[0:32] The time is now 602. We will call the

[0:35] meeting to order.

[0:37] Is that Erin? Would you like to kick us

[0:40] off with your

[0:42] >> Yes, absolutely. Um, so this evening we

[0:46] have a code text amendment. Um, proposal

[0:50] for a car wash on parcel RT32-5.

[0:56] Uh so quick executive summary, WDE Souza

[1:00] with Western Endeavors has submitted an

[1:03] application to amend the code text to

[1:05] allow car wash as a permitted use in a

[1:08] C1 commercial zone. The proposed

[1:11] amendment is consistent with the Francis

[1:13] City General Plans goal to foster

[1:15] economic development by supporting new

[1:17] commercial uses that serve the growing

[1:19] community. Uh if approved, Mr. Souza

[1:22] intends to develop the car wash on

[1:24] parcel RT32-5

[1:27] outlined below. Um and so this is 32

[1:31] here and this is in um the Harwood

[1:34] development. Um just to give you a

[1:37] little bit of a bearing.

[1:39] um a little bit of background on the

[1:41] project and then I'll show um some uh

[1:45] maps and examples of what the car wash

[1:48] is proposed. Uh so on June 8th uh 2026,

[1:53] Wade met with the city staff to discuss

[1:55] the possible possibility of opening a

[1:58] self-service car wash on parcel RT32-5.

[2:02] Um, a formal code amendment application

[2:05] was received by the city on July 1st,

[2:08] 2026. Uh, and the subject parcel is

[2:11] currently part of the Harwood

[2:12] development uh, in a sewing uh,

[2:15] commercial zone and uh, the area that

[2:18] it's in is predominantly surrounded by

[2:21] C1 as well.

[2:24] Uh, the applicant has submitted a

[2:26] conceptual site plan proposing the car

[2:28] wash use which includes two automatic

[2:30] bays and three self service bays. The

[2:33] facility would also have seven vacuum

[2:35] stalls and traffic would circulate one

[2:38] way uh to maintain the flow of traffic.

[2:41] Uh during our preliminary meeting uh we

[2:44] discussed several items that will

[2:46] require further attention uh if this

[2:48] project does move forward. Uh and that

[2:51] includes noise um generated by like the

[2:53] dryers and blowers, water rights and

[2:56] usage, parking, on-site traffic

[2:58] circulation, and the possibility of uh

[3:01] incorporating a pet wash.

[3:04] Now, for water shares, uh will need to

[3:07] be clarified and if necessary, amended

[3:09] within uh the five-year start window to

[3:12] ensure proper water rights are secured,

[3:15] both paper water and wet water. And the

[3:18] proposed development uh would also

[3:20] include a water water reclamation system

[3:24] um that has the ability to recycle up to

[3:27] 50% of water use uh in the wash base.

[3:31] And according to the applicant, this rec

[3:33] reclamation system uh would use 8 to 18

[3:36] gallons per wash compared to 20 to 200

[3:39] gallons um which is typically used for a

[3:43] single car wash in a uh home. And given

[3:47] the site's proximity u to residential

[3:49] areas, noise level will need to be

[3:52] carefully managed. Um lower hours in

[3:54] particular may be a concern, especially

[3:56] in the evening when sound will carry

[3:58] further. Um parking and circulation. The

[4:02] applicant has indicated

[4:04] uh potential pet wash might be

[4:07] incorporated uh which could generate

[4:10] additional parking demand. Um, and so we

[4:13] do need to consider parking needs, um,

[4:16] including stalls for the vacuum dryers,

[4:18] adequate space for traffic circulation.

[4:21] Um, and that can all be evaluated in the

[4:24] commercial building permit process. Um,

[4:27] and then the applicant did note in their

[4:30] uh, application that the facility would

[4:32] help meet growing community needs as uh,

[4:34] existing car washes in the Cameas area

[4:37] frequently experience high demand. Um so

[4:41] as we're going through this just keep in

[4:43] mind that this code only allows for the

[4:46] business use case uh and all car wash

[4:49] parameters and commercial building

[4:51] permitting pro will uh be taken place in

[4:54] the commercial building permit process.

[4:57] Um so now I'm going to show um some

[5:00] great drawings and some data that has

[5:03] been provided by Wade. Um so this first

[5:08] uh

[5:10] um map is uh you'll see like the five

[5:14] different wash bays and then u the cars

[5:17] how they like flow in um to the wash

[5:22] and then um aesthetically from the

[5:25] outside

[5:26] um

[5:28] the bays as well as um what kind of the

[5:32] proposed architecture could look like.

[5:37] Here's another example.

[5:43] And then I'll talk a little bit about

[5:46] the water usage. Um, this was provided

[5:50] by the applicant. Um,

[5:54] as far as how their uh water reclamation

[5:58] system um would help um save some of the

[6:03] water and reuse it in the system. Um, so

[6:07] for car um in one bay. Um and I'll

[6:13] applicants here so he can speak better

[6:15] to this when I'm done with my report. So

[6:18] if I if it needs clarification, we can

[6:21] do that. Um but

[6:25] uh so technically one car uses uh 50

[6:29] gallons um per wash times um you know x

[6:36] amount of a day. Um he's kind of given

[6:40] us totals here that for um month and

[6:43] year totals over here, you know, it

[6:46] could use for a month up to um 163,800

[6:52] gallons um and then a year a million uh

[6:57] 965,600

[6:59] gallons. But with the water reclamation

[7:01] system, um he can save up to 50% of

[7:05] that. So when you're looking over um you

[7:09] know the course of the year that can be

[7:11] up to 982 gallons um per year. So um

[7:17] that's kind of what that chart is

[7:20] outlining.

[7:22] And then um this is also for the noise

[7:25] level of the vacuums. Um so the decibel

[7:29] levels uh 5t away, 30 feet, 60, 100 ft

[7:33] away um the facility and um the noise

[7:38] within the bay blower. So, uh just to

[7:41] keep in mind how that would impact uh

[7:44] neighboring properties

[7:46] within those foot distances.

[7:53] Now, I'll go into

[7:55] um city code. Uh so, in analysis

[8:01] of um the commercial commercial business

[8:04] use

[8:05] in um code 184520

[8:09] uh that list permitted uh commercial

[8:11] business use in a C1 zone car washes are

[8:14] not currently identified as permitted

[8:16] use. Uh this code amendment would add

[8:19] car washes as an allowable commercial

[8:21] use. Uh staff recommends that if the use

[8:24] is adopted conditions be established

[8:26] around uh water shares, noise management

[8:29] and traffic impacts. Um and so the staff

[8:32] recommends in the commercial use chart

[8:36] um if that it's a two tier 2 impact uh

[8:41] when it comes to the buffer zone and um

[8:45] that zone uh that tier 2 buffer zone

[8:48] states that um adjacent parcels

[8:52] um within it so there's an AG1 parcel

[8:55] right next to it um that that buffer uh

[9:00] requires There's 4 foot uh farm fence

[9:02] and um a 10-ft um buffer space between

[9:08] the building and um the the end of the property.

[9:15] Uh now for um code 181001 100 off-

[9:19] streetet parking. Um this one

[9:22] establishes off- streetet parking

[9:23] requirements for commercial use. If a

[9:25] car wash is adopted as a permitted use,

[9:28] staff recommends that the code be

[9:30] updated to include specific parking

[9:32] standards for this use type. Uh these

[9:35] standards should account for adequate um

[9:37] stalls for the vacuum dryers. Uh cued

[9:40] cars waiting to enter the wash um and

[9:43] specifically park counts um and layout

[9:46] will be reviewed in the commercial

[9:48] building process. Um for this the staff

[9:51] recommends in the parking plan to

[9:53] require two parking

[9:56] plus two stacking spaces per wash bay

[9:59] and one parking space per employee on

[10:01] shift.

[10:07] Um now for the general plan uh Francis

[10:11] uh general plan fosters um pro business

[10:16] environment bringing economic

[10:17] opportunities to broaden the city's tax

[10:20] base and staff has reviewed the

[10:22] application against the relevant goals

[10:24] and policies of the general plan. And so

[10:26] I'd like to review um the ones that

[10:29] apply. So policy 18 um this policy

[10:33] promotes a positive environment for

[10:35] business to strengthen and improve the

[10:36] city tax base and quality of life. Uh

[10:39] and this is consistent allowing the use

[10:42] would improve the city's tax base.

[10:45] Policy 1C uh encouraged businesses to

[10:48] locate along State Road 32 in existing

[10:51] commercial and city center zones. Uh

[10:54] this is also consistent. This business

[10:56] is um just off SR32 and in the C1

[11:00] commercial zone.

[11:02] Policy 2A is to improve diversify and

[11:06] increase the tax base, seek revenue

[11:09] growth from economic development activities to mitigate

[11:13] residential property tax increases. Um

[11:16] this is also consistent. This business

[11:18] was would help diversify our economic

[11:21] climate and help offset uh taxpayers

[11:25] cost.

[11:26] Policy 2C um buffer commercial and

[11:30] indust industrial uses from ex existing

[11:33] single family residential areas. Um this

[11:36] is also consistent. Um the zone is C1

[11:41] and um surrounding the zone is also C1.

[11:46] Um

[11:47] So that is also consistent um with that

[11:51] policy

[11:53] staff recommendations. So um the staff

[11:56] recommends uh one of three options for

[11:59] the planning commission um to take one

[12:02] of the following actions. So the first

[12:04] the commission may forward a positive

[12:06] recommendation to the city council for

[12:08] adoption of the code text amendment um

[12:11] for code 184520 adding car wash as a

[12:15] permitted use and C1 commercial zone um

[12:19] subject to the recommendations outlined

[12:21] in this report and um staff recommends

[12:24] this option as the proposed amendment is

[12:26] consistent with the goals and policies

[12:28] of the general plan described above.

[12:31] Second, the commission may uh table this

[12:34] item for further discussion and direct

[12:36] staff to provide additional information

[12:38] or analysis as required. Uh or third,

[12:41] the commission may forward a negative

[12:43] recommendation to the city council. Um

[12:46] if the council finds or if the planning

[12:49] commission finds the proposed amendment

[12:51] is inconsistent with the general plan or

[12:53] otherwise not in the best interest of

[12:55] the city um and stating findings that

[12:58] support that. Um so just in conclusion

[13:03] um just a reminder that this is a code

[13:05] text amendment and um would only allow

[13:08] permitted use and all of the um uh

[13:13] building would take place in the

[13:15] commercial building permit process.

[13:20] » Thank you.

[13:22] >> Scott, did you have anything you wanted

[13:24] to add?

[13:27] » Nope. Um I think

[13:29] the the water question. Um that's

[13:32] something we're going to have to dive

[13:33] into a little bit. You know, he's got

[13:35] some suggestions. Um

[13:38] Hebrew City has had some issues with car

[13:41] washes um in the past, not requiring

[13:44] enough water. So, that's something I

[13:45] mentioned that we really have to look

[13:47] into. And that's what we kind of talk

[13:49] about. if we talked with our attorney a

[13:52] little bit, you know, if we had an

[13:53] agreement that if they're using more

[13:54] water than what they originally planned

[13:56] that they'd have to turn in more, get an

[13:58] agreement with them. So, that's

[14:00] something that if we move forward with

[14:01] this, we're going to have to kind of

[14:03] figure out a little bit better.

[14:05] >> Okay.

[14:13] » Yeah. Would you guys like an opportunity

[14:15] to speak? Is there anything you want to

[14:17] add

[14:18] >> if you could? Yeah. And you might have

[14:21] to push the button so the little red

[14:22] light comes on.

[14:24] >> Yeah, there you go.

[14:26] >> That keeps Suzanne happy with me.

[14:30] >> Uh, thanks for taking the time. So, we

[14:32] just are interested in building a

[14:33] professional car wash at the location.

[14:36] Um, you know, it's considered a water

[14:39] smart business. People are going to wash

[14:42] their cars. Um, I myself have been in

[14:45] the car wash business for 30 years. So,

[14:47] we're a distributor. We actually provide

[14:49] equipment to the public and we design

[14:52] and build car washes. So, I have quite a

[14:55] bit of experience with water and

[14:57] conservancy. Water is a huge issue for

[15:00] me as a professional because it's my

[15:02] business. So, we know how to treat it.

[15:05] We know how to clean it. We know how to

[15:06] reuse it. And you know, we know how

[15:09] sacred it is because it directly impacts

[15:11] my business.

[15:13] So, with that being said, you know, this

[15:15] is

[15:18] a facility that is going to treat water

[15:20] with respect and use the smallest amount

[15:23] we can to do a quality job. So, um, if

[15:28] you guys have any questions, just please

[15:31] fire away. Could you state your name for

[15:33] the record for Suzanne, although it's

[15:35] probably on the application, but

[15:37] >> yeah, Wade Souza.

[15:39] >> Okay, perfect.

[15:41] >> Gentlemen, do you have any questions for

[15:42] Mr. Souza?

[15:44] >> I don't think I do.

[15:46] >> Awesome. Thank you so much.

[15:47] >> Okay.

[15:48] >> Um, I did see it's noted as a public

[15:50] hearing. Do you need Is that correct?

[15:52] >> Okay. So, at this time, I'll open up for

[15:54] public comment.

[15:57] Uh, no public comment. Everybody give a

[15:59] closing public comment.

[16:03] I'll give Susan a second because I think

[16:05] she needs to type all that.

[16:12] » Perfect. Outstanding. Gentlemen, what

[16:14] questions?

[16:16] >> So, I've got some questions for you. So,

[16:18] um it goes back to you know water, paper

[16:20] water. What capacity do we actually have

[16:23] a city to provide water and how does

[16:25] this how does our ability impact

[16:28] applications like this? Well, um,

[16:31] [clears throat]

[16:32] like I've mentioned before in our, um,

[16:37] I guess [clears throat] in our when we

[16:40] do planning for the city, we include

[16:43] some commercial use in addition to

[16:46] residential.

[16:48] So, um, we've planned with the ser with

[16:52] the sources and the the tanks that we

[16:54] build to go for the next [clears throat]

[16:57] 15 to 20 years. So if we get a high

[17:01] demand thing that comes in, it might

[17:03] shorten it a little bit or you know, but

[17:05] we just kind of estimate. We just have

[17:07] kind of have to watch it. But um he will

[17:10] have to turn in paper for it

[17:13] >> um to provide the amount of water that

[17:15] he needs to use. Um but as far as our

[17:18] capacity, you know, with our wells on

[17:19] our tanks that we built, um like I said,

[17:22] we should be good, you know, depending

[17:24] on growth. you know, we're already um

[17:26] planning that at the Hidden Meadows um

[17:28] subdivision when that subdivision was

[17:30] annexed. We um got another well site and

[17:33] tank site and we're planning on working

[17:37] on getting that started in the next

[17:38] couple years. So,

[17:40] >> so I'm trying to remember in the past we

[17:41] had I mean I haven't seen

[17:44] [clears throat] the sign go up yet to

[17:45] conserve water because of pump issues,

[17:47] but is are all of our pumps now

[17:50] permanently wired into the power and

[17:52] everything?

[17:56] And in theory, we have an extra million

[17:58] gallons of water per year that we could

[18:02] put to a cause like this.

[18:03] >> Yep.

[18:06] >> That's one question I have. Let's see.

[18:08] So, another question generally. So, this subdivision and this probably a

[18:11] question for you. When I hear

[18:14] subdivision, it makes me think of homes.

[18:15] Is this a business subdivision or is

[18:16] this a residential subdivision? We're

[18:18] looking at putting car wash in resial

[18:21] subdivision.

[18:23] It's commercial. It's Yeah. Yeah. So, um

[18:27] for that subdivision comment, just to

[18:29] clarify, it's for um like the noise and

[18:33] how it would carry um it would, you

[18:36] know, reach some potentially nearby. So,

[18:39] um like here's the zone. So, um the

[18:42] Harwood development is I don't know if

[18:44] you Yeah, you can see it. It's like this

[18:46] parcel right here.

[18:48] >> Will you turn that one off?

[18:49] >> Yeah. This is Kitty corner to where he

[18:51] wants hotel.

[18:53] >> Correct. Yep. Yeah. And so, um, as you

[18:57] can see based on the zone map, the

[18:59] closest residential is right over here.

[19:02] Um, and so the sound does potentially

[19:04] have a little opportunity um to travel,

[19:07] but that can be mitigated, you know, at

[19:09] night and stuff like that. And we can

[19:10] mitigate that to noise ordinances. Um,

[19:13] but predominantly, as you can see here,

[19:15] it's surrounded by C1 commercial. Uh,

[19:18] and then there's agriculture around it.

[19:23] And I think one thing we need to

[19:26] remember is this is the zone change. So

[19:29] if we approve this zone change, you

[19:31] know, he's he's looking at doing

[19:33] something in the Route 32 development,

[19:35] but if we approve this, it can go

[19:38] >> anywhere where it's red.

[19:39] >> Yes.

[19:41] >> That segus into my question. You might

[19:44] jump in

[19:45] a changing table, right? Not a zone

[19:49] change, a codeex amendment to allow car

[19:52] washes

[19:52] >> in the zone

[19:53] >> anywhere in that zone.

[19:54] >> So my question is, should this go under

[19:57] conditional use permits?

[19:59] >> Remember, we're trying to get away from

[20:01] >> Oh, yeah.

[20:02] >> So based on this,

[20:05] >> that's why we set it up, you know, like

[20:07] we did with the tier ones. Remember when

[20:09] we went through that whole process?

[20:11] >> Yeah. And I was and that's what my

[20:12] question was. Tier two, which isn't that

[20:14] what this is.

[20:16] >> Wasn't this a tier two impact?

[20:18] >> Yes, that's what we're recommending.

[20:19] >> And so as a tier 2 impact, it wouldn't

[20:22] qualify to be under that. And I get it.

[20:25] We all lived at the conditional use

[20:26] permit process.

[20:29] But that's I guess that's my hesitation

[20:32] is that we could end up in kind of the

[20:34] same situation. And now I know it

[20:36] wouldn't happen, but three car washes

[20:39] and you know it's not under some sort of

[20:43] mitigating conditional use. And again, I

[20:47] don't remember exactly how all of that

[20:49] works. Um, we are changing the code to

[20:52] allow car washes in all tier two. So, in

[20:56] the event that this move forward, which

[20:59] is like another

[21:01] move from allowed to not allowed,

[21:06] similarly, there's a determination down

[21:08] the road if this car

[21:12] down the road

[21:15] a table to then

[21:18] >> eliminate it over

[21:23] » in the event

[21:25] that

[21:26] >> we exceeded our car washes basically.

[21:30] >> I I have a question that's on point with

[21:32] everything we're talking about here. So

[21:35] my understanding is from I think it's

[21:38] actually on the page that you

[21:40] It's that last paragraph on the screen

[21:42] right now [clears throat] where it says

[21:44] uh all sight specific requirements,

[21:46] building sign, water rights, noise, all

[21:48] that. Those are all the things or a lot

[21:50] of the things at least that would have

[21:52] been considered in a conditional use

[21:54] permit application would have come here.

[21:57] Can you just talk about the process and

[21:59] the staff involved in making what

[22:02] amounts to the same determinations just

[22:04] moving it to the staff side of the house

[22:06] instead of here? Like who all is

[22:08] involved in that?

[22:09] I assume it's you guys, but who else?

[22:11] >> Yeah, it'd predominantly be um myself

[22:14] and Scott in reviewing that um and

[22:18] making sure that that um meets, you

[22:23] know, requirements. We also work with uh

[22:26] an organization called Shums. Um they've

[22:29] been doing a lot of our commercial

[22:30] inspections. Uh and so we would also be

[22:33] bringing them um into it as well.

[22:38] I [clears throat] think this would have

[22:39] to come back to the planning commission

[22:41] with the commercial site plan to show

[22:44] that they're meeting um all the

[22:46] requirements that we set on it. So it

[22:48] would since it's a commercial business

[22:50] it would have to come back for a site

[22:52] plan.

[22:53] >> That's right. Yeah.

[22:55] >> Okay. And so my question is

[22:56] [clears throat]

[22:57] so kind of looking at all this I mean

[22:58] I'm not eager to get into conditional

[23:00] uses because I'm still traumatized and

[23:02] probably will be for the rest of my life

[23:03] about those knowing that a conditional

[23:05] use just means permitted use. Um, can we

[23:08] tailor this just to this specific plot

[23:11] or to a smaller chunk of land? So, we're

[23:14] not approving it for all of C1, but that

[23:16] we're just saying yes,

[23:19] you know, kind of like we do with when I

[23:22] guess we're reszoning different chunks

[23:24] of land to allow building. Um, maybe we

[23:27] create a different zone and we apply it

[23:30] just specifically to this chunk of land

[23:33] and that different zone allows this use.

[23:36] basically

[23:38] car washes and and by doing that we've

[23:41] created something very narrow. We don't

[23:43] have to worry about

[23:45] you know 15 car washes being announced

[23:47] in the next six months before we can

[23:48] change anything

[23:51] and we avoid conditional use.

[23:55] >> I'm not 100% how that works. I

[23:59] >> I think that would be that that would be

[24:01] an option but we'd have to go back and create the

[24:06] Right now, we're just looking at doing a

[24:09] cotex amendment, but we do have to go

[24:13] back and say we're going to recreate

[24:15] this car wash zone or overlay zone that,

[24:18] you know, they would have to come get

[24:19] special permission for to to put on, you

[24:22] know, wouldn't be like you say on

[24:24] commercial. They would have to It's kind

[24:26] of like the

[24:28] um

[24:30] I'm trying to think of how we've done

[24:32] that in the past.

[24:34] I don't think the res because we changed

[24:36] the residential cottage. It's it's not

[24:40] um it's a zone we have but we don't have

[24:42] it. We don't have parcels zoned as res.

[24:45] So we could create a car wash zone type

[24:48] thing

[24:48] >> and say you can have a car wash but you

[24:51] have to come ask for that zone change.

[24:52] You can always say no.

[24:53] >> Exactly. That's kind of what I'm seeing

[24:54] as an ideal situation.

[24:56] We've had people come and want to build

[24:58] their family

[25:01] propertest.

[25:27] I think the the take away from staff if

[25:30] I were to recap it that there isn't a

[25:32] concern with this car wash there's the

[25:35] concern of what we ended up with in some

[25:38] of the other ones and so I think

[25:41] relating to you know changing code to

[25:44] allow this one I don't foresee as a huge

[25:47] deal I think what what we're worried

[25:51] about the consensus across this team is

[25:53] just

[25:55] How do we keep from, you know, what's

[25:58] the right way to grow responsibly? And I

[26:01] think most of us are a little nervous

[26:03] about adding multiple car washes to the

[26:05] city of Francis, which again, I don't

[26:09] know that that's super realistic anytime

[26:11] soon, but we also said that about

[26:13] another conditional use, so who knows?

[26:17] See, I'm [clears throat] trying to

[26:18] remember. It seems like we kind of

[26:19] talked about this with RV parks.

[26:21] Remember when we talked about that? Um

[26:24] maybe that's something we need to do a

[26:27] little bit more research in that we you

[26:29] know car washes we only allow

[26:32] one you know per so many residents or

[26:36] something like that

[26:38] that's something we could you know if

[26:39] you guys wanted to maybe table this we

[26:41] could look into that a little further

[26:43] talk with the city attorney when he gets

[26:44] back I guess it was yeah we have

[26:47] distance requirements certain number of

[26:49] yards

[26:51] wasn't RV parks

[26:53] I think it was it camps

[26:56] or something like that.

[26:58] >> I remember there was some stuff that

[27:04] » I think we could

[27:07] >> that would be a language.

[27:11] >> Well, you said

[27:18] » I guess

[27:22] Just double check with the attorney on

[27:29] » stumbling

[27:33] more

[27:40] tongines

[27:46] goes next.

[28:00] I do have one other question. Do we

[28:03] think that pet is

[28:06] a separate use from the car wash? And if

[28:09] so, would that mean that down the road

[28:11] the applicant is interested in pet?

[28:21] So,

[28:21] >> I'll let her answer, but I think I heard

[28:23] it. [laughter]

[28:25] >> Um, so we don't have pet wash as of

[28:30] right now as a use. Um, and that was

[28:32] just part of our uh initial discussion.

[28:36] um and the plans that or in the proposal

[28:39] that was submitted in the application, a

[28:41] pet wash was not included in that, but

[28:44] uh because it was a part of our initial

[28:46] discussion before the application was

[28:48] received, I included it um just as a

[28:53] topic of potential

[28:54] >> and I think wasn't it specifically

[28:56] related to the parking spaces?

[28:58] >> Correct.

[28:59] >> That would change the required parking

[29:01] spaces.

[29:04] » No, but you recall there is sort of as

[29:07] they find the uses for that hardwood

[29:10] development they're having to parse out

[29:11] the number of spaces so I mean obviously

[29:14] at some point

[29:17] have x number of so

[29:26] it's not in the sense

[29:29] I was just

[29:32] >> yeah no that's great

[29:36] I think yeah

[29:40] I mean I would entertain a motion

[29:50] I love it

[29:56] for a recommendation to the city council

[30:00] for adoption of a codeex amendment

[30:04] to Francis

[30:15] commercial.

[30:27] » I was just looking at the allowed use

[30:29] table that we have. Um

[30:32] the gas stations

[30:34] that goes

[30:37] >> like in the gas stations we put none

[30:39] other located within a thousand feet

[30:46] » we could add that as a part of

[30:49] >> you guys that's what I'm saying

[30:53] >> so we we have the motion on the table

[30:55] but Suzanne's not done typing so could

[30:58] Scott in theory add

[31:00] >> I wasn't done

[31:02] [laughter]

[31:03] in theory add

[31:15] » thousand feet about two blocks came city

[31:17] blocks. So practically on that map of

[31:20] our C1 zone, do we know how many? So how

[31:23] many car washes would that give us in

[31:25] our

[31:27] So keep in mind this zone does travel

[31:30] down 32 when you zoom out. And then

[31:33] we've got our city center zone at the

[31:35] bottom down here. Um so your commercial

[31:38] use base is all along 32 as you're

[31:43] considering.

[31:47] So if there was one there

[32:02] would get you just past um

[32:05] Nick's storage units to the south

[32:12] » and then you know

[32:16] maybe to the middle of the his other

[32:19] commercial piece. So, ft isn't very

[32:26] [clears throat]

[32:30] » um

[32:32] well, I think there's a lot of things at

[32:35] play. So, first I want to try and keep

[32:37] Suzanne from

[32:39] getting too lost. So, we have a motion

[32:41] on the table

[32:43] if adding that verbage is gonna

[32:47] with what Rich is thinking, then I think

[32:50] we would be better off adding that and

[32:52] then closing this motion out. Otherwise,

[32:55] we need to close this motion out and

[32:58] probably

[33:00] is there

[33:11] instead of including

[33:13] extra language

[33:15] include the recommendation

[33:28] approved.

[33:33] So instead of a language,

[33:40] » no this recommendation

[33:44] that's true.

[33:47] Um, the only thing I'm saying is that it

[33:49] has to probably be because we only have

[33:51] three. I think it has to be

[33:55] >> so 2500 ft get you to on the south um

[34:00] just past where the road goes back for

[34:04] Circle T where Preset has his

[34:08] shop.

[34:13] » 2500 ft.

[34:17] Okay.

[34:33] » Okay. I will second

[34:41] and then we'll vote.

[34:44] All in favor?

[34:58] Thank you so much you guys. We uh we're

[35:01] all still a little shell shock from some

[35:04] previous things. So, we're a little

[35:06] gunshy with changing code. So, hopefully

[35:08] you guys understand it has less to do

[35:10] with your car wash and more to do with

[35:12] unintended consequences which have um

[35:16] left us tattered and broken.

[35:21] » Thank you so much, guys. You're welcome

[35:22] to stay to go over the meeting. you

[35:25] want, but you're also more than welcome

[35:26] to call it a night.

[35:29] >> Awesome. Thank you.

[35:31] >> Um,

[35:34] >> in our neighboring city, there are three

[35:36] car washes.

[35:40] » Oh, yeah. I think that's definitely the

[35:42] case in

[35:44] Yeah, they're certainly within that. Um,

[35:48] >> and again, I think Erin, what I would

[35:50] love if you could emphasize with the

[35:52] council is that, you know, obviously it

[35:54] meets all the criteria that we've

[35:56] outlined in the general plan, and I

[35:57] think all of us are all for some

[35:59] commercial growth, the tax that that

[36:02] brings. I think we're just really

[36:04] hesitant on how we change code text,

[36:07] which is why I mean, I know nobody wants

[36:09] a conditional use, but then, you know,

[36:11] as conditional use, obviously, we

[36:12] realize it can't be turned down. So,

[36:14] it's like, how do we without the

[36:17] attorney here find a good way to say

[36:20] like we don't want

[36:22] >> that's completely understanding the use

[36:37] authoriz

[36:42] somebody successfully petitions the

[36:44] council to Yeah.

[36:48] >> Yeah. I think that's really all it is.

[36:51] And again, I hope they don't take that

[36:52] personal, but I think all of us are I'd

[36:55] love a great car wash and not give my

[36:58] money to other cities,

[37:01] >> but I digress. Uh,

[37:04] do you have anything before I talk about

[37:06] minutes?

[37:07] >> No, you're good. I'll make sure

[37:09] >> I have read the minutes and found them

[37:11] to be an accurate reflection of the

[37:12] meeting with the exception of how my

[37:14] last name is spelled.

[37:16] >> And so with that, I would motion to

[37:18] approve the minutes with the

[37:20] recommendation that my name be edited.

[37:24] All in favor?

[37:26] >> I staff update.

[37:35] Um, I don't have any stuff staff updates

[37:39] uh for the planning commission this

[37:41] evening.

[37:42] >> Outstanding. Scott, do you have anything

[37:44] for the planning commission?

[37:47] [clears throat]

[37:53] » Yeah,

[37:55] >> the crystal.

[37:58] >> Outstanding. I think that that was a win

[38:00] for the city and I think I like that there's some skin in the game as

[38:05] representatives of the city where

[38:07] there's benefit to us. So I think in the

[38:09] end that ends up being a very good deal

[38:11] for us. So outstanding. With that I'll

[38:15] entertain a motion to adjourn. motion to

[38:19] all in favor. All right.

Francis City Planning Commission 7-16-2026

Transcript