Nibley City Planning Commission

Hey, Erin. Can you test your audio just to make sure we can hear you? Yes. I'm here. I can hear you guys.

Great.

Haven't started yet, but you'll hear us when we do. Okay. There you go. There you go.

No. You're good. Yeah. You're good. Good. Okay.

Now we are at the appointed time in place for a special I'd say, a job's meeting with the

with the.

Right? It's to to be with you at meetings. I I'll publish meeting the quarter, and I'm just gonna read what we have. We have we have. We have. We have. We have. And we have. And we have. Erin, can you hear me? Yeah. I can hear you. K. And if you ever cannot hear us, we won't be getting any votes tonight. But if you cannot hear us, somehow, I don't know, send me a text. Let let me know whenever you'd like.

Yeah. I would suggest passing the mic around when the council talks. That would that would help Aaron to hear online.

Okay. Sounds great. Okay.

Mayor, this is council member Lauerson. I'm also online. Oh, thank you.

There he is.

So consent to approve tonight's agenda. If there is no objection,

saying none, we hold it down to that.

Alright.

We will open the the the commission. And we will start with that role. Chris Bracco,

Mike Weir,

And Levi Roberts, city planner. Tom Dickinson, city engineer, and, Helen Bigelow, assistant senior recorder. Yeah. The commission to consider approval of, last meeting's, minutes and the current agenda.

Motion to approve. Second.

All in favor? I'm sorry. And with that, we will turn it over to Levi to kick us off on the workshop. Great. And I'm hoping, you know, this is this is a workshop, open discussion. I just I do have some information just to kinda get everyone on the same page to to start us out if if you'll if if you wanna hear hear some of this. If if you have any questions throughout this, you know, please ask or just o again, this is an open discussion. And so, really, this I was hoping to start this discussion now on residential zoning in Nibley, talking about our first first of all, just introducing our existing framework of residential zoning in the city, go over some of the guidance in the general plan, and then the majority of the meeting would be for this discussion of of updates, how to approach an update to our our residential zoning code, and including what what process we should go through. So this is and we'll get into it more. This could be a a relatively minor endeavor that we're talking about or or a pretty big one. Yeah. I I guess that's the point of this workshop is to define exactly the scope of what we're of what we're doing here, what we're going to pursue. And I have to acknowledge council member Kentska. He actually suggested to get this this started and this conversation. And, also wanted to mention that we well, I'll I'll hold I'll hold on that one. So, anyway, first, I'm just gonna start with this question. You know, residential zoning, obviously, it's primarily for housing in the city. I this is just a hypothetical question. Why should we allow new different in new and different housing in Nibley? Just a really zoomed out look. Why is this important Before I even start, you know, before we even start discussing the nuts and bolts of our zoning code and everything, why does this matter?

Yes. Different life stages. You have different affordability, different ranges and affordability, different preferences, different family sizes. Good point. Anything else? I just thought it'd be yeah.

The the idea of new, I think, and then we get to mince those so that we don't create geographic financial structures. In other words, let's not let's not create a four part of town and a raised part of town. So I think that, you know, that includes what you're saying about different, but I think what's new is what we have been doing for a while is to to blend those economic opportunities different opportunities that people have within

throughout our account. That's me.

I'll also throw in there

This might not feel like it's related to housing, but housing also dictates the feel of of your city in terms of safety, walkability, infrastructure, liabilities for the city. All of that is dictated through the kind of housing allow or not allow.

Yeah.

I'll I'll just

Nate?

I think Garrett's waiting for you, Nate. Yeah. Thank you. Appreciate that.

I just say one of these things that is to consider is how sustainable is the type of zoning we have for us to maintain as a city. The infrastructure, those kind of things. As we get bigger and have less and less of a commercial feel or other ways to maintain infrastructure, I think housing differences can help with that.

Yeah. I I agree with you, Daniel. Was gonna bring up this how do we maintain, you know, you know, an average cost of living without

basically turning us into

a park city or something where it gets just out of control. We've also talked about the need and since we the general plan is complete city where, you know what? You can grow up and you have, like, stay in the end, like, and then you have, like, retire daily. We can't do that without having some sort of variety so that you can affect every stage of life.

Oh, great comments. Any others before we dive in? Those are great comments. I I I think it's important to kinda zoom out and think why why we're doing this in the first place before we start talking about, well, what density should we allow and what you what housing types and what lot sizes or whatever. I I I think it's important to be grounded in really the whole purpose of of of why we're we're doing this. So with that, I'm gonna dive in a little bit on kind of where we're at with our our zoning code, our framework. So, really, when you look at Nibley City zoning, it the the primary framework, the standard zones of Nibley were established years and years ago. I don't I don't have an exact year. I can go back as far as the seventies. I think it goes a little before that. But but these these our standard zones are based on these lot minimums. Right? So you've got the two acre, one acre, three quarter acre, half acre, third acre. That's the standard zones in Nibley. You know, the highest or the smallest lot or highest density is a third of an acre for these standard zones. And and there's, obviously, there's restrictions on the size of the lot, the frontage of the lot. So, for example, the the smallest frontage for any of these zones is a 100 feet. The setbacks also, that that limits where you can build a house on the lot quite quite substantially. So the you know, like in the R two and R 2 A, it's 10 feet on the side, 20 or 30 feet in the front, and well, 30 feet in the rear and 30 feet in the front and 25 in the rear. Sorry. And so that that that really limits the use of your lot and and, you know, spreads things out further. But but this is this is the standard. And and other than that, you know, land use is obviously primarily residential or allowed in these in these zones. There's some other uses that that have that have been allowed, but primarily residential is is what you see there and what's what's allowed. So that that's the base. But then what we see in a lot of a lot of sub newer subdivisions in Nibley have been developed with these I mean, I'm calling them we we don't usually use this top terminology, but these blanket overlays. So within they're they're not defined as an overlay. Normally is where it's just one one specific area, but they're they're really across either the whole city or the the majority of the zoning. We've got this cluster subdivision and this open space subdivision option that allows for smaller lot sizes and the cluster subdivision that you don't get an additional bonus density. So you don't you don't get more lots by developing as a cluster subdivision, and this applies to all residential zones. There's some flexibility, lot sizes, front and just setbacks through the dedication of open space, but you you can still only develop the same number of lots so the density doesn't go up with with that. I I don't know exactly, to be honest, because some of the some of the old subdivisions, I'm not a 100% sure what code they were under, but I'm I'm I think there's about three examples in Nibley that used the cluster subdivision code. The most recent is Stonebridge, but but I think there's a couple that are kind of older ones that that this has been on the books for quite some time. The open space subdivision and it's had it's had three different names over the years. It started as a conservation subdivision, the the basis of this ordinance. It does allow for bonus density, but there's additional requirements for the open space. And and it's I I would just say it's more particular about how where the open space is, how it's designed, and and what what it preserves than than in the cluster subdivision. So we've seen a lot of these in recent years. There's about seven examples that have developed sent, you know, within the last about ten years. And, you know, the Mount Vista subdivision, Apple Creek, the Cottonwoods, the, Nibley Farms, they were all developed they're all developed generally under this this, framework. So that's so, really, you see, there's the base zoning, but there is an incentive to develop another way if you dedicate the open space. And we're and we're seeing that pan out with with the the way our zoning is. So the the city took decided, you know, when this was when this was adopted that, hey. We wanna preserve open space. We care about that. The way we're going to do that is to, allow this additional density or or in the cluster subdivision flexibility to to preserve open space in various forms within the subdivision itself. Then when you look, you know, further at our code, the it's, of course, is all single family or technically two you could have two families. So because we do allow secondary dwellings or or ADUs in those zones. But when you look at multifamily options, there's really only only two options in the city. One is the RPUD, which is seven units per net built of acre. And if you know, going back just in relative terms to those lot sizes, on average, that's about a 6,000 square foot lot. In practicality, we see kind of a mix, and this is allowed through the zoning of single family and primarily townhome development. In in the town center, we do a lot of condos, but in general, townhome and single family, they have to be greater than 20 acres. And, there's a pretty hefty open space requirement, 35%. The net available acre acreage needs to be open space, and then amenities are commensurate with the number of units. So we we got three oh, and and, also, this this is this only applies in limited areas. So this map that you see on the screen, those are those are the areas that someone could apply for an RPUD overlay zone and go through the legislative process, which would include a master plan and a development agreement, for for a specific development. There's there's about six examples, and I'm counting both the recent ones, the our PUD overlay, and then there was previously a a PUD code on the books as well that was that was utilized that that also, you know, allowed for flexibility. It was a different different parameters with the these codes have been, amended a number of times over the years, but but that to get kind of to that higher density other than, you know, your third of an acre or or a little bit higher than that with something like conservation subdivision. In the past, PUD has really been the only way they've been developed because this RM zone, which is relatively new, this mixed residential zone. First, I I guess I'll point out first that there are two RM zones in the city, but there's no active project. So we can't actually point and say, oh, yeah. There's there's an RM development because there's nothing actually on the ground. But the way it's written in our code now, it allows up to 10 units per net developer acre. It's it's flexible on the unit type, so, you know, you it could be all multifamily if if that's all they propose. Must the same open space and menu requirements as as the RPUD, but the acreage is different, 10 to 40 acres. And then there is this requirement for commercial some some commercial development near arterials. So oh, and, also, I'll point out, this is only allowed in the high density town center area or that's on the future land use map, which is actually nowhere now because we changed that map. So, technically, if we wanted if someone wanted to apply for this, we would actually either need to change the code or grant some kind of an exception. And and I'll so I'll just I just wanna point that out as well. We recently changed it, and then we changed we're constantly planning and changing things and catching up to ourselves of what we're what we're doing here. But, something else to point out is the transfer development rights ordinance, which allows for well, there I'll I'll just explain it briefly. It it allows for the transfer of of development rights from one property, which is in ascending zone, to another property in a receiving zone. And with that transfer, they're allowed additional density. So they may increase by up to 50 generally with with, the transfer of of those development rights. But higher in in our PUD areas or RM areas. So 15 unit up to 15 units per acre in there, the in the RPUD or 20 units per acre in the RM areas. We this was adopted back in 2023. There has not been any use of TDR yet. So That is it. It's on the books. Yep. You may not be answering because I'm just asking.

Yeah.

How do we find

a bigger speed? Yeah.

I have to check, but I don't I don't have a number for you. That's a good question. Yeah.

And did we now?

Yes. What area?

Northern State. Portland State. Yeah. They can maybe Levi can explain more, but the Tim Gardner policy group.

You can do it, Talon. You know what just swells me. I know.

I'm just like, you know, you've got a whole

I just like your I mean, I just need to go on. I need the ten partner policy group, the

population estimate committee for the state, and it's, you know, estimating purposes. And they came out with a report from 2020 to 2025, and that's what came out in the Cache Valley Daily articles that were the we had a 8.1% increase of population so that, yeah, we're the the fourth fastest growing city in state as of last year.

By population percentage? By by percentage. Not by It's not by numbers.

You're, like, comparing both the people.

Yeah.

Yeah. And, of course, we've we looked at the numbers, and we questioned them because we know things ourselves, but that's that's what they estimated for sure. Just a few other quick things. Just in general, residential uses are not allowed out of outside of residential zones. They they used to be conditional use in, like, commercial and industrial zones within. That's no longer true except for in the town center area where commercial residential mixed use is allowed in a commercial zone in the town center area as defined on that RPUD map. There must include 50% ground floor commercial. Again, this is an option, but there's no actual projects that have developed under that

that allowance. What's Nibley Coach?

Because they're okay. Nibley Coach.

That's Great.

Yeah. So that that is they were when when they were when they were allowed or when when they when they were approved, commercial or residential is a conditional use in a commercial zone, but that's been changed since. So they actually wouldn't be able to do with Yeah. What they're building now if if they came in through the door today, at least not administratively. So alright, that was quick and dirty, but I just wanna give a general framework before we get into, okay, how do we wanna change this? Just get everyone on the same page of where we're at now. We can, you know, refer back to to that that framework. But we looked at our general plan. There's a lot, obviously, a lot of content in there. Planning commission city council. You both just went through this, comb through this very you know, at length. This this particular strategy or I think we call them action items in in the plan, this one, I think, speaks most squarely with what we're talking about here. And so encourage a wider range of residential uses specifically and attached residential mixed use designated areas to accommodate future population growth. To update the city zoning code to establish a framework with clearly defined residential land use categories that align with the community's vision, market realities, and evolving council needs. This framework should encourage innovative and desirable residential development types, product type and then b product types to consider providing an updating definition intent for may include townhomes, duplexes, cottage core accessory dwelling units, and smaller lots, condos and apartments and mixed use areas. Aspects consider include a reevaluation of the existing minimum, maximum densities for each zone, building height, lot size, coverage, setback requirements, building form and design, parking requirements, transition to adjacent land use compatibility. Obviously, a lot of variables there, things to consider. But but there's a there's guidance in the general plan that we just adopted to to update the zoning code and and its framework. So I just wanna provide that. Next, I just wanna point out some things we've heard. When I say we, our staff, and talking with developers, property owners in particular that are that are looking at options of of residential development. Just a few things. And and I I mean, Tom or others, if if you want to add, these are just some general sentiments we've heard. So so process to get approval for high higher density in Nibley comes with a lot of unknowns. There's a lot of discretion there. So that and some of these, you know, you might say are or could could receive as barriers, and we could ask the question, you know, do we need do we need these barriers, or or or is there a good reason for them? So existing zoning framework doesn't really accommodate market realities. You know, the half acre lot, for example, is there's a limited application with that. It it's not not very affordable to very many households. So, it just doesn't accommodate that market reality. It's difficult for a project to pencil without special exceptions. So we've seen and just within the last, I wanna say, three, four years, the legislature allowed cities to as long as they go through the same process that they did as if they changed the code to grant an exception to to the city's code for a specific development and through through development agreement, do that. Prior to that, we did we we typically didn't do that to my knowledge. And and so it's it's we we're constantly having these conversations of, well, your code doesn't quite fit what we wanna do, and we ask for this this exception. That that's that's asking too much there and not enough here. And so so we we have these conversations of, oh, well, what what is this what what do we think the city might be amenable to? Because what your code is is pointing out isn't isn't very realistic with what is is going to pencil on this property. So we're we're gonna ask for an exception so that we've we've heard that quite a bit. I've had several conversations with people that are interested in developing small scale development. Maybe they've got an acre or two. They like to put in some townhomes or maybe some smaller lots on the property. Again, those there's there's minimums. There's there's acreage minimums. And so for them, I'll just point out one conversation I had this week. Someone has point nine three acres of 3,200 south. They out out close to Ginny's and Ginny's puts up, you know, there on the corner. Our our future land use map shows it as high well, it it shows it as mixed commercial. So make mixed housing and commercial, and, you know, they like to do something a little higher density. Well, under our existing zoning framework, they don't have many much of an option because there's they're they're not even acre large. And so they've got one house on on that almost acre, and they you know, it's a weed patch, most of it, to be honest. And they can't really do much with it except maybe put an accessory dwelling unit on it. They can't subdivide it. It's owned r 2. I told them, well, I guess you could you could ask for R 2 A, and then at least you could subdivide it into two lots. But is that is that reasonable? So we do have some options for larger development like Ridgeland Park, but there are there are a number of these, you know, one to five acre lots or even one to 10 acre that are that they don't I I guess their option is whatever, you know, large lot single family, they could fit on that. And is that is that okay? Do we is that is that what we want no matter what part of Nibali it's in? So, anyway, zoning makes it more difficult to provide starter homes in Nibali. Open space requirements are high and expense. Again, these are mostly complaints, but these are just some I get trying to point out some deficiencies based on what what we're hearing from people. But then on the other end, we wanna retain the community's character. So and we heard this when in the general plan or I couldn't put up there that the city is growing too fast. We're allowing way too much development. So that's maybe the the balance there. Right? On the one hand, there's a lot of demand for housing. There's a lot of demand for different kind of housing, and we're we're seeing people filling that demand. But at the same time, you know, the the community is at large, and many members of the community are feeling like we're struggling with trying to retain the community's character through, you know, the allowance a lot of this. By the way, Kyle Odd, I, Kyle, I saw you came online. I'm just gonna point that out just for the the minutes.

Yep. No. Thank you. Sorry. I'm late. Yep.

Alright. Sorry. I don't I don't mean to I'm not trying to hog the mic here, and I apologize if I have so far. But just for the discussion, what I'd hope to discuss discuss today, if there's anything else, you know, please bring it up. But what are some issues and deficiencies that you see in our our existing code? What are some approaches to reform? You know, are we talking about a a full scale rework of our code? Do we think do we think the framework we have works and gets us where we want to, but we just need to make some tweaks, we need to find what those are. And then what process should we go through? You know, some some ideas. We research existing examples. We see stakeholder input from from, you know, different interested individuals, developers, realtors, residents. Consider and then and then consider different options. You know, I I I'm a fan of scenario planning. Do we look at what we could go about it this way, we could go about it this other way, and then choose a path forward. So, anyway, lot of information in a relatively little amount of time. Hopefully hopefully, that's a kinda provide a primer for the discussion. So any thoughts there? I mean, as far as when you look at our existing code and you see what it produces and then you look at where we wanna go, you know, we just went through the general plan process. Good. What are we missing? What are what are those what are those deficiencies? Where where are the holes?

Yeah. So my perspective, we just do the Boston process. Right? But the consultant, they attribute our general plan. And I think the primary reason why I reached out to be my discussion personally is, okay. So we have a new general plan. I think right now, our existing residential code doesn't really necessarily provide much flexibility and variability, particularly in, like, that detached residential space, right, just what you described or what you illustrated earlier in my in that slide. And I really think from the from the legislative point of view, including the review point of view, I would like to see just a simple expansion upon, you know, adding two or three even new new zones to the books, essentially, and just, hey. Let's create some flexibility, some variability, and potential. And then let's just agree that, you know, this is this is what makes sense for Nibley, and then just allow a process, let's shout naturally. Right? Because I think right now, based on what you're finding, Levi, is correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of probably what we experience is it's always a negotiation. Right? It's like, hey. If I do this, it's it's this negotiation process. Where to me, it should just be a little bit more clear and and almost cookie cutter in the way you describe it. I'm just like, hey. Here's the options of zones. Look. Let's have let's have enough variety to see what fits the area, the time both the area, the context of where we're at in the city, what the needs are, and then let the legislative component to the process decide. Right? But at least we have the options. Right now, I just don't know if we have, like, the robust amount of options that many other cities probably pretty do. So for me, I'd probably like us to work together and come up with some ideas. Even I think a lot of cities have already figured this out, frankly. So we're not we would actually have to, like, create something new. But I would I think it would be a fun exercise to get through and maybe some examples of what any individuals think are successful zones in other cities, and we can just start getting kind of broad and human breed, right, of who's doing what, what we don't what we do like, what we don't like, and then we can continue to collaborate on, you know, kinda making something. We're coming up with some new options that fit in their feet. That's kind of, like, the just my interested

workshop

personally. So Oh, okay. In my previous slide, when I was on another Friday going, we loaded up the bus. We loaded everything up, but we went and toured different cities and saw what they were doing and saw some of the new stuff, innovation. So we went back and climbed you know, that was the talk about it. We had darlings. We had seen entrances just theorizing it to the sub. You know? A a field trip for a day, load up the bus, let's go. Let's go take a look. Let's find the city or see what they're doing in the newer areas, and it could be that go around the subdivision. We need some very interesting things. Like, one of the two same people building two different concepts in in one. One was there's a walking area upfront. All the cars came in to the back, through the alley and park in the garage. They didn't face off to the front, and the streets in the front were narrower. And it was made for walking reports across the road or the highway that they had. They built another one that had a city center with with the post office and the news where they live in. They had another one just crossroad, additional park, car on the thread, wire speeds, and things like that. Same builders, there's two different concepts. And, you know, if I wanna look at some of these other things that are out there and, you know, we're always the same here. Yeah. We wanna change this and do this and say that really maybe more often. I think a little bit of knowledge in the filter might not be a bad idea.

You know, a big piece. Yeah. That's that's a great idea. I think I think what you pointed out, Michael, is and I you know, the way our zoning code is currently set up is it it's so focused on density and lot sizes. But there's there's these other components to it that that I think you you find out when you when you tour and and talk with other communities and, you know, and and as Nick said, review other other examples. Just because that's what we focus on now doesn't mean that's what we have to focus on. We could focus on other other elements of of the development. So yeah.

I wrote some stuff down, and it kinda ties pretty well into what you just said. Like, from what I'm hearing from Nick, like, there's not a lot of flexibility, right, with the current zoning going to where when it gets proposed by developers,

we're

we kinda play, I don't know, like HOA board or something where we we don't want this or we want this or whatever. So, like, we it it feels like we don't have a lot of faith in our own code to create the outcomes we want to see. And from some of the things that are said here tonight, from some of the things that I've heard in past city council meetings, right, what what are those outcomes that we're trying to see from developments? Have a list. So preserving rural character, reducing excessive pavement, supporting agriculture, allowing young families to sustainably, supporting aging residents, improving walkability, reducing infrastructure liabilities, protecting open space, and then encouraging high quality neighborhood design. There's some some things I have heard again from here tonight or past city council meetings. But, like, out of all of those things, the way that we have our zone based off of, which is units per acre, which is basically coming down to middle and lot sizes and frontages. Out of all of those goals that I mentioned, that only measures one of those goals. And so how do we put into our zoning code that, right, mean we can hit all of those desired outcomes and have faith in the code and not have to try and finagle which every with every developer that comes along. You mentioned frameworks. Were you gonna mention any other kind of, like, zoning frameworks?

I didn't prepare it, but we could we could discuss that. Yeah. I didn't I didn't wanna yeah. I didn't want to go into I didn't wanna hog the mic anymore. That took, like, twenty, thirty minutes. So, like Yeah. Anyway

I mean, like,

I I I won't go into all all all the details and stuff, but, like like, it's because it's the only thing that we have and, like, probably most of us have ever known when we hear about, like, zoning is units per acre. I'll I'll just say some stuff, and you can go look it up at home. But, like, there's lots of zoning codes that, use FAR or or area ratios, lot coverage ratios, livable square footage per acre, housing by right, like, housing type mixes, persons per acre, affordability standards, and, like, form form based code. Like, that's just a small list of different kind of frameworks used in zoning. So I I I think there's lots of room for us to play around in and not get to kind of set on the units per acre if we want to zone for outcomes.

Yeah. Like, we've seen it. I'm trying to believe in this general highly really simplified it. We have detached single valley and mixed, and that's it. That's the only distinguishing thing is those two. But quite mixed then, what variety or flexibility do we have? Is there a large part of the are you implying detached single family? It might make sense to have smaller lots.

And what we don't have flexibility right now is getting

argue.

And if you want a small lot, you know, use an open space subdivision, which is still a great ordinance that they can, you know, be tweaked. The fact that we have some big city parks and done through that process, I'm not sure. I want a lot more parks right now. It's it's too late than you know, what it goes into. I do I I think we need some additional zones because we've simplified it to detached and mix residential, and that's the only distinguishing factor in the detached, you know, r two r two a for the most part, anything West of A for one sixty five. And we need some flexibility there because, I mean, there are none of our places where it makes sense to handle higher against me and places where it it doesn't. And that's where the legislative and the flexibility comes in to play in my mind, but we don't have that. Right? So I think we need at least, you know, two more detached residential zones to allow that flexibility for when it makes sense.

Yeah. I I'm a little proponent of smaller houses along the along here. The smaller lot, obviously, they're open space subdivision there. Those are the starter homes for for families. They move in. They they build some equity, and then they can move on to whatever larger than the home of the house. I like that. I like those. And I buy them and go, oh, those of you guys that are getting COVID started and get started. Don't have because we have to have a full space with a bunch of those. All people here. Probably, we're just gonna do that. They want them there. They'll have to have those. And the pharmacy or whatever that they experience that.

And I've been waiting for me to take a work my project down in the neighborhood with my that's true. And it was pretty messy because I had to start our homes, couldn't extend with the other homes. And that's where the other things we need to address and code is some of the scanners. I mean, I mean, the entry level homes. Do we allow one corporation? I mean, I think most of us have been in the national homes. I mean, my first house was 900 square feet in the one point garage. Loved that house. It was there for eight years. And and then we'd run. We're most of us, I think, could say, what we started out in isn't even allowed now. Yep. And and we probably need to seriously consider and look at

where that makes sense and

make some of those changes. Maybe I've talked about just because we allow smaller lots. Some of those sort of huge homes on. There's two whole prices amount of affordable housing. And that one might be where we use some of our setback requirements. It might force someone a smaller lot to build a smaller home so that we can get the outcome that we want with that rather than just small lots of big houses that doesn't accomplish maybe what we're hoping for with the smaller lots or the little lots. And if we're one

Yeah. Generations being different.

That's what we're aiming to do. Yeah. And the start of that, you know, just work hard calls and they start it so that they can afford it again.

Yeah. I was gonna say on on the on the starter home front, the state has been putting a lot of effort into this in trying to push cities toward what they're defining as starter homes, which, generally, it would it would allow, you know, like, I wanna say 5,000 square foot lots. And but there's also a price point that you have to hit. And and then there so the state has defined kind of a zoning framework. I know we keep using that term, but a zoning framework for starter home zones or starter homes home housing. We can look into that and see if we think that fits Nibley or maybe, you know, maybe we we need to tweak it to what what we think is appropriate to the city. But I I I I like I I feel like it at least has a it could have a place in in our city. And then there could be an incentive to do it when you, you know, if you if you do get additional units, and then we can ensure that at least it's more attainable housing because there's there can be deed restrictions on it to you know, the the they have to reach a certain price point. That's that's something the state has actually defined. I think it was last year. They put that, and and they put it in the moderate income housing session section. And the way that they incentivize cities to do it is they said, if you do this, you don't have to do anything else. That's what they said because we have we have to do three strategies in our moderating of housing plan. If we do there's they want us to do five, really. But if we do the one, it counts as five. So it's like, we don't care about any of this other stuff if you just do this one thing, guys. So Okay. We gotta look at it.

Yeah. Just for kingdom. I'm thinking you'd

Just a handful.

On page 34 of our Yeah. For for information, on page 34 of our tentative budget that's on the home page of our city website, it has a breakdown from 2017 to 2026 current of building permits that have been reviewed and paid for. And thus far, the ADUs, as Levi said, it's been three or four within the past two years.

What do you think this people don't do?

Yeah. They acknowledge.

Sleep.

These are I really don't have the answer. I'm not I'm not searching for any of this. And in here, we are saying we need more zoning, but we're not nobody's even using any eight units. Yeah.

Yeah. I kinda go with what Garrett was saying on the house sizes and stuff. They have coaches on 5,000 square lots, but they're putting three car garages on there.

So houses are not They're not.

Not. I don't think we can even put a shed on there without violating anything with code.

Yeah. We are seeing that and and this this relates also back to to just comment on on ADUs. We're starting to see some examples in the market of ADUs in new homes. So if when they build the ADU with the unit so, actually, in in in your neighborhood, there's seven that were built with the units in in Nibley Farms. There's there's a few going up in Nibley Meadows, that attack, you know, internal ADUs. And there's a couple going on there. They've changed their application, and and they're putting them actually over at Nibley Coach. But I think they're happening where it's an option because these you know, this is tracked housing. The builder has that as an option, and they're they're just starting to take off because the my understanding and I'm not, you know, I'm not I'm not on the finance side of thing, but what what has been explained to me is that now, when you get a mortgage, you can count the projected income for the ADU toward your mortgage where before you couldn't. So they're just overcoming that barrier, and we're starting to see kind of right even though we're only seeing a few a year, take it takes some time. And I think there's a number of reasons people don't want to build an ADU. They don't want to be a landlord necessarily or they don't whatever whatever the reason is. But we're starting to see some traction, and and it's starting to come in with the new housing stock. Actually, they're quite significantly. So and I don't I actually don't even know if those ones are reflected in those numbers. Yeah. I don't think though I think those are the those are the building permits that are just the ADU. So, really

Well, they just those ones in Johnson Meadows, 7 should pay with benefits.

Right. Yeah. So, anyways.

Scrutiny of the time. We could not going to allow anybody to get an AU in front. And that's why I just is that a is that a maybe you can try it. Yes.

Make it easy. So one perspective, I I don't know. There's science behind it, but building's expensive. If you're not getting it when you get that first building permit, then these developers are able to do it and find those those buyers that can afford that. I don't know that someone that's maxed out on their home mortgage payment that they're gonna be able to find enough money to be able to build another unit on it. It it really is expensive. So That's a good point.

Yeah. Yeah. Just that that upfront cost,

significant. Anyway

Mhmm. Yes.

No. No. I think I think that's important. I think ADUs are part of this this discussion where where we allow them. We're we're gonna have to amend that code, by the way, because we allow them on lots 12,000 square feet or greater. And guess what? The state just said we have to allow them on lots 11,000 square feet or greater. So

What how big is it?

It is a a little over a quarter acre. Yeah. Yeah.

I I think some other reasons, like, just knowledge gaps. Right? Like, as a homeowner, I don't know anything about building. Like, I don't know any guidance. I don't like, the rules and all of this kind of stuff. And so, like, as a city, like, that's stuff that we can provide. Like, we can provide guidance. We can have,

like, we can work with small builders,

get a list of people that do that kind of building, all of that stuff, and make it very easy for homeowners when they come in. Like, here's here's all the information you need, everything you need,

and just fill in all of those logs. So that's just made it way easier to understand,

get to see. There's lots of them. The challenge is

you build our pavilion. It's finding a contractor willing to build it. They don't wanna do small jobs, and and they it's that's a small job. And so that's the biggest challenge. It's fine when you come to the. So she wanna do multiple

projects.

Right. You want me to start I was gonna start a new topic. Oh, sure. Yeah.

Yeah. So just some things to ponder here. A quick search on in AI will tell you that a home the median price of a home in Logan is $63,000 less than the median price of a home in Nibley. They they densified they have a lot more to to draw from, obviously, and and our higher density code codes are rather new, but I it may catch up, but I just wanna point that out. And I don't know that anyone in the room maybe I don't know if they really understands the economics of development. We can make all the rules that we we talk to and think that this is the best for everyone, but if it doesn't pan out economically, it's not gonna happen. And, also, that's that's one topic. And I I called Nick. I recommended that we maybe interview different various levels of developers, small town developers of larger one, like a D. Horton or a Harkner or visionary, maybe someone in between. And just I I I hesitate to get them all in one room, and they they start to feed on each other. But if you do it individually, we could get their perspective on really what works, what pencils out, what what incentives they need, or or or just the bottom line, what what needs to happen. That could be both density, open space, even to design standards and road width, things of that sort. It's just a suggestion because I think I would really not need to understand the economics of the wheelchair.

And the other

one is our master plan. So we we've we've got master plans that are intended to get ahead and predict where this growth is happening in Nivu City. And with those master plans tell me they guide me in what needs to happen as the development comes in both now and in the future. So when you get a new development, they have a certain demand. Let me I'll just take water because that's a really easy one. And this demand could could equate to an eight inch waterline need for that specific development. Our master plan says, hey. Down the road in twenty years, we're gonna need a 15 inch waterline or an 18 inch waterline. And the economy scale would say, let's put that bigger pipe in now. We can't force through state requirements. We can't force a developer to install that larger line without compensation. But,

hey, there's other ways that we could do it through negotiation,

say, the density and incentive. If you we'll give you 10% additional density or less open space requirement because you have a park over here, and we need this waterline in exchange for you doing this bigger waterline. And and that goes for all our utilities. Where where the growth is right now, that utility needs there's a trend that's going south along 1200 West, 1500 West, and the in those areas. Our master plan shows 18 inch water line. It shows 18 inch sewer line to there. It shows acid storm drains that bring that take all the drainage to the the slew there. We can't keep up with it. We don't have we haven't collected the impact fees when they come in to build. And so we don't have we may or may not have the money available to to pay for those utilities. So later on, when we do need it, we're gonna have to draw we we may or may not have that money, and and it costs more to deconstruct our table out, put in put another side. So just some things to ponder. And then I there's there's these two poll not polarize, but opposite discussions here. We have a prescriptive code on one side of the room. It says, hey. It's cookie cutter. And then a performance based code on the other side of the room. Both are great. Staff wise, performance based and negotiations based and agreements based, it's it's hard on staff. I mean, it because we don't know And nor does the developer know if if they're going to be approved these things. And they'll go through a lot of effort, time, and and money trying to come up with the design. They'll come to city council and they'll say, well, we don't like that. Do this. They come back and go to the drawing board and then come back, and then it gets denied or something. It there's a lot of unknown, and it's a lot of staff time too. Prescripted base is super easy on staff and the developer knowing what they need to do. But there are some benefits maybe when you get into these larger scale developments to have performance base where you can master plan a whole community, every micro community within that within a limited. Just my thoughts just to spark some conversation.

Tom, this is Kyle. I was wondering if you could explain or expound upon a little bit more what you mean by Like, the waterline example. Like, are you seeing, like, if there's a development that's gonna come in, like, the city's infrastructure on, like, say, 1200 West, going past the roundabout or south of the roundabout at 3200? Are you seeing, for example, if there's a whole new subdivision coming in down there, the city's waterline may not be, for example excuse me, large enough. And so giving incentive to the developer to redo the waterline on 1200 or just in his development?

No. Not not yeah. Yes and no. That that could be one scenario.

There's a lot of places where we have an infrastructure. Development brings that in, and they're only required a certain size to meet the demand of their development. They're not obligated to build any more than that. Like, they they have state protection. So what I'm talking about is in these master planned areas, these what you say master plan, I mean, master plan utility areas, we it'd be better to get them in when that development comes in prior to the need rather than come back after the need's there and then have them reconstruct it. That makes sense?

Okay. So try to prevent from having to, down the road, tear up the whole road again to re upsize it, may be planning ahead before the development's actually there.

That's correct. Now if if the development comes in and let me just look at this. The development comes in and they create a deficiency in our system, so what that means is that there's not enough water to serve that, they are responsible to mitigate that deficiency. So if they're if we're at capacity in a waterline and they come in and we need to upsize this to a 10 inch waterline to service them, they're responsible for that mitigation.

Okay. Thanks for explaining that.

So I'm just curious now, I mean, because we can just talk and talk. Right? And I'm I'm interested to hear what's up what's our kind of plan to move forward with how to get this thing going down the train track. Do we wanna spend some time individually thinking, researching, come back maybe a couple months in ideas, or we wanna work with the tour, go around? I mean, what's what's our next step to kind of get this thing along the right direction, do you think? Well,

what I was originally hoping to do was a more formalized process working with a consultant, and we that that's gonna be that's gonna be a discussion we're gonna have to weigh in. Probably, Justin said do it in a different meeting with city council with the budget because we didn't get the grant that we, applied for for that for this coming year. And so there's a there's there's different ways that we can go about that. And I'm I'll I'll send an email to city council on that on that vein just so you can put some thought into it as far as from a budget standpoint, how we can make this happen. Because the the reality is there's a limit to what staff can do in house on there's a lot of great ideas here, but, you know, there's only there's only so much we're gonna we, me, me, and maybe with a little bit of Tom's help are gonna do to revamp our code. Right? I mean, it kinda depends on the scale of what we're talking about. If it's just okay, we're gonna add a few zones. We're gonna tweak a few things here. I mean, that that's that's fine. But if we're if we're talking it a holistic change of our code, I think that takes that's gonna take some outside help just to do it because we just don't have the bandwidth to to be able to get to that. Now you raise a good point that there's others in this room that can do research and bring and bring things. I mean, I know Troy, like, when we did our our parking code change, Troy did a ton of research and and suggested specific changes to the code. And so if there's anyone on, you know, on the planning mission or the council that has specific ideas of things to look, you know, to look at that could get us toward something closer to where we wanna end up, I don't wanna discourage that either. I don't wanna say, oh, it has to be this this consultant. But as far as what what I feel like staff can offer, there there's a limit to that, and and it kinda depends on the scope of what we're talking about. And and also the the the time frame that we're expecting. Right? Is this a year? Is this three months? We could probably chart a path forward with with the right amount of time to get things done as well. But but that's I feel like that's partly a a budgetary question because I feel like it's a little bit different path forward if we're gonna be hiring a consultant versus if we're gonna be doing it in house or in collaboration with with the, you know, planning commission city council. The typical framework is that staff will bring things to you. I mean, you could provide input, but there have been cases where planning commission and council has actually given concrete, hey. This is what we should do. That's a little bit different than, you know, like, what we're doing today. And that takes I'm I'm not gonna obligate anyone on planning commission or council to to do that. But if someone wants to raise their hand, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna tell you not to either.

So Can I just ask the city council a question? I mean, I'm just What is your mission? Do you want Infield?

Hang on. I feel like this is an important question. Can whoever's speaking speak a little more clearly to the mic? Because I wanna hear this.

As a city council member, do you want in there? Because that's an important aspect of you're looking. You want to be South Logan? If we invite, guess what changing, we have to develop. We want infill. What what is your individual kind of thoughts on this? Because this really is going to guide the planning

and ask the parent to look at.

Yeah.

Yeah. You would go ahead

and say that, you know, we're we're looking to make a complete city. We have no options so that we can look at things in case by case basis to decide what we think it's the city best. And we need options to do that more than just one or two.

So are you okay with, like, a little ambiguity

in the code, or do you like strict scrutiny, or do you like a little ambiguity? What's the rule? Do you like some flexibility? I I mean, discussion is important to have with the developer and have some room in which we can debate or discuss and create an agreement that both can be happening. It's hard to do that strictly through a prescriptive, But I think there's a place for prescriptive where standard subdivision, check boxes, dot the i's, cross the t's, and we're done. But because that all in love, no.

Yeah. I mean, I think, you know, as as a I spent the last year campaigning and talking to citizens and, you know, and things like that. And I think the important part aspect that we have today is, like, what is Nibley? Like, we're we're, you know, creating that sense of, like, the vision for Nibley, what is Nibley, and then let's stick to it. Right? And, you know, Garrett did he kinda paralleled my thought a little bit of just, like, have, a, having a complete city, but, b, having a city that can complement all kinds of different uses, sizes, whatever. And, you know, when that time comes and where it makes sense. So what I find frustrating is just kinda to parallel a lot of discussion we've had tonight is it's basically just binary, one or the other, right, right now in our code. And then, really, as as we work through things like we just went through that open space subdivision, you know, where you went and created all that code that I thought was great. But my fear was was because it was already basically entitled. Once we grant that zone, it could go one way or the other. Right? And my little feedback on that was, let's just create a variety of zones that encourage variety of building and and visually interesting developments. So it doesn't just feel like a a a niggly I don't want niggly to be a cookie cutter, you know, one size thing. I I like to see variety. I like to see open space mixed in, trails connecting people, you know, things like that. So I just simply wanna see some variation in option and then just let the legislative body, you know, decide as as we talk to to the community. And then whether it's this version of the council or the next and the next and the next, work work together as a city to decide what Midway should become, and then we have the options to build to build that mission, frankly. So right now, we just don't have that much variety nor option to do that. And I think we just have to balance, like, the reality of where how cities are growing in 2026 and beyond, but also hold true to what makes Nibley Nibley or any other city, right, special to them and create that vision and stick to it. So that's fine enough.

And then

these individuals that said, I hope so bad. I know we might think a couple factors. We just came from some training in Saint George in order to promote you know, certain cities get get the microphone, and they they get a chance to promote what's happening. It was the the cities that seem to get promoted and get be a little bit press time are those that determine the destiny of their city, not the developers. The developers come to them and then they say, okay. Why is it actually starvation in our city? And we will allow this and we won't allow that, and this is why. And so it's a it's a city administrative led discussion is what they were promoting for the most part. And, of course, you're negotiating. You're working with with developers, but it was it was the cities determine the destiny of the city, not the way around. That was an interesting principle I've learned from our training down there. It's just a it's a principle. And what's also important that as we look at our city plan, towards the back of it, you have a bunch of surveys that the citizens have taken. And these citizens, I think, are the number one stakeholders in the city. They're the ones paying the taxes. They made a choice to live here for a reason, and I think I think they should have a significant influence on how the city ends up, how the what the future of the city is. So then we always have to go through the lens of of also what does the citizens want? And and you can read those surveys like I have in the comments, and they're quite direct. And I think the mayor left some good good points months ago to me, and that is, well, how much influence do the systems have? We all need brought up and all the hard part of the mayor that when we when they maybe have thought of of much much about development as you have, then maybe the influence might be as important. That would be paraphrased, but I thought that we were supposed to solve that right. And it says that that we put a lot of time and effort into this, and sometimes we have the citizens don't, but I have to trust them whether they're on face value. But I do believe this. I believe many of the citizens have made many comments that they don't want the future of the other way to be overwhelmed with, attached, the additional attached housing. Mhmm. They want more detached. And I think and I think we can accommodate that. I think we can create some zones that are additional that we do have that can allow for some smaller lots and smaller homes.

I mean, it's important.

So I do think we want a variety of economic levels to be into our city and just say, I I think I'd echo everything that different said there. So I think we should be aggressive about that. I I do. I think it's attractive. I think it's an it it builds good ownership. People wanna stay here. We wanna start, and I think they wanna stay here. I think it's also important to point out why people wanna live in Italy. And that is you think about you get to live in Cache Valley. You can go to Bridgeline. Thank you. I mean, Bridgeline excels in, like, everything. It's a valuable school to go to. People wanted their kids to go to Ridgeline, and you don't have to go to the mess of Logan to get to Salt Lake. Right? And and this is a valuable place to live. It will be more more expensive than other pieces of property. I think that's just the reality. I tried to devalue our property as much as just understand it. This is a great place to live. Thank you.

Thanks. I hope some of these topics have moved on without me. So I'll just throw them out. If you wanna talk about them a little bit as we go along, that's fine. If you allow me to just read through them, that's fine too. I think the idea of prescriptive versus performance zoning is is something I've struggled with for for twenty five years now. I mean, the idea that we can write a prescriptive zone that actually accomplishes what we wanted to accomplish in all the different contexts in Nibley City, I think, is really hard to do. But it is definitely easier to deal with from an administrative point of view. It's absolutely easier for developers to deal with because developers have said over and over that they will take a known liability over the uncertainty of a known asset versus liability. The process of working through a maybe, as Tom pointed out, is very, very hard on bill workers because they put time and effort into it. Staff our staff puts time and effort into it. And then in the end, you know, if we're not all on the same page, then that was all kind of just now it's it's there there are some specific tactics, though, that mean we should do performance type zoning. The the Nielsen folks in Weaver said, one of the bad things the bad things you can do for affordable housing is decide you want to make affordable housing and then zone it that way. Because that just increased the value of the property and made it less portable. So instead, they say, do it. This is a developer now who typically doesn't like performance agreements development agreements, you know, they said zone it, oh, half acre lots, and then when we come in, give us eight units per acre. Right? And and that helps with affordability. Now if you take that idea from a different point of view, that might look arbitrary and capricious. So somewhere there's the right mix between prescriptive versus performance zoning, and we just have to keep working on that. Our relationship with developers is incredibly complicated. We depend on developers to help solve to help achieve the goals that that we stated when Levi started this. Right? We don't build houses. The government doesn't build houses. Developers build houses. And I think that they're great folks, and I'm incredibly distrustful of developers because I believe their motivation is to maximize their profit margin. And that is not our motivation. Right? When a developer says it doesn't pencil out, I fear that that means it doesn't maximize my profit market. And I wanted to build during the boom what would make me the most money, And that doesn't necessarily fit, you know, what we're trying to do what we're trying to to do as a plan in our city. What complicates that is developers know, and they have been successful at city shopping us. Just from history, there's 19 communities in Cache Valley. And because we're all growing we're growing into one another. Strata is on our northern border and straight across from our FireLine Nature Park because we turned them away. They came in with the proposal, and we said, we don't even have a multifamily housing zone, so go away. And so now here it is on our border, and we suffer some of the impacts of that. It's not unique to the North. We're going through the same thing in the South as our cities grow toward one another. Again, I I believe it's and there's nothing wrong with it. I'm a capitalist, but the the motivation to maximize the profit market means developers will say, that puts us in a tough situation.

There's

there I wanna come back to I think I was quoting, actually, Casey Snyderweb. Okay. Thank you, Bob. He said, I try to vote the way my constituents would vote if they had spent as much time learning about all sides of the issue.

Well,

that's I mean, that's a piece of snare. He has all due respect for my friend Casey.

Sometimes he doesn't know as much as he did with conversation.

Do you see the deal from

one of the actually. Mhmm. I haven't seen a batch of letters from fourth graders recently. Few different classes. One of the classes. One of the classes. This is what we have to deal with in terms of what our citizens want and what we what our citizens I'm gonna go ahead and say the perception of what our citizens want. About half of the letters from one of those classes, the fourth graders said, Midway will be a better place if we don't build any more houses. Oh. And I wrote back to the fourth graders, visited their class, because I wanted to specifically ask them, where do you plan to live when it's time for you to move out of your parents' house? Would you like to live in Italy? Would you like to live in Cache Valley? Would you like to live in a place like that? It is a great place to live. And and, frankly, they hadn't thought about it. Someone said, I'm gonna live in my parents' house forever. And I said, okay. Or you can just talk to them about this. And you can have your own family in the same house as your parents and even have brothers and sisters or labor in your family. It's the same. So

I think I

think it is hard to to look at this from all these different points of view, but but we have to we have to settle those issues and and try to see it from from more than just one point of view. One specific thing oh, let me let me come back to my distress for developers for a minute. You don't have to wonder why people what people will do if you understand why they are doing it. And so while that sounds pretty neat to say, well, developers are there to maximize their profit margin, that's their motivation, then you know what they are going to do. And so I know there are agencies that are nonprofits. I'm not sure that we found the right one as we've looked around. But there are organizations that have a differentiated mission than that. So it's not that they're going to be able to build houses for free, and it's not that they'll be able to solve all of the affordability problems. But at least they have in their mission statement and and and and they have expenses and everything else, they have paid bills, but there there is to this nonprofit. So I'm wondering if we can get help from somebody like that to achieve what we want and then we can and maybe it lines up with their mission statement. A very specific thing, I I think I've finally given up after twenty five years. The last two annexations that we're considering, Midway City needs to be very clear that we are not in the ag preservation business. We don't have the financial means. Our citizens can't afford ag preservation. The scale of what it takes to preserve ag is let's talk about the Leeray McAllister funding that the state does. And in 2025, the state allocated a million dollars to preserve open space

throughout the state. Yep. Yep. Pretty good.

And a million dollars doesn't go very far. In comparison, think about what our $20,000,000 cash value of the space fund. That doesn't go very far. The fifth amendment of the constitution says that governments cannot take property without due compensation. And the Supreme Court has expanded that to say over overly aggressive or unreasonably aggressive zoning, which means a judge is gonna have to decide what that means, is a taking that has to be compensated. Newly citizens pay about a million dollars a year in property tax. And to take 20 times what you know, to compare it to what Castelloni is trying to do, and I think it's only accomplishing something on a very small scale to to to to take 20 times what our citizens pay in property tax in a year to say, well, we're gonna we're actually gonna do something to preserve agriculture. We can't simply say no. We're gonna take this into our city in Puerto Minnesota. We don't have the financial resources, and we should give up on them. And the problem is people think we have that power. They think we can just say no. But in fact, it takes money to to be able to say that. One last point on pioneering agreements, Tom. I I think you're right on looking downstream, literally, if we're, you know, talking about which way the water flows. If developer a only needs an eight inch pipe, we can't ask them to put it in tow gauge pipe, but we know there's likely gonna be a developer b downstream to that. And it makes great sense to upsize the pipe. While it's being installed, we can't make they'll break pay for it. Whatever mechanism we come up with, whether it's a pioneer agreement agreement or something something, what I want is developer b eventually has to pay for the cost of that upgrade somehow, and there's cash flow issues and everything else to worry about. But if developer b is gonna be the benefactor, the one that comes later that's downstream is gonna be the benefactor of an upsized pipe, but it makes sense to upsize the pipe earlier than when development b is doing a project. Development b somehow, we need to make we need to hold development b, you know, responsible for a cost of the upgrade. Not all the developers, not the developer across town through impact fees for everybody. Certainly not citizens, but somehow the developer that benefited from the upsides somehow needs to be the one that eventually pays for the upsides. And I'm not be able to update. I don't I don't have an answer, but that's my goal. Anyone wanna follow-up on any of those points? I kinda just blasted them

out. Okay. I think

This is Kyle. Can I jump in for a minute?

Yeah. It's a great meeting.

Well, we've

joined.

Yeah. It it's a joint meeting.

We also have

Aaron and Nate on the line as well that we at least I would love to hear from other opinions.

But, yeah, go ahead, Kyle.

So while mayor Jacobson was talking, one thought that came to mind, you know, I know we can't preserve agriculture, and that's not the business of the city, and it makes sense. But one question I thought about is, obviously, we're talking about the growth and and where the new future development's going to go. And and, Levi, you may or may not know this or Tom, but has anybody ever looked at obviously, land is a is a finite resource in Nibley. Do we know if all of the remaining residential and agricultural land was developed to an average of, say, a fifth or a quarter of an acre lots. Do we know really how many more homes that would be or anything close to that? I'm just wondering I mean, how much more growth does the city actually have till we till we reach capacity if we developed in that manner? Does anybody know that?

Yeah. That's typically what you would do a buildout study for, and I think we'd have to define how that is. Right? Because I think I think the difficulty with that so I've seen I've seen build out studies. There's there's a lot of nuances there. So, for example, I mentioned the point nine three acre lot. Our current zoning doesn't really allow that to be subdivided. So what what properties are we talking about? Right? Is it is it these larger tracts of land that haven't been developed at all? But we could we could come up with a number for sure. I mean, we could do an analysis and and figure that out. We just have to come up with those parameters.

And I'm sure that would probably be difficult because, obviously, roads, you know, are gonna fluctuate based on developments and what land is available, and and I get that. I'm just I'm just curious

what commodity of land is left to be developed. Yeah. I I think I think if I think we could do it relatively easy if we came up with some reasonable assumptions of, okay. We're only talking about undeveloped land of a certain size within the city. Now I guess your your question, though, is it within Nibley city boundaries, or is it in our annexation area? Because a lot of our growth comes from annexation. So maybe that's a

I guess that would be a a question one b or something like that to it. Right? Yeah. I mean, because, obviously, we've got what we have control over, but then you're right. Annexation could continue to happen too, and then we're, you know, taking that hand. But, I mean, ultimately, I think I don't know. On my kind of viewpoint, we definitely want to be respectful of of the landowner's rights. But at one point, does the developer I mean, we this the city still has to be able to, I think, have some guidance and direction on where the city continues to grow. And and I think as long as we're realistic and we're fair, you know, I think then we are respecting the land owner land owner rights with everyone else. And so, I mean, I I performance zoning does make me nervous. You know? And and and so if we ever look at adding anything like that in, I think for me, it would be what checks and balances can we have in there to protect the rights of the remaining citizens around those new developments. Right? And I think that we have to be responsible and respectful for both. But, I mean, you know, it's definitely it definitely makes me nervous. But, I mean, it's it's an intriguing idea. And I may have missed this at the beginning of the meeting, but do we have any examples across the state where this has been successful or there's been positives that we've seen?

I think I think there's a lot of examples, and and Michael brought it up that that we can we can look to other examples for different ideas. I I I think that's a good I mean, back back to Nick's question. I don't wanna cut any anyone off, you know, with continuous discussion on what our next steps is. I think that could be a good first step is looking at other examples to spur ideas. If we think that it it's particularly if we think it's something that fits our community that we're not currently providing. I think that I think I don't think I don't think that hurts at all to to get those ideas. And you know, I mean, if we go to if we go to Downtown Ogden and we see a, you know, a six story building, maybe maybe we say, okay. Yeah. This isn't gonna fit in Nibley. But but I'm sure there's plenty of examples out there that do fit our community. So

There's there's

who's walking in the middle of the avenue?

That's an amazing boat community. People sit on their front porches. You walk down the sidewalk and they say, hi. And then there were these tiny little lots that was built in, like, post World War two. I don't see It was 1910, actually. It was pretty

Yeah.

My kid who did to I'm so excited about them being on a thousand square foot lot in Salt Lake City on a 1,000 square foot house that was built in 1921. And it looks okay on the surface, and then I walked into the crawl space, and it's just like, don't lift the don't lift the hood. But

I

mean, I don't know exactly what they paid, but they paid about four times or anything I've ever paid for a house to be able to get into that. And it it's not up in the avenue as it's done. It's called Liberty Wells. Yeah.

It's a cool little community. And they're tiny.

Compared to English standards, they're tiny lots. So it'd be fun to go see see some of those. It's almost a return. It's almost back to back to the future. Yeah. Right? I mean, you guys talk about the houses you lived in when you your starter homes. There's a bunch of retired people that live next dog's kid. So some people just stay in that. And Marindale is a whole mix of people. So I I'm inspired by some of those smaller lot size, smaller analysis. Kylie, a question about how what do we look like at? I mean, just just looking at undeveloped area between Midway and Harlem without crossing into 8991, assuming we have the same sort of average density that we have now, which I think will be affordable for sure, but just throwing that assumption. I think Deeply could easily be gone two or three times the size that we are now before we run out of space.

Right. And we're and we're projected to grow two or three times the size of if if you you know, in thirty, forty years. Yeah. I

really appreciate your shape. And that's what it looks like. They're so hard for me to get my head around. Are we talking about the right for me to do what I want? It's Barber and Farmers' Terrace to do with what they have a right with their property. We talk about the rights of me to tell my neighbor what they could do on their property. You know? That's the it's such a point of view thing. We have a right to farm, and I'll I'll follow-up on what I think needs to I'm not gonna get reservation, but it would be as the as the access has the resource to achieve that. That's gotta be up to somebody with a lot more the bios development. It's but we have a right to farm. Do farmers that used to farm, like, one more and didn't have kids that don't wanna farm, do they have a right not to farm? And I'm not arguing with anybody. I'm just I

it's easy for me to to to confuse myself. I just

I think I think to your question, and this goes back to what you said previously, Mara, on on ag preservation in general is, you know, the city doesn't have the funds for that. I think that was why we pursued the transfer development rights ordinance because the idea is, okay, the private market can can take care of that if we can define, and it and it can work out economically. Obviously, we didn't quite at least, it hasn't it hasn't shown that it we quite hit the the target on that for the private market to,

respond. But that was the attempt, I guess. Yeah. Yeah. I think it was around, you know, gonna leave the temple. It's a I think it's it it's going to take zoning discipline. If we give developers what they want without transferring development rights into a receiving area

Then I'm gonna do.

Right. Yep. Can I jump in with a couple thoughts when you're done, Mayor? Yeah. Yeah. I'll quit. I mean, I if you didn't have to say anything for a long time, and then, you know, once I took the hold and then nothing done, it's just good stuff. So I'm gonna start.

No. You keep going as long as you want. You're good. I haven't jumped in much yet because I feel like everybody's sort of covering my thoughts for me, but I like the conversation that we're having. I know in the past, Levi, you've you've done some presentations to us before where you showed us slideshows and lots and lots of pictures of what smaller homes on smaller lots look like, especially more like that cottage housing overlay. Right? And I think one of the things that we've brought up that nobody's citizens really want is the preservation of our character. And people think, oh, but what is what is it gonna look like if there's a whole bunch of homes on small lots? And that sounds scary, but I know, Levi, you've showed us a lot of pictures of how they can be done really nicely. And and even I'm thinking on a smaller scale of Daybreak community or, like, Hill Farm community in Kaysville. I mean, there's a lot of these that are master planned communities and not necessarily on the scale of Daybreak, but but have that form based code where homes have a a similar look and a feel. They fit in with each other and with the surrounding community. And I think that that might be a nice tie between what the kind of zoning that we currently have and keeping some control over what things look like and allowing for those smaller lots and smaller homes, those restrictions with smaller homes so that we can kinda find that happy balance. So that I don't know. That that seems like one avenue I would love to pursue further either either with a consultant or on our own. I'm happy to do a amateur research I can as well. And that's something I would love love to look into more for our city.

Nathan, where whose name is still here? I don't know if he wanted to jump in.

Name and it doesn't look like Nathan's on anymore.

I'm just curious from the in your experience of, like, we want to go to consultant route and if you have any experience, like, dealing with somebody, like, in that context, like, what is to be expected? Are they just gonna tell us stuff that we already know, or what what are they gonna provide?

I'm just curious. No. Not necessarily. I think I think one benefit and and it obviously takes the right consultant. We gotta we gotta do our research and and make sure it's it's someone that's gonna get us what we want and not, yeah, not just copy and paste something from another community because, obviously, we can do that. Yeah. But I think one thing that a cons consultant could provide is some expertise on hearing us out on what our values are and what we're what we're trying to achieve. I mean, Troy pointed out some things. Everyone has everyone has brought up some things that we we would like to achieve. How do we actually connect that with standards that will get us there? I think we struggle with doing that, and I think that's why we've that's a big reason why we've gone more toward the legislative route of development agreements and negotiation. And we don't really know what we want until we see it. And And then once we see it, maybe we'll tell you if we like it or not. Yeah. If we could articulate that with a professional that understands that that understands the markets and and understands how to connect that to the words in the code, I think that would be worth

that investment. So it's not And there are professionals like that. Yeah. It's not professionals like that. Yeah. It's not first.

Yeah. And we have to do that. They can't they can't do that for us. Yeah. Yeah.

It seems like a reasonable first step is start putting on paper what we want, and then let's combine the good parts of everything, see what we get. And then do we want community investment? Would be my next question.

And that's where yeah. Everybody goes together, works at some of these places, talks about together, brings it up back here to what you envision. We may interpret these after we see them, what we like and don't like. But unless you go out and see it, you just kinda imagine enjoying the picture. And it's not quite the same.

But, Mike, you're you're so right. And the floor of city from a is a plot a plat.

Yeah.

And no flops during All we see is that is too small. That's too small. That looks like it could be number too small. Nobody can see the innovation that goes into Beyond the Planet.

And the beautiful thing is you will visit the place and then look at the plaque and say, this plaque produce that Yep. And be so creative with plat. That's fine. Yeah. The Marindale Avenue plat, that is the first subdivision

in Cache County that I that I I've I've heard that was. First actual legal subdivision. Pretty boring plat if you ask me, but a pretty cool street.

It certainly would be smaller on smaller lots. They have a smaller lots, but not Yeah. So, hey, you'll be a pessimist, but a smaller lot doesn't guarantee a smaller house. Let me get the marketplace to buy into smaller homes because they want what their parents have. Well Well, I don't know how you sell that to a developer.

Well and a lot of that, I think, is because it goes to the highest bidder. Right? I mean, at the end of the day, if someone even if someone wants a smaller house, they're not paying that high of a premium for it as for a larger house. So that's what we show. If

we're having to get involved, we need to make the possibility of some division for small houses, we don't need that.

Right. And so when they have a couple small houses,

but I guess we're gonna work

saying Well

because I have. No finish pavement.

So so

I'm gonna take that on lawyers, Paul. You you asked how how do we guarantee

a small house while a lot? And, again, going back to the the different frameworks, I I really encourage everybody to look at different zone frameworks. FAR and lot covered ratio would 100% guarantee smaller amount. Yeah. Lot covered ratio would work. Okay. Would a developer buy into it as a product? Is it just me?

No. And Aaron's just said she's leaving as well. Kyle is still.

Oh, I mean, he could be a mess. But a three hour garage would be a luxury. Yeah.

Sites. First thing,

every every council would be interested in. You're stupid on it.

Decision we can make at this time because I don't think we're just blaming a bridge. I was just who would like to be an idiot at that. You know? They should never do the best that they could in 1945. They're making all kinds of mistakes for us with issues. And then, again, you are so right on on the developer side. Some of my greatest mistakes was that we allowed developers to come in for some of these amazing ideas, and then we'd rezone it, They immediately sell it off. And they were like, thank you for the rezone. We don't give a crap about this anymore. We're selling it, and we've doubled our money on the rezone. And then they would some someone else would come in and just destroy the garbage and make it look terrible. And that's how they that's how they get us to be like, oh, Jess. We know we know in meetings, you said that you really wanted some more businesses on the West Side Of Logan. With this zoning, you could do it. I'd be like, oh, that's great. We rezone it. No business set to the West Side Of Logan. And so I I think the flexibility obviously, I think there's some options you can do, but but but I do think we could come up with some things that allow flexibility. The best agreement I ever had was something that Kimber told me not to do, and I did it anyways. And I walked away feeling pretty good about it. And I I went and walked the lot with the developer, and who cares? I've been gone for five years. I said, hey. I think I know the council pretty dang well. I think if you presented this with the agreement attached to the to your request that you could get x, y, and z. And they presented it, and they got it. And it was kind of this mixed use thing that had a good a good amount of single family homes. Owner occupancy was important. And so I think it's you can lay things out within it and say your stated goals, and that allows them to understand what they may be able to present in the council. We never had that anywhere, Logan. Like, oh, we hope to have more owner occupancy. It was like, well, let's see what you got. You know? And and but stated goals like that just within some framework, I think would really allow allow developers to come in and say, okay. Let me get this. Here's the agreement that I'll present to the council. So I think there's some things that we can do. Do. Because then if you say, look, counsel, you have 10 things. And we say counsel because you're the ones that matter. We just say, we recommend her recommended her or denial. But they'd say, look, Kimson, you have 10 must haves. Here's your must haves. We check this box. Check this box. Check this box. Check this box. We can't beat this one. But in order to compensate, we have this. Check this box. Check this. I think that would something like that. Honestly, if you were to say, here's our nonnegotiables. Here's the thing that we hope to see from every development. Something like that. We could get down to a reasonable zoning with flexibility. As I've listened, I just maybe I'm way off. It sounds like you have the flexibility to do something. Am I wrong?

You could.

I mean, I don't disagree with Troy, but I don't see any company. In my area of mind, I think all if you have a thousand square feet in two bedroom, you're glorious. Yeah.

Lee, I just pointed out folks

two council members that were, you know, here in person.

We no longer have a forum, and so our council meeting is adjourned. We can continue to discuss it with for the record, we are adjourned.

It's funny though. Kyle and I had started in the same area, and it was what was our house? 1,195 square feet maybe, Kyle?

Yeah. It was about 1,200, just under it.

And I I think Grace started do you think I I think we could get people into something.

Pretty easy. Oh, you know, my my daughter and son, how they built that community, hospitality group, and they're they're upstairs since thirty, thirty, forty, thirty, and there's basement on on you know, you should put that and they've got pretty much probably bigger than my lot. But they he's put that whole on stuff. Moscow put the two car garage on it. But it's two bedrooms, two baths, nice little home. Things like that, you know, would be be acceptable too. They love it. They just have this bonus. So we have three kids. They fit right in. They haven't done the dates together. They're looking good, but they turned out work.

Although, maybe Not

There's a few places they can.

I think.

So so, again, I appreciate all these besides talking about blocks as, you know, lot of area of approaching for a team with setbacks or whatever. Actually, trying to talk a developer into building. But that I haven't heard that's what they really want to do. But if we're willing to give them something, they will probably, you know, give us something. Yeah. So as we write an ordinance or something. You know? And then, Tom, we talked about giving if the community gives something up, the way to make sure that the community benefits from the other side of what we gave up is through deed restrictions. The neighborhood nonprofits were fantastic in Italy for a while, and they were affordable housing for the first generation. And then because people had sweat equity, you know, in those houses, the the next buyer, it was no different than any other house. That's the way it should have been because they had sweat equity. But if we're if we're if the community through up to making a concession, we need to make sure that benefit gets to the end of the row instead of landing in the developer's pocket as an increased problem, Arjun. And, hopefully, it's to the benefit of the community for ten or twenty or thirty years through deep restrictions. And those are all those are all things we can impose. We just have to talk somebody into doing it.

Mayor Jacobsen, I was gonna ask if you could

I I prefer Larry if it's okay. But

Sure. I'll call you Larry. So, Larry, because that's, I guess, one of my concerns too is that, obviously, we can say whether it's performance or rescriptive zoning, and a developer could come in and, you know, we can say these small lot sizes or things like that. But you you mentioned deed restrictions. You know, obviously, we wanted to benefit the community for a long time. What do you mean by that? Like, are we saying that the developer can come in and do x, y, and z, but there are certain restrictions on what they can do with the deed moving forward? Or or what do you mean?

Yeah. It's a restriction reported on the deed of that lot, and it not only applies to the developer, it can apply for the next thirty years. And certain types of deed restrictions, if a community, for example, says we need workforce housing. We need housing for teachers. We need housing for firefighters. We need housing for law enforcement. And the community decides that they're going to allow, I don't know, something like a reduction in impact fees, or they're going to allow an increased density, or they're going to make an allowance to make that workforce housing possible, the city can impose that same deed restriction not only on the developer, but on future owners of that of that lot and that house. For example, it has to be owner occupied. For example, it has a capped appreciation rate. And and so, you know, future buyers, owners of that are giving things up, but that's because they're getting the benefit of something the community gave up to get what the community want.

And and

the city become is the enforcer of those deep restrictions. Habitat for Humanity, those kinds of folks, they put a lot of deep restrictions, things like lower occupancy and maximum appreciation rates and things like that. And the city becomes the enforcer of those deed restrictions even if they're set up by a nonprofit organization.

Does that make sense, Kyle? Yeah. Yeah. So if if we put a deed if the deed restrictions on a home that says it has to be owner occupied, it can only be, educators, law enforcement, EMS, or something like that, then for whatever time period we put on that, that would effect. So if John Doe wants to sell to Jane Doe down the future, she has to fit into one of those boxes in order to sell to buy that house?

Exactly right. And and the logic is John Doe in that when he bought the house and that he had that advantage offered to him whenever the concession was. Maybe it was a, like you say, a lower cost house because they weren't in the higher density. But because John, though, bought into that, he's bound by he sells the house.

K. No. That that makes sense.

Multifamily housing. Moab requires any multifamily housing project. One half of it to be occupied by workforce by by workforce laborers. Because Moab relies on people that make the beds and wash the dishes and serve the food, and they realize their economy will collapse if they don't handle roofs. And they Moab's out of the middle of nowhere. People from the view to to Moab like you can with New York City. They have deep restrictions on one half of the multifamily housing built in Moab that is for workforce housing. Yeah. That requirement is is on the owners of of who wants the multifamily housing.

Yeah. So there's a lot of

There's a lot of ways for the to interfere with people's needs. That's the that's the bad news.

No. No.

What are the next steps for all of this week? That's a really good question. I think this is a really good brainstorm. I think I think it brought out a lot of great ideas. I think I think we all need to take a little bit of time and reschedule maybe another something like this and revisit and come with a path forward. I don't know if we're gonna get that tonight, realistically, unless we wanna unless we want to The efforts of that or something. Yeah. Yeah. Like and I I would just say maybe maybe there's a good for nest next first, second step. I don't think there's necessarily I don't know if we're gonna get to a a whole path of exactly what we're doing, but may maybe what are the next steps? I think that's great. Could we

maybe submit? It's shop would be the initial where we present to the. Piece of paper and then people could put, like, a favorite on the. Something more. But but it said, like, this one this one, don't like this. Obviously, then that would give us better sense of the direction we want to go.

To show the different options and then

I mean, individually. Yeah. Just set up a team's projects that we can just dump

examples and ideas in, and we can just collaborate that way. Would you be back with the team council if you see them? Okay? I think we can

share information. I do think that we need to be careful about deliberating outside of a public meeting Yeah. Because the open public meetings act. So if if if it's

What if we could just, like I mean, you could just say, your folder like, here's the folder where you put so many of those in. You can call them all about connect with space to, you know, so much images or whatever. Is that just a lot of space right now? I wonder if we could just somehow clip examples of maybe, like, hey. I found this really cool code in the city. Here, I'm just gonna post this to the team's folder for people to review. Is that okay? That won't finally make public meetings after anything? No. No discussion. Right? Yeah. No. Just security files. I took a screenshot of this of Wes Horton's code and whatever it is or whatever maybe

That is what would be we're

Yeah. I mean, I'm still like we gotta get the ball going. So Yep. So outside of meeting like this all the time, which take time, we can still collaborate and start to research if you're still inclined. And I just was trying to think about Teams is built for that. So use it and, like, just put stuff in. Or do you want us to send it to you and you do it or what?

I don't know if that crosses any lines. What do you would you say it does?

I don't think it would. I mean,

that's Cheryl.

I don't I don't think it would. I can also check with Cheryl.

But my understanding,

how it would work best is if there's no discussion in that Teams file, and then we as staff would retain that for for public access. And then if that material was used in the creation of code that would have, Huddl can be presented later on, then that would be an attachment

that we could

have your the agenda packet, for example, or reference to this. I to my knowledge, I don't see a problem if it's explicitly files going in there without any commentary deliberation.

Yeah. I I agree, Tom. I I agree with that one. If we say, here's an idea. I think that's okay. If we say, I like this and I don't like that, then I think that's a policy discussion. And we get easily and so public should have access to see what ideas are put in there without comment just like we do, and and then we can always check with our attorney. Their Mhmm. That that's their job is to keep us out of trouble, so we consult.

There's nothing in my mind that we've done with a file on it, and then, like, and Troy is like, oh, what did you like about this? He can just see him. Yeah. Yeah.

Individually. Okay. Yeah.

Just yeah. Just individually.

Well, so

Yeah. Absolutely. We're buying the vehicle. We're still renting.

Yeah. If yeah. One trips or individual discussion, there's no problem. Of course, we want to avoid having a form or or even taking the press. Or if we do have a form, we post it. Yeah.

Just see. That's a it's a It's a it's a mock meeting, and people were invited to follow the boss. In fact, that's what we did for the

Logan does it, like, every week. Yeah.

And and just

to further explain, you can send out an email, but it needs to be a blank part of the copy, and you can't have a group discussion or you can instead of sending, you know, all these different emails, you could send, hey. I I I like this, and that blank carbon copy would go to each person. And then if they do reply, that would only come to you, and then you could have that individual discussion. So

Yes.

Would you like to set up the folder, Levi, or or Talon? I I guess it doesn't really matter who's Figure out if we can. Yeah. K.

So action items. There's one. Set up a folder.

There's so discussion about

tour. Is that something we want to have an action item on on scheduling

a date? Yeah. I mean, I I can is that a later thing after we

What's the guy find different?

I can I can look in into it? And in the meantime, if you guys wanna send me ideas, maybe blank carbon copy or just send them directly to me or and then we can propose them to the group. Yeah. Yeah. Economics. Very good.

Economic. Economics. Yeah. Any final

Do we wanna reach out to a nonprofit developer and maybe have companies with it?

We've already yeah. I've had it. I think so. Mhmm.

We can get a green department somewhere.

Yeah. We started.

It is it's the right initial statement.

Yeah. Thank you, Tom.

Thank you. I assume you're okay.

Well, I I just try to get some action items for later.

I mean, I don't need, like, too much to do, but a few things is great.

Yeah.

I think you think I think it depends.

Yeah. We we can forward it in the which is almost a year. It's

a I think it's good to set a timeline. I don't I don't think we do that till we've had a scope of what we're doing, though. And we're not we're still defining the scope. So once we get once we get a scope of this is what we're tackling, I think then we'll say what the timeline is.

K. Any final thought?

If not, meaning return.