Nibley City Council- 08/21/2025

Oh,

and see right when you can.

Yeah. I like it.

Actually, I was

impressed at how it was. Yeah. Well

Yeah.

That's

not

Thanks.

Yeah.

I hate all this stuff on the side because it's all the things that, like, YouTube thinks I wanna watch or whatever. I hate how it puts that up there. I wonder if there's a way to get rid of that. And see what my interests are. I assume this city properties is your presentation, Rod. K. I'll get it get it up here. It's what was that? It's in there. Okay. Yeah. Out of town.

How are you doing, Eric? Hi, Eric.

Yes. Five

Yeah.

Everybody has names and names in here.

Yeah.

Brian. Yeah.

Well, there's probably a presentation for that asset management thing. Right? I'm guessing. Yeah. I do. Is that a there it is. This just oh, there it is. Yeah. How come yeah. That's that one shouldn't be in there. Well, that's the old presentation. I guess it's fine.

Is there a good one? Yeah. Because that's

It's fine. It's not that different. I mean, it's different. I'm gonna be giving a different presentation. But Yeah. That one's I'm not giving that one. I didn't know that. It was probably put in there the last meeting and carried over. Right?

Yeah.

That's funny.

Mhmm.

At the time, put out the algorithm. Yeah. Test this. Make sure it's working.

It does see an happening.

It's all day, man. I won't be good to shit all day. It's great. Oh, yeah.

Mine will be back. There you go.

When did school start up there? Okay.

Okay.

We get at least a half. Those those private. But

that that is is is the the.

Hey, Justin. Do you wanna just test your audio?

Yeah. Hey. Can you hear me?

Yeah. I'm good.

I sort of like my screen. Yeah. Thanks for doing that. I I I looked on my calendar. I didn't see it, but it wasn't smart enough to look in the email. So Oh, no problem.

Thank

you.

Before we call that meeting to order, we have a chance for, Norm Larson to give us some thoughts if he would like to on open opening ceremonies. No. But thank you, mayor.

Darren Mann. So Darren Mann. Nathan Lamson.

Larson. Larry Jacobson, and Katie will not be doing it tonight.

So Okay. Levi Roberts, city planner.

Tom Dickinson, city engineer.

Why don't you introduce staff that's

present? It would be our public works director Steve Eliason. We have code enforcement officer.

Yep. Evan. And see how hard it is to know. Be very dense. Parts director,

Rod Elwood. Chad Wright to the back with recreation.

We have our city attorney, Eric Johnson.

We have Kinsta, client commission chair. And we have rec Kendall. Kendall Welker with the rec parks and rec committee. Sure.

The chair or No less than. Yeah. There's someone online that's of interest too. And and Justin Miles, city manager, is online. Can you hear us, Justin? Yes, sir. Thank you. Okay. And if you we appreciate you attending remotely while you're doing your other duties with drinking water. If you if you can't hear us, that's good for us to know that we need to speak into the mics. We also have people watching this. So

you can help us do a little quality assurance on that.

Yeah. Absolutely. And thank you for having patience and letting me join online.

Yep. Okay. Next, let's consider, please, approval of July 31 with any minutes. And if you would also take a look tonight's agenda for approval.

2984 Stone Ridge Drive. Thanks, Johnny. I appreciate you guys getting here on board if you guys do. I know it's a challenge to be here. We're just now on the neighborhood party tonight that we are happy. We're here to be here because this matter is super important to me. As you guys all know, I don't think it's any secret for anybody in the room. Now I feel, about a lot of the things that go on with the recently, on the land there on 32 in our south just directly behind my house. You know, I I don't know. I'm hoping that some things have changed. Some progress has been made. I'm hoping that we can make some compromises. I'm all for development, and I just really wanna emphasize and put a part of my stance on the resiliency. I hope you guys vote against the result to two a unless there's some significant changes with the developments in the proposal. I'm in favor of open space, just not the cost of cramming. Not many houses into there. I know I've gone through several subdivisions that are small homes of that size, and it's it's not a pleasant experience. I'm sure the developers will do their best, and I know Josh, you represent them. You know, you've got a a tough road to hoe over there. I know you do, but and I'm sure that the developers that Josh represents, I'm sure that they do have good intentions. I understand that the city council wants to respect the developers as landowners and their rights, but I just hope you guys also respect all the landowners and our rights for everybody that's running this. And I know that you probably didn't have a great term today because of that neighborhood. They can get together side over with some bridge. But I know several of the families are there, but we all feel the same. So, anyway, thanks so much for you guys. Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Derek Forbes, would you like to speak to us?

Thank you very much. Yeah. Derek Forbes at 3160 South 1350 West. And I do happen to be adjacent to the property. This is, you know, agenda

tonight. And

it won't be very long. Just sharing my wishes that the council would not rezone what previous city councils have determined would be good for, I guess, for Zone 2. To be familiar with the those executive parts, changing it to two a means lots can be very, very small, and 50 pound, your foot is a very tiny lot. No. I would just like the since you consider leaving it, what it's been. And I think putting 70 needs on the piece of property is very varied in the density. And you 40 or 35 would be just fantastic, and I would offer no opposition to such development right now. So, again, in. And I when the book comes down here, mister mayor, as the moderator of the council, I hope that you would get a motion in a second. I hope that you would ask for a temporary discussion so the city council members can share their reasoning why they vote to them.

That's pretty much the way we do things.

Right. We haven't had any discussion in the past time. I was first meeting. This is the second meeting. Thanks.

Oh, good discussion.

Thank

you.

Please.

Hello. I'm Jared Willis. I'm with the very. As we've been going over this last few weeks, my concern is the horse trying to put off getting the agenda then. Some of the you guys sometimes ask for a suggestion of what we do, what can you make out of me as I've been thinking about it. I'm wondering if we can maybe look at the turnover as far as five of the scenarios between the houses. I think that's been one congested in the neighborhood. I think it's lost size. You can build a vehicle on the many schedule as well. We get them to themselves and breaks up neighborhood appeal and seeing several houses, it would get them lost just fine, not both the lost in the society. So that's maybe kind of that's a concern as far as.

Another option is, can we still we can open space on this as R 2. I think that's talking to me.

This does R 2, but it's on the open space. They still have the open space, but it makes slightly larger lots. Maybe using 78 nearest square feet.

We need to be about the occurrence on.

We're all in which

we we're he suggest that we could extend the border to the clearances on already existing layouts around the field or if they're sharing sidewalks. So you this is why I feed

existing lots. There's, like, work on lots out there, but maybe it was two. Then there's a few others that you know, maybe very much or maybe a standard standard of getting to be this kind of standard for the already existing subdivisions. I think we're concerned about main traffic. That's in 3205 Hundred. I have a little concerned about traffic within the subdivision as far as, you know, the street parking. They are being flossed outside their car parking, big driveways, side gravel. Just as far as getting up a street parking, which means it's gonna shut down somewhere. So long way, when it's gonna do worse in the street parking, is there gonna be any guest parking? So so maybe we'll be looking to I think if you have cars on the side of the road, you're gonna have kids to get ahead of you.

Yeah. I wanna thank you, Sal.

Chris Heschmeyer, alumni in West, 890

South. Yeah. I know this. A lot of the concerns have been said previously. I think we might have a concern for the area would be. I think as as it'd be really really tough to overparking and pull out the other things that it said in. I know there's not a canal like it had been in the past. I will just make everyone aware here that the annual neighborhood party surrounding that area is tonight, and that's when the majority of the residents are tonight. So I think that's that's the main reason for the lack of numbers as an FYI.

And then I have a letter to read,

from William Bud Bolania at 376 West, 4515 South. And he says to the city council and the zoning and planning, I oppose the zoning changes on this property for the following reasons. It's completely out of character with the surrounding neighborhoods. There's parking for on each side for swing sets. A lot of the lots for swing sets, sandboxes, or other childhood and activities. The three piece setbacks for structures from side property lines is a safety hazard. I'm speaking in his voice, I'm a volunteer firefighter. Especially if the fence or anything is located at that side, it would be extremely difficult and dangerous for fire personnel to work in or pass through that narrow passage to get to the rear of the structures even without a fence or other line. The total six feet could cause problems. Also, due to the current composition of most homes and their furnishings, when one catches a fire, it quickly spreads through the structure, especially in windy conditions. Heat and or flames can easily extend within six feet outside of the building, which puts anything in that distance of danger of catching fire and being damaged. It may be wise for the zoning. We need to consider looking at a property setback re at property all property setback requirements if you consider safety issues. I have closed the whole property proposal for the following reasons. Potential major contradiction of concentration and congestion in that area is another rotary, especially in the morning, evening, rush hours. A worker issues on the property, which should be satisfied and resolved by the developer to the leasing and other governmental and environmental standards before the residential property construction begins. The home is finished in the woods. The catching back of the property, which with structures is not a very generous gift. If it if it costs us $150,000, you're burning structures of the code. The developer should have the structures of the code or or briefly, midly first, in the city for these costs prior to any residential construction starting. In the proper the proposed roadways within the development of the a safety concern, not just for general travel and parking, but even more so for vehicles, ambulances, fire apparatus, and for delivery trucks, all of which are larger and take more room with in length in lengthwise to park turn corners to provide needed services. Thank you.

Thank

you. Alright. Thank you all for speaking to us tonight. With that, we will close the public commentary and move to our next item, which is a planning and zoning report. Levi or Nick, are you planning to work, sir?

Council and mayor, thanks for having me. So we did in the last planning commission meeting, we did discuss two items on the agenda, item number 13, which is development agreement at Quick Subdivision. The council did or the commission, excuse me, did recommend approval for the the development agreement Napa Creek Subdivision to include an additional building lot. That's it. So the other item on the agenda was item number 15, which is the parking requirements. Basically, the state requiring Niddly City to count two garage spaces as as a parking, which is a bit of of change to our code. And so at the the planning commission did deliberate, and we basically unanimously voted to still require three parking spaces for single family residences and four for multifamily residences, which would include ADUs and different things like that. So even though the state is requiring us to count garage spaces as parking, we did feel the planning commission did feel through the the city over the years has spent a lot of time on our parking codes and our parking requirements, and we still kinda wanted to see things sit as they were eating with the change states. So so we can leave. I can certainly elaborate on that.

Discussion.

So those are the two main things on tonight's agenda that have progressed. You guys have any questions?

Perfect. Thanks,

Next, let's talk about resolution twenty five twenty eight. Council, as you know, we have an ordinance that allows Nipley City to partner with community, well, community partners, where we make facilities that are owned by the citizens of Nipley more readily available to those organizations because they are doing what we think is for the digital community. So we know that it's a requirement to be on that list of community partners to receive approval by the city council because city council is the steward of the resources of citizens of. And so tonight, we have a resolution before you to add a name, Little Lamps Foundation, for kids, to add that, to add their organization to a, our community partners. It's a level two, which you wanna get into details, which means that they have access at no charge. Not priority access, but access at no charge to citizen phone facilities. They want to do a five gate run and use with billion and heritage parks to to go on that five gate run. So that's resolution for you. If you would like to have a first reading on this and just ask questions about it that you don't understand, that's fine. If you of course, the council also always has a chance to waive the second ring and move to a conclusion on this matter with that offer to the counsel.

Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve resolution twenty five twenty eight. Wait a second.

I have a motion from May and a second from Aaron to approve twenty five twenty eight as presented at waive second grade. Discussion on that, please? Is there opposition to voting? Seeing none, Sarah will you call the roll, please?

Council member, man. What did you hear about? NPR. Council member, man. In favor, gentleman. In favor. In favor. In favor. In favor. In favor. In favor.

For you, work for the citizens, work for work for Guam and staff. But I am going to give myself the privilege without your permission of signing a proclamation to make September month of recognition for the labs. That's. I'm not even asking your permission.

You're not. Okay.

With that, let's move to a workshop on asset management software. And Steve, our public works director is going to introduce that to us, please. Steve, thanks for being here tonight. Appreciate the work that you need to produce too. We

We can request the asset management team. Kind of a big deal to me. Big deal to public works. We've we've talked about it for a long time, and we're hoping that we can make this move forward to move in so we can show you guys what it takes to do everything. This will be live, you know, real live data that we'll be able to share on any project that takes place. So with that, I think money is a big deal. I think we can save some. So this is just some of our new assets. This is just a point. You know, we have roads. We have sidewalks with signs, urban gutter, PDAs, fire hydrants, meter, playgrounds, parks, pavilions, storm drains. That's just a small picture. This is kinda this is all for GIS. So you look at that. It's a lot of lot of stuff for us as more our managers to to keep Excel spreadsheets, I guess, is how I'd say it. I don't think there is Excel spreadsheet is very good.

So I thought so

with an asset management, it would allow us to have that asset because we always keep track of that asset and work done on that asset from people to equipment to material, when it was done, when we were there. So I can read through the list or you guys can just take a look at it. But, you know, 2124 sign, that's a lot of vinyl and out model of trails. Our water and sewer lines got a little time line. You know? I mean, for the most part, our water lines, we have really good ideas where our problem points are, but there comes a time that we'd say, okay. We will need to place this line. Right? Because it's costing so much. I'll use an example. Last Saturday, we had a main break here in Elkhorn. 25 feet of the line we ended up replacing. But if we would have something, I could tell you today what the cost is. And I could tell you Monday what the cost is. It's just configuring even. So six months from now, we're gonna have a hard time finding what that cost is where I could just pull it here, and and we would have that cost that what that repair took us. So NASA management will allow, of course, set time for more organization for through the workflow and creates some easy reporting. Management the asset management will allow to track specific details all in one place. The reporting is straightforward to be used for budget plans and or reports for payment, which is great, big, perfect there, and of any other tracking fee. Asset management allows us to keep track of work being waited on each asset and the work orders created. That'll be automatically edit entered into an inventory dashboard. Equipment spending and employee time will be all part of our SaaS from the time that it was created. Data will always stay with us. People pull in seconds for a week. Some of the benefits, it's gonna track our time, cost of employees, and equipment, reporting, you know, mapping in job locations, multi email scheduling, mobile access. We're out on the field. Any one person can create a work order and then put supply into

who

whoever they issue it to, you know, all puts Rob's Rob's out there. You can ship it to Mitch and the Streets department or Chad or Jared in the water department. Increase our productivity, access anywhere scheduled managed reminders. So without productivity and access the scheduled range minor, what we can do is we can set it up in there. So if we put them in an area, they can see the a manhole, and so they need to be inspected for this year. You know, while they're there, if they have the time, they can get very detailed just to kinda help us rather than us pulling it together. Budgeting and capital planning would be a huge benefit to this as well. So work order equipment reported, whatever equipment material inventory mapping. So this is another one here in Elkhorn. So Elkhorn is really been gracious to us here this last this year. Well, this is a a water service lead. Here again, you know, when we do the job, we have the expenses in our debt and the material that it took to do. But, like I say, you know, probably two months. Be able to tell you. I could get it more, but it's gonna take you six months. So it was power. It's gonna improve our preventative maintenance, work order management, real time cost, long term. Like I said, being reimbursements that we need. Hopefully, we never do, but improve the budget. So with that, we checked out two two asset managements. One of them being here in the valley. I've broken it down here. It might blow out money, but when I literally broke it down, it made more sense to me that this really is not what I'm very much in need. So the public works package is 10,000, works management package is 5, and formal our package is 25. So our yearly annual cost is 17,500. Like, we all set up these everything for us. All of our training and everything is included in this, plus they're all they're right in the moment. So

right. Backdoor.

Well, that breaks down to $277 a month for the water, sewer, and street. The parks is $4.16 and then stormwater too. True. So that would carry us for I see. For the year. They do have another thing that they can increase 5% each year. Since I started, I wanna say 25 ago, they've never increased long time. So I feel pretty confident these guys would definitely be on our side here. So OpenGov, this was a really fancy one as well. As you can see, subscription substantially more set up substantially more. We brought these guys in. We actually had, what, two or three meetings with Penrod. We have three or four meetings with these guys. It it would be really substantially more, and we feel that Fireworks is gonna give us what we need to do. Gonna take some time if we do it. You know? Six six months to a year before we get it down. It might be an overnight task, but I reached out to

other users of this software as well.

And I reached out to other users of the other software. I I went to other. All these folks are using it here. I just kinda picked on one that were vocal to us, and they enjoy it. So

Go back.

It's flashing. Well, that's just kind of a briefing real fast. When we got a busy agenda, I definitely take a lot of time. So any questions or any while we had to decide?

Yeah. So, yeah, so as you know, this is our agenda for our workshop. That means we will have a chance to discuss it. He directs a new staff. We will not be approving the purchase. Right? Yeah. As there's no vote on the agenda, and we always advertise votes before we take them. We did have some discussion on this during the last budget Friday phase, and I believe the council said, let's leave it out of the budget for what we adopted and come back to it after we adopt the budget, look at this proposal with more detail. And as you know, we would have to reconsider some things within the budget to to make this purchase. As you also know, we budget very conservatively in terms of anticipating revenues and expenses. And and so I'll leave it to the council to decide if this is just beyond our reach or if there's something that you would like to consider at a later date in terms of opening reopening the budget to look at a to that budget for this purpose. It's not in the budget now. Certainly, you would all can make it our budget. So here's a chance to ask the questions. I have a few, but I'll set aside for Yeah.

So we have we have a a test out. This is where our work order management is through now. It it doesn't get used because it's just not user friendly, I guess. I can't put I can put equipment and hours in there, but I have to type it all. I have to all my receipts, everything, I just turn them in, and I just call them. I'll be able to attach everything in one spot here. You know? So this is gonna be drop down, drop downs. I can create a work order very fast. I don't have to call it front office, or I guess I can create work orders in Shaw. But

so to me,

this is just a 10 steps above what we have right now.

Probably 50 steps above the items again. And and if we have a subscription for the current sun board,

yeah, where you do I'm sure. Yeah. Well, I guess, in the sale. Yes. Yeah. But but we wouldn't be

just to be clear, we this would be over and above what we're already paying for for GSL. We would not be saving money on. So by providing this additional

Yeah. Because we have to keep the work order the work order side for our water meters because our water meters are tied to sell PO heavily.

Because of billing.

Yeah. But the work order management side of the things just it's not. I've been giving my for a lab here. It's just

not

official to the city, and it's not getting with the city. It's not giving us any interest. Does that make sense?

Yeah. If we could.

So could we use impact fees to get every part of this where this is the impact cost? Like, you have the stormwater parks and the other quarter is that?

if if you would like, if you can hear Mark's question?

On the other hand, you know, things that it it impact fees are special, but it might mean that we could use impact fees for those projects more specifically and pay for this in other way.

I'm not being very clear on that. Justin, are you gonna bail me out or so I'm just sleeping next to you? Yeah. Can you hear me okay? Yes, please. Okay. So let me just shed a little bit on, like, of the software that we do have. It's called Cassell Clarity, and it's really built around accounting. It's financial management software that's specifically tailored to municipalities, and it adds these extra little packages into it. And what it does well for us now is keep a, like, almost a task or a to do list. So when somebody calls into the city and needs something fixed or there's a pothole or a manhole cover missing or something, It's a great software for dispatching crews to go out and to do something. So they go out. They do it. They mark it. It's done. They can put a couple notes in it, but there's not a lot of smart data that can be added to that work order such as how long did it take, what materials were used, how much did it cost, things like that that make it that we could use to analyze what happened, what took place to be able to plan better for the future. And so that's what we have now. And it works well, again, just for that list, but it doesn't give us that extra piece of the analytical data. And so that's what this would do, would be this extra software package that would allow us to be able to put those inputs and save that data to be able to analyze, to be able to calculate, force, budget, plan ahead, and try to look at how we can use money different ways to be the most intelligent way. It's just a a smarter way of managing the assets that we have. So and it just gives us more tools and a clearer picture than us coming through spreadsheets and trying to remember what we did that year and why we did it and and things like that. So that's what the software does, the both what we have and what we're looking to purchase. And Mary was correct that there is no money in the budget currently for this. So if we decided if you desire us to pull the trigger on this, we would, at some point, need to amend the budget and add that money in. And then, to Norm's question, I do not believe that impact fees could be used for this, to pay for the software. Impact fees, like Mary was saying, are very rigid, very structured. They're very dedicated to specific projects that are from growth. And so I could do some checking, but I'd be really surprised if we could use impact fees to pay for this.

Relative to the amount of money given Nibley City's growth rate and impact fee rate, which are both high, we're actually paying 17,500 a year as small compared to the amount of impact fees we collect in. So I hope you're okay with that answer. Yeah. I I suspect not. Yeah. I suspect yep. Other questions?

What do what do we get from an annual subscription then? I'll follow-up with that Okay. Order next time. I'll hold it.

Aaron? Did they be spoken about who they want to enter into, like, a one year contract or a five year contract?

You know? Yeah. So right now, it's just a one year. It's year to year. So we we've really negotiated with each I mean, even since January, I think we let's start started down this road December, January, you know, with these guys. I mean, we have the interest in public works, and we wanna give real live data what's what's happening, what what we're doing. And It should. Yeah. That's efficient. Yeah. The so with that yeah.

So so, Steve, let me ask you about efficiency increases. And this is gonna be a really hard question to answer, I I admit to you right off the bat. I think efficiency software and self help software, the the most important question we could ask you is this. If we if we spend $17,500 a year by using this tool, how much money do we save a year by using this tool? And I don't know even how to coach you on how to answer that, except it might be efficiency in terms of, well, it's normally a so many hour task to track this, and this would be a fewer number of hours by by this factor. Or it could be that you say, well, some of these costs are just not even calculated because it's lost knowledge, and who knows how long it takes to recover that knowledge. But you know? And, again, maybe before we get around to opening the budget, I mean, I'll challenge you and say if we spend 17,500

a year on this, I assume this is the preferred package for Facebook. Yeah. That's on I mean, I have a big one, but I just kinda left it out right now. You know, complete I said they would have to us for treatment. And it was these guys are really intrigued.

Right. Well, I will. So So where is the breakeven? That's the question. Right. And and then I'll just throw it out. Yeah. I think I think I can probably you know, I can

I can't say we're gonna break even right off the bat? If I have stuff on my guys' calendars, which these guys would be probably be the one doing for his guys, Jared would be doing for his guy. But they they come to work at 07:00 in the morning. They get on the calendar and and all their tasks are today. I mean, one of the guys will ask BS for thirty minutes. So I think with having tasks like that, I'm only getting overdone. It'll be faster because now I'm not on the wall. I know. I wanna have something that's done right here next door, you know, or I need to flush this fire. I'm I'm not here because of my my maintenance schedule and get done. So this thing I don't know. This seems those types of things where we're gonna save our money rather than coming back. We can do whatever it is. Okay. So I'll I'll I'll research more into that as well and have a better answer.

Along those lines thank you, Steve. Along those lines, have you demoed this software?

So we haven't. We have just I mean, we've sat through two thirty minute demos.

Well, they demoed it for you. Right? Yeah. Tell me about the data entry without any details because sometimes I fear that efficiency software is very efficient once you ignore the extra effort of the data entry. Right? And that's the part where if the data don't get into the system Right. There's no amount of efficiency that the system can give you if it's too much trouble to put the entry into the system. And that's an overhead Yeah. That is probably well justified. But how do you feel about that data entry process? Well, I feel the data entry process,

we can customize it. Customize it where it's gonna fit on our needs.

Okay. Do they charge extra for customizations,

unlimited customization? We'll we'll customize the the system. When we start up, we'll be able to customize how we want Well, what it's gonna do oh, yeah.

Okay. It customized it. There's some configurability, sounds like. Yeah.

And it's user friendly. Like, Rob not gonna be the only one who use it. Steve might be the only one. Rex and Brody, everybody's gonna lose it. Yes. You know, Rex is out all along. He's gonna put his time into that park. No more. Oh, we think it's about $6,000 an acre to manage. You know? We're gonna have real life cost of what tomorrow cost us, what gas cost us, what my man hour were.

So Okay.

Mayor, if I may.

Go ahead, Justin.

And and, Steve, I'm gonna ask you this question. I know the answer, and that's why I'm not afraid to ask it. But I think for me, as a supervisor, as I'm thinking about it and looking at it, what I need to see is dedication from the staff that this animal is gonna be fed because as the mayor alluded to, input can be and is a pain for some. And I want your commitment and the staff's commitment that you're gonna feed the animal, and it's gonna have good data in it that's gonna provide us with good information to make good decisions with. Because without that commitment, no no software is gonna solve this problem.

Yeah. No. I I agree. I'm just adjusting. I we've got that discussion through and through. I don't want to apply this to say, you know, I have a 100% lead line. So these guys are excited to do this. That's why I wanna do this. There's there's there's rewards in this. It's gonna take us a year. You know? But next year at this time, we'll be gone, and the bond year would look back, hopefully, and say, wow. Look at this. You know? Right now, I can't show you much. I can tell you what we're doing. I can tell you what's happening, but we'll be able to so, yeah, Justin, to your question, I have a 100% buy in, and and we'll continue to pass.

So I think there's two sound bites there. If Justin, let me add to it. You need to feed the animal, then you make sure the animal is still subservient to you, and you're the master of the process. And the process is not run by Aviso side. Right? It's facilitated by the software, but feed the animal, and you're still the master of the animal. Okay?

Eric?

No. We're just looking at the budget

for this year. And so I just have a budget question. If if we're just pulling the money for, say, this software from the public works department, do we need to reopen up the budget, or can we just pull money some from this line, some from that line, some from another line? How does that push process work?

I would say that's a question for Justin and Steve, but go ahead.

Yeah. I would just need to look at it a little tighter, and I'm sorry I don't have that right off the top of my head. And I wouldn't feel comfortable making that decision or telling you that until near the end of the fiscal year. To me, if we're gonna do it, we might as well do it and open the budget, put the money there, be transparent about it. But if you would like to go that route, we can. I just don't know for sure. We would have to wait till we're closer to the end of the year, see what we had left, and whether we could pull the trigger and fit it into the lines that exist.

Versus reopening the budget and pulling money

to align Yeah. That's a good question. So, you know, where where are you gonna pull the money from? You know, we didn't have a lot of extra that was rolled into the capital projects. And so, you know, that that's honestly probably a fair question that I should have been ready to answer is where are we gonna pull that money from? I got a bunch of thoughts flowing through my head. I think we could find it. I just don't have a specific this is the best case right now.

Okay. Well, we also have a purchasing policy that's the letter of the law about each month we spend on each without accounts with Google. I think this is below the 20,000 just off the top of my head that would require accounts with approval. But I also think it's getting close enough that we should give oversight to the staff on SS counsel.

Yeah. I I mean, I I I'm

all my commitments to you guys are my team's a 100% in the world to make the work. Like,

it's we're excited to do it. Everybody's excited to do it.

So again, for tonight? Tonight, this is a discussion, but it's not most you know, either those votes be taken. I think you could,

No. No. I would say let's do that. Let's bring it back before I'm

or go. K. Thanks for appreciating. Yeah. And

we're not taking both, so anyone else that wants to get the votes, they can get the votes.

Yeah. You know, and we're we're growing like crazy. We're getting more and more assets. It's just so I think if we can get them moving now, it'll be ultimately forever. Be a good thing. So reflecting a lot. And the good thing is with something like this too is people turn over, retire, whatever. The information is there. Not here. You know, if you have the information, you can roll with software.

Do you think this lets your employees act more autonomously? In other words, they know what they're supposed to be doing instead of having to check with the boss to see what they're supposed to be doing. Yeah. I mean, I I think they're down they they are

to be honest with you, I think from all of our side, I think they're all leaders. So they Yeah. They're they're good at this already. You know? So

they can

yeah. They're just they're they're good kids and good folks and Okay. Better leaders as a piss. So Okay.

Garrett, please Garrett mentioned in the absence of paperwork, we have often we'd be able to do a paper reports and some of those other reports might be it's not a bit more intrusive. You know, I think we get into a whole lot sports season, something like that. You know? We could use all that stuff.

It would be a software that we'd use in here in our In our emergency, you know, point, we'd use all that. We just we'd be able to pull the data right here that the support was and turn it into them.

Right. So Sorry,

Garrett. Can you repeat that question? I I couldn't hear your question.

I was just asking.

I want you to do the research nature reports and how time intensive are they now and how make sure the same if you can use it through this program.

Yeah. Are we only talking about regulatory reports that we have to do or reimbursement reports we have to do, or are you talking about we can run reports that help you more efficiently

run public works. So I could come in here and you guys can help me. I mean, water leaks we've done this year. I pulled up right here in. I can pay the talks about it. I mean, fire items like this year. How much does it cost us to go out, you know, with two guys and flush those fire items? How much it cost for every small storm we do? You know, we're gonna put cost to our vehicles. We've never done that. You know? We gotta pump the dollar amount of what I've done cost of the metro cabin. We're seeing real life stuff. You know? So

we'll be able to

I think anything you wanna know, how many signs we would so I think as far as budgeting goes, I think it'll be a great budgeting tool. Do we need to borrow 8% this year versus 3%, or do we need to drop it? You know, drop 5% because we've over budgeted. But I just we've just never had anything like this, so there's just a lot going on my end that I think it could be you know?

Me too. Steve, do you feel like you've have received the direction you were looking for with this discussion? Yeah. Okay. They all all up.

Yeah. This moment together as far as what you've asked. He's prepared and I'm still around.

K. Thank you. Thank you.

Something similar but different. Let's talk about, another software package. This is called the code enforcement software. Evan, welcome. Thank you. Hey, You you should sell your pitch in that pitch. I'm trying to it's just like

I didn't ask. Is or is this both Levi and Yeah. We're gonna back things on it. Evan, thank you. Yep. I'll come over here.

Yep. I'll come over

here. Alright. Thanks. We're gonna give you an update of code enforcement activities and some of the some of the challenges we're facing, some of the successes we're having, and then we will get into a a software that we're we've been looking at to help code enforcement run more effectively, more efficiently as well. So first, I just wanted to get into kinda from the the background. What do we talk what are what are we mean when we say code enforcement? So ensuring compliance with local government ordinance, state laws, the code. So I took I my kids were watching this movie last week. Parts of Caribbean. You've probably seen it. Code is more like guy grinds out of actual rules. We took great exception to this to this quote. The code is not just gotten it is it is the law. It's not and it's not even just rules. It's it's the law. So we we take that at heart with code enforcement. We know a lot of great effort and and, you know, a process is is run through when when these laws are created. Obviously, we're involved in this. And and we know the city council then has the interest of the public in mind, the health, safety, and welfare of the public when when law you know, when codes are adopted. And so, really, what what we're trying to do with code enforcement is uphold these laws, do everything we can to ensure compliance with them. This include and I'll get into this in the the next slide. This includes preventing, detecting, investigating, and then enforcing. So prevention, I misspoke, I I should say, in a in a previous meeting, I think, council member Sweden asked if code enforcement part of it is education. And I I I kind of led it to believe that's not really part of code enforcement. It it absolutely is. That's that's really the first thing, is that if people are educated about our codes and ordinances, most of them will follow them. You know, most people in the community will. And so that makes our our job easier. They're proactively educating residents and businesses about regulations and promoting voluntary compliance. Another component is detection. So this is this is actually finding those. This may be through a citizen complaint. Some communities, that's the only way that they only through complaints do they detect any code violations. We're more proactive than that. We we do get out there. You know, when Evan's when Evan's out on the street, he sees a violation. He'll he'll follow-up on it. So it's it's through these inspections, the investigations. If we do receive a complaint, it's not only based upon a complaint that we'll follow-up with the resident. We'll always do an inspection before you know, to make sure that it it's always tied back to the code, not just someone's feelings or if, you know, how much some something bothers somebody. Next is this investigation. So thoroughly examine your court violation to determine the extent and severity of the issue that's that's going out there and also applying it to the code again. It you may may drive up to a residence and go, oh, that that just looks terrible. But when it comes down to it, sometimes we we go through and we go, you know, there's really not a code violation here. So we're not we're not going to implore any any enforcement, which is that next. So taking appropriate actions to ensure compliance. Our general process is warnings. That's we typically if if we can get compliance through warnings, then then that's going to be what we focus on. That may be a verbal one. That may be talking with them. It may be issuing a letter. And then if if there is a compliance that way, we have citations. And very rarely, I don't have it up on the screen, but there's abatement. So that's where there's there's a violation, and and the, the violator doesn't comply. The city can go out and actually abate it and then basically send the bill to whoever the buyer figures. We don't like to get there. That's why we that's why we use fines. If we can get a compliance, you know, through through a a fine or a citation, then then that's the appropriate way forward. But, again, typically, it's through warranties that get I'll I'll get in we'll get into that presentation of how often we get combined through. So just in, you know, in summary on this first part, the we have a code enforcement to ensure compliance with local regulations to maintain a safe and orderly community and overall, really to preserve the quality of life in the community, knowing that the the ordinances that we have in place were really designed to do that. And, oftentimes, residents don't know about it or otherwise or whether they don't know about it or they're or they're ignoring the the laws and ordinances that are in place. Code enforcement is there really to remind people about these and and to really to get compliance with with the city's codes and ordinance. So I'm gonna go over I'll turn it over to Evan here in a minute. The cases that we've had, and you'll see kind of how this evolved pretty quickly over the course of the last few years. A lot of times, you, as city council members, are aware of some of these things. You you get calls and things from from residents. And but but we, you know, we we work hard to follow-up with with any issues with as far as code compliance goes. So in 2023, if you might remember, and and years prior to that, we we weren't engaged in code enforcement. This isn't this isn't a new activity. The city has been doing this, but, generally, the city planner has been a code enforcement officer. In 2023, this is just a snapshot. I believe we had about sixty nine cases

of of compliance there.

We just started dipping our toes into parking compliance. We the the state passed a code which basically allowed, you know, city staff rather than just law enforcement to enforce parking. And we had some parking enforcement issues, and and so we we started getting involved in this. But you see there some of the different violations are primarily nuisance COVID related violations is what we're following up on. And as far as how much time the city planner had, we did follow-up on on I I followed up on any complaints that were received. And then one time a year, made sure we got on I got on every single street and then followed up on any violation there. And it that basically took that still took a lot of time. There's a lot of follow-up that happens with each of these violations. But in '69, you may not see a lot, but between letters and going back and following up and calling people, trying to get compliance, it it it is time consuming. So in 2024, we did hire a dedicated part time code enforcement officer. And as you can see, we parking tickets that this became kind of a bigger you you see how that that becomes a a lot bigger share of the pie. Again, to remind you, we didn't do parking enforcement before. We didn't really know what how I I I feel like when we got into it, we didn't quite know the can of worms that I was opening of of how much there is. Really, if we wanna get compliance with our parking code, and we feel like we're we're we're getting there with the amount of parking enforcement we've done. We also at this time, we weren't set up, and we didn't we we didn't, do any warnings with with parking violations, particularly in public right of way. So those are all parking tickets that you see there. And and there'll be kind of a summary chart at the end of this that they're Adam has handled a lot of cases than either I ever did. We did have another code enforcement officer, Sergio Alvarez. He he he was the first dedicated code enforcement officer. He he moved on. He had other responsibilities. We've had Evan's Evan's been here for over a year about we've been here on TOC. So we had a lot of impact within ten months. We we really appreciate everything that Evan's been able to accomplish in that time. So that's that's some of the cases. I think I'll turn it over to you, Evan, for a few slides.

K. So then we get into 2025 and watch me making friends. You can see in this slide, this is a slide with no on street marketing. No. This one does. This one does. Well, this has this has the on street parking. So I took the total off these. I don't know why I did, but we're around about 780 cases that I'm working on. The majority of those at this point in time were parking. But if you take a look at this slide and compare this to 2023, this is no on street parking. This is all nuisance. So you can see the difference in what we're handling other than parking. We still have the animal end use. We still have the obstructing public right ways, stored in public view. Weeds is a big one this time of year. If you look at just Nuisance, we get 78% compliance from the warning letters that we've been sending out.

So

taking parking out of the piece of the pie, 78% compliance by the residences is pretty good. This slide shows the total number of cases throughout the years. So in 2023, we have sixty nine. We have a hundred and eighty eight hundred and thirty five now, and we still have four months to go. So that just gives you a an idea of what we've been dealing with. I know you guys have been hearing complaints, but 835 citations or warning letters, cases we call them. If you take a total one word complaints, discount a certain resident that complaints a 100 times a week. The number of complaints to the number of complaints that we get, in my opinion, is fairly small. Change hurts. A lot of people don't like change, so you're gonna continue to hear that if we continue on the same path as well.

Yeah. So I I just wanna summarize some of the successes that we've seen the last few years with code enforcement. As Evan mentioned, we have I mean, he said 78%. Really, it's it's higher than that. It's it's more than 80% if you if you go into that chart. When you when you count the number of people that it just takes a little bit more follow-up to get compliance, but we still haven't cited them yet. So the vast majority of these cases are are voluntary compliance, you know, once once they get a warning letter. We're also getting more direct communication with residents with with Evan on board in particular. He's he's because he's out there, he's there's more presence. He is he's able to spend more time explaining the codes, meeting with residents one on one, and I've just I've just seen a change there that that seemed bad. All of all of those conversations aren't always pleasant. Code enforcement's a very difficult job sometimes. You know, it's it it gets confrontational, and people aren't happy that, you know, maybe they didn't know about it. Maybe it's something they've done for several years, and the city never enforced it or or or never weren't aware of it. And but there's there's a there is a lot more direct communication. I feel like there's a lot of positive impact there. And with that, there's increased education of adopted city ordinances

at the time they're

prior to having a dedicated code enforcement on the third. We've always tried to do this, you know, from the time that I've been here to to educate residents, but the most we've kinda found the most effective education sometimes is targeted. There's a problem going right after it, having that goal on getting with an unpleasant conversation will lead to lead to compliance going forward. We also have improved responsiveness to residents' concerns. So when we do have complaint with this dedicated co enforcement officer, he's able to get out there quicker and and respond to these the issues. And then I haven't got into it in a lot of detail here, but, Evan's been very dynamic at in improving our process, looking at ways to do things more efficiently as we go forward. Just just as an example with parking enforcement, prior to to having coming here, the way that we issued parking tickets was pretty inefficient, but it was kind of the best way that we knew at the time. And that was that was to go out, take a picture of the vehicle, come back to the office, look it up online, write the parking ticket, mail it to the resident, hope that they get it. If they don't, then we invoice them again. So it's well, there's a lot of staff time, and and Evans helped improve that. We currently will get into this. We're still kind of working twentieth century technology with the with the ticket book and with paper warnings, that then need to be put into a spreadsheet. But with with the tools available, we feel like the the processes have have been more efficient, and we're trying to continually improve those. That's just an example. There's several others. Some of the challenges, I mean, is looking at compliance as well. So parking we're we're getting quite a few complaints of parking with unregistered vehicles and trailers on the street. This is something that is, by state law, not allowed. We don't have specific ordinance in in city code, but it's it's a very common occurrence that we're we're struggling with how how to do it. There's no plate on the vehicle. Maybe there's a VIN number. How do we follow-up on on these issues? A shed and fences installed without permits. There's a lot of these. A lot of them encroach on setbacks or easements. And and so but it's pretty difficult to tell someone you gotta rip out a fence or nuke your shed. So that that's a challenge. Animal land use is is an issue. We try to coordinate with animal control on a lot of the issues of animals. They're they're more trained to deal with kind of the the situation with animals, but we've we've found that sometimes it's our our role, sometimes it's their role to deal with these issues. So we're showing the landscaping that if you might recall, the city within the last couple of years adopted landscaping ordinance and yeah, in compliance with that, we're kind of we're seeing that it's going to be an issue with with wire wise landscaping, and we'll have to do that effectively with enforcement, hopefully, as as painless as possible. Something else that we struggle with over the years is getting compliance of business licenses. We feel like we've improved it, but but it's we feel like if our if we get our process more efficient, we can be more effective there. And then conservation easements with the city who holds several conservation. And Evan Evan's about to go out and follow-up and make sure that we have compliance with, you know, those conservation easements. We to be quite honest, we haven't other than just in passing, we haven't done that in a formal way in doing that. But all of these things, I put it as a challenge. They they take they take time. And so although we've been able to enforce a lot of our codes, there's there's some of them that we feel are really important that are gonna take more time. And because in this that next one on, we have we still have an inefficient process. We're doing things with old technology. We're setting we're sending mailing warnings. It's pretty cumbersome process for notification and administration warnings, tickets. We have to come in, track a spreadsheet, write a letter, send send it. Some cases, people claim they didn't get it or it took too long to get it. They then then we have to follow back up. And it's it's just we feel like there's ways with with some tools to make that more efficient. And so that's part of the reason we're coming in in front of you tonight is to be able to be more effective with with code enforcement. And Adam's gonna get into the tool we're looking at and and the the way it's doing the benefits of it.

So we did the same, Steve. We went out shop for code enforcement software, parking enforcement software. We interviewed four companies. Some of them do parts. Some of them do code enforcement only. Some of them do parking only. Some of them do the hardware, but they don't do the software. So we found t two systems, which

also is the system that we all did the city park being used.

They do an all inclusive package. They do code enforcement and park being enforcement all in one, and it is a complete software tracking system up to the date and prediction. It even tracks my movement. So those those reports that we showed you guys, if you had any questions on what code enforcement was doing, those would be readily available. The presentation we put together took us about a month to gather all of that information from Excel spreadsheets just like Steve. I'm not an efficient Excel spreadsheet guy. On top of that, when I go out on the field, I don't have a hotspot. So any information that I put into the computer while I'm on the field, if something happens, which which it did in my computer crash, wasn't it? And we lost over a month of data. So if anything have happened in that month where we ended up in quarter,

we Could be there. Okay.

So that's what teaching that's what teaching will help us with. Real time, of course, the platform, hands on. It's a mobile phone, so the next slide should show it's a mobile phone with a printer. It's an immediate, customizable platform. We can do one warning. We can do two warnings. We can do four warnings, and then track everyone people done for that address or for that license plate. There is no going back into the spreadsheet now, seeing the violation six months ago, but then I see the same violation now and go back back to see if that I've somehow had that violation before. Because we have, in our code that if you repeat offend within twelve months, then it's an immediate citation. So dragging through all of those spreadsheets, trying to find if that particular license plate or that particular home was in violation with Boris is very cumbersome. For scene benefits, on the spot notification, that's you'll you'll get a warning on door or on car or wherever you're at. You'll get the warning right then. And right now, we mail them out. I just got a call from a resident that got an obstruction of public ways. I mailed it out on the tenth. She claimed she got it on the eighteenth, and there's two days to fix it. So we work with them in that case, but a timing notification would be hugely helpful for our residents. Time management, I spend about an hour and a half in the field and then four hours in front of the computer back here putting in all the data, writing all the letters. So that would hugely increase my time management. Improve tracking. Like I said, it it tracks as soon as I log in to that phone. It tracks everywhere I go, what I'm doing, where I've been, how long it stops, and then it creates those spreadsheets for you guys. Up to up to date follow-up reports, you know, significant reduction of this. Currently, I give a citation. People have to come in or call the front office, pay that citation. If that citation is not paid, Amy has to invoice it. So it takes a lot of front time. With this software, it's it is all inclusive. They do all mailings, all the collections at no cost to the city. No loss of data. Like I said, I lost that month. No searching for past notifications. Kind of explained that already. Easy payment. There's a QR code on the bottom of your if you receive a citation, a QR code on the bottom of your citation, you can scan and pay it. You never have to come to Citi if you would want to. So, also, it's a safety benefit for our fire office staff. Easy payment.

Additional tracking of residents complaints. So this is something we do not have in them.

The majority of the on the street unregistered vehicle parking is complaint based. I have I currently do not track when I get a complaint from a resident, so I don't have that data. But this would track complaints. So it would track whether it's a complaint or whether I noticed it. Well, I was not good. So we would have that notification. I think that's everything.

Yeah. And, unfortunately, I failed to put the cost upon the screen. Did you did you find it? Or I I I I recall, just to give you a ballpark figure, the upfront, upstart cost of this is about, 12,500, and that's, the reason and then and then each year thereafter is about 7,500. And this is this is for two modules. There's a parking module and then a code enforcement modules. They they operate a little bit differently. And both of those, you it's customizable as far as what violations go in there. You can it'll it'll basically write on write on spot issue. We, you know, we issue a lot of letters for code enforcement. It'll it'll, based upon the violation, have the template letter right there that you can you can just issue to the rest of the info back into the office. So there's there's a code enforcement module and then a parking module, which is more for parking tickets as well as warnings. So you can you can decide. You can follow the same path as far as the warnings and and, you know, avoiding the citations wherever possible. This will actually help us do that more effectively and because we won't it it won't take quite as much tracking. That was part of the reason we didn't do parking warnings before, because we we saw that it was going to take a lot of time to pull the tracking. We have done it, and it does it does take a lot of time. We've we've made it work, but this would just allow us to do that more efficiently because it's all in the system. You you already know once you put in that license plate number, for example, that you so, like, yeah, the upfront cost is 12,500. And then going forward, it's, I wanna say, $77,500. Well, if if you, you know, direct us to bring this back, we'll have a more specific numbers to put in front of you. But

but that's kind of the ballpark that we're we're looking at. $70.20 retro's down. How much what's the start up? So the start up's about 12,500

and about 7,500 each year thereafter. And, really, what you're paying for for the start up is that hardware. So and and the re a big reason you need the hardware is the printer. It comes with the printer, but everything's integrated within within the the device. It's really that one on the right is what we would be is is what the quotes are based on is is to have that all in one system. It's all everything's integrated with with that, and then you can print your warnings, your citations, everything right from the device.

That's Question.

Yeah?

And, Riley, you you work part time. Correct? Yes, ma'am. So do you do, like, a few hours a day or a couple days a week?

I try to I try to give you guys as much time as I can. I'm usually around fifteen to fifteen to twenty hours a week. Twenty is plenty is expensive for me. So Yeah.

It sounds like you yeah. You spend a lot of time just inputting information. Maybe just to cut out your time so that they can make this inputting information. Yes. It takes me seven and a half weeks prior to write a parking citation.

This I could write in thirty seconds.

What do you think about this? Yeah.

Yeah. Just as we look into this, again, just a workshop, but I think I'd appreciate the company giving us their, like, data privacy agreement type stuff and then attorneys look at that? Because if they're the ones doing it all and looking at all, I assume that they have that to be contracted agreement. And I'm just who's the liability in the Verizon Center? We probably have that information already. We have 60

slides from that. Okay.

We can we can bring that back if you Just provide it. If you can.

So and I know we're enforcing more, but it seems like we're writing more and more

tickets.

So our and then on the same point, we're seeing that we're we're seeing more people in this

So less and less tickets. So in March of this year, we started doing prints, which is the first time Yeah. That we did warrants. I'm since that time, we had 282 warrants 202 warrants, and only 247 citations. But remember that part of those parking citations are winter parking. So that would have been from January to April. I can pull I can try and find the actual numbers from January to April on how many of those citations were written. But since we started doing warnings, there's a lot less citation Now the citation citations are gonna go back up for winter parking because we don't do street warning for winter. We do have a free education program starting in October, reminding the residents that they can't park on the street, but that they're parked on the street during the winter hours, they get a citation.

Yeah. That that's that's a current plan, but we could adjust that with with directions. So Yeah.

I just I just hope we're not in the business of just writing tickets. You know? If if our code is wrong or people are there, we should change your code. Like, maybe these are the people that elect us. These are the people that would be all you just want a good place to live. So this I just hope we're not seeing how much we could drive up. I'll make notes on this slide. Okay.

So it looks like and this this isn't counting parking. 60. It's 50. Yeah. So nine about nine. Started before resolution three. I didn't have resolution since on nine. There weren't parking related. Again, we've changed we've adjusted our process. We used to just cite any violation of the parking. We've adjusted that, but if there's the citations we're getting are pretty few and far between considering all the cases that they do.

Well, I I appreciate I just hope that we're gonna spend this kind of money just for writing that fucking ticket or if if that's our issue. But I'm

anyway, I'm just I'm just processing it. So I I I want I wanna stress that this system would allow us to much more effectively do warnings than we currently are. It's it's it it takes a long time overall to to to to warn, to track. Then the next time you go up to make sure you didn't warn them, because if you've already warned them and you just keep issuing warnings, that's not effective either. So you have you have you have to go through the system, and and it's just it's just cumbersome the way we do it now, and this would be more integrated, more efficient. Thank you. The other one?

So we need to let the council do its work. Right. We got a full agenda and may not prefer to the council, but this is really the time for council to do its work. Sorry to say. Counsel, you let me know. So a couple of comments. There's there's no harder job associated with getting people to live next to one another than code enforcement. And so thank you so much for the efforts you put there. To be frank with you, I'm afraid if we make you more efficient, it just means I will get more angry phone calls. That'll be great. And and maybe that's the way it's supposed to be, and maybe that's what I signed up for. I'll let you I'll give you a minute. I mean, I'll give you a chance. I think the low point in one of in in probably four years of conversations with a citizen, and it's just it's just one citizen. They said, Larry, why do you want to be an HOA president? And I don't I don't want to be an HOA president. And I realized how hard it is to get compliance with the ordinance, how hard it is to make sure we have the right ordinance. And we'll never know if we have the right ordinance if we don't work on the code on the code enforcement part. I'm just trying to figure out how we with code enforcement even, I don't have the answers. I don't know what it looks like, how we build a relationship, a positive relationship with citizens as we approach code enforcement. I get calls, and I've spoken to you guys about this. I'm not sure what the notification says now. We write a warning, compliance letter, and people don't know it's a warning. So we're missing the boats on on that, I believe. They they think they have been cited when, in fact, what it really is is a warning. But when I looked at it, it didn't say warning anywhere on the on this on the statement. Right?

Has that been changed? Be my brother. It's been changed. Okay. Thank you. That's I'm trying to figure out just a non violation. You know? Just above that, it says warning. That's that's a big step forward. Thank you. Because people

think they're being cited. I mean, we think we're running warning to get education in in in the process before we write a ticket to your point. We just write a case. And they in the past, they didn't understand it. So thanks thanks for that improvement. I don't know what the answer is. I I know that law enforcement somehow and it makes me think of officers that were lost last week. Part of their whole mission whenever they interact with the citizens is to build a relationship with those people so they're not just the bad guys. And I don't I don't envy. I don't know how to help us get to that point. I'm not I'm not saying that there's there have been efforts to improve it. And I'm just gonna encourage us to say, you know, we need to help people understand why the ordinance is written in the first place and understand how that's a public good for us to to get compliance with those ordinances and somehow not act like the mean HOA. And now let's speak. I would

I would encourage you to let them talk to me. There's currently nine residents that I'm working with. When they reach out and they're willing to talk to me, I go out and I meet with them, and we work together towards solution. But when you ignore and just complain, I I can't help you. If if they're calling you and they're yelling at you, but they've never spoken to me, I can't help them and I cannot work with them. So if it gets to the point that they're calling you, I honestly, I would I would have you direct them to me. And if they don't wanna talk to me directly, have them go through Justin. He's very good at calming people down to the point where when I do get to them, we can have a discussion. I need lots of residents when I'm out about Yeah. You never get the calls from the disabled veteran that my boys and I went over and he'll give movies trucks so he can get a citation. You're never gonna get those calls, but that's the kind of stuff I'm doing with the backside.

Yeah. I'll I'll once somebody gets ahold of me, I'll probably stay in the loop. But, obviously, I'll probably you guys in when I get those calls. I have no problem working with people. It's about compliance, not about citations. How long might there be between somebody calling the city office because they are trying to reach out to you and you're able to get back to them?

It depends. If it was last week, it was a week because I have a vehicle. So usually, two to three days because

I'm part time. I'm not here all the time. Yep. Yep. Excellent. Is there a way that we could help people know that, you know, what is the expectation about an appropriate amount of time? And it may change with context depending on whether you have a vehicle or don't or you you do get time off as well, I hope.

I don't I don't know if this telephone that they're giving us actually works as a phone as a company phone. We can check. I mean, that would be one way to have a company phone. I don't like giving out my

personal phone to angry That's what that's my job. Not sure. Right.

Yeah. I mean, I've

had two phones in my whole career, and I answer the work phone. I answer my personal phone. So, yes, there is a way to respond quicker.

And I'm not saying it's a slow response. It's just, you know, people get what they think is a citation. It's actually a warning, and they're going out of town, and they don't have time to fix it. And they call, and two hours later, you haven't gotten called back to them, and now they're calling me. Yeah. Right? I mean yeah. That's just the way this game is.

Yeah. And to to be quite honest, it was worse when I did it. It took me longer to get to them and then it's been shaking at them.

So So Because some there's other conflicts that I have.

Will this software fix that? Yes. So every time I log in to the phone, it brings up everything that needs to be followed up on that day. How does it get into your phone? Is that through front office? It's through the software that they provide us. So the front office will give you access to through my code. We're only paying for one license.

Right?

But but people

will call the front office, and that will get into your software system. The notification that somebody called in, they would like you to call them back. Look at yes. He didn't have to enter the information.

Yeah. We we have tried to as much as as we can, you know, have the front office trained to be able to provide some information to resident, but there's only so much if you're not a code enforcement. I mean, a lot of times, they go to me, and I can look things up. But if I wasn't on the site again, I wasn't I wasn't the the officer there saying this is Okay. This is this is what I saw. So there's only so much she can go far. So maybe not tonight, but maybe

next time, help us understand the interface between a phone call to the front office and how that gets into the

efficiency software that you're A phone call to the front office, they would have to go into the software on the on the desktop and input that information. And then when I log in on the phone or on the computer, it would pop in. And have to is an onerous process or easy process?

Depends on what they're calling to complain about. Yeah.

No. No. Just just front office knows somebody wants to talk to you. Front office just needs to get into you a notification that somebody wants to talk to you.

Yeah. That'd be very quick. Okay.

But and this but the front office can access this to see if it's a citation or what it's all about, or it's only access on my end of telco device? No. They will have access to the desktop. And so and the mayor could have access too if it's on the cloud, if you can have that. I don't know if it's on the cloud, but Careful.

He he wants it.

Just just throw me under the bus.

I don't get a referee. I I guess maybe I'll emphasize. I wouldn't say that the main purpose of this software is to field those complaints. That's that's that's an that's an additional benefit of it. But, really, it's it's a way to track all the cases to issue the warnings effective effectively and efficiently and and the citation and track all of that within one system. The the communication and you're you're still gonna have to communicate with people.

Yeah. Alright. Thanks. I agree. I don't think any piece of software can build the relationship with the community like a personal command. Now

that said, we have a lot of conversations with people after they've been cited. They come into the office. They're frustrated. They're really just there to pay the site their citation, but they're airing their grievances to usually our front office staff. If they're paying online, there's a lot of them that wouldn't necessarily do that, so that could free up some time to to our grown office.

They just have one more thought. And it's it's unfortunate that it goes along with the death of law enforcement in Box Hill County, but it's still within my memory. Five, six years ago, a code enforcement officer was killed while working in West Valley City. Joe Robinson. I just attended the code officer safety training

for that. I'm currently going through the process to be certified. It is the same training you get police officers on approaching citizens, approaching doors, approaching cars. So just so you're aware, I did get certified as a code enforcement officer for the city, and I'm going through that safety certification.

My my, on top of that is no parking ticket is worth the death of a city employee. Agreed.

Brewster might be.

Brewster's are another star.

Thank you, Kevin. Thanks. Anything else? Okay. Do you have what you need from the council?

I just I have same question to Steve. Would you like us to to bring this back for consideration?

I'll take this for a while. Please pass again. Okay.

Sounds like this.

Thank you. Thanks, everyone. Mayor Fakid, real quick. Oh, yes. Before we move on. Go ahead, Justin. Just wanted to tell Evan and Levi, I appreciate their efforts. It's it's a super hard job, and I beat them up quite often. And they do, they they do a great job for us, so I appreciate all that they do.

Thank you, Jess.

Okay. Council, how are you feeling? I'm gonna take your okay. Let's press on that. I see one thumbs up. That's that's good enough for me. Next, we have a workshop talking about pocket parks in the city. This this is a request that came from a council member to talk about open space and pocket parks specifically, and maybe it's expanded to more than that until I I'll introduce State of privacy. Rob Elwood, our parks director.

Thank you, mayor. Appreciate this opportunity to have this discussion with the council. Right. First off, I'd like to thank gather together as well as the county GIS administrator for help with this. Give you a little background of of properties the city owns. I have a little pointer here. Up here in this corner here is the hence the bus station, and up here in the bottom right is the water tanks. So just for reference, if this map that's still here. Okay. So in Italy City, we have parks, which includes about 69

and a half acres

and an additional four acres of park sheds, medians, planters. We're told about 74 acres. And those are highlighted in a loop there. Right out through part of the city. Of those parks, seven of them have stormwater in them. The two in the purple are their primary function is stormwater. Those being Discovery Park, which is the Sunrise Disc Golf Course and then Meadowview Park down on 1600

West. You have the point. I'm having trouble pulling out that color per It it's in the text there.

In the text per point.

We have working locations that are snowboard basins that are those are the yellow ones. And then the green along 165 are over new. Plant properties that are stormwater based that we maintain for them so that they aren't just a big weed patch. So we have about 23 acres of stormwater that we take care of. We have about a 120 acres that went developed for HURC. One of those properties is which is the blue one, which is the city Center Park. We have three locations that are listed in the master plan with a concept plan, which are the regional park on 640 West. The property on 1200 West near the in the Old Green Whiskey Cycle so they can then the property on. And then there are three properties that we don't have a plan for them. And in one property that has a development agreement of developers about to the point in the project, we will be putting some amenities in for us. Pocket parks in Nibley City. There's kind of a definition of pocket parks, but by definition, there are three pocket parks in Nibley. We have Meadow Creek on the East side of 165 Main Street. We have Shadowbrook Park, which is across the street from the Morgan Farm, and then Sheridan Park, which is adjacent to the Nelson Well on 250 and about thirty six fifty south. So, as I said, is on on the east side of the highway. It's about a half an acre. It was part of an open space subdivision. There's a water feature in it, and then there's sidewalk access from 38 or 23850 to the Interior road. Shadowbrook Park, it's about three quarters of an acre. It was part of the development that they gave to the city, has open space. There is a picnic table with a a concrete pad. I have seen a few people stop there and have a picnic pad. Not very many. It's mostly a kid hangout as well as some wildlife habitats. And then it's a shortcut out of that neighborhood to get a 100 plus. Sheridan Park was bought after the Nelson Well went in. It's about three quarters of an acre. It has an emergency overflow designed into it. So if the well and that canal back out, it's designed to run across that property and not go into residents' homes. It's the side of eight people projects and two youth group projects. And then originally, it was planned to have a small playground and a small facility. This funding was created. There are four other properties that currently don't have a plan. The green is down next to Midland Gardens. It was part of an open space subdivision. It's behind the LDS Chapel on 1000 West. The Orange Fund is in Shell or in 700 acres. It's just off of 1500 West, about 3300 South. It also included some irrigation ditch, frontage, as you can see that little l shaped piece that goes to the to the right there. The one in the blue is a stormwater or a stormwater basin as well as the stuff in the lighter blue as the Hawkesboro Trail and then some land across the canal that we have no access to. And then the purple site is part of the original establishment of at least it is the old tank site on Howard. C also owns three properties that have homes on them. The one being next door and then the two up on Main Street across from the the traffic light on 32 North South. And then we own about six acres by the high school off of 2600.

What is it? I think you're just at the end of the slideshow. That's it. She missed it for me. Is this the wrong presentation? Did you have another version? That that's all that's in there. That's all that's in there. Yeah.

You can do this. It's all good to you. So we still have we have a with 70 acres of developed parks. There's only two acres. Other property that parcels that we did here are parts to its flatchers. There are 21 acres of newly city owned stormwater bases we take care of. There's 1.75 acres of. There are a 120 acres of undeveloped property, which totals to about 217 and a half acres of property littering system, including the the storm waters. And so for Metro Pocket Parks, there's only 2.1 acres, which is about 1% of the property we own. I said there's a three house properties in three.

Questions? Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.

Are there any of these properties that are trained on resources that we don't feel have any value,

you know, purpose

for us to keep maintaining and keep as a city?

Justin can confirm this, but the one in green here in In States is we're not sure what to do with the space. And the last two master plans has been left out because they weren't sure what to do with it. But that that would have to be a council decision because it's part of an open space

of what to do in here. But we're knocking meats down. We're just not going to be here. That's it. Four times a year.

It well, it depends on if it rains more. This year, it's been four. Sometimes it's got eight depending on how much rain you get.

So that was intended, if I recall, right, as a buffer between teachers' backyards and the trail thereabouts. Yes. K.

Right. Now it wasn't what we were looking

for. Excuse me.

Is it Meadowview Park, Mohammed?

Yes. Well, Middleview, Stormwater Basin Slash, put a playground on it. Yeah.

To make it a part. Are both of those lots considered Stormwater?

Yes. Nature. And they work together.

Other questions?

I'm sorry. The the one that was orange, is that one have so I had grass on it. It would just

in the stormwater basin, we have to go and maintain that irrigation ditch about every three weeks because it's there's so much water.

Absolutely.

Now we have to do with the trailers. There's no other we have to go over. It's about 10 feet in the morning.

But the big worst part is The big worst part

is. Well, of course,

How did we get stuck with maintaining the irrigation campaigns?

No, sir. Not to point a finger, but it was to cancel it

three times.

Then you literally point at the

finger. Project five.

The next counsel will be just as far as this can be.

From when you mentioned no access to the Fosse Holland, the Monkspereum,

Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum, Monkspereum,

Mon

There's a trail on the East side of the town, but to get to the West side, there's enough to get to that.

Do you wanna point with your pointer, Raul? That might help. So right, the trail times in right here

goes down here. Are you saying on the west side of it? On the west side. Yeah. Understand. I'll cross the.

Okay. Thank you. Never mind. There's not a there's not a bridge get. So it's kind of a a graveyard for some hunters for me.

Contractor art. Yeah. In some sense, I'm sure it's the first time I've heard that we have anything.

Yeah. I guess it

it's been a little frustrating. Yeah. It's it's

so, Garrett, if I may, I I I can certainly hear from you and risk of counsel that question that you asked Rob. You asked Rob. So is there something that we're not getting you're paying for the buck? You know? Something we need to divest our divest of on Citizens' behalf or you know, we'll we'll turn it back to you. What do you think? That was the only reason I brought this up. You know? One second.

Is, you know, being efficient. You know? Because I know it is for him to get all people to the different pocket parts to maintain all these spaces, to mow them, to keep them, to I mean, and then, you know, if if you can't get to it every week, we get to call. How come we didn't maintain the parts? We do maintain the parts. We just can't get to all of them all the time, and some of them just don't have a. And some of these, like, one across from Oregon farms, me and the one on that 3650. I see people on the sidewalk, and I've never seen any of the connection used. I'm going, is there a better use? We're better off divesting that from the city move this space to someone who wants it or maybe a building or something, you know, and not having to maintain something that isn't being used. I just don't wanna waste the resources on something that that we're not getting any benefit from not seeing anybody get anybody.

I agree. And I'm asking you to help answer that question in addition to asking the question. It may not be tonight, but that's that's that's our job. Right? That's not Rod's job. You can guide us and practice. But but we're talking about property owned by the citizens of Italy that we are the stewards of. So that's a question we should be answered. And I didn't know what all we know. I'm just so this is very helpful. I just price down any pocket parks we have. The pocket is more than that, actually.

They did function in other ways. Yeah. I guess they did function in other ways. This this same discussion came up in the parks advisory committee, and that's where the mayor saw. He gave the presentation to this on stormwater basins. That helped them to understand as well. The main function of those is stormwater. It's not recreation space, but they are being utilized by some of the younger kids as them.

I really appreciate this. I I didn't even know about

this or myself.

So one one point I'm sorry. To follow ups on what Justin said. So when we do open space or conservation subdivisions, it is certainly not 100% of the time that the citizens accept ownership of property. Many, many times, it stays in private ownership, but it still has conservation limits. Right? Conservation easement is is is all that piece left. So there's only so many things they can do. They can put horses and cows and agricultural type stuff. They can they can do various things. But as as the cows and most or other folks, we go through lots of conservation subdivisions. Great one example is Cottonwoods on Hollow Road, the North End Of Road where the houses are set back off Hollow Road. There's conservation space there. There's a horse pasture. That's not a Mumbai city. We don't maintain that. They the the HOA has a a little pavilion there with a a picnic. It it's like a pocket park. Yeah. It looks like a pocket park, but it's but it's not the city's pocket park. It's the it's the HOA spot. So are there anything like that in Mount Vista? Put you on the spot. Maybe park. Yeah. Parks, Spain, since the both of the city Yeah. We have almost done an injured in the world. Right. Yeah. Right. My neighborhood pays for garbage. So,

you know,

casting the junk style, whether the city accepts on behalf the council accepts on the behalf of the citizens. Ownership of land is not the only way that we can conserve and preserve open space. It can be under private ownership.

Yeah. K.

Man? Yeah. Just to piggyback off some of the the comments, something that was, I thought, really insightful and and nice to participate in was the development of the open space and recreation master plan to that balance. But and it provides guidelines for us now that we didn't have before when accepting, when we should consider when we accept. And I I don't think it except for cases where it's, like, at a specific type of easement or something, I don't think that I think it's a we as a council could apply those same guidelines to current current spaces and see if there's something still on. But then because the the most of those were accepted without those guidelines. So

finding those now wouldn't hurt, and that could be a future

Right. The general workshops that I That that's a great point. I think we are constrained by the conservation easement that we set up. That is part of the deal of, you know, plus three houses that are leading open space. But it doesn't mean we have to own the land. We just own the conservation. That's what you're saying. Right? And and there's a process for the best future of public land. We don't just it doesn't just disappear out of the citizen's ownership and land somewhere else. There's no public process there.

I think we're gonna say this to maintain those are maintained by the works.

Correct. Okay. Anything else?

Maybe if I I just might add something else to to key to think of is the potential the opportunities that that a particular space might have other than just a city park. Maybe there's an economic development opportunity there. And I look at 2600 South and the highway. I I know it was on a previous parks and rec master plan. We didn't include it in this one. We didn't really see it as an appropriate place for a park being right next to the highway there. Looking at other opportunities. I mean, we think a lot about parks and but maybe maybe the park a park isn't the best use for that space. But maybe the city's still somehow involved in what does go there.

Yep. Derek, is that get out what you were hoping to do? Yeah. Okay. Give me some sort of a lot of intro. Thank you. Thanks, Robert. Well, the the city of Italy the citizens of Italy owned one heck of a lot of public space. We don't have enough money to develop at all as quickly as we would like to do. But there was a previous council's foresight to to to buy property before it went crazy. And by the way, it's ownership of that property that justifies the highest park impact fee in Cache Valley, $9,000. If you build a house in Cache Valley to maintain the same level of service because of so much property that the citizens own, it's $9,000 to continue to buy and develop park space.

It's fine. It'd be great, Mike.

You're ready. I would appreciate

it.

And to create a new special service district. The district's purpose is essentially to provide recreation services and with the boundaries of Nubly City from Lisbon, with the option for other cities to join or or pass similar resolutions themselves. So approval of the resolution tonight does not create the district. It instead conformally begins the process that the by scheduling a public hearing, and as as written on October 16. And that's where the city council and residents and those within those boundaries can come and discuss the proposal to actually create the district. So this just this is an action that allows public input before any final decision is made to establish the district. After that public hearing, they will require sixty days before a require be sixty days are required before an action can be taken on the proposal.

And so that would put us

12/17/2025 if we wait a second meeting tonight. Mhmm. Any any longer of that day, I guess, well and if there are any changes well, I just I just wanna ask, so that's fine. So, basically, this this proposal is asking the the resolution is is kinda saying, you know, we're gonna have a public hearing. It, tells our state recorder to follow laws in publishing that. It's a little different than just the standard kind of meeting. It's got certain timelines that's to be done within and certain amount of lines. And that's all in the resolution. But, you know, this this special service ticket does not it it goes that far. Special service district would not have taxing authority without a successful election, but allows us, other interest for municipalities, essentially, to join and start framing what the structure and services of the district might look like before actually calling that election. So, essentially, with if we pass this resolution tonight, Nulu City is telling the rest of the valley that we're willing to come together and discuss this so that when the time comes for if the district is made to ask for money, we actually have a plan and and who's part of that plan. So yeah. I guess. There's questions I think we can ask Eric or

Okay. Eric, do you have things to add or wait for us to ask you questions? It's up to you. You hear the name of your questions. Okay. Thank you. Council, discussion questions?

I have a question. So the name is South Cache Valley Recreation is just that name. It's not a geographic map. It's not saying that it's on the it is in the municipality north of on the North End Of The Valleys, personal brief one, Joy, Good Day. I mean, is that

Eric, I haven't answered, but I'd rather you answer.

Just any Yes, ma'am.

But we're not

having public hearings that will allow people to approach the formation of this district except in any city. This Correct. This is specific. This district, if it if if we hold the public hearings and don't have protests and the council says we're creating the district without any taxation powers or anything else, it would be limited to Nibley City at this point. So I don't think that's our end game as we've discussed it. But, you know, we think one of the hardest things to figure out in local government is scale. Now what scale does it work the best? And I think we know that Nibley City can only afford what Nibley City can't afford. And we'd like to get as you know, we'd like to get other communities simple. But at this point, until they do something with their own public hearings, this district would only be within the boundaries of Nibley City.

Despite the proposed name Right. Says that the public hearing is only core creating district would be in Nibley City.

So it's a sales pitch. Right. As part of the timing, we talked a few months ago about if we were if we had wanted to try and develop the ballot this year, we would have had to provide language ready by, what's it, a certain some number of months before November of this year. Now obviously didn't happen. So considering if we end up getting this on the ballot for next year to become a taxing entity, at what point do other cities could join us and have their public hearings done with so that they can join us in time to get booted on ballot with us as they will determine our South Cache Valley Recreation special service district.

Yeah. Everybody needs to be part of the district who is going to have to call their public hearing by, let's say,

the board meeting mark of next year. So there is a very specific time.

Right. Right. So it it here's Peter's let me explain the time. Here's why. So they would have to essentially adopt a, you you know, a mere image of this for their community by March February or March of next year so that because it takes at least ninety days, maybe a hundred and twenty days to create in their community in order to to join. Mhmm. K? And so they would have to join and be part of this district by July of next year. And so so then then the district would be created. It's created. Matter of fact, it'd be better in June because once once you have decided to create it, then you have to turn it into lieutenant governor's office. They have thirty days to certify the general and party. And so you can't take any answer to that certification, and then then you have to call the election, which needs to be happening in July. We'll just. So, yeah, this is sufficient, but if if you wanna give it on for next year, you know, it's it's that's the time frame others have to join.

Yeah. It sounds like long. It was good. That's really odd.

It isn't. But I anticipate, I shouldn't speak for everybody. I anticipate even before nearly city holds their public hearing that they will be out each other.

Right. I mean, there's no point in making a special service district whose boundaries are limited to Niffen City. We have a political jurisdiction to accomplish recreation in that area. Correct. However, the steering committee working with consultants on the feasibility study, and Nathan made made the suggestion. I think it's great. It's like someone's gotta put a step forward. Right? So let's let Nittwood City make that step and then go to work on encouraging other communities to create a recreation district at a scale that we can share with each other and build something bigger than what Nibley City could build on there.

And if if I may make an observation, one of the things that you would need to have in place by the time you call an election, at least hold the election, is a clear concept what the election is gonna need to be asking for. And so even by next November, it may be a little difficult to get on that. Because right now, we're just figuring out who's gonna get in the vote. And then once you know who's in the boat, then those folks decide, okay. Why are we gonna propose to the people? And, you know, then they take a look at the time. You mean,

like, say, we're talking about an indoor rec facility eventually that would be a bond and everything else to do that. Do we have to have that definition done before we find out if people are in the boat? No. No. No. Okay. First, you find out who's in the boat. Right. And then you do after that, then you define,

you know, what what recreation services and activities the district will provide. I'm just saying, I don't want you to be disappointed if that isn't all accomplished in time to call an election for next year. Okay. It's it's an aggressive schedule. That's what I'm saying. To hit next year.

Is there one election where the citizens of the district the the patrons of the district empower taxing authority and another election if there's bonding and borrowing of money? Or are those They could happen at the same time. It could happen at the same time. So I will go ahead, Nathan. Give you a motion. Oh, please. Go ahead. Yeah. Oh, there's a question. Go ahead. Well, we certainly discuss well after motions. Yep. That's true.

Yeah. I'll give you a motion to approve

with the follow-up amendment.

That the word south be dropped from the name of the district and everywhere. And that's where it describes the date, 10/16/2025

at 06:30, we just had PM,

which is after number five below.

It just says 06:30. It doesn't say a a motion. I won't repeat it because I have to wait for a second. I'll second it. K. Motion from Nathan and a second from Aaron to adopt resolution twenty five twenty one with amendments to drop the cell from the name of the district and go to p and one. Got it. Perfect. Thank you. So this is the complicated part of it. So I appreciate your motion because it strikes at the complication and might as well be able to. Neli said he has taken a step forward to even fund the feasibility study.

Cheryl, I did not. You did not? Not yet.

Oh, I'm sorry to read. Yeah. Right. So this is for first three. Right? So then we said he has taken the initiative by stepping forward to not only take this step, but a step that we started a year ago by looking at a feasibility study to say, what do we want? What do citizens want? What can we afford? So on and so forth. So lots of surveying. Lots of so on and so forth. The county is also involved in a feasibility study to look at providing recreation facilities, possibly indoor rec facilities or whatever gets defined at the county scale. Right? So I have to tell you that there are political bodies, let's say mayors in other parts of Keshe Valley that believe it's wrong for Nibley to take this step forward. And that's because they say that will just let the county off the hook. And we've all seen the hesitation on the county's part from public statements about we don't have a rec department. We'd have to put a rec department together. We'd have to we'd have to create the whole department. Recreation, I've heard county council members say in session recreation is optional. It's not the responsibility of government to provide that. Frankly, I think that county doesn't perform well on a lot of other services that the county should be providing, like collecting trash, a library, a county wide library, sewage, wastewater treatment. We could go down the list, but there's a whole bunch of things that is well, fire protection district nineteen sixty, mid nineteen sixties. A resolution was passed by citizens that said, we're gonna create a fire protection district. Guess what? It never happens so that way these communities done things like we do with Hiram to put up fires, and and Logan's not part of that fire district. We have to put one of these together now because it was adopted by the citizens in '19 the mid nineteen sixties. Things the county hasn't done in terms of providing services at the county's care. And like I said, I think one of the hardest questions here is what is the proper scale of government to provide certain services? Now my biggest concern about us moving forward with anything, whether it's, except a South Cache County recreation district, is that, by golly, we're gonna solve this this problem for the citizens that live South Of Logan or at least to the South Of Logan, including the South Part Of Logan. So it sounds like I'm arguing with you. I'm just presenting another point to say, look, if we're gonna let the county take care of this or wish and hope that the county will take care of this, then maybe we shouldn't be doing this at all. And if we're serious about creating a solution for the citizens in the South Park Cache County, maybe it should be readded as such. I think if if if the county actually does something, putting another facility in North Logan isn't gonna do us any good. And so that's unacceptable. And that's one of the reasons that I'm even the county does something I'm worried about whether it actually solves the problem in the South Park's County. Again, the the pushback from a collection of cities trying to talk the county into doing something says, Nibley, you shouldn't do this because you just give the county a reason to you ready for this? I'll go ahead and say it. Do like they've done with other things and say, oh, we'll just let Logan take care of it, which has happened on a number of those things I just mentioned. And I think as we've done survey it's been said in the public session. As we've done survey with other communities, it's like, this is a facility that needs to be in the south part of the county and not just another thing that we're gonna let Logan take care of because we're not happy with that. So in summary, I've had to defend us taking this position because it deludes the county wide effort, which if I was completely forward about it, I would love to see the county take care of this. But they better take care of us the same way they take care of the rest of the county instead of just leaving it to loan. So I like the focus of South Cache Valley Recreation Special Services Group.

I appreciate the insight about what other mayors are thinking and saying. Dude, that's helpful. And it makes a good point that if we wanna be if we want this to be specific to the South, maybe we'd run-in as such.

Thanks. And there's still a question. I mean, with the the the catch, the the phrase we adopted before when we're working on our own feasibility study paid for by Nibley City residents, and we've shared all data and everything else, all the findings of that feasibility with county feasibility study that they're also doing with the same set of consultants, by the way. We've shared all that. I forgot where it's going with this.

But We'll be able to see this stuff. I think South was attached on that. I think that's where you were headed. We would focus there. Yeah. Yeah.

And and if we do something county wide, it's gotta be two facilities. Like, why did we build two high schools? Because we can't you know, the Gastown School District built one high school in the South, and then, you know, bus people through Logan. We'll build one at North and bus people through Logan. So I think even if the county does something, it's gonna essentially be the north and south sort of service area even if it's the full county, you know, politically.

Yeah. I I removed the South because of what I heard about some city's concern that we were moving forward. I agree with you a 100%. If if there's not a a resolution to us down here on this part of the valley, then it's it's not a resolution. This is I don't care what it's named. I just didn't want to, I guess, ostracize anyone that didn't feel they're part of the South. Like, I don't know what how how men can identify this or or others conversations and be a part of this district and then and build something else, and then we want the name to keep them from thinking about it. I think that those that are interested, and I think us me suggesting that we do this first is that we will do the work that we've already been doing to get

municipalities on board that wanna be on board. But if we wanna keep this up, I think that's fine. But that's kind of the reason I make sure that it's Yeah. Fair. And and I think the the message we indicate,

if we start even acting like we're gonna do the county's job, the the mayor to the North the mayor says the North will say they're even more unhappy because that's the county's job. We can't get the county to do the county's job. You guys are diluting that county to do the county's job by taking up an effort in the South. And if you if you say, well, we'll just create a county wide district or an almost county wide district at Middle East initiation, well, we're just further diluting. We're giving the Kellogg a chance not to do what we think they should do. Okay.

I'd like to start this. This is gonna happen.

Eric?

So by doing this, I mean, we'll just help the county to push forward in

the beginning of the process, and then the county actually did something that would have to end up creating it. I mean, this is just the beginning step, but, I mean, this is, you know, a flare in the air. We're we're here. We're moving because our citizens have asked for this. Right? A large number. And, I mean, their kids will be grown and gone before any needs to build them, and they would wait based on the history of what's happened in the past.

Yeah. That's a great comment here. I I I it's not good for me to predict how people will think of something we do, but I think the county council could go one or two ways. They could be motivated by what we're doing and maybe even motivated by the survey that they have done outside of the South, which is almost the same survey that we gave the South. We they used ours. We gave it to them. That's why they modified it a little bit. But but there's a there's a feeling in the steering committee. I'm on the steering committee for the town too, but you guys know that, the sculpture. But I'm trying to solve the problem. I don't care how to solve it at an appropriate scale. But there's a feeling of enthusiasm from the steering committee, steering the feasibility study that there's so much you know, it's not widely enthusiastic as the South survey, but it's still very enthusiastic that the county will actually do something. So the county with our move here could do one or two things that we can say, oh, with this new found surveying throughout the county and Midway is putting pressure on us. We should get something done. Right? We should take care of this, the county. We this is a big enough issue. We should as as the county, that's the right scale to solve this problem. The other way they could react to it is fine. Well, let the cities take care of this, and we don't have to do anything else. We won't do anything as the county to solve this problem. We'll let the cities take care of this. And then we took a step forward to take care of this works. I don't know how they would build that. I don't know how they would build it.

Eric,

once the public notice is given, like, if we wait Saturday evening tonight,

what impact would a name change afterwards have

have have anything?

I'm I'm sorry. I do not know the the advance from that. Yeah. I know the answer on changing the boundaries or the services or things like that. But

And and I'm not I'm not about anything. I'm really not. I'm just I'm just trying to get clear in our minds what our objectives are. Mhmm. And go after what we want to achieve.

Yeah. I mean, the the reason I think I brought it up in the in the steering committee was what Garrett said. I know that the citizens of Niddly are considering this by themselves, and we can get others on board. If this moves that process for them along a little further, then we'll try. Because even if it fails by December or whatever, we where we get a protest and the things like that that that they don't want it. And it says things can't continue before in the future or accounting. So in the past tonight, you know, when it's named, even if it's just for the citizens of Italy.

You you could always go very Trumpesque and include the Gulf Of America and the Viso.

Don't forget our neighbors to the North. Far north. Chad, do you have Chad recreation directors here? Do you have anything you wanna add to this discussion?

Yeah. There's so much we could discuss. One thing I think this council might consider is there's been a change in employment for Brandon Bell, who was the project facilitator for the county. It's uncertain who will be picking that project project up. So there's a very real possibility that the county efforts may delay, potentially stall out. It's it's unknown at this point. So that's something that you may consider. I would agree with what's been said, previously by Nathan and Garrett that there's definitely a lot of interest in moving forward moving forward just as quickly as we can. I think our residents have been very patient with us, and they've responded to five surveys indicating that they're interested in indoor recreation. And at this point, I'd be hearing when are we going to move forward. So I'm gonna offer that.

Yeah. Thank you. I'll I'll counter a little bit on change of personnel at the county level. I mean, I'm I'm of the opinion that government has more momentum than any single employee.

Possibly. The I think the other thing to consider is how committed the county is overall in solving this problem. Right. If we look at how they approach funding the the study, that's something to think about. It it it meant a lot of resistance, the the proving the first phase. There was not as much resistance on the second case. So so that is something to to think about.

But I don't see Brandon as a champion for this cause. I think him he's he's a county planner, and the county said, hey. Alright. We'll spend some money on a feasibility study with or without enthusiasm. I'm not trying to imply that. And we need someone to run the project. Brandon, you're the guy to run the project. If if he was a really, really strong push even as an employee to to get this done, then I think his absence could slow them down could slow down the county. But I think he's he's just he's been doing his job. He's been doing it well without seeing as a really strong advocate. Like, thank you very much. Our staff in Nibley is a strong Right.

You might say I'm a champion.

Oh, yeah. Of of this time.

And and the reason I'm championing that is I I feel like Yep. That's what this body is for as well. And and I applaud you for doing this thing.

There is one other point that I wanted to share.

Obviously, Brandon had other duties and responsibilities and their spread here and getting down the date. It might come to me later. Okay. I might wave at you if I think of it. Yeah. That's fine. Kendall Welker, president of the parks and rec

advisory committee. You wanna add anything to this discussion for us? You don't have to if you you know?

I just have a I think it's my fault. I just have one big analogy. Most of us have children, and I have a lot. But the way I see Nibley in the county is Nibley said we're gonna do this, and we start doing this feasibility study. And along comes the bigger brother. Wait. Wait. Wait. I have a battery. Like, you don't know how to do it. Let us do it. And I try to teach my children. No. He was doing it first. His lady let him figure it out. And so I kinda well, I try to teach both in that situation. And, like, I'm passionate about this. And by the time we finally get a facility, if we do, I'll still live here. So my kids may not. Even my eight year old, it made me have to just find, like, Eric said, if we stop the momentum that we have going, it may never happen. We can't predict the county future. We can talk about what has happened. But as far as newly citizens, like Chad said, five surveys. And when you got to the third one, they're like, another survey. Where does our bill meet? We want this. Like, they have to say but they kept answering those surveys, and it always came out. We want this.

So those are the two that

Yeah. And and, Kilo, I would I would I mean, it depends on the county. I don't think they're playing big brother that we'll come along and show you how to do this. I think they got dragged into it by other political entities, municipalities saying, we have a better chance of getting indoor rec space, maybe two indoor rec spaces because the South needs to solve the problem and the North needs to solve the problem. If we're in this altogether as municipalities and all of the citizens of Cache County, I think they got dragged in by the synergy argument more than, yeah, we'll show you how to do this. I I think they would like to be let off the boat based on public statements they've made.

Mayor, I would definitely agree with that. I attended many of the meetings with you and and had conversations

with others. And and I think it's a momentum of the internal rally that's kind of driving some of their effort. I would say this, though, in terms of momentum, I feel like we have greater momentum on this in the the valley. And that's been demonstrated in the surgery responses and in the results of those survey responses. We can talk about the detail, but it that's my memory. 70% are in support of, solving indoor recreation, and they're willing to support that with funding it through taxes. So support was still very good on the North End above 50%. I think it was closer to 60. So that's something to consider if if there was an alignment, where that would be niply in terms of getting a bottom class. So that's, just something to think about.

Okay. You get substitute,

May I hear that?

Justin,

go ahead. Just give me a chance. Yeah. Just just one comment that I felt out of the meeting is certainly, you know, just a perspective to share was the timing. And some of the members that were in that meeting at the Which meeting are you talking about, Justin? I'm sorry. The the county The last county steering committee meeting. Correct. The last county steering committee meeting. One of the frustrations I felt from those in attendance was the timing and whether or not, we needed to pull this trigger now or wait for a recommendation from the consultant on a county wide solution. And I think that was a lot of the heartburn. It was just the timing and not giving the consultant that opportunity. And correct me if I'm wrong, Chad, but they felt that that opportunity or they they would have some answers possibly as early as thirty days. Can you help me on that schedule?

Yeah. So the best way I can do this is October for today that we might be able to offer. In that in that meeting, just if we can put the options, they said you can do a accounting by option. Hey, Chad. Could you sorry, buddy. Eat that mic. Get real real closer, please. Sorry. It was October. They said you can offer some guidance in terms of that. And the particular question. And in the end, can I just quickly give you a summary? The options that we present and and Whitney from BCB was just priming the problem and and, encouraging us to start thinking about some of these possibilities. One possibility is something that I mentioned that you can avoid solution. The other would be to split the ballot into two districts. The other would be three districts, the north, middle, and the south. The other would be to to indoor recreation independently. And by, you know, each city addressing that and perhaps the county taking care of the the bigger items, quants and ice. And I believe that covers only on Kings Island. Any anything else that was wrong? Yeah. I think there's one other than and to this as well, Justin.

Yeah. I think that covers what I remember. But the the frustration was just the timing, and they felt that by us prematurely pulling this trigger that it would, you know, limit our possibilities potentially, which in turn would impact or potentially impact their possibilities.

Yeah. Three main tour being defined as before the consultant hired to do a feasibility study makes an official recommendation Yep. About about what to build?

Oh, no. Just about how to split how the dish how to handle the districts.

District ties the county. I see. I see. Okay. That makes more sense because I I mean, we don't even have in our feasibility study, which is ahead of the county's feasibility study, we don't even know what we're gonna build yet. We're just trying to create. We're just taking steps possibly to create a political entity. A special service district. Yeah. Okay. So that makes more sense. Right? Alright. So let's take that. I mean, of all those possibilities, there's a lot of great possibilities there, but one of the one that rings most true to me is that there's a North District and a South district within the county. Aren't we kinda taking the step to do that here? If they wanted to do that in the North, let them do it. Right? Because I want this problem to be solved. This wasn't on my thing list of things to do when I ran from there. But I heard from a lot of people just following, this is what it's supposed to do. Okay. So it sounds I'll try to put a proposal here.

Yeah. My my concern is this takes time. And, I mean, even on the time line we're at, we're we're we're just simply saying, give them the notice that we're gonna have a meeting in October. A lot can happen between now and so It'll be extravagant.

You know that. I know.

But I think that it it encourages us. It puts us on the agenda to engage with at this level. Yep. Not necessarily just, hey. Are you interested? Yes. Are you willing to have a resolution soon? But it also puts us on a timeline of that I think actually aligns with the county study, FM, that that we're ready to go as soon as making those recommendations. And we can kill it. Yeah. We can say, don't mind. Don't do it anymore. Right? So I don't see anyone asking this to me yet.

Norm, well, you would have a substitute motion. Okay.

And then it was just a wait a second meeting. Okay.

So let's talk about the invention. One sec. Oh, sorry. Yeah. Before we have a motion and a second to amend the motion on the floor to wave second, Cree. Discussion on the motion to waive second reading. Any opposition for voting on the amendment? Seeing none, those in favor of amending the motion on the floor to waive second reading, please say aye. Hi. Are there any opposed? K. The motion is amended to waive second reading.

It's good.

No more discussion? Well, I can put either So I any

Good question. So if we vote now, it would be to pass this as is with the name cash counter, not sell.

That's

that is the motion before he's

this to say South Cache County instead, can I make us up to the budget? Yes. Add some.

Yeah. I mean, since it's still a since it's a main question. Or let's do it as some time. But if that's a good deal. Yeah. I'd like to remember in that case, the admin

word sends out back in throughout the documents that says South Cache. That yeah. I'm sorry. South Cache. Thank you. So I have a motion

and a second from Garrett to put South back in the name everywhere on the k. So now we will talk about that specific. Who would you know? Who who thinks we should have South? Who thinks we've talked about it to an extent, but Nathan's all beat up. Go ahead.

I'm just curious why you wanna ostracize people that don't identify as that.

I think this just goes back to the point that they were making. I think it's I like the idea that there's going to be a South district rather than a county wide option. And it says, put us on the right path to that.

Thank you.

It's consults.

Alright.

Discussion on the amendment. You'll put Salah back in. Seeing more to no more discussion on the amendment, I'll call for a vote, please. Those in favor of amendment to put Salah back in the title and elsewhere in the document, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Say it again. Say aye. Aye. One, two, three. And those opposed. Name. Name. So the motion to amend passes through your phone. K. Now we have the amended motion for you, which is On. What you see except PM. Except PM. Right. More discussion, please? Can't pull it out of you. This is the way I can read, so let's make sure we're done talking about this. Right? I will ask, is there an objection to voting on the motion, which includes waiting waiting second reading as resolution? I see no objection. Shall we call the roll, please?

Council

member. Sorry.

You there? Council member Larson, what is your boss? In favor. Council member Bob Larson. In favor. In favor. In favor.

Yeah. I count that forward favor and unpost. So Nests. Thank you. Eric, thanks so much. Drive safely. You can stay in the rest of the meeting.

You're not digging.

He's

But

the we're gonna take two separate votes on that because it's two separate issues. So the first one, which is before you turn out to rezone, from r two to r two eight,

I put up before you.

Do you mind if I give you if I give you some updates? And and really, what on in the in the packet, the these updates were all provided. And I'm glad I'm glad you mentioned, mayor, that to consider these at the same time. In the packet, All of these updates were provided in the next item on the agenda and the development agreement as they kind of more squarely line up with that. But they but I I I think I'll I'll just mention them now, these updates, so that you can kind of have that context. And, really, these were, in in response to the council's request. And a lot of these, I'm I'm gonna give a credit to Tom. He he provided and followed up for the majority of these. So if you have any questions, you can go into Tom, but I'll just provide a quick summary. So storm drain and grading plan has been provided. And by the way, this was this was provided with the preliminary plat. It's just included in the in the packet there, so you have that information that and then including the off-site storm drain piping through Malouf to the Hiram Slough. The water use calculations are provided. And, again, we go into more detail there, but those are in the packet. And there's an estimate that has been provided since the last reading on electrical repairs that would be needed to bring those buildings up to code, and that's 23,000. And then plumbing repairs is 50,000. If you recall on the last meeting, we mentioned some deficiencies, but there wasn't an actual estimate. And so that that has been provided there. Just a justification and a little clarification on the traffic study. So it if, the traffic study, it was not required. This this development didn't meet the 20 acre threshold, which is what's in in the ordinance. We we can have some leeway to require traffic study anyway, but, you know, some considerations there is there's two or two roadways. And just in general, from a high level, wasn't anticipated to generate sufficient traffic to result in significant roadway congestion. And the and the, summary that Tom gave, and he he can go into more detail on this about 35 peak hour trips. We're just just based on the ITE trip generation rates. That's that's about what you'd be looking at for for these for this development and and Seven, thirty, 35 each way. Oh, 35 each way. Sorry. So so at at each entrance to the subdivision. So, anyway, that and just in general, just as a precedence, we we didn't require this for for other developments that are a similar scale, similar. Traffic impact, so, this this wasn't. You know, it basically just didn't meet quite meet that threshold. A few a few things provided by the developer, the developer has agreed to increase the side yard set bags of properties adjacent to existing residential properties from five feet to 10 feet, so increasing those by by five feet. And then the developer has submitted a runoff management plan This it it was it was just provided to us, and it's currently under staff review, but we we haven't had the chance to go through and review that yet. So it's not included in the packet. We didn't we didn't we wanted to be able, you know, and have the chance to review that and and make sure it meets all the requirements we're looking for. So that I I don't know if you have anything to add, Tom, on updating that.

Just a little bit on the runoff management plan. That's basically just putting all everything that's in the design in the preliminary plat into a cont into a textual document just describing everything that was done. It it'll it didn't mention the land drain on the west end. It'll mention the pipe into the canal. It'll mention the fill material that's being placed. It's all been in the plan, but part of the requirement in in this was it the r two? Well, the office space, it requires a drainage plan. So I haven't had a chance to go through it in in-depth, but I'm anticipating that it's going to reflect what the designer, me, and and the owner have discussed and worked out in the plan that's that's been Mhmm. Approved by the planning commission.

Normally, two questions. The the the public comment earlier today, if you know from Jerry Wells about fire code. The setbacks between the two buildings, how do we buy our code then?

So the international residential code is the governing document there, and it does allow a setback from a buyer separation line, which is it's if there's no property line, you establish an imaginary one. If there is a property line, it it uses that property line, and it's five feet away from the property line. So it gives 10 feet between structures. And I mentioned that the six foot extension of the flames going six feet, I've actually seen that. When I lived in Blackhawk, there was a one of the garages caught fire. I believe they were six or eight feet. The first story structure caught fire, and it went up in the attic vent of the the main structures. They were able to extinguish it quickly. But back to your question, five foot setback does not violate any fire codes. If it is closer than five feet, there are ways to treat the walls to prevent that fire from or excuse me, not prevent it, but from to retarget from going from one unit to another by fire rating most. And then also when you get closer than five feet, you're limited on the amount of openings that you'd have. It'll be windows and beds and things. And then at three feet, you can't have any windows or vents. So

that ends your question there. Yeah. And and does the exterior does it have a little bit like side of the road?

Not really that Not in the fire separation distance. It's it's the five foot. When you get closer, it it you can still have those facades on there. You just have to treat the walls with the fire

the fire rate construction.

So the road width proposed and the development of the pre flat that is is 29 foot of asphalt. There's there's been a letter circulating statewide by the Fire Marshals Association. It's been signed by the Fire Chiefs Association, Fire Marshals Association, one other fire organization. This I believe it was this year or last year, the Home Builders Association went to the state legislature and says, we don't wanna build roads that are more than 25 foot of asphalt. The fire guys wanted 35 foot of asphalt or somewhere in that. They ended up saying, okay. We'll limit the amount of asphalt that any community through Ludmila can require up to 32 feet. That's the maximum that we can exact on asphalt for of the small local road. The fire marshals association in this letter want that to be the minimum that any community uses. So that becomes basically an absolute if if communities are gonna follow the recommendations from the fire chiefs and the fire fire marshals association. So that's not codified. The code says we no community can can require more than 32 foot of asphalt. We do have code in Nibley that allows 22 foot of asphalt that would allow two cars to pass. If someone's parked on one side, you would not be able to pass. You you'd have to move around. That's not unreasonable on a local road. Even having a 29 foot of asphalt, having parking on one side or the other or both, it it's pretty common to weave in and out in a local road. 300 South in Logan's a great example. If ever you've traveled West Of Main Street toward 600 West on 300 South, it's congested. There's parking on each side. And you you'd need to take your turn in when you try to manage, but I I'm not aware of any collisions or crashes or anybody getting hurt because of it. But what it does do is slow traffic down. When you have those that side friction, you you get slower traffic. People have to slow down because now you're you're having to pay pay attention on the side friction. I do know I drive that all the time. And I know during the winter, during parking restriction, speeds are way back up there at 35 miles an hour because you don't have that side friction from that parking. So there's benefits and disbenefits. The council can decide what what those are.

And may and maybe just to add to to both of those comments on the setbacks and the and the roadway widths, this isn't anything new. This is all if you look at any of the subdivisions that have recently been developed, they're anywhere between twenty two and twenty nine feet of asphalt if it's a local road. If it's collector, you know, a lot of times, they're 35 feet, if they're master plan Collector Street. But if if it's local, it's between twenty two and twenty nine, and that's what our standard cross section is. And as far as the setback goes, just just to point to, again, to examples, the all all of the RPD subdivisions that have gone in, the single family homes have the mirror of the setbacks that are that are in here. So if you look at Ridgeline Park or Firefly States or Nibley Meadows, they all have the same five foot setback, 15 foot in the rear, and 20 feet in the front. But so it's not new to the city, I would say. It is for this type of development, this zone. But you can look at examples around if you wanna kinda see what that looks like.

Yeah. Yeah. I think we include any structured chain

We're, like, missing a hurricane straps and the trust is the stabilizer. We need to name who was in the we needed to entrust us for a couple of things that we're gonna add in the work department. This doesn't include any. Right?

You see bids? So the two new bids were just for electrical and plumbing.

But there's an old not old, but a previous estimate on structural improvements.

There is a previous estimate. We didn't get more information on that. Right. And how much was that? That was about a $125,000 with both buildings.

Those are all things.

Two questions for staff. In the actual note agreement, there were some exhibits that are still blank, such as street trees, little descriptions,

things like that.

And I guess the stormwater, which you mentioned already. Just to address

are those still being worked on? Is that why they're putting the development agreement? I'm gonna say That's a great question. So I I can speak on the stormwater. I believe I added to the packet as stormwater exhibit both off-site stormwater piping and the development piping. And I even marked one up with some notes and things to clarify what lines were where, you know, what what the lines meant. Because it was I thought I was being helpful. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah. It's all. And then these exhibits, it might be an error on staff's part. It wasn't intentional. I think they were just referring to what the the approval of the preliminary plat by planning commission, those documents there. Am I correct on that?

Yeah. So just just so you know, the the development plans, that'll what would go there are the is the preliminary plat, which is in the packet and has been approved conditionally by by planning commission. The street tree cost, this is a placeholder. Currently, we we would have to run bids, and and so that that would be included, in here. In general, it's gonna be what what is it? Between 3 and $500 a tree or I mean, may maybe higher. We're getting higher than that. It it really just depends on what the cost of the tree is. We'll run the bids, and then it'll be the at the time that that that's required, that would be included or, you know, we would go up until, basically, we record this document. So we want it to be we kinda left it blank because we wanted to wait to run those bids. But the street tree design is boring code. That doesn't change. Right. Right. So street trees are required every 50 feet, and they have provided a street tree plan. So we already know where they're gonna go. This I guess, the cost here would be calculated based on those bids.

Okay. Yeah. That's helpful. The the recognizing of the plan. Yes. So that's good. And then the second question was after first reading

is it still staff's recommendation?

This is a third meeting.

Yes.

Yeah. Is it staff's rep can you repeat the question? Yes.

The first meeting, staff's recommendation was to approve. It was similar to the planning commission. After all the things we've found out, the addition of the commissions since first meeting, is it still staff's recommendation that you issue or concerns that being addressed on staff side?

With regard to the development design things, I the staff would recommend that. With all the ancillary items, the the accepting of the building in accordance with the development agreement, the cost to make those upgrades, that's that'd be a council decision. Yeah. Thank you. And,

you know, one of the recommendations I had was reducing the Watson combining that couple. Was that ever discussed from 70 to 65? Those ones with the side yards buying Watson?

So

so staff didn't discuss that specifically with the developer. Our understanding was that was a recommendation for the developer to consider. So, I mean, the the the developer is here if you wanna ask that directly. But

So there was a team who said your sent in, though. Yeah. Right. I think that was that by having 10 I don't know if there's a vinyl on that. Is you know, that's an option.

Maybe pull up the dialer. Yeah. We we thought we would concede, after hearing your concern, on specifically Lots 24 And 31, the the ones that are touching Heritage Crossing, that we would concede an additional five feet on anything that's touching the Heritage Crossing lots that's

above and beyond what COVID dictates. So so we can give the lots, but then just give people who have a side yard is what is what they want.

What what I heard from

concern citizens and and you and council person, that that you were concerned with the setback and that the homes may be too close. And so I went back to our team and found that we were able to exceed an additional five feet. They just put smaller houses on on the list. If you wanna change alongside, you can just Yep. Change alongside. We'll just we're just making our setbacks on the homes that will be built on those lots further from,

for example, you almost You you do want the whole narrative. Okay. There's Like I said, lots

24 through 31, 24 through 31.

Oh, so It'll be

so maybe that'll be different.

Twenty four

thirty one.

Oh, so the rear yard and not just the side yard in some cases because the rear the rear the rear yard

from 15 to 20. I mean Okay. That would be Yeah. So the rear yard setback, such as the existing heritage crossing crossing goes from 10 feet five feet in addition to what's for the The backyard setback. I'm sorry. The the rear yard setback is currently 10. 15. If you increase that to fifty Fifteen. And then

If if 15 it'll go to 20.

It's fifteen and twenty. And then the side yard setback on there's 24

and lots

Thirty and thirty one? Correct.

Go to ten ten to the five.

But they still save it everywhere else? Correct.

So they will go taller and get the same house, or you're just gonna just adjust on the lot? They'll they'll need to the

the homeowner will have to work within the confines of the grid of those setbacks just like you would on any other lot.

So those are 5,000 square foot lots. Yeah. Probably nobody's gonna build a 4,500

square foot house that Yeah. In a you can't afford that. You know? Wow.

It means they have to move the house away while climbing. But it's still a twelve, thirteen hundred square foot house on a 5,000 square foot lawn. It's even

with bigger settings.

Per level. So they can go to two level. I'm just the one that you see some of those that are just really narrow and taller for me.

I don't It does get more tight. It does it does get more tight when you have those increased setbacks. But if it's a smaller house, you can make it fit. I mean, we don't allow basements. You see you see what's built in Ridgeline Park. Other than in the 55 and over area, most of those are one story bungalows. We're mostly seeing two stories. I mean, that's just kinda what the market, I think, is looking for so you can get, you know, three, four bedrooms instead of a two bedroom house. And we allow that and we allow forty forty feet in height in all pretty much all residential zones. So And

and then we we did the math on this. This, can hold to 70 per code and everything else. We're not pushing numbers.

Yeah. That was all that was all we didn't present all of those numbers to council because the planning commission reviewed those numbers with the preliminary plat. But, yes, that that was all provided by the developer and and calculated. And it it's exactly 70, but not not more. They fit what they what the code allows.

Yeah. Yes.

Northeast Barn. Are all installs then being removed because the road looks like you did almost hit that Northeast Barn. It's supposed to be seen. Now are all the stalls going away again? Because the way it maps out, right, little at least half of those have got to go where the road is coming up.

Yeah. So, structurally, it'd be easier to just to sever all those stalls from the existing buildings. So I believe that was the plan. K.

I've had you know what?

I spent so much time on this,

and I talked to Roxy. I love Roxy. And she's she's quite the optimist because, you know, I have a lot of you know, we wanna do a week when therapy with this and different things. There's there's 24 horse stalls alone and just a big building. And the six and a half acres, I mean, putting experience with horses, it's not a space. And if you have an install, you have to exercise a baby. Where are you gonna put that? Roxie has some ideas for that. Obviously, you know, most of those would not be reimbursements because this property actually isn't big enough to accommodate that many years. So I guess my question is, you know, I mean, I asked Rocks if they had a plan. They talked about a couple different plans. There's really, honestly, a different plan. You don't really know what this what that would cost, and we have OpenSpace. You saw that I'm already kind of on this efficiency thing with open space, you know, when I asked Ron to do. Because are we getting you open space that's usable and of value to the community? And this is what and we want this to be worse property or anything else. Let's have them get big enough. And I'll I'll I'll be the first to admit. When when we amended the code, you know, we didn't know what things were gonna look like. I think we're all looking for a little more creativity, variety, and lot sizes. And, you know, honestly, the well we envisioned, I don't feel like this needs that. But what we and that's what I mean, we welcome code. You know? But this is a legislative and not administrative decision. And Vinnie has been pretty clear out. Most people fill it out this. I feel like, I mean, we need to make some additional tweaks, to decode because, I mean, for what this property could or shouldn't be with the horses, the only he's big enough. And that my my bosses are a huge horse guy. He has 17 horses and rides every day. And, I mean, he's he's got three millimeters, and he thinks he still needs to ring one. And I mean, granted, he pastures some of those. They're not all installs. So I just wonder if the benefit we wanna do is to make a little bit more to and the additional four channels could be put in here. I mean, if we put a, which one here limits that substantially, does it really help us accomplish the goal that we were looking for and making enough usable agricultural space that often the citizens in Italy and the kids that wanna get four h, they don't live in those places where they can get four h because they don't have a big enough I mean, this may I don't know. This get this gets us there based on the size.

Thank you, Garrett. I'm gonna jump in here and try to focus the council on the agenda item. And I think it's fine that we're talking about two feeds at once. Normally, I think that's a bad idea. And it seems like these are all wrapped up into one another, but there are really two separate actions for the council to consider. One is this development agreement and the dedication of open space and the conservation or open space subdivision, the plat. That's really the second decision. The first decision is the rezone request from r two to r two a. So with that in mind, can you pull up Natalie's zoning map, please, with in this area? Yeah. Just give me a second. I know it's catching up. Or

It'll just take me a second. You got an old PUD

to the west. You got an archway to the north.

You got an archway to the east. I'll let you make my point if you'd like. And you got it. You you know where I'm going. Right? Happy, everyone. Okay. So point out point out what are you talking about? It's the yellow there, the R 2. All of that room stuff is R 2 A. So I I'm not sure that we can say that R 2 A doesn't belong in this part of town. Did you manage it? No. Wait. This is not a public hearing. I'm still talking. So all of that Stone Bridge is in R2A. The Hidden Valley Or Highway Estates is R2. That's correct. The stuff on the right hand side is R 2 A. There's an open space subdivision South Of 3200 South. The Maple Valley, it says R 2, but in fact, that was done as a neighborhood nonprofit with special consideration for higher zoning, higher density zoning, there are less than point three acre lots throughout that subdivision. Right? R 2 A is an average of one third acre lots. So to me, that R 2 A, I'm focusing I'm not talking about I'm not talking about the conservation subdivision. I'm talking about does R 2 A fit this part of town? And in fact, many of the people that spoke tonight live in R 2 A. Yeah. When they say, so for agency in R 2 A, I'll look it up. There's a lot of R 2 A in that part of town. So one point I'm making. So that's the thing I would like the council to focus on. Now, you know, we the the next thing will be, is this a good open space subdivision? This has accomplished the goals of preserving open spaces, usable open spaces, and burden on the community, and so on and so forth. But, you know, include Maple Valley as not R 2, it's R 2 A or less because of the nonprofit PUD plan unit development Mhmm. And stuff with the hash. And you guys tell me, does R 2 a belong in this bar account? Yeah.

K. That's my point. Yeah. No. I I I appreciate the focus back on the the reason. Because the reason that was the initial proposal years ago. Right? And one of the concerns, I, as a citizen, came to hunting and zoning, said, was this this area lacks open space that is not attention walls. I remember saying I remember saying this and suggesting that planning is gonna consider and that the developer consider looking at something that is not what we would call cookie cutter box where you just get all housing in there. And when I brought those things up, there was concerns from both planning and zoning after their recognition, but, initially, they did. City council then also discussed it and eventually rezoned this area to R 2

as an incentive

to try and open space up there because of we've had courses there. We've had all this kind of stuff. You know? Can we work in our field there? That was discussed, and and we we looked at different things. Right? But it's been a long process, and I I I appreciate Josh and his group for being transparent in the application and can and including the plat because I think it's easier to to say yes to things. But we are the reason it's kind of mixed up. We we make these decisions to to incentivize and open space. And, unfortunately, data takes longer because you're negotiating two things at once, like you said. I think R 2 belongs here because we've put it here already. However, as noted, we have changed our OpenSpace subdivision to significantly reduce all sizes and therefore increase density. So our future land use map zones that area as what we call medium density. All of that area, including the one in question and those that you put in the surrounding. And if I pardon me if I'm wrong. But currently, the highest base zone density that Nibley allows is seven units per acre without any having the additional subdivisions or anything like that. Is that accurate?

The RM is 10. 10. Yeah. Without without any

bonuses or TDR or anything. Yeah. And it would be

Point five. Point five over here.

And so 10 of our highest

is seven medium is something that I've been asking. Mister, are we following our teacher when Andy is? Can I because it turns out to be less than per developable?

It's it's more like 4.5 per developable. And gross, it's about 3.5. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. So, Mayor, if we build this R 2 A and then we discuss the other one, then we don't want it quite as dense. Yeah. Entitled. What's the reason? R 2 A is entitled to that?

Could I sorry. Could I correct you a little bit on that, Amir? The open space subdivision is an administrative decision. What is legislative are certain items within the development agreement, including taking on that open space. If they check all the boxes and they're not dedicating any open space to the city, the way it's structured now in the code is they could administratively, just through planning commission approval, get approval for the Open Space Subdivision.

How many lots would that

would that still be Yeah. It's the same same amount of lot, same calculation there. But let's say this was private instead of the city. They could theoretically go to go to the planning commission and and propose that. We the only other provision in this code that triggered it coming to council is we added a provision to treat this as an agricultural lot so that they could have large animals on there. There's other avenues to get there as well, but we felt like this was kind of the cleanest to know which know what you're getting. The the real reason this is the development agreement is in front of the council is for that dedication of open space.

So if we put this r two, and then the next developer even have a big list, and he says, I don't wanna do that list. We're gonna keep it private HOA, then he can do that.

He could if he checks all the boxes because it is it is an administrative approval. It's it's not a rezone. It's I mean, the the zone's there. It's you get a bonus density if you check these these boxes. If the planning commission finds that they are the approval authority unless unless it the council and unless you're dedicating open space to the city, or or there's other exceptions to the code.

Josh, go ahead. Yeah. And that's exactly why, Norman, that I I wanted to run all of these processes parallel so you know exactly what I'm intentions were.

So here's my advice in terms of separating these variables. Right? And and I'm I'm encouraging to you to think about the zoning first. That's usually how we do things, and you look and see how it fits and so on and so forth. But when we start talking about open space subdivision, and I can't wait till we get to that discussion, Nathan already talked about how we got here, how we're trying to conserve open space and duplicity because when we moved here, whether it was a year ago or thirty five years ago, we all saw open spaces. So we should we should preserve that. We should hold on to the character of Nible City. We should preserve open space. Well, one way to do that is to go buy it. That's one darn good way to conserve it, whether it's private or public. We can't be we can't afford to do that as a city, so we try to come up with these ideas of clustering lots into smaller units and then take on open space around that. Now what I heard I mean, you can go back and look at the comments, look at the comments, look at the comments. What I heard was 5,000 square feet is not a big enough lot. And so we have never done a conservation subdivision at R 2 A. This is a new thing. Right? And I'm trying to figure out the scale where conservation subdivisions work. I know they work. I have seen them work. I have I have not seen one in R 2 K. And so if I'm not sure if I'm gonna be voting on this or not. I'm separating the r two to r two a decision into one thing, and then I'm saying what I really heard was strong opposition to 5,000 square foot lots. And if they're gonna develop the way we developed, that's fine. And put 40 houses there, it's a 40% bonus. It's it's 20 the difference is 20. Put 50 houses there. Lay them out without open space, and then it's our two eighty like the other stuff, but get rid of what I heard was the biggest opposition of 5,000 square foot lots. Maybe we went too far with a bunch of basins that are basins on R 2 A. Maybe maybe we give up on OpenSpace. I mean, people say they want it, but there's a cost. Right? The idea of clustering, I think, is a great idea. I can show you a lot of places in town where it doesn't work. Maybe it doesn't work on R 2 A. Listen. But you can't, frankly, you can't tell me that R 2 doesn't R 2 A doesn't work there. This it's all around there. Maybe the open space doesn't work there,

but it sure looks like r two a works there.

That's that's my opinion. I've done that on a whim.

That was the fact that I was saying is it's our fault. We don't code and but it doesn't do what we wanted. And so we just wanna change the code. My only issue with this is I know there's a set map, but we've muddied him so much that I have proven our to bring your net in essence, saying yes to this subdivision as it is presented. Because he has the right to as soon as the torch pick, he can do that.

Whether he dedicates open space to the city or not, he can do it. We cannot stop that. It's a ministry. No. If he didn't need to open space to the city, we can deny that path. That part. Right? We wrote a code to allow conservation seven bedrooms, 5,000 square foot blocks in our two bedroom site. And that that proposal didn't report without mitigation, building space. Now I know this council looked at houses on 5,000 square foot plots. And so it it's not like long discussion.

Sorry? Yeah. We there was a long discussion with with photos and images and

Yes. We could be, like, our PADs or a deal percentage.

Yeah. That's where we have to fix the. So Okay. How

about most things? Tom, well and and I'm not second guessing what the developer might want or might not want, but his original proposal to its council was zone meter or two a. We said, wait. That doesn't give us any open space. We're supposed to be preserving open space. We like non space subdivisions. We're not gonna give you because we didn't have constellations subdivisions in r two a. And so I'm not thinking for the proponents by any means. The opponent might be the proponent, since that's what he's originally proposed, it might be insane to him to go back to a standard r two a sub base and not masking bulges.

Nathan? Yeah. So so my my initial concern with the original proposal years ago has not been alleviated, and And I think that's what I was getting. It's not anyone's fault. It's just the nature of where we're at at this point, which is we got the same size of loss from. Now we just have more of them, and we get a potential liability or asset in open space. We have choices. So that then that's the convolution. So, you know, I I you don't have to answer, but I I reached out. So we we will have to mix in the diversity of lots of it. This is gonna take us longer. But it's us kicking us down the road because that helps us decide. Because we lost the authority to approve that.

Right. That's the other thing. The income legislation.

So we are giving away

regarding the concern post planning and zoning approval of the flat back to I mean, we're giving it back to the planning. Right? So that that's just a question I have with you.

Yeah. I mean, here's my answer. I like, going back to 2023 Yeah. I've listened to everything that this body has wanted and what the neighbors have wanted and what staff has recommended. And I hope that you can see that we've been thoughtful and we haven't been cavalier and for us to bring you something. They are smaller and they're they are there are much more of them, and there's not a diversity of size like you say. But what we did was we listened. I mean, you were very helpful in even bringing the Morgan Farms idea. You know, that wasn't mine. And, you know, the lot size, they're just going by code. I'm not asking for variances. I'm not doing anything outside of what a normal landowner would be able to do. So and on top of that, Nathan and the real estate, now even more than $20.23, these are needed. You know? Like, I'm I'm a cash out of native. I I played baseball out on the park. Before there was anything out, I broke these two teeth, sliding in the home base. So, you know, I I remember and I empathize with the growth because I feel it too. But, you know, our parents are getting older. They need smaller houses. Our kids are getting older, and we want our families to stick around here. These smaller lots, there's a need for them, and we're gonna make a great subdivision over there. I know it looks maybe overwhelming to some people when they look at it, but I think it's going to be a feather in the cap for Midland City. And I think where we find it over there is going to serve us a whole group of young people that that are interested in that and not able to do extra particulars like anyway, that's I guess, my answer is no. I wouldn't wanna reduce. Yeah. Totally. Yeah. There you go.

A lack of of accepting the R 2 a would keep it over two where an open space subdivision, as was mentioned, by public comment, is still labeled. I believe the size of that would be at 9,000 with the same density values square feet.

Yeah. The small 7,800, I believe the average is more, like, 88 8,400 or something.

Also, I don't know if we're going to get to this point without the d VA, but we're also willing to provide all of the outbuildings, the barns, with all of the outright reviews and the electrical and the plumbing up to code. So that's not something hopefully, you got that message. Someone got that message, but that's not something that we're looking at putting on the backs of the new new citizens.

Yeah.

I'll make a motion to deny ordinance twenty five twenty six, resolving to RFA and keeping it at r two.

May I have motion and second to deny the rezone and leave that parcel at r two? Discussion on those.

I

I don't know.

It's to to to build that, like I said, that's a lot of lot of money, and I could see the benefit, but just those side laws. I I'm struggling to get over out. Now I appreciate you giving us ten ten feet, but I was hoping to see five less lots

myself. But

And just to make make some of the lots bigger, is that

Well, that's what they're that's what everybody's asking. Just variance and and sizing so we can have a couple more variety and and the buffer between the two. We can have those I know there's value there, but I I don't know. I I walked through the bar if I didn't mind trespassing. I walked through a couple times and it's like, I I could see it. I I sent pictures of these. We were in Iowa and had the little kids seeing land. So I I could see the advantage of it, but what at what cost is is it keeping?

Yeah. Yeah. So we have we have a recent history of wanting to preserve open space. We also have a pretty good job of buffering. And this this reminded me very much of some of the early RTD slide fire questions, and we were very mindful in in negotiating. People aren't happy still of creating buffers between existing presidents. And I think that this is just more of a surprise than what we worked on two years ago. Right? It's very different because we changed our care, and we allowed it to go ahead. And so I think that's that's the thing. Like, we we we feel obligated to listen to the residents in the area. We also feel obligated to do the best thing for the city. We should also respect landowner rights and. I think we think that our code, you know, and and your proposal has proved that to us. And the citizens commenting have given us that to think about. And so I think if if there was some variety in there, like I said, especially along where there are already and it it's tough because we actually go around all the existing structures, which kind of dictated where the process went, right, which was up against everyone else. But I think that if there was willingness to do some variety of sizes to creating in a tiny bit of buffer, you would see a lot more willingness. So you still get, like you said, 60 or so. I think 70 of these sizes because we've never seen it. It it's our service. Yeah. So I mean, it's been a long time, and we've we've been been through the process with it. And and I'm also one that can demand feed. It's it's it's my work because of different things. I'm not so low in structures, but me being willing to pay the data. If that changes because of lot sizes, we'd wanna know that too. But if you change lot sizes and it helps them, less willing to fix your structures, that'd be useful for us to know too. But that's essentially what I meant to motion is is I think the ours us trying to put open space in an RWA is new. And because there's not a buffer, there's concern. And variety. Buffering.

Please speak. Sorry.

I what John was saying, I'm a big fan of trying to buy options in our city for, young people who are trying to buy homes. I think that this goes a long ways, and maybe people are making it too far. I think it's supposed to be a long ways towards providing extra lots in our city that are gonna be more affordable because of their. Just thinking about buying my personal and how much I pay versus how much it costs. Same home today is is crazy to me. I so yeah. So I think I think Amy makes a great point about maybe having some diversity, especially where it bumpens up against other existing homes. But in my opinion, I like a lot of times. I think they're great. I realize that my backyard is not. I can't forget. If my back character did that, but again, then I watched the thing that I'd still do in favor of them because I'm honest in my city, but I know that not everyone feels like they've heard that multiple days. So it is a balancing act between listening to what I'm hearing, wanting to represent that, and also doing what I think is best for the city. In my opinion, I think these lot sizes are good, and I like them. It would be great to see a little bit of extra diversity, especially where some of these lot of, again, existing homes, but I like the loss of

this. Can you speak to me a little bit about

I'm just trying to also comprehend because in my last time, this got rejected and was trying to go from r two to r two a. I just wanna really understand this. And you said, well, it probably shouldn't be r two a. And I heard that over and over and over again just like the mayor just said. You know, it's it seems dangerously close to spot because I mean, if we don't have or we're not getting into it. It it be interesting to know what legal experts would think, but I I just I still don't really understand how you it can be justified not to be RQA when it's surrounded by RQA.

Yeah. I I'll I'll I'll turn it back. It's it's it's that you're doing like I said, I'm glad you did it in conjunction. So we know what we're getting. But because you're doing an open space, so it's it's a different layout than what those are two ways. Right? It's o it's an RWA with a multiplied density. And that's that's so your lots are small. Right? So that RWA with an open space subdivision would look different than what the number two a looked like ten years ago. Right. But you wanted the open space. Correct. I'm going to consider the open space and the diversity of loss as it's

So, Nayan, where if your motion carries this this arc too, What do you hope happens to that land?

It could still be open space. My my preference would be a diversity of all sizes. If we don't get those, you know, with some buffer, I am just hesitant to pass an r two a and not have control over what the resound space. So I could I do a conditional r two a with standard. That'll also be in when I can note if I said it. Okay.

To be clear, that's that's okay. Look. Let's do what's already in the area. Let's do an additional r two a, your original proposal way back when. Not that I've been working on your proposal with you. But that was your original proposal. Let's do r two a. So you're saying Yeah. That's an option. An option. R two a, no 5,000 square foot blocks, same size blocks that there are, not in Hidden Valley or Hidden Hideaway Hideaway, but similar zoning density to every to to Olive Brown and and also the BUD that's maple above.

Those are the two motions that are considered. So for for the reason.

Right.

Yeah. And it was right when the reason

And you ran again.

Let's not go there. But, you know, I haven't given up on the idea that conservation no. I think subdivisions work. And and one of the one of the beauties of the original conservation subdivision, I've rewritten it a number of times, was the beauties for us and the problem for the developer was it was a negotiation. And that's because the number one reason that we should ever do a conservation open space and the very first step we should take is identify what's unique about that property that people find as a community benefit. And so that's why, as problematic as it is, conservation, open space subdivisions are a negotiating process when done best even though it's paid. Because what I find of value might be a stand of cottonwood trees where birds live, and what other people find of value might be completely different. And so that's when the council has a negotiator on behalf of the community says, this is what we value. This is what we wanna conserve. This is what we wanna keep open. That makes it

a a a a a let's make a deal process.

And so, you know, the fact that it's gone to a administrative approval, we lose that negotiation. And the fact that we went to R 2 A with Cox Mason Subdivisions, at least the one we've actually seen, there's a lot of problems in terms of mitigating the the perceived impact to the people that are already doing there.

Yeah. I mean, when we wrote the code, I agree. Obviously, some of the agents work, and there's a number of them that I really like. And he amended the code, and then he showed us what worst case scenario looks like with the code. Now someone has to fix it because it's not exactly what we want. There is a place to find out a quarter for bots. I have a problem with this size. And problem set of the album, but my problem with this is the open space. Because there's a lot of money that's needed, which I'm grateful to Josh. He's willing to fix up the bill gauge and stuff. It won't even be used for its full intent and purpose, only being six navigators. Yeah. Well And so but that's yeah. I know it's a separate matter.

Just in the idea of moving the discussion along, Maybe there's a a motion out there that says rezone to r two a contingent upon a standard r two a subdivision.

to do the math or confirm The guy was waiting to see if there was a willingness to do a diversity of lots with as presented. But I still think in r two, I don't know how much land they could then be willing to give up, Can you get smaller lots in there and still have open space subdivision, possibly one barn or just maybe a pasture? I don't know. I'm essentially saying that passing what I've proposed is a invitation to start over with the developer to a degree. I don't wanna do that. I would rather see a diversity of loss sizes and some other changes to what we've gotten. But I'm also understand sometimes the things that work better work. I agree this law says it's fine. So there's a couple of motion we could make. I just don't have to make this one

because it's the one that I understood the most and had to control.

May I ask who's the second was on that last motion?

Online? Garrett. Garrett. I didn't make the motion.

Oh, I know. But we don't want to deny the There is a motion to deny the resale. Oh, got that. So let's get it. Yeah. What do you think?

I think if you're gonna preserve the open space in that, you need to maybe look in. I think we either go with this one or just to

I'm loving it to not just being Ag. Put another product part or some other I mean, I'm not

that's what the proposal I have now. Do your proposal to keep that r two, you're saying? Yeah. And you're saying with our fleet, it would still be on big shirt with a different sized open space Correct. Which could be a bottom part. We've already discussed the parallel. Correct. And you're okay with that,

honestly? Yeah.

It's been 70 lots all the same size

for that anymore.

Sorry. You're saying it could be a 50 law subdivision with the R 2 within open space. No. R 2 A. Yeah. No idea. R 2 a. R two a standard. We we said that they received Thirty fifty law from now open space. Correct. And still backyard.

We'll give you a motion for RTOA standard.

R 2 a stand R 2 A would be consulted. You said that. The condition

The rezone to R 2 A with a condition that'll be done as a standard R 2 a subdivision.

Which limits the property owner out? I'm just carrying out this bill 51 of You're saying but can I not do open space in there to correct any owner? Why why is that? I don't think it's not. Because it's attached to the motion. I know. What what's the purpose that it's attached to the motion? Basically.

Maybe we're just gonna need all the small blocks of data. I think it's the same as what we're seeing is that. That's what we're asking if we can renegotiate. Yeah. I'm saying those could be

anyone that has r two a zoning, have open space, and the higher density.

Let's let's see if we have a second. Second. You know, motion was part two, a standard contingent upon standards. And there's no second. So as

k. So that tells me we won't open the space in this area.

We don't have open space until we have to give up something to get it Correct. Like, 5,000 square foot lots. We cannot the fifth amendment of the US constitution does not allow the US government not only can you plead the fifth because you don't have to testify or against yourself. The US constitution said the government cannot take away your property or your property rights without just compensation. Now what is just compensation? There's a whole process of zoning and there's winners and losers in zoning. Not everyone gets the same zoning and so on and so forth. But even I can probably look at a map and say, R 2 A seems to be what's going on there. That seems reasonable. And I think that what we in talking to residents, I think we don't all, not that we're right, not that I'm right, have the same definition of open space. I mean, I talked to people that said 5,000 square foot lots is not open space. I mean, to them, open space means room in their backyard, more than 5,000 square feet of room in their backyard. It's not that there's no room in their backyard for a 5,000 square foot lot. But they say open space is in my backyard. And that's not how we have viewed open space. We said open space is what is called value to the community, direct value to the community, not direct value to the individual. Even if it's just looking at them. Even if it's just to look at the animal or to look at the trees or to look at whatever Yeah. Of you scared.

I would love

to sit down and try to come up with concepts thinking about her. I feel like I've worked with you so much, Nathan, and given you and given you and given you. So I I mean, I don't feel like what I'm proposing is one iota unreasonable. Everything's within code. Everything's what you asked for. So I like, to ask for to to for some odd reason, I don't know why I'm special that I shouldn't be able to work with encode.

Yeah. We we still need to we could just change. Well, the code is what it is now. It is what it is now. Yeah. I mean, I I can't act

any other way other than what it is right now. So I I guess, I mean, I don't know. That's good. And I'm trying not to be unreasonable. I'm like, normally you said, this is what my concerns were. The the neighbor have concerns. I address those. Yeah. You know? Garrett, you have concerns about the costs. I address those. R two a, like the mayor's saying, it's I mean, I think a quote would say that's spot zoning, but that's not r two a. You know, especially with the comments last time that we're not gonna give you r two a because we want open space. And if we give you r two a, we're not gonna get open space. You know? I I I don't think the group's being fairly creative.

So to provide the council, the motion on the table is denied the rezone from a request from r two to r two. Right?

I mean, I would love

to either do it now

or continue to determine what that does for the property owner and what rights do exist open space wise. I'm looking it up right now, but knowing, like, the amount of land and just doing something kinda quick. If it stays r two a and you still decide to do an open space subdivision similar, what's there? So

and that's the only reason I would stays r two if it stays r two

and then we'll choose to do You can do a back of the envelope log calculation. Right? I mean Yeah. We just I I will I will say that that was that was all considered the last the last time that this was brought forward. And the developer said, no. That doesn't work for me. But, financially, it, you know, it just doesn't pencil. I don't know if that's changed, but that was all looked at. How many lots are gonna fit in here? It's it's it's about the same. So you get about the same amount of lots, which is why there's no incentive if you have an R 2 A if in an R 2 open space subdivision as you do in an R 2 A subdivision. The difference is the the difference is you get the open space and you get smaller those smaller lot sizes. It's very similar. Like, the math works out. And and so an an r two a standard subdivision or an r two open space subdivision, number of lots, it's a wash. Like, we did that math, and that's and that's what led us to this change in the ordinance of, look, there's no economic incentive for a developer to do an open space subdivision in R 2 A. It is allowed by code, but there's no reason to do it because they could just build it out with the exact same number of lots.

We didn't change r two sizes when we changed an ad or two ad.

We no. We didn't change the size. We did make some adjustments to setbacks and some different things in there to be and I was learning from some past experience where there the setbacks, in some cases, were restrictive enough that we that it was difficult to fit the footprint of the home. So we've relaxed those depending on the lot sizes. But, no, they're they're essentially the same as they were before. The main thing that happened with that with that code change that the council passed was the r two a and and allowing r two a, but getting it to a level where there would be some economic incentive to do it.

So what I mean is if a we still have a point four multiplier.

Your average needs to be 9,200,

and your minimum would be 7,800.

Okay. Yeah. I guess that was off on 8,400. Right.

$4.03.

Right.

Right. And that that's about the same as what it was before we changed the code. Actually, that is the same. What what changes the setbacks, yeah, a little bit. I think we went from 10 to eight feet, for example.

I have a question. Please. If it's dated process, it does not pass.

It failed already. No second. No. No. And It was Hayden. Sorry. It's still.

So his problem is he's done a pass.

The reason is denied. That's the end of it. He stays there too. That's the end of

it. If it does not pass Okay.

He wants to do not set up a motion.

Yes. But that's take a different motion. We're gonna take a different motion. Okay.

I did this. Okay. So is there any opposition going on the motion? The motion before you is to deny the retail act from r two to r two a. Any opposition? Therefore, we shall vote. This is second reading, so this is a call and roll, please.

Council member Wilson, addition. Council member Council member Mann, Mayor Jenkins there.

There's not an R 2 a open space subdivision in there. So I'm going to vote in favor of the motion to deny in hopes that that this bores into an R 2 a standard subdivision. My vote is the motion in favor to deny the lease off.

I'm not I'm not I'll just be good enough to Yeah. Figuring out what makes you guys tick the but I appreciate everybody's consideration.

So the motion to the proposal to resound student. Next on the agenda, we can do this for the motion to approve the development agreement that cannot exist. Fifty twenty three. No. Just deny it.

Okay.

Yeah. My bad. Okay.

Thank you.

I I'm good at turning off the sound. I always forget to turn it back on. Alright. So so that's that's what's being proposed. So there's some shift in in there are areas that currently have conservation easement that that through this proposal wouldn't. You can see that previous conservation easement boundary, but there's, there's much there's more area that would be added, if if this were proposed. So there's additional conservation space if this is approved overall.

Let's see here.

So this was, provided by the applicant, and this is this is required, by the way, Just as additional background, this is required by the open space subdivision code, the sensitive areas designation plan map. They they do show some areas of a tree stand, perennial stream in the area. And let's see here. So spring to the south. So you can kinda see the that sensory designation map, and they they show the difference of be of how that relates to the the proposal in front of you versus what was, you know, originally improved in that subdivision. Just a little context. The this this slide, this really was considered by the planning commission. And and I just wanted to point out the open space. It was found that it does comply with three of the design standards for open space. So significant areas of natural landscape, contiguous land, and agricultural land. The the open space is proposed to be private, maintained with the garden, perennial stream, wetland, and pond is what the has put on there. So this really is the reason this is in front of you tonight is in order to approve this modification, it would require the council through development agreement to grant a a couple of exceptions to the city code. One of those is, allowing the modification to Lot 35, adjusting the boundary of the easement. The the current, open space subdivision code does not allow subdivision of conservation, areas. And in consulting with the the attorney, what is being proposed, technically, this is considered as a subdivision. There's it's included as part of the subdivision changing those conservation boundaries. So it would be granting an exception to that, provision of of the code. The second one is it would. Oh, it would allow the creation of a flag lot within the open space subdivision code. It requires all lots to meet minimum frontage widths and flag lots do do not do that. So, these two exceptions are included in the in the development agreement and really are the reason this is in front of you tonight and not not just something that the planning commission could approve. Both staff's and planning commission's recommendation is approval of this this ordinance, this development agreement for the Apple Creek subdivision. As I mentioned before, the planning commission already approved the preliminary plat, subject to approval of this, development agreement. That is all that I have. I the applicants here too if you want additional context on this on this application, but that's a summary of of what's in front of you tonight.

Thank you, Scott. Cancel the end of question. Delete

the purple.

This is here on first reading, So you can help me guide the discussion based on the other motions for first or wait first only or wait for second.

Anything else, Aaron? Thank you. Where's your two approved for first year day?

We have a motion from Nathan, and a second from Norm to approve for first grade.

part of the proposal, I'll go back to the plat, is to so if you look on the south end of the property this isn't my pointer isn't working. But if you look on the south end of the property, the the hashed area, that's the applicant's proposing to dedicate that as an easement for a pedestrian trail or pedestrian easement. If you can look, kind of there's a dashed area that bisects that diagonally. That's what's currently recorded on the property, and that's what current that's what was approved as part of the Apple Creek subdivision. There was there's a triangular piece that basically started at 20 feet over by four fifty west and and dissipated down to zero on the West side. So that's what that's what was originally approved, and the applicant has offered some additional pedestrian easement, which would allow if the city chose, you know, to to put a trail completely on that property along that section and tie it into the Mount Vista area rather than, you know, having to work with that adjacent property owner. I mean, he's putting the trail in. Right? No. Putting the trail in. Just just increasing the easement is what is what is being proposed. Yeah. Why not?

Well,

it was a it wasn't originally approved it wasn't originally required as part of the Apple Creek subdivision. This is only a two lot subdivision. I think to require a trail for one additional lot is probably getting a little shaky on on exactions. So it if it were required as part of the original subdivision, that would be different. But this and they I'm not an attorney, so I I don't wanna talk too much out of term here. But get getting some some easement, that's that's reasonable exaction. But putting the trail in, I mean, that's that's an additional cost to be able.

Yeah.

And this is why wasn't the trail put in with the other we don't require trust within division. That

I that was before I was here. I I don't know if that code was in place at the time that Apple Creek was

I don't know if was there.

Yeah. I know that's what we require now, but I don't

So so my Yeah. My my message doesn't update to our new standards then? I guess where I'm going.

Well, that's

Sean, do you have something to offer? You you and I, I think, are the only ones that were there. Larry's there. Oh, you weren't there? I was there. I guess I I can't lie. I was there. Is

it now working? You can. Yeah. We got another one of it now. Okay.

This is why I had it standing with the deal. Sorry. My recollection is that at the time we did this trail coming out of the subdivision

to where the subdivision would require.

There were some additional trail meetings that I had to give to the city, but similar to the conversation that was for the discussion that that happened earlier, that's the reason why that's an easement and not a win because the city didn't I can I can put whatever easements on the property? You wanna put them in easement.

Right? But I'm looking at

I can't force somebody to accept the right indication. And so I wanted more credits and practice through this. And when the mayor mentioned this in the council, they don't really want it, but I said, I didn't. And at the time, Mount Vista did not come in, so there was no there was no connection through there. There was no vision for what was gonna happen. It's it's just kinda lucky that that that Mount Vista Trail happens to terminate. Yeah. That's the way I Right. It was it was good to have the

but

a little early to lay down asphalt. Because we didn't know what would happen to itself.

But to your point, Norm, it probably wouldn't hurt to put in the development agreement. Even though I mentioned I think that's shaky ground on if that's a reasonable deduction for a trail. To be clear on what's being proposed, it would it would probably make sense that we could do that. I mean, if you're doing this first reading to put a provision in there that explicitly states that that's not a requirement to actually build the trail, but just to put the easement in and dedicate that easement. We could we could do that if you want that to be a clear

I don't know if you It's actually

cost Or or if you want the trail built, then put that in there. That I mean, I think the city had a rough estimate because we had it in the budget for a while, and it didn't it didn't go through. And part of the reason is this this easement.

K. 100 and 100 and

Yeah. I know we had budgeted a 100 and something thousand, like, four or five years ago. That's Well, I I think that was intended to cover the whole length of Apple Creek. I don't know if it was enough, though. Like, I don't know if we did a good estimate of what that is. I just remember there it was in the budget at at that time.

Yeah. Go ahead. So so as far as technical stuff, you say that's this guy. Mhmm. As far as history and and motivation, that's that's me. And I will tell you that this was I can't remember if this is the second or the third transformation of the vision that was done in the way. But a lot of what I'm trying to do here is really you know, again, it goes back to your conversation earlier today about pocket parts and what happens once that gets dedicated. Well, that happens from the private side as well as from the public side. And at the time that this was flattened, the the open space is laid out to get approval or proceeding with design on subdivision before the subdivision gets designed. And so so the the open space is actually allocated and set aside where there's really a lot of information about other than just walking the side about what exactly the particular things are that we want. And what we found once it was actually done was that some of the stuff that we wanted to preserve was not in open space, and some of the stuff that wasn't really critical to preserve wasn't in open space. So part of this was to clean that up. And another part of it was is I watched how the state subdivisions developed. One thing that I noticed was that my idea of what open space was and how that open space should be developed wasn't consistent with homeowners, I guess, who bought open space or there wasn't a clear boundary between what was their property that they can do stuff on that wasn't attached to the open space provisions And what was their property that they couldn't use stuff on that was covered by the open space provisions? And so another part of this was just cleaning that up and making sure that whoever ends up with Lot 36 and Lot 37 I mean, I know my intentions are my intentions are hot. But I'm gonna be there for, you know, if I'm if I die there, I'll be there for the person that happens to it. And And then what does the next person do? So it's it's kinda the two way to score because I'm I'm talking to them saying, hey. Let's let's go back in and and resubmit the open space. I'm not supposed to resubmit so we can better protect the open space. That's really the intention is to is to protect the house and we purchased this because it was a spot that was important to our family and to our kids. And then we wanted to see continue this and all of us now. And I just wasn't I didn't feel like I was meeting with super of it than it was because we had all these places where somebody could go in. They There just need random spots because of the way that the subdivision ultimately laid out where people can put stuff that was in compliance with city ordinance, but that would you know, I think is the best word I can come up with. When you when you look at the way that some of those lines ended up on there, it's it's really almost random in terms of where you can build and where you can't build on the current Lot 35. And so by doing this, we did clarify that, yeah, you can build in that section where Lot 36 is. And, yeah, you can build in that section where Lot 37 is. We really wanted to tie those down and say, these are these are exact boundaries where that development should be happening. And outside of that, that means to that means to be reserved. And as far as the you know, I I'd be willing to have a discussion about the trail. The problem is that City standards for what constitutes a trail are pretty heavy. And to put in you know, I'm offering 10 feet of rider loading that's not required by either the subdivision of the ordinance currently or the subdivision ordinance at the time. So I'm offering that because I feel like you basically cut off three quarters of a mile for a kid that wants to get from Mount Vista to your neighborhood, Norm. It cuts off three quarters of a mile by just doing that. And now that we know that the property is for subdivision. And then what's what's the future of that? What happens with that? And how do we maintain that that access for that kid? Because right now, everybody in that neighborhood just cuts across the field, and Corey's been fine with that. But I don't know what all property owners are gonna own houses to back up to my property. We're gonna say about kids going through their backyard. So

so anyway,

I'm I'm not I'm not offering enough to do a 20 foot wide trail with a five feet of landscaping on both sides and a 10 foot sidewalk section through the drain. I am offering to maintain that portal and make sure that that stays open input to. But as far as I know I mean, I don't spend the time reading the old CD code. But as I I don't. As far as I know, the standard trail session is what it is. And that standard trail session doesn't work on what's on on. So if there's another trail section that we can talk about, I'm happy to talk about that. But then now now we're going further down, you know, modifying code for a special project, and I'm fine with that. You know? I don't I don't work here anymore, so I'll I'll do whatever you guys wanna do. But at the end of the day, that's that's what we're trying to do. That's that's what brought it about. And yeah. So Any other questions or comments, things to work out before second reading? Is can can can we can we have access can also have access to the property? Just go look at it. Yeah. There's no horse in this year. Last year, no officer didn't mean this. That'll help me. Yeah. And I'm happy to go down there and mark it with anybody if they are not comfortable doing it without me, but you're also I mean, every kid would probably have a mile around hang down in there.

So it's it's

it it would be kinda I don't I don't stop them. I don't would it be creepy if I went there?

You're making a photo.

Not school started, but I I think there was a morning group and the afternoon group. So there but, yeah, you guys logged. If if you don't, just be aware that you you're not gonna see the pond. The pond is is pretty shallow, and you you might end up to your ankles or up to your calves without doing what you did. So if the grass is really, really green, go

Well, it's it's just it's just this law, but but yeah. Right. It add it adds up to more. It's late. It's late. And,

I mean, this is a value statement. Sean, I know how you feel. You told us, Tom or Levi, you wanna put it out there and see whether you feel like there's an upgrade of value to the community for the new conservation space compared to the old conservation space, or is that for me to go walk it, look at it to decide that? I I think there is

It's more contiguous. It it there's actually open space adjacent to the area to the south. I mean, not all of it because Lot 7 30 Seven's there. Right. But that wasn't there before, so at least and and that ties in with Mount Vista. It may tie in with Corey Johnson property. I mean, we've we do have a pending application for that one. We haven't haven't we're it it's just under staff review at this time. But, yeah, I mean, I I think it is. The love for the community? I I think it is. Okay.

Yeah.

You know,

it doesn't cut the book. One, it puts it puts a gap on it. It never happened in some as far as the subdivision could be expanded in 39 lots. That's that's what it calculates out to. But this is the last piece of property in the subdivision where that can be done. And I think this is the best way to do this. And I've got a question about why I just do five thirty six and five thirty seven. And the answer to that is the 536 kicks off all of the same stuff with with the approvals and the council of redoing the subdivision. Anything else goes? And right now, there's actually a a higher economic value on the Yeah. Because the primary global areas that were offered. And so it's I don't know. I've thought about this for probably seven years now. And this is the best.

I mean, I mean,

in my opinion, matching out the city's values and for and the city requirements for a conservation subdivision and my desire to do specific things to property and to conserve specific spaces in this property.

This is what I came up with. So Okay.

Norm, you've asked for cost estimates estimates to build a trail. Yeah. Still interested in that. Yep. Okay. Anything else to get you to before second, Adrian? Just confirmation that

Carol mentioned would be too much, I think. It's something we might as well ask. And then maybe have conversations with Provona about

writing another part that changes the ordinance and making a graph, which may help something along. Yeah. We're changing on the If if we're if we're doing a development agreement, then I'm not sure if we did this back in the day, but the legislature has enabled this process of development agreements that says you can ignore your ordinance as long as you go through all the same steps on the specific development agreement that you would have to go through to change the ordinance. And so it's it's like a one time change just for one specific piece of land. So maybe there is the option we could ask you turning. You know?

I don't know. I mean, I I wanna make sure that

we're not building the trailer nowhere. Yeah. So Yeah.

And then and then the question is what we want. I mean, if it's city

You might lose ADA compliance and all that other stuff. Mhmm.

So

okay. Any more thoughts? First reading? Any opposed to voting? Questions? Same opposition. Those in favor of approving for first greeting and dancing the second with the homework given, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Board in favor, not opposed. Thanks for staying up late. We're gonna set the alarm off when we go out again.

I don't have good.

Depends if you wanna keep talking. It's Justin.

Okay. Jenny, 2524. Land use is. Yeah. We still have to do a CRA meeting tonight.

There's there's no updates on this one. Okay. It was it was passed for first reading. Do you want me to go over this again? I can, but I did in the last meeting. No. I remember.

We need a second reading.

Take a motion. Okay.

We have a motion from Aaron and a second from Norm. Thanks. I have to look up. They did it right now. To approve twenty five twenty four. Mhmm. It's kinda what the legislature wants to do.

Mhmm. Is it been reviewed by our attorneys?

Yes. K.

K. Yeah. I was just keep going. I'm saying that we call roles based here.

on parking regulations on accessible dwelling units. Go ahead. First, Alright. Yep. So, s b one eighty one, again, this this was spurred by the state legislature. The as as you remember, the city just updated parking requirements, and we didn't really anticipate doing it again, but here we are. So the the reason why is because the city is not currently compliant with two restrictions that the state has placed on how we regulate parking. One is that the city cannot restrict garages using garages as satisfying the requirement for the number of parking spaces. The second one is it the city can't restrict an unobstructed tandem parking space from satisfying two parking spaces as a part of the minimum parking space requirement. So how I'll explain how this the city doesn't comply with these. One is that two parking spaces are currently required for a single family home, and you but that excludes the garage. So you do need to count the garage, one car, two car, three car, what however many spaces. Those do need to be counted toward the number of parking spaces. The the tandem parking, the EDU ordinance currently violates that provision because there's a provision that basically says you can't block any other parking stalls you got, and it's gotta be around back behind the front plane of the house. In staff's opinion, that's that's violating that provision of the ordinance because you're supposed to count those those tandem parking stalls. Now staff's recommendation is approval of this this ordinance, which basically and I and I can bring up the the specific code, but it basically just strikes the the language that doesn't comply with state code and retains those same thresholds. Now the planning commission, their recommendation was different, in that they they're recommending to increase the parking from the required parking from two to three spaces for a single family dwelling and then four spaces for a two family dwelling. Understanding that, effectively, it's not, in most instances, increasing the number of spaces, but it because you are counting the garages, and they were concerned about overflow parking and whether two spaces would be enough. In in most house designs right now, it's not really gonna affect too many too many of these homes because usually what you see is a two car garage and enough space to park two cars, and that's four spaces, which would be enough actually for both single family and two family. Where it could be different is if you had a single car garage with one space. That wouldn't be enough. You'd have to either add an additional garage space or or additional driveway space. And so anyway but it was so that's where the the recommendation differed is is on those those thresholds. But in either case, the recommend recommendation is approval just with that modification from planning commission.

Yeah.

K. Thanks, Lee. Bye.

25 total fee for first meeting.

We have a motion from Norm and a second from Garrett for approval on $25.23 for first reading. Any homework to do? Anything to look at? It's just except for us. Yeah. That's a little Nothing else from stat. May maybe just quickly

give a little bit more context on the justification. So so stat recommended the two spaces for for single family and three for two family. Largely, we that was based upon research that was done previously with the when the parking ordinance when we when we went through that that whole process and looked at, Institute of Traffic Engineers parking generation rates, and two was approximately, like, the eighty fifth percentile. And just with the looking at this practically that that it would allow it would allow it, but in most cases, there would be more than two spaces. But if but it would but it would allow that possibility for someone that maybe they only have one car or two cars. They could they wouldn't have to build more than what was necessary. So it just allows a little bit more flexibility that way. Understanding there is a trade off with spillover parking, I'm not sure if it is gonna have that big of an impact either way, but

that was So the subdivision that we've seen and denied, would that

affect that subdivision? Like, you're already talking? Yeah. I mean, I think I think that if you have a narrow a small lot narrow lot, maybe the the it it probably makes more sense to do a one car garage, for example. I mean, I know I know, for example, the, Stephen Waldrop, who's kind of the state housing czar guy, he he said, whatever happened to one car garages? And, like, are we he he's he's looking at ways to decrease cost of housing, and a lot of cities basically outlaw a single car garage even if that's a preference of the property owner. You've you gotta build two two car garage. Now we don't people would under this ordinance wouldn't have to build a two car garage. They could fit parking somewhere else, they they could. But that was kind of the thought process, affordability, flexibility, and it meets most needs even though and and this was discussed at planning commission. There's gonna be with a lot of households, there's gonna be a time where you've got two or three kids in high school and they all have cars or you've got, you know, 20 something living at home and they've got cars, and where do those cars go? But that was kind of the back and forth, and, ultimately, the planning commission recommended the three spaces and four for two family.

If if you had a a 5,000 square foot lot with the 10 foot setback on the side, 15 on the back, do you put that in carpet stalls?

You could Well, most likely, you would fit it with a two car garage and two spaces. I mean, you look that's the thing. Next door, these are mostly 5,000 square foot lots in in Ridgeline Park. So most of them have a two car garage and space for two, sometimes three if they've I mean, but, I mean, at that point, you're taking up a lot of yard, which our code doesn't really allow either.

I just had a mechanic back a customer's card into a forklift and you have a lot of respects in that.

Still holding them. Yeah. Submit.

No. Yeah. That didn't get it.

01:30. Absolutely.

I can't believe it. It's good. It's good. You might have an opportunity. 01:30 at your place right now over you. Right? Yes, sir. How are you enjoying the meeting? That's good. It's been a good discussion. I've enjoyed it. Alright. Next up, we'll call on you, Justin. This is resolution twenty five twenty seven to approve an interlocal agreement on between Nibley City and Nibley Community Reinvestment Agency, which is this group of green with this group, I think. Yeah. We're we're

go ahead, Nate, Justin, please. Alright. Thank you, Mary. Yeah. This is a little bit of catch up. We back in maybe my date's wrong because it's late. Twenty twenty ish? 2021?

2022.

'22. Jeez. Thank you. 2022. The Community Reinvestment Agency, which is a separate legal entity that is controlled by board of directors that is the city council. So it's similar to the NBA in that it's just another legal entity. And what this entity exists for is for the opportunity to provide tax increment financing for particular areas in town as a way to incentivize and motivate economic development and development in the area. So that all was framed and set up. And back in 2022, we created the agency. We identified a project area as the area out around Malouf and a property of Wesley Nelson family property at the time just North of 2600 South, and we entered into interlocal agreements with both Cache County School District and Cache County as, other taxing entities. We did have brief conversations with other taxing entities such as the Mosquito Abatement District and the Cemetery District, but, they were so small that we decided to hold off on those until we were ready to actually see some movement and see something happen before we really attack those again. So we never entered into those agreements with those two taxing entities. How and the weird thing is is that staff cannot find an paper trail in the agendas or records that show that the community community reinvestment agency entered into a local agreement with Nibley City. So that's relevant because in the plan and budget that was approved and interlocal agreements based on the date trigger was 2025. And so as we approach that deadline, mayor and I had many discussions with each other. We spoke with consultants. We spoke with mister Sean Milne at the Bragg as our kind of commune economic development adviser and on what we should do with the plan for the CRA because there hadn't been no development or movement on the property. And at that time, it was suggested that we just let the plan trigger and start the process of collecting that tax increment and putting it into the CRA even though that that actual dollar amount would be very small. We had discussions with Malouf about that. They were, at the time, were okay with that, were on board with that. And so when that clock was about to tick, I reached out to the consultant and said, hey. Let's get that paperwork all set up and be ready to be followed with the county. And they said, great. And they started gathering all that up, putting that together, and they could not find the documentation of that interlocal agreement between Nibley City and the CRA. So that is what is before you tonight is a resolution approving this interlocal agreement that exists between you all and you all. And we will have to do open a meeting of the community reinvestment agency and approve the same agreement.

Any questions?

Thank you, Justin. That's great. You're doing wonderfully for the hour that it is. Do you do do we have to go back to the other taxing entities with this, or do we have all the doc all papers we need for that? Yeah. My understanding is County School District, for example, in Cache County.

Yeah. My understanding is we don't need to go back to them. This is just basically gathering up all the paperwork for us to submit to the county for the for the plan to trigger. We do not need to go back to anybody is my understanding.

K. Perfect. Thank you. Council, it's yours. Questions for test discussion, Garrett?

Garrett, I've made a motion to approve resolution. We we have

a motion from Garrett and a second from Norm to approve twenty five twenty seven and waive the second reading. It's pretty straightforward. We'll end up with we can't stop. Any discussion? Questions? Is there an opposition to voting? Seeing no opposition. Cheryl, you got the role, please? Council and staff reports, Garrett. Appreciate it, Locksmith.

You know, I just staff. We really appreciate that and all stuff you guys. All the information you provided with the to make any decisions. One question that we had, what what is our process to verify that the developer has to be tied to the rate an estimate to be developing.

You can just send that to me. I'm just saying it's okay.

You know,

Oh, that's what it is. I have a couple of questions in chat.

Mhmm. I think you mean that we have so many residents

of Midland who just made in these sports, and they wonder if they'd paid a different fee in our

our resident. Nope. I believe they don't. I think we've had that answered. Nope.

It's on. Aaron?

I just went to the rock star Savannah ran a unique flower event, Morgan Farm.

We it was really fun.

She did great enough. There's a really good flower this year. A lot of them seeds were done and started donated by state, and she's made it in the beautiful garden there. So I don't know. It's a lot of fun who participated, and that's all.

Sure. Thank you.

1350 West looks great. We did it. Yep. Citizens and construction and staff involved. My guess is Tom, I'll send it to you, but questions about building the meetings.

Just wanna thank Tom and staff for answering questions, scenario

for me and her citizens. So I said, if you could get that. Just one question is I think I need the answer, but if a neighborhood was interested in getting a sign that said no outlet or dead end? Is that upon the city, Canadian, anything that are record visitors? Just give me a call. K.

Great. Thank you.

I just had one complaint about getting the parking warning. I was there, and we complained that the person across the street was not licensed and was there for a while. So, typically, if there's a car park not licensed, all you do is call the police and then they will abandon, and then the police will contact 110 within seven days. So anything that's not licensed, just then

Yeah. And that and that is the current process. The hard part is when you can't figure out who the owner is because it's not because it's because it's not a there's no play. It's a it's a small trailers. I guess that that was the the point we're making, but we do go through that process at the share frequently.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. We've we've done that.

Tom, I'll just be frank about it. Yeah. Nathan both referenced it. It. Aaron started to there's a perception amongst some folks that we are not doing an appropriate job of QA inspecting what developers do before we accept dedication of infrastructure. My opinion, that's completely false, but we might want to think about a strategy to help people understand exactly how exhausting that process is, actually, how how full that process is and work past what I think is a false perception. Is that fair? Yeah. That's great. Yeah. So, again, it's not disparaging comment. It's just it's it's a matter of helping people understand what we do. Were there deficiencies noted that you can convey to us specifics? We can work on that. You've actually answered a bunch of those specifics and documentation you provided. There's always questions there there's a question about, well, what does the city do with the developer versus what the individual homeowners do with their own contractor? So I think I think it's not worth addressing I mean, we can talk about specifics if that person can provide them. But I also think it'd be interesting to find out for people that believe we are just laying down in front of developers to find out what we actually do to ensure that the citizens of Nibley are owning quality infrastructure.

So what exactly is the

request? We'll talk about it. Okay. Yeah. Let's see what works out. Form strategy. Yeah. And it might be a workshop. Might be on a council in future council meeting. Justin, I hope he's still here. He can contribute to that. It's it's just education about what what how does yours how does Dignity City make your life better? It's specific about accepting infrastructure as it gets filled by the developers.

It'd be easier if there were problems that I don't address. Okay.

We can find problems if you want. Yeah. Create plans too. Okay. That's it for me. Levi?

I think I'm good. Thanks. K.

Tom,

we've got a lot of roads closed and more coming. Just kinda be aware. One in particular, they wanted to close 2600 South at Stokes Nature Center from the highway to through their frontage. I denied that request. They wanna do it during school. We were try we've been trying some part of the process of getting acceptance. We were trying to get them to complete their work so we could open all that before the school started. They kept putting it off, putting it off, and now the school started, I'm kinda drawing the line that I'm not gonna allow this. So I'm asking them to do the work after 03:30 or on Saturdays. So with that, there might be a little bit of pushback. You might hear hear about that one. And there's several others on the other end of 2600 South from 12th West to the highway. That's closing on Monday. 8th West is closing tomorrow right there at Midway Coach, and then it'll close again on Monday. So, hopefully, you guys are reading my emails. You're able to open yours now. So we're good. I wanna commend public works staff on an incredible feat that was accomplished last over the last week.

The reduced speed schools on

800 West and 3200 South for the Heritage Elementary. Justin called me on, I think it was a Friday or Monday morning, says, hey. How are people from Nibley Meadows gonna get to school? There was an incomplete section of sidewalk. And he says, well, we've decided we're gonna wait till Nibley. Middle school was done before we move anything. He said, well, just be thinking about it. Well, the next morning, he came in, developed a plan, laid out a new reduced speed school zone, Met with Steve and says, let's do this. And they had the signs moved and everything the very next day. We worked with Nibbling Meadows developer, Travis Taylor. There was three foot of extra fill he had to bring in. He brought that fill over the next couple of days through Thursday and Friday. By Monday, they were pouring a concrete sidewalk. In the meantime, public works crews. And when I say public works crews, we had parks guys. We had street guys. We had we had water. We had sewer. We had everybody. It was all hands on deck. It was just a beautiful sight to to see how this work going. They they just did a fantastic job. I just wanna make sure you guys knew that and how valuable those people are regardless of acceptance of the subdivision. These guys are really good good folks. So through the ULT, the youth lady dresses. Their blooming season's over. They've gone to see there was there were 56 populations that found and a 150 plants within those 56 populations. So they're there. It's pretty clear. There there'll be a final report that will be submitted to the board, the Fish and Wildlife Service. And And then just kinda wanna update you on one the church house the church meeting house on thirty four hundred South in 12th. We had a meeting with the architect, worked out a few details. They plan on moving forward and coming to planning commission and and city council for their site plan approvals really soon. They're they're eager to get started. In those conversations, we also talked about another church house that they they've been looking at up on on the North Side, 2600 South and 12 West. There were some very specific questions they had regarding stormwater and how to how to manage that. They they wanna use the city stormwater pond that's north of there, but that pond is overcapacity. So there's gonna have to be some work. So we we talked through those things and some other small details. That one, they said it was not a huge hurry that they're trying to close the deal on the property. So just wanted to update you on that as well.

Do you have any questions for me?

You, Tom. Cheryl?

So there are signs up there for the native service on September 6. There would be service opportunities at Fireblind Park at the golf course at, Morgan Farm in here at City Hall. We're looking on global conversations that final, obviously, it'll be ready to go. September 12, we have our heritage second graders coming here in the City Hall. You probably saw the email about that. And if you can, make it here. It's actually quite fun, and there's the perception that there will be a lack of public servants in the future. And we can start at second grade and show them how awesome it is to work and serve in the public sector. Yeah. I

don't know. Nobody changed their mind. It's like

it's grooming. I'm going to work with you in the town. I'm I'm not going to ask you if you have a first lady by the. Whether you work and your significant. And then last, it was late, but, Tom brought my attention some guards and what they did for stay at the schools. They've provided people in arch for students going to school. Not on them. It could be a dime that is what they're doing. And I'm just doing things

for me. Nice. Okay. Actually, I thought I'd want more. I'll be really brief. I went to a meeting with Yudak and Mayers last week, something like that, and found out for all the effort that we put in to figuring out ways to spend $60,000,000 to alleviate traffic on Logan's Main Street, the answer is we're gonna turn the y into an x. Yeah. Little 25,000,000. And I said, when was this decision made, and how was that decision made? And there wasn't a lot to say about it except 25,000,000.

Why is the

There's no reason. It's it's a alright. I'll stay. If you no one's listening. It's an economic development project for the city of Luton that you guys gonna find. Show me the card. So we're playing. Anyway, it says that's gonna happen. I don't have to schedule on it, but you heard it here first. Anything else from anybody?

Oh, I was Yeah. Yeah.

I'll just echo what Tom said, and he kinda stole my thunder on how awesome our public works team is. They did a great job. I checked in with the principal. He's very, very happy with how things turned out. And then also just thank the rest of staff for holding the fort down, allowing the opportunity to come out here on the East Coast and learn a few things and play tourist for a couple days. So appreciate every the staff's amazing and appreciate all that they do.

Yeah. Justin, it's good to hear that you've given us a thumbs up, Seth.

Thank you. Thank you.

Meeting like now I'm doing more. And our team is like, Well, you know, we think we won't I can see here everything that we all about. Kind of Thank you. You know, I might be able to play all the pitches I've heard of, like, their position when you work down the road. Like, my bottom change, the bottom 5,000 worth the bottom. I can see you guys thought a lot about us and all. I know a lot of people are mad at you about something. I mean, but you know what I mean?

We we know it's me. We know it's me. We know it's me. We

know it's me. Yeah. I understand this.

Hard decision. It

wasn't good. There wasn't a good answer

about all. You know? We still yeah. Thank you. Thank you. That's right. Thank you. We got another have a CRA meeting to go up. Yeah. Back so we can get out of here. Alright. So if there's no Yeah. Skip the meeting. So I will adjourn the city council meeting, say no, text, and return. And do you have a change of reporting?

Thanks, Nate. You can. I I'm hosting this.

We wanna keep on YouTube.

Yeah. I'd like to make a motion to approve resolution c r a twenty five dash o two. We have a motion

from Garrett and a second from Norm Folk. There that's our rules. So that's the Liberty City Of England. So yeah. Yeah. So this is just the real deal and a second from Norm to approve twenty five dash o two. Is there a discussion on that? Justin, do you have anything else to offer from what you already talked about in our last public meeting? No, sir. K. Thank you very much. Is there opposition to voting? Seeing none, let's proceed with the roll call if you would please, Cheryl.

Agency member. What is your In favor. Agency member. In favor. Agency member. In favor.

In favor. On queue.