we have vegetation. And uh also you can kind of see that there's some areas like in the middle of

the river that are highly flammable or um on the rocks where there's not a lot of vegetation. Uh so there's some things here that are probably more or less calculated by formula but don't necessarily match what we see on the ground. And then the other map that was in the uh community wildfire preparedness plan that you would have seen, this was generated by rimto- rim. And the parts that are in the middle of the city that are like natural like not yellow and surrounded by red, those are the areas they identified as being at the interface of wildland. And then the yellow that they've identified there is um basically the stuff that is not uh based on kind of a preliminary assessment. We also have a number of other maps and things going but we have um more or less some questions here about what is our urban wildland interface and what tools are appropriate for the levels of risk we're seeing in the city. And then I also have some goofy property diagrams because we could run into a situation where we have properties. You might recognize this from the landscape code. Um and then we could have a wildland urban interface that is not aligning with property lines. Um so it could run at the back of your property. It could run on the edge of your property. It could actually run through your house or include the majority of your property. And if we're looking at how this code applies, we need to come up with a map that identifies the properties that need to meet the WOOI. And the properties may or may not totally match what we're seeing in the natural landscape.

Well, how do we do that with like flood plane? Because obviously that's the case with flood planes, too. Yeah. Cory's smiling. You getting there. All right.

All right. Well, I I this is I don't have any other slides here. Um, we do think that in a lot of ways it is similar to the flood plane. Um, with the difference being that fire is more contagious than a flood, as in if your neighbor's property floods, it's not necessarily going to catch. You won't necessarily flood because they did. Um, whereas if your neighbor's house catches on fire and their landscape catches on fire, it might just by association spread. Um, do you want to talk more about how we handle flood planes contagious? I maybe I I think I may but maybe let conversation begin. I unless we want to at this point kind of get to

uh what back to our adopted map options and then maybe we talk about details like that later. I don't know where we won't start with that. The rec I guess do we want to discuss the recommendation we're facing and where our attorney believes we're at?

Yeah. So currently our recommendation is that we adopt a WOOI map with no properties identified for the state code. Um and then we also simultaneously work on a city code that um provides different levels of preparedness for properties that are in the city. Uh the current WOOI code is pretty ownorous for something that is built in town. It's built more in line with if you had a cabin in the woods. So if we if we do that, like if we identify codes in the city, they're going to have to have all of those things in place on their properties and it could make it more expensive to develop and it might be um a stronger tool than we need for the level of risk that they have. So we could create a more tailored tool to the kind of fire risk that we have in Moab and then we could make a map for the Moab code. So that would be the staff recommendation. However, I'm happy to discuss other options and then we can also do the the state map for the structural exposure score is not high resolution, but we can get in and look at areas of the city if we want to look at where some of the higher levels of risk are identified by the state. with that prompt could we move to the uh heat map for the risks by state. So understanding the scoring of what we're seeing here is that um as we're look and again understanding this is a little bit hard to diagnose at this resolution but uh generally speaking we're not we're not in a risk category of warrant. However, there are some spots here that do kick into a tier that might qualify, but how um technically accurate that might be is why we're considering a adoption of zero until we get the state's assessment and then read

based off of that for particular things. That's what I'm kind of considering option one. It's our attorney's suggestion. Um, more or less I think from this map which is going to kind of spur us to our next option too. As you can obviously see see in our our wetlands area uh the conservancy to the northwest west of the city there are some designated spots. It's they are not within city limits. So this is where it gets a little interesting for us. Um, so where those heat spots might exist within the wetlands, uh, while they're out of our jurisdiction, the property or parcel, which is how you designate WOOI, is it it's not, um, where that interface might live, it's it kicks in and establishing the entirety of a property. So when we're looking at the map that Alexi showed where there may be an actual interface, that's where we want to through a city tool use a much more surgical option versus a large parcel getting lumped in with something that maybe a small portion of that property might actually be legitimately designated. So again, that being said, can we go to the next map that was the uh rimtorim generation?

Yeah, let me see. I'm gonna try to annotate. We'll see how this goes.

One of the perks of doing the zoom share system. Um, so using this I mean it kind of having the coloration of the the satellite imagery. So what we would kind of be identifying is something more along the this boundaryish um with maybe a pedest uh secondary potential identification of this peninsula into uh city limits area all within the conservance area. still uh the majority of it is still within a single property or within a few properties. Um so if we were to contemplate a WOOI designation though the those sections of the wetlands that are in the conservy parcel would be likely the ones we would designate. Um the important distinction here is who is triggered and who is not by the WOOI. So if that your parcel is now designated wooi like it would be with a flood plane you're developing in that context. So if we were to take um this agricultural parcel right here oh you can't see my cursor uh this agricultural parcel right here that is currently within the county but you know eventually annexing um while it may not be designated the WOOI it will develop but will be clearly an interface area. So now we're talking about what we would say is maybe a city's sophistication of an interface or in our code which we can look at is what some you know working title we're calling it a um defensible fire interface uh zone where we actually identify a surgical area that within that you have more or less a buffering type mechanism. So, a defensible space and we'll probably try to very likely uh not reinvent the wheel here, but adopt some of the zones that we discussed to create a buffer that is not the entirety

of your property including your front door if we really only are trying to buffer on the back side of it. Um, a lot more work to be done there. But this is why when we're saying looks of adopting a map with zero when clearly there is some risk is we're not trying to say that there isn't risk and we're trying to avoid that or adopt zero. It's trying to be sophisticated in how we approach it. So we're not lumping properties in to an overwhelmingly ownorous degree that for our community maybe isn't it's I've been saying from a staff perspective the woo is a little bit more of a sledgehammer. I'd like to add the sledgehammer where it's necessary but then maybe use a little little bit more of a chisel interior to our community especially as you can tell which is going to be running through our our floodway corridors where that vegetation is naturally going because of the the water source there. So that's my spiel on option one, option two. Um, and maybe where we want to go from from there if there's any questions or anything else from staff what we're thinking.

So if we say option one because it does feel like it'd be better just to adopt the code and then learn as we build this math. We say go with option one just because of the sum summary. Then you guys go back and work on option one and then we come back and approve it to be forwarded to city council or like what are the next steps?

Yeah, I I think if we agree that we want to adopt a map with no properties then we can bring that at the next meeting. Uh a map with nothing adopted. The code is already required by the state so we could move that on. And if we wanted to move on to the second piece of that, which is coming up with something that was more tailored to the properties here, we would keep working on that and then send it to city council when we're ready. And I this would be through ordinance adoption of our code, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Through the public hearing process that public hearing like we saw tonight and the recommendation council makes

more sense to me than sledgehammer approach from the getgo. Yeah, I think there's things that need to be sort of dialed and finessed a little bit particularly because this does implicate assessments and that's new requirements and all those kind of things. I think it's something where we set the framework and then

iron out the details. Uh again talking about the last meeting like with a robust public information process. Yeah, this would be a Yeah, this would be a lot to and that's I mean the op opinion of our building official, the opinion of attorney who's currently working with communities that are engaged in the law and developers that are developing within in the excuse me, not the WOOI

um is they're both it's very uh ownorous, very ownorous um comparative to what we're talking about how it's similar to our flood plane management I it's significantly more ownorous. So if that gives you any sense of how our community is already starting to try to deal with our flood plane management uh system, it's it's that much more so. Um, so but again, we're not wanting to shy away from truly being effective in a defensible option or uh regulations, but doing it doing it in a way that that is more tailored to us and we actually have control over

makes a lot more sense I think from staff's perspective and and would likely again from the assessment not have maybe as deep level implications but be just as effective. Yeah,

I agree with that in a big way. I also think it's worth noting that like clearly from the states map versus the one we generated with rimto rim there's a different understanding of where there is actually potential for wildfire in our community and I think it's also worth noting that essentially like the riparian zones and the type of vegetation we have in the riparian area versus what would be like a pine forest are going to burn very differently. And the state I don't think is reaching that level of distinction. I mean you know when you look at when you look at some of their maps like areas that are rock or maybe sparsely junipered have higher risk areas than riparian areas and clearly that's not quite accurate. So, I think the more we can avoid having to implement these kind of heavy-handed, ownorous state requirements and instead are able to generate requirements that take into consideration the type of vegetation that are in our wildlife interface areas and how it burns and how, you know, quickly a fire spreads through them. how just the difference of like uh you know an area where it has large cottonwoods if you clean up most of the brush and debris underneath them, it can be pretty resistant to anything but serious significant wildfire and you still don't have to like have a 100 foot gap between the trees in your house. So I think kind of being able to tailor that and would be very important to our community since we're not facing the same considerations that a community surrounded by like pine forest would be

and the the consideration for risk here is just from wildfire not from human started fires that is some wildfires are human caused. So yeah and fire I think it's just fire I think fire but not like electrical fires like but I think importantly this the wildland urban interface is not necessarily high fire risk within a city. It really is meant to capture

that sort of crossover between more of the backcountry like lightly managed, differently managed, unmanaged, whatever you want to call it, and habitated areas. So like I don't know actually but like pack creek in town high fire risk maybe as it stands now but not necessarily the wildland urban interface because of what it kind of where it falls whereas if it were you know up on Ray Mesa or something kind of different in that regard. I don't know Lexi where you're

it yeah we get to decide really like since we pick the map we decide what we think is a wildland urban interface which is where we get into that ambiguity of um some areas the the creeks are pretty wild but in other places like around Woodies not so wild a different way

a different kind of wild uh so we get to decide what we think um and that's where we do want your perspective on this. And um we'll still have to decide if we if we decide to do the zero map um and then we also do a city code. We're still going to have to decide on a map. It'll just have different requirements in the code specific. Uh if I can I'll go ahead if I can share screen and this is again jumping ahead to so where we're getting to next talking about the code

is I'll share this is where this section would be reserved or live in the code until we've established the ordinance. So again you'll be you'll be familiar with this from last meeting as we really quickly went through this. Um but within our uh development review procedures uh we're going to through districtricting establish the interface whether it be boundary or zone or however that's distinguished. So that will be one element. And then in our standards, if your property were to be going to develop, we would be going through this review of a filter of what flies, what doesn't, just like we do with flood plane. This is where they really would be triggered in a really similar way, processed in a really similar way. In fact, maybe I'll show you um it's it's all under environmental management. So within that flood damage prevention which is a code we currently have is built out with our consultants a little bit more uh with this rewrite uh what we're seeing here is how that'd be structured. We the very next one that we're going to be adding would be just that both in the idea of wild and urban interface and this is where it lives in the code with its associated map but we also might include a uh defensible fire interface requirement and a map associated with that and then it goes through methods um permitting standards specific standards and so forth. Um so again that's that's how when we're talking in this kind of ambious way of this idea this is how it would be structured it's already contemplated in our code in this way or will be

is there has there been a mapping exercise of the table of the 10year area fire history that's in the preparedness plan that was in the packet? I'm not aware of that. I mean, I'm aware of different experiments with like what a buffered space and things like that would be in the city. Um, as far as other maps that would be associated with the recommendations or the the preparedness methods in the wildfire plan, I'm not aware. I could talk to REM to see if they have any that were not included in the plan. Yeah, it would just be interesting to see how like the actual 10-year history of fires tracked to those couple of both the state map and the rimtorim map.

Yeah, makes sense. Like if the ultimate goal is mitigating the spread of fire and the damage to structures, then I feel like it would just yield some more insights as we're trying to say like, "Oh, should Pat Creek count as we're not?" You know, we I think have a staff person that could probably help us pull together, which really informative when we go develop our ordinance. That's a great suggestion. Um, so yeah, I'm looking to help help remind me when to take note of that. But yeah,

let's let's do That is yeah very doable. So the direction I'm hearing so far is that we do we want to move forward with the map that does not identify properties for the state level code? Yeah. Do we have to adopt the state level code this year? that they haven't released their map yet.

Yes. And we won't adopt it this year because we don't have meetings left. But um we we have already established that we are talking about it. Um I have heard various accounts of that deadline being extended because of the late launch for some of the tools at the state level. So we would just move it through early next year and then we could update the map if they released a map that identified properties in Moab and we agreed. So do we need to make a motion for that? We're not we're just discussion item tonight. Um but your direction will help us come back to you at the beginning of the year next year

or uh what could be if it's that simple is the public hearing advance that that recommendation for the ordinance as a zero map if you will. That would be my choice. Okay, that's good direction. And then Corey, do we want to do anything else on the city level code or do you just want to wait? Um what is the what's the appetite for the commission? I mean we're already at 7:30. Um, I've got it's relative. I mean, it's we we can just place kind of a bit of cups in what I'm talking about with the code. So, that is relative and would be really informative to me moving forward and we can just take away from my 30 minutes that I was going to use for other land use items. But that it's just as helpful. But since we're on the topic create a city woo code

basically. Yeah. Yeah. We're I'm trying to term it in a way that is distinguishably different but also just as apt. So yeah, the working title I have is more or less a defensible fire interface. It's called zone now, but it could be just defensible fire interface. And it's established just like we saw with rim rim as a boundary. And like we might see with a screening and buffering boundary upon that boundary, we will establish regulations that pull you at a defensible zone type. uh depending what it is and maybe that's why I think it should be a zone is that depending on what's on the other side of that boundary if it is heavily forested therefore like Lexi saw showed in that slide the intensity and likelihood increases you're maybe in a different zone on your side if it's light on this side than you're light on your side so that's the sophistication I'm hoping to work towards we took our first whack at it and we kind of on the the whiteboard that we had started experimenting with variables obviously if everything is linear in a perfect scenario, it's really quite, oh, we'll just do it this way. Um, but really the the for me at least the key approach that we're trying to look at is under the fire code as it as it exists now, you have development rights and through that. So, a good example is um if setbacks didn't exist, which in some loans they don't, it's zero. The closer you get to a property line, the more you have to fortify your building because you're taking up basically your neighbors responsible for for uh 10 five feet and you're responsible for five feet. And collectively that 10 feet through fire code is enough that we say that's enough that fire should not be jumping from structure to structure. So our codes allow structures to get closer together, but the more the closer they get, the increased rating that they'll have to build to, which is expensive. and often owners, but it's at your voluntary uh um option to get closer and closer. So, using that methodology of a

prop kind of expanding it to a property is um based on what the intensity or likelihood of a fire risk could be, what you're zoned at for that particular zone of the interface, you could move not lose your development rights. That's what I'm trying to get at. you have an option to develop really close with boundary but then maybe you are building to full WOI or even more intensive standards than the WOOI but it's our decision on how that actually works specific and I think Miles you put it really nicely what the reality of that fire could be doing in that zone the other element here if we kind of flash forward is that if you have a really uh vegetated property and you just want to put your house right in the middle of it well your zone is now probably the entirety of your property you're building entire entirely within that interface zone. If you were to clearcut that in theory, you've totally clearcut it. It's clean and green, you know, using that terminology. Uh that boundary, you've now moved that boundary. So, it's more of a living map of what the actual on-site existence is versus this is this blanket designation. Even if it's totally clear-cut, the risk is totally removed. You're still on WOOI. again, hence the sophistication that is in our hands of you can actually move where that boundary is based on how much work and improvement you want to do to your own property. So, that's a lot coming at you. There's a lot of regulations within our flood plane development that work in a very similar way. You can raise the elevation of of if you're in the 100year, you can raise the elevation and build there. If you don't choose to raise it, no, you you can't build there because you're below the BFD for 100 year. So using that modeling of property rights forward, not trying to damage assessments based off of BL, you know, blanketing uh designations, but get to the core of actually being defensible. So it's a dynamic tool. Our first hack at it, it illuminated a lot of problems, which is what we saw when stuff isn't

like linear, you know, it stuff that's all over the place. Um, but having that first work session, I think we're confident we can get to something, but it will be a little bit more sophisticated than I think I even originally thought it might have to be. So, we'll have to kind of dig in a little deeper. Um, but that's that's my take. How do I do four minutes, five minutes on that one? Does that mean we're going home now? Um, so I'd love to get some feedback on it and then we can move on. But, um, so any thoughts on that?

How Okay, so it's a interface in the sense of like we're I own this parcel and it's in the woo zone for this this and this reason on the interface and then you get to say oh if I clean this up then I'm moving the boundary like if it's ours yeah if it's not the wooi because the wooi is just your property is period right

and it remains because again I think the woo is established around big fire big fuels ours is really it's it could be a portion of a property or even one property and a or a portion of it that would be the you know our line that we saw that that penetrating line of our riparian areas it's quite narrow so you can actually I would say arguably mitigate your way out of it depending on how effective you are at maintaining that space sorry be part of like the permitting process exactly so you'd come and say you know the house on the right uh top right here

highly vegetated so we'd say yeah your house is fully within zone you got to you that fire is going to hit your house so you have to fully fire your house, but you say the house on the far left may have looked like the one on the far right, but you're you're willing to and capable and legally can depending on the trees or whatever it is, remove all those fuels that all of a sudden now that line can move where you you've now created defensible space. So, it's not a property designation. It's a little bit more articulated. I think there was kind of a joke of I wish our uh I wish our flood plane maps could be like that earlier and that is the joke because once we've established FEMA that is where the line is that's where it lives for at least 10 years if not longer no matter what you do to the property um to a degree um because they're in in these perpetual zones of flow but um so that's when we're when we're looking at updating our FEMA floodway maps they're looking at uh improving our system we're looking right now doing the same thing where we kind of have this more sophisticated chisel approach for storm water issues because when we talk about flooding in FEMA, it's not really articulating for what's happening in the community with water, but there's clearly water flow, storm water issues at surface level, not just in the creek. So, how can we be better um how can we be more responsive to some of those damage issues because it's clearly a problem for us. um fire thankfully hasn't been as devastating but I think you know there's property owners have lost you know it's it is a problem it's not fictitious um but that being said this is all very this is all proposal um so the commission say I don't think fires or the risk of fire without our riparian streams is that big of an issue we just do away with it and then we just do do woo we and that's it so we could also just not look into the sophisticated chisel if we feel it's complicating development too because that's the risk. I think with

landscaping, I said this um the burden of regulation is to do it right. There has to be a lot of it. If you're going to if you're going to have regulation, you need it will often be robust to have it be sophisticated enough to address all these nuances. So, I'd rather have a really big tool or no tool at all. often having a small tool for something that is complicated. You're just creating conflict where I've said the rubber's hitting the road poorly for us of saying sorry you can't build and they're like but all these reasonable reasons we should be able to like sorry the tool says you can't I want to I just rather not do it or do it right as kind of my my approach to regulations in that way. Um so there's three options on the table. Wooi nothing uh or this kind of dual one two punch option. So if I get some tonight some kind of feedback of yes continue to work on it or you know maybe we do need some discussion whether it's even necessary that's totally reasonable because this is just thought process.

Um I mean I think it's worth exploring like especially based on the fire history data and like I don't know climate projections and things like that because we want we don't want to be missing something that could potentially protect people's property in the future. But I agree with everything you're saying about not wanting to like over complicate or overregulate or make it too expensive unnecessarily. But um I feel like we don't know enough at this point to know if we need it or if we don't need it. So to me it makes sense to continue doing this kind of like data gathering exploration to be able to decide which tool or combination of tools makes the most sense especially the history like that gives us some good direction.

I think that's a really great suggestion and mapping it um will give a good visual representation. And I think the the one thing unspoken here is Rim's work of the fire fuels reductions

efforts that are currently going on and will likely be ongoing in a certain sense of the engagements we've had to basically reduce firefs within the reparian areas. If that is massively effective and ongoing and committed to, it could reduce the need for this. This is all coming with the idea of that being a variable we're out of control of because a lot of these locations which is a problem with our fire fuels reduction system and the engagement we're doing right now is the floodway which happens to be where a lot of this vegetation's happening majority of it is owned by prop private property owners that we can't get access to or they refuse us access to even clean it up on their behalf.

Really big issue and that's an education issue I think. I think broadly if people we were saying hey we want to come in and help the biggest thing here is some of that is really heavy fuel trees and removal of trees is not popular even if it is imminently going to run down the creek and run into a bridge and fall down or uh die that it's still a tree at that moment. So that's one of the biggest challenges we've had where I say this is worth pursuing because that that variable if that was hyper successful I might say this is this is a little too too much or or unnecessary to the level that it's already being taken care of. But that's I think the history that's a really great tool to bring to the table that can that can provide a warrant for us to advance or not. And then then the commission to consider. I mean really at the end of the day it's you guys are going to be the big lift in this whether it is worth it or not. Maybe we'll take it to council on more or less how the tool works. Obviously, they'll adopt it. But

I will say in my time uh talking to a lot of community members recently, fire concerns in the Riperian area were a major concern. And it is interesting to hear that there may be an education lapse with people not willing to take our help and allow rimto-rim to do some of this fuels mitigation on their property and on their behalf. So, it does make sense to me to pursue something like this because at the very least if you're handed, you know, some kind of documentation to say, hey, you know, you do actually have a risk on your portion of your property and especially if we're able to follow it up with, we are partnering with Rimto to mitigate these risks. If you would like to allow us to, we can help you with this, but you need to be aware of it. And then if you're doing future development of that property, that development needs to be in line with the amount of risk you're willing to expose yourself to. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Yep. That's useful direction for us because we were discussing going from like is it defensible space only? is a defensible space and the structure sometimes or is it always both? And I think that that side of things where we're looking at okay specifically if you can mitigate the the hazard you have on your property that it would make you lower risk is helpful for us to try to target like what level or or what kinds of um provisions would be in a you know particular code. Um, and we can also bring more information on where we think uh risk is based on past fires.

Perfect. Yeah. Forget about that discussion. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. All right. So, I think the followup to this will be uh probably a public hearing on the state code and then some additional research on whether or not a city specific code is appropriate for Moab. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks, Alex. Thank you. I'm gonna compliment out loud. Alexis's presentations are always the best. Agreed.

Got slideshow MB for sure. Yeah. So, on that note, I don't have a slideshow, but I have a gobs and gobs of material. Go with your Google document. That's right. We're back to the docs. Um, so I if we're ready to move to the next item. Yes. Yes. Moving on to next item on our agenda 5.2, the land use code update discussion.

Okay. I'm going to attempt to go light speed. Um, and my hope in this, in which we were kind of already we were kind of already leaning this direction, is having this session maybe be a bit of a specific introduc introductory to this topic, letting the commission think on it, engage with the community, and actually come back with some suggestions. So the over overture of tonight um is land use and standards specifically how we're identifying land uses or and I've been using this word a lot but the sophistication of the uses and how they're identified to better uh have better descriptions therefore that are being distributed into districts appropriately so we're having effective uh uklitian zoning tactics things placed where we believe they ought to be. Um, and the the the counter to that, which I believe is happening in our community right now to a degree, is we have zones that have a particular purpose. For example, we have neighborhood commercial zone C5. Yet, there's nothing in that zone from a use perspective that's actually effectively practically advancing the purpose of that. It's so for example, the intent was this is a zone meant to be for local commerce, local eating establishments. It's meant to be local servicing, neighborhood commercial, uh, small, local oriented. When we've had applications come in the come to us in the past to develop retail or eating establishment or some a business for that matter, um, there's nothing in the code to a regulatory perspective that articulates that. you're having what we do have right now is it basically just makes small tourist oriented things over there uh which is a corridor so it it's not something we've object objected to because we can't and also it's like this is what the market is calling for um but that's what I

think my my premise of tonight is to we need to look deeper into our uses and maybe not all uses what's kind of bizarre is we have hypers specific uses in some context es and then either very vague uses or a lack of them uh at all represented our code. So we have shoe shoe repair shop as one. We have pig farm, coal refinery. Uh we have a bunch of absurd uses in my opinion, but we don't have uh a family shelter use. We don't or civic type uses. We we don't have a number of uses that we have not only one but multiple and they're essential to our community. So this is where I'm calling on the commission of this is the very first thing that I thought the commission this is what a good work piece would be for you guys to consider engage with your I wouldn't say constituencies but your your realms of uh of the community to see how we could be better mapping these things. So I'll share a bit of a storyline via Google Sheets. I try I tried to put this into a PowerPoint. It was just going to end up more of a nightmare. So give us

um this is a really interesting document that has uh basically five years worth of we need to fix our code. Um so there's a lot here. This particular tab running list yeah if you can identify some of those um the terms and definitions within our code. So basically our our definitions glossery. So that has obviously things that like alley aren't a use in particular, but it's good for us to know the context of what is defined and what isn't. But then beyond that, we have uh permitted uses or or considered zoning permitted uses.

Um again, flying through this and this is where I want to kind of introduce it, give you guys some actual materials, and then chew on it a little bit. Um things like we have secondhand stores. We do have uh I'm trying to think of things that are specific guard residences.

Sure. We have again kind of again to the narrative. We have a lot of things that are specific, but then we just have service stations. And that's encapsulating I what I can think of is maybe five major variable types of service stations, but they're just allowed in any zone that the service station is allowed, which may not make sense because again, uklitian zoning, which is the traditional practice of separating uses by intensity, uh, which is what we practice typically for versus the alternative to that is form based code. Doesn't matter what you're doing as long as your building from the exterior looks the same.

Uh you can think about old world Europe is often in that context. Stuff goes in and out. You never know what it is. Uh Uklidian zone is much more like your building is actually catered to what your use often is, but it needs to be located in appropriate area that you're not creating conflicts between uses particularly those that are commercial and residential. It's like bars, brew pubs, micro breweries, distilleries. Yeah. Which is one. So that got that got really specific. So before that ordinance, which is relatively recent, we didn't even we didn't have bar. Bar was not a use. Uh it didn't exist. Um so that was an interesting one. We're not careful. It's not going to be use any.

Amen. Um so and then so those are the uses that we do have. We also have uh uses that are permitted but don't have any definition. and therefore they're just floating as permitted use in the code but there's no way for us to uh analyze or synthesize how they should be applied or what the constraints of those uses might be. Um and then we so existing uses without definitions that hasn't been populated with this tab. And then we also have uses that are just vacant in the code entirely um that we some of them we we do have in the community. So, we've just kind of bandated the way in which to give them entitlements or business licenses that even though they're not represented, at least in a specific way. Um, hair salons for instance, how do we, you know, it's one of those things that some of the most obvious things are kind of uh interesting in this way. Um, or at least that one doesn't have a definition, I should say. Um but then yeah, this is where we start getting into the generation of code. You guys thinking about the things that we need because if we're not um profiling the things that we actually need in this community, it's very it's it's it's not impossible. We work with people all the time that that is currently the case, but it makes it much more difficult for them to progress through the community. So if there's things that we need and don't have represented, that's an immediate challenge for folks um to advance. So next, this is a bit of a preview. Going to switch my categories here into module one that our consultants produced, which again were not inadequate by any means. uh the tools that they had, they just weren't as responsive to um what what we needed. There's now I'm thinking about too much. I really appreciate how our

consultants did and we're using it as a backbone to what we've done, but to the content language, it just they they could there's no way they could have been informed to how it could actually implement. So, what they've produced from this is a way to break these down a little bit better and by use categories. Um, so this is the one, this is, uh, module one that was submitted to us. Within that, they've organized it in use categories, residential, public, civic, use categories, which I'm really appreciative of having its own distinguished category, which it it traditionally does everywhere. Um, but that's I think a for Moab a really under identified and served community of business that needs to be fortified and and represented in our zoning districts much better or even have its own zoning district dedicated in my opinion. uh commercial uses, industrial and then kind of open use categories that might include right now uh mix use mix typologies or in this one I had agricultural in my um in my my working document. I've actually pulled agriculture out as its own its own uh use category type uh just and that we are a traditionally rural community. I think it's it's not that much of an offset. So it does deserve its own its own category. Um, but then I was actually going to kind of show into what the code might look like as we're starting to with like say for residential housing, housing living, uh, is an example of a residential use type. So within that use type, we're going to probably be breaking them into primary uh, and then also accessory use components. So, a good majority, which is why the Google Doc is kind of hard to translate here, we're moving away from a narrative type code into much more of a uh figure and matrix type code. I might even fly through this really quick to show you basically through uh figured pictures

and matrices. It's very clean, what is, what isn't, what the the metrics are, and very easily amendable versus a narrative can get really it can get more challenging, which is the way our code's designed now. Um, but residential type living, uh, group living, and through these use categories, it really sets up a really nice platform for us to populate with things we do have or the things we want to have that might fall into that that we can't we wouldn't normally think about because we're just going to count what we see. um community service, daycare, um it gets quite expensive. Educational facilities, government. So this again, this is the public and community service realm. Um I'm going to because my computer's going to die, lie up to a figure just to show you guys really quickly what I mean by uh figure. So, we're going to hopefully be populating our code with a number of images like this that help represent what can be, you know, a picture worth a thousand words, how development and form regulations would actually uh look. So, when we're having citizens trying to access our code, this will be able to translate not only language barriers, but also jargon barriers. Um, okay. So, I'm going to go ahead and stop sharing in case my computer dies. So we've kind of talked about our existing conditions. We've talked about the proposed framing and categorizations of uses. And then the third topic I was want talk to uh about tonight which is something our consultants had limit limited ability to understand or do is look into uses that we need to uh expand apart. Uh some of those topics might be like how we identify overnight accommodations. Um, I've I've used this example in the past and it's not

particularly eloquent at this point in time, but there are communities that live in the snow. We'll put it that way. And the whole the whole saying goes, those communities have, you know, hundred words for snow because there's all these different variable types. But, you know, why would people in Florida have such a variety of type of definitions of snow? for our community, overnight accommodations, outfitters, um, local and non-local oriented type businesses. We need right now we have one term outfitter in that instance. When we're talking about uses and how they're meant to be regulated and getting away from arbitrary regulations is every uh, use will essentially have an impact that should have a mitigation, hence the regulation. We shouldn't be regulating things just for this arbitrary sake of that use we're going to put this fence on it. Every regulation we should have should be tied to a specific instance that use creates. Um an example I had is a small retail bike shop that happens to also do touring agencies is not the same as a large river outfitter company that has massive storage and uh site impacts. Yet our code doesn't distinguish any difference between those two. Um, so what we're seeing is there's folks usually around the middle middle realm of that use. It's kind of it's kind of appropriate, but then there are uses that are way impactful to the neighbors or or the community that don't have to offset their impacts nearly uh to an uh equity standpoint. And then what is even more significant which we're seeing left or right is really small businesses or small typologies of a business that have way overly ownorous regulations. I'm not doing that. I'm not storing an acres worth of yard and drainage issues. I'm a little bike shop. So that's my ask of the commission tonight is looking at

these three sections. I would really like us to and we've got what four minutes before eight o'clock but u so I'd like a little bit of feedback here but go into our break considering this and then when we come back I think we'll produce materials in the packet that are basically what we've shown to kind of rejogg your memory of here's what it is here's what we're trying to plan to do and then maybe here are some prompts excuse me of some uses that uh we do want to focus on and break out in particular like those I've mentioned

um So I'll go ahead and pause there. I think that's enough of an introductory and I'd love to get some feedback right now what our thoughts are or particular ideas that if you can mention them now I will also during the break do research if you're like no we this is tremendously upper under reppresented or hey we have all these types of descriptions for this one thing that we don't even use anymore we could probably get rid of that. So either one of those is very very helpful. Um, but maybe throw this to the body to discuss a little bit, give us some feedback.

I think I think it's a really smart direction to take the the uses code. Um, I think it shows an intentional mindset in our planning.

And it also makes it extremely clear when people are like, I want to start this business. It's in our code. The use is defined. Um I I would also suggest that we somehow word in the code for a use we haven't thought of kind of section uh that that like we'd be open to discussion and potential code amendment, you know, because we we would like to define it and also figure out where what uh section of town it would make most sense in as far as zoning. And so rather than have it just continue to be exceptions, you know, I would I would love to see something in the code that's like, hey, if you

have uses that we haven't thought of that to start a business. You're right in line. And I think like right now our code is if this list is not explicitly permitted in the zone, it is prohibited. So it is or is it? Yeah. this this new draft we actually we identify if a use is not listed but it is within this scope of interpretation we can apply it and say yes that that qualifies as this thing so we can band-aid legally band-aid in that way.

Um and then it also has a section of if it if it can't be interpreted or we choose that it it does really truly not have a use it has an option for that. So that was something the the consultants through this system were already starting to contemplate a little bit. Um, and that's the type of code I think throughout we're trying to to develop, which is we we know and I was as you were speaking about that, I was thinking a lot of our code, and no offense to those of the past that have had been trying to build it up, a lot of it is kind of copy paste from other communities. So, no wonder we had this use that we don't even use. It was copy pasted from this other community. Um, so now we're we're kind of maturing as a community. We're like, no, we're we're really ready to take the reigns of what's happening here. Um so not only with our uses but how we approach the dynamic of that I think we're we're definitely getting ready to that so that'll be represented in I think all aspects whether it's regulations something comes up we're seeing that with our exceptions exemptions type system is we know we haven't thought of anything so rather than just telling you no it's we're giving avenues um so that'll be something if we're missing in the code and you guys notice hey there's really not a parachute on this for this person if something doesn't That's something we need to be aware of and maybe we are intentional in very few instances we're like nope this is this is the line period but most of the time we like it's yes if it should the answer should never be no it should be yes if yes you can do this if we go and do these other things that's at least the way we'd like to approach it

I think it's useful and and y'all might already have done this but I know it was a little ownorous but the list of our existing business licenses go through it, make sure everything fits in a category that we have on the books at the end of the day. I feel like that's maybe maybe a fun task or something like, you know, glass of wine some night or something, but like you know, make sure that we're at least capturing what exists today. uh that everything that we currently have a business license for has fits into one of the categories that we're going to end up with with this book proposal.

You guys are some fun project. The uh the descriptions of what's what a business is doing on their license often changes dramatically. Well, and by history it might say retail and that was from when they started the business in 1980 and now they're retail with coffee shop with a so it evolves. Yeah. And also the business licenses back in the day are massively um unhelpful as far as scope. So we've been recently like capturing you you'll read like something you know

we could probably assess oh this is what that we know that you'll see like bike themed and be like okay yeah here's what bike theme does let's make sure they fit into one of these which category is appropriate I think that's a good example because they are a bike shop and out there a coffee shop how many hair salons do we have yeah so many I was thinking also and I'm sure this is part of your spreadsheet already Corey, but like um peer communities, other gateway towns, other tourism towns, maybe Colorado mountain towns, like coming through their use categories that might be more similar to our context and seeing if there's anything we're missing.

We um I think to that's a great suggestion as well. So we I we haven't um explored those, but we haven't actually created a a catalog of those. So it's kind of been more like inquiry level stuff. So, I think creating catalog is actually a really good Well, I think particularly those towns that that have you know, you keep coming back to the outfitter definition for for good reason, but those towns that are likely to have multiple categories across different recreational activities and at different scales because like you're absolutely right, like sort of a sole proprietor who's, you know,

renting the occasional canoe and maybe taking people on a hike is very different from like a major UTV rental place. Exactly right. Is different from a major canoe rental place like Texas, you know, different from Wild West who has a bajillion boats in a huge yard, you know, not the city, but all sorts of Yeah, certainly. you're when you're building these uses, can you also do it within like so if you do outfitter that is rent canoes that and then a size and you segregate them. I mean you could have like outfitter one and outfitter 2.

It's kind of Yeah. I mean that's the essence where I think we'd like to go and it's I'm kind of pushing this out to you. Outfitter for me was kind of one of the mo one of the most obvious. Yeah. uh where it's like it's just so clear that we from the folks we have that it should be broken out in that way where you could be a you know you are a canoe outfitter but there's different scales and scopes of that and so I think you could break into kind of what we saw with residential commercial public is within that sub subuse of outfitter maybe that is the umbrella use but then we have you know motor recreation outfitters and then within that there's different classes and scales fleet sizes put you into different categories. Yeah.

Again, and this is kind of what we were saying with Lexi to do things right.

It's a lot of words. You end up creating a lot of code to fortify and do things right. And the way we've talked about with this with the building department is what we the term we kind of use upstairs is we're like the more we try to look at something, we're dividing mercury over and over. So right now you can do outfitters or you can't. It's one ball of mercury. It's one one conflict point if you will, but we say, "Oh, now there's three types of outfitters. Now somebody's gonna be just on that side of not being able to do it." Like, well, what about us? And so, we'll divide Mercury further. So, we keep dividing mercury until there's basically an account for almost everybody. There's still going to be conflict at some point. So, that's the balance that the commission I will task you with is how specific is too specific? How bo how boiled down do we get before we're like this is this is broken down enough? You're you're going to be

we've said this kind of the way like tax brackets. It'd be nice if your particular income situation was that is your percentage, but you're going to be into brackets where somebody's going to be on the short end of the stick, somebody's going to be on the nice end of the stick. So, how narrow do we make those brackets? That doesn't mean no. That just means we haven't thought of it yet. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Another example that comes to mind from like our conversations the past couple of years was um that one person who came to talk about having like a a parking lot for people who live in their vans, you know, and whether that would fall in the same I don't know what the current category is if there's like RV park or if that's also

um something else, but yeah. Could you lump that with RV park or does that That's a really good example of like I said I said OAS that's a really good example. OAS doesn't really distinguish for that that nuance of especially the as we're getting more technically advanced and people are getting more creative which is what I'd say with Moab. Nobody's coming in to build a bookstore anymore. They're coming in to build a bookstore that does yoga that also has a juice bar and which is good. It's it's good for the economy of Moab to have that diversification.

But what that's doing to us is like that we don't have words to support them. So we we're having to be really creative in our approach. So giving us a little bit more something I think like Shay said is like it's there then it's easy for them to go. Um but again we can't con and that's I think your point. We can't contemplate for any given situation but enough language that says oh we haven't contemplate that but here's your path based on where you may be within a particular category. Yeah. That way it's not like making your guys's jobs so exasperating. Clear. That's all this is. We're just selfish at the end of the day. We just want to have our jobs be easier. I need it to be.

You guys are we're making your jobs harder now. Yes. That's really a good way to look at this. This is be hard that absolutely it's plug and play. Theic the levels of interpretation and and administrative change over creating disruptions. That shouldn't be the case. It should the coach should stand enough on its own. Well, I think that this has been a long time coming these. So maybe it will take a little longer,

but if we really do it intentionally and and get it the best that we can because you know how long has it been since it's been done prior to the you know so we so it lasts for years so that you're not like you said always making these exceptions always exceptions. So I think if we do harder work in the long run it'll be easier. So that's how I feel about it. Click it. So, you're gonna give us a copy of your spreadsheet or I will. And yeah, so I think presentation wise it didn't transform well, but I think Email it to me in a in a packet. We'll get you the spreadsheets. U basically

Yeah, the what is and what isn't. Um I think before bed. Yeah, no kidding. It'll put you right to bed. Um but yeah, that's what we're we were kind of contemplating before this is we didn't have time to really fortify that for the packet tonight. So, let's just introduce it. Um, we ended up taking quite a bit of time anyway. But, um, it's a big topic and it's going to and as I'm looking through the code, a lot of the rest the remainder of it is either the attorneys are doing it. Johanna and I are working out policy regulation structures of it.

Um, this is going to be I think your guys first biggest bite of the apple. The second which will be the second chapter or second second half of this uh section will be what regulations we attach to these things. So use regulations. So first establish what all the uses are and then we say what do we need these guys to be doing based on maybe the scales that they have to offset the impacts that they might have. Um

yeah it's going to be really tricky to separate those conversations. Um, so I'll be taking a lot of notes for whatever comes up in our conversation about what uses in their definitions. Uh, whenever something comes up about the use parameters, although those are going to be separate conversations, we'll be sure to capture all your ideas. That's something we discussed last thing I'll say discussed in the code today. I was going to maybe we could hold maybe we don't need to was the whole um use parameter attached to the

Yeah. So AR code's currently structured if you go look at any given zone here's the list of uses and again narrative format not matrix here's the list of uses permitted in this zone and then indents here's if you want a daycare here's all the things you have to do to a daycare use parameter elements of that use um or the use regulations or what if plans like these are the permitted uses and here are the conditions that you have to satisfy to do that use this code proposal and I don't we don't know how we feel about it yet. At least the way the the consultants organized this, which I don't necessarily agree disagree with right off the bat, is basically saying we're going to list all the uses and define them. And then we're going to put what you need to do with them in a totally different section of the code. So they're not married.

That's a bit of a user quandry of when we look at the code, you'll have in this zone, this is the use that's permitted and in this zone, you have to do these things with this use. where we've seen that is like professional offices in the C4 professional offices you have to do X Y and Z in a different zone professional offices you have to do A B and C. Um so when they're organized that way it's a little bit clear more clear to the user this zone has a specific type of professional office and this one has a different one. what we'd be doing in the code organization which I think will have a psychological impact is it's permitted and then you have to go track to a different section of which zone I'm in which regulations will apply

just kind of reverse engineering so it's I think that's what we have to think through of how will the user uh I don't know what the how to say that the user process would be yeah practically making this into a PDF and sending this page permitted uses is what people call probably most frequently. Yeah. About Yeah. Give me the permitted uses. Yeah. And I send them this PDF. I have a property of interest in this zone. What can I do? There you go. Um this would take some here's what's permitted in this matrix and then follow this little asterisk to this section of the code to see what you have to do to do under that use.

Yeah. The county's code currently does that. So, if you're interested in an example, you can go take a look at the county code and try to navigate that. And that's I think as as you as you zoom out, the way the consultants have it structured is where I'm like I don't disagree with that because it's organized in a much more um I think regulatory oriented experience for us could be easier for us and that's why I don't know. I don't know. I don't know

versus like a user where it's narrative based. I think there's some some merits to have something in the narrative organization versus matrix with associated uh offshoots within the code. Well, some sort of hybrid could work too, right? Like the maybe the uses and then a table with the um that was Yes, I I'm right there with you. Me personally, it's it's kind of if you've if they've ever used a matrix from kind of an XY axis, you're getting the information in the middle, but it you have to know what your X and Y searches are. I know which zone I am or I know what use I want.

And then you can kind of find information, but what if what if you don't know those variables? That's where the narrative is helpful. You're basically you're open shopping because we've had people say, "Hey, I want to do a restaurant. Which zones could I do it in?" Well, that's one type of matrix. But if you're like, "Oh, I'm in this zone. What? How do I say it? Somebody knows they want to do a restaurant. They don't know what zones they're in or they know what zone they're in. What uses? What of any of the uses can I shop from? That's a totally different matrix. So having one matrix to capture everything gets you in a bit of a weird search mechanism. Whereas narrative is just it's just there. Um

so we're I've been grappling with that with the consultants. I kind I kind of wanted both because from a regulatory standpoint, the manual is really clean and nice. Um, but from a user standpoint and it maybe it's converse, it works both ways. Was there a way to create like a filter system where it's like I want to filter by zone or I want to filter by whoa maybe they're like all shopping. Yeah, that was what I was going to bring up. the the interactive or something like that if it's not accessible now like certainly it's not on our website through AI and the improvements to technology it should be

like if right now you're saying hey AI you know what what uses or what zones are permit restaurants or eating it'll so if we had something implemented just in the code like that that would be really handy that's something that we're searching about I think that's our software program less of a code organization, more of a software issue. That's really

Yeah, I think in general, while I understand the PL like the case for narratives, I think if the narratives are poorly written or in any way confusing, they cause tons of problems. Whereas a matrix or something like that is really cut and dry and people can learn to use a matrix, but a poorly written narrative is always going to be a stumbling block. So, matrices with some kind of searchability so that you can kind of cut through learning how to connect the squares and instead just search like I am R2 and I want to, you know, like how many housing units can I have on my property of this size. If you had something that could filter through it, you wouldn't need a narrative.

Yep. And I think that you've nailed it. I mean, heard and agree. That is that is it. Um, which is how we're going to I think grappling how to approach it. But that that you've nailed it. Okay, we are exactly at a half an hour if we want to observe that. I mean, whatever you guys want. This was a a big one. So, I think this was a appropriate amount of introduction that give us some time to think. Come back in January. We do have a future agenda item. Yes. Consideration if we want to be done with we're done with land use code for the moment. Uh yes. Let's move on to

Well, we have one more thing before we move on to that. We have 5.3 which is our just our 2026 planning commission agenda. Uh which was the item. Sorry. Yep. That's the one. Yes. Um I have no surprises. A suggested amendment. Okay. Um to help facilitate Amasa's expedient process. Okay. Um January 22nd, we have a regularly scheduled meeting on there. I would like to propose that that be moved to the 29th.

If we Yeah. If we do not change our regularly scheduled meeting, I will likely be coming to you to schedule a special meeting. Got it. So, thought might as well just That's because it won't be ready by the 22nd, but we would like it before our first meeting in February. We have to wait for the city council meeting, but because the month is offset from the first Thursday, one of those we need the DA done before we can act, but our meeting was before the DA. So, so not doing the that's just Yeah, the 29th as of right now works fine for me. Same massive audit that day.

We don't need your schedule, Miles. just Yeah, I should be done. I have a massive state. Okay. Best of luck. I'm looking forward to it. Yeah, I think um I should I should be here. If I'm not I think I'm out of town on the 8th. Really need to pray for me. Yeah, we'll send you a gift basket on the 8th of February. January. Oh. Oh. And that's where so the ETH again that's the first meeting is uh typically canceled because we're having our strategic planning sessions. Okay. So we as council and planning commission we typically skip the first meeting.

Okay. Good. Because I want to be out. Yeah. Carolyn, would the 29th be available? I think I should. All right. Okay. I see a conflict. Not I we ran into this last year but May 28th is graduation of high school. Mhm. So I will not be here. Just you know that. Yeah. Wow. Well, because it's always I know. So it's just one of those days like I can just tell you I won't be there. Me either. Arthur's really advanced. He's be graduating high school next year.

Yeah. Yep. Yep. So just I just know I won't be here that day nor will I be here for either of the marches. But miles that and we can cross those bridges but like like just keep that flag that a few months in advance. I'll let you guys know. I might be getting married like right around April 25th. So like nice. You don't want to get married here in Chambers during I could probably rope open the mayor. No, I really don't. That's awesome. Yeah. And I have a have a sbatical in the summer, too. So, we'll figure all that stuff.

We'll figure that out. Yeah. But yeah, it's it's very flexible. Um, you know, more or less it's the general outline, but we figured this at least very first immediate event that I was like, might as well not do a special meeting. Let's make it a regular meeting. Yeah, let's do that. Okie do. a vote for. Yeah, I think that's that 29th. 29th instead of the 22nd. Okay. Correct. I like it. So that would require amendment uh which the action.

I move that we amend our uh regular meeting schedule for 2026 uh to include a regular meeting on January 29th and cancel the otherwise scheduled regular meeting for January 22nd. I second it. Second from Shaye. Any discussion? All in favor of that change, please say I. I I We have a mile. Amended and posted. I Yes. I mean, you're still on the planning commission. It's not as important for me, but yes,

right now you're still one of us for another five minutes, man. All right. All right. Uh regular meeting schedule amended uh and approved for 2026. Uh next future agenda items we have um uh annexation. Okay. Coming through uh first January meeting we have the um update for the WOOI. Um we have a possible planning commission appointment. if we get anybody. Um and uh

planning commission code updates. Um and I don't have anything else for the first January meeting. Great. Yeah. Cool. Did you get my email, buddy? I did. Sorry. Couple replies. That works. Thanks. All righty, covers it for us. All right. Uh, that said, I will adjourn this final meeting of 2025 at 8:21 p.m. Miles, goodbye forever. Thank you. Good luck.

Good choices. You've been a wonderful addition to the planning commission and we're really really excited every single person for you to represent us on city council and to carry the god gospel What?