Council Meetings - Regular Meeting

January 14th, 2026. It is our first official meeting of the new year, and it seems like it's been a little bit since we've met. Um, as is uh custom here in Washington, we have our public forums on the first uh meeting uh the first Wednesday of each quarter. So, uh that said, um I will [clears throat] at this time open up the floor for uh public for the public forum. And is there anyone who would like to speak to the council?

This this demand for open public comment. This is Jordan, have you got something to say to the council?

Come on up. If you just remember to state your name and verify that you're a resident of Washington City. My name is Jordan Hess. I am a resident of Washington City in the Red Waters area. Um, I actually just came from the Washington Wills Park. There are some professional BMX bikers down there testing out the tracks right now. And it is like Disneyland down there. It is so cool. It's getting very, very close to being finished. And I just appreciate that our city is making that a priority and guarantee it's going to be a huge draw from not only our region, but I think the entire state. Wonderful. Thank you, Jordan.

All right, seeing no one else, we'll go ahead and close the public forum. Mayor, may I make a quick comment? Council Coat since he brought up the wills part. Yes. I told some of you, but it's kind of funny. So, I was a pretty big rollerblader in my early years. Got me a brand new set for Christmas. Gone out a couple times. I'm just ready for the Wheels Park to open so I can see if my knees can really break and go that way. [laughter] You got to Why did you make fun of me like that? [clears throat] I had more hair back then.

No, I probably could. [laughter] I probably could, but it wouldn't be a score. We should have a roller a rollerblade race. I was also an avid roller skater growing up. Rollerblader actually. Really race? But let's do it. Is the blades versus the skate is it the number of wheels? Right. The the two and two versus the single line of Is that the skating versus blading? I'm just verifying here. You're correct. Me, man. [laughter]

And that concludes our public forum. At this time, we'll move into our regularly scheduled workshop meeting. Uh, today again is Wednesday, January 14th, 2026. Uh, I will call for a motion to approve our agenda as outlined. So move, mayor. Have a motion by Councilman Coats. Second. Second by Councilman Bell. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? Our only item of business for the workshop meeting is a close session. So we do have need to go to close session for um character or professional competence of an an individual pending or potential litigation and possibly purchase, exchange or lease of property. I'll call for a motion on that item and then we'll do a roll call vote. Sorry. Have a motion by Councilman Ivy. Is there a second? Second by Councilwoman Caspersonson. We'll go roll call beginning with council member Caspersonson. Hi, Ivy. Hi. Coats. Henderson. Bellaston. Hi. That is unanimous. We will move into the boardroom for close session.

You probably was for a second to close the meeting [laughter] and talk about all that we got done. Yes.

Okay, we'll get started here. Welcome to our regular meeting. We're located in the council chambers of Washington City Hall. Today is January 14th, 2026. Our first regular meeting of the new year. Our meetings are streamed live and archived at washingtoncity.org/meings. Um before we start our meeting tonight, I just um with respect to the to the Bennett family within our community that's experienced a tragedy today, I just like uh for us all to just take uh a moment of silence. Thank you. Is uh Mary Robinson here by chance? I'd like to invite Councilman Henderson to offer the invocation after which Councilman Coats will lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Our father in heaven, we're grateful for the many blessings that we have. We're grateful for the opportunity to meet here as a city council and as a community. We're grateful, Father, for Washington City and for the many wonderful experiences and neighbors and things that we have here. Bless us with thy spirit, Father, as we discuss the city business that we can come to the agreements and conclusions that will be the best for our city and will help our

residents. We're thankful for all that we have. We say these things in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Council, I will make note that we do have need to go to close session this evening for pending or potential litigation and purchase exchange or lease of property. That said, I'll look to you for a motion to approve the agenda as outlined.

So move, mayor, have a motion by Councilman Coats. Second. Second by Councilwoman Caspersonson. All in favor?

The agenda is approved unanimously. We have a few announcements. Tomorrow is the annual What's Up Down South uh convention at the Dixie Center. Our offices will be closed on Monday, January 19th in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. And uh I know some sitting up here and some in the crowd are looking forward to the Utah State Legislative Legislative session which begins on January 20th and ends on March 26th. Council, are there any announcements that I may have missed that uh should be made mention of? Seeing none, we'll go to the next item on the agenda, which is declarations of abstensions and conflicts. Anything to declare or any abstensions this evening,

mayor, item 6A, uh I did the work on the annexation platy noted. Anything else? Moving right along, we will go to the item four, which is youth council. I'll invite it looks like Annie is here with Mayor Brown. Um, and they have a presentation of a proposed service project and a city manager is it uh Ken Earl. I was going to say Earl, but I didn't want to be wrong. Good to see you, too, Kaden. Welcome.

Thank you, mayor and council. Um, the Washington City Youth Council would like to propose a service project and as the adviser, I would like to turn it over to mayor and city manager. Wonderful. Thanks, Annie.

Thank you, Annie. Thank you, mayor. Thank you, council. Uh, as the Washington City Youth Council, one of the goals we always have is to have physical change in Washington, something that can stand the test of time. And this year for our service project uh we are proposing a mural that will be under a bridge in Sullivan Soccer Park. Uh this mural it will be based on Washington uh early Washington all until present day Washington how it's changed and how it's culturally changed as well. Uh all as well ending with the America 250 mural at the end. Cool.

Uh so we as the youth council will be designing and painting this mural under the bridge. uh we'll be coming up with the design. Uh while that is not done yet, uh the funds for this are funds we have raised as well as funds allocated by the America 250 from the city and for this we have already met with the parks department and Paul Walker to see the feasibility of this. Thank you. Well said, Mayor Brown. Anything you would ask, Mr. Earl? Nothing to ask. Sweet. I'm glad. You know you're not getting off that easy. I wish I was. Councilman Ivy's the uh the council liaison there and I've got four other elected officials here that I'm sure have questions for you or or or input or comments.

Perfect. Are the funds that that you mentioned are those enough to cover this effort? Uh the funds from America 250 and the funds we have already had. Yes, they will be. Okay. Will you guys be doing the painting yourself or hiring an artist or Yes. All of us. We'll we already will have the supplies and the paint, everything we'll need, and it'll just be us as the youth council on a day maybe like this. Who knows? But going out under the bridge and doing all the painting ourselves. Yes. Is this the is this the bridge that where the trail goes underneath right there at Sulvin? I believe we This is one. Yes. So, is that where you putting it on the concrete wall up on the bed wall?

Yes. Um, we had also talked to Paul about adding some lighting underneath that bridge so that the walls can be illuminated as well as create safety for the community that will be using that bridge. It's also like deter graffiti so that it doesn't Exactly. So people feel safer under the bridge and there's also less to keep it clean. There we talked about there needs to be some added to it to make it probably lit. Yes. Yeah. There's probably like one light to just you can

have you talked about what you might paint what what uh what representations of the city and progress that you might paint put under there. Um I don't think we've had any formal meetings at all, but I'm sure that will be coming up very soon. Okay. Okay. And what's your timeline? Um, well, as soon as we get approval, [laughter] as soon as we would like to get it done before the seniors are graduating. This is kind of the last senior group. So, we like to do that before. So, the timeline would be ending May, June. Uh, that would be the finished product. I love that. It'd be kind of cool if you could finish it before cotton days and then we could have like a big, you know, some type of That would be cool.

Yeah. Embelling during cotton days or something. That would be cool. Cotton Days is the last week of April, first few days of May this year. I don't know if that's possible. I don't see why not. Yeah, we bush. We have some graphic design interest within the council. So, we just need to get the approval and then we'll go to the design phase and then get the approval for the design and then we can paint. Cool. Perfect. That's awesome. Mayor, what are you looking for? Just a thumbs up. It's not really Yeah, this is just an informal kind of a nod or I think they're looking for a thumbs up. I see at least three thumbs. What do I see? Four.

Well, can I u maybe add to your project? Something that we talked about at active transportation today in our meeting was you know there's a building on Sullivan Park right by the I I think it is a bathroom facility. But anyways, a discussion was had that maybe we could do a mural like on the back side of it like where the right right where it goes by the trail. It's not too big of a a building. I don't know if you guys would want to do maybe even a design if you don't want to add your project, but at least a design too while you're doing the two, you know, that mural that you're doing.

I feel like it like underneath the bridge is nice, but it'd be also nice to see it where it's not under the bridge, too. Like I think murals really add a lot and especially if we did something with the 250th um and with the cotton days that um is, you know, patriotic would be just a thought. I don't know the building that you're talking about. would love to go look at it. Yeah. Undertaking it would be, but we're totally amiable. Whatever you guys want. Yeah, I I Yeah, go by there a lot. So, yeah, it's not like you said, it's not too big of a space. Um I don't know if it would be an add-on or something completely different, but I we're already there.

It's cinder block. I'm correct. It It's cinder block. It's the restroom. be harder surface, but uh I was just going to suggest for your mural where they part of these funds is the America 250 and we're celebrating our 250 years this July 4th. It'd be really fun to add add that to the mural as well. and mayor council. Let me just share that this group they really what they like talking about is how to give back to the community, how to do service and how to help and how to they've had countless conversations about ways to provide service and help and they all of them just so enthusiastic and eager to help and I I really appreciate being a part of them. Nanny does a great job. And you know, our adviser, our employee of the month, Michelle um

coming Cummings, she's she's wonderful as well. And and uh you know, it's just it's just a privilege to work with these young folks. So, one last maybe a last question before you go. Now, you have the trip the annual trip to the legislature coming up. Is that early February? February 8th and 9th. February 8th and 9th. And so, we've got we're excited to get up there again and Oh, yeah. and make the rounds. This won't be either of your first time going and we've been up there a few times with with both of you. So,

I love that you keep those traditions alive and I think this is an appropriate um you know project for this youth council to to leave a visible impact in the community in addition to the you know the many many hours of service and and that you've given over the years. So, we appreciate that. Anything else council before we excuse them? Thank you. Thank you. Perfect. Thank you. We'll move on to the consent agenda which includes the approval of minutes from council meetings 121025 and 121725 and the board audit report from December 2025. I'll call for a motion on that.

Mayor, I actually have reviewed the minutes in the board audit and I'm prepared to make a motion to approve the consent agenda as outlined. You've heard the motion by Councilman Ivy. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilman Coats. All in favor? I. Any opposed? The consent consent agenda is approved unanimously. We'll move on to the next section which is public hearings. Item 6A. This is a public hearing and consideration to approve an ordinance accepting the annexation petition known as final local entity platition Washington City. I'll invite city recorder Tara Pence to present to the council. Miss Pence.

Good evening, mayor and council. We are almost at the end of this process. So, this is the final step for council um approval, public hearing and approval of an ordinance for the east edition for our annexation in the near Warner Valley. It's 4,294 acres. You guys accepted the petition for this item on November 12th. We've done all of the process from that point until now and we're ready to move forward the public hearing and get it submitted to the lieutenant governor's office. Wonderful. Any questions for the city recorder on this or for uh legislative affairs director Jordan Hess who I knew know is also working uh on this. Thanks Tara.

Yep. At this time I'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak uh on behalf of this uh annexation petition, the opportunity is yours to come forward and speak. Seeing no one, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and turn to the council for for further discussion and or a motion. I'll make a motion, mayor, if there's no discussion. Go ahead, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion that we approve an ordinance accepting the annexation petition known as final local entity plat East edition. And I'll second that.

You've heard the motion by Councilman Henderson and the second by Councilman Belliston. Let's go. Roll call vote beginning with Council Member Ivy. I Coats abstain. Mayor Henderson [clears throat] I. Belliston. Caspersonson.

I. That is approved unanimously on a vote of 4 to zero with Councilman Coats abstaining. Item 6B. This is a public hearing and consideration to approve an ordinance for an easement abandonment in Queen Queens Ridge phase 5 located at Camino Royale and Arena Way. New development project manager John Hinky is ready to present on this particular item. Good to see you, John.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um the ordinance we have in front of you is for vacating an easement um across the property that's being developed as Queens Ridge phase 5. Uh we have a water man that crossed it before development. It was in an easement. We relocated it into what will be the right of way for Camino at Royale and we're ready to we're getting close. So we'd go ahead and get this in front of you. The only thing I would ask is the condition shown on there is that this doesn't be recorded until we actually record the final plan for Queens Ridge 5. Okay. You've heard staff report. Uh any questions? Thank you, John. Thank you.

This is a public hearing. I'll go ahead and open the public hearing on item 6B, which is uh easement abandonment. Anyone wishing to speak to this, this is your opportunity. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and turn to the council for further discussion andor a motion. Make a motion that we approve the [clears throat] uh abandonment of the Queen Ridge phase 5 uh easement. You've heard the motion by Councilman Coats. Is there a second? I'll second that one as well. We'll go Councilwoman Caspersonson on this one. Have a motion by Councilman Coat, second by Councilwoman Caspersonson. We'll go roll call bullet on this beginning with Council Member Coats. Hi. Henderson. Hi. Bellison.

Hi. Casperson. I Ivy

that is approved unanimously 5 to zero. Next section on the agenda is conditional use permit item 7A consideration to approve the proposed location for the evaporation pond for conditional use permit C-25-07. Community development director Elden Gibb will present on this item. Mr. Gibb. Thank you, Mayor Council. The first two pages of the exhibit identify the location of the perfect swell recreation lagoon along with evaporation pond in relation to the entire PCD as shown on the screen here. And as shown in the exhibit, the proposed location for the evaporation pond is at the north end of the PCB which is adjacent to Washington Fields Road. The evaporation pond is identified on the first page with a bright red rectangle. charge service line connecting the lagoon and the evaporation pond is shown on the first page with the red line which I'll zoom in. You can see those details there. That smaller red line is the discharge there between the recreational lagoon and the pond. discharge line is shown in the HOA maintained and managed properties except for where it crosses the public rightway in five different locations. Pages 3 through 5 are a closeup of the proposed evaporation pond and storm water basin. The applicant is proposing to make aesthetic improvements to this area, which include an L-shaped privacy block wall to screen the site from the southbound traffic, a 4ft wide chat trail and seating benches around

the evaporation pond, 4ft tall rot iron fence around the pond to keep debris out, and increased landscaping around and in this area. Page six shows what the site currently looks like. Pages 7 and 8 are a narrative from the applicant and pages 9 through 13 are an engineering memorandum from Cloud H2O. Proposed pond is shown in an area designated as open space in the ALA PCD and the discharge is coming from a commercial use. If council is considering to approve this location, a zone change application designating this area use should be facilitated to finalize the discharge at this location. That concludes staff report and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Elden. Questions for staff? Seeing none, I'll invite the applicant or the applicant's representative to come forward and speak to the council. Bry's saying, "Is this me?" I'm assuming the council has questions for you, even if they don't have questions for staff.

Good evening, council. Brandy Walker with civil science representing the applicant tonight. Um, thank you, Elden, for your presentation. And I know you guys have had an opportunity to review it. So rather than continue with this bill, we're just looking, you know, to for your approval to to use [clears throat] this location. So yeah, here to answer any questions you may have. Questions for Brandy representing Zion Shores. So this is already a a basin, right?

Yeah, it's currently uh serving as a detention basin. It's um historic are old, but I can get into that if you want. But uh so yeah, the area right now there's two basins sitting there right now. There's a kind of an upper and a lower basin. A lot of people probably didn't even realize they were there because they do sit as you're driving down. There's a burm on Washington Fields Road that does block the views of them. So you can kind of see them in the presentation. It's kind of the red one that we're proposing is the evaporation pond. We would be reconstructing the existing basin there. And then there's the upper one that's shown in purple on this one. And again, reconstructing it to increase the size of it to accommodate the needed capacity. So, we've got a detailed drainage study um that explains how and why and how we got to this point. So, we'll provide that, you know, upon acceptance of this location. Um so, we do have the capacity. So, we're not losing storm drain capacity to be very clear. We're just reconfiguring existing. This area is designated as open space, but it's been more or less like a natural open space. You can see on the south end that there is some improvements. Um the grass has kind of been struggling because they would like just to revamp it along with the overall landscape plan that's being prepared for Ala. They pulled this area into it and make it more uniform with what's going to go down the fields road and then you know groves in those major corridors. So increasing the walking paths. Um we've had some drainage runoff issues right there. You can see it's been ponding. So yeah, this is the improvement of it, what they're wanting to do. So it's kind of hard to see on this because there were yellow highlighted on this exhibit, but it shows that the existing versus the improved. So the amount of linear footage of trail currently we're is roughly 788 linear feet with proposing to increase it around the evap pond. It actually ups the linear footage to 189. And it we talk about the landscape

improved too, but we do want to eliminate all turf or grass. So it will be desert scaped and try to be more water conscious in this area as well. It's kind of a little outcropping of grass there. So to improve it there, um the basin now as it exists today is really deep on that north end basin. So we would shallow it up for the evap pond and you know recontour it to meet the needs of what engineering is requiring for that. What's the area of the pond and detention basin? Just the area this like the that Elden Q. Back to that civil exhibit, please.

And I'm assuming Elden while you're looking for that that that would would um count towards the the overall pond acreage that that the development's approved to have. No. So, our detention basins are not counted as water. So, these ones are not holding water. These are solely to hold storm water runoff. The but the pond would be so the pond you're talking the evap pond here. This is not included in our water recreation. So this would be so the amount of water in the pond would be you know fluctuation cuz it's manont controlled. It's not a mother nature but I'm not sure I'm understanding what you're asking. So you have you have just under 19 acres of of lakes

of of ponds and lakes. We can pools. We've used all the terms kind of interchangeably. It just it seems to me that this would would count towards the the entitled acres of of water feature even if it's shallow. So this is kind of a gray area because it's somewhere known because it's not recreation but two and it's not storm water. So our storm water basins don't count towards a lake use. But this one right here um we're if this location is this is up to council approved by you guys staff has directed us that this would have a commercial zone on top of it not a lakes. So let's do do you find the area?

It's at the bottom of that sheet if you can pan up a little bit. I can't it's right bottom. Sorry. Uh so it's right there. So it's about it's an acre because it's 5t deep. So that [snorts] red area outline is an acre. So our our goal would be to take that o acre of open space and reallocate open space within the PCD. So move it to another location. And then you know again this is council's direction. But then that that that acre there would have a commercial zoning versus a recreational lake. It would be a part of desert shore.

The other lake if I can jump just a quick question. The other lakes do serve for storm water as well, right? They're joint. Half of them do. So the the pond lakes do, but creation ones, but the pond lakes, correct? Yes. Okay. But they're dead [clears throat] pulled, so there's a water surface in it. Like this could be dry, so it's not really a lake aesthetic, but

I can comment, mayor. Um, [clears throat] I like the I I don't mind the location. I appreciate, you know, planning landscaping around it and stuff. My main concern would be smells. You know, I know in your thing it says this the odors would be minimal, but what does that mean? And then the other thing is having a hard time picturing like what it'll look like. I know it says you'd have what 181 cubic yards of sediment to haul off every year or something like that. Just trying to wrap my brain around what that would look like. You know, is it just like sludge down in the bottom of the pond and you

roll a loader down in there a few times a year and [clears throat] Yeah. So with a five foot deep pond, we anticipate about two inches of buildup annually in a dry powder form. So it' be like you're walking through like dry minerals is what it will dry to. So you wouldn't probably every few years you'd do it. I get it. Okay. And it's based. So again, it's man controlled. So if they needed to clean it out, they just shut off the back wash to it, let it dry up, and then, you know, scrape it out. Makes sense. Ask, is this lined? Yes, it'll Yeah, cuz we don't want it to percolate. It'll be an evaporation situation.

It's lined with Right now, we want We're designing it with clay. What kind of clay? All the beautiful clay we have out there. Yeah. No. Are you using blue clay? Um, so Stuki has a couple different types of clay. So the Deadpool lakes that are currently constructed out there, AGC has engineered the liners on those. So we'll have the geoteex look at usually the when they dry out then they they become useless. Correct. Dry out the clay. So how do you do that? So the Deadpool lakes that we have right now that are constructed have 3 ft of clay liner and they have a a foot of sand cap. So, in this situation, we kind of do want it to dry out, which

you don't want the liner to dry out because then it cracks and then it doesn't work. That's what I'm worried about is the the liner cracking. Yeah, there's a lot of clay out there. So, we could and right now this pond, I think, is it kind of ranges in depth, but it's about 8 ft almost in depth. So, we could easily throw 3 ft of clay in as it sits today and have a solid, you know, base, but then top it with Yeah. As soon as it dries out, it you'll have a problem soon as you turn the water back on. So that's correct. systems.

Yeah, like exactly good question because Cloud mentions in their report it to you got summer, you got winter, you got high evaporation, you have no evaporation, you have monsoon season. So there's going to be all sorts of seasons and all sorts of situations or you know variables involved. So yeah, if it became where it needed to really be cleaned out, then they would time it to where weather and you know the amount of water going in it and I don't want to misspeak but and I think Cloud is on is on call too. They're here I believe available. Yeah. But it's about equivalent to like a garden hose pouring water in there because it was I noticed on there like a 2-in line. So it can't be that much water going into the pond.

Correct. Just minimal. The reason the pond is so large is because we want it to evaporate. So, we want that water to be as shallow as we can make it. And the water would only show up when you're doing your process, right? The summer months when there's peak evaporation [clears throat] would be producing more water. So, yeah. So,

we're going to Yeah. We're going to This is the entry to the development. It's been somewhat overlooked over the years as you come in, but we'll put a monumentation and some, you know, some beautifification on the corner there, but right there's a secondary slide to the improvement one that shows, it's kind of rough, but it shows this is like a cross-section of it. So, we would put because and I can have Cody get up. He's got some water that he wants you guys to look at tonight, too, that shows you the byproduct. But, um, because the water itself doesn't smell. There's no there's no smell to it. um any sort of contamination just like a standard detention basin would be like a normal detention basin really doesn't smell but if you get rotting weeds and growth that's what smells. So this basin because of the high levels of content of mineral won't grow anything but if you get weeds and stuff down in it that's what we want to protect. So, right around the top of the basin, as depicted in that photo, will be a 4ft rod iron fence with tighter slats to keep weeds and like debris out with, you know, the gate on the end so they can access it to service. It'll have 3 to one side slopes which will have again a sand filter with some bouldering around it. So, it will look more or less like like a [clears throat] drainage basin you see around town, but instead of having rock bottom, it'll have that mineral that mineral bottom. Further questions for the applicant? Thanks, Brandy. Council, further discussion on this particular item. I'll just I'll throw in my two cents. I know that they did say they have water. If if uh if you'd like to see it, touch it. If you're brave, taste it.

Um dad took a pole off of it. And then um Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. That's This looks like the kind of jar you drink out of normally. Councilwoman, I would definitely have Jeremy try it first. [laughter]

I don't know what it is. Lin State your name for the record since you're at the mic now. Yeah. Cody Larkin with Zion Shores. Cody Larkin. Okay. This is uh basically a sample of what will be going into that evaporation pond. This is what comes out of the TDS system. And uh I know there's been just a lot of I don't know question about what is it exactly we'd be putting in. And I think sometimes people think there's like sludge or almost looking like sewer or something like that going into this. Where did this sample come from? This was prepared by the engineer. So that we because I I really just wanted to make sure that everybody understood exactly what was going into.

I think the the word that I remember that that's probably of concern to me is brine. Yeah. And so I'm confident that the water doesn't smell, but is there brine and does the residue um the byproduct of the reverse osmosis that it'll smell exactly like this comes out? When you think of brine, you're thinking of a different kind of brine that has more sulfur in it. I think it's like hydrogen sulfate is what they say. So, so you're saying like on the record that it doesn't have a a strong sulfur does not have a strong sulfur smell at all. This is what it will smell like. It smells like earth. And so, uh, and I brought that specific.

What happens if I go down if I have some of our good neighbors that complain about the smell? Cody, what? Well, we'll be complaining ourselves because Okay, but yeah, but we've gone through all the processes with both our engineering firms to make sure that it doesn't and they both are like, "Yeah, it does not smell like what you think. You know, you're probably thinking of like a hot springs or whatnot. Totally different product." Okay, I'll believe you, but I'll verify it once this is if this is approved. Once this sounds good, I'll vote for it if you take a drink of it.

Bring it over here. I'll down it. [laughter] And then someone asked about the water. So, you know, we overengineered this so that we don't it won't run all the time. We'll run it even in the hottest times of the year, we'll run it probably 70% of the time or something like that. And it's it's set up so it's it doesn't run as we're filling the lagoons. The water the way it comes out of the the wells, we could use it just like that. The only reason we're running the TDS system to remove this from it is to as water evaporates [clears throat] in our lagoons, we don't want those levels to rise. And so we're basically trying to keep it back to those levels that it comes out of the ground. So additional questions for Mr. Larkin.

Thank you.

Okay, great. Thanks. So, council, I'll just I'll start the conversation again with with another just comment. Um, I am probably not sophisticated enough to make a distinction between a pond and a lake. To me, this does seem like water area, but this is something that I don't vote on. And so, that's just something that I'll throw out there. To me, this looks like water area of what of the entitled 18.7 in the development agreement. So, mayor, I I see what you're saying, but I I kind of disagree in the fact that it is a detention, but just on that aspect, it's not really a lake or an amenity, but I can see where you're I don't know.

Fair. Fair enough. I just I kind of understood what Brandy was saying where detention ponds are detention ponds. Now, this isn't a detention pond, but this is part of the lake process, so it's a they're definitely a gray area. I'm going to say I agree with you. There's a gray area, but I don't know if I fully say it goes away from their legs. Fair enough.

But with that note, I'm against this location. This is the exact reason why I didn't I wanted them to come back to the council is they put it as far away from all the new development, but right next to the existing residents. That's my concern. If they want to move it toward their place, I'm 100% on board. But I this is why I wanted it back to the councils because I was afraid they would put it next to all the existing residents. So, and I'm sure they've done I mean I read the report makes sense. Sure seems like a long ways when if it doesn't have a smell, why don't you just put it? So, that's just my opinion, but what it's worth.

Can you put a map back up there and kind of point out what's new development, what's existing? While he's doing that, I was going to say one other thing is that they also promised us landscaping along Fields Road and it's been over a year and it's still not done. So now they're saying they're going to landscape this and are they or are they just going to tell us and not get it done? That's my two concerns on project.

I'll highlight the proposed evaporation pond location here to the north. To the south is where the park is, the surf pond park's located.

I'm not seeing it on your thing. Elden, do you want to know where the surf park is located or the evaporation? Both. I think it's behind the little tab there. It goes away as soon as he Okay. So, that's the evaporation pond, correct? Okay. The surf park's way down there, right? Correct. Is there an alternate location? Brandy.

Yeah. Brandy again. Me again. Elden, do you mind putting the PCD up, please? So, in picking a location, we went round and round with this. So, I know at first glance you're like, we shoved it out of the way. And I can explain a billion different ways why we have it here. The number one thing to focus on is property ownership. What I mean by that is this is definitely not the shortest route. We have to pipe a pipe way further here than we looked at sticking it in quite honestly the park in village 5 cuz that's close. However, it's like looking down on the neighbors and we promised an amenity. So they scratched that one because we want that that's a park that's not open space. So it needs to be usable. Okay. the evaporation pond in our eyes, as much as we're putting walking paths around it, it's not a park. So, we looked at moving it down to uh village 19. That makes sense. It's close. It's uphill. We'd have to pump the current location. By putting it down here, it's downhill. So, it would not require pumping. But by putting it in 19, the issue we have is property ownership. Right now, the location we've chosen has zero private easements needed, zero public. We're not in your pee. So, we have maintained a route that is solidly through common area open space with the exception of five street crossings. Whether we go south, north, east, or west, we're going to cross public roads. We just it is what it is. But the route that we're on right here, there's no private ownership. We don't have to go to individuals and put an easement in their yard. We don't have to go to the city and say, "Hey, can we share space in your pee?" We're solely in the ownership of the of common area HOAs. And then the tension basins on the north are still owned by the developer. They have they're in the master HOA. So the path that we've chosen will forever be in common guarded open space without trying to share space with the public utility or be in a private sideyard. To

go south to 19 would require us to run in the front yards of a townhouse lot lot and share side with power or would have to try to go on the other side of the street which is the same issue. We can't be in the pee. would have to be back into somebody's front yard and getting private easements going down. So, it makes sense to keep it in a common space corridor that will forever be governed by umbrellas of HOA. Yeah, the longer route is not nice. That area is detention basin. So, to try to beautify it was also an incentive. I understand you're saying it's easier and but I look at it as those aren't current residents.

So, I don't know if they're here [clears throat] tonight. I know. So, so they're not current residents that own the property down, right? The two houses at the end of the culde-sacs are immediately adjacent to a detention basin current. I'm not talking the proposed location. I'm saying bear with me and just 18. You said that was a potential, right? Yeah. That's commercial space. And your concern was now you're going to have an easement outside of the standard public utility easement to house your 2-in line, which because you can't go on the public utility easement be a private easement. Correct. But what what's your concern where they're not constructed yet? So they are constructed. What the roads aren't constructed yet. They are where W's Edge is built. I'm going to walk away from the mic. Sorry I'm pointing.

This is so powery all the way. You guys sold it. Why didn't you think about it when you I guess it was your development. So bear with me though. Okay, Councilman Coats, if you don't mind. To say we're impacting existing residents.

There's two homes at the end of the culde-sac that back the existing basin. Can you please help me understand how we're putting it down south impacts less residents? I just don't I'm not tracking. Okay. So So what I'm saying is that you're putting a pond next to all the and I'm not just considering the two homes. I'm talking all because I don't agree it's not going to smell cuz it's going to smell. It might be good some days. It might be bad. You're keeping constant water in it. It's going to smell. Be good or bad. I I mean I've never sat and tried to smell one. So but I know there'll be some smell. But you're impacting everybody around there, not just those two houses.

Pull up the image. And so what what I'm trying to say is these are all brand new residents that bought into the development that knew about this the surf lake that agree to everything that goes with the surf lake. The old residents did not. That's what I'm trying to get at. Got that make sense? Okay. Yes. If you look at the image, their houses backed to Washington Fields Road with the detention basin behind them. Our stance is I'm not arguing the detention. I'm arguing the the evaporation pond. Okay, I'm tracking. I mean to say it's not going to stink and evaporation in a detention basin may or may not stink.

Can I inject a question just we don't get too far down the road from it. Is that right? Okay. Um the way I understand the science of this, it's not persistent standing water. It's not expected to be standing water. The pond is effectively a high salenity evaporation that will mainly be dry. Correct. Correct. And uh and it only be need to be cleaned out several years at a time, not and so I think the whole saying if it had a negative impact then I concede that. But I think for the most part those minerals that will be dry minerals in the bottom, they won't smell because they're designed not to because of the system removes

solids that that make it smell and those are hauled away. But the way I understand it, it's not persistent standing water. any water would be a concern, but I don't think it's designed that way. That's correct. That's why the basin is so large and oversized at an acre feet. There's a letter from Clard Engineering signed and stamped by their professional that backs the TDS backwater backwash that's coming out of it. So, I mean, they put their professional licensing on that letter. Well, it's fine. They wrote a letter that said they don't think it smell, but I I just Okay.

We want this to be a longevity thing. And by shoving it down closer just to be not impacting residents with opinion versus opinion versus opinion when I don't want to have a home that's going to have a 2-in mane that they don't know about in 5 years and they're planting a tree in their front yard cuz that pipe is sitting 12 ft into their yard.

It's a good argument and and I appreciate that because there is a good argument in that. I think the thing I'm struggling with a little bit is that it's the development that you're developing around it, right? and and you're doing the engineering around all of it. I'm just I mean it's just my opinion. I just my biggest fear is the smell. I'm not worried about it someone's yard. Like do we want it in there? No. You could have chose not to put it in their yard. You could have chose to put it in a corridor that's more an HOA corridor instead of someone's yard and push the lots back to make the line work. There's things you can do to adjust that kind of stuff. So, but to say we couldn't do it is is just different where it's all new development that you guys are de doing as the master developer. And I know Zion Shores is just Zion Shores, right? But they bought it from the master developer who knew this was coming in. Their whole development was based on that. I'm just saying there's things you can do to mitigate that if we're that worried about it. I'm just worried about the smell. That's why I asked for it to bring back. This location concerns me because um

you can't come back. We're literally dealing with other smells in this county or in our city that are causing us headache and problems for our community members. I don't want to be here in two years and there's nothing we can do about it. That's what I'm concerned about. And and that's why I'm But if I'm a big big advocate if you buy your house around something and know it's there, then okay, you you know the smells, you know it's there. That's all I'm trying to say. But when you go build a place right next to a bunch of existing houses that didn't agree to it in their master plan when they bought their residents, this surf park wasn't there when they bought it.

And I know that the HOA um manager has knocked doors to those residents. He reported with me this morning that he talked to those residents. Did we advertise this meeting to them or was that not a requirement on this one? Requirement on this. Okay. I was just clarifying.

So he's gone to his residence. We've heard we I should not say we but the HOA and the developer obviously landscaping is a concern. So we've heard it from the residents. They've had in you know HOA meetings long HOA meetings about the landscape about promises made and so this is one area that they have talked to the neighbors about and have discussed this about with. So, we hear your point, but we don't necessarily see eye to eye on that.

Excuse me for a sec. Are are there residents that that live in Stuki Farms and not Ala? Do you do you live in Stuki Farms over here? I see your hand up, sir. Do you live in Stuki Farms as well? Okay. So, we have one individual. Okay. I I'll give you a moment in just a minute. Any further questions for Brandy while she's here? This might not be her last time up. You know, keep your running shoes on. I just was on the hook for maintenance. So, it'll be an umbrella.

So, it'll be an umbrella of people. Number one would be Zion Shores because this would be their extension of their commercial development, so to speak. And then on top of that, because it is running in an HOA corridor, an HOA owned and maintained property, then the master HOA would have jurisdiction over it as well as all the individual neighborhood HOAs are also and under of HOA. Yeah. But where it's and that's why I was why I was asking are they financially going to be impacted in shape or form or is it is the financial cost of the maintenance of it? The maintenance would be on Zores. Correct. Solely residents. Correct.

Okay. Comments, questions for the engineer. Thank you, sir. Come on up if you'll just state your name and give you a minute or two. Sure. If you'll also just state where your name and where you live. Sure. Clayton McDaniel. And I live just to the east of that. So across the road that you would be concerning of. I personally have no concern. I when I first heard about it, I was like smell is my first like thought. Um engineers from what I've heard have deemed that it's not going to smell. So I mean I I personally have no concern. I'm right across the street from it. So okay,

I just wanted to show support for it. Um hopefully all goes well, but uh thanks Clayton. Appreciate being here. Yep. Absolutely. Council, I'll turn to you for further discussion on this item andor a motion. Mayor, I'll make a motion to approve the uh proposed location for the evaporation pond for conditional use permit C-25-07. You've heard the c uh the the motion to approve by Councilman Ivy. Is there a second? I'm going to shock the applicant and second that one.

Okay. Got a second by Councilman Belliston. I am shocked on so many levels on this one. Be careful. He hasn't voted yet. Mayor and council, just whatever motion might materialize. It is currently zoned open space. if you might just consider conditioning that motion with a zone change to true it up to to a to a commercial use instead space use. Can we can we do that on a zone change or or that we would do that at a future meeting with notice?

This one's just a site plan condition that's out there and so I think you can it's also the site plan was a written agreement and mostly we just would like a record created that that's an expectation that staff can Can you say it one more time and I'll ask Councilman Ivy to consider amending his motion. The motion would just have a condition that if approved that they would then bring a zone change application, an open space zone to a commercial the appropriate commercial zone. Mayor, I'd like to amend my motion. Go ahead. To do exactly what mayor uh the council has just said.

Okay. You've heard Councilman Ivy's uh very well said amen. Council Bellson, do we still have a second on this? Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve. We'll begin voting. A question,

just one question is to Elden. Um, is there a requirement for so many uh acres of open space per the development agreement? And if so, are they making it up somewhere else if they change this to a commercial application? So when we have met with them in staff meetings, we have told them that that would be expected that if they convert this open space to a commercial which that we would expect them to replenish those acreages somewhere else,

not take away from the commercial areas. You wouldn't take any other commercial areas away. In theory, if if this motion's approved, they would be approved to expand their commercial allocation a little bit, but we wouldn't make them remove commercial from other places and replenish. Council staff is nicer than I am with commercial than I would have been with water. But nonetheless, uh we have a motion to approve. Let's vote on this. Uh motion to approve. We'll begin with council member Coats. Nay. Henderson. Hi. Ellist, hi Caspersonson. Hi Ivy. IAD.

That uh condition use permit is approved on a vote of 4 to one. Thank you. We'll move on to item eight, ordinances. Did you get your water back? Hey, Mr. Locker, are you going to show us that it's Let's see. Take a drink of it. Well, Thad's drinking worse. I mean, just inorganic. Okay. All right.

Good luck to you guys. We're on to section eight in the agenda, which is ordinances. But I will make note that the public hearings for items 8A, 8B, and 8 C occurred at the planning commission level. I will also make note that uh this council has uh seen those uh those the public comment and recognize that some who made public comment are also here this evening. Item 8A is consideration to approve an an ordinance for zone change Z-25-24 from A20 to PUDC located at Washington Fields Road and George Washington Boulevard. Community Development Director Elden Gibb will present to the council. Mr. Y this particular location has a general plan land use designation of community commercial which allows for administrative professional C1 C2 and PUDC zoning designations. The surrounding zoning is a 20 to the north, RA1 and PUDR to the east, agricultural 20 to the south and PUDC to the west. Each request is for the purpose of developing the site into a commercial development and the applicant will be required and fully understands that they will need to bring the specific site design plan back to city for approval prior to any work beginning on the project. The proposal is seeking approval to identify ingress egress to the site and obtain an approved useless. Pull up this exhibit here. You can see the requested ingress egress which staff has reviewed meets the access management

plan here. Planning Commission reviewed this request on January 7th and made a recommendation to approve Z-25-24 with the added condition that the developer to coordinate shared access with the land owner to the north along with proposed use list to be modified as such which we can dig into at this time. Here's the proposed use list. [snorts] And mayor, I was just going to go line by line if that's okay. Absolutely.

Line number one is administrative, executive, professional, medical, and research offices asking for that to be a permanent [clears throat] use. Line two is banking and other financial institutions. Line [clears throat] three is automobile car wash not to exceed four bays. Line number four, automobile service stations excluding major repair work such as engine or transmission rebuilding body and collision repair frame and heavy duty trucks. Elden, does that include tire shops? Seems like it would include tire shops. It just doesn't specifically say it.

That's allowable. It's not allowable. Excluding that I'd say they are wanting it because automobile services would be services. I mean otherwise you'd say excluding all automobiles. Just would like clarification. Yeah, this came from if you look at the zone which each use is approved in in the city, this came from a C1. Um

I do too. I think I I would be a little hesitant to have a tire shop right there. So I mean I would maybe recommend excluding tire you know I mean really pick right there let's I for the specific comments I begin and um if something is vague let's sure do that while you're going through this list or do you want us to hold back comment until after the list?

I think now is a great time, Councilwoman. Now is the time to do it and and I'm sure somebody's keeping note. Okay. Please chirp in when needed. Okay. Or automobile service stations excluding major repair work such as engine or transmission rebuilding body and collision repair frame and heavy duty truck. I've made the note to exclude tire shops there. Line number five, child daycare or preschool center, which meets all state and local regulations. I feel like we should uh exclude that as well.

You don't want a child care there, daycare? No, because I feel like if we have limited commercial areas and if you look at some of the areas that have, you know, have a, you know, have a grocery store as an anchor, you know, recently in neighboring cities, um just there's an anchor and then um there's really you could have really nice um shops and restaurants and where Bahama Bucks is, you know. I'm just saying it doesn't what it doesn't bring any sales tax to Washington city. So I feel like

sort of a residential like if you that is a commercial use if you're the daycare run telegraph trail head that's commercial commercial zone thing is if if they want to do a daycare they can all they can they can bring it back and show like the design and everything when they come back later too. So, it's not like it has to be a permitted use. Now, they could bring they can bring it back.

Well, this is just part one one more step of the process as far as I understand like they can from my understanding they can if they when they bring back the PUB, they can show that they want to maybe do the the preschool at a later time. This is the problem we have with the way our code's set up.

I I I the PUB is intended to show us what you're doing and go do it. Not it's it's hard, right, to go back and forth. I I understand they want to get their what's permitted so then they can say, "Okay, then they can go build it." Like, it's I don't like this. Most cities don't allow an additional step. It's just give us your PUB and you go do it. And and this is where we get into this tough part. We're trying to figure out the stuff not knowing what we're looking at. Well, I struggle with it, but it's our own code. This is how it's written. So, we have to try to narrow down the things that are that we think will work in there and but also they have things they think they'll work. So, I am shocked you don't want a child care because I've seen them be successful. I mean, my office I'm in has a child care and I'm like at first I'm like, "Oh, this isn't cool." But it's been kind okay, you know, and I've seen the other ones. So, but I don't know. But that's just a little experience I have with it. I think I think the concern and I don't want to speak for you, Councilwoman Caspersonson, is to see more sales tax and that's not a sales tax producing. You're exactly right. Um, for instance, get to some of these others. You've got, you know, a hospital and and it's hard to say that's a permitted use when we can't see what that looks like. Is that going to take the entire 20 acres or are you So,

my recommendation would be if you if you can't see it, eliminate it. They can always bring it back when they bring the full PUD and ask for it, right? It doesn't mean that they they mean it's not automatically approved. No, but so let me just ask you this then. But then I thought if they come back with a PUD and we're like, well, it's not a permitted use. You can you can make it a permitted use when they come back for the entire because you can see it. Why are we approving any of this? Because they should just bring back their plan because your code allows for it. I don't I don't disagree with you, but the code allows for it and and for some reason the They want to they want to know that but then they can come back to us and say well I have it permitted and you approved it. Right.

Exactly. If you if so if you have a concern with it easier at this point to eliminate it from the list rather than and then Rusty if you'll just come in the like on deck circle in case we need you to pinch hit on or or add some insight. You'll just come up to the front row please. Can I get a few get a few swings in? loosen up just in case we need we need your insight on this. Councilman Bellson, I mean, if sales tax is the argument, you know, then that means we got to cut out the yoga shop that can't go in there. The um you know, anything that's not retail sales doesn't

Well, from the planning commission, it seems like the the grocery store wanted it seems like they wanted to have as part of the the process to have a permitted use for their grocery store. That's what

they want to make sure they get. Look, the reason why it was broken up and Councilman Coat's concerned that I want to see the whole PUD, right? But the problem from the development side is you you got to know that you're going to be able to take it um in the direction you want to take it before you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in in all the design, right? Um or they can spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and come in before this body and say, "Hey, we that we can build this." You know, you need to give them some assurance that they can their money's not being spent in pain or um I you know, honestly, in my mind, you know, back to the the tire store thing, that to me is not heavy heavy or major repair work. I can see a you know CMT [clears throat] tire because that is commercial tire is not a heavy why would why would we so if this is general plan community commercial which has C1 C2 and AP uses why are we looking to cut any of these out at this point I just I mean the general plan

if we approve it then they they're permitted to do this and say well I that approval to do all this. I can do anything I want. It's our code. But it's consistent. I mean, those zones are all consistent with the Yeah, I get what you're saying. In ideally, when they're asking for a PUB C zoning, we know what those are, but in theory, they could come and ask for any of these C1, C2, or AP uses. And a lot of them are just permitted, some conditionally permitted. They can ask for them, but I feel like with us giving a list that we approve gives them the entitlement to now they can do these no matter what. If they just bring the plan, they're not entitled to do anything until the plans.

So, I see Ian Lang here. Usually, I just see him at Chick-fil-A in Centerville. That was a while ago, I think. Are you Ian or No, no, I'm Matt. Matt. So, got the wrong name, but didn't get the wrong face or location. Matt, if you'll just come up too. I think that you as the applicant should be involved in in having some feedback um as we go through this. Comment, mayor, before you. So, uh if you'll just stay right there and then Councilman Ivy's got a comment.

I would assume that the applicant just pulled all these out to try to see get some direction and an idea of what the council's temperature is on them. I think there's some obviously that that they wouldn't build even if they had the entitlement. But I agree. I I would love to have a little cleaner system here because it's hard to sit here right now and give approvals for without having the rest of the information. So, I do totally agree. The last one was on the property just directly to the west on that corner when Representative Walter was the realtor on it and it was just it's kind of a messy process to like go through and try to say what what would be permitted, what wouldn't be permitted.

Matt, will you come up and just talk to us about what you want to do with the property? help us like find a way to like if we're just wasting our time on uses of what might be what do you want to do with the property? Yeah. No, I appreciate it and thank you for your time. And sorry for calling you Ian. I Ian's a great guy. I'm happy. But I did two out of three. Centerville Chick-fil-A, right? Ian is listening right now, so he's somewhere smiling. Um,

yeah. So, Matt Nielsen with Evergreen Development. Uh, we're really excited about this project. We bought the property about a year ago and we're we're grateful for city staff and for all of you because I mean to get to this point takes hours and hours. So, thank you for getting it to this point. Um our intent is to do a grocery anchor development. We're working with um a couple different grocerers, but one in particular that will take up about a third of the property. So, the building and parking and gas station for that grocery store will take up about onethird of the property. So what we're looking to do for the rest of the property is all the uses that would be consistent with a neighborhood ger center grocery center. So to your point, I mean there there's certain uses on here, right, that we discussed at length with planning commission that we're not intending or trying to do. You know, storage units is one of them that that's not something that we're concerned about that we're asking for. We took all the language of all the uses from C1, C2, and that was city code to add them on here. And there are uses that we care about because we we think they'd be a great benefit to the community and to the development, but there are certain uses that we don't. Hospital being one of them. Hospital is very vague and it's big. Um, specifically regarding hospital, there is certain uses that we would want to push for. You know, there's small format clinics and doctor's offices and there's some standalone small Instacares right now that are, you know, not bigger than a few thousand square feet that we think would work well in the community. But we we want to work with staff. We want to work with members of the community. We've met with uh neighbors. We want to work with you to give a development that the city of Washington can be proud of. and we're happy to go through these uses and kind

Why don't you stay here as we go through the uses and if there's a case that you want to push back on, let us know. Perfect. So, are you okay? We're at five. Child care daycare.

Yeah, I I I see what you're saying um about the uh childare not being a tax revenue source. Our intent if we were to do a child care, there are some of these national child child care brands that come in and do a really nice looking product that um you know have the outdoor playyard that have a really nice looking building. We would like to market to those type of users to take up um a small portion of the property. I don't know if they're interested in this area. We have not gotten to that point yet, but that would be a use that we would want to see on the property. Um, and then backing up to automobile, uh, I agree, tire stations is or tire shops is a use that we would want to see on the property. And our hope would be that it would be a permitted use, but then we would come back with a site plan and elevations to show that we're not trying to put the tire shop, you know, right up against someone's garage or that, you know, that we can put it in a spot that makes sense for the development and for the community. I see auto service stations like a lube oil filter and a and a tire shop, but I think you get too much more than that. I think you're

Yeah, that's where it's excluding major repair work. Yeah. And we're not we're not interested. I mean, we want a development that's going to be successful for the community and for us as well, right? So, we're not interested in putting a large scale automotive repair that's doing major engine work that's going to ruin the aesthetic or the feel of our commercial grocery anchor shopping center.

Councilman Henderson, I can tell you've got something. I was just going to ask, maybe I'm misunderstanding, but if we entitled the the problem I see with tire stores is the impact wrenches are a sound nuisance if they're close to houses. And so if we entitle the entire property for a t tire store, then potentially a tire store could end up right by some homes, right? And so I would suggest we pull the tire store out today and want to come back later and a tire store out on the corner where it is, then maybe that's acceptable to us.

So my understand and I'm I'm learning this process as well. So please help me understand if I'm I'm off base here. My understanding with this PUD is if the use is approved, we still are required to come back to go over specific site plan, design elements, elevations, and so if there is concerns, it seems like that would be the time to address that so that we can go out and market and see what the the market demands and then at that next stage there can be concerns voiced over, you know, location or size or whatever it is. Am I understanding that the process? Well, I mean, if that's if that's, you know, if that's right, uh, Elden, I mean, is that right? Cuz I mean, my understanding is looking like it's entitled for the whole entire property if we pass that.

Great questions. There there's truth to both of those statements. It's a two two-step process. Um, you know, we if if tire shops were to be a permitted use, they would then go advertise, but yet they would then be required to show on the site where it's located to buffer noise, which we as a city would be heavily involved with and and influence the location and I'm down with that. So, that's fine then. So your your use, you couldn't deny it for the use because you'd already approved the use, but you could deny it for other reasons like just exclude it now until we see a plan

or you could do what Councilman Coats recommends which is exclude it [clears throat] and but but that's hard to market it if it's been an excluded use. So this is why this process is so wonky. Doesn't mean it's fully entitled next comes in with the plans. I know, but it's it's but then you have to put a tire shop there no matter what. It's just where it gets located because it's it's been entitled, right? You can't just deny it for the use. You can't say, "Well, we don't want a tire shop there because it's been entitled with the process." You say there, but not there. Yeah. You can move it in the 20 How many acres? 20 acres.

Yeah. 19 acres. I'm just an example, right? Like that I get it. The only uses is I look through this whole list that give me pause is, you know, RV sales and storage units. Other than that, they all seemist, you know, commercial activities.

I don't disagree with you. I just don't want to hear the wrenches. The other one I have a little issue with, I like all the changes that the planning commission did. I'm just fine with all those. I think those are good. The other one that I'm a concerned about is uh2 retail and or wholesale sale and or rental of goods, merchandise, and equipment. I would hate to see an Ahern rental equipment rental or something. And you know they all have their sky jacks 100 ft in the air and they're advertised. I would hate to see something like that.

Could you drop it down Elvin just so I can see line 22 Henderson it gives examples art shop beauty shop whatever it's goods where they roll out on carts onto their front display. If you go by Adrian's they got carts of suits that are out front that out every day and they roll back in. That's kind of and that's fine. But it also would include a earn rentals as well because it says it right there. Retail and or wholesale rental of goods, merchandise, and equipment, which means I'm pretty sure the grosser flip a gasket if you parked on. I'm sure he would too, but correct.

We still I mean we're giving entitlements today, so we still have to kind of look forward and I think you do because story is just one of the entitled uses. So if you entitle that and then they I mean I'm I trust you completely but you come back and you say I can't get a ger I can now get an ah right so we have to you know this what they intend to do today but once you approve those uses that can always change because we don't have the full plan yet and if there's issues on that particularly I'm I'm fine adding in language line 22 that limits you know large uh automobile rental equipment things like that because that's that's not our intent like you said but Um, yeah. So, we're I'm okay with that as well.

The planning commission excluded some items out of line 22, I believe. Um, they did laundry. Yes, just laundry. Correct. Yeah. Can you just for the record, Elden, just remind us of the plan commission's recommended exclusions? I hate to skip over something. Do you care if I stop? Just go over there and then come back. Can you just tell us what plan commission excluded? You betcha. Line 15, scratched, painting, laundry and repair services. Okay. Line 18 clinic. So it' be a hospital slashcl clinic

they excluded to to to for to permit a clinic. So it's do you get rid of hospital? like you it's it's written hospital/cl clinic but wouldn't we just want to get rid of a hospital and just do clinic because you wouldn't want to do a big hospital correct right my understanding from planning commission is that we were limiting hospital but allowing for you know clinic small scale you know smaller and I'm not exactly sure what falls under clinic but you know things like a doctor's office a clinic like the one health clinic being you know it started going vertical today did it like a medical clinic medical clinic yeah correct Okay, keep going. Elden, proper term there is hospital-ash clinic. Just

Okay. Uh line line 19 proposed to remove that line, all of those uses hotel or motel. Okay. 21 is to remove the entire use list motor vehicle, trailer, camper, and recreational vehicle sales agency. Line 22 to remove laundry from that list. And line 24, remove storage units from um define laundry.

Well, I take myself cleaners. It's not they don't do the the cleaning there. They don't do the dry cleaning there. It's it's a clean operation. I walk in, I walk out. It's, you know, it's it's it's not a coin op to find laundry. I mean, I I don't think that's an offensive use. on some of this stuff because when you're doing a nice development, you're you're not going to be I I agree with you saying it's going to be a nice development, but how do we know? We don't say have anything in front of us. That's the thing that I'm struggling with.

And you still got to let them know that they can charge forward and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in planning that they have some ability to design. that but I think what we're trying to say is otherwise if if I was say just come in as a C2 let's approve it and go then we don't have to have this conversation because it's it's allowable in our code I understand what you're saying I think I'll at least for me it's let's hold back a little until we see the plan that's all I'm saying don't just blanket give it C2 we might like you said the whole thing strike this whole part of the exhibit get the zoning where he needs and have them resubmit it with the rest of it.

That's what we did on the southwest corner. They didn't propose anything on the Andress piece. There's nothing approved there. Why are we having this? Because we're we're doing PC that this neighborhood commercial C1. All right, Rusty, you're up to bat.

You know, I need to take some responsibility for this. So my understanding here I I've been advising the the client um as far [clears throat] as process they do they do have the option to ask for straight zoning which would be easier for them because they could market they do intend to build a a grocery anchor commercial center it's all commercial and we understand that that's what the it's general plan for and that's what the council wanted um and and with the address piece they did want to get some certain uses um locked in and so after having some discussion it seems like we're kind of stuck between and it's kind of our process, but we're stuck between wanting to have a really nice design and have that looked at and not just go straight zoning, but also that they need to market and they need to be able to know what uses are available. So rather than them choose, you know, everything that they necessarily intend to, I had advised them to go through AP C1 and C2 and list all the uses, all possible uses. So, they don't intend to put I know it was said I watched the I didn't attend the uh planning commission meeting, but I did watch it afterwards. Um and and they were they you know some of the planning commissioners the word the phrase it seems like you're throwing the kitchen sink at it came up and there was kind of this mystery of what is it you know and and that wasn't the intent behind it. [clears throat] The intent was quite frankly everything is needed in this area and they understand that the council represents the community and so we I had advised them to go through AP C1 C2 of all possible uses that would work as far as what's driven by the market and then let this council as representatives of the city say which things would be appropriate and which wouldn't because this area has traditionally been difficult for commercial but it's been general plan for commercial. We have Long Valley Trails building that will connect through and right now they're hopping on seven and they're going down to two or they're going to other outside of our city limits. And so these amenities, goods, services,

we did the same thing on this with the snow piece. We did. Um but the snow piece, we did it. It was messy like we said, right? Like we didn't like the process, but they came back with a a plan, right? Well, and like Rusty says, not initially. We got a good design. What we got is a great design. Although nothing's built yet, but it's a great design.

Well, I I can tell you that when uh when we did the zone change on nice and field, had we gone through and tried to exclude this and that and the other whammers wouldn't exist today because it would have been cut right out. Well, we don't want that there. But, you know, through the PUB, they were able to design it with the pumps on the opposite side of the building from the from the homes and and and move some things around. So, it mitigated those those concerns and those issues. But, you know, you got to allow the developer some ability to go into a project and and get the right let let's try to move it forward then. So,

I agree with him that we should allow the developer, but then okay, it's PUB commercial. Give us your plan. Go figure out what works and bring it to us and see if it works.

Yeah, Councilman Ivac jumped in. Mayor, um I just I totally understand agree with what you're saying. There's a lot to to bite off here. What I would suggest, as much as I don't like tables, tableabling, I think that I would feel much more comfortable with having the applicant go back and refine this list to things that are actual uses that you're going to consider with even maybe some just rudimentary layouts of what it would look like because this is really a lot for a council to try to to try to decipher because not only we have to consider whether it's going to work there, but how it affects neighbors and all those things. And like I said, I don't like tableabling, but I I I'm not real comfortable trying to

What What if we try this? What if we try to get through the list? Keep a table in a back pocket. Try to get through a list. Matt, you and Ian know that if it's a no, it's like we it's probably a no, but if you could make a case on the way back for it that it's not definitely a no. So, what I'm hearing now is on line four, no tire shops. Line five. Are we still against child care daycare? Where are we on that one? I have no problems with child care in a in a project like that. It's actually no other developments that I've seen and around

with child care. I don't either. Okay. Six coffee shops. Okay. Do they sell soda in that coffee shop? I was thinking about that today. I think because my wife will be really mad if she can't. The soda and the coffee. That's where the cultures collide. Be good. I think it's got to be one or the other. But I I don't know. Um. Yeah. So, no soda shops are allowed, you know, cuz you didn't put soda on here. Come. It's not allowed. Sorry, guys. The regulars. No, no Coke. Like a half a muff from your house counts. Good coke. Um, seven commercial recreation entertainment facilities. Any concern there?

Just gyms, right? Color gym. Elden notation. If you read on, mayor, on number line seven, not to include Yes. certain businesses. We're good there. Are you getting this, Elden? Yes, sir. A eight personal any personal instruction, yoga, Pilates, private schools, no problem. Reception centers, wedding chapels,

restaurants, is 11, 12, 13. Bar establishments, 14 process. So I'd say remove that myself because of the the long process and it seems like a lot of people were not too fond of the process of the bar establishment but I say zone they say I say leave it because they have to go through that process anyway and if you want a restaurant with a bar in it I don't want to exclude it a restaurant this is this is just a standalone bar

okay so what I'm hearing is remove it I guess 15 the um that was I am yeah we would laundry please. I was going to say we'd ask for laundry to be put back in. I think during planning commission they were worried about the environmental impacts but there is a difference between dry cleaning and laundry and what's being cleaned on site or offsite. Even if it was dry cleaning it'd have to conform to all state regulations on dry cleaning. And so we'd ask for laundry to be put back on there. Any concerns with laundry back in? Not a problem. This side laundry was removed. 15 was removed, but we're thinking of putting it back in. Is that correct? Yeah. Okay.

Any concerns, Councilman? And then 16 or 17. Any concerns there? Plan Commission didn't have concerns. The only thing that on 17 would be overnight cure. That's a little I don't suppose you're going to have we we're not intending to large cattle or horses. So remove line 17. They just send them next door.

We know we we haven't explored hospital or veterinarian clinics. I would say if it was up to me striking overnight care of large animals, you know, in case there is a a vet of dogs, cats, birds, whatever, veterinarian would be great right there for small animals. Yeah. So we would say key veterinarian we I'm talking strike overnight care of large animals. Yep. Large animals. Yeah. And then you're comfortable just that the hospital clinic rather than hospital. Is that what I'm hearing? Yeah. And I'm not sure how it would be defined but our just to get you know the small format. Okay. Instare clinic that sort of thing. And then 19 hotel motel was removed.

20 mobile food vendors left in 21 22 and 24 were removed. 22. It's just just to exclude equipment dealers or equipment rental. Yeah. Like an ahern or beehive or something? I mean that's So to clarify, 21 was removed, 22 was added to and then 24 was removed, right? Okay. Yes. Is that was that the is that what

we just approved a liquor store or you want a liquor store there? Thi this is I learned this last time and I' I'd love to have you jump in. I didn't know this last time. The the city attorney was mentioning that whether it's approved or not that the state has the ability to come in and supersede zoning laws. We haven't talked to the state liquor store to be clear, but I didn't know that and I learned that last time. I think that's kind of why the Anyways, all right. I forgot that. You're right. Asking the question is there plans to put one on there? We haven't talked to them or we've had no communication with them. So, we got through the list. I didn't make a good notes. I can't even read my own notes of the list. It's the problem. It's on

I saw Elden writing furiously. So, I think Elden So, council, I'm I'm sorry if I pushed on this just to get it moving along here. I'm going to turn to you for further discussion on any uses or limitations on this and then somebody can try to take a stab at a motion on this one. Are we moving on to exhibits or we just um of the site because I have some concerns on that far is unless objections. I I think we should finish up the conversation on uses before we go to site. Did Did we finish the use conversation? If someone has if someone hasn't written I felt I felt bad that I pressed the use conversation.

If someone has the use the use is list written down. I don't Did you get my I mean you can always go back and watch it too so we can get it correct. Is it clear? All right. Site plan. Elden, if you'll carry on. Here's the proposed site plan. You can see on the left hand side of the screen is Washington Fields Road to the north. the top of the screen there. AC access number one is a proposed full motion full movement access there line up with the development that was approved on the west.

That's right at the All right. What was your question, Councilman? Matt, if it lines up with the access that was approved to the west, I I don't believe it's been correlated with that one to the west. There's also a a pre-existing driveway slightly to the north on the state. I got a headshake from John that they do correlate. Thank you. I was going to say we we did we did try to coordinate those. Sure they're not off if we're doing a full movement. So John,

the other detail I wanted to address is Staley Farm does claim a driveway just to the north of that boundary and there may need to be some correlation between both sides of the property lines access there. Yeah, it's it's been a minute since I've been looked at the other one, but I do know the the other one across the street, the right in right out, we do have lined. I don't believe there was another entrance point further to the north, but the right in right out, that's our intent is to make sure that those two are lined up across. So, access two lines. So, the right in right out. Yeah, access two. We'll that's that's intended to line up with the one for the snow property. I don't believe that there was a a full movement access on the snow property up there to the north. They only had a ride in right out. John, can I ask you a question?

Sure. Mil Royale and uh Washington Fields Road, what's the distance between access for our access management plan? Okay. So, Washington Fields Road. Um it's 660 for full full movement and 330 for right in right out. One in the middle. Right in right out. No, it says full motion, right? No, the Oh, it's right up. Correct. It's my concern. My concern with the two ocean ones is they're right on the edge of that property. Which which ones are we talking about? Sorry. The two ones on the north, the one on Camino Riala and Washington Fields Road. Uhhuh.

Right. Currently, the property of the north, you know, if you say that, well, now we're not going to allow access, then there's a problem because they still have to maintain access in in and out of their property, right? So

now, yes, I when when the the uh Staley um farm property was brought in for the a tourism zoning and stuff, I was one of the mo items that I brought up was we'll need to work with the Staley family and stuff on on working through all the access points along there. So this this north one that we're talking about on Fields Road, yes, we want to work together with everybody because at one time it was wanted to be shifted off of the property line. Then we now look at trying to move it onto the property line so that we maintain access separate. There's a separate access further up where they access you know into the farm area. But then that property right there

it's directly north you know they have an access that you can see what they've been using but you can't say well not 660 ft or you only have it right in right out. They still have to have full access or full motion access. Not necessarily. I mean, we work with the entire property to to try and align as accesses and we work with them as best we can to make things work um in congruence with our access management. So then why don't we make it a joint access on the property line? That's one of the items that I believe they're working with the Staley family to to realign that. Um because there's been discussion back and forth as to whether they want that one off of Fields Road to be on property line or just slightly off or

That's fine. It just shows right here that that the full motion's entirely on your property. The problem with that is now you've got a situation where you've landlocked the neighbor and I don't want to see that happen. And I think on planning commission's recommendation, the language in there says that the the full movement shared access to be coordinated between us and the property owners to the north. And uh I've had conversations with Sherry um and we are willing to to work with them and figure out how we make that work because you know we we want to be good neighbors on this. you don't want to have to shut off their access point. I mean, we want to

I don't want to suggest you're not being good neighbors or anything like that. I just I you know, I just want to make sure that that's you know, in in the record and certainly at the next level when you come in with your design, you know, we'll expect to see how that's going to work. Okay. Right. Yeah. And I I I want you, you know, council, these likely will shift slightly, but they'll stay within our access management. If like the writing right out on Fields Road to make sure that we're aligned straight across, it may it may shift 10 15 feet and stuff, but we'll make sure that those line up and we stay within our access management. But you'll see that when the when the bigger plan comes through of exactly where they'll be.

All right. I mean, I understand sometimes your access management plan says it's a certain footage or this or that, but I don't want a plan to preempt somebody's ability to get in and out of property. Yep. Totally understand. Yep. And then you said the the one on Camino, did you Well, the the one on Camino is basically shown as the same, [clears throat] you know, just barely below that that property line, too. So I I mean you've got two axes out, right? That one lines up with the the street across the street, right? And there's house all the way down.

So that's the intent with the ones on Camino is to line up with the existing roads across. So you got Roadrunner and that other access point there. So what you're saying is that that next one to the north would be where the access is for Roadunner. Yeah. Off of Camino. Correct. Since we already have an intersection established there, that would be where the access point would be. Private lots. Yeah.

So, that's not even an issue anyway. So, you're coming around the back private lots and um Okay. Well, I guess your Camino Royale might need a your access there if there's some cross access agreement to the to that property in the north behind the lots. Does that make sense? Which which property? No, I didn't follow that last statement. Oh, this we need a laser pointer in here.

I think that that that's all one that's all one part of Staley Farm. There's a house right there.

Any other conversation on the site plan or access to the site? Any other discussion or questions for the applicant? Is there anything you want to let us know or No, you covered it all. I appreciate it. Thanks so much for your time. It's always it's always a great discussion. So, thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Matt. Mayor, if there's people here in the audience who came for this line item, do you think you would um let them have opportunity to speak?

Absolutely. So, uh we did hear the public comment at the planning commission. So, if there is something that wasn't said there um or additional information that you think we should have, I'm happy to open it up for some brief comment if somebody's here for this particular item. Come on. Come on forward. Sounds like you got drew the short end of the short straw there. If you'll just state your name. And my my name's David Hillyard and I live on Roadrunner Drive. Welcome, David.

Thank you. Couple of things I mentioned to the planning commission as far as site. Uh, of course. Let's see.

Come into the mic. We'll get you on the record there. Camino Camino Rial is a highway right now. I mean, there are more cars going up and down. No speed limit controls. It's a mess. You're hearing this, Lieutenant. If you put two entrance, there will be speed uh Yeah.

control there by tomorrow morning. But if you put two uh two new entrances on Camino radal, it's going to cause a lot more traffic. And you also need a uh a light where Cam Rial and Washington Fields Road connect at that corner because the traffic coming down from Highway 7 is supposed to be 40 miles an hour. Nobody does 40 miles an hour there. And so you're creating a problem here just with with people getting around and and it's just going to be a mess for traffic. That's all I can say.

Thank you. Is there anything else you you'd add? Well, yeah. on some of the things that they planned, you know, for the uh for the project. Uh you've talked about a lot of them, but I think uh you know, my my feeling was going to the planning commission, the planning commission should have had them come in and and lay out their plan. You know, we don't know how high the buildings are going to be that they plan. We don't know anything about that. and and that was kind of the debate amongst the council here on here on this process. So, we will see that at their next application. Yeah.

And that's when I'm confident this council will will vet all of those parameters. And the advantage of them doing this planned unit development commercial this way rather than just straight zoning is that does give the council a lot more um input and flexibility on making it attractive. the elevations, the look, the feel, addressing some of those soft elements that wouldn't be addressed on just straight zoning. So, it can be a little messy, but we're going to get there. It's just like a car wash. We have so many car washes in town. We don't need another car wash. Do you agree with that? Everyone's sitting up here. Yeah. I mean, we don't need another one. We [laughter]

Okay, I made [laughter] my comments. Thank you. And then we know you, but for the record, if you just state your name again. Britt Nichols. I live on uh Roadrunner as well. Good to see you, Brit.

One of the things perhaps the council needs to consider is El Camino is used by a lot of children and I'm on that road almost every day. And I'm sorry, these kids on their scooters, their electric motorbikes, their ebikes are blasting up and down this street. not looking. Uh when we drive on that road, we slow down and we're just paranoid because they're crossing roads, they're not looking. It's also heavily used by children going to school. And so we have to consider that any egress that is going on El Camino is going to add to that problem. We've already had a real tragic accident

up on Majestic. I would hate for us to have one in our neighborhood [clears throat] as well. So that's something we we need to consider on in this regard. Thank Thank you, Brit. And I'll just let you let you know as you're walking back to your seat that this is that those electric scooters and motorbikes are they are something that this council has taken very seriously. We've had in-depth conversation with staff and our PD. Um we're doing our best to educate the the parents of those riders and just help them do those in in the right places and at the right speed. It's it's a new element that's really challenging and we have seen some tragedies. I'll take one or two more if anybody else wants to speak to this just briefly if there's anything new or additional that should be added.

Seeing none, I'll turn back to the council. Um I'm ready for a motion. Ready for a motion. Do Before you do that, can I just ask something really quickly? Um, the access number five, is that something that is required or is or is that something that you could John? It sounds like you got a little too comfortable back there of um, can you address Councilwoman Castersonson's comment about number five and then I I kind of did go back through the list if anybody cares or anybody want to make a motion unless you got it. [clears throat] I got it on the back of a envelope here. That's all I could find a ride on. Um, access point five is one that they had requested. It does meet our access management.

It does or does not. It does. It does meet our access management for road classification on Camino Royale. Um, and again, we've lined it up with um Roadrunner um across the way since it's already a platted street in an intersection there. So, I just wondering if like with, you know, based upon the comments if you could have more of the traffic be, you know, closer to George Washington and not have it be close, you know, to the all the residents if, you know, that could make any difference not to have the the traffic go, you know, back closer to the all the residents there. that.

Yeah. I mean, based upon, you know, what they're talking, if it's a large ger and stuff, you're you're probably trying to squeeze in between those two those two access points. So, trying to put one in in between those probably wouldn't work. And then the only one that would, you know, is the the existing one down there, access four, since it's right across from an existing um intersection and stuff as well. So, so you would need you need to have you need to have five. You couldn't just do four.

You could do four. I mean, it ultimately it's it's it's your decision. Um, our our deal is we we're just simply looking at existing access points and and whether it meets access management. Um, I would defer to the council and and the developer if it's an access point that they truly need and want. it meets our if it meets our access management. I don't know how we can tell them they can't have it. Well, I'm just asking because it's closer to, you know, more residents over there. Just trying to keep more traffic on George Washington Boulevard and where it's busier, not you know, not into residential areas. No, I agree with you as I'm just saying if they meet dictate if they can put it there or not.

Yeah, it it is tough for staff to deny it if it does meet our access management. The other thing with us looking at Camino Royale and those access points is it helps alleviate traffic from that neighborhood back there having to get down all the way to George Washington Boulevard or whatever to to access to get back into the property. We don't want to be pushing additional traffic that would, you know, frequent this getting them down onto George Washington Boulevard. We would much rather prefer that that neighborhood would be using the Camino Rial um access points. So, it just would hamper traffic movements back out on George, Washington with that one access point. John, do we require a right turn lane on any of these like we have on

We may very well um until we get a little bit further in and start seeing traffic, but we we could see a right hand probably there on the George Washington one. We could I'm just saying like that's some of the problems we see on some of these on Fields Road in George Washington is there's nowhere to turn, right? So, those accesses might require it. They we may Isn't it Isn't it per our code that it is required on Washington field road? I don't believe so. I'd have to go in and take a look, but I don't believe that there's requirement based on it's based on traffic count. Councilman Coast, this isn't showing the design. This is just showing the locations of where they want full motion. Yeah. Yeah, that's a good comment. Yeah, you're right. I mean, the design will come back and and

Yeah. And I'm not saying put that in here today. I'm just bringing it up to John that I think that we've done it in the past on other commercial developments along Fields Road. Never I' never George Washington, but yeah. And and as as part of this project, you know, they'll they'll be building all these out. So you have George Washington will be a five lane. Uh obviously Washington Fields five lane as well. So thanks John. Sure. Thank you. Don't get too comfortable. Matt, did you have anything else to add? Otherwise, I think Council Bellis is about ready for a motion. Yeah, I I think we're ready. I'm sorry we're taking up so much time. I was just going to We want to get this right.

Yeah, I was just going to remind every I mean, we are doing substantial improvements to all three of the roads where the roads will be widened, sidewalks will be in, landscaping. There's a the trail system that will go along George, Washington. Um, so there will be part of the the concern about traffic on Commino Royale and kids walking. You know, today there's no sidewalk and we will be obviously putting in sidewalks and things like that per city code. And access 5 was particularly important for us with how grocery and you'll see the site plan when we bring it back in, but how cars can then loop out of the grocery store instead of driving right in front of the grocery store and creating additional conflict points driving putting putting so much traffic in front of the grocery store. Um, so those are my only comments, but we're Yeah, I think that's it. Thank you.

Wonderful. Thank you, Sher. I see you came to the front row. You do have something to add that you didn't say the other night. Maybe. Okay,

Sher Tate. Um, I just want to I probably said this the other night, but I think it's worth repeating. So, um, I just hope we're very intentional on our design and what we do as we've been with Whammers and these other areas. It's it's important. I think that that four corners is a is a beautiful spot that we all should be very proud of. Evergreen has been awesome to work with and we've really I think they catch the vision of Washington Fields and what the residents want and I feel like um if I can just say something like we were a long time at planning commission and we're long here because of this I don't know where the lack of communication is on on how how it's supposed to come forth but um yes we would all love to just see a plan and it would be great but anyway so I just feel like if we um moving forward, it's important to us that we, you know, get our accesses we that we're not the ones that say, "Oh, sorry, because they're building a big commercial thing. You guys are going to have to figure it out." I hope I I feel confident we can work with them and hopefully the city to to make this all work. But I just wanted to add that like just just uh be just as intentional on this project as we were Whammers and the others that are, you know, cuz we were going to have a big Washington fields plan and and we haven't seen it, but we're in moving in the right direction. So, thank you.

Great comments. Thank Thank you, Sherry, and thank you for your input the other night. Um, it is a little, like I said, it's a little bit of a messy process, especially on this one, but we're we're doing it this way so that we we can be intentional on that. And we appreciate you too, Matt, and all the work you're doing. Council Bellison, I think you might have this. Do you need the back of my envelope or you I need the list. If you've got the list, or I was going to get with Elden on this is a I don't know if you can. No, I want the one that's marked up that we said we're going to get rid of so that I can that's Elden can cross reference me, but that was just kind of off my scratches and

just to just to clear things up. I I personally don't have a tire store or have a problem with the tire store. I don't think it's heavy repair. Do you have a problem with it? I just Maybe we'll just let them ask back for that one. Maybe we'll just let them ask back for a tire store. That's how I feel. Let him ask kind of what I heard the consensus was. Is that council [clears throat] I'll I'll make a stab at it. We'll see.

All right. Um, I'd make a motion that we approve an ordinance for zone change Z-25-24 from A20 to PDC located at Washington Fields Road and George Washington Boulevard, but we remove um bar establishment. We changed from hospital to hospital clinic, remove hotel or motel. We remove um motor vehicle and RV sales. We exclude Ahern type rentals. We exclude and we remove storage units.

And then did you do line 21 motor? Did you already say motor vehicle trailer camper? I did answer that. Okay. He says correct. You've heard the motion. Any recommendations to the councilman on his motion? Was that consistent with I think what we tried to go through? Did we have we You didn't say tire shop. So, I didn't say tire shop. [laughter] Want to make that clear. The PUB is part of the design and they're gonna have to show it. Out of all four corners, this is probably the best place to put a tire shop. I didn't want it on the west because there's residents on the southwest because it does in the southeast, but this one

I think best out of all if we have to have one there. But you're going to have a lot more um noise from exhaust from vehicles as they take off from the stoplight than you will from a couple of impact wrenches. Right. And it's Hey, I listen I lived right, you know, half a block away from the the stoplight at Fields Road in Washington Dav. I can tell you that the exhaust noise is way worse than a couple impact wrenches. All right, we have a motion on the table. I am looking for a second. I will second that. Have a motion and a second.

We'll go roll call on this beginning with council. What? Councilman Coats. Just was looking in the right direction for Should I just leave right now? Just say hi. [laughter] No. Should we start with Councilman Coat? I think so. My turn. We're beginning with [clears throat] council member Henderson. I Belliston. Hi, Caspersonson. Hi, Ivy. Hi, Coats. Hi, Matt. It wasn't pretty. Bring us back a great site plan with intentional design and let's get this going. Okay.

Thank you. going to let Mayor Brown leave so early. Hey, thanks for hanging in in there for, you know, a few hours. Good job.

Apparently, I don't know anything about ponds. We'll move on to item 8B. This is consideration to approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-8A-8 detached accessory dwelling unit. And Elden, do you want to run 9 C uh 8C concurrently with it and 8C, which is consideration to approve an ordinance amending city code title 9-8b-7 detach accessory dwelling unit. Community Development Director Elden Gibb will actually let you get through your entire presentation this time before interrupting. I promise.

No problem. Happy to be here. Uh this is a great item here. You know, we had the hack conference a couple months ago. Uh kind of kicked things off. Since then, we've had a few applications that have conflicted our our current code. So So this is good kind of um updating the code to meet demand. Um, council made some recommendations from the work session such as increasing the footage and defining how we calculate the square footage which I've incorporated into this. Planning commission heard this last week. Also had some really good comments I've incorporated. Do have a few concerns still. Uh, we'll dig in here and and uh figure it out. Starting with uh number two there. um proposing to remove the requirement or that the wording has no attached garage or car carport so that these DADU units could indeed have a attached garage or carport to the facility. Looking down to number two, um proposing to remove the minimum 10,000 square foot lot requirement. And then the planning commission had the comment that they wanted to add the note that detached accessory dwelling units shall be constructed in a manner so that the exterior material is in the same is of the same of the main residence so that it blends in feels like existing and and just meshes with the existing.

Can I make a comment on that? um for not to have that in there because um I think there's some there could be a nice detached accessory dwelling unit built that would be very nice, pleasing to the eye and all that that's not necessarily the same as the house.

Me that just sounds like I'd rather leave that up to CCNRs, but Cuz like in a neighborhood like mine that doesn't really have CCNRs, we don't have an HOA. I would hate to restrict one of my neighbors to having the accessory dwelling unit match their house. Exactly. That just feels too much like CCNRs to me, you know, and I don't think the city should should be involved in that. Um

I would too for just for a different reason, right? Like my my last house, my roof was tile and pitched. My RV garage, I went with flat roof just so that it didn't stick that much higher. So, I brought it down. So, it was just a different different style as well. I would take that out.

Not that I mean that just to me really restricts people, you know? I mean, there's a lot of areas in our city that don't live in an HOA for a reason, you know, and uh I know one of the gentlemen that talked in uh uh the planning commission, you know, didn't want metal buildings and stuff like that, but I've seen some beautiful metal buildings out there, and I don't mind them in in my neighborhood. You know, I got a neighbor next door that has a beautiful metal uh accessory dwelling unit and it doesn't match his house, but it it's really nice, you know. So, I mean, to me, I I'd rather give people that don't live in an HOA with CCNRs a little more freedom to, you know, build something that they want to build. I mean, there's some neighborhoods in Washington that it would be just fine for somebody to build one of these out of a a uh shipping container, you know? I mean, shipping container construction is really popular now. And that right there would prevent anybody in the city from even considering a shipping container building, you know. So, you know, Councilman, it might also um slow down the process of building the ADU if you're trying to find brick that You know, I mean, I'm sure it wouldn't be that restrictive. It have to be the exact same brick, but I think it gives builders latitude if they don't want to be that expensive if their home's brick and they'd rather have siding or Yeah. Can I can I make a comment? I I've spoken a lot already, but I I'll make one comment and then I'm going to back out of the whole thing. But one thing that we get from as concerned from neighbors when you're thinking about accessory dwelling units, you're talking about neighborhoods that are already built. So, a lot of times when we get complaints like a shed or or an accessory, somebody that says, it's kind

of like our last comment, I bought this house and I knew what I had around me, right? I knew what the houses looked like and I knew what it was going to feel like and now you're building something that I didn't buy into, if that makes sense. And and also with the heights and things like that. I mean, I bought a house and nobody was looking in my backyard or I knew what was already built around me. So, I just just when we get complaints, those are the complaints that I get. We got we've got a couple of in the last couple of weeks where someone was building a metal shed and somebody said this obviously can't be allowed. There's no way the city would allow this. So, I just just as you as you make your comments, think about that. What we're doing is putting these into existing neighborhoods where where people already bought in. Just

I agree. When when you say shipping container, it makes me a little concerned because and and and it's completely up to you guys if that's what you want to allow, but but we will get those calls about, you know, you allowed a shipping container in my my neighborhood. So, I mean, I a whole lot of people that are rushing to do a shipping container and turn it into a house without dressing it up and doing something cool with it. But like I I don't want to have something that's southwest style. If I wanted to do a little cottage style, you know, little one-bedroom thing out back, that might be kind of a cute thing in my backyard that, but if if we say it's got to match the house, it it can't.

One person thinks it's a really cute thing, another person doesn't. Either we're going to allow these or not. And the problem is any of these ADUs are going to go in existing uh neighborhoods because you're not building a new house. I just want us to think about that because we will get those calls. Get rid of the ADU ordinance so we don't get I think we're just trying to say what what's what we're trying to say is what are we okay with telling people you're right and we're okay with it. So,

trying to minimize the impact um the neighbors because something I was thinking about too is like the height um where we're raising the height. You could have you're you know a you're going to be able to build a detached accessory dwelling unit 3 ft from your neighbor's backyard and then you could if it's you know a a twotory you'd be looking into the right into the neighbor's backyard. So, like think about a neighborhood that has um all um singlestory homes and then you have one of the neighbors that wants to put a you know [clears throat] an detached accessory dwelling unit in there and then they have this twotory in the backyard looking over their neighbors yard.

Mo most of your concerns, Jeremy, are taken care of in CCNRs in most subdivisions. But people like me that are hillbillies and live on the street that I live on for a reason. I want to be able to exercise my property rights and build whatever building I want to live within code on HOA and I wouldn't want a shipping container that didn't have some kind of cover on it right next to my house. I will tell you have CCNRs in your neighborhood. Two grow this week. Zero CCNRs. Zero CCNRs. Zero HOA.

That's it. complaints I got this this last couple of weeks were from downtown neighbors and so where those areas were built long CCNRs were a thing but I I'm not arguing with you I'm just I want to make the point so that we have it on the record and when somebody comes in and says are you think about have them give me a call okay have them call me I'll talk to them

I know but council I I agree with manager red in the fact of I'm fine with doing different types of materials, but it's got to be cohesive with the neighborhood, right? I mean, that's my opinion because I agree. I built here this and then all of a sudden they build whatever they want. They're

I address your concerns, Councilwoman Caspersonson. You know, you said, "Well, I don't want to have somebody, you know, this big twotory behind me." Um, my house is a predominantly flat roof where I currently live. Uh, an RV garage. I cannot physically build an RV garage next to my house that's not going to be taller than my house. So, you kind of just need to pick a number on a height and build to this height. Um, the challenge and and I asked Elden to bring this forward is I have I have a client that wants to build an RV garage. Totally allowable. He wants to build an ADU, totally allowable. You stick the two together, our code cancels each one out and he can't do it, right? So, just because he wants to build an RV garage with a bedroom on it, he now can't build that because we don't allow it under the code. So, some of these changes just need to be made so that, you know, that people have options to be able to do them.

Yeah. And my first instinct is to let people like Brett um excuse me, Councilman Henderson said is to do what they want. But then when you listen to residents and their concerns too is I think you have to take consideration too on the you know the community and and the neighborhoods and the impact that it does have. And I don't know I guess I think this I think this ordinance does I mean allowed an ADU um which is already allowable. we need to allow people to be able to build it if especially if they can combine it with another use um that are both allowable under the code. Does that make sense?

Makes sense. Although I I you know I I feel like the the concerns of like having an RV garage I think is different than having a living space 3 ft from someone's backyard and then having you know like you're essentially like looking down into their into their you'd have you could look down into their home and to their backyard because you could put a window right there you know facing the backyard and so I feel like a garage how is it house of 10 foot setback being next to another twotory house foot setback. It's not

Well, how would you how what about the singlestory um homes that I brought up like they're all in a singlestory neighborhood and then you have a bunch of homes that start doing twotory in the back of their homes. Councilman, you know, a neighborhood like that, typical we have CCNRs that would not Well, we just have a situation where Councilman Coats brought up that he don't have he doesn't have any of those things. I'm going to look that up tomorrow and get back with him because I don't believe it. [clears throat] Here's the other here's the other problem. You know, there's there's there's certain [laughter]

tomorrow. Can I make a comment? So, Councilman Ivy made a good point. Like there's a lot of homes that were built say 25 years ago out of brick. That brick is completely discontinued. And if somebody wants to build an ADU or a detached garage or something like that, number one, they're not going to be able to afford the brick. And number two, they're not going to be able to find the brick that matches. And so I just find that little addition there a little problematic. So I'd like to see it removed.

There are certain dimensions in construction that are you have to build to, right? are are are just kind of inherent. An RV garage is going to be a 16 foot plate line, right, with the tr roof trusses on top of that. A twotory ADU is going to be, you know, 9 foot plus 1 foot plus 9 foot to the plate line. So that's 18,

right? Um, but right now the ADU says we can only build to 17 feet to the overall height. And so you can't physically you couldn't physically do it even though both are allowable, you know, independently. So we just need to pick a height and that I thought he did a great Elden did a great job on pick of 25 ft or it needs to be reduced height if it's closer to the property line, right? So it it's it's a little bit lower and then as you pull in to the property, you can go a little bit higher, but most people don't build to three feet to the property. Could you? Yes. But most people don't because of fire codes that that come in because now you've got to deal with fireblaze glass and other fire codes to protect your neighbor.

Those are not that like I I personally would want to which we did build as close as you can to the property line even if you have to do all those additional with you know meet all the different fire codes because you want to give yourself more space in your property. So, you want to push it as close as you can, but you you're still seven and a half. No, I'm talking about detached. Like I I would want to I we just barely did this and we push it as far as property line so we could have more space. I think backard

I think that these are all good points. They really are. I mean, there's an argument every direction, but I just want to remind the Council of Hawaii we have ADUs in the first place and why they're a topic with the League of Cities and Towns almost every week. It's because we're trying to address housing shortages and and I I kind of always default to property rights and is that property rights the person that is building the ADU or will be possibly negatively affected by a neighbor's ADU? I think that um it it's a hard balance to find, but for me personally, I'm just going to default to the idea that we need to be able to build them in a way that promotes people to do it and they can do it without a lot of restrictions.

I think we could beat exterior elevator exterior colors up enough. But we move on to the next. I was just wondering if there might be a list of included and excluded exterior products. I got a pen. have a a tear chart. I'm all out of envelopes. I got you. Carry on. Elden

regards to the materials. If I could just follow up with that. It it says is of the same material. So it it's not adamant that it is the same. If a house has stuckle, brick, rock, it it if this is approved this way, that unit would need to incorporate same similar materials. We're not asking for the exact [clears throat] color, the exact product, but just to look and feel and kind of you still kind of by doing it of the same material,

you know, what if I wanted to build a detached dwelling in my backyard. My house right now is stucco. What if I wanted to save the expense of Stuckco and I wanted to do Hardy Board myself without hiring a Stuckco contractor? I paint it the same color as my Stuckco, but it's Hardy board. That would prevent me from doing that. Correct. That's the way I read it. And and if your roof is tile roof and I do a flat roof, that's different material, you know. I just I'm with him. I don't I don't

comments. Looking to number three here. We'll get to the next page. worded this to read. The square footage of detached accessory dwelling units shall meet the following criteria. Detached porches and/or garages are not calculated in the detached accessory dwelling unit square footage are calculated towards the side and rear percentages. The detached accessory dwelling unit square footage when calculated together with other existing or future structures shall not cover more than 30% of the rear yard and 50% of this IDYard area. Um this is where we incorporated the tiered structure. um R16 and R112, keep the same 1,000 square ft with the um exception here that if a lot size is bigger than 15,000 square ft in one of these zones, they could then abide by the R115 criteria. There are a few lot sizes out there, a few examples, you know, the PUB zones. um couple other examples throughout the city that they're zoned in the R110 or R112, but yet they're sitting on a half acre.

So, um because this is all straight zoning, you mentioned PUD. If somebody was in a PUD that had room, is it allowable or not? It is correct. Yes. Yes. R1, they they would abide by this criteria here. So, they would be considered an R110. to to meet that criteria. Yes. Based off their lot size within within that PUD zone. Okay.

The planning commission did recommend to drop the R12 in with the R115. I I don't see eye to eye with that. I feel like the R12 is a little bit too dense, a little too small to include a 1500 square foot floor plan and up to 25 foot. Um, I would leave that up to council to get get some input there and decide what we do with that. Looking to number four, the height of detached accessory dwelling units shall meet the following criteria. Again, the the same tiered structure here, R16 through the R R112, 17T tall with the exception if they meet the lot size of 15,000 square ft, they can then jump into that criteria.

So, we're only allowed to go to 25, correct? with the exception that um and here's where we get into the foot per foot rule. Starting at 3 ft off the property line, you can go up to 20 ft and then an additional height for every foot moved in towards the the property. Can I ask another question? Right. So, shall not exceed 1,000 square feet or 1500 feet. Why why do we care if they're meeting their um open space of the lot requirements?

Thousand square feet is pretty big. Um they already had to meet their 30% or 50% you know requirements. Are you asking for an actual answer or you is this a rhetorical question? I mean, it would go to my same comment before that you knew what you had next to you and all a sudden you're you're going to have another 2,000 square foot structure next door to you. It's just another in my mind the limitation would be limitation for your neighbor. You know, just

what it would that would work really well for. But think of a lot of your downtown. You've got big big lots downtown. So, if you can you put that on the screen if this is really interesting. I mean, I'm not trying to It's just you knew what your neighbors were and now you can have David. This is Thad. Can I do um screen share?

Yes. Elton should be able to swap you to the Apple TV. Can you see

in the for the airplane code and I can't see it on the monitor? There it is. council. This is an image of a that I took myself within oh about a block from here. you'll see the traditional home structure and then represent anything other than in my viewpoint an example of what the market will build if there aren't if there aren't some forms of uh rules to to for staff to administer. And so you'll see the add-on here is slightly larger than the original structure. original

original structure is right here by the two Italian cyprress. I'll I'll pull it up a map on a map and show you where it's at. It's it's right next to the Adair Spring uh source monument, but I'll I'll show you on a map if you don't know where that is. So that that looks attached there. It they attach the two car ports on on a wall. And so that this is essentially an add-on. U but it is a good example I think of what the market's going to build if there isn't some form of a you mean in terms of the thousand or 1500 square feet or

if city code doesn't adopt standards in certain places all I'm saying is the market's ready to to build baby build this this ordinance wouldn't even correct that's why this is allowed right now but I think I think just think of the think of what somebody can do if we don't put any limit. And if you're okay with that, that's okay. We just it's a good discussion to have so that when that does go in, we say, "Yeah, we talked about it. We we thought about it." And but the thousand

that's not necessarily for that's not an affordable house, right? If we're if affordability is one of the things we're looking for, you know, a 3,000 foot ADU is not necessarily hitting any affordability. Are we talking about changing the size or are we comfortable with the,000 and500? Because to me, this is for that young couple or that, you know, mother-in-law or whatever. Just it gives some flexibility to infill and use the space.

I I like the way Elden's kind of drafted this based on council feedback. I'm just asking why why we even why we even go that down that road because we we do already limit how much area can be used and these lots are small enough that you would be really hard to utilize that much area for 3,000 foot house with two garages. You know whi which lots are small enough. We've got some we've got some big lots in downtown that have no CCNRs and no that that could certainly fit another 3,000 square feet and not so you'll see here see on my map where the cursor is city hall R16 to R12. You going to have a heck of a hard time

image I showed you is right on the upper right corner here. You'll see that's the original structure and that property you saw being built is filling that whole space there. Yeah, I I like I like where we're going like with the context of an accessory dwelling unit, not a new home. If they want a second home, then we have an R2 zoning they can apply for. But I like where we're going with this one. And plus, we're broadening it already. I mean, this is we're trying to be responsive to to the need for for housing. That's because otherwise we're doing like duplexes. Yeah. I don't want to get hung up on it. Let's move on. What was the reasoning behind it? If someone wants two residences, let's reszone it to R2. Yeah.

Number four, uh the height, which we just dug into, um R15 and larger larger can go up to 25 foot starting at 20 ft off of 3 ft there. Any questions, comments, concerns with that? I already expressed mine, so I won't bore you with that again. I'm going to buy the lot right next to Kim's and I'm going to build [snorts] the tallest garage ever. [clears throat] Are you gonna What are you going to build it out of? Like what material do you think? A shipping container. [laughter] Shipping containers. Container. Yep.

Item number line item five here. um proposing to scratch that remove the 10-ft separation from the existing home. So what is the setback? What is the distance? There is no distance. There would not be fire code would regulate that distance between that the fire code would regulate. Correct. Yes. Do you know what that is? I'm just curious because I I do not have it memorized. Okay. Um, I just wonder that would work with I guess they'll figure it out what the what the fire code is.

Well, I'm just wondering without, you know, having a distance between the the home and the that just if the current res I don't I can think about that later. On a plan review with the building department. Correct. Chief, you want to take a stab or I mean I know you have [clears throat] Uh, as far as state your name for the record and we haven't seen you here for a minute. Evans Chief, it's good to see you, buddy. Um, I really asked this question so you could come forward so we could say hello and everything. I was just about to fall asleep.

The whole meeting has been building to this moment right here. it uh the the closer you get to it that uh it it requires as uh Councilman Belston was talking about that uh it starts to require different ratings. So the closer you get the more rating you would have to put there. So, you get to five feet and you got to have an hour rating. You get under that, it's got to have a two-hour rating. And you'd have to do that on both the your home and the way if you're going to do whatever, you know, how close you do it, you have to make adjustments to both your home and the ED,

anything that uh that's within that distance. And that would be the same for and that's actually inside and outside the wall. Um, and so when you you talk about windows, when you get that close, it gets way too expensive. So you don't typically see windows in that um because of what it costs to get that kind of rated material. And that's within the closest that you have to start doing that is within did you say your property line? So your structure and then your line and then if your neighbor does the same thing then they would have to do that same piece. Well I'm saying the is it is the distance it begins at three and five. Begins at five. Begin at five. Okay.

Yep. Starts at five and then it uh it goes up as far as that rating. rating between house from between an ADU and an existing house because they're both on your same property is just like a normal house. Yeah, that's correct. So, it can come closer than 10 ft, which our code kept them 10 feet apart, but it was just kind of an arbitrary number. It didn't not because of anything that would be required by building code or fire. Yeah, fire code was updated and we didn't update our ordinance to reflect those changes which we're doing now. Issue that was a true requirement. Thanks.

Thanks, Chief. Appreciate it. Elden, is the is the next item Appreciate you, Chief Evans. Is the next item the uh is it the same? Looks the same to me. It is correct. Just applied to the uh R1 zoning. I think this is the residential rule. The other one's just for the street. Okay. Okay. So, um before I turn back to council, I see a gentleman here that's interested in this item. I'm just going to give you the opportunity to state your name and say a few words if you'd like. Yeah. Yeah. Just don't get too comfortable with the mics. Keep it tight. We've all been here a while. And start with your name.

Uh my name is Dan Wit. I'm a builder here in southern Utah and I specifically focus on ADUs. So give us your give us your feedback on this conversation.

So a couple things um yeah feedback on the original topic which was similar build um and and to address your concern um uh with height that has been a similar thing in other cities um and can come up with neighbors um especially on the twotory thing. So, like Elden was saying, well, the taller you go, the farther the way farther away you need to be from the property line certainly would help with that. And or um going to the original setbacks if if you know you do a two-story home and the setback is eight and 10 on each side and you want to do a twotory ADU, then match the setbacks of the main home. And so that can sometimes resolve that issue of well that has already got an eight and 10 side setback for a two-story home. Their ADU if it meets that same setback would could sometimes resolve that. Um there's not a lot of call for twotory ADUs. Um because again you're trying to keep it in less than 1,000 ft. I would say the average size is right around 5 to 600 square feet single bedroom typically for family, young couple or mom or dad. Um so twotory becomes problematic in 5 6 7 800 ft because the amount of square footage you lose in the stairway. Mh.

Um, but still it's it's wise to think about it and and consider those concerns because one neighbor might not care about the person living next to them or might deliberately want to do something just to irritate them and and build a twotory that has a window peering right into their yard and when you're 3 ft off the line versus farther away. So, I I like how that's written where it's 17 ft um when you're 3 ft off the line, but then you get higher if you move away from that line. Um, regarding the um similar build, I agree with Elden that it's not that it's saying it has to be the exact same color, um but of similar build materials and quality. That's verbiage that's used in a lot of

similar is a better word. And that gives some flexibility,

right? So similar build quality and materials. So then a similar material to Hardy board is Succo. Those are considered similar building materials um in in its quality standpoint, right? So similar build and quality puts that in the in the same realm and and that gets you away from brick that doesn't exist anymore and that kind of stuff. So, you know, certainly have an opinion on that verbiage. Um the setback for fire code. Obviously we we love the idea of having closer setbacks 3 ft from the property line because farther than that, you know, 8 and 10, we're we're trying to get it closer to the property line. When we're 7, 8, 10, you know, a lot of cities are getting closer to that property line. And 3 to 5t is a very magic number. We don't get a lot of push back from customers if we're telling them we're in between 3 and 5t. when it gets up to eight and 10, that's where we were getting push back. I go, what am I going to do with that 10 feet behind my ADU and it really eats into the yard. So, that magic number for setbacks is really in that 3 to 5 foot range. Five foot real obviously uh three that three to five foot range obviously solves a lot of problems on the fire code as well. So, yeah,

that's actually really helpful. Any feedback, council? Sure. Appreciate what appreciate your comments. Uh my main thing with that one uh you know the similar materials is when we make city ordinances we want to avoid subjective decisions right so one person's similar materials may be different than another person's similar materials like I like your definition of similar materials but we try to avoid subjective decisions you know so because one one guy at the city might think party board's not anything like Stuckco, but another guy might take your viewpoint that says Stuckco and Hardy. [clears throat]

And to your point, it really does become a problem when the main home only has Stuckco. So, if the main home has stone, stucco, and Hardy board, well, now the ordinance works because you could do the ADU in full Hardy board or full stone or full stuckco. But the problem comes in is well, what if the home doesn't have anything but brick or stone? Then then that's where you get into this difficult way of creating the verbiage that protects neighbors and and

you guys from getting phone calls because you know we don't want we don't want the neighbors of our clients calling into the city complaining about I mean we're putting a sign out in front. We're trying to do everything we can to mitigate the neighbors complaints of what's going on which is sometimes based out of jealousy. Don't leave for me because you're you're helpful. Um, do you feel like similar quality is subjective? Absolutely. Yeah, because some people would say tin is not the same quality as 2x6 exter you know 2x6. You use the term similar build and quality. That was an interesting well code. So everything has a certain amount of quality. So yeah.

Well, yeah. Don't you think the objective other than code? So, well, and the shipping container would have nice quality next to my backyard. Your next deer lot would be ideal. Yes, it' be nice quality. Especially if they're stacked three high, right? [laughter] All right. So,

and I think a comment was said earlier, well, no one would put a shipping container back there without making it kind of pretty around. That's not okay. I mean, if you will allow it to be a shipping container that can just be left rusty, if there's not a CCR in place, then I guarantee you there's customers out there that would put a shipping container 3 ft from the property line, if nothing else, just to irritate the neighbor that pissed them off 5 years before or something like that. So, that would be my concern with with Well, again, CCNR's, you know, they've still got to meet that, you know, their neighborhood issues issues there, right? His neighborhood on straight zoning. I guess that's my only concern is where do you is there a line? Right.

Right. And a majority of the neighborhoods do have CCNRs, but there are plenty that don't have those CCNRs or those H or or they might have some CCNRs, but they're so vague that it's like, yeah, whatever. Do whatever you want to do. Thank you. Yep. Appreciate that. Council, you've got two items here. Is there any other

They're the same. 8 B 8C are the exact same um except for just one applies to the agricultural zoning, one applies to single family zoning, but it's the same ordinance. You got a few things to chew on and then uh and then if if somebody's ready for a motion, I I I worry about that shipping container. I know we're joking about it, but you know what? I don't vote on it. I just give my two bits. You shouldn't have said the word shipping container. That was my mistake. There are people who have brought those in. I think that I think that there was comments about that. So, it's not like it's not a legitimate

mayor. It has been a minute since we looked at the agenda. So, I'll just remind that there are two items that need two motions there. Right. Right. We'll need we'll need two. But let's when Are they ident? They're not identical. They are the red lines and and strikethroughs are identical. If you look at the very top,

I would like to change the R115 and larger to start at 17 in height to match and then you can move in and do it higher. So, so the R115 and larger on number four, it it's it has 20 rather than 17. And I think it'd be better to have both of the heights start at 17 and then you can go higher as you move in to your property. Um work. It doesn't work to build that way.

The plate line. You have to be able to build, you know, to the plate line at 19. It doesn't work. I I mean, you don't length that even equals 17. And that was to the that was to the top, right? So you've still got to put trusses on. But you're saying if you keep it at the ADU can never go. Yeah. Through that. I mean, you ought to be able to have a second story if you're doing a larger law. again just

well you can if you go in further than onto your property. So you're not having a twostory home right next to your neighbor 3 ft from your neighbor's home. So, in the scenario that I brought up that RV garage is having two bedrooms, right? But they're on the second floor now because the R the RV garage is allowed, but the once you put a bedroom on it, it's so no longer allowed because it's now considered an ADU and they cancel each other out. I mean, that's part of the problem. Yeah. You move it further into your property if you want to do that. No,

because you still have to be able to have the room in the back of your property for for other stuff. How are you going to put a How are you going to move an RV garage into the interior of your property? You got to get past your house to get into the RV garage. It doesn't work. I feel like it could on some homes. Isn't that two separate permits? No, it's one building combining uses into one building. It's not two separate permits. I mean, that's that's the problem. Se it needs to be I mean, someone could do an RV garage and then put an AU on the back of if they're wanting to do that. No, they couldn't.

Why? Because the GR the garage space doesn't because that rule alone, that rule alone is 17 ft. I'm saying what you could build a garage and then on the back side of it or the front on the back side of it you could have an ADU in the the have like a little bedroom in the back. No, you can't. Why? Because it because it now be the the codes cancel each other out. How do they cancel each other out? You explain on that is that's the problem with it. As soon as you put the the bedrooms in that structure, it's considered an accessory dwelling unit. The accessory dwelling unit rule says you can't do these things.

But isn't there But isn't didn't it say in here that the garage space is not included as part of the square footage, Elden? Correct. Yeah. The square footage of of the 1,000 square feet or 1500 square feet. It sounds like coun I think councilwoman counselor's just concerned with the height of of the structure. Um I think you guys are just not seeing eye to eye on this. You know both have that argument. Um well the 17T doesn't work when you have a second in the 17 doesn't work when you have a 16T plate line

for the original. What if on the twostory instead of the three-foot setback you had a five foot to start with? So you're start in a little bit more. Would that kind of accomplish the same thing? Well, that's what I think I was saying, right? I was saying 17 for the three and then when you and then you move in and you can go higher, but maybe instead of say 17, you just say five feet on the twotory and you start still start at 20, but you're you're five instead of Why don't you just 25? you start growing.

Well, because you go up a foot for every additional foot that you go in the way that it's written. So, [clears throat] if you start at 3T and at 20 and then each foot you go in, you go up a foot. So, I'm just saying if 17 doesn't work, why you just started at five and 20 and then each se So, if you went back 10, then you could get to your 25 still, but if you were at 20, you're five back. I'm just saying I'm just trying to address councilwoman's kind of comments. I'm not trying to have a twotory like pressing over a a neighbor's yard, right?

Especially when you consider the impact of on neighborhoods and on the community like if like just to bring up the example that I brought before, if you're all in a singlestory neighborhood and then all a sudden you have all these twotory popping up in your backyard. I don't know. I just feel like you like go to go back to what Jeremy was saying, you got into a neighborhood and so I just feel like we and and you bought what you thought you were purchasing [clears throat] and then all a sudden it the it changes and I I want to give the um people flexibility, but I also think we have to consider people who are living there currently and the impact that's what does it matter we put ponds next to people's houses

like [snorts] that was there was already a pond on there. I don't I'm just saying I'm ready to make a motion, mayor, to move on. 9:00 and I think we've beat this to death. But and if you can agree or not agree, it maybe I'll make a motion to table this then and then we can have motion. Second. I have I have a I have a motion to second. Okay. So, just to clarify your motion, do you have a motion to table items 8 B and 8 C? Correct. And you have a second to table just to see where it goes.

Items 8B and 8 C. No, wait. Uh to two weeks. Yes. All right. Uh we've got a a motion to table items A, B, and C. We'll uh vote on these. Roll call concurrently begin with council member Henderson. Mayor, may I ask one question? Sure. Before I Is there anybody in the pipeline that's waiting for us to make a decision on this applications? There is. So, let's discuss that for a second. So, so there's submitted applications that are waiting for us to make a decision on this forward. Right.

Motion in a second. Don't we need a vote? So, so that point well taken. Council, uh, council member Henderson, nay. Elliston, nay. Caspersonson, Ivy, Coats, nay. Okay, so we are still live. We are where? I I have a second motion, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion that we approve it as outlined exactly how Elden has written it. I have a motion by Councilman Coats. Is there a second? Um, can I make an amendment to your motion if I second it? You can make it. Let's hear it. I'm not saying no. Amendment to your motion would be an amendment or a substitute motion.

Well, no. Just my amendment would be that on B2 get stricken that says that it has to be same as the main house. I like that part. So, I don't want to make that. But you can make an if I don't get a second, you can make an amendment motion for that. Um, Councilman Co, does anyone want to um I'll make I'll make amendment. Does someone want Does Councilman Would anyone like to second Councilman Coats's motion that's on the table? I'll um second it with an amendment. [clears throat] You can't second with an [laughter] amendment.

All right. So, um, Robert is turning over in his grave right now. The motion dies for lack of a second. Would anybody like to make a substitute motion? Motion. I can we do two? We got to do them separate. Right. Items A, B, and C. We're running them concurrently, so make a motion for they're the same. Okay. I would like to make a motion that we approve an ordinance amending city code uh on the ADUs and move the um line B2 adjustment that says that the exterior material is the same of the main residence. You've heard the motion by Councilman Bellson. Is there a second? Second.

I got a second by Councilman Henderson. We'll go a roll call beginning with council member Belliston. I Caspersonson. name Ivy Coats I Henderson I that is uh item 8B and 8 C are both approved 4 to one

we ran them concurrently and I I I said it from the beginning. So that's items uh tit anyway city code title 9-8A-8 and city code title 9-8B-7. We'll move on to resolutions. Item 9A is consideration to approve a resolution amending the master fee schedule. It's in your packet. If there's uh is there any discussion on this? If not, I'm happy to entertain a motion to approve as presented. Are we going to raise fees every year? Um, yes. Can we not just have a year we don't raise fees?

Well, there's always there's always slight adjustments that happen all throughout the year for different reasons and then we bring them once a year to adjust the entire fee schedule. But no, but we put we jumped the rates of plots again pretty high. Well, remember we had non-residents though, we had people coming from other cities because our non-resident rate were cheaper than their resident rates. So that a lot of these we'd already had discussion on. This is just to finalize all the little changes we've made throughout the year, but happy to entertain a motion on this item. So move. Mayor have a motion to approve by Councilman Coat. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilman Belliston. Is a resolution.

Didn't Tara [clears throat] want to come up and um do this? Uh we are going to give her the night off and we're going to begin with council member Belliston Henderson Coat Ivy Caspersonson I that is approved 5 to zero.

Item 9B is consideration to approve a resolution designating a representative serve on the administrative control board of the Washington County Special Service District. Number one, we did this last year as you'll remember. Uh somewhere or another uh we ended up needing to do this again. It does not have an expiration date until unless and until we make a change or Councilman Coat is no longer in uh in office um as as an elected official. Um you can still assign me to it afterwards if you want to produce me with that punishment. There's just a process to do it just so you know. But is there any uh discussion on this item? If not, I'll call for a motion to approve. Motion by Councilwoman Caspersonson. Is there a second?

Second. Second by Councilman Ivy. Roll call begin with council member Henderson. Coats. Hi. Ivy. Caspersonson. Hi. Bellison. Uh it's approved. Five to zero. Item 10 is the annual council business. 10A consideration to approve the 2026 annual meeting schedule. It is in your packet. We've continue on with the same schedule. Is there any concerns or any discussion to be had on this? Mayor. I know this is on the council business. What do do we ever discuss like of the employees? And and mine has to come with uh what's the one that the new one personnel policy manual if you

I just I like to be consistent with other cities on that where it's the one holidays that are more floating. Uh what's sorry what's the holiday I'm thinking of? like Junth. Junth is the one I'm thinking of, but Junth should be either the Monday or the Friday behind it because it that's what the other cities are doing. And it's hard to sh because we make everybody shut down. Like constructionwise, it's real frustrating that our city employees get off and then none of our inspectors work so contractors can't work. So, I think Junth should be a Friday or a Monday, not a Wednesday. It's one of those tough choose, but it's like we celebrate the 4th of July on a different day, too. The 4th of July is way different than Junth to me.

But it is a particular day. Everybody gets July 4th off pretty much. Only public people, public entities get Junth. Since that's not part of our meeting schedule, can we add it to a future? Let's add it to our our discussion on Friday. Is that okay? Yeah, I'll add to the list. Thank you. It's on the list. I'll make a motion that we approve the annual meeting for 2026 schedule for the city council. Have a motion by Councilman Coat. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilman Henderson. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? That is approved. Four to zero unanimously. We'll go into the next section of the agenda which is appointments. 11A. This is consideration to confirm the appointment of a member to the planning commission. Um, I am recommending the that James Yur, who uh filled the remainder of a plan commission term, be appointed as the alternate to another term. Okay, I have a motion by Councilman Ivy to approve an additional three-year term for uh Commissioner Yur. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilwoman Caspersonson. All in favor?

I. Any opposed? Mr. year is approved for four more years on a 4 to zero vote 11B. This is consideration to confirm the appointment of the 2026 plan commission chair. My recommendation is Pete Bullock. If there's no discussion on that, I'm happy to entertain a motion. So made [clears throat] have a motion by Councilwoman Caspersonson, second by Councilman uh Coats. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? Approved unanimously. Four to zero. 11 C. This is consideration to confirm the appointment of a power board member. Um I have met with null Jackson who came uh recommended by uh two of our existing uh power board members. Uh he is willing to serve um on that role and to fill the remainder of the seat vacated by Andy Palmer which runs through December 31st, 2027. If you agree, I'm happy to entertain a motion. So moved. Have a motion by Councilman Coats? I'll second that. Second by Councilman Ivy. All in favor? I. Any opposed?

Mayor, could I suggest that maybe we meet him in a future meeting? That's a great idea. I don't think that I know the gentleman. Yep. Great idea. I'll reach out to Nol and ask him to to to do that. That's approved five to zero. Item 11D. Uh, it's my recommendation to you council that we reappoint both Dick Saunders and Todd Spriggs to three-year terms beginning January 1st, 2026 ending December 31st, 2028. Any discussion? If not, I'll entertain a motion. So move. Mayor have a motion by Councilman Coats. Second by Councilman Bellison. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? That is approved five to zero. Item 11E. Let's see. 11D. 11D. Yes. This is a mo I'd like to reappoint Michael Dinsmore as the power board chair for 2026. So moved. Mayor motion by Councilman Coats. Second. Second by Councilman Bellison. All in favor? I. Approved unanimously. 11E. I would recommend that uh both Jason Bright and Rich uh Levvin be reappointed to the Washington City Historic Preservation Commission from January 1st, 2026 through December 31st, 2028. Can I have a motion? I'll make that motion there.

Have a motion by Councilman Ivy. Is there a second? Second. Second by Councilwoman Caspersonson. All in favor? I. It's approved unanimously. And it would be my recommendation that for 2026, uh, Kenneth Nilson serve as chair of the Historic Preservation Commission. I'll entertain a motion. So moved. Second. I have a motion by Councilman Henderson, second by Councilman Coat. All in favor? I. That is approved unanimously. Section 12 of the agenda, report of officers from assigned committees. We'll start at my left with Councilman Belliston. I was just going to say you sound like you're burning through a county commission meeting. like

I am like a a horse getting close to the stable. I you know it's been a slow start for January as far as commission as far as assignments go but I don't have anything today. Thank you Councilman Bellison. Councilman Henderson have anything Mayor Councilman Coats? Nothing tonight. Councilman Ivy

short I know it's been a long meeting. We had legislative policy. Just a couple of things to mention. Uh property tax is a hot topic this year. So keep that in your in your mind. Um there's one bill that um we came back from last year. Um transportation utility fee is going to come back again, but that's kind of one of those hot topics right now. And then there's one bill that's risen to the top of one that we are going to oppose. It's called local land use uh revisions. The league has spoken in deni uh recommended denial of that and I'll keep you a prize of that. But um things are starting to take shape for the session. We look forward to being on on the hill starting on the 20th. Thank you.

All right. Eat your wedies. Councilman Councilman Casperson. No. I'll just be really quick. Um speaking of the skate park, the concrete for the skate portions will be done this month. The BMX will be done this week and then they're hoping to be done by the end of March. And then also I have another one to add to the list for Friday is possible a mural project. Um they're going to do one in St. George and they want to know if we want to have representation from Washington City and I can tell you guys more about that on Friday to see if that's something you guys want to do. Cool.

Thank you. I'll just uh uh remind you that we have our counselor retreat. Uh starts at 8 a.m. on Friday and we'll be we'll be meeting at Santa Clara City Hall. So go to Santa Cl mayor. No shoes, no shirt, no no service or no problem. I don't Okay, perfect. So I don't have to wear a tie then. Okay. No ties.

Perfect. And uh I think and we'll we'll that that's an open meeting. They're hosting us there. We'll we'll uh we will not have breakfast. We will have lunch. We'll finish at one. And those that want to go over to uh to Canab to tour their city center, the Canab Center, you're welcome to do that. So, uh section 13 of the agenda is city manager report. Thank you, mayor. I think I've said plenty tonight, so I'll pass on my report.

Okay. And we do have need to go to close session for uh pending or potential litigation. And just to be safe, we'll call it purchase, exchange, or lease of property as well. We'll need a motion, a second, and a roll call to move to close session. So made, mayor. Motion by Councilman Ivy. Second. Second by Councilman Coats. Roll call. Council member Coats. Hi. Ivy. [clears throat] Hi. Casperson. Hi. Ellison Henderson. Hi. We will move into close session. Thank you everyone.