Hyde Park City's Planning Commission Meeting 10.15.2025

Did you get everyone picked up?

Find a backpack. Took us a few stores, but he finally found a good one for a decent price.

Not really. He's such a baby in there. I don't have his mommy come and pick him up. Ned, I haven't seen you in a while. Would you ever come? Why haven't you? I always see her last time. Oh, I was in Alaska. Sorry. It's fishing. Yeah. You know, somebody's got Bad excuses. Like Get a lot of salmon? Since salmon are over, it's trout. Oh. She has more fights. Right. Trout. No. It's not. Yeah. It is. No. It's not. Not even close. It is way more. Not even close.

Yeah. I'm pretty sure there's a Pointing in public. Public meeting. Yes.

I got I'll send in my freezer that says it's not as much. If I'm eating, I would go fetching. How much trout do you have? I don't need Yeah. There you go. Alright. We're gonna get started. Welcome everyone to the Hyde Park Planning Commission, 10/15/2025. We wanted to excuse commissioner Baird, Holly. She's she'll be arriving later, I believe. She had a meeting to go to from the note that I received from her. Alright. Why do we always have me as opening remarks?

You're about to say. Does that just mean he's in charge of asking someone to do it?

K. Do you want me to pray? Yes, please. That'd be wonderful. We're gonna ask Melinda if she would offer a prayer or a thought and lead us in the in the pledge of allegiance.

K. I'll pray. Our Father in heaven, we come before the this city planning commission meeting, and we thank thee for the free country that we live in and the beautiful state and this community, this valley, we thank you for all who are here to make it a better place and working together. Help us to have clear minds and understanding and good communication with each other that we can work together to help each other and

keep it a great place to live. We pray for their watchful care and all that we do and pray for our families while we are away. We pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. Please stand and

repeat the pledge with me. I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the Republic for religious status. One nation, let me draw, and it is well with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.

Alright. Let's jump to our first agenda item number three, approval of the minutes from the last meeting. And then you can vote if you'd like to. You don't need to abstain even though you weren't here. But Right. Okay. I I didn't see anything in there to change. Did anyone see anything that needed to be I submitted a couple little things. So Right. Let's go to your little things. Oh, I

I just I think it's just one. She just had color in there twice, and we took it out once. You okay. It's already been adjusted. I think so. Yeah.

K. Anything else that you noticed? Alright.

I'll make a motion to approve the minutes as corrected.

Okay. I'll second it. And we have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as they have been corrected. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of approving the minutes as they've been corrected, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Thank you very much. McHale, you have a workforce.

I do. Next week, we will look to the mayor to approve an additional member of planning commission to take Holly's place.

She's still acting in the capacity until we get her replaced. Was that correct? Yes. As far as I know. K. Yes. So

we'll keep we'll keep bringing them in and training them up. So and then the city council did hear all of your approved recommended to approve those ordinances that you sent to them, and those were approved. And so today, we had our first off the books, DRC meeting. It went really well. We were able to get all the feedback we needed, and I think we are looking forward to move applications through more quickly now so that we can have those meetings weekly, if we need to. So at least twice a month, we're gonna meet, if not every week just to button things up. So Well done. Appreciate all of that from you guys. And that's all I have.

Alright. Thank you so much. Action items to be because before I continue, let me thank everyone who is in attendance. I didn't mean to pass over your your being here earlier. I'm a little bit foggy right now. I'm in about nine hours ahead of us. So what is it? Four in the morning. Something like that. Feels like it. But we're grateful you're here. We appreciate your attendance and your interest in in the goings on in the city administration. Alright. Let's jump to the action items. First one, a is the consideration of the hazard entity site plan. We've already done a or is there one even needed for this? All the public hearings we've already completed, correct, on all of these? So site plans don't require a public hearing. K. So we've already done any

Right. What they don't require is a recommendation from planning commission to approve or to deny based on findings of fact. We've heard this one a couple of times, and it seems like each time we hear it, the stormwater drainage isn't quite right. We've we've worked through all of the parking, all of the traffic circulation, all of the requirements for them to build. We've got through all of that. The very last thing has just been the stormwater situation based on where it is and how it drains and what the road condition is in that area. We did talk about this again at DRC today. We've got some specific direction for the applicant to go, and so we're we're ready to recommend approval if you are. Staff recommends

Right. Approve.

So my understanding was that the drainage wasn't there wasn't enough drainage because of the quality of the soils and because of where it's located.

They had to get a second pond. Is that correct? So there's a few options the applicant could take for the stormwater drainage. Long story short is they made the ponds way bigger. They're maximizing the use of the drainage with the water table being what it is. The last issue is the plan is currently 100% retention, which means you don't release any water unless it spills over the sides of the pond into the road. It still doesn't quite meet the calculations, but with a small adjustment, they'll be fine. And so that feedback is gonna is going to the applicant, and so the city staff recommends approval at this point.

K. We're ready to move forward? Yes.

I motion to make a recommendation to approve this. Make that recommendation to the zoning administrator of the site plan Okay. Of the hazard commercial business.

Alright. Any Do do we need to say subject to the we're good then. It's taken care. It's taken care of. Okay. Alright. The ninth second, Pat. Alright. Any further discussion on this? K. Yeah. This has been going on for quite a while. We've heard this quite a bit. So, all those in favor of, approving the recommendation to approve.

Exactly.

Okay. I just wanna make sure I got that right. Approving the recommendation to approve the site plan for the Hazard Entities site, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Alright. We'll jump to the Muir site plan.

And go ahead, Mikhail. Let us know what we know. We know where this is. I'll pull up the map.

You're welcome. Thank you for coming. This is right next to the school, the middle school. Correct? There it is. Just north of it. Yep. It's outlined in neon blue for you up there.

They have broken their development into two phases, and they've adjusted their boundary line to match those phase lines. So what we're approving today is or what we're recommending for approval today is just this phase one section in the split zone area. We have met again at DRC today, and we had a few details to button up as far as landscaping and irrigation go. That seems to be kinda like the final hurdle for all of these developments along Wolfpackway is just nailing down exactly what we need, especially in mixed use, trying to get the specific calculations for what landscaping meets commercial standards and what landscaping meets residential standards, especially where they overlap, is just a little tedious. So that's all that's really left to button up there.

Go ahead. Hey.

I understand there are some issues with the areas that run alongside Wolfpack Way because of some slope.

And that was that that's the last Is that the landscaping part? That they needed those improvements and changes, and they they did those right away. I believe maybe one or two days after that meeting, they came back with those changes. So all of those things Taken care of. That DRT requested they take care of have been taken care of. Alright.

Any other questions of Mikael?

Is this this is not zone mixed use right now, or was it and it's just not updated on the map? So it's been developed through a development agreement. That was my Okay.

Not my favorite way to do it, but it is its own zoning.

Okay. That was

Sorry. I don't need to throw my opinion in there, but the split zone does Can I can I accept that opinion? Right? I yes. Okay. I would anyway, yes. Development agreement. And so they have their own special details and rules for this development, which they're following nicely. And, yeah, we we would like to see this move forward. Is that is that same

when I looked at the plans, is this part of the development agreement too that it seems like the entrances to the property are a little close to the roundabout. They don't is that part of the development that allowed that? Okay. So I have no comment then.

There hasn't been as far as I can tell in that development agreement, there hasn't been any details as far as deed restrictions

or ownership requirement. Is that something we could talk about before the next phase with them?

I don't think it's something that we could change now because the development agreement has been done. But in the future, moving forward with anybody else who proposes development, we could certainly talk about that. Yeah.

I make a motion to recommend to the zoning administrator approval of the site plan for mirror phase one.

I'll second it. Oh, it's a tie. Repeat. Second, third. You gotta be quick with Ned. Any other comments or thoughts on this? I have one or or a few. This was a a plan. This develop was was brought to the planning commission. It was a recommend disapproval. They made changes to it that we did not see. It was taken and approved by the city council, which is not a path that I would have preferred, that I know that it takes an extra two weeks for it to come back to us, but that was two or three months ago that that happened. So I'm not sure why it couldn't have come back to us. And so maybe we can bring that up to the city council as figure out how we wanna do this. And I know that we do we do this sometimes to save time, but the planning commission is here for a reason, and we didn't get a chance to view the the amended plans that was that were presented to the to the city council. So I wanna bring that up formally and request that maybe the city council talk about a procedure that they want to adopt if this were to happen again. And let us know if they're gonna approve it without our approval, without us seeing changes, that's fine if they wanna make that procedure formal. So k. I've said my piece. Noted for the record. Thank you. Thank you. Alright. We have a motion to recommend approval for the site plan for phase one of the Muir

Development.

Development. Thank you. And the second, all those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

And I'm going to abstain because of my k. Feelings on that. Not gonna say no. Do I have to? Do we does it need to be do we have enough to continue to

to approve it? You have a vote of three, which is enough to pass.

Is what?

Yeah. So you have three votes in favor, which is enough to pass. Okay. Typically, under state law, you're not supposed to abstain unless there's kind of conflict with the risk of something. It's supposed to be no or yes. But since there's a quorum and it's moving on either way, maybe we'll let you get away with it this month. Thanks. Appreciate it.

So in principle, I abstain, but I guess I said yes anyway because it went forward. So and it has nothing against the site plan. It's just the process.

Noted.

K. Next action item. Consideration of the LDS church site plan, which is

down Have a map for you? Yes. Thank you.

I thought I

So if you'll remember, this one came before you initially as a rezone, a partial rezone of this parcel. And so that is the same area that we're looking at where they have rezoned it to public institution use from r two is where they plan to build this meeting house. They are adding improvements to both sides of the parcel, so they'll do their street improvements. I can pull up the site plan. That might be helpful. Let me get you the best. That might be the best one right there. So they've got improvements to streets on both sides east and west and then the site improvements themselves. We did review this one at DRC, and we found that they do meet code. And so we also recommend this one for approval.

Okay. Do the improvements go all the way to the end of the block or just to the end of the property line? Just to the end of their parcel. K. And the the property just to the south of that southwest, is that developed already, or is that the part of the the property across the street that was rezoned to mixed use?

Set The Set two major that was rezoned to mixed use is directly to the south. Sorry. I was trying to turn off the addressing map.

Can you slide that to the right?

I can. There you go. And I can turn on zoning if you'd like me to turn on zoning. K.

No. I just this this parcel here is actually part of this parcel. Correct. K.

Yes. They share the same parcel number in the same zoning.

So if someone if capital fund wants to do anything, they need to do the improvements on their part of the road? Exactly. Or is the is the LDS Church going to do anything on that road to the south?

No. Their intention is to just include that. I can go back to the site plan. Their property line covers that, and so they'll just include it as part of their part of their parcel. There's no improvements shown on that area.

That road is gonna go away, that path or I'm not sure what what it would is considered.

Like a Yeah. Is it like a dirt road? So that was a historic farm access. The city thought that we had a right of way through there. When the LDS church went through and did the survey work and the property work, they could not find any evidence of public right of way through there. And so their survey found that their parcel actually takes that right of way onto their property. So

K. Could you go back to Yeah. I thought one of those pictures showed, like, dedicating land to the city, like, 20 feet to the city for the road. For Talking about on the South side.

Mhmm. Okay. I'm mixed up. I think there's a dedication on the

the West side. Maybe it was maybe the map that's listed.

There's a dedication on that side to meet our master road plan. But on the south, no. They're just gonna be incorporating that. Okay.

K. Or can you go back to the plat map? Sure. K. And these these three properties all have access

besides that road that you can see that their driveways meet up either on the road to the South or the road to the east.

So it's listed as public right away isn't really there. Is that right? A different part. Well, that's a different So if I zoom in, you'll see that that moves away.

So is the plat map wrong?

Remember that the county GIS map is a representation

of property lines. So just a bad representation.

When you sign in to use it, you have to actually read the disclaimer that says this can't be used for legal purposes. So it's a representation of property lines, but it is not intended to be inexact.

Probably because they're taking the map map and just overlaying it over the, like, the Google Maps.

There's there's lots of different layers involved for sure. That's but that's quite

a quite a

a difference there than what actually exists. So So these three are going to abut directly against the church property. All three. All three. But no traffic going between because there's it's just okay. Perfect.

Alright. Any further discussion or motions?

I'll make a motion that we recommend this site plan is for approval. Okay?

I'll second. K? Go ahead. Alright. You got it.

Okay. We have a motion to recommend approval and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of recommending approval for the LDS Church site plan, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. Alright.

Great.

Item six is there's nothing there? There's nothing there.

However, we've been talking about site plans all night, and you see the work that goes into that. DRC dives deep engineering, public works, even building department and fire department weigh in on all of this. Are site plans something that needs to continue to come before planning commission? Is this something you guys need to consider, or are you happy with letting staff do all of these reviews and do this in house? We still want to have our chair or a representative from planning commission come to our DRC meetings so that they're aware of what we're doing. Would I guess my question is, would you rather vote on it in this way, or would you rather have my planning staff report say, here's what we're taking to DRC this week, and here's what we moved through the site plan approval this week and show you what we're doing, or would you rather hear it and vote on it?

I don't mind having it brought up before the whole commission even if the someone from the commission is at the DRC. I don't I don't it didn't take much time, and we did discuss a few I don't know if those things were discussed in the DRC Mhmm. The things that we discussed here. So if maybe we are discussing it twice, then we don't need to do that. But I'd have I'd feel bad if we missed something that would have been brought up during a planning commission meeting. Sure. So any other thoughts? Yeah. On whether or not we should be seeing site plans

as a It's just a matter of all because of these ordinance changes we did, all development requires a site plan now. We wouldn't bring a single family home site plan approval to planning commission. But every business that wants to have a business license, every business that wants to do any improvements on their property has to go through site plan review. All of these different kinds of structures and subdivisions require that, and so they have to wait there two weeks to get on your agenda. And if you guys are are still okay with that, then that's that's fine. They can continue to wait for next meeting. That's not a problem. Does every site plan go to the DRC?

Yes.

We we rely heavily on the DRC to check our work and to make sure that all of the things that we're supposed to be evaluating get a written evaluation. So we dive pretty deep into DRC, and sometimes that already takes you you know, you gotta come back to DRC if you didn't get everything corrected that you needed corrected, and sometimes that's two or three times through DRC. And by then, we feel confident it could come to planning commission, and so we bring it to you. But by that time, they're you know, they've been if we are meeting weekly now, then that's maybe two or three weeks through the process, and now they have to wait for a planning commission meeting to get the final stamp of approval. So it's something to consider. If there's this is all proposed for the benefit of the applicants to move through the process in a timely manner. Especially, we have to consider weather and things of that. Something that's new for me is, now we can't pave after October 15 without a cold weather paving plan, and I can just see how waiting for the next meeting sometimes is the difference between getting to pour concrete and having to wait till spring. So it's just in the interest of helping folks move along in the process. It's not trying to circumvent eyes on applications or anything like that. So it's for your consideration.

I don't know. I mean, I mean catch any thoughts. Yeah. I'm not I'm not sure how many things we catch per se or things that we point out that weren't already considered. Although also, I do think we're the eyes that are kind of the public. Like, not that we can judge things by, like, oh, how does it feel, or does it look good? Because there are just the specifications that they have to meet. But I I don't know. I'm not sure.

Yeah. And it's not something we even have to, you know, delve into tonight. It's just something to think about. That everyone else has their technical things that they're in charge of. Mhmm. It just seemed like the planning commission

was kind of the public's or the neighbor's view, you know, making sure that that it's not like we can stop it because of likes or dislikes anyway.

Could could it be maybe halfway in between if if they come in and it's not ready? If it hasn't passed DRC, we just see it then? Because most of them maybe that would be a good enough review for the public to see, and it would help with the streamlining. Well, the public doesn't yeah. It's not like the public comes to these meetings. I mean, us being the public guys like you were talking about. Yeah. If we saw the if we saw the site plans two weeks ago before they had refined them and looked at them and looked at them and didn't have an issue, and then they could refine them later and then move on, then it would streamline it. Sure.

But I don't know if that's another option, I suppose. Well, the the only issue that I see with that is if we if we look at a plan before it's had a review and then changes done to it, then we don't know what the changes are if they need. So we need to see it after all the changes have been recommended and and

required of the the applicants. Well, we could see it twice too if we needed to if it was significant changes. But if it's just something so stormwater that didn't doesn't really matter to us, then then it could move on. I don't know.

I mean Yeah. I'm trying to think of the things that over the years that we've caught or found or had checked on. I'm not sure. I'm not sure that there's anything substantial that the planning commission has said. Oh, well, did you think of this?

Yeah. My my 2¢ for what it's worth is I think Hyde Park City has come a long way in a very short amount of time. Yeah. Even, like, five years ago, the planning commission, a lot of the times, did a lot of the technical review of these plans because there wasn't a zoning administrator. There wasn't a city planner. But as we've hired more people and refined our processes and updated our ordinances, there's more checks along the way. And so what we're proposing is just what does the planning commission if you want things to keep going the way they're going, that's totally fine. We can keep the ordinances the way they are. But you're gonna have a lot of site plans coming your way very soon. And so if you ever feel like, I don't think we're making that big of a difference, we can modify the ordinances to change that for you. But if it's fine the way it is now, fantastic. We'll keep it that way.

I do agree. I think there's been great strides made, and it did used to be a lot more responsibility falling on the planning commission, and some of us are brand new going, I don't know what I'm looking at. You know? And where they we do, like, go through people kinda quickly. I mean, yeah, when Mark Lynn was on there, I felt like I was just whatever Mark Lynn voted, I'm like, yeah. He probably knows what he's talking about. I just vote with him. And now I've gotten to know a little more, but still not not everything. And so, no, I do appreciate that. Like, there's both of you here now. And so, already, there's more eyes that see these all the time and that are gonna pick up on the same things that we would have had to pick up on when your two positions didn't exist. So I'd be fine to let it to not see them at the planning commission. That's one vote. What? No. I yeah. Just Yeah. That's probably where I fall of the five of us, four and a half, one and a quarter, four. I had a bigger percentage than I am 25%. K.

Both parties. Yeah.

Alright. There was an email that went around about non domesticated animals. Oh. Is that something that we want to bring up and talk about, or did we figure out that there's I didn't Well, it was that you had responded to it, but I didn't see yet what you responded.

Yeah. So this came from commissioner Baird. I guess one of the neighbors had sent an email to her and the planning commission in general upset by the city's supposed lack of rules around, fencing for livestock. Even though we do have some rules, they're not very robust. But that was my response to the email was pointing out, we do have rules. They're not the most thorough rules. But that was just a question for the planning commission. Is that something you want to discuss on a future agenda or not?

Oh, you do not wanna talk about animals. I've yeah. I mean, there's been a few times that this room has been full, and talking about people's animals is one of those times you will fill the room. And so, I mean, for good or bad, you'll find out. You'll do a public hearing, and you'll find out who has animals and who really cares about their animals.

Maybe we can just have, Mikael, maybe you could just make a do a presentation about these are the rules that we have

within currently within the city code. And we probably get a hold of NorthPark Animal Control, see if they can give us some pointers as well for things they look out for as far as enforcement goes. K. But I believe the complaint was something along the lines of there's a neighbor that had some goats, and they have fencing around it that the neighbors felt like wasn't an appropriate place for the livestock to be kind of in the front yard. I haven't been up there to look at it. I don't know exactly what's going on. But the complaint was basically, can you force them to have their animals somewhere where they're not bothering me? And that's very, very paraphrased. And so the city does have rules saying that you have to have adequate fencing for your livestock. They can't be getting into your neighbor's yard, but there's nothing that I could find in my very quick look that that says, like, they have to be confined to a certain portion of your property, which I think is the problem that the neighbors have.

And, again, just like you talk about, you know, five years ago, you two you know, your two positions didn't exist. Fifty years ago, like, everybody had animals. And, you know, a hundred years ago, everybody had farmland and everybody so it's just slowly growing from rural to urban, and there are those that for sure wanna keep it rural and others who are like, I don't like the smell. I don't like the dust. I don't like the flies. Yeah. That's ugly. Like Like, there's Yeah. Passionate people on both sides. Yeah. As we grow from what used to be everybody has farmland and stinky animals, that's how we live to, no. This is a nice neighborhood with curb, gutter, sidewalk.

So the question remains for the planning commission. Do you want to open the can of worms, or should we leave it where it is? Because it will be

Well, I think we should open the can of worms. Nothing like a good

Well, I I, for one flies flies or worms. One of the two. Well, I, for one, agree with Melinda. I've only seen really, really passionate outbursts from people, two instances in Hyde Park City. And one was regarding water, and the other one was regarding animals. So Well, I mean, I think maybe You'd rather talk sexually explicit businesses.

Alcohol anybody will have. Well, maybe maybe it could be like a workshop to start with to see where we're at to see if there is things that need to be efficiency somewhere. K. You know? Because

maybe we see where we're at. We don't wanna open the worm. We can. Would that would you wanna be a joint workshop, or you just wanna have work session with the planning commission to look at it? Just the planning commission right now. Maybe just a Yeah. A five to ten minute brief on

what codes exist. There was a Holly, welcome. We're about to close. Welcome. That's okay. You're just in time.

I think we gotta let Holly make the motion when the time comes. Okay. So if we're talking about doing a work Okay. Session, do you wanna try to schedule that now, or do you want some time to think about it and we can talk about it in the next meeting? It'd be good if we could be brief on it. I think you're thinking about it. Material put together, it'd be okay. I mean, it's not a big we're not doing it for an hour. So Yeah. Whenever you get it put together, put it on the agenda. These these are the codes that we have,

and so we get an idea of do we need to

do we need to, yeah, crack that can open? Leave it. K. One thing that's been on my list to crack open if we're opening this is talking about animal allocations. Because right now in the ordinance, you can only have an animal if you have a certain amount of land and don't feel like that's very equitable with the new zoning that we have. So that's another can of worms we'll have to open up. Isn't it the 20,000 square foot? I don't remember what is off the top of my head, but it's like, you can't even have chickens unless you have a certain size of property. That's probably not, yeah, not very equitable for all the smaller lots we have coming in town. Yeah.

This this this topic.

And I guess the other question really is, is this something that the city needs to worry about, or is this something that they should be taking care of within their HOAs?

Right. That's an well, another thing we'll get into during the presentation is a lot of our animal ordinances are like, you have to do this if your neighbor doesn't like what you're doing. And so we need to take a look at those codes and be like, okay. Is this really the metric we're gonna use to measure success if your neighbor likes it or not? Because

that's a very dangerous place for us to be as a city. Yeah. There but there is something to being a good neighbor, and there is something to having code saying, hey. X are we talking about the goat thing? Yeah. So we're just all we're talking about is should we have a discussion about it or not? We're not, like, getting into the specifics of the goat thing. Just I think it warrants a discussion. So I'm the one that sent the email. Yeah. And the reason obviously, because it came from my email. And the reason the email was sent wasn't because I had one person email me. It's because over the course of three weeks, I had 17 people contact me. One person took it upon themselves to send the email. Had it have just been one resident, I probably wouldn't have I still would have taken it seriously, but it wasn't it wouldn't have been as much. But I kept a list on my phone, and I had 17. So that to me isn't just neighbor versus neighbor. That's a community.

Mhmm.

That is. Yeah. We were just saying, like, in, you know, my time here, there's been a just a few topics that pack the room, and animals are one of them. 100%. Oh, yeah. Like, you will it yeah. There's passion and Yeah. Anger and so we can do it. He's just saying, do we wanna open that can of worms? Like, it it's a lot. What we're gonna do next meeting is we're gonna have a presentation

on what city ordinances we have right now. And then we may wanna discuss whether or not it's better or more efficient for the HOA to take care of that or or if we need to to worry about changing ordinances to that point, then bringing that to the public. There's some communities that don't have an HOA. Yeah. Why don't you understand that? Yeah. Most of them don't.

So They come and do the presentation, then we know exactly what the framework is, and we could go, oh, I see a loophole. I see a loophole. Or

Yep. Or maybe we don't wanna change anything. Right. Yeah. So we will focus on a presentation of what it is today. We won't necessarily look into solutions. We'll just present We'll what it is today. You could certainly

highlight issues, maybe.

We can do that. You know?

So Or potential issues.

Yep. And that would be a good time to get input from the code enforcement officer what kind of issues he sees daily on his in his duties.

Like, can we shoot deer with paintball guns? Is that okay? Keep them out of the gardens? Yes. I think that's a rubber balls? No. Just paintballs. And then if you get a deer with so many dots, then you can take it out.

The the police now have the ability to harvest deer, urban deer. They've they've had that on the books for a while, and you can get on the list to get Yeah. So if you're interested so the city has a program through the division of wildlife resources that they're allocated a certain number of deer they get to harvest every year from the urban population, and it's a flock that's tracked by DWR. So it's not the deer that come out of the mountains when it gets too cold. It's deer that live here and breed here and live in the cities. And so we're allocated a certain number of tags per year. They go by complaint first, and so there's lots of farmers between North Logan and Hyde Park that have a lot of livestock or not livestock, deer eating their crops. And right now, they're dealing with those. But once those numbers have been brought down, their next target is gonna be other complaints in town. So if you do have persistent deer, there's you can submit a complaint to the North Park Police, I believe. And if you would like meat, there's a list to get on if you want meat, if they harvest one.

So do they go shoot them on the other people's property?

Yep.

Okay. When the kids are in school, you don't want them to see Bambi.

Sorry?

I can do that. You know, if we had to pick a number I guess it would depend. It's like if it's a fourplex, you'd say, okay. Maybe one rental. But if it's a lot, maybe 5% or 10% could be rentals so that it's the vast majority. I guess it would be fact specific based on the number of units. Sure.

K. Any other items that we may wanna discuss in the future?

Transition zone. Mhmm.

Well, it wasn't a transition zone development. It was a development agreement that was made with the city council. Now this was this to be. That was the intent. This is a development agreement that takes precedent over whatever zone is in that area.

So That's exactly what we said, really.

K.

Thank your state legislators for that. Yeah. Yep. Alright.

The next meeting that we have scheduled is the November 5, 7PM. Same bat channel, same bat place.

I just wanna put out there November, December, usually, we have lots of holidays that fall near to the planning commission days. And so as we're looking forward to the calendar, just be mindful of those if we want to cancel meetings for holidays and just have that discussion as we move forward. One per month?

Month ago. Is that Yeah. Wanna adjust to try to fit where there's not a holiday?

Well, we're probably gonna end up doing that anyway for November and December. But Okay. Yeah. Procedurally, we haven't gotten anything changed in, like, the codes or the policies to do one meeting. I mean, you wanna, like, go to the second? I guess, the city's.

I mean, you could do it on Tuesday or something.

Anyway, just remember remember the holidays as we're getting closer.

Okay.

You're not dropping any meetings right now? You don't have No. But we don't wanna get a pub a planning commission meeting all noticed, and then everybody's like, oh, that's Thanksgiving. We're not coming.

Oh. I'm not applicants have to think that You're asking for our attend you're asking for our availability

on the first and third November, December. Yeah. Just like as we're getting to these scheduling, so we're not saying next meeting is the day before Thanksgiving, and we've got a bunch of site plans lined up for review. And then suddenly, nobody's gonna be here because we're all out of town. So just watch your calendars and keep us informed if we're gonna have to cancel or move meetings because people are not able to attend because of holidays. Can we just drop the second one in December? Yeah. Probably.

Hey, Marcus. Just a thought. The Hyde Park City employee party is the first Wednesday in December.

Usually. We haven't we haven't finalized a schedule that one yet. Sorry. K.

Take that off. Scratch that from the minute.

Alright. Holly, I'd entertain a motion. A motion. Not a motion, but a a motion. I motion to adjourn. K.

I second that. Yes. K.

All those in favor to adjourn, say aye. Aye. Oh, and that was a ridiculous.