City Council - Regular Meeting

I'm not going to read it to you. I'm going to read it with you. How about that?

National Public Works Week, May 17th through the 23rd, 2026. Whereas public works employees focus on infrastructure, facilities, and services that are of vital importance to sustainable and resilient communities, and to the public health, high quality of life, and well-being of our residents, business leaders, and civic organizations in the city of Washington. And whereas these infrastructures, facilities, and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of public works employees who are responsible for rebuilding, improving, and protecting transportation, public buildings, and other structures and facilities essential for our residents. Whereas it is in the public interest for our residents, business leaders, and civic organizations to gain knowledge of and maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and the public works programs in the community. And whereas the American Public Works Association has celebrated the annual National Public Works Week since 1960. And this year's theme is rooted in service powered by community. Now therefore, I Jeff Padkkey in place of James D. Hegodore, Mayor of the City of Washington, do hereby proclaim the week of May 17th through the 23rd, 2026 as National Public Works Week in the city of Washington. And during this 66th annual National Public Works Week, I call upon all residents, business leaders, and civic organizations to acquaint themselves with the issues involved in providing and maintaining our public works infrastructure and to recognize the contributions which public works employees make every day to our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life.

I will say something. I do want to say a shout out to our employees. They're the backbone of the whole operation. So good but good group of guys. I agree with Tony. If it wasn't for those guys, we wouldn't be standing up here anyway. So they're the most important group that we have out there. Public works guys are. So thank you all. Thanks. If we can, mayor, I need to go back and actually do the roll call on the minutes. It was a deputy city clerk mistake. So, uh, roll call on the approval of the minutes. Bear, did you read them? Read them. Yes. Yes. Did you read them? Oh, there we go. Briggs, yes. Coulter, yes. Hydrrich. Holm. Hi. Padkkey, yes.

Pepsil, yes. Solent, yes. All right, there we go. Now, your motion still stands after that. Yeah, it's all good. All right, dear council members, I here with submit for your approval the following for reappointment to the urban forestry council. Matt Sod term ending May 2029. Make a motion. Second. Motion by Holm, second by bear to approve Matt Sod for the uh reappointment to the urban forestry council. All those in favor? I opposed. Thank you. Thank you to Matt for serving on that.

Next uh public hearing, special use permit 1950 and 1960 Highway A.

Yes. Good evening, council. Um before you, you have a special use permit at 1950 1960 Highway A. Um this uh these two parcels are both single family homes, but they are zoned uh commercially. and the applicant is requesting to uh a special use permit for an agricultural use. Um specifically what we're talking about here is the applicant is requesting permission to keep one mule um on the property uh part-time. Um the mule will reside behind uh 1960 Highway A. and our our zoning our our C2 general commercial district specifically calls out um I've highlighted it here on screen the grazing breeding and raising of livestock as a special use and uh so therefore they're required to go through u this process um these two lots total out at about um just just shy of two acres I believe um so staff believe that that it's fairly appropriate um the applicant wishes to operate in in the long term uh bed and breakfast uh business out of out of his home um and wishes to offer mule rides as part of the guest experience. Um in the meantime, uh they they just want to have the mule on property to to train it um part-time. Um during the past couple planning commission meetings, we have been discussing uh uh this uh this law that was passed by uh the Missouri legislature around four years ago uh exempting a lot of homebased businesses from our zoning processes. Um, however, just just to note, and we're we're working towards getting our making our zoning compliant with this state law. We're not quite there yet, but we are operating within compliance of uh this state law that exempts a lot of homebased businesses. Um, relevant to this case, um, this this business or this uh use is uh does not is is not exempt from our zoning as uh it is it is visible from the street. Um

here is so I guess let me back up a little bit. This red square that you see on screen here is where the uh mule pin will be set up behind this house here. And then if we go to this slide, you can see kind of the red um circle is about where the mule pin will be. And you got pretty good visibility from where that pin will be from highway A. So it's not exempt um from our zoning. Um and just a few staff comments here. Um it's low impact, not no impact. So special use permit is required. Um and staff recommend conditional approval of the special use. Um agricultural uses as you kind of saw is a pretty broad uh you know use category that has a lot of varying things. Um you know so just you know tailoring that recommendation to say hey the applicant can only have um one mule on premises at any given time. Um that uh keeps the keeps the ask reasonable. And then on screen here you you'll see the uh the pen that the uh applicant wants to bring on property. And uh the applicant is here tonight if you want to address address the council.

Hello, I'm uh Randy Paley and uh my main thing was getting another mule. I've had them but then the last seven years I got away from it because my parents in bad health. But I want to ride with my niece and it's like any animal you get. I just like to have it there through the day and then keep it overnight. I have 15 acres, my dad does, out of Crocco where I'd keep it fulltime. But it's just nice if you want to walk by it and work with it a little bit and be around the animal. I can just make a better animal out of it. And then um I would kind of I wouldn't be getting it out by the road or anything. I just keep it back there. I'm not going to be, you know, getting it out where I shouldn't have be. And I'll make sure I clean up all the time after it and keep the pen looking nice. And actually the pen I'm going to use if this goes through is going to be a lot nicer looking. So I'll try to keep everything looking real nice. And uh do a good job with it. And if you let me have it there, it'd be nice. Just uh it's a little hobby I got and I just enjoy animals. And like I said, just being around any animal, it just makes them so much nicer to be by it and pet it and work with it a little bit. Just be handy. So that's my

Are you living in one of the houses? Yeah, I live in the brick house right there. And then we got the other one there. It's setting empty right now like with my parents and I got them. But uh yeah, we're going to fix it up for a bed and breakfast. That's our goal. Yeah. Yeah. I live in that brick. I bought that brick house right out of high school and I've had it ever since. So I've been pretty lucky. So yeah. Yeah. I know it's a meal, but didn't we used to have parcels in town anyway? Yeah, I'm sure at some point you had other places that did. You've got your agricultural

code when the code got revised in 2017. I'm sure it just probably wanted to make sure that people are aware in commercial areas for stuff like this. I mean, this is the same zoning that you have out on the highway. So, I mean, you know, if Walmart came to you and said they want I mean Yeah. Yeah. It would be the same exact process that you're you're seeing today. It's just this Exactly. So, yeah. Yeah. These these homes are all zoned uh Yeah. commercial along Highway A because there is kind of a mix of uses there in addition to single family homes. So, any other questions for the applicant? I think it's okay with me as long as you name that meal Darren.

Doesn't have a good ring to it. Thank you, Randy. Miss Simon. So, yeah. So, thanks Randy. Thank you. Thank you guys. It is a public hearing. Is there anyone else who'd like to speak on the matter? Any other comments from council? I'll make a motion accept in the minutes. Second. Motion by bear, second by Briggs to accept into the minutes. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. An ordinance granting a special use permit to utilize 1950 and 1960 Highway A as an agricultural use in the city of Washington Franklin County, Missouri. Briggs.

Introduced by Councilman Briggs. All right. Just the ordinance following up the special use permit. Any other comments? Second reading, please. An ordinance granting a special use permit to utilize 1950 and 1960 Highway Agricultural use in the city of Washington, Franklin County, Missouri. Padkkey, yes. Briggs, yes. Pepsel, yes. Holtmire, hi. Bear, yes. Solent, yes. Coulter, yes. By your vote, the ordinance passes. Thank you. Hey, thank you guys. Thank you very much. Name it whatever you want.

Code amendments. Fire code duplication. Aaron.

Yes. Uh and chief if you want to come up and interject whenever you're more than welcome to. Um so this is something uh I have been working on ever since I came on with the city and it's finally now uh getting to you all. So um I've been working with uh chief on this and it passed uh had a positive recommendation from planning commission last month. So we'll go over it here and chief chime chime in whenever. Um so just kind of a brief overview about um historically how the zoning code and the fire code have interacted. So, historically, the fire department believed the best way to ensure safe, clean, and adequate development throughout the city was to add pieces of the fire code to the zoning code. However, it has this has since had the opposite effect with section 400.10b 10B stating, "It is not intended by this chapter to interfere with or abregate or anull any ordinance, rules, regulations, or permits previously adopted or issued and not in conflict with any provisions of this chapter or which shall be adopted or issued pursuant to the law relating to the use of buildings or premise premises. And likewise not in conflict with this chapter. Nor is it intended by this chapter to interfere with or aggregate or enol any easements, covenants or other agreements between parties except that if this chapter imposes a greater restrict restriction, this chapter shall control. And there are a number of things that are in the zoning code that um are are are more restrictive than the fire code that um make make chief's job a little harder. So we'll we'll kind of go over that um a little bit here. So, uh, just talking about the responsibility of the zoning code versus the fire code. Um, the responsibility of the zoning code or the planning commission specifically is to use the zoning code and comprehensive plan to guide the city council on land use, infrastructure, and design to better the community while the fire department/building department using the fire code to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of the public. There are certain items within the zoning code the fire the fire code should regulate.

These include um fire lanes, fire department connections, flash point, flammable liquids, and combustible liquids. This that actually should read um these are the items within the zoning code that the fire code should regulate, not not not the other way around. Um so the implications of um what our what our current our our um the fire lanes, fire fire department connections, flash points, combustible liquids, those things being in the zoning code. The implication that they have on the fire code is as follows. Um so the fire chief is granted discretion to wave or impose more stringent requirements on a case- by case basis uh for regulations in the fire code. However, this is not the case for uh these items controlled by the zoning code per that section I mentioned earlier. Um this is problematic for the fire department, development community, and planning department. Uh the fire department does not have control of several matters they ought to be in enforcing such as fire lanes and fire department connections. Um for the development community, if there is an issue with a fire lane, this means a variance. They have to go to the board of adjustment. That's $300 around a month turnaround instead of just permission from the fire chief. Um I've got an example up on screen. About a year ago, um Taco Bell that you see up there, they they subdivided off from the rest of the uh shopping center and they did not have a wide enough fire lane and chief had no problem with this um as as to my understanding and uh they had to go to the board of adjustment because we have fire specific fire lane lengths in our zoning. So, um just an extra step for um you know those who want to subdivide their property or you know have a non-conforming situation that makes some sense. Um and then for the planning department the zoning code and fire code should work together but to strengthen both codes they should remain separate. Um and then some additional I guess let me let me back up a little bit here. So these these code changes

specifically are uh we're uh aiming to remove uh the fire lane regulations, the fire department connections, flashoint, flammable liquid, and combustible liquid from our zoning code. However, however, these will be regulated by our existing fire code. So these we're we're still regulating them. It's just not planning and zoning who have sole responsibility. It's the fire department, which is how it how it ought to be. Um, and then just some additional things that we uh we me chief and I worked on. Um, several definition changes to fit the international building code. Kind of have some syncre there with the building department. Um, those being boarding houses, lodging houses. Um, additionally, a new definition shall be added for above above ground storage tanks. Um that being uh the following and these will be a special use in our agriculture, general commercial, industrial and planned commercial and planned industrial zoning districts. Um and so with that questions, comments and uh anything else you want to add?

Sure. Good evening council. Um little history how this came about was in the you go back 25 to 30 years the the codes were a little weak in some of the ways that it was written for the enforcement of some of this. And so at that time this was kind of baked into the zoning code as a a way to ensure that it was enforced and that it could be put into place. Um a lot of this was held out in annexes and if you don't an adopt an annex specifically you can't necessarily enforce that. Um, and so what this has done is is basically now that the codes are much more robust, uh, it cleans it up and puts the right code language in the right spots. Um, and it takes out these restrictions. The month for the Taco Bell is actually very uh, uh, generous. That was actually about a three-month delay in that project and a number of visits with attorneys. Um, so it's very costly um, on some of this stuff. Um, there's another instance, for example, the property at 6540 Highway 100, which is where Los Cabos and and the pool company are, there's a three-foot section of fire lane. It's two foot too narrow. That had to go through all of the same stuff for three foot of fire lane, which it's not a not an issue. Uh, but because of the way the code's written, we have to go through the process. And this this basically removes all of that. Um, in all of this, the one thing that that I noticed in going through all of this that that Aaron and I spoke about briefly is that the above ground tanks, we may broaden that out and just clarify it to everything that above ground tanks period are special use across the board. Um, it's basically the fire code forces you to regulate it, but it's just a way that we catch it. Um, because right now we have no way of really catching it when when something's being built until usually it's too late. So, we'll be the one uh reviewing the plans on on something new that coming in.

Well, what what happens here, Joe, is is that um yeah, we review we review some plans, but not not all of it. And there's a there's a team approach with um the the various departments within the city. So, we do a site plan on new on new developments. Uh but as far as these particular topics go um when they bring in a set of drawings then we'll look at fire lanes and look at all those things. P and Z what their job is to say okay yes this building makes sense in this area or this building doesn't make sense or this type I shouldn't say building this occupancy use doesn't really make sense like the previous one the agricultural for example it makes sense in that spot but it may not make sense to put an industrial type of of occupancy in that same location and so that's what the zoning code's really there to do and what was happening is is there was language the language in some places is verbatim in three or four spots including the zon zoning code. So, if there was any changes to this, you had to go through a pretty arduous process to to get it amended because it was it was it's two two two or three different people that are controlling it. And so, it was putting it out in front of boards of adjustment. Then you started have to find additional fees and cost and it it just really slowed things down. And the Taco Bell example is a great one because that really was was a a pain for everybody. It was pretty much of a pinch point for everybody. and we realized that this this really needed to be fixed.

Okay. Propane tanks falling into the zone. Man, that is a great question. Uh that I do not have the answer for. What what did you say? I'm sorry. I didn't propane tanks. Yeah, those those would be those would be in with this this definition of above ground and I would have and that's why R may be exempt from here, Steve. the the what the above ground storage tank. What drove that was the energy crisis back in the 70s and above ground fuel tanks and alleys. They didn't want gasoline being somebody buying bulk gasoline at 300-gallon above ground tank and being stored. That's where that came from. Um but that is an excellent question.

Actually, I should I'm sorry that's that's wrong. They they're not included in this in this definition. It's it's uh it uses the the international fire code uh tank definition and that does not include um propane tanks. You know that you would use in many res separate codes for propane tank. I'd have to look at that. That's a good question. I don't know the answer to that as it's written right now as this is being proposed to you. It would not affect residential. So home heating fuel would be exe would anything on R would be exempt. And that's why I'd like to look at this in the totality of it, but we may have to put an exception in for up to 500 gallon propane tanks or thousand gallon propane tanks. That's considered an above ground tank.

Correct. Exactly. So, we'll have to look at that. And then also it in the fire code, it depends on the size of the tank and the type of material. The size of the tank is dependent on the type of material. And so if you're going to put above ground water tank in, who who cares? Uh but it depends on the hazardous material that's being stored. So there's different requirements in chapter 50 of the fire code. Well, the bottom line of this is stating that special use in a C2, M1, M2, plan development in land development, commercial, industrial. So residential are not even on this list, right? Because they're not allowed in residential. No, they are. Okay.

So, you're saying we can put that thousand gallon fuel tank in my backyard without permit? That's what I need to go verify. Honestly, that's why that last line we need to go back and verify that as to what the code actually allows. And then you're I mean, I would I would guess not, you know, I I don't know, but I would I would assume, you know. Well, I agree with you too, Eron. I I assume not, but it's to count's point is a 200-gallon propane tank's no different than that. And if we're going to change this, we need to change it for all the right reasons. And I need to look at the because there there are some home fuel exceptions in the code. And I can't I can't give those to you off the top of my head. I don't know without researching it yet.

And there's a 250 gallon pro a fuel tank inside your basement. Yeah. Fuel oil tank. Those are actually allowed. Those are in chapter 45 of the IFC now. And so there are provisions allowed. They're not combustible. It's correct. It's a non-combust. It's a combustible fuel, not a flammable liquid. And you're allowed there's there's a capacity limit on it as to what you're allowed. And nobody's exceeding that capacity because it's a it's a type 3B liquid. Any other comments? Do we need to approve this ordinance after you go do this homework? I think it would make sense to approve it as it is because really nothing you can go back and change.

This is this is not changing the existing ordinance now or the existing code language as far as those special uses. Um so it would be a matter of of kind of going through that and then making a mod in the future if we needed it. I would encourage you to um pass this as it is and it would make it much simpler for the development community and much simpler for P&Z to do their work. So we be looking for our approval here tonight and then potentially going back and checking and I'll I'll have answers for you in a month or so except in the midst. Well, we got it's public hearing. So if chief is finished then we'll ask anybody else questions. Any other questions for chief? Thanks Tim.

This is a public hearing. So if anyone else would like to speak on this matter. All right. Seeing none. Any other discussion from council? I'll entertain a motion. So move motion by Sentin, second by Holtmire to accept into the minutes. All those in favor? Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you.

An ordinance amending sections 400.045 400.110. C 425.005 005 and chapter 400 attachment I and repealing sections 400.090 point D.6 400.095 D.6 400.100 D.7 400.105 D.7 400 1110 D.3 425010. A.3 point G and chapter 435 of the code of the city of Washington, Missouri. Not as good as Sherry would have done it, but

Oh, yeah. Well, that's fine. B team, buddy. Remember, you're on it. This is the ordinance that supersedes our discussion here. Any other comments? Need a motion or need to introduce Sully introduced by Councilman Singer. Okay. Any other discussion? Second reading, please.

I'll have fun. An ordinance amending sections 400.045 400.11 point C 425.005 and chapter 400 attachment I and repealing sections 400.090. D6 400.095. D.6 400.100.D.7 400.105. D.7 400.110 D.3 425 010 A.3 G and chapter 435 of the code of the city of Washington Missouri Padk yes Briggs yes Pepsil yes

Holtmire I bear yes Sentin yes Coulter yes we Citizens comments next I just have one question on the on the followup on that council truck. You want that for all heating fuel I would presume on all occupancies. Correct. Just just verify citizens comments. Anyone here who would like to address the council on any item not on the agenda? Hearing none.

Ordinances and resolutions. An ordinance amending the 2026 budget for the period of October 1st, 2025 through September 30th, 2026 for the city of Washington, Missouri. Trip introduced by Councilman Sentrip. Tammy, take it away. Good evening, council. Um, this is a budget ordinance. Uh, excuse me. This budget amendment is for the um for some projects that were not completed as of 2025. So, um, we had to roll those projects forward. Um, and that's mainly what this is for, the road projects and things like that that we didn't we weren't actually finished with as of 2025.

Any other questions for Tammy? Good job. Further discussion. Second reading. Hearing none. Second reading, please. An ordinance amending the 2026 budget for the period of October 1st, 2025 through September 30th, 2026 for the city of Washington, Missouri. Padkkey, yes. Briggs, yes. Pepsil, yes. Holm, hi. Bear, yes. Solent, yes. Coulter, yep. By your vote, the ordinance passes. Thank you. Thank you.

An ordinance amending section 2110.2570 2570 of the code of the city of Washington, Missouri. Introduced by Councilman Holtmire. This is the uh the item that we've discussed the last couple council meetings about amending the uh construction work uh during certain hours of the day and certain times of the year. Uh I believe we have in everything that the council had requested at the last meeting. Um any questions? Irony has it Mr. Hydridge is not here tonight. I think it makes sense and I hope it's the right thing.

The big change here is the 8 a.m. on Sunday versus the earlier time is this. Correct. Correct. Right. Right. All right. Any other discussion and comments? Second reading, please. I'm sorry. Who introduced it? Holmer. Holm. Thank you. Second reading. An ordinance amending section 2110.2570 of the code of the city of Washington. Padkkey, yes. Briggs, yes. Pepsil, yes. Holm, hi. Bear, yes. Selen, Coulter, yes. By your vote, the MO ordinance passes. Thank you.

An ordinance amending um I'm sorry. an ordinance authorizing and directing the execution of a Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission cost share agreement by and between the city of Washington, Missouri and the WA and the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission for the Highway 47 widening project SL0082B. Sol introduced by Councilman Sentra.

Good evening, council. Um, back in December, we are um awarded the 50/50 cost share for the 47 project. This is finally just getting around to the the formal agreement. Uh we are waiting on some of the cost distribution. Um trying to line that up with the STP application that we're putting in. So any questions? A positive comment on that is we just recently u u found out that we are on the recommended list for the STP grant application that was submitted. So therefore the 80% of this half of this is also going to be recommended. There will be a workshop for the Franklin County community all or for all of the county. They will hold it here in our council chambers. U I don't I I want to say July 27th I think is the date. So it will be uh posted for you guys to go ahead and attend. I I strongly encourage you to go ahead and provide comments to MDOT that night about you know express not just for MDOT but for East West Gateway so that uh they know that the city's behind uh the application. Charles, I know that date.

Yes. Yeah, we'll we'll send that out when we Yep. that. All right. Any other comments, questions? Reading, please. An ordinance authorizing and directing the execution of a Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission cost share agreement by between the city of Washington, Missouri, and the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission for the Highway 47 widening project SL0082B. Padkkey, yes. Briggs, yes. Pepsel, yes. Holtmire, hi. Bear, yes. Solent trap. Coulter, yes.

By your vote, the ordinance passes. Thank you. An ordinance authorizing and directing the execution of a supplemental agreement number one with SC Engineering LLC doing business as Cochran for engineering design services for the Third Street roadway and ADA compliance project STBG-6401603

Bear introduced by Councilman Bayer. This is for our third street project. We're working with Cochran on design from uh Jefferson to High Street. Um until we got into the environmental review, we didn't really know the true scope of the cultural resources um which would be needed because this is a historic district working through the downtown uh portion. So now that we have a better idea, that's the uh supplemental $8,000 that we'll need for that. Questions? Any other questions for Charles? comments. Second reading, please.

An ordinance authorizing and directing the execution of a supplemental agreement number one with SC Engineering LLC doing business as Cochran for Engineering Design Services for the Third Street Roadway and ADA Compliance Project STBG-6401603. Padkkey, yes. Briggs, yes. Peps, yes. Holm, hi. Bear, yes. Solent, yes. Coulter, yes. vote. Is this sidewalk and street? Is it what? Sidewalks and streets on Third Street project. Yes. Completely redoing the sidewalks and the street. Yes. Sorry. All right. By your vote, ordinance D passes. C or E, please, I'm sorry.

An ordinance amending the 2026 budget of the city of Washington, Missouri for Third Street and ADA compliance project STBG6401603. Bear. Introduced by Councilman Bayer. And this is the budget amendment to go along with that supplemental. Change the $8,000, right? Yep. There you go. Any other questions or comments? Second reading, please. An ordinance amending the 2026 budget of the city of Washington, Missouri for the third street roadway and ADA compliance project STBG6401603. Padk, yes. Briggs, yes. Pepsil, yes. Holm, hi. Bear,

yes. Solenrop Coulter. Yes. By your vote, ordinance E passes. F, please. An ordinance designating a historic preservation design area and approving a historic preservation design area map. Bear, introduced by Councilman Bayer.

Yes. Good evening, council. Um the following is a request um from a property owner and operator to be removed from our uh historic uh preservation design review area which you can see on screen is currently uh what it looks like. Just a reminder to the council. Um this is an area where all exterior um renovations uh within these boundaries are required to be reviewed um by our historic preservation commission. The Historic Preservation Commission is a uh mandatory review, voluntary compliance um body, so they they don't have any uh uh teeth, but their suggestions are are often valuable to uh property owners as you know they look to improve the the historic significance of uh this area of of Washington. Um that being said, some history on this this specific request. Uh there's there's this letter from the uh operator and then I I placed a letter on your desk from uh the the property uh owner. Um the uh uh the operator at uh uh Mjibella at Elijah McLean's requested a uh sign um permit on uh early March I I believe and uh uh staff um informed the the applicant that um backlit cabinet signs are not permitted in the historic district or the excuse me the the design review area. Um, so while uh you know all exterior uh improvements are required to be reviewed within this area, there are a couple places in our sign code that specifically call out um backlit cabinet signs and electronic message display signs as uh prohibited within these boundaries you see on screen here. And so, um, as a result, the applicant, um, took this case to the board of adjustment, um, where the board

of adjustment denied a variance to allow the applicant to, um, put a put up the the sign that you see on screen here. And as a result, the applicant is requesting to be, um, removed from the design review area. Um, staff don't really have that many concerns uh, with this. As you can see, Elijah Mlanes is on the very edge of our design review area. It's not really contiguous to the rest of um uh downtown. Um it was a uh this this removal was approved by our historic preservation commission. Um and our our chair even said that uh 600 West Front uh may not even be eligible to uh to be nominated to the National Register of Historic Places as of all the renovations that uh could you know have gone on over the years. Um something that uh they they mentioned in that meeting which I thought was uh pertinent to this this request is that um all demolitions are required to be reviewed um if they are within the historic um preservation design review area. And so I'm not saying anyone is going to do this, but you know, that is something that uh if if the um 600 West Front were to be removed, um that would just be one protection, you know, that that the city would would not have as is an additional review. Um that being said, this was this was also reviewed by um planning commission and uh as you may see by the the letter on your desk, they recommended uh denial and uh uh recommended that it should not be removed from our design review area. Their primary concern was they were worried about the precedent this may set um i.e. you know uh the the property the applicant uh had uh was denied a variance by the board of adjustment. They already went through the the their due process and um they they felt that this may um set a precedent of of

skirting the rules. You know what's to stop other property owners from saying we we can leave the uh design review area. So, um, that being said, I will, uh, leave it open for discussion. So, the one other item I would just add is you do have a letter that was, uh, provided to you, uh, I believe this was just prior to tonight, the owner, uh, Kurt Understall. Well, one of the questions for the planning zoning meeting was it was the How did you determine the, uh, the occupant sent the letter requesting out of it, not the owner of the property? Oh, sure. This took place of the owner of the property. So that's helps that out.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Years ago, another owner begged us to put them in, didn't it? I don't I don't know that they begged us to put it in. I this this map was created uh I want to say in the 2000 2006

mid 2000s. I was close. Um when they decided to go ahead and make it mandatory review. Prior to that, we did not have mandatory review. And that's when this map was created to say, okay, what properties are going to be subject to be reviewed by the historic preservation. And as a matter of fact, I would say that they probably stretched out a little bit further west to include Elijah's because of the fact that uh you probably wouldn't necessarily include the um um the senior community development that's there off of Second Street. that would probably not necessarily be, you know, part of a um what's the word I'm trying to look for that they use a yeah or are the uh contributing contributing structures. So with that, I mean, that's the only reason why that that went that far. Um but u the rest of it, it was really designed for all of downtown and to pick up those properties on Front Street. So to

Councilman Seldra's point 10 years ago plus the owners at that time wanted to be part of downtown Washington. Oh if you're talking about if Yeah. If you're talking about with regards to zoning in the district. Yeah. They wanted to be and and these are two separate. So just remember this. This is a design review area district. That is not the same as the zoning. C3 is a different uh is is the zoning district for downtown, but it does not have the same boundaries of what you see on that map right there. Aeron's pulling up uh the zoning map right now. You can see uh those areas and then the areas that you have in is it blue?

Yeah, this this light this light blue here is our our downtown C3 zoning district. And Elijah McLean's also has a different and so yeah, they they wanted to be uh have you know the our our downtown zoning. I believe it was because of parking. Is that is that correct?

That is correct. They wanted to go ahead and add some additional structures on that that would require additional parking. So, they came to the city and wanted to request uh the C uh two or I'm sorry, C3 downtown zoning district, and I believe I I'd have to go back and research, but I know it went through planning and zoning, but I think somewhere along the way along the way it got denied or recommended for denial and they dropped their application before it ever got in front of city council.

That's my recollection. My whole thing is they should probably be out of that because of where, you know, they're on the very end. Plus, the business is trying to get established and they have no decent sign to show them that they're up on that hill. So, and and they're incorporating the old pillars with the sign. So, I not the old colors, the old sign. It's a historic sign that we're trying to put back up. So, yeah. So I uh who's we I definitely think we should let him out of it. I have no stake in it, sir. Okay. Any other comments from council?

I guess a couple things I would I would like to mention. Uh a few a few more things. Um at uh next let's see the June 1st council meeting, there'll be two items that'll be related to this item on on the agenda. One is a small um code amendment. There's a section in our code that um even though you'll be uh you know the the uh adoption of the new uh design review area is on on the table for tonight, there's a section in our uh uh historic preservation code that refers to the specific ordinance that was passed in 2006. So, we'll just be updating that to, you know, uh be be this ordinance that uh may pass tonight um if that that goes through. And then we also are looking to um change our uh sign code to um not completely ban uh back lit cabinet signs or electronic display signs. And those those changes were um recommended uh by by planning commission. Um so those are just something to uh to look look forward to um next next council meeting. All right. Any other questions for Aaron? Any other comments from council?

All right. Second reading, please. An ordinance designating a historic preservation design area and approving historic preservation design area map. Padki, yes. Briggs, yes. Pepsil, yes. Holtmire, no. Bear, yes. Sentinrep. Yes. Coulter, yes. By your vote, ordinance F passes. Thank you. G, please. Okay. An ordinance approving a boundary adjustment for Schlit acres in the city of Washington, Franklin County, Missouri.

Councilman Sull.

Yes. Good evening. Uh this is a uh boundary adjustment. Um we we looked at this uh property off Highway A here just south of Chamber Drive. Um just a couple of months ago, um after that boundary adjustment was approved. Um they uh the applicants uh came to planning and engineering for an expansion uh that they they plan to do um back let's see right back here and on these these parcels. Um but they uh forgot to anticipate the uh the rear setback here. So they need just a little bit more room off the side um to accommodate that expansion. And so the red that you see here is the old um lot line and the green will be the new lot line that we're changing. So really we're just shifting this boundary here from lot one into lot three um just a little bit. So that's what this boundary adjustment is for. Lot three. Three will have the recommended square footage then.

Yes. No. Lot one will have the recommended. It's a setback from on a lot one improvement. Steve, they'll all have the minimums. They'll all have the minimum lot size. Yep. That's the key. Any other questions for Aaron? Any other comments? Second reading, please. An ordinance approving a boundary adjustment for Schlit acres in the city of Washington, Franklin County, Missouri. Padkkey, yes. Briggs, yes. Absol, yes. Colt, hi. Air, yes. Solent. Coulter,

yes. By your vote, ordinance G passes. Thank you. A resolution authorizing the city of Washington, Missouri to apply for funding through Missouri State Historic Preservation Office for the City of Washington Design Guidelines Project.

Yes. Good evening. Um this is a uh resolution um to uh authorize the city to uh apply for um a uh grant to update our streetscape and building design guidelines. Um these guidelines are just about 17 years old and uh a lot has changed in downtown Washington um in the past 17 years and so uh we believe it's it's apt to go ahead and update these. There's a pretty good matching grant out the uh from uh the state historic preservation office. So um yeah, any any questions?

Erin, you might want to let them know you you have talked with some firms about the possibility for this. Uh yes. Yeah, we've uh myself and our our chair of the Historic Preservation Commission have been scouting um several firms to uh that that can work or you know are qualified to to work on these these updates and um we've we've we've found some some pretty good firms so far. So, um we're uh want to want to hit the ground running when when when we uh get the grant. So, all right. Any other questions for Aaron? Any discussion from council? Is a resolution. It's a resolution. I'll entertain a motion. So move.

Second. Motion by Sullen, seconded by Briggs to approve the resolution. All those in favor? I I. Any opposed?

Resolution passes. Thank you. a resolution authorizing the city of Washington, Missouri to apply for funding through Franklin County Transportation Committee for the Main Street Reconstruction and ADA Improvements Project. Um, this is uh the Franklin County grants that we usually apply for every year. We're looking at the Main Street project coming up uh to apply for. We've been talking with the um traffic committee about putting uh removal of ballards down on Main Street to kind of help with uh the closures during festivals and different events on Main Street. Um and we thought this was a good opportunity to use the the grant funds from the county to help offset those additional costs for those Ballards and the project as a whole. So

So they'll suck down in the ground or you going to install them on top? They they'll have the sleeves that sit in the ground flush like we've used on trails in the park system. And then yeah, you you stick those poles into the ground there. So, yeah, like at the fairgrounds, we got some at Bush Creek as well. Uh they'll be the the 6 in though. Most of the ones in the park are 4 in. What year is this supposed to be constructed? Right now it's slated for early 2028, but we're not doing every street, right? What? We're not doing every street for all activities as far as the Ballards go. Yeah, we we pick different locations, you know, close to the farmers market and then a couple of the other.

They're not they're not as cheap as we want them to be, right? So, don't do so many at a time. But I think the main object is to get Main Street done first. Yeah, Main Street the focus. That's where most of the events are. Um, during construction is a perfect time to do it. Right. We definitely didn't want to have to go back in and and put these in later. So, right. Any other questions for Charles comments? Got a motion. Move to approve. Uh, motion by Pepsil, second by Bear. Pardon me. Sorry, he said it quietly, but he was there. All those in favor.

Any opposed? Eyes have it. Resolution I passes. Thank you. Commission, committee, and board reports. Preliminary plat approval for Parkway Manor lot 3 plaque 2. Good evening. Yes, this is a uh two lot reubdivision uh turning a duplex into uh two attached single family homes. Um they uh are doing this for financing reasons. um meets all minimum lot sizes, setbacks. Um yeah, any questions? Any questions for Aaron on this item? Comments? Um I need a motion to make a motion. Motion by Sullen. Second.

Second by Bayer. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? No. Okay. So, accept it into the minutes. Ordinance to follow an ordinance approving the final plat of parkway manor lot 3 plat 2 in the city of Washington Franklin County Missouri introduced by Councilman Solent. This is the ordinance that supersedes the preliminary plan approval ahead. We're waiting for our deputy city clerk to catch up on his paperwork. All right. An ordinance approving the final plat of Parkway Manor Lot 3 Plat 2 in the city of Washington. Franklin County, Missouri. Patki, yes. Okay. Briggs,

yes. Pepsi, yes. Holtmire, hi. Bear, yes. Solent. Coulter, yes. By your vote, ordinance 8B passes. Thank you. Mayor Prom's uh report. What are we going to do without you? Well, you got one more meeting with me. So, now just hopefully I won't be as busy. Just the people in the public know the mayor's nothing wrong. just uh on a trip back from Germany stuck in Minneapolis from what I understand. That's correct. Guy who's flown a million miles and can't get home. So can't get it happens to everyone, right? They won't let him in the cockpit anymore. They won't let him in the cockpit. Otherwise, he wouldn't be home.

I know his feelings. City administrators report. No report. No report. No report. Better have one next meeting. I will. Council comments. Um, we did a proclamation for a young man a couple years ago at the age of 105 probably. Yes, we lost him this weekend. So, um, keep your family in your prayers. There you go. Said if anybody's interested in visitation, it'll be Friday 2 to 7 Miller up on Jefferson. So, Mr. Jasper, Mr. Jasper Jasper passed away. Yes. Thanks. Anybody else? I entertain a motion.

So moved. Second. Second. Motion by bear. Second for second by Coulter to adjurnn. All those in favor. Any executive session? No executive session. All right. There you go. We're jjourn. Thank you. your