[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.