[0:00] Now, here's an extra whatever.

[0:10] » I think you're going to want this. >> Yeah.

[0:13] » How are you? Good. >> I don't think the cameras are working

[0:19] yet. >> I don't think they are either.

[0:27] How do we get this thing back to full screen?

[0:40] » The other the first. >> Yeah. Go that way.

[0:51] » [snorts]

[1:34] » Let's

[1:42] go. Let's go.

[2:43] » [clears throat]

[3:04] [clears throat]

[3:11] [snorts]

[3:26] » and my son at game tonight. I might need to stand up just

[3:48] cuz I'll just throw you under man because I already signed up with

[3:54] DAV.

[3:57] Gotcha.

[4:01] Cuz I haven't thought about it.

[4:06] Actually, that

[4:10] [clears throat]

[4:13] I want to say [clears throat] maybe four or five months, but I

[4:17] retained them as my RS my RSO back in

[4:26] 20 21

[4:31] [clears throat]

[4:36] about 5 months medical. So you

[4:43] graduate from boot camp you can exclusive

[4:50] boot camp is where I broke my back in three places. So, while I got to red,

[4:54] white, and blue face, I was recycled. And because I had fractured my back in

[4:58] three places, and I did not heal as fast as I as they wanted it as a recycle, I

[5:04] was >> All right, Andrew, we ready?

[5:10] Okay, we'll go ahead and call this [clears throat] Twilla City Planning

[5:13] Commission meeting to order this Wednesday, April 22nd, 2026 at the hour

[5:18] 700 p.m. here in City Council Chambers. Uh there is a significant increase in

[5:24] fraudulent fishing requests using information from the public notices that

[5:27] are issued concerning the applications being heard during the planning

[5:30] commission meetings. Uh Twilla City collects fees only at the time of

[5:34] application submitt. Uh Twilla City will never ask for funds to be sent over wire

[5:38] transfer. Legitimate Twilla city emails always end with twillis.gov.

[5:43] If you receive a request requiring you to pay additional fees for an

[5:47] application in an email that does not end in twillity.gov of after your

[5:51] application has been submitted. This is fraud. If you receive such a request,

[5:55] please contact Twilla City Community Development Department immediately. Our

[5:59] first item on our agenda tonight is our pledge of allegiance. If you'll please

[6:02] rise and repeat the pledge.

[6:06] » I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[6:12] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[6:18] justice for all.

[6:25] Okay. Number two on our agenda tonight is a roll call. Commissioner Hammer

[6:28] » here. >> Commissioner Proctor

[6:29] » here. >> Commissioner Faircloth

[6:31] » here. >> Commissioner Lynford

[6:32] » here. >> Commissioner Anderson

[6:33] » here. >> Let's please excuse Commissioner Sloan,

[6:36] Cordova, and Jensen. I recognize Council Members Gossip, Council Member Hansen,

[6:40] uh staff members, Miss Young, Miss England, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Agard.

[6:48] Number three on our agenda tonight is a public hearing and a decision on a

[6:51] conditional use permit request by Jessica Howard to authorize the use of a

[6:55] child care and preschool involving 8 to 16 children to occur at the property

[7:00] located at 1664 North Ashlin Court in the R17 single family residential zoning

[7:05] district on 17 acres. Miss England, >> hello. Yes. Um, so I just wanted to

[7:13] point out that it is surrounded by residential use and residential zoning.

[7:19] Um, and then this is a close-up site plan. This is just showing um,

[7:28] you know, the layout and where the um, fenced outdoor play area is going to be

[7:34] and all that type of thing with this um, application. And then um here's some

[7:40] street views. Uh I will bring up that um the reason why I brought this, this is

[7:46] supposed to be an administrative conditional use permit. Um, but the

[7:52] reason why I brought it to planning commission is because I did get um a a

[7:58] an email from a concerned neighbor who had some who was saying that, you know,

[8:03] the culde-sac might um get overwhelmed with the additional traffic and that um

[8:10] there were a lot of cars parked at the property and

[8:15] uh there were a lot of people living at the house. And so I did talk to the

[8:21] applicant. The applicant did say, "Oh, I am renting my house, my basement out to

[8:27] another, like a couple." So basically another family. So we had to clear up

[8:33] that um zoning violation for us to be able to

[8:38] proceed with the conditional use. We did get that taken care of. Um, one of the

[8:45] conditions of approval will be uh for her to make sure that all of the drop

[8:52] off and pickup is going to be located either on their driveway or in front of

[8:57] their house. Um, this is the play area in the back

[9:03] and then this is just a list of all of the additional requirements for home

[9:08] occupations that were that do have a daycare. um they are only allowed to

[9:13] have one non-resident employee. Uh the total number of students children shall

[9:18] be in shall also include her her children as well if they are under the

[9:24] care of the licensed uh daycare provider. Um they are allowed to have

[9:31] two sessions per day of a child preschool, but we've already talked

[9:35] about this and right now she is only going to be using it for daycare. She

[9:40] may eventually turn it into a preschool though. Um,

[9:45] and then also home daycarees are allowed to are allowed a fenced outdoor play

[9:50] area as well. Um, in that they do need to have all of the um proper state

[9:57] licensing for home daycarees. Um planning uh staff recommendation is to

[10:05] approve the um conditional use permit with the condition that all of the drop

[10:11] off and pickup activities are occur in front of her home or in the driveway her

[10:19] driveway. So that is all I have if you guys have any

[10:23] more questions. >> Okay, let's bring us back to the

[10:25] commission for questions for staff.

[10:32] Seeing n done. That's a good thing, right?

[10:34] » Yeah. Great. [laughter] >> Okay. This item does require a public

[10:38] hearing. I guess you're Miss Howard back there. Okay. Well, I'll give you some

[10:40] time after the public hearing if you don't mind.

[10:43] » Perfect. All right. We'll go ahead and open the

[10:46] public hearing. If you want to speak to this particular

[10:50] item, go ahead and approach the podium. State your name for the record. Write

[10:53] your name for the record. We can give you time afterwards since you're the

[10:56] applicant. if you don't mind, Miss Howard.

[10:58] » Um, it's Harard. >> Howard. Sorry.

[11:00] » Sorry. >> Um,

[11:02] » yeah. Hold on just a second. We'll give you some time after the public hearing.

[11:06] » Oh, sorry. >> Yep. No, you're good. You're good.

[11:13] » There's not a whole lot in here. So, [laughter]

[11:17] » seeing no one approach, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and now

[11:20] invite you up. Go ahead and address the commission. We just have a process we

[11:24] have to do. >> No worries.

[11:25] » Thank you. appreciate it. Uh, you want to go ahead and address the commission,

[11:28] you can. And if the commission has any questions for the applicant, we can

[11:30] address them now as well. >> First off, I'd like to say that yard

[11:34] looks great. Um, I don't see these kind of applications very often with a yard

[11:38] like that with toys and things for kids to do. So, I greatly appreciate that

[11:42] part. That's that's great to see. Um, any other things you like to address to

[11:46] us? >> Um, I was part of Overlink Academy that

[11:52] shut down. I was an assistant director there and

[11:56] what I went through with the parents as well is the reason I opened. Um I mainly

[12:03] have two and three-year-olds and I'm currently in college for this uh

[12:08] for my early education degree. [snorts] So

[12:12] I do understand um about the congestion. I completely respect it. I have talked

[12:19] to parents even before uh this came [clears throat] up that it

[12:24] would have to be in the driveway or in front of the home. Um since then I've

[12:29] moved two of the trucks out into storage like where campers are and stuff. I pay

[12:35] for storage now for those trucks and I just have one vehicle in the driveway

[12:40] now. So it's pretty much opened up um for them to be there for pickup drop

[12:46] off. Kudos to you for furthering your

[12:49] education. That's awesome. >> Thank you.

[12:51] » Good. Do we have any questions for the applicant from the commission?

[13:01] » Pretty straightforward. >> Thank you. Appreciate you. [laughter]

[13:05] » All right. With that all that having been said, we'll go ahead and entertain

[13:08] a motion on this item. [clears throat] >> Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion.

[13:12] » Hold on. Just >> Yep. Commissioner Anderson,

[13:15] » I was expecting more discussion. We can have that. [laughter]

[13:19] » Um, actually the photo that was submitted and I don't know if this came

[13:23] from the applicant or if this was staff with the camper that

[13:32] is parked in front of the house and not beyond the back of the or the front of

[13:38] the house. >> So that particular picture was um

[13:42] submitted by the applicant. Um that's why I also went to the property to um

[13:48] verify what the conditions are now. Um that camper is not there anymore. So

[13:58] » perfect. Any other discussion questions? >> And then just to confirm the other adult

[14:04] individuals that were living in the basement that were smoking there, that's

[14:08] been resolved as well. So, um, what zoning is going to regulate

[14:16] is that single family homes are used as single family homes. We don't

[14:21] necessarily regulate whether or not somebody smokes. That's all going to be

[14:25] state licensing approval that they that will be monitoring that, not zoning, not

[14:32] the city. So, just so you know, there are different rules and in that type of

[14:38] thing in this situation. Um, but as far as the second family, the married couple

[14:44] that lived there, they no longer live there. So, it's all just her family

[14:49] that's there now. So,

[14:56] good questions. Good discussion. Anything else from the commission?

[15:05] We'll do this again after we get a first and a second. All right, [clears throat]

[15:09] Commissioner Proctor, you want to go ahead with your motion?

[15:11] » I move we approve the conditional use permit request by Jessica Howard to

[15:16] authorize the use of child care and preschool involving 8 to 16 children to

[15:20] occur at 1664 North Ashlin Court. Application number

[15:25] 2026019 based on the findings and subject to the

[15:30] conditions listed in the staff report dated April 16th, 2026 and to include

[15:37] this instructions for drop off and pickup activities.

[15:41] Perfect. We got a motion to approve with com from Commissioner Proctor. Do I have

[15:45] a second? >> I'll second.

[15:48] » And a second from Commissioner Hammer. Any other discussion before we take this

[15:51] to a vote? I just want to make sure that we've um

[15:57] addressed all the concerns that were sent by the neighbor.

[16:05] Um [clears throat]

[16:10] and actually I think that we have um >> Yeah, I'm good.

[16:18] » Good. >> Yeah.

[16:19] » You sure? >> Yeah.

[16:20] » Okay. All right. Commissioner Hammer, how do

[16:24] you vote? >> I.

[16:25] » Commissioner Proctor, I. >> Commissioner Faircloth,

[16:27] » I. >> Commissioner Lynford,

[16:29] » I. >> Commissioner Anderson,

[16:31] » I. >> I am Chairman Hamilton. I also vote I.

[16:33] That one passes six to zero. Number four on our agenda tonight is a

[16:38] public hearing and recommendation [clears throat] on a proposed text

[16:41] amendment to Twilla City Code 7-14-11, landscaping and water conservation with

[16:47] new [clears throat] development regarding the use of sod and residential

[16:50] landscaping and the use of irrigation systems associated with residential

[16:53] landscaping. Mr. Agard, >> thank you commissioners. This ordinance

[16:58] amendment is more of a housekeeping amendment.

[17:01] Um it was at the behest of the city mayor uh and she was looking through the

[17:07] code and found it to be fairly cumbersome and difficult to understand

[17:11] and so we are proposing some amendments to this ordinance to try and make it a

[17:16] little easier to understand a little less cumbersome.

[17:19] Currently it's the ordinance that governs landscaping and water convers

[17:24] conservation with new development. Basically any subdivision that was

[17:29] approved after April 1st, 2023 is required to comply with this ordinance.

[17:34] The problem with this ordinance is there's some areas in it that just don't

[17:36] make sense. Um it made sense when we ratified it three

[17:42] years ago, but um in looking at it today, it's just we wanted to revisit

[17:46] this. So the current language of the code states that saw or seated lawn

[17:50] grass shall be prohibited from park strips and areas on the lot less than 8

[17:54] ft in width. And then number two, lots within lots within subdivisions whose

[17:59] preliminary plan approval occurred after April 1st, which has at least 250 ft of

[18:05] total landscaped area within the lot shall be landscaped with no more than

[18:08] 50% of front and sideyards landscaped area as natural lawn grass. Front and

[18:14] sideyard shall be landscaped and maintained. Landscaping is strongly

[18:17] encouraged to necessitate no or low water use and the use of artificial turf

[18:22] is strongly encouraged for the appearance or desire of lawn where

[18:25] irrigation is needed for plantings outside of lawn areas shall be a drip

[18:29] style irrigation. So what we are proposing to change is

[18:34] number one, we'd like to eliminate the language that

[18:37] prohibits saw areas and saw in areas then less than 8 ft in width. And the

[18:44] problem is in the R17 zone, you can have a 6ft setback on the sideyard. And this

[18:50] ordinance basically prohibits anybody from doing

[18:54] sod in their six-foot sideyard. if they want to put sod in their six foot

[18:58] sideyard, as long as they meet the 50% requirement, they should be able to do

[19:02] so. So, there's a bit of a conflict there.

[19:05] Um, let's see. Number two, eliminate the

[19:10] language that states this ordinance applies to any lot with more than 250 ft

[19:14] of landscaping. Not sure why that's in there. Every lot has more than 250

[19:19] square feet of landscaping space. Uh the minimum lot size we have in the city is

[19:24] 7,000 square ft. So they have more than 250. So that just doesn't need to be in

[19:29] there. Um number three amends the language regarding artificial turf. We

[19:36] would like to see artificial turf used more as a a landscaping element, not as

[19:41] the overall predominant landscaping for a site. So, we would like to make sure

[19:46] that that uh turf does not take up artificial turf does not take up 50% of

[19:52] the front and sideyard areas, but is more of a of a landscaping element

[19:56] combined with other elements. And then uh number four, just some grammatical

[20:01] errors to help the code become easier to read and understand.

[20:05] These are the changes that we are proposing.

[20:09] Uh the red is the code language that's being stricken and the blue is what's

[20:14] being proposed. We do believe that it does simplify and make the ordinance a

[20:18] little more easier to understand. And this is how the changes would look if

[20:22] were to if the changes were to be adopted by the city council. Saw or

[20:26] seated lawn grass shall be prohibited in all park strips. Number two, lots within

[20:31] subdivisions whose preliminary plan approval occurred after April 1st, 2023

[20:35] shall be landscaped with no more than 50% of front and sideyards area as

[20:40] natural lawn grass. Front and sideyard landscaping shall be regularly

[20:43] maintained by the property owner. Landscaping is strongly encouraged to

[20:46] result in no or reduced water use. Artificial turf may be used as long as

[20:51] it does not exceed 50% of the total front and sideyard area. irrigation

[20:56] needed for plantings outside of lawn areas shall be of drip style irrigation

[21:00] system. So, by and large, it's still the same thing. It just uh in my opinion,

[21:06] it's a little easier to read and understand. So, if you have any

[21:09] questions, I'd be happy to answer those for you.

[21:12] » Okay, we bring it back to the commission. I like less complications,

[21:16] » less words. [laughter] Spells it out a little bit better. Uh any discussion or

[21:20] questions or comments for staff from the commission? I just had one question, but

[21:24] Andrew answered it in his presentation on the 50% artificial turf. So

[21:30] » great, >> perfect.

[21:34] » How this is supposed to fit in with our water reduction, right?

[21:39] » Mhm. >> Why would we Why would we even limit

[21:44] artificial turf to 50%. I I get what you're saying, but one of the best

[21:50] neighborhoods in my or best yards in my neighborhood is 100% turf,

[21:55] artificial turf. So,

[22:01] well, I don't know exactly how to answer that question. Um, it does look great in

[22:07] the summer, looks a little odd in the winter, but um,

[22:12] » it reduces water usage, right? If you if you guys would like to change that, by

[22:17] all means, you can make that recommendation.

[22:25] And Andrew, I also know that we I've discussed this with you about the water

[22:31] usage. Anyway, um developers are turning these lots over to homeowners. How is

[22:37] this landscaping going to be enforced?

[22:43] Enforcement is always a difficult thing with with the city. We have one in co we

[22:48] have one code enforcement officer and they are busy and we don't regularly

[22:55] he doesn't regularly drive around looking for enforcements. He's busy

[22:59] responding. So we're still at a in a situation where

[23:04] this is an ordinance that is difficult to enforce. Uh we are working on a

[23:08] document you've provided an example of that a while back to me that we we would

[23:12] like I would like to have inserted with every new building permit that is and

[23:16] CFO that is granted to a potential homeowner. Um but at this point in time

[23:22] it's more of a we respond to complaints and then go under go into enforcement

[23:28] procedures. We just don't have the staff right now to actively police this.

[23:35] I get it.

[23:39] » But when they submit their plans, if they provide landscape plans, we verify

[23:43] during the building permit process and and so forth.

[23:50] » Good question. Good comments. Any other questions from commission?

[23:55] » I have one. >> Go ahead, Commissioner Lford.

[23:59] » The Let's see. Second sentence. its front

[24:03] and sideyard landscaping shall be regular regularly maintained by the

[24:06] property owner. So with this being under the water conservation for new

[24:11] development just to make sure I understand. So that

[24:14] will transfer from the builder over to whoever the new owner is. Is that

[24:20] correct? >> Correct.

[24:23] um during the process of building, is there anything that suggests

[24:29] um that the the builder or contractor isn't

[24:33] going to let that get out of hand as well.

[24:37] » Right now, builders and contractors usually don't put the landscaping in for

[24:41] the residential homes. It doesn't happen very often. There's a couple builders

[24:44] that do. Dr. or Horton does the front yards, but once they turn over occupancy

[24:49] to the resident, it becomes the resident's responsibility.

[24:53] Uh we have talked about in staff implementing an ordinance that would

[24:57] require contractors to install the landscaping

[25:01] which would give us better ability to make sure we're meeting the 50%

[25:05] requirement and so forth. That is not something that we have

[25:09] brought through the process yet, but I [snorts] don't that does that answer

[25:12] your question >> a little bit. I I know when uh my wife

[25:16] and I first moved, our sideyards were filled with metal uh concrete that they

[25:22] just had hardened and left. And so that's why I'm curious if there's

[25:27] anything that we're putting in this as well that would enforce

[25:32] the builder to keep the lot still tidy, even if the homeowners are the ones that

[25:37] are going to eventually put in the landscaping.

[25:42] Yeah. Every home has to go through inspections before CFO is granted. One

[25:47] of the things that the inspectors look at is to make sure the site is graded

[25:51] according to plan and that it slopes away from that the slope is away from

[25:55] the house for storm water management. They aren't I don't know how to say this

[26:01] but they aren't in the quality business. The building inspectors don't do quality

[26:06] of construction. and they're there to ensure building safety and minimum

[26:10] satisfaction of the codes. So they don't look for concrete and debris in finished

[26:16] grading. They look for grading itself. So right now that is not a mechanism

[26:21] that we have ability to enforce. I understand what you're saying, but

[26:25] that's more of a quality versus a a safety issue.

[26:36] And I I will just say that there are a lot of builders are now starting to

[26:40] include front yard landscaping and even sideyard

[26:44] landscaping for corner corner lots. >> Yeah,

[26:49] » we've had we've had a lot of discussions amongst staff how to enforce this

[26:54] ordinance because it's one that we need to enforce more. Um, I am petitioning

[26:59] the city council for an additional code enforcement officer to help the the

[27:03] current code enforcement officer that we have. Uh, they have not approved that

[27:07] budget yet, but I'm hopeful that we will get another code enforcement officer

[27:11] which will enable us to begin or to do more enforcement of codes like this.

[27:17] So, we we are aware of the situation and we want to enforce that. We are working

[27:21] to get there. That's about all I can give you right

[27:24] now. So, Yeah, it's just having an ordinance that

[27:29] doesn't have any teeth. Like it doesn't make any sense to me. I wish that there

[27:34] was a way that we could figure out because as a no new homeowner, my very

[27:39] first time, I wouldn't even have known to come and ask. Luckily, my front yard

[27:44] was put in. But I mean, you wouldn't know that you need to submit a plan.

[27:48] There's so many people that think my property, my rights, I get to do

[27:52] whatever I want and and doing it um after the thought like after they've

[28:00] done everything wrong and spent all the money and done all the things and then

[28:03] we're going to send in the court code enforcer when things go wrong. Just

[28:08] seems like it it shouldn't be that hard to figure out. Do we give it to a

[28:13] developer? it's part of their package of coming to the city or does is the

[28:18] developer required to tell the new homeowner we're not putting in your yard

[28:22] but you have to and it has to be this way.

[28:25] » I mean because having this code is going going to be great. I love the new

[28:30] improvements. I don't have any problems with those. I just don't think that it's

[28:33] going to be very helpful. I mean that doesn't

[28:38] » and >> it's not a problem for tonight. I guess

[28:40] » it's an educational problem as it really is.

[28:46] » Yeah, it we're evolving. We're we're working towards it.

[28:50] » Yeah. >> So, would would amending this help give

[28:55] you some leg to stand on in eventually putting something in our codes that

[29:02] would delegate this to the builder? Does this help you along that path at all?

[29:06] » No, this just cleans up existing code. just makes it easier. Just a bit of a

[29:11] like I said a housekeeping matter. That would be an entirely different code that

[29:16] we would have to bring back to you. >> At which point then we would probably

[29:20] remend this so that the property own to exclude the property owner line.

[29:26] » It might it might it might be involved in an amendment.

[29:29] » Okay. >> Yep.

[29:32] » Oh, interesting. So, we could theoretically table this until that

[29:37] part's included if we wanted. Or would you want language and then work

[29:43] on it? >> But the ordinance is already there. I

[29:45] mean the qualifications. So >> tableabling it doesn't really change

[29:50] anything because the ordinance is already in place.

[29:56] » I see. I will say for the record that I do like the new changes,

[30:01] » but I really am not buying into the 50% limitation on artificial turf.

[30:11] [clears throat] >> And of course, we can make that

[30:13] recommendation. We're not making a decision. So, we're sending it up to

[30:15] city council to make that big decision. >> You can recommend however you'd like on

[30:19] it. [laughter] >> We could recommend that uh Councilman

[30:22] Gossip shakes his head, too. But, you know, I doubt it'll happen. Give it a

[30:26] couple years. [laughter]

[30:31] » Yeah. If if you're not buying in the 50% if the rest of the commission is on

[30:35] board, I guess we'll find out. But um I think living in our day and age, the

[30:39] less water the better. Right. >> Right.

[30:45] » Great. Any other questions or discussion?

[30:53] make a recommendation in there that they uh hire a new code enforcer. [laughter]

[30:59] » Actually, I I do have one more question. >> Yeah, go ahead.

[31:02] » With with section one on this, I I see under section two, you have a date of

[31:06] April 1st, 2023 for pre-existing in uh homes that have solder seated grass.

[31:14] And this just straight across the board saying that it's prohibited. Now, um,

[31:22] homes that already have it, even if they were built prior to that date in section

[31:26] two, are they still prohibited? Are we going to be knocking on their door

[31:29] saying, "Hey, you need to go hire a landscaper and get rid of this, or are

[31:33] we going to set kind of a grandfatherin situation

[31:39] with this before we go down the route of code enforcement?"

[31:42] » Excellent question. Uh you'll note that the title it says landscaping water

[31:46] conversation with new development. So it's anticipated that this applies only

[31:51] to new development. So existing development that has lawn in their par

[31:55] straps, we're not going to chase them down and say you need to put gravel or

[31:59] cobble in there. It's it's new development.

[32:07] » That is a great question. I think I would just want to see that in

[32:12] section one as well just for clarity cuz as it stands right now I I understand

[32:17] that it's under the with new development. However, I could see that

[32:23] still being hairy at some point just because of a misinterpretation.

[32:28] So, I would I would hope to put a date on that as well,

[32:35] specifying for subdivisions or plans after April 1st, 2023, just so that the

[32:42] language is in both.

[32:52] » Andrew, what are your thoughts on that, including that date in number one?

[32:56] » I think it's a sound idea. Yeah, I have no problem with it.

[32:58] » Okay. >> And you include that put landscape and

[33:02] water conversation doing development approved after April 20 23rd as the

[33:07] heading. >> You can do that.

[33:09] » Yep. >> That will all

[33:12] » Yep. >> Yeah. That helps kind of reiterate the

[33:17] numbers and the dates because we know how well we all read things. We just

[33:21] skim through it most of the time and we're not really reading deep into

[33:24] » so if it right there in the heading it sticks out.

[33:28] » Yep. Applies to both paragraphs in that point. So yeah, it's it's well said.

[33:37] » Great idea. All right. Any other questions or comments for staff?

[33:42] And hopefully these these houses that do have sod in their park strip, they take

[33:46] care of that sod buyback program because they can actually make some money off

[33:49] that. Yeah, redo their yard and save some money. I would, but I don't park

[33:54] strip group. So, [clears throat] all right. Any other discussion,

[33:57] questions, comments, concerns?

[34:05] All right. This one also requires a public hearing. So, I'll go ahead and

[34:09] open the public hearing now. If you'd like to speak to this particular item,

[34:12] please approach the podium. State your name for the record. Write your name for

[34:16] the record.

[34:21] Seeing no one approach, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing, bring it

[34:25] back to the commission for any of the further questions, comments, or further

[34:28] action.

[34:36] » Chair, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to city council for the

[34:42] proposed amendment of Twilla City Code 7-14-11, landscaping water conservation.

[34:48] um for new developments with in accordance with the staff report with

[34:54] the following changes um

[35:01] for approvals occurring after April 1, 2023

[35:05] bold in the [music] title and everything after artificial turf may be

[35:13] used stricken.

[35:22] um with the and let me modify that. [snorts]

[35:27] So the irrigation needed for plantings outside land areas shall be

[35:32] um drip style irrigation system. I want that included in that.

[35:37] » So you pretty much just want to eliminate the percentage on artificial

[35:40] turf. >> Yes.

[35:41] » Okay. So, I got a motion with a positive recommendation with the conditions

[35:46] listed as uh add the date to the title, the a date, April 1st, 2023, and then

[35:51] remove uh the limitation on artificial turf. Is that correct, Commissioner

[35:56] Anderson? >> Correct.

[35:57] » All right. Do I have a second? >> I'll second.

[36:00] » And a second from Commissioner Lynford. Any discussion before we take this to a

[36:04] vote? just that I haven't had enough time to

[36:08] look at less than I mean to take out the 50%.

[36:14] So I'm not I'm not in favor of that.

[36:19] » Okay, we can discuss it still. I just I'd like to know the benefit of

[36:28] of having of taking that out and and I'm not sure what I what I think that looks

[36:33] like and what a whole neighborhood would look like. So, I'm just not sold on it.

[36:38] I haven't had enough time to think about that. So,

[36:40] » is there a different number in mind that you have or [snorts]

[36:45] » Okay. >> Just my personal

[36:48] » and you're entitled to it all. Any other discussion?

[36:53] » When I when I think of something more than 50% of front and

[36:58] side, I think Vegas. I uh I came from Henderson um before moving up to Utah

[37:04] and a lot of that area

[37:10] is about 70 80% turf. They'll still put in a garden bed here or there. They'll

[37:15] do they'll still do some uh a little bit of zeroscaping here and

[37:21] there to offset it. I don't know that I particularly have seen 100%. But

[37:25] limiting to no more than 50 I I just I don't think that necessarily needs to be

[37:32] there and and I think that's why I would second that motion as I did.

[37:37] » Okay.

[37:41] Any other questions before we take this to a vote?

[37:48] » Okay. Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote?

[37:50] » Nay. >> Commissioner Proctor,

[37:52] » yay. >> Commissioner Faircloth,

[37:54] » yay. >> Commissioner Lynford,

[37:55] » yay. >> Commissioner Anderson,

[37:57] » yay. >> I am Chairman Hamilton, I also vote I.

[38:00] That one passes 5 to one.

[38:07] Of course, that is a positive recommendation going up to the city

[38:11] council. They heard our discussion, so they will address that then as well. All

[38:15] right, this brings us to number five on our our agenda tonight is a decision uh

[38:19] on resolution 2026-01 public comment policy amendments and

[38:25] open meetings. Looks like we [clears throat] got Mr. Johnson joining

[38:27] us tonight for this one. >> Thank you, Commissioners.

[38:30] » Absolutely. >> I don't get the mic very often, so I

[38:33] appreciate it. >> You going to sing us a song, too? No,

[38:36] but I am kind of doubling up on item five. So [laughter] if you let the

[38:40] lawyer talk, you get twice as much, right?

[38:42] » That's okay. Just tap in pants. >> Oh, perfect.

[38:46] » Okay.

[38:50] » So, what I originally was planning to present was um just some changes in the

[38:54] public comment policy. I I'll get to those in a minute, but but the um Twilla

[39:00] City Council made some changes to their policy and it seemed to make sense to

[39:04] offer similar changes to the commission to see if it would make sense to adopt

[39:08] those. Um talking it with through it with Mr. Agard, it's also probably a

[39:14] good opportunity since since it overlaps a little bit with the Open Meetings Act

[39:18] to have a discussion on the Open Meetings Act. So, we're kind of doubling

[39:22] up on item five. Um, if it's okay, I think it makes sense if I were to we

[39:27] we'll count this as training as well to to go through the open public meetings

[39:31] act portion of it. Um, see if we have any questions and then I'll I'll get to

[39:36] the to the resolution having to do with the public comments policy.

[39:40] » Perfect. I love it. >> Great. Great. Um, so the goal of the uh

[39:45] public meetings act really is is transparency. Um, it's right right in

[39:51] the in the statute itself. We It doesn't say we the people, but it certainly

[39:56] reflects we the people. Public bodies exist to aid in the conduct of the

[40:00] people's business and actions and deliberations of public bodies must be

[40:04] taken openly. And as I stated, there's also a

[40:09] requirement right there in the code that there's annual training um for all the

[40:13] public body members. And just to clarify, public body includes the the

[40:17] planning commission. you are all part of a public body. Um, as as we go through

[40:21] the slides, I kind of go back and forth between commission and public body, but

[40:25] but uh you are a public body. Um, I'm going to jump ahead to the punchline,

[40:31] but we're going to talk a lot about what's in the um open meetings act. The

[40:36] one I really just want to hit on the head is this one. Um, we'll talk about

[40:41] things like notice and minutes and those requirements, but where the commission

[40:45] will have support of of city staff like Miss Young, Mr. Agard, Miss Miss

[40:50] Angland, and city recorder on all those things. This is one where

[40:56] really not that you're totally on your own other than, you know, we have this

[41:00] training, but but this really will be up to you as the commissioners to follow.

[41:05] And this is just right out of the code. It is a violation for individuals

[41:09] constituting a quorum of a public body again that counts as the commission to

[41:14] act together outside of a meeting in a concerted and deliberate way to predeter

[41:20] predetermine an action to be taken by the public body at a meeting on a re

[41:26] relevant matter. So you can't huddle up before a meeting basically and and and

[41:32] plan on what you're going to do. Um, we'll come back to that. Like I say, I'm

[41:37] really going to hit that one on the head. But first of all, what are the

[41:40] elements of a lawful meeting? Well, first of all, a public body convenes. It

[41:45] seems odd that that's not defined, but what we have in mind is that a quorum of

[41:49] the body has to be present. So, for the commission under the bylaws, it's at

[41:53] least four members. One or more may be present electronically.

[41:57] Um, and that's to have a quorum. So keep in mind when we when we get back to the

[42:02] one I'm I'm I'm hitting over the head it that's actions by a quorum. So four

[42:07] members even if electronically um could constitute a quorum. Um it con

[42:13] it's convened with someone with authority to do so and uh following the

[42:18] lawful process to do so. In other words, the chair calls the meeting to order.

[42:26] Um the lawful purpose of a public meeting. First of all, I'm jumping down.

[42:30] It's worth defining relevant matter. That's actually defined in the statute.

[42:34] It's something within the scope of the authority of the of the public body.

[42:39] So, the purpose of the of a of a meeting is to receive public comment about a re

[42:44] relevant matter or to deliberate deliberate about a relevant matter or

[42:49] take action vote on a on a relevant matter. Again, this these are all things

[42:54] that for for the commission, things that the commission has jurisdiction over.

[42:59] Things that aren't a public meeting public meeting even if a quorum is

[43:05] present are things like social gatherings and chance encounters um

[43:10] parades, ribbon cutings. We don't have to notice if if five of you are planning

[43:15] to go to a ribbon cutting. Um we don't have to, you know, uh recently Mayor Win

[43:20] retired. don't have to notice if if a quorum of the of the council or

[43:26] commission is going to attend because you the plan isn't for you to go there

[43:30] and talk about business, right? Talk about relevant matters. It's the same if

[43:34] you attend a a seminar. You don't have to divvy up say, "Oh, only three of us

[43:39] can go to this training." No, it you you all can go. It's okay. Just be careful

[43:44] not to not to discuss something inappropriate. And if you run into other

[43:49] people at the park, that's fine. You can talk to them. You don't need to run

[43:51] away. You just um like I say, you can't talk about anything inappropriate.

[43:57] So, how is a meeting open in public? Um basically the questions are how does the

[44:04] city or how does the commission what does it do to ensure that the public

[44:08] knows the time and place that the meetings are going to are going to occur

[44:12] or have already occurred? What are the topics that are going to be discussed or

[44:16] were discussed? um that the public has a reasonable

[44:23] opportunity to attend and give input at the meeting and they need to have a

[44:28] reasonable way to see how the commission came to the decisions. They need to,

[44:34] like I say, you can't huddle up before the meeting. You deliberate at the

[44:37] meeting. Sorry, this is a busy one, busy slide.

[44:44] Um the notice requirements I'm going to go quickly through. I did put an

[44:48] asterisk next to them. I The open meetings act has specific notice

[44:53] requirements. A lot of what the commission considers have special notice

[44:58] requirements that are in LAMA, not in open public meetings. I'm just making

[45:02] note of it. I don't want to get too complicated. For the purpose of the open

[45:06] meetings act, um it requires 24 hours notice for the meeting itself. Um the

[45:12] notice has to show the uh date, time, and place of the meeting. has to be

[45:18] accompanied by an agenda and the agenda has to have reasonable specificity as to

[45:23] what's going to be discussed and I highlighted hearings especially with

[45:27] hearings it's it's uh commission of course gets a lot of hearings it's

[45:32] important that they know what is going to be addressed uh for example the

[45:38] hearing um recently on the on the ordinance uh having to do with parking

[45:43] in the front yard if the notice only said ordinance on parking. That wouldn't

[45:49] do it. Um I know Mr. Agar did a great job of getting exactly what it is in the

[45:54] notice so so that it was clear. Um also um

[46:00] uh there it's uh specified where where the notice has to be posted uh for

[46:05] Twilla City. Those are the three places. The Utah public notice website, city's

[46:10] official website, and in a public place likely to be seen. We'd like city hall.

[46:15] That seems like the one that makes sense.

[46:19] What if someone brings up a topic that's not on the agenda? Well, first of all,

[46:27] topic is not defined by the statute, but I'm going to jump down to the bottom of

[46:30] the slide here. Topic probably is limited to relevant matters. Um, so

[46:36] within the scope of the jurisdiction, uh, for example, talking about

[46:40] Councilman Gossit's haircut, shaving his head, that's probably okay. Even though

[46:45] we didn't put it on the agenda, it's probably okay. You mentioned it. Um, but

[46:50] for relevant matters, commissioners can't bring up something that's not on

[46:53] the agenda. But if a resident brings up a topic that's not on the agenda and the

[47:00] chair allows it, the commission can discuss that topic further as long as it

[47:05] originated with a resident and not with a commissioner. Um but the commission

[47:10] can't take a vote on it. So that's kind of a judgment call for the chair. Um how

[47:16] how much do we really want to talk about this if we can't vote on it? Are we

[47:20] gonna muddy the record if we're eventually going to take it to vote at

[47:23] another meeting? It's a judgment call.

[47:28] Um, briefly, I'm I I'm just notice just going to

[47:32] mention notice requirements for emergency meetings. Just to be clear,

[47:36] emergency meetings are not the same as a regular meeting during an emergency.

[47:40] This isn't like, okay, you have a regularly scheduled meeting and we have

[47:44] the next pandemic and so you got to figure something out. meetings can be

[47:47] postponed and cancelled. These are more meetings where um something came up

[47:52] that's unforeseen and it's got to be decided in a in a quick manner. So

[47:57] probably um maybe it's my lack of imagination, but I just don't think that

[48:01] that's um going to happen that often. We have emergencies, but not necessarily

[48:06] emergency meetings, if that makes sense. Um and the timing of the notices,

[48:11] [clears throat and cough] excuse me. Um

[48:14] we we go right to the best notice practable practicable so of the time and

[48:20] place and the topics to be considered. Um with an emergency meeting time is

[48:26] short and and so they the legislature gives you some leeway as as far as

[48:30] timing and also the location just what makes the most sense

[48:35] to have an emergency meeting. It requires an attempt to notify all the

[48:40] commissioners. So again, this isn't just we had a regular meeting and we had an

[48:45] emergency situation where we got to figure it out. It's got to be nobody

[48:50] knows about this meeting yet. We're trying to notify all the commissioners

[48:53] and then a majority of the commissioners have has to have to approve that it's

[48:57] going to occur.

[49:02] Public access to meetings. I apologize. This is about the most circular

[49:06] explanation I I I've done. But what is open and public? Must be open to the

[49:11] public. A little bit uh better of an explanation

[49:16] is um there has to be a space provided and facilities uh at an anchor location

[49:22] where the commission normally meets. That's right here. even if there's uh if

[49:26] it's a electronic or virtual meeting um the public has to have an opportunity

[49:32] to gather here and to comment here have hearings here. The only exception if is

[49:37] if there's some kind of health or safety risk in in that case there can be an

[49:40] exception um and something else figured out depending on

[49:46] on on what the danger is. Um there still has to be reasonable opportunity for the

[49:51] public to be heard. Um, and I'll also note um the Americans with Disabilities

[49:57] Act that um any accommodations we we'd seek to to make those happen for for

[50:02] people with disabilities so that they can have meaningful access to the

[50:06] meeting and and meaning meaningful input.

[50:09] Okay, we're back to this one that I'm hammering over the head. Public access

[50:15] to the commission's deliberations. It's a violation for individuals constituting

[50:19] a quorum of a public body to act together outside a meeting in a

[50:23] concerted and deliberate way to predetermine an action to be taken by

[50:27] the public body at a meeting on the relevant matter. Um some pointers, avoid

[50:32] texting or emailing other commissioners um about any [clears throat] topic

[50:36] during the meeting. avoid discussing discussing or deliberating items outside

[50:41] the meeting with other commissioners, but especially if there's a a quorum of

[50:45] commissioners. Um,

[50:50] and then public access access to records after the meeting. This goes through our

[50:56] minute taking. Um, there has to be an audio recording in in its entirety. uh

[51:01] written minutes which constitute the the official record and must include um the

[51:07] dates the members president uh substance matter of of uh all proposed or

[51:13] discussed items a record of how each individual member voted and we're not

[51:20] just bugging people to write their names. There has to be uh the name of a

[51:24] person who provided testimony or comments and a summary of their

[51:27] testimony or comments. And then the minutes must be available

[51:33] within a reasonable time. That's a little open, but once they're approved,

[51:36] it has to be posted to the Utah Public Notice website within three business

[51:40] days. What happens if a public body violates

[51:45] the Open Meetings Act? Um some big things that could happen. A court could

[51:51] overturn any action that's taken in uh in violation of of the public meetings

[51:57] act. Any person who intentionally violates the public meetings act can be

[52:02] charged with a class B misdemeanor. Um two big ones. We don't want those to

[52:07] happen. It is an intentional violation. If if it's an accidental violation, it's

[52:12] still bad, but but uh it's not a class B misdemeanor. Um, if we can fix mistakes,

[52:19] it's possible. It might well it probably requires renoticing and redeliberating

[52:24] any particular item. As you can see though, if you think through it the

[52:29] noticing requirements, we can we can probably fix that way. Um, minute

[52:33] taking, we can probably fix that way. The the one where you deliberate before

[52:38] a meeting, that's hard. How do we fix that? We've already [clears throat]

[52:41] deliberated before the meeting. So that's again kind of why I'm hitting

[52:45] that one as hard as I am. So we're going to I won't read it again,

[52:49] but here it is just for as a refresher. That's the rule. We're going to run

[52:54] through a couple of scenarios and see what you

[52:59] think. Is it a violation? So there's a ribbon cutting. Five commissioners

[53:03] attend the ribbon cutting at a new doughnut shop. Their attendance was

[53:06] planned two weeks in advance, but no public notice of their anticipated

[53:10] attendance was given. While there, all five gathered together

[53:15] and debate whether cake donuts are better than raised donuts. They split

[53:18] three to two in favor of cake donuts. Is it a violation?

[53:22] » No. >> No. No. They can talk whatever they want

[53:25] about cake donuts. That's not a relevant matter. So, we're good.

[53:30] » Okay. Example two, social event. Four commissioners are all invited to the

[53:35] same private picnic. The fact that the four happen to be friends with the host

[53:39] is a total coincidence. While there, all four gather and discuss a controversial

[53:44] reszone application. All four stating that they plan to recommend against it.

[53:48] Is it a violation? >> Yes.

[53:50] » Yeah, that's looking bad. Right. Right. Example three, the reply. All I have a

[53:58] feeling I just as I was looking through previous materials that probably some of

[54:03] you have heard this example before, but here it is. Uh, city staff sends a an

[54:08] email packet. Um, excuse me. City staff sends by email a

[54:13] packet to all the commissioners for the next meeting. The agenda includes a

[54:17] controversial reszone application. One commissioner hits reply all and

[54:22] expresses many concerns with the proposal. Three other commissioners also

[54:26] hit reply all to express their concerns with the proposal. Is that a violation?

[54:31] » Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah, that's looking bad.

[54:35] Okay, sorry. This one feels a lot like like

[54:40] you know those rotten crest questions you'd get in school, but here it is.

[54:45] City staff sends an email similar uh sends by email a similar meeting packet.

[54:50] So again, it's got a controversial reason application on the agenda

[54:54] in a separate email. So, not reply all, totally separate email. Commissioner A

[55:00] emails Commissioner B that he hates the reason and wants uh to forward a

[55:05] negative recommendation. In another separate email, Commissioner

[55:10] B emails Commissioner C and mentions that she agrees with Commissioner A's

[55:15] concerns. In yet another separate email, Commissioner C emails Commissioner D and

[55:22] mentions that she agrees with Commissioner's A concern and

[55:24] Commissioner's B concern. So, none of them like it, but they're not all

[55:28] talking together. It's sort of going down the line. Commissioner D replies to

[55:33] Commissioner C that he likes the reason and wants a favorable favorable

[55:38] recommendation. Is this a violation? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you can try to say

[55:45] you got one guy disagreeing. Is it? No. I I think it is. I think they're

[55:48] deliberation. >> Yeah. They're deliberating. Exactly.

[55:51] Exactly. Great. 100%.

[55:55] » [clears throat] >> Rule of thumb for emails may seem

[55:58] obvious at this point, but uh as much as possible, use emails only for scheduling

[56:02] and transmitting documents. Uh the more this can be like a one-way

[56:06] communication, the better. And if you can think in terms of any opinion on any

[56:10] agenda item, it's best reserved for the microphone. You'll probably always be

[56:14] safe. Um

[56:18] examples of safe transmitting information one way, like here's the

[56:22] traffic study for the meeting. That's fine. It's a little more dangerous

[56:25] voicing [clears throat] your opinion in an email. I think the traffic study is

[56:28] wrong. I'm voting no. Um and then it's definitely illegal to to just use it to

[56:33] predetermine. So if someone says, "Let's kill this thing." And gets six thumbs

[56:37] up, yeah, you're out. That's definitely bad.

[56:42] Um, there are times, again, maybe it's my lack of of imagination

[56:48] or experience, but I I don't foresee the planning commission having closed

[56:52] meetings, but it is in the it is in the open meetings act. So, um, for all of

[56:57] you who are interested in what city council does, they do close meetings

[57:01] sometimes. Um, when can a meeting be closed to the public? Um,

[57:06] there's certain subject matter that's allowed. um discussion of character or

[57:10] competence of an individual. Um B in other words, these are personnel

[57:14] matters. This isn't like your the the competence of your favorite celebrity or

[57:19] athlete or or anything like that. These are personnel matters. Um also what's

[57:23] allowed strategy strategy strategy strategy sessions to discuss a pending

[57:29] or imminent litigation and strategy strategy sessions to discuss the

[57:34] purchase, exchange or lease of real property. uh if public discussion would

[57:39] prevent getting the best terms. [clears throat]

[57:41] These all kind of make sense if you think about it. I mean, if if there's a

[57:44] bidding war and we're talking about something in in public, we're not going

[57:49] to be able to get a good deal. If we're getting sued and we're talking about it

[57:53] in public, the other side sees what we're doing. Um but any final action

[57:59] still has to go back to a public meeting. They can't vote on something in

[58:03] close meeting and have that be the final decision on it. they got to take it back

[58:06] to the public meeting. Um, for example, if if it is a a real estate purchase,

[58:12] they can talk about in closed meeting, but to approve it, it's got to come back

[58:16] to the open meeting and be voted on. And just procedurally, closed meetings

[58:21] have to be initiated by a motion in an open meeting. They can't just start out

[58:24] in a closed meeting. And you have to say why. You can't just say we I move for a

[58:29] closed meeting. It's going to be to discuss litigation, to discuss

[58:32] personnel, to discuss both all. Um, and there has to be a majority for in favor

[58:39] of closing the meeting. I actually didn't know this till the other day and

[58:42] when I was reviewing it. It has to be a twothirds majority. I've never seen

[58:46] anything other than unanimous, so I never knew, but it has to be two-thirds

[58:50] majority. And the close meeting still is recorded as well. Um,

[58:56] hopefully that was not too fast, but any questions?

[59:05] » Okay, >> pretty straightforward. [cough]

[59:07] » Great. Great. Well, having that having said that, I'll move to

[59:13] uh resolution 202601.

[59:18] Um, as I stated, this started with uh some

[59:23] changes to the city council uh public policy, public comment policy. Um, some

[59:29] issues that that we were seeing as city staff were having to do with written

[59:33] comments and not being clear which rule from the from the uh verbal comments

[59:40] applied to their written comments. One big my memory is what sparked it is,

[59:46] you know, they have the the public comment email address. Well, it was

[59:50] getting junk mail and the city recorder said, "We can just ignore this, right?"

[59:56] And we kind of looked through what we could point to to ignore it. And we

[1:00:00] figured we could, but we would feel better if we made it more clear. So,

[1:00:04] that's part of what started it. Um, also there there were some emails that were

[1:00:12] um came in later and and [clears throat] this gets a little more complicated with

[1:00:17] with city council since they have an open public comment period, not just

[1:00:20] hearings, but does it get read later? Is it just disregarded? Um, so we hope to

[1:00:27] clarify that some of those with this. Um, one issue is as we did point back to

[1:00:33] say all the rules um that apply to verbal comments also apply to written

[1:00:39] comments. For example, if someone were to email an anonymous written comment,

[1:00:47] the chair would have discretion to just disregard it. Um really the the comment

[1:00:52] period including for public hearings is um it it may be limited to residents and

[1:00:59] stakeholders and if you're getting anonymous emails you don't know who that

[1:01:03] is. So it doesn't mean you have to but um you [clears throat] you the chair

[1:01:08] would have the option to to disregard those emails. Um, and also just general

[1:01:14] decorum. Um, just as someone uh can't come up to the microphone and and be

[1:01:20] insulting or threatening or anything like that, it's the same. If there's a

[1:01:23] threatening or insulting email that the chair would have the option to disregard

[1:01:28] it. Um, one other more housekeeping item that's

[1:01:34] that's in the first paragraph is is we clarified that chair as used in this

[1:01:39] includes anyone lawfully uh presiding at the meeting. So, in other words, vice

[1:01:44] chair. Everything still would apply to vice chair. Um, I apologize I didn't do

[1:01:48] slides of of this as well, but it's in your packet. Um, if you have any

[1:01:53] questions, I'd be happy to entertain them.

[1:01:56] » Perfect. Let's bring this back to the commission for questions. Hopefully

[1:01:59] everybody got a chance to read through it. It's [clears throat] been a a

[1:02:02] discussion for quite a while actually. I brought it up a couple years ago when I

[1:02:07] was chair and now we're getting some solidification. So, I like it.

[1:02:13] » Any questions for staff comments, concerns?

[1:02:16] » No, I'm just glad it's done. >> Yeah,

[1:02:18] » I like the new time um when public comment is due because then it really

[1:02:24] does get to us in a timely manner. I can see when it was the 5:00 cut off, then

[1:02:28] staff didn't see it. We didn't get until the next day and and oftent times you're

[1:02:33] reading it right before. So, I like that.

[1:02:36] » Great. Great. >> Yeah. I noticed too in there you've you

[1:02:40] explain in depth that uh freedom of speech does exist, but if it's not

[1:02:45] pertaining to the agenda, then the chair does have discretion to disregard those

[1:02:49] comments and ask them to step down. >> We need to stay focused.

[1:02:53] » That That's correct. That's correct. And and this is um the city does have the

[1:02:57] right this is a limited public forum and and and the commission has the right to

[1:03:02] limit time, place, and manner of comments. And yep,

[1:03:05] » and I think getting it writing is going to help us out immensely. I mean, we

[1:03:08] haven't had an issue since I've sat on this board, but um I think it'll help in

[1:03:12] the future. So, >> right.

[1:03:18] » All right. Any other questions, comments for staff? This does require a decision

[1:03:22] for us since this is our uh public comments.

[1:03:27] [clears throat] So, I will entertain a motion.

[1:03:32] » Chair, I'll make a motion. >> Yes, Commissioner Proctor.

[1:03:35] » I move we accept the ordinance as presented by Attorney Johnson.

[1:03:40] » Okay. I got a motion to approve the uh public meeting

[1:03:46] » ordinance, >> whatever numbers are [laughter]

[1:03:50] » as presented by Mr. Johnson. Do I have a second?

[1:03:53] » I'll second. >> I got two of them. Also, Commissioner

[1:03:56] Hammer. Any discussion before we take this to a

[1:03:59] vote?

[1:04:02] All right. Commissioner Hammer, >> I.

[1:04:04] » Commissioner Proctor, >> I.

[1:04:06] » Commissioner Faircloth. >> Hi.

[1:04:07] » Commissioner Lynford, >> I.

[1:04:08] » Commissioner Anderson, >> hi.

[1:04:09] » I am. Chairman Hamilton, I also vote I. That one passes six to zero. Thank you.

[1:04:13] Appreciate that. All right. Number six on our agenda tonight is our city

[1:04:18] council reports.

[1:04:25] » We won't make you shave your head yet, y'all.

[1:04:28] » It's almost there. >> You're going to let it do itself, huh?

[1:04:31] » Went from a forehead to a five head. It's almost to a six.

[1:04:34] » Well, now you're [laughter] now you're a city councilman. It's going to be gone.

[1:04:37] » Yeah. you know, look at my future. [laughter]

[1:04:41] » We love you. >> So, uh, well, since Chris isn't here

[1:04:45] tonight, everybody knows that, uh, Commissioner Sloan loves racing, but I

[1:04:49] think the reason you like racing is because, uh, you get to see the racks,

[1:04:53] right? That's the fun part. >> I like tonight. I like that there was

[1:04:56] some discussion and and good comments and the fact that not everybody just

[1:05:02] agrees blindly. So, I thought that was really cool. So, I that's what I come

[1:05:06] for. Andrew had me all excited when he was

[1:05:09] telling about Riverton and how they get heated and everything. And so I've been

[1:05:13] waiting for one of those and everybody's too nice. So [clears throat]

[1:05:16] [laughter] So I liked it. Uh we really didn't have anything to that that was

[1:05:21] too wild and crazy uh last week. The one thing that I did like uh was John Kra

[1:05:28] got up and gave the the quarterly report for how things are going in the city.

[1:05:32] And I think that's it's really fun to see the things that are coming, the

[1:05:36] things, you know, the vacancy rates, the everything that he goes over. It shows

[1:05:42] that we're growing and and we're moving kind of in the right direction. So, I

[1:05:46] liked everything that I heard. If anybody had a chance to watch it, if

[1:05:50] not, go back and >> and watch it. But, uh, it's interesting.

[1:05:53] It's fun to hear the you know, you're watching the pieces of it, but it's fun

[1:05:57] to sit back at the end of the quarter and go, "Oh, wow. That's That's pretty

[1:06:01] cool. But I don't have anything else, but I appreciate you guys and thanks for

[1:06:06] all the time you put in and and for your thoughtfulness and thinking about

[1:06:11] matters like this. You know, you too, Kelly. I like that. So,

[1:06:17] » I can have a thought. >> No, I I I greatly appreciate that, too.

[1:06:21] I'm glad Councilman Member Gossip brought that up. It's almost taken a

[1:06:24] page out of Governor Cox's we can disagree better. Yes,

[1:06:27] » we don't have to agree about everything, but we can talk about our disagreements

[1:06:29] and we don't have to agree about everything. We don't we can disagree and

[1:06:33] we can talk about it, but at the end we're going to come to a solution and

[1:06:36] we're all going to get behind it and we're going to do it. So, I love that

[1:06:40] about this commission. It's it's so work awesome working with all of you guys.

[1:06:44] » Perfect. Thank you uh for those kind words. Moves us on to number seven is a

[1:06:48] review a decision on our April 8, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes. Are

[1:06:52] there any additions or corrections to those minutes? She already made the one

[1:06:57] correction I pointed out. >> Perfect. I'll entertain a motion.

[1:07:02] » I move to approve the minutes from April 8th, 2026.

[1:07:07] » Got a motion to approve. Do I have a second?

[1:07:10] » I'll second. >> I've never seconded.

[1:07:13] » There you go. And a second. I got a first from Commissioner Hammer and a

[1:07:17] second from Commissioner Faircloth. Any discussion?

[1:07:21] » Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote? >> I.

[1:07:22] » Commissioner Proctor. >> I.

[1:07:23] » Commissioner Faircloth. >> Hi. Commissioner Lynford.

[1:07:25] » Hi. >> Commissioner Anderson.

[1:07:26] » Hi. >> I am Chairman Hamilton. I also vote I.

[1:07:29] That one passes six to zero. >> Now, um I'm going [clears throat] to

[1:07:34] jump ahead a little bit um because we'd like to excuse the minutes taker. If

[1:07:38] she'd like to leave, she can leave while we do training, but you don't have to.

[1:07:42] You're welcome to stay and hang out with us. Uh but other than that, we've got

[1:07:45] some training here. Some conditional use permits, which I think is very vital to

[1:07:49] what we do. We do a lot of it. >> Question for you, chairman. Do you want

[1:07:52] to do you want to adjourn the meeting >> or do you want to wait till after

[1:07:56] training to adjourn? >> That's a good question. Should we go

[1:07:58] ahead and just adjurnn and then move to training?

[1:08:01] » I I would move that we adjourn first because I'm going to have to miss

[1:08:04] tonight's training myself. >> Okay, I'll entertain a motion to

[1:08:07] adjurnn. >> I'll make that motion.

[1:08:09] » Okay, Commissioner Fair or Lynford and I'll second. We'll go ahead and adjurnn.

[1:08:12] Uh those that don't need to stake can leave and we'll go move into training.

[1:08:17] » Well, as the commission is aware, we are requ

[1:08:20] » I have one question. Did the public meeting training that the attorney did,

[1:08:25] does that count as a training also? >> So Matt and I have tag team tonight. Our

[1:08:29] hope is to get you one hour. So a half an hour in open meetings and then a half

[1:08:33] an hour on my conditional use. So >> perfect. Thank you.

[1:08:38] » Do I keep streaming or no? >> Yes.

[1:08:41] » Yeah. So you are aware that state law requires the planning commission receive

[1:08:47] four hours of training every year. One of those hours can be attending 12

[1:08:52] meetings and then you can also obtain your own training or you can let staff

[1:08:58] give you some training and fulfill that those hours in that manner. Um I like to

[1:09:05] give specific trainings that are related to what you do exactly as a planning

[1:09:09] commission. So, for those of you that have been on

[1:09:12] the commission for a while, you've you do a really good job with conditional

[1:09:16] uses, but it's always good to have a refresher course on what conditional

[1:09:20] uses are and how we handle them because really that's the majority of what you

[1:09:25] approve is conditional uses. Uh for the commissioners that are new, this is a a

[1:09:31] good course for you to understand uh your role and your authority in regards

[1:09:35] to conditional uses. So to start,

[1:09:40] what is a conditional use?

[1:09:44] How do we define them?

[1:09:50] Mr. Anderson

[1:09:54] um things that nor don't normally take place in a zone but can be permitted. is

[1:10:02] based on whatever conditions the the planning commission or whomever the

[1:10:07] regulatory body is puts on that use. Okay. Excellent.

[1:10:14] So this is what we define a conditional use and Commissioner Anderson is right

[1:10:18] in line with our definition. A conditional use is a permissible use

[1:10:22] upon which the approval authority has the opportunity to assign conditions to

[1:10:27] mitigate specific potential impacts onto adjacent properties. That's the whole

[1:10:33] purpose of a conditional use is to identify potential problems and try to

[1:10:38] resolve those with conditions of approval.

[1:10:42] uh you guys have had one just at your last meeting with auto repair business

[1:10:47] and you attach conditions to it to try and mitigate potential impacts. That's

[1:10:51] that's the purpose of what we're doing. >> What does permissible mean?

[1:11:01] » It's allowed permitted >> but it's not something that's

[1:11:06] it's allowed but it has to be approved. >> Yeah, exactly. I couldn't say it any

[1:11:11] better than that. So, how are conditional uses determined?

[1:11:18] » Based upon the use that the applicant wants to

[1:11:22] do in that area. >> Okay. Who who establishes conditional

[1:11:25] use? >> Council.

[1:11:27] » The city council does. Okay. Conditional uses are established by the city council

[1:11:32] during the legislative process of establishing zoning districts and the

[1:11:37] types of land uses that can occur within those zoning districts. The city council

[1:11:42] also decides which uses are conditional and or permitted. So what that means is

[1:11:48] when you don't want a use to occur in a

[1:11:53] particular zone, the time to prohibit that use in that zone is not during the

[1:11:59] conditional use permit, but during the time when the council is ratifying that

[1:12:03] zoning ordinance. You will often encounter members of the

[1:12:08] public who will come to the planning commission is I want you to deny this

[1:12:11] doesn't belong in this area. that doesn't matter. Once the zoning

[1:12:16] ordinance permits a use, it is permitted in that zone. So, those kind of comments

[1:12:22] really are irrelevant to a a planning commission's decision on a conditional

[1:12:27] use permit. The zoning code already allows it. They can do it in the zone.

[1:12:31] Period. We are trying to find how does this impact the adjacent properties and

[1:12:35] how can we correct that. So, just be aware. You will get those comments quite

[1:12:39] a bit. We need you I want you guys to deny this. No, zoning code allows it.

[1:12:44] That's not up for discussion tonight. Okay.

[1:12:48] Utah State Code 10-9A-507.

[1:12:53] A legislative body shall classify any use that a land use regulation allows in

[1:12:58] a zoning district as either permitted or a conditional use. So, state law also in

[1:13:03] requires the city council to establish permitted and conditional uses.

[1:13:09] So, we have conditional uses in our residential zoning districts. I

[1:13:13] apologize if that's not very legible, but I just wanted to throw the chart up

[1:13:16] there for your reference. This is our list of uses for our residential zones.

[1:13:22] So, we have various uses in residential zones, and some of those uses are

[1:13:26] permitted, some of those uses are conditional, and some of those are not

[1:13:29] permitted at all. If there's not a P or a C in the chart, that is not a use that

[1:13:34] can occur. You'll note that mobile home parks and subdivisions are not permitted

[1:13:38] in any zoning district. So, somebody can't come in with a chunk of land and

[1:13:44] say, "I want to build a mobile home park." It's not on the list. It's not

[1:13:47] approved. You can't do that. So, that's how we determine residential uses. If

[1:13:52] they come in and they say, "I want to build a

[1:13:56] um a golf course and a country club in an R110 zone," you can see that that is

[1:14:02] conditional in the R110 zone. So they could do a golf course and a country

[1:14:06] club in an R110 zoning district, but they have to come to the planning

[1:14:10] commission to discuss how they're going to prevent all those stray golf balls

[1:14:14] from taking out people's windows. Okay, so that's how our residential ordinance

[1:14:18] works in regards to conditional uses. Commercial zones are very similar to

[1:14:24] residential zones in regards to we establish the use and then we look at

[1:14:30] the chart to see if that use is conditional or permitted. Till city has

[1:14:35] a very expansive list of commercial uses. This is only the first 10 or so

[1:14:40] uses on our list. But if someone comes in to Anna and they say, ' Anna, I want

[1:14:44] to build an auto impound yard in this property next to my house and it's zone

[1:14:48] neighborhood commercial, Anna's going to look at that list and

[1:14:52] she's going to see, okay, there's nothing there. It is not permitted. You

[1:14:56] cannot do that in that zone. But if they're next door to a piece of property

[1:15:00] that zoned industrial service, can they build an auto impound yard?

[1:15:06] Absolutely. It's it's conditional. But then they're going to come to the

[1:15:09] planning commission. planning commission is going to say, "Well, you're storing

[1:15:12] wrecked vehicles. How you going to prevent people from looking at it?

[1:15:15] You're going to assign conditions to mitigate that." Okay? So, that's how we

[1:15:19] establish and and uh govern our uses in both residential and conditional zones.

[1:15:24] Now, this list and the previous list is all established by our friendly city

[1:15:30] council members. Does the planning commission ever have

[1:15:33] an opportunity to weigh in on these uses,

[1:15:37] these use lists? Yes.

[1:15:40] » Yes, you do. So, if we ever go through a a a code amendment where we revise or

[1:15:45] add uses to a list, planning commission will have the opportunity to make a

[1:15:50] recommendation to the city council. So, you do get involved in the establishment

[1:15:54] of these things as well. Are conditional use applications

[1:15:59] administrative or legislative reviews? >> Administrative.

[1:16:03] » They are administrative. Okay. So everything, all the legislative, all the

[1:16:08] parameters of the code have been established by the council. It's your

[1:16:11] job as the commission to make sure that it complies with those standards.

[1:16:17] Um, I already done that.

[1:16:23] Okay. The review and approval of a conditional use hinges on the

[1:16:26] satisfaction of the substantial evidence test. Now, what makes substantial

[1:16:32] evidence? This is a quote from my predecessor, Mr.

[1:16:36] Jim Bolzer. Those you guys, those of you that remember Jim know that he was a

[1:16:40] very eloquent individual and had a lot of big words. I love this one. The

[1:16:44] quantum and quantity of evidence on the record sufficient to

[1:16:49] convince a reasonable mind to support conclusion. By the way, I missed Jim.

[1:16:53] So, um I'm not sure what quantum means, but I think it has reference to quality.

[1:16:59] [snorts] Okay. So, in a meeting when you receive public comment on a

[1:17:04] controversial conditional use permit issue,

[1:17:07] um, you want to weigh the quality and the quantity of evidence on the record

[1:17:13] of a potential impact and you want to make sure that you clarify that and

[1:17:17] voice that into your into your motions and into your findings of fact.

[1:17:24] » Can a complete application for a conditional use permit be denied? No.

[1:17:31] » If there are extenduating circumstances that safety then yes that we cannot

[1:17:36] mitigate >> that we cannot mitigate.

[1:17:38] » Exactly. Ex spot on. We are you are as a commission obligated to approve

[1:17:44] conditional use permits. Um you can establish conditions that

[1:17:50] would be pretty ownorous to satisfy if you have evidence that you that that

[1:17:54] condition mitigates a problem. For example, someone wants to build a sewer

[1:17:59] plant next to a residential zone and you put a condition. You need to build a 100

[1:18:04] foot tall wall. If you believe that that is going to

[1:18:08] mitigate the problem, that could be a condition. Can they meet that condition?

[1:18:13] Probably not. Okay. [laughter]

[1:18:17] » No, because our highest structure is only 19.

[1:18:19] » Exactly. So, in some situations, a denial is just as effective as putting a

[1:18:26] condition on an applicant that can't be met. Um, however, I strongly emphasize

[1:18:32] that it's not good to deny a conditional use permit. You are obligated to approve

[1:18:37] it and you're obligated to establish conditions that they that will mitigate

[1:18:41] a problem, but sometimes it can't be done.

[1:18:45] I have seen you guys deny one conditional use permit in my eight years

[1:18:49] here at city. For those of you that have been on the commission for a while, do

[1:18:53] you remember which one it was? >> Tyson,

[1:18:56] » tell us about it. It >> was over here in this Well, there's two

[1:18:59] of them actually that I remember. One of them was the trucking company over here

[1:19:02] because the inadequacy of the road over there and the other one was over here,

[1:19:05] this Allen Lid building. It was the applicant did not suffice his previous

[1:19:10] conditional use. So, we denied the second one. He could not Yeah. So, we're

[1:19:14] not going to give you a second one if you can't comply with the first one. So,

[1:19:17] there was two that I know of. >> So, the one that the truck driving one

[1:19:20] is the one that comes to my mind. I remember you you guys deliberated that

[1:19:24] quite a bit. um you you established the fact that in

[1:19:28] order to accommodate the safety of a truck driving school on that unimproved

[1:19:33] road that they would have to improve that road being Flender's Way and 1280

[1:19:38] North that was going to require road widening, a signal modification at the

[1:19:42] intersection of Main Street. And I remember Chris Sloan saying they're not

[1:19:46] going to do that. We need to deny this. Um you could have also just slapped

[1:19:51] those conditions on there as well. But uh just show your information that you

[1:19:56] are obligated as a commission to to approve your conditional use permits.

[1:20:04] Utah case law has established that the burden of the land use authority is to

[1:20:08] identify potential detrimental impacts to adjacent properties and set specific

[1:20:13] conditions to mitigate those detrimental impacts. Okay? So your conditions have

[1:20:18] to be established to mitigate a problem. So, if you don't like a particular CUP

[1:20:25] that's coming in, let's say you don't like that sewer plant and [snorts]

[1:20:29] well, where am I going with this? You can't you can't set you can't set

[1:20:34] unreasonable conditions just because you don't like a particular use. That's

[1:20:40] where I'm going with that. Your conditions have to be addressed to solve

[1:20:43] a to resolve a problem. Okay? It is the applicant's burden to comply

[1:20:50] with those conditions. So if you set those conditions, the applicant has to

[1:20:54] comply. They don't want to comply, then they don't get their business license or

[1:20:57] their conditional use permit. So when you set those conditions, they have to

[1:21:01] get they have to follow that through. Why does the applica why does the

[1:21:07] planning commission deal with conditional use permit applications? Why

[1:21:10] not the city council and why not or why not both?

[1:21:14] » Because the city council delegated it to us.

[1:21:18] » Exactly. city council sets the law and you guys have the responsibility to

[1:21:22] enforce it and to uphold it. So, um the state has really been cracking down on

[1:21:27] on city councils and what they can and cannot be involved in. Uh when I started

[1:21:32] here, the city council heard subdivisions. Every subdivision went to

[1:21:35] the city council and recently the state told the city councils, "You cannot do

[1:21:40] that." And so, we had to revise our code. Uh what the state is doing is

[1:21:44] they're trying to keep the city council strictly legislative and uh keep them

[1:21:48] out of the administrative [snorts] responsibilities.

[1:21:51] Um some cities and counties comply with that, some don't, but uh everybody's

[1:21:55] getting to that point where they're going to have to.

[1:21:59] Once the city council establishes the code, the planning commission's

[1:22:02] responsibility is to execute the code. And then to city code 7-5-3

[1:22:08] specifies the planning commission is the approval authority over conditional use

[1:22:12] permits. So the conditional use permit process.

[1:22:17] How do we process a conditional use permit? So first of all, they're going

[1:22:22] to [snorts] call Anna, our city planner, and they're going to ask her if they can

[1:22:24] do a specific use in a zone. If Anna determines that it requires a cup, they

[1:22:29] submit an application to our department. have got some images of the application.

[1:22:35] The application includes a checklist. Our checklist usually in includes the

[1:22:40] application includes the noticing documents to to meet all the noticing

[1:22:45] requirements. Um usually a site plan or some other

[1:22:49] traffic plan if it's related or any other pertinent data or that would be in

[1:22:54] that would help the planning commission in making their uh decision on the

[1:22:58] conditional use permit. We are required to send out notices

[1:23:04] for the public meeting. So we are required to mail notices 10 days prior

[1:23:09] to the meeting apprising them of the hearing, the location and what is being

[1:23:14] asked. And we are also required to post the notices at the city hall state

[1:23:19] website and um we mail those notices to all

[1:23:23] property owners within 200 feet of the subject property. So, anytime you have a

[1:23:27] public hearing, we've had to go through those notices, make sure that everybody

[1:23:31] within that proximity has been properly um aware of made no properly made aware

[1:23:36] of the of the meeting. Our public notices usually are just one

[1:23:41] sheet of paper that include the date and time of the meeting as well as the

[1:23:46] location. and uh we will often put a map

[1:23:51] identifying the particular property and um that's what we send to the

[1:23:56] applicant. We try to put as much information as we can in the notices um

[1:24:01] but also make sure the notices are quick and easy to read is we found that if

[1:24:06] they're too long, people don't read them.

[1:24:12] » Staff reports. You're familiar with our staff reports. Whenever we have a

[1:24:16] conditional use permit, the city planner or or the director will write up a staff

[1:24:21] report and we send that report to you on the Fridays before the meeting. Our

[1:24:26] staff reports include facts about the subject property, descriptions of the

[1:24:30] issues involved, staff's identification of potential issues, staff's

[1:24:35] identification of conditions, and staff's recommendations. We also like to

[1:24:39] throw in their maps and plans and model motions, all for your reference and use.

[1:24:47] And then during the public hearing, we have a staff presentation. Applicant

[1:24:51] presentation if needed or requested. Public comment is taken. Planning

[1:24:56] commission likes to have the applicant presentation after the public comment

[1:24:59] period. It's entirely up to you guys. There's nothing that says otherwise.

[1:25:02] [clears throat] And then the public hearing is closed

[1:25:05] and the planning commission deliberates and and makes a decision on the cup.

[1:25:11] Planning Commission decision um includes discussion impacts

[1:25:16] identified conditions determined motions and vote. Uh we need to emphasize that

[1:25:21] when you make a condition that you need to identify the impact. So if you're

[1:25:26] going to require a 100 foot tall fence, how does that mitigate the impact? And

[1:25:34] uh you guys are pretty good about doing that. Commissioner Hamilton always reads

[1:25:39] that into the motion when you when you have a complicated matter. So, keep

[1:25:42] doing that. That's very important important. We always have to identify

[1:25:46] those impacts. Uh written notification. Once you

[1:25:50] approve a conditional use permit, staff prepares an official approval letter

[1:25:54] including the date of the decision and the conditions of approval. Uh and then

[1:25:59] we mail that to the applicant and that's their formal approval.

[1:26:05] Conditional use permits are good for one year if they don't take any action. So

[1:26:11] to city code 7-5-4, prior to approving or denying a conditional use permit

[1:26:16] application, the planning commission make in the public in the business at

[1:26:20] which the public hearing is conducted a findings of fact. So again, the findings

[1:26:24] of fact are needed when you're going to make a condition of approval.

[1:26:28] Findings of fact should have the reasonably anticipated detrimental

[1:26:32] effects of the proposed use on an adjacent property.

[1:26:36] Evidence identified of the reasonably anticipated detrimental impacts.

[1:26:40] Reasonable conditions imposed intended to mitigate detrimental impacts. Reasons

[1:26:46] why conditions are imposed and how they hope to mitigate impacts and evidence

[1:26:51] that conditions will resolve those impacts. So, there's quite a bit that

[1:26:55] you'll have to you have to remember when you're when you're slapping conditions

[1:26:58] on a conditional use permit. Question for you is the planning

[1:27:04] commission obligated to follow staff's recommendation, conditions of approval,

[1:27:09] etc. No, you are not. Okay? When it comes to

[1:27:14] a conditional use permit, staff is a resource and we give you

[1:27:18] recommendations, but you are the decision authority. So

[1:27:22] you can you can make those decisions however you feel like regardless of what

[1:27:27] staff is recommending.

[1:27:30] Question for you. Who is responsible to see that a conditional use permit and

[1:27:34] its conditions are upheld by the applicant?

[1:27:39] » That's my job. Okay? That's [snorts] me. Okay? You guys do not have to do that.

[1:27:46] Um, now you can make staff aware if you see a conditional use permit that's in

[1:27:50] violation. Um, that has happened and I I encourage that. But when it comes to

[1:27:56] enforcing that, uh, that is my job. I am specifically mentioned in the ordinance

[1:28:01] as the the authority to do that. Um, same question here. Who's

[1:28:07] responsible to um, enforce it when they're in violation of the conditions?

[1:28:11] Uh, that's me. That's not the city planner. Um, it's not Paul. It's not the

[1:28:17] code enforcement officer. It's me. We We recently had one where we had to

[1:28:22] go into some enforcement. Do you guys remember what it was?

[1:28:25] » The reflective lights or reflective strips.

[1:28:29] » Yep. Yep. The uh the little coffee shop down there in front of cow ranch. They

[1:28:34] [clears throat and cough] they had put little bike reflectors at the top and I

[1:28:36] guess those had fallen off and uh we had to I had to make sure that they they

[1:28:42] addressed the issue and put the pro the appropriate reflection materials on the

[1:28:46] building. So it does happen from time to time. We are currently in the process of

[1:28:50] enforcing another cup that you recently approved. It was the auto repair

[1:28:55] business just north of city hall on Garden Street. Um, they are now in the

[1:29:00] process of putting up their fence and bringing in some paving, but we've had

[1:29:03] to send them some notices. So, I'm the one that has the pleasure of enforcing

[1:29:07] your conditions. So, thank you. >> Can the planning commission revoke a

[1:29:13] conditional use permit? >> Yes.

[1:29:15] » Yes. >> The planning commission

[1:29:19] can revoke a condition a conditional use permit only when staff brings it back to

[1:29:25] you for a hearing. Okay. So, can the planning commission amend a

[1:29:31] previously approved conditional use permit?

[1:29:34] » Yes. >> Would that be the same situation?

[1:29:36] » Same situation. Staff has to bring it to us.

[1:29:39] » Yep. It has to be appropriately noticed as a meeting and so forth, but you can

[1:29:43] amend a previously approved conditional use permit.

[1:29:48] Can the planning commission establish impossible conditions if they are

[1:29:52] opposed to a proposed use to prevent it from locating on a particular location?

[1:29:58] I don't recommend it. >> Not for the fun of it. No. [laughter]

[1:30:03] » Could get us into legal trouble down the road.

[1:30:06] » Mr. Johnson would have some words about that.

[1:30:07] » Mr. Johnson would have fun with that. [laughter]

[1:30:10] Can the planning commission table or continue a conditional use permit

[1:30:14] request? >> Yes. Yes,

[1:30:15] » absolutely. In fact, that's a tool that that I recommend that you use. Um, if

[1:30:21] you're lacking information to make a decision, table it. But make sure that

[1:30:26] when you table a conditional use permit that you do so either time-sp specific

[1:30:30] or >> action specific. Okay. So, give the

[1:30:34] applicant some clear understanding of what you need. Um, is there can you

[1:30:40] table it too many times? >> Not really. Really. There's nothing that

[1:30:46] says you can't table an item too many times, but you want to make remember

[1:30:49] that the applicants, they paid money for that application and they want to get

[1:30:53] things going. So, be reasonable in how many times you do table an item, but

[1:30:57] there's no limit to how many times you can do that or how long. Okay,

[1:31:05] let's see. Just answered that one. Tips and tricks. Okay,

[1:31:10] leave emotion and personal perspectives at the door. be objective. Not always

[1:31:16] easy to do, but um I think in this position sometimes we have to be

[1:31:20] objective and uh actually we always have to be objective. You don't want to be

[1:31:24] subjective in making these decisions. Uh be clear and detailed about your

[1:31:31] findings of fact. So always state into the record what your findings of fact

[1:31:36] are. Don't be shy.

[1:31:41] If you believe a use will generate an impact, voice the concern clearly on the

[1:31:47] record. Uh there's no such thing as a stupid concern. If you have a concern

[1:31:53] with an application, speak up. Uh let us let us know. Let let get that into the

[1:31:58] record and deliberate and talk with your fellow commissioners about about what

[1:32:02] you think is an impact. If it's something that is not relevant or is is

[1:32:07] not an impact, the other commissioners will probably put you in your place or

[1:32:11] staff will tell you, you know, you're getting that's not pertinent to this.

[1:32:14] But don't be shy. Please speak your speak your thoughts. Um don't rely on

[1:32:20] the staff or the staff report. I remember last time Commissioner Hammer

[1:32:24] has some questions about this. [clears throat]

[1:32:26] Um we're going to give you the best we can give you and we always do. Um, but

[1:32:33] sometimes staff has maybe they're not entirely right and that doesn't happen

[1:32:38] very often because we we we do we we do good at our jobs. But even tonight, you

[1:32:43] know, Commissioner Anderson disagreed with staff on on turf and uh nothing

[1:32:50] wrong with that. That's that's that's a very healthy thing. So, uh, if you

[1:32:56] disagree with staff or if you, uh, you don't exactly agree with what's being

[1:33:01] said, that's okay. I have a thick skin. I I think Anna has

[1:33:06] a thick skin. She could probably handle it. Um,

[1:33:12] questions for me.

[1:33:17] » I have a question. >> Sure. Um, just about like the

[1:33:21] disagreement that y'all had today about the turf.

[1:33:25] » Um, when you don't have that information, like I don't know why turf

[1:33:30] is better than it's, you know, I've heard that maybe your yard can get too

[1:33:33] hot if you have too much turf or but would could we have tabled that before?

[1:33:41] Um, because I know it was more about the grammar and revising just the wording.

[1:33:45] » Yeah. But he asked that we revise even the percentage. Was that okay? Like I

[1:33:51] don't I just don't understand. >> You could have tabled it if the comm if

[1:33:54] the majority of the commission wanted to table that pending a revision, you could

[1:33:57] have done that. >> Okay. And then when you are tableabling

[1:33:59] something, um, if you wanted more information about turf and why turf is

[1:34:04] good and could we have asked for more information on that or can we go home

[1:34:08] and research that and like I just >> you could you could direct staff saying

[1:34:12] hey why are you recommending 50%. >> Okay, that's what I Yeah, I

[1:34:18] » you could ask Commissioner Anderson, can you give us a little more information on

[1:34:22] why you think it should be all of it? um that is absolutely within your purview

[1:34:26] to do. >> Okay.

[1:34:28] » And I will [laughter] encourage you to do that

[1:34:30] » presentation. [clears throat] >> Yeah. Now, keep in mind that that's a

[1:34:33] legislative item and so they're a little different than a conditional use permit,

[1:34:38] but the the principle's the same. >> Okay.

[1:34:41] » You can always table an item pending more information.

[1:34:44] » Okay. Yeah. I I think I just need to learn more about what is what and what I

[1:34:49] can ask and >> and you can always direct staff to bring

[1:34:51] you more information. >> Okay. and we'll bring you the

[1:34:54] information that we can. Um, yeah, good question.

[1:34:57] » Tabled that one twice >> on the [clears throat and cough]

[1:35:02] older home parking thing. We tabled that one twice to get the information we

[1:35:06] needed. So, >> okay.

[1:35:09] » Yep. >> Cool.

[1:35:10] » Send it on. >> Thank you.

[1:35:12] » Any other questions? >> Can I ask a question?

[1:35:14] » Sure. So on the conditional use permits, if you get your list of I'm asking

[1:35:22] because I had a situation like this, but if if I was granted a conditional use

[1:35:27] permit and it came with these conditions, you can do your business

[1:35:32] there. Whatever. If those were never broken,

[1:35:36] can you be broken? >> So if they're in compliance with all of

[1:35:41] their conditions, >> with everything, is it possible to

[1:35:46] pull the rug out when you've met all the conditions?

[1:35:51] » No, I don't think so. >> Yeah, there have to be there has to be a

[1:35:55] reason for staff to revoke that. And we would investigate that. We would see

[1:36:00] there's no violation. We [clears throat] drop it. We drop it immediately.

[1:36:05] » Actually to carry that one further, let me ask if if all those conditions are

[1:36:10] met, but there was an unforeseen condition that has

[1:36:14] arisen during the course of business that is now causing the two neighbors to

[1:36:20] not be good neighbors. Could we revisit that conditional use

[1:36:26] permit at that point with noticing and all the things? Yes,

[1:36:31] » I believe we could. I believe we could. It would have to be a staff initiated

[1:36:36] thing. Um, but through proper noticing and of the both the property owners and

[1:36:42] the adjacent residents, I believe we could revisit something like that.

[1:36:45] » Wouldn't that just come back to us for reision re revision

[1:36:49] of to mitigate the new problem?

[1:36:54] » I believe I believe we could. Matt, if I'm out of line on that one, let me

[1:36:58] know. But I >> that's where I I sit back and I go,

[1:37:01] "Okay, I was given a a conditional use permit to do a a nightly rental in a

[1:37:08] fair." >> Yeah, a different town. But if it seems

[1:37:12] to me if if you gone through the process to get the condition permit and it's

[1:37:17] granted doesn't seem right that they'd be able

[1:37:22] to go back later and say, "Oh, now we want this." That's why that's why I

[1:37:26] asked the question. I have never broken.

[1:37:32] » It's it it it's a difficult situation. It's one we don't face very often. I am

[1:37:38] thinking that if a if a situation arose and there was a code enforcement issue

[1:37:44] involving that CUP that is part of the code enforcement procedure, we could

[1:37:48] require them to go back to planning commission to address it. Um, if there's

[1:37:55] that's probably the only mechanism that we could do something like that. We just

[1:37:59] can't.

[1:38:03] Well, going back to that coffee shop. Um,

[1:38:09] no, but they were they were violating their condition. They weren't they

[1:38:12] weren't doing something new. So, yeah, those are those are excellent questions,

[1:38:15] but I think it would have to be tied to a code enforcement

[1:38:19] action. So,

[1:38:24] » I think it would have to be something substantial, too. It couldn't be

[1:38:27] something minor that it's like, "Oh, right. We didn't see that. We didn't

[1:38:30] think of it." And it's it's something really just that the neighbor doesn't

[1:38:33] like it. It would have to be something substantial that would be you'd have to

[1:38:38] mitigate the first should have mitigated the first time around, not not something

[1:38:41] minor. Yeah. >> Yeah.

[1:38:44] What would likely happen in that situation is I would begin an

[1:38:48] investigation into it, work to understand the issue and possibly

[1:38:53] resolve it with the applicant and then we make that determination at that time

[1:38:57] whether to bring it back to the planning commission. So, excellent question. So,

[1:39:02] excellent question.

[1:39:05] Got me thinking tonight. [laughter]

[1:39:10] Any other questions?

[1:39:16] Now, when I when I say, you know, don't always trust staff completely, that

[1:39:20] doesn't mean be mean to us. [laughter] Um,

[1:39:24] » you guys you guys are always very kind and uh respectful with staff. And

[1:39:30] believe me, I really appreciate that. I I' I've been on commissions where we've

[1:39:35] had antagonistic commissioners, and it it is not pleasant. And so you guys have

[1:39:39] always been really good about working with and respecting staff and I

[1:39:44] appreciate that. City council is as well. City council's also very very good

[1:39:48] with their staff. So I appreciate that.

[1:39:55] Okay. If no further questions, that's another hour in your training books. So

[1:39:59] uh uh for the record, for those commissioners that didn't come in today,

[1:40:03] please view the training and let me know online. our YouTube YouTube has all of

[1:40:08] our planning commission meetings. Uh that way you can [snorts] get the

[1:40:11] training time on your on your record. So >> thank you Andrew.

[1:40:17] » Thank you. All right, guys. Have a good night.

Tooele City Planning Commission Meeting April 22, 2026

Transcript