City Council - Regular Meeting

Just make sure you don't tax returns. Do you want it like what's this part right here? Audit presentation. You just want to leave it on the flash drive. You want me to copy? Put it on there just by itself. Uhhuh. Should be good. Well, I can fire it up and minimize. Are you first on the agenda? Are you I'm the Well, after Okay. Well, I'll maximize It's down here running. Okay. Really fast, but it's still there. It's only a couple pages. Okay. So, it should be under Which one of these is it? Make sure you Oh, it's a PDF. Just double click it again. It'll bring it back up.

Okay. Yeah, exactly. All right. Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to our city council meeting. We're ready to get going. We had a few technical difficulties, mostly mine. So, we'll go ahead and get started out right in the correct way by having an invocation uh by the Reverend Alex Wilkkey.

Let us pray. Lord God, our heavenly father, in a strange place we're meeting today that we've never been in before. We thank you that these places are being made for us to learn how to get around and do the things that we need to do as we're being servants of the city council and they're being our servants for us. May we each keep our minds solid and our time of commitment to a minimum not to go on and on and on as I have heard people do. Now bless each one of us, the mayor and each member of the city council. And may they remember their their obligations and how much they need and how much time they have to say what they want to dis. and we give you thanks for this all in the name of the Lord our God. Amen.

Amen. Reverend Wilkkey, Reverend remind me you came to St. George in 1961, correct? Yes. 1961. We were talking at the prayer over the city and the first settlers were called to St. George in 1861 the street when I went to some of those prayers and and then the last ones were up here while this building was being built. Thank you for your service to our community. Yes,

appreciate you. We we were talking at prayer over the city that he came in 1961 and I said that's a hundred years after the first settlers came. It's kind of cool. and then reminded to him that uh we've our address here is 61 South Maine. Super cool. So, thank you, Reverend. Thank you. I've asked uh Councilman Steve Kemp to lead us in the pledge.

America, indivisible. Liberty and justice for all.

That's a good idea. Okay, thank you for that. Um, now we don't have any pre-aggenda items, correct, John? No pre-aggenda items. No pre-aggenda items, so we can go right into the consent calendar. Okay. Item number two is the consent calendar. These are administrative items. Staff has reviewed them and recommend approval on all seven seven items. However, if the council would like to remove any of these for specific consideration, staff can accommodate that. Otherwise, we recommend approval. Council, any questions or

I have a couple of real quick questions on items uh D and F. If we can pull those off for just a quick question, I'd appreciate it. I'll make a motion that we approve the consent calendar except for items D and F. Second. So, we have a motion by Steve, second by Natalie to approve the consent calendar with the exception of E and F. D as in dog and F. F dog and fox truck. Awesome. Um, all in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Now, uh item D as in dog.

Yes. Item 2D uh has to do with the widening of UD do. Uh I'm assuming this is the South Bluff widening project. Uh estimated that the entire is it estimated the entire project will be 206 million? No, 200,000. Excuse me. That wasn't what my question was. our work will be this 200,000 net when you when you do the give and take based on what they're going to do for us and we're going to do for them. So this 206,000 is what UD do will reimburse to the city. Um we have two departments uh energy services and water services um desiring work. Some of this project impacted some of the power utilities power infrastructure. UD do is reimbursing the city $26,000 and some change. Um, and energy services is going to do that work. There's some other uh work that you that energy services will be doing beyond that 26,000. It's kind of outlining that agreement, but UDOT will reimburse us the 26,000. The 59,000 and some change is water services work that UD do will be doing on the project that the city will be paying UDOT.

Great. When is this project anticipated to start? I we had a big flurry of activity and conversations about whether first of all whether or not it should even we should be widening South Bluff Street and then the conversation about raise medians etc etc. We heard a bunch from the community members and then everything went quiet. Uh it sounds like they were moving forward with the project with or without our consent. I mean, I know we don't have to consent because it's a U dot highway, but what's going When's this thing supposed to get going?

So, my understanding is they're hoping to get it uh maybe during the summertime. They've been um I'm pro probably getting it mixed up with another project on I-15. Um I think they want to go sooner than that. I'm getting it mixed up with I-15 widening. Um so, Bluff Street, yes, they are wanting to move forward with this. Um I don't have a specific date, but I think within the next couple months they want to they want to bid it out. Um and then a couple months after that is when it would uh start construction. So has the final design been has the design been finalized on the

it's close to I have a KMZ file that goes to Google Earth that I can show you um the medians and the ride ofway and some of the landscaping and stuff that they provided to me in case that came up in the meeting. Um, but I don't think they have uh 100% design plans. Um, they may have 90%. When we do, it'd be great to get that information and uh be able to because I'm getting asked those questions by business owners on South Bluff. What's going on, what's happening here? And so, I'd appreciate that. Thanks, Cameron.

Gotcha. Yeah, that was a question that I had had as well and I had reached out to Cameron on earlier in the week because it has been quite controversial that project and we haven't heard much on it the last several months really to know what was being finalized. So, I know those medians especially are a source of contention and you know it's something that I've I've not advocated for those medians but it sounds like they are making some adjustments to those medians. Is that correct?

Correct. They have made some adjustments. They opened up uh one of the intersections I think it was uh u to open up if you want to see this. Yeah. Might be nice if we could see the drawings. Do you have those? I have uh just a CAMZ file. So, outlines. They're not finalized. Yeah, they're not finalized. I got to put my glasses back on. I was grateful that they shared this with me. Do they not have to share that with you?

Not really. It's you do. Way. They do coordinate with us. Um and I do appreciate that. So they do when especially when it comes to the landscaping UD do would install medians in other places of the state and not install uh landscaping um because of communication they've had with city of St. George. We wanted to try and beautify that south bluff rather than kind of like the north bluff that doesn't have the landscaping in. So do we know what the landscaping looks like?

I have So this will be Main Street and Bluff and I will just try and go up the road a little bit. So this this green is the median and then the yellow striping right next to it. And so you can see where these are supposed to be trees in here on this section of lands on the landscape median. And then as it gets to I have the roadways turned on and do this is uh I'm looking for the name of the road. No kidding.

It's not coming up. Tire pros right here. Big old is it big old tire. Um it opens up for the intersection. You've got the median as it goes forward. You don't have trees right here. Uh you do have bushes and then it opens up again at this intersection. This will be uh I think the signal is at 900 south. This might be 950 south. And then it opens up again for the traffic signal. Can you stop right there and back up a little bit? Sure. So effective effectively for that whole block between 900 or that whole section between 900 and I think that might be eight right or close to it maybe

signal 900 the signal is 900 so then it's south 900 so from that intersection that you got your your mouse on all the way up to 900 there will be no access northbound to any of those businesses on the west Correct. It would be right in, right out through that area. Correct. They can get through the parking lot and get up to the traffic signal. I've done that quite a bit. But, uh, correct. There's no on the Bluff Street. There's no left in or left out right there.

And I assume that all those trees right there in front of uh those businesses are going to be taken out. I believe these trees were being impacted. Yes, they are. I thought they were staying. No, I know they uh from the meeting that they came and spoke with uh you council about uh reducing the amount that they were going to on the curbing, they took that information and moved forward. We had Did we have conversations about what the the pedestrian access along here? Whether whether it was a widened sidewalk or a path or

It is a sidewalk. It is a sidewalk. We did remove the the trail so that we didn't take out as many trees. And then we don't have any landscaping in this one in this. But it is still a raised median. It is a median. Yes. Thank you. And then you get to I think this is 850 south. It it opens up. This is a a potential driveway that they told the developer you can put a driveway in. You can

can um I don't think they have Um, but that was a potential driveway that they could put in. Um, but I don't believe they have. And then you've got some landscaping here. This is just uh uh below Arby's. It's Arby's. Yeah. And then it opens back up. So effectively the that that large the St. George Place project will have one interchange that is full functioning. That being that one right there, 900. Correct. Correct. If they unless they chose to put another driveway in. Thank you.

So, just to clarify, if you want to visit one of the businesses on the west side and you're traveling north on Bluff Street, your option is to flip a U-turn somewhere. Is that going to be allowed to come back to those businesses? They have not told us that they were limiting or limiting U-turns

because I know we heard this. This thing is so loud. I know we heard that. I mean, I was part of that when they did that on the boulevard. It and we heard the Burger King people say that. It is a really a hit to those businesses not to be able to get to that side. you and we have a lot of businesses, food establishments on that side of the street that will make it more difficult for like people coming from my office to get to. But then right now we see on River Road where Sprouts is people are coming almost up to the boulders and flipping a U-turn which is another traffic hazard right there by Bundy Lane. Sorry, maybe the answer or the question I have is after the meeting, can you provide the council members with a contact at UD do for where they should have people send their public comments and their their concerns because I've filled it a ton of them. I know other council members have as well and it sounds like UD do's not I mean, you know, they're they're coordinating so to speak with your office, but but they're not listening to the residents and so I want to be able to tell them who to talk to. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Um Cameron. Well, and I do think sitting in those meetings with you, I do think they made quite a few concessions and tried really hard to work with us on this um while also preserving safety. But I do think that we should ask them to look at the pedestrian flow now that the uh road is open up to Tech Ridge just because that was part of the conversation. If we remove the trail, how are people going to be able to come down off Techridge and access those businesses? And now that that trail from Tech Ridge is open down that new road, um I think most people are actually going to want to use 900. It's what makes most sense if you're coming down off of there walking. Um you're going to want to come down 900 and access those businesses whether you're on a bike or on foot. So just um having them make sure that that pedestrian flow is good because that's part of Tech Ridg's whole goal is to have people use their car less. So,

sure. And I just want to make sure I understand correctly. So, we as the council will have no input as far as the actual approval when they do finalize these plans other than behind the scenes being an advocate for those businesses and residents and having like Councilman Kemp said having residents contact UD do directly. Outside of that, we don't have a lot of decision-making authority. Is that accurate? Correct. Okay.

And and I guess I would say that this is, you know, this is much different than the plan that we originally saw that UD do has worked with us. Originally, they were going to open up and do multiple lanes. They're only striping it for the existing lanes. Um they had far less um cuts within the within the median. they added at least one maybe two additional cuts. They did have a lot more landscaping and so they've reduced the landscaping. Um and so those businesses still have some visibility. Um they also um had a little bit wider of a trail, but they came to the city on on uh reducing the trail and hopefully saving much more trees. Originally, I had I think they had all but maybe 10 trees or cut down about 40 trees, but with this updated plan and making those adjustments, I think they're saving more around half of those trees. And so, UD do has been good to work with the city on several of these items. So, I got to just point that out.

And John, I appreciate that. And I and I remember the original plans and and we have seen significant uh movement from UD do on on being willing to work on some of those issues. Honestly, the the the ability to to do another access uh effectively a full functioning access at 9 I'm not sure if that's 900 or 800 whatever just north of the Red Lion that would drop into the new St. George Place. uh that would probably be the most impactful on the most businesses um especially new businesses. So I appreciate all those things and uh I'm anxious to see the final design.

Yeah, just [clears throat] to echo what was being said in my conversations with you do. Um the question was is there some of these things you can't bend on? He's like, "There's a couple that we can't and it's because safety and their at least from their viewpoint and from their uh data that they have and and a lot of that had to do with the medians and that they save lives and so they just weren't willing to bend on those things, but they did take into consideration a lot of our other concerns." So, I do appreciate that, but it is a UD do rightway. So with that we can

should we do we need to do a motion on that one. Okay. All right. Item 2F. Uh this is a sole source um for the Slick Rock looks like a um steel the structural steel package for Slick Rock substation. One of the items listed in their contract had to do with uh whether procurement policies were waved and if they were first of all were they waved and secondly if they were why were they waved on procurement. Yes. Um one of the the reason we had went with this is to save time on the fabrication bid instead of having to bid out for the engineering and stuff because theobald has already done our substations which are fairly uniform. Mhm.

We wanted to go forward with them because they already have in shop the engineering and stuff to do that and we've worked with them before and um this is what purchasing recommended we do to say go forward with that instead of So this saved us money by not having to re-engineer correct another have somebody else engineer what we already have engineered they can just cookie cutter to the next one. Correct. Okay. Thank you. With that, I'm I'd like to make a motion that we approve items 2D and 2F of the consent calendar. Second. Motion by Steve, second by Natalie for items uh D and F of the consent calendar. All in favor say I. I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Item number three is a presentation of the audited annual comprehensive financial report for fiscal year 2025 and Tiffany will present this.

Good evening, mayor and council. Our financial audit for the fiscal year ended June 30th, 2025 has been completed. Um Steve Partner, audit Steve Palmer, audit partner, is here to discuss the process and answer any questions. Uh while Steve now resides in Leeds, he has lived the majority of his life in St. George. After graduating from Dixie College in SU, he started his 26y year career in public accounting with Hinton Berdick. He specializes in audits of local governments and serves on the firm's governmental practice development group. And he has served as Hintenber's management team for several years. Effective January 1st, 2026, Hinton Berdick merged with Squire, a CPA firm lo located in northern Utah. Built on a shared commitment to exceptional client service, deep community roots, and forward-thinking leadership, the integration unites two firms that share a vision for growth, innovation, and long-term client success. Across the inner mountain west, the combination position Squire Hinton Berdick is one of the largest CPA firms in the state. And although Hinton Berdick's name has changed to Squire, all partners and professional staff in southern Utah have remained unchanged and the city of St. George will continue to receive the same attention, service, and expertise that we have received in the past. And with that, I will bring Steve up here to uh do his presentation. Um, as just a reminder, there's no action needed on this. It's just an opportunity for you to ask any questions.

Thank you, Tiffany. It's a nice introduction. As Tiffany mentioned, effective January 1st, 2026, we did merge with another firm, uh, Squire and Company with offices mainly, uh, in Oram and Salt Lake City. And following the merger, uh, we are now one of the biggest firms in the state. Uh there were several strategic reasons we did this merger, but as Tiffany stated and I would like to reinforce, what will not change is our dedication to provide quality auditing services for the city. All of the partners, professional staff with Hinton Berdick have just transitioned over to Squire. It truly was a merger and not a takeover. So I I truly believe the only difference that you will see going forward is a change in the name. This is just what Tiffany just read. So, we'll skip that. But it is my pleasure to be here uh to report to you on the results of the city's most recent audit. As you know, uh this the city is required to have an audit done for each fiscal year and we have recently completed the fiscal year 2025 audit. Um upon completion of the audit, we issue several reports. Uh the first being the independent auditor's report and it's within this report where we express our opinion on the city's financial statements or if after doing all of our audit procedures we agree that the city's financial statements are materially correct and I'm pleased to report that we issued an unmodified or a clean opinion if you will on the city's financial statements. [clears throat] Excuse me. Governmental auditing standards require us to issue the second report on compliance on internal controls over financial uh reporting. There are a few different categories of findings which could potentially be issued in this report if we discover problems in the entity that we're auditing. I'm pleased to report that we

did not note anything that rose to the level of needing to be reported on within this report. No material weaknesses, no significant deficiencies were noted. We also uh performed an audit of the city's uh expenditures of federal funds. Each year that an entity expends a million dollars or more of federal monies, they have to uh go through procedures which are referred to as a federal single audit. And the federal government gives us the the steps or the procedures they would like us to perform for the grants received by the city. I'm pleased to report that we issued an unmodified opinion on this as well and we did not note any instances of unallowed or questioned costs. We did note one minor finding, a compliance finding in that on a form that the city submitted uh for expenditures on a particular project, the amount of expenditures reported on that form did not agree with the expenditures uh in the city's financial records. And we're going to talk about that a little bit more in just a minute. However, I did want to point out that manages management's response to that finding is in great detail on page 210 of the city's financial statements if you'd like to read that or if the public is interested in reading that. But we'll we'll address that in a little bit more detail in just a minute. Uh the last report that we issued is on the the city's compliance with state requirements. The state auditor's office gives us a compliance supplement that they want us to use which with with each audit and they give specific procedures they want us to perform. Uh we did notice a couple of things uh that that are or findings under these procedures that are required to be reported. Uh the first being uh deficit fund balance. The central business development CDA fund

reported a deficit fund balance and the Tech Ridge CDA also reported a deficit fund balance. Uh the second finding that we had is that the Tech Ridge CDA expend overexpended the budgeted amount and we'll talk about that in a little bit more detail now as well. I also want to point out that more detailed responses are included in the financial statements on pages 210. So, let's look at at these two findings in just a little bit more detail. Uh, the deficit fund balance in the business central business district. You may remember this has been around for a few years now. Uh, a number of years ago, the city purchased a hotel on the boulevard and and and after they purchased that, it created a deficit fund balance. Now that that property has been sold, that deficit has been reduced and the city is continuing to reduce that balance and it's expected uh that it will be eliminated through future revenues. Uh the Techbridge CDA uh reported a deficit fund balance in fiscal year 2025 mainly due to expenditures uh for the new road on the east side of Tech Ridge. And it's also expected that that deficit will be eliminated in future years uh through tax increment and revenues resulting from the Techridge project. for expenditures in excess of budget. The Tech Ridge CDA transferred money out uh to the capital project fund to fund the construction of the new road and due to the timing of when that transfer occurred uh management was not able to get the budget amended in a timely manner and so the it ended up having expenditures in excess of budget due to that transfer to the capital projects fund. And last but not least, the finding with the federal single audit.

Um, that form that that did not agree to the city's accounting records was actually completed by staff of NRCS and they did not have accurate information and the city did not detect that those expenditures were were not accurately reported. The city has since implemented controls to ensure that that that review is made so that expenditures on the form do agree agree to the city's underlying accounting records. So in summary, those were the the significant items that we noted uh during our audit. Overall, a very good audit, a clean opinion in all material respects. I would certainly like to express my thanks to Tiffany and Robert who bear the the brunt of the audit. We ask a lot of questions. We ask for a lot of documents and they're always very accommodating and give us everything that we request so that we can complete our audit. And with that, I will open it up to any questions that you may have.

Question. Okay. I have a question, Steve, about pension liability. Mhm. Um, what is a a healthy pension liability in your opinion? And is that something you advise on over time? Like you're looking when you're doing an audit for us looking out into the future?

Yeah. So, the net pension liability is an interesting thing. It's going to fluctuate every year depending on the demographics of the workforce employed by the city as well as stock market performance and actuarial studies that all go into calculating that net pension liability. The best advice I can give is as long as the city continues to contribute the amounts recommended by URS, the Utah retirement systems, that should provide the resources sufficient to fund that liability. And that's what the city does each year. URS the contribution rates will change depending on what's actually happened and their projections. As long as those contributions are made, the city should have adequate resources to fund the liability.

You're welcome. Any other questions for Steve? Awesome. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Good to see you. Okay. Item number four is a public hearing in consideration of resolution number 2026-00001R to review and approve amendments to the fiscal year 2025 and 26 budget.

Good evening, mayor and council. Tonight's item is to look at three different amendments for your consideration. Um, all three of these amendments uh had accompanying purchases on tonight's consent agenda that the council will uh reviewed and approved. Uh, the first item, and I'll go ahead and walk through these, and if the council has any questions, I'll be happy to address those. The first requested amendment is by our police department to add funding for the conversion of the current vehicle garage at the city commons to a fully operational multi-level storage facility. Uh the police department currently uses multiple locations within the city, including the headquarters, the city commons, and the animal shelter uh storage facility there to store all of their long-term and short-term evidence. Um the city actually went out and looked did an analysis a couple years ago to see how we could address that need because the sto the the demands of the county and uh on maintaining those items is just growing longer and longer. So their their inventory is just continuing to grow. And so we looked at an alternative option of converting a portion of that garage to long-term storage. But what we determined was that only bought them three to five years in in their need. And so we went back and we looked at a longerterm solution. This longerterm solution would buy them 20 to 30 years of inventory and it would also centralize all their inventory in one place within the city commons garage area which help them be more efficient in in managing that inventory. And so staff is requesting to amend the budget in the amount of $680,888 uh for that that purchase or for that that conversion of the that space. Uh funding for this project would come from our general capital project fund fund balance uh to fund that uh conversion. Uh item two is a request from our Sunran division to add funding for the purchase of two replacement transit buses that are at the end of their useful life. Uh, Senate currently operates 15 buses across our eight routes that we offer to the community. Two of those buses are

currently at the end of life, basically uh 500,000 miles. Um, and so we'd request to replace both these buses. The order time for the bus is about 18 months. And so staff uh would request to amend the budget amount of $1,418,78 to make that that replacement. 80% of that purchase would be funded through an FTA grant that we would receive and then 20% of that would be the city's match and we would propose to use the transit sales tax fund to fund that portion of the purchase. And then item number three is a request from our airport department to amend the budget to add funding to retain professional services uh for project management uh related to the terminal expansion project. Uh this consultant would serve the as the city's agent and fiduciary um and help basically help the city control costs and make sure that the project is moving forward and meeting all the critical timelines uh on that project. So staff would request amend the budget in the amount of $150,000 to uh fund that consultant and then funding from this for this request would come from a prior state grant that we received in 2024 of $10 million that would help help fund that and this would be the fund phase one portion of that project um through through completion of design of terminal expansion. With that there's three amendments. I'd be happy to answer any questions the council may have.

Any questions for Robert? I just have a comment. Um, I had made a request of Mark that you all saw over this 680,000 because I saw that the bids the way that the bids looked, they looked drastically different. Um, and so Mark sent all of us the the bid request information. Sometimes when you see bids come in and they look drastically different, it's because the bid request uh wasn't thorough enough. Um, but that wasn't the case. So, I just wanted to report that the bid request was actually really fantastic. It was very thorough. So, I think the only reason why the bids that came in looked so different is just simply because the contractors structured them differently. So, just wanted to share that. I just had a couple questions on Suntran, which Robert and I emailed a little bit earlier in the week, but I just wanted to clarify because I had asked how many passengers are riding it annually. And so it was 372,000, a little over that passenger trips. And so by passenger trips, does that mean that there were does that actually count the number of people or is that just how many trips the bus I mean the buses will take the trip regardless of if anyone's on there? Correct.

So that's counting every time somebody boards the bus. So that is an actual boarding of the Okay, perfect. Yeah, because something and we've talked about in the past is, you know, does it make more sense to do more micro buses? Do we need these large buses? Do we have the usage to justify the millions, you know, that we're putting in? So, I think that's just always something that we need to be looking at for sure.

Yeah, I agree with that. I think that's something we need to keep talking about because, you know, you have to balance. You have a bigger bus, but then you only have one driver. You get smaller micro um mobility and you have to have more drivers. But in a lot of places that microobility does make better sense. So it's definitely a conversation for us to keep having.

Well, I'm happy to report on that. We hired our new transit manager uh later last year and we've actually been working on an RFP for our service study. And so we're planning to come to the council in February to have a discussion on uh the goals that the council has for that service study so that we can move forward with determining if there are other options of service that we need to provide to help us be more efficient. If Um, so we're we're looking at that and we're trying to move forward with that request. Perfect. Any others?

Thank you, Robert. With that, we'll go ahead and This is a public hearing, so we'll go ahead and open the public hearing for those who have come to speak to item number four for the review and approve amendments to the fiscal year 202526 budget. Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing, council, and come back to you for your consideration. Mayor, he is I'll make a motion that we approve resolution number 2026-001R to um approve the amendments to the fiscal year budget 202526.

I'll second motion by Danielle, second by Steve. Uh this is a resolution requiring a roll call vote starting with Steve. Steve Kemp I. Natalie Larson I. Danielle Larkin I. Michelle Tanner I. Motion carries unanimously. Item number five. Consider approval of ordinance number 2026-00001 to amend the Green Valley Mall and Professional Plaza PDC permitted use list generally located at the corner of Val Valley View Drive and Dixie Drive. And Brian will present this item.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. So, just as John said, this is the Green Valley Mall and Professional Plaza. Again, this is at the corner both corners um of Valley View Drive and Dixie Drive. The PL professional plaza is on the north side of Valley View Drive and then the Green Valley Mall on the south side. Current land use is commercial. Current zoning is PDC. This PDC was an was originally approved in 1984 with the approved use list of the AP uh use list. Just a reminder as for the AP and the C1s, they're usually much smaller commercial developments, usually surrounded by residential zones. Um just trying to limit the impact on those residential zones around them while also providing um conveniences and other services. So again, 1984 this AP use list. Later in May of 85 was this commercial C1 which was added to the use list there. And then the applicant is proposing these three retail uses. Antique shop, used furniture, and then thrift shop secondhand store consignment with that no storage or no deliveries outside of business hours. Um, with that, I can answer any questions that you may have. And one of the owners and the applicant is here as well if you have any questions for them.

Brian, that was my question. I did some research on the ownership of this property and it doesn't look like the applicant uh Old Gold Enterprises is either of the owners. Is this a tenant? Yes, it's going to be one of the tenants is that's making applicant. Do they have the approval of the owner?

Yeah, they've talked to both owners both for the professional plaza and the Green Valley Mall. They were both involved as to what was going to be added on the use list. Um yet they kind of know what's going on. I noticed that they they you it was all owned by the Lemlleys at one time and then they sold the larger section to a group out of California. Um real the other question is um that's a there's quite a few little shops in that area. Um I drive by it every day. I'm s why if we're going to go through I I now knowing that it's a tenant that was the applicant that all they wanted to do is make sure that their use got added. I think that we in the future may want to look at at we're going to do these amendments to these PDCs, maybe adding a few more uses. Uh because I know that that center has struggled only being able to do restaurants and you know that that very small list uh and those types of neighborhood uses are needed in that area as this is one of the few commercial nodes on the west side. Yeah, that is something that we brought up to the applicant is to involve the owners and make sure they communicated with the owners, go through all the commercial uses and see if there was any addition anything any additions they wanted to make to it. Um, they did add they actually only had antique store and used furniture store. They added the consignment portion as well. Um, I think there was maybe a little bit of caution there saying, "Hey, make we don't want to do anything too drastic and they still kind of wanted to make sure that they got their uses approved." And so I think that's why it kind of came back to came back to those three. But you're right, it was definitely

and and I'm not being critical of their use. I I appreciate their use and and I know that these um thrift stores or or used furniture stores have are very popular right now. Uh I have my children that I ask them what they did that day and they said they went thrifting. I'm like, "What does that mean?" So I know there there's a need for them. Um, but I am concerned about the uh the storage of of used uh clothing and and goods and furniture and things like that outside. Is there any regulations about that stuff needing to be stored inside?

So, I think that's kind of where that one portion comes in where it talks about no outside storage. I think that's where that comes in. I think really the business is closed. It's more talking about the deliveries and then obviously the no drop off items during hours. the business is closed. All of our all of our secondhand or thrift stores have that same uh requirement. Yeah, this is a use that's pulled directly from the commercial uses. So yeah, same verbiage. Thank you. Any other questions for Brian?

Okay, thanks Brian. Come back to you for your action. I will make a motion that we approve ordinance number 2026-00001 to amend the Green Valley Mall and Professional Plaza PDC permitted use list generally located at the corner of Valley View Drive and Dixie Drive. Second motion by Michelle, second by Natalie. Uh, this is a ordinance requiring a roll call vote. Starting with Michelle. Michelle Tanner I. Danielle Larkin I. Natalie Larson I. Steve Kemp I. Motion carries unanimously.

Item number six, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-00002 amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from AVI, ASVP, and open space to C2 on approximately 27 acres generally located directly north of Southern Parkway at approximately 2600 East.

Okay. Thank you, John. Um, yes, this is the location. You see Southern Parkway here on the um on the map. Um, outlined in red is are the properties. Um, the land use is part of the um Desert uh Canyons PD. And then the zoning map shows the various zoning that they are currently zoned. Um, again, the AVI, the ASBP, and the open space. Um [snorts] they are currently in the middle of um moving um building flowers way and that is going right through um through this these properties. Um in fact isolating a piece of this open space but also kind of creating a what would appear to be kind kind of a pad that could naturally be used for some sort of um construction or some kind of building. Um so the applicant is proposing uh let me this um that they that they go to a C2. This would allow them to um expand their uses. Um the the ASBP that and the ABI are are um a little more restrictive and they um they'd like to just have a little more flexibility. That's why they're asking for this. Um, one thing a lot of um maps in here. Uh, one thing that um we wanted to make sure is that if if they that open space is taken away that we're not taking something that was required through the through either their development agreement or their um their zone plan um because they are required to dedicate or um or to uh set aside uh certain

amount of open spa space with each project that they do. So if you have a a single family development that requires them to set aside some open space. So we'd want to make sure that if we took that open space away here that that would not uh reduce them lower than what they are required to give. So um we went through that analysis. We sat down with the applicant uh their their zone plan. We looked uh with with the uh with our legal team um and we um and and where we landed was that they are actually approximately as of the last time that they donated approximately 30 acres almost 31 acres over what they're required to give. So by removing this uh three or so acres um they would not dip below that required open space that they're uh required to have. So, just wanted to make sure that that was understood. Um, [clears throat] and again, here's the this is the applicant submitted this, but this is the um current zoning, and this is what they are proposing to go to C2 on all all three of those um uh pieces that the Flowers Way would bisect. So um with that planning commission held a public hearing and they recommend approval with a six to zero vote and if you have any questions the applicant is here or I can try to answer those as well.

I guess my question is so in the narrative it said they were trading the open space so that's not the case anymore because they're you're saying they're 30 acres over on their open space or are they still trading it? So when when we go back to this slide, um they will need to reduce that 30.772 by that three um three or so acres that they are taking out of their open space. So So it's not a trade. They're just reducing. Right. That's fine. I just wanted to make sure that we have that correct because the narrative does say they're trading it.

I have a question for Dan. Yeah. Um, one of the items in the C2 zone is the uh it it automatically has an allowable height of 50 feet for facilities. Um, this piece of property is in direct line of the airport uh approach or takeoff and I wanted to find out if you had done any calculations on the elevation change between these parcels on both sides of Flowers Way and the air the runway to and and then if you've had any conversations with Dustin, make sure we're in compliance with the FAA. Uh most of the properties out there where we're put into AVI or this other zone, one of those requirements was that they have a height limit,

right? Yep. So when in the ASBP and I believe the AVI is the same way, they're required to as part of their site plan review get approval from the FAA. It's a part I I can't remember the the number, but it's a it's a an approval from the FAA basically. Um and um so we did look at that and we did talk to Dustin um uh because there was some concern would that um would that be too high and uh after after we went back and forth um Dustin felt like that would not that it wouldn't interfere with with the airport's requirements and so forth. So

do you know how much elevation change there is? I mean, I can see the the rings on the topo map. Uh, but I, you know, they're too small to count. Have any idea what the elevation is? Maybe that's something the applicant can answer if you can't. Yeah, he might he might be able to answer a little better, but let me show you this right here. That's kind of a bluff and there's there's a lot of um there's some biking trails up there and so forth. Um, so this is the bottom of that. Um, and so I I believe and and maybe Kirk can add on to this, but any building which could go up to 50 feet would sit below that bluff, I believe. But if you want

Yeah, that's off. May council Kurt Gordon with Desert Canyons. So the area that we're talking about the the closest to the runway is about a mile and a quarter south of the runway and it's roughly a 100 feet below the elevation of the runway. And so if you put together the conc surface, which is a one foot in elevation per 100 feet, that that the FAA would allow you to build, you'd have to have 150 foot tall building in this area before you would violate FAA. Before you'd have to go talk to the FAA. So we we don't have any plans like that.

Thank you. I just want to make sure we had looked into that. Thank you, Kurt. Any other No. If there's no other questions, I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve round number six. Right. Um, ordinance 20226-002 amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from AV airport vicinity industrial air airport supporting business park and open space to C2 highway commercial on approximately 27 acres generally located directly north of the southern parkway at approximately 2600 east with um recommendations by staff that he'll need to submit fully designed site plan and comply with all the requirements of C2 zoning at the time of development.

I'll second the motion, but I do have some discussion.

Well, last item. Um, that the top of that messa that Kurt just mentioned is a it's a mountain bike trail, I believe. I I can't remember the name of it. H Pushing Tin. Yes. How will this development ultimately impact that mountain bike trail if at all? Um, and you know, will it benefit or or hurt that? So you can see that the mountain bike trail basically follows the wash that's to the east of the OS zone right there. And that'll stay in place. We've actually built under under Flowers Way a covert that's big enough to have, you know, you can it's 9 ft tall, so you can that trail will continue and connect on to that uh Pushingington open space.

Great. I appreciate that. I know that that mountain bike trail was built at significant expense by I believe Desert Canyons, so wouldn't want to see that go away. So the No, we'll I'm fine with the I've seconded the motion. Any further discussion? If [snorts] not, we have a motion by Natalie and a second by Steve. This is an ordinance requiring a roll call vote. Starting with Steve. Steve Kemp, I. Natalie Larson, I Danielle Lin, I. Michelle Tanner, I. Motion carries unanimously.

Item seven, consider approval of ordinance number 2026-00003 amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from RE 12.5 and G&G to PDNZ on approximately 49.3 acres generally located on the east side of Highway 18 between 4100 north and 4400 north.

All right. Um site is located just John just said on uh highway 18. Uh you have 41 4100 4200 north here. So 41 would be about the southern boundary and then 4,400 north up on the top here. Um this is adjacent to um project on the uh the north um property and and other property that has not that is looking at doing some some other development down here to the south um and um but is currently undeveloped. land use map calls for uh properties designated low density residential and general plan. Um one thing to note with the PDT and Z is that it's explicitly compatible with the with this design. So so really it's no uh there's in the code it doesn't require a general plan amendment um for the for this for a TNZ. Um the [clears throat] zoning map calls for is is RE 12.5 and um gravel and grazing says uh M&G, but I think that that's a carryover from old from an old designation. Uh it's gravel and grazing. Um the context map this this is uh showing surrounding uses include uh planned residential neighborhoods, public lands. uh SR18, sorry, north is to the left, just to orient yourself. Um project is designed to transition appropriately between the ledges up here on the north and then future um future land uses here on the on the south as well. You can see that they've stubbed in their design all their their roads going into those different um either potential projects or um or even into uh

some of the property that is owned by that is owned privately and currently um homes access off of. So they've they've tried to lay it out in such a way that that it will um it will comply with with future uh development standards and so forth. So, um, land use plan. This is kind of the meat and potatoes really of what they want to do. Um, it includes 300 to 380 total dwelling units. One thing with the, uh, PDTNZ, which I should explain, we we only have one of in town actually, and it is, uh, Desert Color. And so, this is this isn't Desert Color, but it has some of the same elements that desert Color was required to comply with. So, um, one of which is there's two subcategories of this zone. There's an NG subcategory and an NE, which means neighborhood general or neighborhood commercial or neighborhood uh edge, sorry. Um, and um they they have opted to go for the neighborhood general over the entire property. Um, the neighborhood general is typically smaller lots. Um, one thing that you should also note though that this is really designed to be a single family zone. So, there's a requirement that um that there's at least 50% of the of the uh units would be um would be single family and so they're meeting that at 54% or 204 single family homes. Um there are commercial elements, there are multifamily elements, there are duplexes, uh forplexes, uh threelexes, um as well. And so you see that the density kind of is more up here towards the front. U these would be probably

some apartments. Um but you have triplexes, um kind of a mixeduse, live work situation. And then here you'd have uh commercial uses as well. But as you go out both to the south, to the uh to the east, and to the north, you get into um just the single family homes. So that's that's really kind of the and again just want to point out that they are stubbing into these properties for future development. Civic space. This is um another requirement of the PDTNZ zone. they are uh required to have at least 5% uh in the NG um category uh for civic space. They are providing 8.4%. They're also required required to have it centrally located. So they've provided um several spaces throughout here. POS um uh greens and then this is kind of the big one here and then also this one up by the uh up by the um commercial and uh mixed use uh areas. So there are several civic spaces throughout the the uh throughout the community and um so they're meeting that requirement as well. Tree planting is another thing that is covered in the in the design guidelines for um for the TNC zone. They're showing this is a typical um what a typical um street would look like as far as their tree plantings setbacks. [clears throat] Excuse me. This is uh they have the various types of of units here. Um, again, town homes, um, uh, apartment, 12 plex, uh, 12pex plex splats, uh, twotory town homes, duplexes, then your detach product and your live work, um, as well. And, um, and the so these are the various

setbacks. We can go over any of those if you want. Um, or we can come back to them as, as we kind of go through this as well. But, um, that's what they're proposing. [clears throat]

zoning code requirements. So, the there's two things that we looked at um with the with this project. TNZ design guidelines. There's actually a manual that was produced that that um kind of um guides how the how the uh project will develop and then there's also the zoning code. So that zoning code states that they have that they need to meet not only the zoning guidelines but also the development manual. So, they've gone through um and in your packet was um their zone plan that they're proposing and um as we've looked at the zoning requirements, the zoning code requirements um it appears to meet all the requirements um there in we've talked about most of these the mix of forums, the the NG civic and the civic space uh the integration how it will integrate with properties um around it. Um and then this is the architectural design guidelines and I won't go through every one of these. Um [clears throat] but um just know that gone through these um we want to make sure that uh all these are being complied with um and they have again in their in their uh zone plan outlined uh c um guideline by guideline how they will comply with with all these uh standards. the parking requirements. [clears throat] Uh again, don't want to go over every one of these, but if you have any questions about um about the uh the parking, um one thing that is interesting about this one is that there will be on street parking, and on- street parking is actually encouraged in the TNZ uh the PDTNC zone. Um because it's more walkable and so forth, we want to have things that will slow traffic

down. Uh, one of those being um on street parking. So in and that's that is um unique to the PD TNC zone. We typically don't allow to count for um on street parking but um in this Can I interrupt you for a minute, Dan? Yes, sir. I've had I looked through the packet and I there was the road width the road the width of these roads was I I couldn't get clarity on that. Are you going to be covering that in another part of your your presentation? I I hadn't. And uh Wes, did you want to talk about that a little bit? The the roads.

I did meet with development solutions. We kind of went over the road layouts to make sure because the property to the south has submitted a plan, you know, we've looked at and their road layout. So, we wanted to make sure that the two are going to interface together. You're talking about the former trails project. Yeah. Uhhuh. And they were involved in but not the individual properties that are wedged between them.

Those were it was the trails and theirs and also to make sure the snows and that all had access. And so we went over that to make sure. And as I recall, we did talk about this has been a while. So, um, as I recall, we did talk about the road widths and that they did meet a city standard, but we'll have to verify that. What city standard? We've got road widths here that are 106 feet wide and 35 ft wide. I'm I'm very This is the only issue I have with this project. I love it. I think it's a great project. I'm super excited to see it happen and I'm thankful for the developers for bringing it forward and being willing to to do something different. But the road width and the access that those those large lots how they will access their properties and the width of the road especially with on street parking is the only concern I have. So, and again, I yeah, it's been a while since I sat down and went over this with them, but I believe they like we have a 45 foot uh rideway, a 50- foot rideway, and we are looking at maybe narrowing one more um that we talked about for uh town homes because sometimes when you have town homes, they're actually because of the driveways it creates, there is no parking on the road. And so, we, you know, we're still looking at that as we go through the standards. Um, and I think that they have met that knowing that we are hopefully coming forward with that as far as um a little narrower cross-section for town home type projects.

So, we don't know. I think it's I mean to me it's it's a question of, you know, are we going to allow road widths that make sense for TNZ for the walkable neighborhood, which is what Dan was presenting. regardless of what that road width is, it has to be wide enough for people to drive down it. So regardless, they're gonna have access.

Correct. So in a TNZ, in the design manual, there's a specific road width that is different than what our code requires. And so in a residential road, you're going to have there's a 50 there's a 55- ft residential, but the crosssection is 14t and 14t. So you actually have 28 feet of asphalt, curb, gutter, planter, and sidewalk. And so your cross-section in a TNZ is different than what it is in the other code because the idea is you're going to have narrow streets, you're going to slow down traffic, which encourages safe pedestrian um walking. And so it's just the TND TNZ is a different uh a different type of project than what you see in other areas,

which I encourage and I and I'm excited again for this. But if you've got 20 ft of asphalt and you've got on street parking, you're going to lose at least 15 feet. You're going to have a 5-ft section of asphalt left. No. So you're going to have in your 55 foot, which is your local residential screen. And it depends on, you know, how the classifications are. You're going to have 28 feet of asphalt. And so if you have parking on each side, what's a parking? You figure 8 ft. And so then you are going to have, you know, whatever the remaining is of of 16 minus 28 west 12 12 12 feet of of drive drive aisle

between the two. So two cars couldn't pass. It would be and I'm okay with the concept of what's going on here. I just want to I know that we've got right adjacent to this property to the south, we've got some large property owners who have arenas and they have, you know, big horse trailers and big doulies and other things like that. And this is going to be their only access to their property because the road that's already there is going to be absorbed into this project. And so that's during your I mean that's your local residential street. There are other collector there are a whole other segment of different roadways. So it depends on how that's classified on what the whisk going to be.

So is this are we using the 55 local residential? Is that what those those roads will be? Yeah, that's that's the one that John was referring to. So there's also a 70ft mixeduse commercial, a 70 foot. And so we need to look at those roadways and determine if they've classified them the appropriate cross-section based on what the use is.

Sure. And and again I everything about the project I really enjoy or I encouraging and I like to see and I'm and I appreciate these guys being willing to step out of the mold so to speak and do this. But there's already an existing road. I think it's even labeled 4230 north that comes off and goes to these other properties and maintaining that access so that they are able to access those three or four parcels that they have their residential homes that they live there and they use those. I I say my only concern is that we're not cutting off or so severely limiting their ability to get down that road

that they have if we're we're only talking about 12 feet total. Was that right? If we what was it 28US 12 or 28 - 16? So 12 feet total. And and that neighbor actually came to the public hearing. um the one that lives here and and voiced that same concern. And I don't want to put words in the applicant's mouth. He's here. If he wants to hear from the applicant about what they see here because I'm I I I have one other question about the and I'm sorry for interrupting your presentation. This this was the the only

the only fly in the ointment to me. So that's why I did. No problem. Um the other concern was the the road adjacent to that property going to the south. Is it the intention that they're going to put in the full road width uh and then have a small narrow strip of property that they own to the east of that road? Right. I'm not totally sure that all we want right then. Again, we were just making sure at that point that they were connecting. So, we didn't really discuss about what they were going to do. I can see that remnant piece right there on that east side of that. Yeah.

I I just want to under Maybe again, maybe these are applicant questions. So, I'll let you finish your your presentation and we can ask those. Sure.

And I won't take too much more time. Um these are just some examples that they put in their zone plan of what they felt like they could um what they wanted to provide. These won't be exact. Um u but but it gives you kind of a flavor of of the type of um housing that will go in there. Um and then this the attached town homes smallcale multifamily um and then the some details on the commercial as well. So the recommendation planning commission uh recommends approval of the application for Rusty Cliff Zone Change with these conditions that the number of units associated with the project is limited to 380 as shown. Uh that there's preliminary plat submitted for review and approval. Um that any units, [clears throat and cough] excuse me, or group of units that are not single family will have to come back for your review as a PD amendment.

Tan, can I ask you a question on that one in particular? Yes. Why is that necessary? Um that seems redundant. Typically when we get a PD um like a we we have full elevations drawings that kind of thing and we don't have that with this. Um so just like desert color they come back with pretty much any neighborhood that has any sort of um multif family element to it. Same same idea. But isn't that already in our code? If you're building a TNZ neighborhood, why do we need to add that? That's it's just redundant is all I'm saying. Right.

I would agree with I would agree with that. We specifically mentioned as in the different sections of the TMZ zone that we what what we're looking for that we can't you know mass and scale and those kind of things. If you're comfortable with them do with them uh you know working with staff on those kind of things and us making sure that the all the guidelines are being met and they're they commit to that. That's certainly something that you can I just think that one of our goals has been to reduce redundancy and additional reviews on top of reviews if they're not necessary. And where we've already got the TNZ spilled out so distinctly, it doesn't make sense to me to add an additional redundancy to make it more complicated for the developer.

That's definitely a a condition that could be eliminated if that's what you'd like to do. What what that does is it puts the burden on staff to ensure that it's complying with the code opposed to coming in front of the city council um to look at the design. I don't have a problem with keeping it in just for councils down the road if this takes a while to build out for them to have that consistency and to lift that off staff then us come back and say we don't like it. Does the code now um does the code now require the multif family to come back to the city council? Would this be a deviation from the code?

Um, the code, yes, actually the code requires for PDs that um that they that they come back for that they get that they when they turn in a PD um such as this that they would have a full elevations uh concept landscape plan, concept site plan. Now, we have this concept landscape and site plan. What we don't have really, the only thing we're really missing here are the elevations. Um, but that is in the PD. That is a PD, a requirement of PD.

Has the applicant given us a sample of what the elevations would be and would that suffice to meet that um that requirement? These are these are the samples that they gave us. Um, I'm trying to remember. I I guess question to the applicant. Would they be comfortable? And I'm assuming they're not being comfortable with these elevations being applied across the project. That's what I assume. Okay.

Well, I guess that's not maybe I'm not stating my point effectively, but to me, we created these like the TMZ zone. We created it so that it would speed up these processes, right? So people could do creative things and then it would we also want to speed up the processes. So adding that additional um review does it just seems redundant to me. And I think like these example elevations um I think I'm just trying to think in my mind is there a way that this could suffice that requirement in the code. And looking at the applicants um nodding his head I think he'd be concerned with being limited to these specific elevations to meet the code. And so,

so, so basically, I guess maybe I'm not understanding because I I think that they would have had to come back anyway the way that it's written in our code. Correct. So, the code requires all the elevations to be approved. They did submit some sample elevations. I think if the applicant was okay building to these sample elevations, I think you can make an argument that it meant that portion of the PD ordinance. But in sense they're not completely satisfied with, unless I'm misspeaking, Stacy, not satisfied with those examples, um then you'd have to come back and get additional elevations approved. But do you but um planning commission added this as an additional requirement

when it's already part of the code. So why do we have to have that added as an additional requirement? I don't think it I don't think the code needs to be clarified as part of a condition because they're required to comply with the code regardless if that condition was in place. So that could be removed.

So back to the road, do we ever determine what the width of the road was based on the what I was provided? Looks like it's 55 ft. the residential street section with 28 feet of asphalt total. Is that correct? Yeah. That and that is the road that will replace the existing road 4230 north that comes directly off of the roundabout. The roundabout is what comes off of the frontage road. Yeah.

Yeah. And we would have that same road width on the on the road that right now they've got a little strip of asphalt that comes south. That that road that effectively lines up with that would also be 28 ft total of asphalt with the ability to park cars on both sides on street parking. There could be there could [clears throat] be areas right around that, you know, that um right here that may that we u don't allow parking in that exact area. Steve Yeah. What if you just made part of the motion that on that particular street because it's access for those lots and it's it's peculiar, right? like it's different that there's parking on only one side of the street through that section.

They have to sign it. You could make that a condition that they that they can only park on one side of the street. Yeah. Or there's just no parking in this this intersection. Um and we can we [clears throat] can work with the applicant. Does that will that work with the because we are including on street parking. Will that work? Will that work for the applicant? I think that'd be hard for us to enforce in a residential neighborhood to have no parking for single family on one side. Yeah, cuz you you you'd have to it'd be like you're having a red curb in front of your house. I think that'd be probably

Can we do it around the actual intersection where that's where you're going to have the biggest issue with things like horse trailers and other types of trailers making that, you know, we do that in downtown that'd be easy that'd be easier to enforce. You know, usually it's 20 ft from a stop sign anyways where you're not able to park. And so that may naturally um I think it may be easier to make sure the sweep is correct on that intersection than it would be to limit the parking. Okay.

Yeah, that that was that was my original intention was just around that that curve on that one particular intersection. So on this particular in this case, it's where the road curves and comes to the south. Um it only affects one lot on the east side of the road. Yep. right here.

The the applicant may have something to say about about that as well if he you want to come up. He's been itching to you the whole time. I know. Come on up, Stacy.

Yeah, you guys know me. Okay. Uh Stacy Young um representing this uh this item and I love to hear myself speak. You guys know that. Um yeah. No, I think we'd be absolutely happy to to um uh prohibit parking on as much of this as you're comfortable as would make you comfortable. Um in this type of neighborhood, we we welcome on street parking, but in fact, I don't think it's going to be heavily utilized. We still will be providing a ton of off- streetet parking with the alley loaded garages and and so forth. So, it's not going to be in high demand and so if it will make you more comfortable to remove some that that won't be a problem. Does it make sense what I'm saying about with 28 feet of asphalt and you lose 16 of those feet to parking on either side that you're looking at a 12 foot piece of asphalt that you'll actually know and be guaranteed you'll have access to drive down

on any particular time that and and that being a concern to to the rest of the project. these people know what they're getting into, but to the fact that there's already an existing road there and we're going to be absorbing that road into the project. I appreciate that you've you've designed it in such a way to give access to those parcels and uh and and keep those to maintain that access for those those individuals. I think there's only three homes, correct? Three land owners. Yeah. So, I would Yeah. In fact, I think there's actually only two homes. The rest are just arenas. Yeah. I thought the third parcel had a home on it.

Yeah, though. You might be right. Anyway, can you talk here? But yeah, I think the rest are just a react. And then when these people, who knows what when the next generation what's going to happen to that roughly 20 maybe 25 acres that's sitting there. Uh, and it is being wedged in between your project and the and the uh, former trails. I don't know what it's being called now or what. I know another group bought it. So, I I just I don't want to land get these people get stuck and not be able to get out of their properties. And I think with if that's something we can work on for sure

down. I think Gay and Lee are the only two folks that actually live there as far as I know. Excuse me. Uh Gay Bowler here and Lee Snow here I think are the only two actual residents. The rest are and and you've got roads that push to both of those into those. The one coming down I so I appreciate you designing it that way. Yeah. And I think they actually will get bigger, but they'll have 16 feet of cars on either side of them. So potentially. Yeah. Okay. Thanks, Stacey. Other questions? Any other questions for Stacy? All right. Thank you. Thanks.

All right. Any other discussion questions? That was a good 29m minute discussion. Good good questions. Yeah. What What was the reverend's prayer? [laughter] No, those were all good questions. Thank you. I am ready.

All right. I'll make a motion that we approve item number seven, ordinance number 2026-00003, amending the city zoning map by changing the zone from RE 12.5 and G&G on approximately 29 or sorry 49.3 acres to PDNZ and um accepting the planning commission's recommendations except for striking recommendation Number three. What page of the packet is that on? The recommendations are Sorry, my page numbers actually aren't showing.

Okay, I see it. Never mind. It's in front of us. Page seven of the of um item seven. I'll second motion. So, we have a motion by Danielle, a second by Michelle. Um this is an ordinance requiring a roll roll call vote starting. Can we have discussion on the motion? if you would like discussion. Absolutely. Really quick discussion. Would you consider amending your motion to include the the request that the developer u be willing to work with the uh existing land owners, specifically the the snow family where you have to make that turn uh on making sure that they have correct radius or enough radius to for large trailers.

Yes, we can amend the motion. Thank you. Are you okay with that, Michelle? Okay, so we have an amended motion. Everything you need. Okay, go ahead. I was just making sure Dan. Okay, clear, Dan? All right, so we have amended motion by Danielle and a second by Michelle. This is an ordinance requiring roll call vote. Starting with Michelle. Michelle Tanner. I Danielle Larkin. I Natalie Larson. I Steve Kempai. Motion carries unanimously.

Item number eight, consider approval of a conditional use permit for a new cell tower on an approximately 4,000t site located at approximately 1,0001 East White Dome Drive.

All right. This is a site. Um you have the Career Tech High School here, uh River Road off to the far right and um White Dome Drive accessing the property right next to the new uh LDS seminary building. Um right there, this is this is there's some topography to this. You kind of come up this way and then it's uh there's some hillside over here, but uh this is the 4,000 square ft right next to that again that seminary building property uh that they're proposing. Um land use map is PD and I believe that's part of the desert color PD and then the R110 uh zoning map uh currently. So, um, the reason they are before you is because any if they wanted to do a a tower 50 feet or less, they wouldn't have they they could just do that by right. Um, once you hit that that 51st foot uh up to 100, um, but they have to apply for a conditional use permit. Um, that gives you the discretion to look at it. Are there any conditions? Really, conditional use permit is is a permitted use, but what kinds of conditions that need to be or are appropriate for the site in order to uh stave off any sort of um uh ill effects that this use might bring. So, that's why there before you code requires a conditional use permit. Uh you can see it's per it's in the R110 zone again. Um this [clears throat] is a look at the site. uh closer up version shows uh cell tower

here. There will be some uh buildings and areas for uh equipment as well. Um 100 ft is what they are proposing. the antenna does go to a little higher height um of 105 feet, but the um uh but the actual tower itself is 100 ft tall. They're proposing the ones that one of the things that we talked about at the planning commission, the applicant said um that they were okay with the changing. By the way, the applicant couldn't be here tonight because of a conflict with another site that um that he had to go to another meeting, but um wanted to proceed. But um this this fencing, they're proposing a vinyl fence. As we know, vital fences don't do super well here. So that's why you have a condition um that it be a masonry fence. That that's actually what's required in the code um as well, six foot high masonry fence around this site. So, uh, they were okay with that. Um, but, um, so that's one thing to keep in mind as well. Um, this is just a little bit closer look at the the proposed tower. Uh, there will be colllocating. If you if you've spent time down in Desert Color, you know that uh achieving a good signal down there can be a challenge. So, this will help with that. it won't take care of it 100% but the applicant says that they're they have another site in the desert in desert color that they're working on as well to get better coverage of that whole area. So um that [clears throat] is what they are proposing and here's that fence that I mentioned as well. Um, so you have conditions. Um, with that, the planning commission recommended approval with the

conditions. Um, and if you have any questions, I'm happy to answer those. Any other questions for Dan? One quick one. Um, so they'll be able to put four different RAD centers, meaning four different providers on this if they needed to at 100 ft. Yeah. Did the land owner, the school district sign off on this application? Yeah. My Yes. Mine. Okay. Okay. I don't have that right in front of me, but yes. All right. I'm ready to make a motion. Then just one more question. Does our code cover the aviation lighting on these types of towers?

Um, not for the cell tower specifically, but they will they'll have to comply with any standards that uh you know, any kind of aviation standards. But so if we're allowing it to be 100 feet, we don't need to have that be in they have to go through communications uh approval and all that all those kinds of stuff. Uh all those kinds of things. So um so our but our code doesn't specifically require that with it being down there by the airport. I don't I just was curious. They put the condition on. Will you add that condition, sir?

Sure. I'm ready to make a motion. If there's any questions, go ahead. I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number eight u which is ordinance [clears throat and cough] actually just a cup for the new cell tower on approximately 4,000 foot site located approximately 101 East White Dome drive with the planning commission's um conditions included in the motion as well as the requirement that they uh provide red aviation uh notification lighting on the top of the tower. Second

motion by Steve, second by Natalie. Roll call. Okay. Yeah, I don't It's been a while since we did a conditional use. Um, all in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Here we are. Uh, I don't have any appointments uh reports, Steve. No reports.

Stumble is moving forward. We're going to We've seen a lot of activity with earthwork this last couple of weeks. By the end of the month, we're going to start to see some concrete poured and it's going to get really exciting for everybody, but we're on schedule.

Yeah. I just wanted to share um an hour ago we did a life-saving award, our police department did for three of our officers. All three of them saved people who had um cardiac arrest. And it made me super emotional because I had that opportunity to be saved by someone a few years ago and I just got lucky and and I got lucky because the person behind me knew how to do CPR and they acted fast. And that was the thing that stood out to me today. Um, as I was watching our officers, it made me so grateful that we invest in our officers and in their training and they were all able to save people's lives because they were adequately trained. They knew how to jump right in and um, you know, do the thing that they needed to do without fear. Um, and I think that we just need to remember how important it is for us to continue making sure that they have adequate training. And it's such a blessing. And it was just really neat to see these three people whose lives were saved. One of them was a very young father with four little girls. And interestingly, he was saved by one of our police officers and by our airport director who had been riding bicycles with him. And he collapsed and Dustin started doing CPR on him. And then one of our officers took over. So, just wanted to share that.

No reports. Okay. I don't have any reports either. Oh yeah, I better report that. We do have something coming up um on Saturday. Obviously, we have our ribbon cutting. So, remember that we're starting at 11 with our um little program out here and then we will do be doing continuing with our heritage day celebration beer floats at noon. So, hope to see you guys all there. Is there anything else you wanted to add? Okay. I have We're going to beam sign the We're going to sign the beam for the tower on Tuesday. Yep. And the public's invited to that. That's next Tuesday. That is correct. At out at the airport.

At the airport. Beam signing. So, and that's most of the day, right? From Mhm. till 4 o'clock. If they want to see you, you have to be there at 10:00. 10 is a good time to be there. But you can I think it's all day. Yeah. So, do we have need for a closed meeting? Nice. Okay, we just need a motion. So moved. Second. Motion by Natalie, second by Steve. All in favor to adjourn. All in favor say I. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. We're adjourned. Thank you guys. Thanks for that.