* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. AND [00:00:01] WE ARE RECORDING. ALRIGHT, CALL THIS MEETING OF [Planning Commission Regular Meeting on May 14, 2025.] THE AKIMA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ORDER. WE HAVE A QUORUM WITH MR. SMARTPHONE AND MR. GALE AND MR. ROGERS. ABSENT. DO WE HAVE, UM, ANY, UH, ADDITIONS OR SUBTRACTIONS TO THE AGENDA? OKAY. MOTION TO ADOPT AN AGENDA AS WRITTEN. I BELIEVE WE ADOPT THE AGENDA AS WRITTEN. SECOND. AND HAVE A MOTION A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. WE MOVE ON TO THE MINUTES OF WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9TH, 2025. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS? I MOVE. WE ACCEPT THE MINUTES. ANY MOTION TO ACCEPT A SECOND, SECOND MOTION. AND SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? OKAY. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. HAS ANYBODY SIGNED UP? NO. ALL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND MOVE ON TO OLD BUSINESS. WE HAVE, UH, CHAPTER 1 0 6 ZONING DEFINITIONS AND METHOD OF CALCULATING SIGN AREA. ALL RIGHTY. GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. SHANTE'S RIBBON COUNTY PLANNER. ALL RIGHT, HERE WE GO. OKAY, SO THIS EVENING WE'RE GONNA BE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME TWO ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT LAST MONTH. UH, THERE WILL BE SOME NEW INFORMATION. UH, THERE WILL BE SOME REPEATED. SO THE TWO ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS THAT, UH, WE ARE ON NOW. FIRST, CLARIFY THE DEFINITION OF BUILDING HEIGHT UP AND A METHOD OF MEASURING HEIGHT. UH, RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO, UM, MEASURE TWO HEIGHTS. SO WE HAVE A START HEIGHT, NO MEASURE, TWO HEIGHT. SO STAFF CURRENTLY IS MEASURING FROM GRAY TO THE TALLEST, UH, PEAK 0.1, WHATEVER STRUCTURE WE ARE REVIEWING. UM, THAT HAS LED TO SOME INCONSISTENT REVIEWS, UM, CONFUSION FOR BOTH STAFF AND THE APPLICANT. AND, UM, WE NEED TO SPECIFY THAT MEASURE TWO POINT. UM, IT HAS ALSO CAUSED MORE VARIANCE REQUESTS AS WELL. THE SECOND ONE IS ADDING A DEFINITION AND METHOD OF CALCULATING SIGN AREA. UH, SO WE WOULD LIKE FOR THE SIGNS IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ON THOSE LARGER BUILDINGS TO BE MORE IN PROPORTIONAL WITH THE BUILDING SIZE. OKAY, SO THIS IS A TABLE THAT YOU SEEN LAST MONTH, UM, WITH A LITTLE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WHICH YOU CAN, CAN SEE IN RED. UM, MOST, WELL, IN MULTIPLE DISTRICTS. IT SAYS THE SAME FOR ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, MAX HEIGHT, 12 FEET OR ONE STORY. SO STAFF IS STILL PROPOSING TO STRIKE THE ONE STORY AND HAVE A FIXED MAXIMUM HEIGHT. SO CURRENTLY THAT HEIGHT IS 12 FEET, BUT DUE TO, AGAIN, VARIANCE, SEVERAL VARIANCE REQUESTS. UM, AND ONE OF THOSE EXAMPLES WOULD BE FOR, UM, TRAILER PORTS. UH, STORING RVS 12 FEET IS NOT ENOUGH. SO AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER LOCALITIES THAT I LOOKED AT IN THERE. RANGES FROM 15 OR 15 UP TO 24 FEET. SO WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOUR FEEDBACK ON THAT, UH, BETWEEN THAT 15 TO 24 FEET. UM, AND THAT WOULD BE ACROSS ALL THE DISTRICTS THAT HAVE THAT SAME VERBIAGE OF MAX STRUCTURE, HEIGHT OF 12 FEET OR ONE STORY. UM, AT LAST MONTH'S MEETING, SEVERAL OF YOU HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE SENSORY STRUCTURES AND, UM, AG BUILDINGS IN THE AG DISTRICT. UM, YOU THOUGHT THERE NEEDED TO BE MORE FLEXIBILITY AND MAYBE SOME OTHER EXCEPTIONS. SO WHAT STAFF HAS PROPOSED IS PROPOSED AS AN EXCEPTION FOR AG STRUCTURES THAT ARE NOT USED AS DWELLINGS, CONTAIN NO SIGNS OR ADVERTISEMENTS, AND ARE CENTRAL PERFORM. SO, UH, THESE CURRENT EXCEPTIONS ARE LISTED IN BOTH SECTION 1 0 6 59, WHICH IS AG DISTRICT AND 1 0 6 84, WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. AND THOUGH THESE ARE SOME GOOD EXCEPTIONS, THERE ARE STILL QUITE A FEW THAT ARE MISSING FROM THIS LIST THAT STAFF, UH, FEELS THAT, UH, WOULD BE BENEFICIAL. [00:05:03] SO THOSE POSSIBLE, ADDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS THAT STAFF IS PROPOSING TO ADD WOULD BE SOLIDS BRING ELEVATORS FEE STORAGE, MIXING STRUCTURES, AND THAT THEY EXCEED NO MORE THAN 100 FEET. THAT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE MECHANICAL AND ROOF MOUNTED EQUIPMENT, AS LONG AS IT DOESN'T COVER MORE THAN 25% OF THE TOTAL ROOF AREA. AND THEN ALSO OTHER NON DWELLING FARM BUILDINGS. AND THEY MAY EXCEED INTO A MAX OF 45 FEET, PROVIDED THEY HAVE THE NECESSARY SETBACKS TO DO SO. UM, THE GOALS HAVE NOT CHANGED. I THINK I MIGHT HAVE ADDED ONE WORD IN HERE FROM LAST MONTH, BUT THE GOALS ARE STILL THE SAME TO IMPROVE CONSISTENCY, REDUCE, UH, VARIANCES, SIMPLIFY THE REVIEW PROCESS, PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY, BE, UH, MORE CONSISTENT AND, UM, TO HAVE THIS OVER ALL ZONING DISTRICTS SO THAT IT'S NOT ONE THING IN A ONE THING IN RESIDENTIAL WHEN, UM, IT NEEDS TO BE A UNIFIED UNIFIED ACROSS THE BOARD. OKAY. SO MOVING ON TO, WELL, NO, BEFORE I MOVE ON TO AREA, DID ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT BUILDING HEIGHT OF, SINCE THIS IS WHERE MOST OF THE QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS WERE LAST MONTH? I DO, UH, AHEAD AND, AND YOU'LL, YOU'LL CONFIDENT THAT IT WILL WORK ACROSS ALL OF THE DISTRICTS, UH, INDUSTRIAL INCLUDED. I MEAN, IS THERE, ARE YOU CONFIDENT THAT THE, UH, HEIGHT THAT ASSIGNED EQUALLY TO THOSE DISTRICTS WILL NOT BE A PROBLEM FOR SAY, INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS? UM, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. AND I MEAN, RIGHT NOW ALL THE DISTRICTS HAVE THE MAX STRUCTURE OF 12 FEET OR ONE STORY. BUT IF YOU ALL HAVE A SUGGESTION, IF YOU THINK THAT 15 TO 24 FEET, WHICH, UM, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOUR GUIDANCE ON WHAT YOU BELIEVE THAT NUMBER SHOULD BE FOR AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. UM, WE DO THINK THAT THE INCREASE WOULD COVER A LOT OF THE, UH, VARIANCE REQUESTS THAT ARE COMING IN NOW. SO IT'S 24 FEET, THE MAX OF VARIANCES THAT YOU HAD. SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING, WHETHER IT IS, UH, RESIDENTIAL, UM, AG OR INDUSTRIAL IS 12 FEET NOW BY I MEAN REQUEST. SO WHAT, YEAH, SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS A NUMBER BETWEEN 15 TO 24 FEET. OKAY. SO MY QUESTION IS, TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF HERS, COULD THE 24 BE THE MAXIMUM, IF IT'S GONNA BE 15 TO 24 AND AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN THAT RANGE? OR ARE YOU ASKING FOR, SO WHAT WE ARE AT, SO 15 TO 24 IS A RANGE THAT I COLLECTED FROM OTHER LOCALITIES. SO SOME LOCALITIES HAD 15, SOME HAD 18, SOME HAD 24. SO WITH SAYING 15 TO 24 FEET, WE'RE ASKING YOUR GUIDANCE TO SAY, OKAY, WE THINK THE 12 SHOULD MOVE UP, EXTEND TO 15 FEET, OR IT SHOULD BE 24 FEET. SO WE DON'T HAVE A SET NUMBER YET, SO SURE. I DID GO IF YOU, IF ONE OF YOU THINK 15 SHOULD BE THE SET NUMBER, 24 SHOULD BE THE SET NUMBER. SO WITH THIS, I'M KIND OF, UH, ASKING FOR YOUR GUIDANCE ON, UM, WHAT YOU THINK WOULD WORK, AND YOU'RE SAYING THIS FOR RVS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. SO THIS WOULD BE, UM, ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS WOULD BE THOSE, UH, TRAILER PORTS WITH PEOPLE STORING RVS THAT WE COULD GET A QUITE A FEW OF THOSE. SO, BUT 12 FEET IS KIND OF LOW. SO THE BDO MAX IS 13 FEET SIX INCHES. RIGHT. I AM NOT 100% SURE IT WAY. OKAY. 13 SIX. SO I DID GO ONLINE AND LOOK UP, UM, COAL BUILDINGS AND HORSE BARNS AND, AND DIFFERENT LIKE PLANS THAT PEOPLE OFFER. AND MOST OF THE HEIGHT WAS FROM 15 TO 18 FOOT. MM-HMM . LIKE IF SOMEBODY WON A HORSE BARN, I LOOKED THAT UP AND MOST OF THE PLANS WERE 18 FOOT OR, YOU KNOW, A POLE BARN FOR YOUR CAMPER WAS LIKE, YOU KNOW, FIT, FIT IN THE 18 TO 15 FOOT RANGE MM-HMM . SO, SO IF WE SET IT AT 20, 24, SEEMS LIKE A LOT. YEAH, THAT'S A LOT. I MEAN, I'M, [00:10:01] YOU KNOW, I'M LEANING TOWARDS 18. YOU'RE LEANING TOWARDS 18. 18 IS REASONABLE TOO. I MEAN, SO WHAT I'M JUST THINKING ABOUT IS, IS THE, IF THE VEHICLE'S 13 FEET, SIX INCHES TALL, YOU GOTTA HAVE AN A-FRAME ON IT OF SOME SORT. YEAH. SO THE MAJORITY OF THE AVERAGES WERE LIKE 16 FOOT FOR ALL THE ONES I LOOKED AT, BUT THERE WERE SOME 18, THEN THERE WERE SOME 16. AND THEN CALCULATING IN THE CLEARANCE, I WOULDN'T LIKE IT, BUT I UNDERSTAND I LIKE A 1212 PITCH, SO IT WOULD BE WAY HIGHER. , , THIS REALLY MAYOR. YES. YEAH. SO WHERE, WHERE ALL THIS STARTED AS, AS, UM, UH, COUNTY PLANNER REALLY HAVE MENTIONED, WAS IT, IT CAME FROM A LOT OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTS THAT WE WERE GETTING. AND THEY WERE PRIMARILY FOR THESE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, UH, WITHIN FIVE FEET OF, UH, OF A SIDE YARD SETBACK. WE'RE GONNA SET THAT SETBACK, UH, UH, ASIDE FOR A MOMENT AND JUST REALLY CONCENTRATE ON THAT 15 FOOT TO 24 FOOT RANGE. UM, ONE OF, ONE OF THE POINTS OF AN ACCESSORY BUILDING IS THAT IT'D BE PRI THAT IT'D BE CLEARLY SUBORDINATE TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. SO MOST OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ARE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HEIGHT OF ANYWHERE FROM, UH, GENERALLY 14 TO 18 FEET. BUT, UH, A LOT OF THE VARIANCES WERE FOR THESE POLE BARNS AND FOR, UH, AND FOR THE, UH, THE, THE TRAILER PORTS. ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THIS IS, UH, AS SHE HAD MENTIONED, WAS TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VARIANCES, BUT PARTICULARLY IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, UM, THE RANGE OF 15 TO 24, ACTUALLY, IF YOU WANT TO INCLUDE OUR NUMBER IN THERE OF 12 TO 24, 12 SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BIT TOO LOW. UM, CHAIRWOMAN, UH, WINGFIELD YOU HAD MENTIONED, UH, YOUR, YOUR, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, YOUR, YOUR CARPORT OR YOUR TRAILER PORT, AND THAT WAS A REALLY GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHAT THE STAFF AND THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS ARE DEALING WITH BECAUSE OF THE, UH, BECAUSE OF THAT MAXIMUM 12 FOOT HEIGHT, I THINK IT WAS A REALLY GOOD SUGGESTION ABOUT THE VDOT, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, BRIDGE CLEARANCE OF BEING 13 SIX. UH, THAT SEEMS LIKE A, A, A REASONABLE FACTOR IN DETERMINING WHAT THAT, UH, NUMBER SHOULD BE BETWEEN 15 AND 24. UM, THE, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE 24 FEET IS ALSO PRETTY TALL. EIGHT, YOU KNOW, 16, 16 TO TO 18 SEEMS KIND OF REASONABLE TO ME. BUT AGAIN, WE CAN'T WRITE A PERFECT REGULATION OR AN ORDINANCE TO COVER ALL, UH, YOU KNOW, ALL SCENARIOS. SO THIS MIGHT NOT ENTIRELY ELIMINATE VARIANCES, BUT IT WILL CERTAINLY REDUCE THAT BASED OFF OF WHAT WE HAVE, UH, EXPERIENCED ON THE STAFF AND THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS SIDE. SO, UH, I JUST WANTED TO, UH, MENTION THAT I THOUGHT THAT THE, THAT THE, UH, VO CLEARANCE SINCE WE WERE TALKING SO MUCH ABOUT VEHICLES AND, AND, AND RVS IS, IS A, UH, IS AN ESTABLISHED AND REASONABLE, UH, FACTOR TO, TO THROW INTO THE HOPPER AS TO WHAT THAT FIGURE SHOULD BE. BUT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT SHOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED IS WHETHER OR NOT THAT HEIGHT IS GOING TO BE, UH, SUBORDINATE IN NATURE TO THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. SO DO YOU WANT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT'S ACTUALLY TALLER AND BIGGER THAN THE, THAN THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE ON THE, ON THE LOT ITSELF? THANK YOU. IN THE CURRENT, I'M SORRY. THE CURRENT ORDINANCE NOW DOES STATE THAT THE ACCESSORY BUILDING HAS CANNOT BE TALLER THAN THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE. AND THAT WON'T CHANGE. WE HAVE NOT PROPOSED TO CHANGE THAT, BUT WE COULD, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO WRITE THAT DOWN? SO I HAVE A MANUFACTURED HOUSE, THIS IS A SINGLE STORY MANUFACTURED HOUSE. I DUNNO HOW TALL THEY'RE, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE MORE THAN 24 FEET. NO. 'CAUSE THEY HAVE A, A SHALLOW, RICH, I MEAN, PITCHES SLOPE, YEAH. MM-HMM . RIGHT? SO YEAH, IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT TYPE OF COMPANY IT IS. AND, AND THEY COULD STILL GO TO THE BZA AND ASK, LIKE, IF I WANTED TO HAVE A 1212 PITCH, I COULD GO TO THE BCA AND ASK FOR A VARIANCE. BUT I MEAN, IT'S REASONABLE. 18 FEET'S REASONABLE. I THINK, THINK I DO TOO. AND I, AND I COME TO THAT CONCLUSION BECAUSE IF YOU'RE AT 12 NOW, AND WE ADD SIX WILL GIVE US 18. SO FROM THE 18 TO THE 24 6. [00:15:01] SO IT KIND OF PUT US RIGHT THERE. SO THE INCREASE WOULD BE SIX. AND FROM 18 TO 24 6, I THINK WELL KNOW 18 WOULD ELIMINATE A LOT OF BZA STUFF. RIGHT. I THINK 18 WOULD BE GOOD. I MEAN, I WOULD WRITE IT AS 18, BUT HEY, AS LONG AS WE KEEP THE SUBORDINATE RULE OH YEAH, YEAH. WE HAVEN'T PROPOSED AS OF NOW. WE HAVEN'T PROPOSED ANY CHANGES TO THAT. OKAY. SO IF YOU'RE AN AG AND YOU PUT THE, UM, ACCESSORY BUILDING, IT'S 18 FEET AND MY HOUSE MAY BE, YOU KNOW, 16 FEET, WOULD I HAVE TO GIVE VARIANCE BECAUSE MY HOUSE IS LESS THAN THE MAXIMUM OF THE ACCESSORY BUILD? I WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S CORRECT. CAN'T WE JUST TAKE THAT OUT OF AG? BECAUSE AG IS FULL OF BIGGER BARNS, BIGGER BUILDINGS. OKAY. WELL YOU JUST CAN'T BUILD AN AG BUILDING EITHER. I MEAN, LIKE IF I HAD A LOT SOMEWHERE AND I WANTED TO PUT A GARAGE ON IT, YOU HAVE TO PUT A DWELLING IN IT. NOW. YOU CAN'T JUST BUILD A GARAGE ON A LOT, YOU HAVE TO PUT A DWELLING IN IT. SURE. AND ALSO ON THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS, THE THIRD ONE, OTHER NINE DWELLING FARM BUILDINGS MAY EXCEED UP TO A MAXIMUM OF 45 FEET. SO DEPENDING ON WHAT TYPE OF STRUCTURE IT IS, IT COULD FALL UNDER ONE OF THESE CATEGORIES. YOU SAID FARM, IF I'M NOT A FARMER, THEN I'M EXCLUDED. AND YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE TAXPAYERS IN THE COUNTY AREN'T FARMERS. OKAY. I'M JUST SAYING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GOOD POINT. WE'RE REALLY, YOU KNOW, TIGHTENING. I MEAN, I MEAN, I KNOW PEOPLE THAT HAVE BUILT BIG GARAGES, BUT THEY HAVE TO PUT AN APARTMENT ON IT TO EVEN GET IT BUILT. YOU JUST CAN'T BUILD A BUILDING. YOU JUST, YOU CAN'T, LIKE, YOU CAN'T EVEN BUILD A GARAGE TO STORE YOUR STUFF. TO BUILD YOUR HOUSE. YEAH. YOU HAVE TO BUILD YOUR HOUSE AND THEN BUILD YOUR GARAGE AND STORE YOUR STUFF TO BUILD A HOUSE. I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S, I BELIEVE OUR GARAGE IS TWO FEET TALLER THAN OUR HOUSE. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. BUT I THINK 18 FEET IS REASONABLE JUST TO RIGHT. OKAY. HELP THE PGA. ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS TOPIC? LEMME ONE MORE THING. THANK YOU. UH, LE HAM, A DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ON THIS FIRST BULLET POINT HERE ABOUT THIS 100 FOOT, UH, UH, 100 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR, UH, NON-HUMAN OCCUPIED STRUCTURES. UH, WE'VE ALSO SEEN A RANGE THERE, ALTHOUGH THAT'S NOT DEPICTED ON HERE. UM, WE'VE SEEN ANY, WE'VE, WE'VE SEEN THAT SPECIFIC FIGURE FOR THESE TYPES OF, UH, FOR THESE TYPES OF STRUCTURES, SILOS, GRAIN ELEVATORS, FEED STORAGE AND MIXING STRUCTURES, THAT KIND OF STUFF. UH, WE'VE SEEN A RANGE OF BETWEEN 60 AND 100 FEET. WE'VE SEEN 60, 75. I THINK WE'VE ALSO SEEN 80 A HUNDRED FEET IS PRETTY TALL. BUT, UM, UH, THAT NUMBER RIGHT THERE IS ALSO ADJUSTABLE. SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A HUNDRED. IT COULD BE LESS THAN THAT. IT COULD BE, UM, UH, 60. IT COULD BE 80. WELL, FOR A GREEN ELEVATOR THAT WOULDN'T INCLUDE THE, THE ELEVATOR. I MEAN, PARSLEY'S ELEVATOR IS 215 FEET. OKAY. BUT THAT WOULD BE PARSLEY'S PROBLEM, NOT THE COUNTY PROBLEM. RIGHT, RIGHT. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT DAVID EVANS HAS GOT OVER ON 16. IT'S PROBABLY BEEN THE 75, 80 HE MIGHT BE PUSHING. AND I THINK AT THE LAST MEETING, THE ELEVATOR PROBABLY, WELL, MR. GALE'S NOT HERE TONIGHT. HE MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING THAT HE HAD HAD ONE PUT IN, UM, A FEW YEARS AGO TOO. BUT I DON'T REMEMBER HIM STATING HOW, HOW TALL IT WAS. SO IF THEY NEEDED SOMETHING TALLER THAN ON HER FEET THAT HAVE TO TO VGA. CORRECT. THAT'S, THAT'S REASONABLE. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO NOTE OR COME BACK WITH FOR NEXT MONTH? CAN WE MAKE IT 99 FEET ? OKAY. UM, SO GETTING INTO DEFINITION AND METHOD OF CALCULATING SIGN AREA. SO AGAIN, UH, THIS INITIATION INITIATING RESOLUTION CAME DOWN FROM THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AT THEIR JANUARY MEETING OF THIS YEAR. UM, AND AGAIN, TO ADD A DEFINITION AND METHOD OF CALCULATING SIGN AREA IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, THE ORDINANCE CURRENTLY, UM, DOESN'T ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THIS. SO STAFF BELIEVES THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME ADJUSTMENTS AND THAT THOSE ADJUSTMENTS [00:20:01] SHOULD BE BASED ON BUILDING SIZE, A LOT SIZE, NUMBER OF STRUCTURES ON THE SITE. AND WE NEED TO ABOUT A STANDARDIZED APPROACH FOR CALCULATING THE SIGN AREA. SO JUST, THIS IS SOMETHING YOU'VE SEEN LAST MONTH, BUT JUST TO GO OVER THIS AGAIN, UM, SHOWING WHAT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE STATES AND THE CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE FACING BECAUSE OF THAT. UM, AS OF RIGHT NOW, UH, FOUR SIGNS THAT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR A PROPERTY, IT HAS MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON IT. UM, 160 SQUARE FEET, TOTAL MAX AREA IN ANY DISTRICT, UM, FOR THE LARGER BUILDINGS. AND I DO HAVE SOME VISUALS TO SHOW YOU ALL AS WELL. UM, BUT THAT'S INADEQUATE FOR THE LARGER BUILDINGS. AND FOR METHOD CALCULATION, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE LENGTH TIMES WIDTH, WHICH FOR IRREGULAR SHAPES TIMES, UM, THAT'S JUST NOT ADEQUATE EITHER. UM, IT'S INCLUDING THE VOIDED SPACES, THE DEAD SPACES, UM, WHICH ALSO LEAVES STAFF UNABLE TO ACCOMMODATE UN ACCOMMODATE, ACCOMMODATE, SORRY. UM, THESE DIFFERENT APPLICANTS. SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING FOR THE CALCULATION METHOD IS 10% OF THE WALL AREA, UH, WALL ELEVATION AREA WHERE THE SIGN IS PLACED, THE USE OF GEOMETRIC SHAPES, UM, WHICH THEY WOULD BE SQUARES, RECTANGLE, TRIANGLE CIRCLE IN THE FORMULAS THAT GO WITH THOSE. AND FOUR, UM, FOUR MACS FOR EACH BUILDING. UM, THE SIGNAGE ALSO MUST NOT EXCEED THE ROOF LINE OF THE BUILDING. SO FOR THOSE BASIC SHAPES, IT HAS TO BE ONE OF THESE. AND RECLINE ALSO INCLUDES A SQUARE AS WELL. UM, THESE ARE THE BASIC FORMULAS AND THERE WILL BE NO SPECIAL, UM, NO SPECIAL CASE SHAPES. SO, UM, FOR A SIGN THAT MAY BE, HOW TO THINK OF THE WORD, MORE ORGANIC SHAPED, IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO FIT IN THE RANGE OF THESE SHAPES. SO WE WOULD NOT GIVE SPECIAL ATTENTION TO SOMEONE WHO HAD A SIGN, UH, THAT HAD ONE OF THOSE MORE ORGANIC SHAPES VERSUS SOMEONE WHO HAD A SIGN THAT WAS A RECTANGLE. SO THESE IMAGES SHOW MORE OF WHAT THOSE SLIDES TRY TO EXPLAIN. SO CURRENTLY WHAT THE COUNTY IS DOING LIFT TIMES WITH, WHICH WOULD BE, FOR EXAMPLE, A RECTANGLE AROUND A SIGN. SO AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, WE HAVE VOIDED SPACE HERE, VOIDED SPACE HERE, AND THAT CUTS INTO THAT 160 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S ALREADY NOT ADEQUATE. SO WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING IS TO DO UP TO FOUR SHAPES. THOSE FOUR BASIC SHAPES TIGHTLY AROUND EACH PORTION OF THE SIGN. SO WE ARE CUTTING OUT THAT DEAD VOID SPACE AND TO SHOW WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE TOGETHER. SO ALL THE YELLOW SPACE HERE IS WHAT THE APPLICANT WOULD BE SAVING AND NOT CUTTING INTO THE ALLOTTED AMOUNT. SO THE BENEFIT OF THIS WOULD BE SCALABLE AND PROPORTIONATE SIGNAGE, CONSISTENCY, UH, REDUCED EXCEPTIONS, FAIR APPLICATION, AND NOT DOING THE ONE SIZE FITS ALL. AND TO DEPICT THAT, GETTING RID OF THE ONE SIZE FITS ALL WITH THESE TWO IMAGES, YOU'RE SEEING A LARGER INDUSTRIAL SIGN THAT'S BEING SUBJECTED TO THE SAME SIGNAGE SIZE OR AREA AS A SMALLER BUILDING. AND THEN YOU GET TO SEE IN THIS ONE A LARGER INDUSTRIAL BUILDING THAT HAS A SIGN THAT'S IN PROPORTION WITH IT. SO, AND DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT ANY OF THIS? 'CAUSE LAST MONTH YOU GUYS DIDN'T, UM, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS ABOUT THAT, ABOUT THIS, BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS NOW, WHAT'S THE PROPORTION CALCULATION? UH, 10% OF THE, UM, 10% OF THE ELEVATION WHERE THE SIGN PLACED [00:25:04] NOTHING MUCH, MUCH BETTER SAVING THAT SPACE, THAT EMPTY SPACE. I JUST THINK IT MAKE SIGNS PRETTY. YEAH. AND IT'LL BE REALLY, REALLY GOOD FOR, UH, THE PARCELS THAT HAVE MORE THAN ONE STRUCTURE ON IT, BECAUSE IF THEY'RE ONLY LIMITED TO FOUR SIGNS AND THEY HAVE FOUR BUILDINGS ON THAT ONE PARCEL, THEN I GUESS ONE BUILD EACH. WELL, YOU'RE, IT JUST WOULDN'T WORK BECAUSE YOU CAN'T USE THE MAX IS 160 SQUARE FEET AND MOST OF THESE LARGER BUILDINGS, ONE SIGN IT'S MORE THAN 160 SQUARE FEET. SO YOU WOULD HAVE ONE BUILDING OUT OF THE FOUR WITH A SIGN, AND THAT SIGN WOULD STILL BE TOO SMALL. BUT MARK MULTIPLE USES IN A SINGLE BUILDING, WELL, YOU WOULD STILL FACE THE SAME, THE SAME ISSUE WITH HAVING ONE A MAX OF 160 SQUARE FEET. OKAY. ALSO, UH, REGARDING MULTIPLE USES IN A SINGLE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, UM, IF YOU'VE GOT MULTIPLE TENANTS, THEN THEY COULD ALSO ELECT TO HAVE A, UH, A TENANT PANEL. SO IF, IF YOU'VE SEEN LIKE A, UM, A SHOPPING CENTER SIGN WITH THE MULTIPLE STORES, UH, THAT'S KIND OF THAT SAME CONCEPT, BUT, UM, IT WOULD ULTIMATELY BE UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNER OR THE PROPERTY MANAGER TO DIVVY UP WHO GETS WHAT OUT OF THAT MAXIMUM SQUARE SIGNAGE THAT THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED THAT AUTOMATICALLY. SO WE DON'T, WE WOULDN'T NECESSARILY GET INTO, UH, WHO GETS WHAT. WE WOULD JUST TELL 'EM THIS IS THE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE THAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE. IF YOU'VE GOT MULTIPLE TENANTS ON THE PROPERTY, YOU GUYS NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT YOURSELF. SO LAST CALL, NO QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE. OKAY. AND WAS THERE, UM, ANYTHING ELSE ON THE HEIGHT THAT WASN'T MENTIONED THAT, UM, YOU NEED ME TO COME BACK WITH FOR NEXT MONTH? WE'RE GONNA SETTLE THIS UP NEXT MONTH. , MAYBE WE COULD CERTAINLY BRING, I'LL TAKE A, MAYBE YEAH, MAYBE WE, WE COULD CERTAINLY BRING THIS TO PUBLIC HEARING IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT YOU'VE HEARD SO FAR ON BOTH THE HEIGHT AND THE SIGNS. JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THE SIGNS WE'RE, WE'RE ONLY, WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT TWO THINGS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ADDING A SIGN AREA CALCULATION METHOD, AND WE'RE ALSO TALKING ABOUT AMENDING THE, UH, UH, UH, AMENDING THE MAXIMUMS IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ONLY. WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT ANY OTHER ZONING DISTRICT. THIS IS ONLY FOR THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, UH, IF, IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE, THEN WE WOULD REQUEST A PUBLIC HEARING FOR NEXT MONTH, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. WE'RE, WE'RE NOT TRACKING ANYTHING ELSE FOR PUBLIC HEARING NEXT MONTH. SO THIS IS WHAT YOU WOULD BE, UH, WORKING ON NEXT MONTH AGAIN. OKAY. SO I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT MM-HMM . FOR THE HEIGHT THING ABOUT, UH, ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, ORIGINAL BUILDING. WE TALKING ABOUT CAMPERS BEING PUT ON LOTS FOR, UH, BUILDING HOUSES ALL THE TIME. AND WE SAY, OH, WHY DON'T THEY JUST PUT A MOBILE HOME ON THERE? SO ONCE YOU PUT A MOBILE HOME ON THERE AND THE HEIGHT IS 12 FEET, DOES THAT RULE OF NO DWELLING, YOU KNOW, NO BUILDINGS ABOVE THE ORIGINAL DWELLING ACCOUNT AND YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE BCA TO BUILD A GARAGE AND A HOUSE AND HAVE BEFORE BGA. YEAH. IF, IF THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WAS TO MOVE FORWARD AS WRITTEN, THEN AGAIN, UH, THEY, THEY MIGHT HAVE TO GO TO THE BZA IF THEY WANTED A LARGER ACCESSORY OR A TALLER ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. UM, AGAIN, THERE IS NO PERFECT REGULATION HERE WITH REGARDS TO THAT, BUT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS WE ARE TRYING TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF VARIANCES, UH, WITH SPECIFICALLY THAT, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT SCENARIO. UM, LET'S ALSO KEEP IN MIND THAT THE, THAT THE CURRENT METHOD OF DETERMINING HEIGHT IS FROM THE AVERAGE GRADE ALONG THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TO THE OVERALL HEIGHT. THIS CAME FROM SITUATIONS, PARTICULARLY [00:30:01] WITH SOME OF THE NEWER HOUSES WHERE IF WE SAY THAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IS 35, BUT WE'RE CONSTANTLY GETTING HOUSES THAT ARE, UM, 38 FEET TALL OR 40 FEET TALL, AND THAT, AND THAT METHOD OF MEASURING OVERALL OF, OF MEASURING HEIGHT IS THE OVERALL HEIGHT. UM, WE JUST WANTED TO, UH, UH, TO PUT OUT THERE THAT THERE IS AN ALTERNATE METHOD, WHICH AGAIN, WAS, UH, WASN'T REALLY HIGHLIGHTED THIS AFTERNOON OR THIS EVENING, BUT WE HAD MENTIONED THAT BEFORE, THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE AVERAGE HEIGHT BETWEEN THE EVE AND THE RIDGE OF THE ROOF. AND THAT GIVES THEM A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY THERE, YOU KNOW, UH, DEPENDING ON, ON THE ROOF PITCH AND THE, AND THE, UM, AND THE HEIGHT. AND THAT WAS A CONCERN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND IN PREVIOUS ITERATIONS OR PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS AND WHAT WE PUT IN THE ORDINANCE WAS, IN NO CASE WOULD THE OVERALL HEIGHT EXCEED 45 FEET. SO AGAIN, TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM THOSE PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS, YOU KNOW, WELL, WHAT IF IT GO, WHAT IF THAT AVERAGE BETWEEN THE ROOF, BETWEEN THE EVE AND THE OVERALL, AND THE, AND THE, UH, ROOF RIDGE, UH, IS 48 FEET, THEN WE START TO GET INTO SOME PRETTY BIG HOUSES. UM, BY COMPARISON IN, IN SANFORD THERE IS A BIG HOUSE, UH, IN, IN SANFORD IT'S PRETTY BIG. AND, UH, WE, WE LOOKED AT THE PLANS AND THEY HAD SPECIFIED AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF 45 FEET. IF YOU'RE EVER IN SANFORD. AND YOU SEE THAT BIG HOUSE RIGHT THERE AT THE, UH, AT THE INTERSECTION ON THE FAR END OF TOWN, AS THEY'RE HEADING OUT TO SAX, AS YOU'LL SEE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THEY SAY THAT HOUSE IS 45 FEET TALL. I, I SUSPECT THAT IF WE MEASURED IT, IT MIGHT EXCEED THAT, BUT THE PLANS SAY 45 FEET. SO IF YOU WANT TO SEE A LIVE EXAMPLE OF WHAT A 45 FOOT TALL HOUSE IS, THEN CHECK OUT THE BIG HOUSE IN SANFORD. UM, THEY HAVE BEEN REHABBING THAT HOUSE FOR A WHILE NOW, AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THAT HOUSE IS COMPLETE, UH, THEY'VE DONE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK TO IT, BUT THE OVERALL HEIGHT WAS SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS IS 45 FEET. SO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AS A LIVE EXAMPLE. BUT THAT IS IN THE PROPOSAL AS, AS WRITTEN NOW THAT IN NO CASE WOULD THAT, WOULD A STRUCTURE BE ALLOWED TO EXCEED 45 FEET IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. ALSO, KEEP IN MIND THAT IN ORDER TO EXCEED 35 FEET IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, YOU'VE GOTTA HAVE ADDITIONAL SETBACK. SO IF YOU'RE PROPOSING A, IF YOU'RE PROPOSING A 39 FOOT TALL HOUSE, THEN YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR ADDITIONAL FEET OF SETBACK IN ORDER TO, UH, TAKE ADVANTAGE OR BE ELIGIBLE FOR THAT ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. IS, IS THAT COMING UP NEXT MONTH TOO? IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN DO TOO, OR NOT? THAT'S ALL IN, THAT IS ALL IN THE ORDINANCE AS IT WAS WRITTEN AND PRESENTED, UH, IN PREVIOUS ITERATIONS. UH, WHAT, UM, WHAT MS. RIDLEY IS DOING IS, UH, ADDRESSING SPECIFICALLY SOME OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS, UH, QUESTIONS FROM LAST MONTH. SO IF WE SET THAT TO 18 FEET, OR YOU ALL DID, IS THAT SOMETHING WE COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH AND BE DONE WITH NEXT MONTH? YES. OKAY. I GUESS I GOT ONE MORE COMMENT, UHHUH. SO FOR HOUSES, LIKE IN LOW LYING AREAS, LIKE YOU'RE TALKING SANFORD, WHO HAD TO JACK THEIR HOUSE UP 10 FEET, WHERE THERE WAS LIKE A, UH, GRANT AROUND 10 YEARS AGO THAT JACKED PEOPLE'S HOUSE UP, YOU KNOW, 10 FEET, IS THAT SOME KIND OF, WOULD THEY HAVE TO GO TO A VARIANCE OR TO GET A VARIANCE TO JACK THEIR HOUSE UP NOW SO THAT, YOU KNOW, THE WATER AGAIN DEPENDS ON THE ORIGINAL HEIGHT OF THE HOUSE, RIGHT? SO, UM, 35 FEET IS A, IS A, IT'S A BIG HOUSE. IT'S A BIG HOUSE. IT'S, IT'S, IT'S A LOT OF HEIGHT. SO WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN ORDER TO EXCEED THAT 35 FEET. I THINK MOST OF THE HOUSES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE A SINGLE STORY. THEY MIGHT EVEN BE, UH, THEY MIGHT EVEN BE, UH, UH, TWO STORIES, BUT AGAIN, NO PERFECT REGULATION. SURE, DEPENDING ON WHERE IN THE COUNTY YOU ARE AND WHAT THAT BASE FLOOD ELEVATION IS, IT CHANGES. UM, AND, AND IT COULD CHANGE FROM, YOU KNOW, FROM MAP VERSION TO MAP VERSION THAT'S HANDED DOWN FROM FEMA. SO WE, YOU KNOW, WE ARE TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME FLEXIBILITY HERE, BUT, UM, THAT, THAT DOES RAISE A GOOD POINT ABOUT, UH, YOU KNOW, ABOUT SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE IN THE FLOODPLAIN, UH, LET'S SAY THAT, UH, YOU MIGHT HAVE TO ELEVATE TWO FEET TO GET OUT OF THAT BASE FLOOD [00:35:01] ELEVATION, UH, PER THE FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE. IT, IT REALLY JUST DEPENDS. BUT THERE MAY BE, THERE MAY BE INSTANCES WHERE ONE WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS TO, TO EXCEED THAT HEIGHT. 35 FEET IS PRETTY TALL THOUGH. I THINK THAT WE WOULD, I THINK THOSE VARIANCES WOULD BE FEW AND FAR BETWEEN. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM . ALRIGHT. EVERYBODY'S COMFORTABLE. WE NEED A MOTION FOR ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS OR WE GOOD? YES. WOULD. UM, AND IT WOULD BE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS. OKAY. UM, I HAVE A MOTION. CAN I GET A MOTION FOR, UH, THE SIGN ORDINANCE CHANGE FOR JUNE? IS IT JUNE 9TH? JUNE 11TH, PUBLIC HEARING A MOTION TO STAFF? COMPLETE THE PRESENTATION FOR THE SIGN ORDINANCE FOR NEXT MONTH SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD SECOND MOTION AND SECOND FOR PUBLIC HEARING NEXT MONTH. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A. AYE. YOU NEED A MOTION FOR THE DWELLING TOO? YEAH. YES. SO, UH, DEFINITION, SO THAT ONE WOULD BE B LEMME BRING IT UP FOR YOU SO YOU CAN SEE IT. SO THAT WOULD BE DEFINITION OF HEIGHT. IT CLARIFY THE METHOD OF MEASURING HEIGHT. I MAKE A MOTION THE STAFF CONTINUE FORWARD AND BRING TO THE FINAL NEXT MONTH DEFINITION OF HEIGHT, CLARIFY METHOD OF MEASURING HEIGHT AND ADD AN 18 FEET. I SECOND. THIS IS FOR A PUBLIC HEARING? YES. YES. ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A MOTION. I SECOND. A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR OF PUBLIC HEARING NEXT MONTH. JUNE 11TH, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? I MUCH BETTER WHEN YOU ALL WRITE THIS STUFF DOWN. SO, OKAY. MOVE ON TO STAFF REPORT. SUBDIVISION AGENT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. UH, HAM, DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. UM, AS YOU SEE HERE, AND AS YOU'VE READ IN YOUR REPORT, WE DON'T HAVE ANY, UH, MAJOR SUBDIVISIONS REQUIRING PLAINTIFF COMMISSION REVIEW. UH, NOTHING HAS BEEN SUBMITTED. SO, UH, THE COASTAL SQUARE RESIDENCE CONSTRUCTION PLANS ARE STILL UNDER REVIEW, BUT, UH, IN TERMS OF NEW MAJOR APPLICATIONS, WE DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT AT THIS TIME FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE PERSPECTIVE. UM, THE, THE VZA AND THE CODE ADMINISTRATION STAFF, OF COURSE CONTINUE TO, UH, DO GOOD WORK THERE. BUT, UH, WHAT YOU HAVE HERE ON THE SCREEN AND IN YOUR STAFF REPORT IS THEIR WORK FROM, UH, ACTUALLY IT WAS FROM, UH, LAST WEEK, MAY 7TH, AND WE CONTINUE TO SCROLL DOWN ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE THE FOURTH. THEY DO HAVE FOUR CASES. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS OF TODAY, ONE OF THE, UM, UH, ONE OF THE CASES HAD ACTUALLY, UH, HAD ACTUALLY DROPPED OFF, BUT ONE OF THE OTHER CASES, AND I'M NOT SURE, WHICH ACTUALLY REQUIRE ONE OF THE OTHER SPECIAL USE PERMITS REQUIRED. A VARI REQUIRES A VARIANCE, EXCUSE ME. SO THEIR CASELOAD FOR NEXT MONTH STILL REMAINS AT FOUR, WE CAN GIVE TO DEPUTY COUNTY MINISTRY. SURE. SO, UM, I DO SAY NO MATTERS TO PRESENT AT THIS TIME. UM, WHAT I WILL REPORT AT THIS TIME IS THAT THE WALTZ RESEARCH PARK LEADERSHIP COUNCIL HAS, UM, HAS RESUMED THEIR WORK. THEY LAST MET IN FEBRUARY. THEY ACTUALLY ARE GOING TO MEET, UH, THEY MEET QUARTERLY AND THEIR NEXT MEETING IS GOING TO BE ON TUESDAY, MAY 20TH. UH, WE DO HAVE THEIR AGENDA ON BOARD DOCS AND, UH, I THINK IT'S GOOD READING, SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, CERTAINLY GO TO BOARD DOCS AND, UM, AND LOOK AT THEIR AGENDA. THEIR AGENDA DOES NOT CONSIST OF ANY ITEMS REQUIRING VOTING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THEIR MINUTES. BUT, UH, WE WILL BE UPDATING THEM ON SEVERAL, UM, SEVERAL PROJECTS AND INITIATIVES IN THE NORTHERN MACK AREA, PARTICULARLY AS IT, AS IT, UH, UM, PARTICULARLY REGARDING, UH, ANYTHING FROM, UH, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, THERE'S AN UPDATE THERE FOR ROCKET LAB ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'VE BEEN ACCOMPLISHING OVER, OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS. UH, SOME INFORMATION THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM VIRGINIA SPACE AS FAR AS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS ARE CONCERNED, WE ARE LOOKING TO RESUME THE WORK OF THE BUILDING CODE BOARD [00:40:01] OF APPEALS. SO THAT'S, THAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE, UM, THE, UH, THE, THE SIBLING ORGANIZATION OR, OR BOARD FOR THE BUILDING CODE. SO WE HAVE THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, WHICH HERE MATTERS ON APPEALS FROM THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BUT WE DO HAVE A, WE DO HAVE THE SAME THING FOR THE BUILDING CODE. UH, WE DON'T HAVE ANY WORK FOR THEM PER SE, BUT IT'S BEEN SEVERAL YEARS SINCE THEY HAVE MET. AND, UM, AND, UH, WE NEED TO GET THEM BACK INTO THE, INTO THE ROUTINE OR THE HABIT OF AT LEAST MEETING ANNUALLY SO THAT THEY CAN, UH, SO THAT THEY CAN STAY UPDATED. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE, UM, THE STORM WATER APPEALS BOARD PRETTY OBSCURE, BUT IT'S THERE. AND, UH, WHAT WE WANT TO DO AS THE STAFF IS TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE KEEPING ALL OF THE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT WE'RE TASKED WITH, UH, WITH SUPPORTING UPDATED AND CURRENT. SO, UH, WE ARE TRYING TO BACKTRACK AND, UH, AND GET EVERYBODY BACK IN THE HABIT OF MEETING REGULARLY, EVEN IF IT'S THAT, EVEN IF THAT'S JUST ANNUALLY. THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS AT THIS TIME, AND I CAN FEEL OF ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. HOW ARE WE DOING ON HIRING? IT'S TOUGH. GOOD ENOUGH? YEAH. SO WE HAVE FIVE, UH, WE HAVE FIVE VACANT POSITIONS. THAT IS, UM, UH, TWO BUILDING INSPECTORS, A DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS, AN ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER, AND THERE IS ALSO A HOUSING COORDINATOR POSITION, UH, FTE, THAT WE COULD, UH, YOU KNOW, WE COULD ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT WITH THAT, BUT, UH, UH, THAT COULD BE A HOUSING COORDINATOR, THAT COULD BE A GRANTS WRITER, THAT COULD BE A COUNTY PLANNER TYPE POSITION. BUT, UH, UM, WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS TO DUPLICATE WHAT OTHER, UH, WHAT OTHER DEPARTMENTS MIGHT BE DOING. SO, UH, IF YOU HAD BEEN FOLLOWING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUDGET DELIBERATIONS, ONE OF THE, ONE OF THE POSITIONS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IS, UH, OR, OR MIKE MASON COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR HAD PROPOSED, WAS A, UM, WAS A GRANTS WRITER, A PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, IS ON THE WISHLIST. AND THAT'S NOT FOR OUR DEPARTMENT, BUT THAT WOULD BE FOR COUNTYWIDE. UH, I THINK THAT THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT PICKED UP, UH, ANOTHER TWO POSITIONS AND, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY HAD PICKED UP SEVERAL ADDITIONAL, UH, UH, HAD PICKED UP SOME ADDITIONAL POSITIONS. BUT, UH, IN THE MOST RECENT BUDGET, COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DID NOT, UH, REQUEST ANY ADDITIONAL POSITIONS. IF WE'RE HAVING CHALLENGES WITH RECRUITING, THEN WHY WOULD WE ASK FOR ADDITIONAL POSITIONS WHEN WE CAN'T FILL THE ONES THAT WE HAVE, UH, NOW IN ORDER TO PROPERLY DO THE WORK, UM, AND TO PAY ATTENTION, THE PROPER AMOUNT OF ATTENTION TO THE WORK THAT WE DO. IF WE COULD JUST FILL THOSE FIVE POSITIONS, UH, WE WOULD BE GOOD FOR A WHILE. OKAY? MM-HMM . ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND THE NEXT MEETING IS JUNE 11TH. UM, IF YOU HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN, MY FAVORITE PART OF THE MEETING, I MAKE A MOTION. WE ADJOURN. I SECOND. A SECOND. ALL FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.