Nibley City Planning Commission- 8/13/2026
2026-08-14
Levi Roberts. They're probably not plugged in.
Levi Roberts. They're probably not plugged in.
Oh, I didn't put. What? Levi Roberts City Planner.
Oh, I didn't put. What? Levi Roberts City Planner.
It's that. I can either plug them in or you're on speaker over. Our recreation department uses the dais during the week, and they unplug them so they're not broadcasting. They're shirt folding.
It's that. I can either plug them in or you're on speaker over. Our recreation department uses the dais during the week, and they unplug them so they're not broadcasting. They're shirt folding.
It should be good now.
It should be good now.
Discussion, duration. Do we need to improve the minutes from
Discussion, duration. Do we need to improve the minutes from
Mhmm. Last minutes of the current agenda. Yeah. Yep. Minutes and
Mhmm. Last minutes of the current agenda. Yeah. Yep. Minutes and
K. We need approval of the minutes from the meeting on July 30.
K. We need approval of the minutes from the meeting on July 30.
Do I do it separately or all together?
Do I do it separately or all together?
In the agenda. Or we can do it again. We can do it again. I move to
In the agenda. Or we can do it again. We can do it again. I move to
adapt and approve the general consent of of July 30, the minutes from 07/30/2026 and current
adapt and approve the general consent of of July 30, the minutes from 07/30/2026 and current
agenda. One second. K. Here's the the motion to approve the minutes and also a second.
agenda. One second. K. Here's the the motion to approve the minutes and also a second.
Times received. Times were be fine, please. K. Let's go ahead and vote on it. All in favor? Any opposed? I guess we cannot vote again. I guess we could. And so we'll move to the public hearing. It's 26 hyphen 12, if not, for the NC nineteen point fifty expiration of any applications. And, Levi, you wanna introduce that to them?
Times received. Times were be fine, please. K. Let's go ahead and vote on it. All in favor? Any opposed? I guess we cannot vote again. I guess we could. And so we'll move to the public hearing. It's 26 hyphen 12, if not, for the NC nineteen point fifty expiration of any applications. And, Levi, you wanna introduce that to them?
Yeah. So, just a little background on this. So we've had we've had this issue in the past where, you know, we have pretty clear deadlines for staff of when we need to submit or when we need to submit comments to applicants. Generally, you know, like, for a subdivision, for example, fifteen days review for preliminary plat and twenty days for final plat. But for the applicant, they really can go as long as as long as they need to. But this becomes an issue, you know, as over time, we change the city changes its code, and we're we're constantly changing our code. And and and so we then it becomes an issue of if they're vested under the old code versus the new code. So what we're recommending, and this is pretty common in a lot of cities of from from what we've heard, and this is also what we enforce with the building code, kind of the same with with building permits, the the same timeline, that if they haven't re if the applicant hasn't responded to request for information or or materials within a hundred and eighty days, then it's considered expired. They can request an ex a one time extension of up to a hundred and eighty days, And that is at the discretion of the whoever the approval authority is for the application whether to grant that. But but that's that's pretty much it for this ordinance. So staff's recommendation is to recommend approval of this ordinance. It it would establish more clear guidelines for for inactive applications. You know, currently, kind of how how this works, we can still expire them, but we kinda feel like it's somewhat arbitrary to say, okay. It's been a year. It's been nine months. It's been two years. It it we just wanna have clear guidance of a specific time frame. Agree. Yeah. And
Yeah. So, just a little background on this. So we've had we've had this issue in the past where, you know, we have pretty clear deadlines for staff of when we need to submit or when we need to submit comments to applicants. Generally, you know, like, for a subdivision, for example, fifteen days review for preliminary plat and twenty days for final plat. But for the applicant, they really can go as long as as long as they need to. But this becomes an issue, you know, as over time, we change the city changes its code, and we're we're constantly changing our code. And and and so we then it becomes an issue of if they're vested under the old code versus the new code. So what we're recommending, and this is pretty common in a lot of cities of from from what we've heard, and this is also what we enforce with the building code, kind of the same with with building permits, the the same timeline, that if they haven't re if the applicant hasn't responded to request for information or or materials within a hundred and eighty days, then it's considered expired. They can request an ex a one time extension of up to a hundred and eighty days, And that is at the discretion of the whoever the approval authority is for the application whether to grant that. But but that's that's pretty much it for this ordinance. So staff's recommendation is to recommend approval of this ordinance. It it would establish more clear guidelines for for inactive applications. You know, currently, kind of how how this works, we can still expire them, but we kinda feel like it's somewhat arbitrary to say, okay. It's been a year. It's been nine months. It's been two years. It it we just wanna have clear guidance of a specific time frame. Agree. Yeah. And
this is the part of the subdivision
this is the part of the subdivision
or Any land use application. Yeah. So it could be subdivision. It could be a fence permit. It could be any anything that comes out of land use. Okay. Yeah. Okay.
or Any land use application. Yeah. So it could be subdivision. It could be a fence permit. It could be any anything that comes out of land use. Okay. Yeah. Okay.
Yeah. I you know, before this year, we live in Providence. So we we got the we made the remodel and we do our own right. Another guy told me he'll got got it at the same time. And he's still sitting there permitted, and let's see. That's been twelve years now, and he's still permitted. He hasn't done any more than he did within six months.
Yeah. I you know, before this year, we live in Providence. So we we got the we made the remodel and we do our own right. Another guy told me he'll got got it at the same time. And he's still sitting there permitted, and let's see. That's been twelve years now, and he's still permitted. He hasn't done any more than he did within six months.
Yeah. And I don't know if it would a little bit more. Yeah. And I don't know if this would apply to that specific situation or not. If he's been granted a permit, we actually don't have an expiration Yeah. In every instance, but it's it's this really is for when they're working through the process, yeah, to get to the point of approval. And and we've asked them to for information so that they can become compliant, and they go, that's not gonna work for me. And and sometimes they can clarify and say, you know what? I'm I'm gonna withdraw my application. But very often, it just sits. And so this would expire at a certain point. But Anyway, it's the.
Yeah. And I don't know if it would a little bit more. Yeah. And I don't know if this would apply to that specific situation or not. If he's been granted a permit, we actually don't have an expiration Yeah. In every instance, but it's it's this really is for when they're working through the process, yeah, to get to the point of approval. And and we've asked them to for information so that they can become compliant, and they go, that's not gonna work for me. And and sometimes they can clarify and say, you know what? I'm I'm gonna withdraw my application. But very often, it just sits. And so this would expire at a certain point. But Anyway, it's the.
K. We'll go ahead and open and close the public hearing.
K. We'll go ahead and open and close the public hearing.
Well, I like it especially because they're safe. Let it expire when we're getting rid of the thing to close.
Well, I like it especially because they're safe. Let it expire when we're getting rid of the thing to close.
We can open the discussion now, Mike. What's the value number three or four?
We can open the discussion now, Mike. What's the value number three or four?
Mike, so this is just the application process? Yeah. Okay. So it's not like Stonebridge where they're haven't finished phase two and phase three?
Mike, so this is just the application process? Yeah. Okay. So it's not like Stonebridge where they're haven't finished phase two and phase three?
No. So we have a provision in our code that with a subdivision, for example, once they receive preliminary plat approval, within a year, they have to submit for final plat for at least the first phase. So Stonebridge, they have the first two phase, but there's no expiration for the next ones. So it doesn't really take care of Stonebridge and the issue there. One of the issues that's kind of goofy with Stonebridge, though, is they got a conditional use permit for that that says that they have to do certain things, and there's no sunset on that conditional use permit either. So this doesn't take care of all expiration of every situation. It's really it's really meant to be for, like, active applications, whether it's active or inactive. Once it becomes inactive, then then it's expired.
No. So we have a provision in our code that with a subdivision, for example, once they receive preliminary plat approval, within a year, they have to submit for final plat for at least the first phase. So Stonebridge, they have the first two phase, but there's no expiration for the next ones. So it doesn't really take care of Stonebridge and the issue there. One of the issues that's kind of goofy with Stonebridge, though, is they got a conditional use permit for that that says that they have to do certain things, and there's no sunset on that conditional use permit either. So this doesn't take care of all expiration of every situation. It's really it's really meant to be for, like, active applications, whether it's active or inactive. Once it becomes inactive, then then it's expired.
Yeah. And then they have to be.
Yeah. And then they have to be.
Yeah. Yeah. They'd have to reapply, and then whatever had has changed since that point, they'd have to adhere to those. Is this a legislative action or an election action? This is legislative, but it's but it's a it's a recommendation for city council. Yep. Good question.
Yeah. Yeah. They'd have to reapply, and then whatever had has changed since that point, they'd have to adhere to those. Is this a legislative action or an election action? This is legislative, but it's but it's a it's a recommendation for city council. Yep. Good question.
The documents point success to all of our NCC nineteen point five as a branch there. Okay. I'll accept it. K. There's been a motion and a second. Any other discussions? I think it's a good idea. I wish we could do it on building permits so the Outer West Path would get finished.
The documents point success to all of our NCC nineteen point five as a branch there. Okay. I'll accept it. K. There's been a motion and a second. Any other discussions? I think it's a good idea. I wish we could do it on building permits so the Outer West Path would get finished.
Yeah. Again, we do have a building permits, but once they have a building permit, we don't have An expiration. We don't have an expiration. It can just go on and on and on. Yeah. That's been going on for I know.
Yeah. Again, we do have a building permits, but once they have a building permit, we don't have An expiration. We don't have an expiration. It can just go on and on and on. Yeah. That's been going on for I know.
I think longer than that.
I think longer than that.
Yeah. So, anyway It'll be nice. It looks like it'll be the next one that's done. But so and I think they're earning money in building this, but it's vacant. So alright. Since there's no further discussion, we'll go to a vote on favor. Right. Looks like it's five to any opposed? Five to zero in favor of passing them. Moving on to public hearing, 26 hyphen 13 and then in NCC nineteen point twenty four point one fifty, prevent signs including provisions related to the political and the temporary signage and setbacks and permit requirements. And
Yeah. So, anyway It'll be nice. It looks like it'll be the next one that's done. But so and I think they're earning money in building this, but it's vacant. So alright. Since there's no further discussion, we'll go to a vote on favor. Right. Looks like it's five to any opposed? Five to zero in favor of passing them. Moving on to public hearing, 26 hyphen 13 and then in NCC nineteen point twenty four point one fifty, prevent signs including provisions related to the political and the temporary signage and setbacks and permit requirements. And
can you introduce that to us? Yeah. And and most of what I'm gonna be talking about was discussed in a workshop, not the last meeting, but the one before. What brought this up was was a a bill to pass in state code that requires cities to allow political signs in the park strip as long as the adjacent property owner, agrees to it, basically. The but on top of that, we're we did we did a more thorough review of our sign code because there were some things that we as staff felt should should be updated and changed. Our attorney reviewed it further. Didn't find a whole lot of issues, but but I'll I'll point those out of what what kind of came out of that. So first of all, there's an updated provision or, well, first first of all, we're the this code would would allow for those political signs and the park ship as I mentioned. But then on top of that, it updates temporary signage provisions. So it defines it further that the maximum time for a temporary sign is, I believe, is ninety days is what we said. So about three months. Beyond that, it's it's no longer considered temporary. And and and just clarifies it a little more so it's it's more enforceable. There's provisions in the current code that that say which signs need a building permit, which signs don't. And rather than that, we're just recommending to reference the building code. And if it if it if it needs a building permit, then we'll require it when they get their sign permit. If not, then then they won't. There there's some signs listed that really they don't they don't need a building permit. They we just need to make sure they meet, you know, zoning zoning standards, dimensions, and things like that. There's a we're recommending a reduced setback for signs. It's currently 10 feet for all signs, which is pretty restrictive. So we're we're recommending three feet. So still allows a little bit of a buffer, a little bit of breathing room there, you know, between the sidewalk, but 10 feet seemed a little excessive on there. So based on the discussion we had with with the planning commission previously on this. And then currently, most signs require conditional use permit. So they, you know, they this they would they are currently required to come to this body. And what we're recommending is rather than getting a conditional use permit, they would get a signed permit that would be administered by by city staff, and and we just make make sure that they meet all the standards of of the city code and then issue it similar to what we do currently with, like, fences and accessory buildings. So we felt like that was appropriate for signs, just streamline the process a little bit for applicants and and where it's, you know, completely administrative. It seemed like that's more appropriate. This last one, no one was clamoring for this, but it came out of the re review for from our attorney. And there's this restriction on sexually oriented businesses for EMD, which is electronic message display signs. He just said this could be a content neutrality issue. So there's a a provision. You know, it's it really is kind of a first amendment issue on on freedom of speech that we can't really discriminate based on the the content of the sign. And he said, you might be able to say you're doing it for some countervailing, you know, purpose, but it would be scrutinized. So we're just recommending to remove that restriction. It's specifically for AMD signs. If it ever came up, it's just I don't I don't know if it's worth the the scrutiny to have it in there, but that's up that's up to you. So staff's recommendation is to recommend approval of this ordinance. I'm happy to bring up the the specific code if you if you're interested, if you wanna dive in any further. But but it it pretty much reflects other than other than probably that last one, it reflects what we discussed previously. That last one came out of the review from the attorney.
can you introduce that to us? Yeah. And and most of what I'm gonna be talking about was discussed in a workshop, not the last meeting, but the one before. What brought this up was was a a bill to pass in state code that requires cities to allow political signs in the park strip as long as the adjacent property owner, agrees to it, basically. The but on top of that, we're we did we did a more thorough review of our sign code because there were some things that we as staff felt should should be updated and changed. Our attorney reviewed it further. Didn't find a whole lot of issues, but but I'll I'll point those out of what what kind of came out of that. So first of all, there's an updated provision or, well, first first of all, we're the this code would would allow for those political signs and the park ship as I mentioned. But then on top of that, it updates temporary signage provisions. So it defines it further that the maximum time for a temporary sign is, I believe, is ninety days is what we said. So about three months. Beyond that, it's it's no longer considered temporary. And and and just clarifies it a little more so it's it's more enforceable. There's provisions in the current code that that say which signs need a building permit, which signs don't. And rather than that, we're just recommending to reference the building code. And if it if it if it needs a building permit, then we'll require it when they get their sign permit. If not, then then they won't. There there's some signs listed that really they don't they don't need a building permit. They we just need to make sure they meet, you know, zoning zoning standards, dimensions, and things like that. There's a we're recommending a reduced setback for signs. It's currently 10 feet for all signs, which is pretty restrictive. So we're we're recommending three feet. So still allows a little bit of a buffer, a little bit of breathing room there, you know, between the sidewalk, but 10 feet seemed a little excessive on there. So based on the discussion we had with with the planning commission previously on this. And then currently, most signs require conditional use permit. So they, you know, they this they would they are currently required to come to this body. And what we're recommending is rather than getting a conditional use permit, they would get a signed permit that would be administered by by city staff, and and we just make make sure that they meet all the standards of of the city code and then issue it similar to what we do currently with, like, fences and accessory buildings. So we felt like that was appropriate for signs, just streamline the process a little bit for applicants and and where it's, you know, completely administrative. It seemed like that's more appropriate. This last one, no one was clamoring for this, but it came out of the re review for from our attorney. And there's this restriction on sexually oriented businesses for EMD, which is electronic message display signs. He just said this could be a content neutrality issue. So there's a a provision. You know, it's it really is kind of a first amendment issue on on freedom of speech that we can't really discriminate based on the the content of the sign. And he said, you might be able to say you're doing it for some countervailing, you know, purpose, but it would be scrutinized. So we're just recommending to remove that restriction. It's specifically for AMD signs. If it ever came up, it's just I don't I don't know if it's worth the the scrutiny to have it in there, but that's up that's up to you. So staff's recommendation is to recommend approval of this ordinance. I'm happy to bring up the the specific code if you if you're interested, if you wanna dive in any further. But but it it pretty much reflects other than other than probably that last one, it reflects what we discussed previously. That last one came out of the review from the attorney.
No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No.
No public hearing and move the discussion, Avi. Number six, any discussions on this? We have this we have the codes in the packet. Right? Or the
No public hearing and move the discussion, Avi. Number six, any discussions on this? We have this we have the codes in the packet. Right? Or the
Yeah. I can pull I'll pull it up while you're talking.
Yeah. I can pull I'll pull it up while you're talking.
Is it? It's one of the changes on it too. Yeah. Is it? Yeah. Yep.
Is it? It's one of the changes on it too. Yeah. Is it? Yeah. Yep.
Can you give me an example of what the attorney is concerned about or saying more specifically?
Can you give me an example of what the attorney is concerned about or saying more specifically?
I know we can shop socially or in a business. He's not from.
I know we can shop socially or in a business. He's not from.
It's basically so there there's there's case law out there, and it and it really points to first amendment, a freedom of speech issue that cities really ought not to regulate content of signage through zoning and things like that, but but more just the the type of signage, the size, and that gets into content. So it's it's a it's a content neutrality issue. Does that make sense? Because you're saying, oh, well, you can't advertise a specific type of business. Like I said, we don't have anyone asking for this, but it's just to it's just a legal question. And so we're we're just recommending to strike that that specific provision. The d r? Yeah.
It's basically so there there's there's case law out there, and it and it really points to first amendment, a freedom of speech issue that cities really ought not to regulate content of signage through zoning and things like that, but but more just the the type of signage, the size, and that gets into content. So it's it's a it's a content neutrality issue. Does that make sense? Because you're saying, oh, well, you can't advertise a specific type of business. Like I said, we don't have anyone asking for this, but it's just to it's just a legal question. And so we're we're just recommending to strike that that specific provision. The d r? Yeah.
Does anybody know the history on why we haven't had any was there an issue back then that somebody was concerned about or
Does anybody know the history on why we haven't had any was there an issue back then that somebody was concerned about or
But we we You might be able to ask Larry. I think he wrote a lot of this back in the when he's on planning commission. But
But we we You might be able to ask Larry. I think he wrote a lot of this back in the when he's on planning commission. But
is it? It is. And and and then the one on I think this code was created right before the sign out on eighty nine ninety one Bullfrog Spas and those businesses. That's pretty much it. So it's pretty uncommon. I mean
is it? It is. And and and then the one on I think this code was created right before the sign out on eighty nine ninety one Bullfrog Spas and those businesses. That's pretty much it. So it's pretty uncommon. I mean
I think that the electronic ones are pretty flexible. You could display it. Yeah. It's fun. Yeah.
I think that the electronic ones are pretty flexible. You could display it. Yeah. It's fun. Yeah.
And and see, my question would be what if I would do something with something pretty offensive to pretty what would what would our recourse be to stop that and have And so we know we don't want our kids to see and things like that with their side of the other.
And and see, my question would be what if I would do something with something pretty offensive to pretty what would what would our recourse be to stop that and have And so we know we don't want our kids to see and things like that with their side of the other.
I think it's a fair question. I did. I don't know if it changes the sort of it's a fair question. Yeah. So with that, the other topic, another thing we we kinda look at, or is it just I mean, that both have some complaints or that hurt the business.
I think it's a fair question. I did. I don't know if it changes the sort of it's a fair question. Yeah. So with that, the other topic, another thing we we kinda look at, or is it just I mean, that both have some complaints or that hurt the business.
Yeah. Yeah. But, yeah, you know, we have one in Logan there with my own circle. Ring circle
Yeah. Yeah. But, yeah, you know, we have one in Logan there with my own circle. Ring circle
and Phil's, you know
and Phil's, you know
yeah. You know what I'm saying? Yeah.
yeah. You know what I'm saying? Yeah.
Between or something? Yeah. Go from there.
Between or something? Yeah. Go from there.
I don't know. I mean I don't know.
I don't know. I mean I don't know.
Yeah. I I yeah. I understand this part, but I also say what is our what is our alternative if they do do something like that? What's our enforcement in there?
Yeah. I I yeah. I understand this part, but I also say what is our what is our alternative if they do do something like that? What's our enforcement in there?
Yeah. I know we have to be careful with with regulating sign content. I'll just say that as a city. I'm sure there I'm sure there's laws or state laws out there that kinda limit certain things, but, I'm I'm not I can't I can't quote. Probably the same with the law or something. Yeah. I can't quote anything specifically. Also keep in mind that we don't allow off premise signs, so it's just they they they can't advertise other businesses. It has to be businesses on the premises. So they would that that would have to be established at that location.
Yeah. I know we have to be careful with with regulating sign content. I'll just say that as a city. I'm sure there I'm sure there's laws or state laws out there that kinda limit certain things, but, I'm I'm not I can't I can't quote. Probably the same with the law or something. Yeah. I can't quote anything specifically. Also keep in mind that we don't allow off premise signs, so it's just they they they can't advertise other businesses. It has to be businesses on the premises. So they would that that would have to be established at that location.
This is the code this is an update or code to match what the state is.
This is the code this is an update or code to match what the state is.
Partly and then some other staff recommendations as well. That's what kinda spurred this was the state bill. But then while we while we opened it up, we felt might as well update some other things. Yeah. No.
Partly and then some other staff recommendations as well. That's what kinda spurred this was the state bill. But then while we while we opened it up, we felt might as well update some other things. Yeah. No.
There's probably enough. I agree with what the statement is on the business signage. If they go out of business, it's gotta review move in thirty days. If they're out of business, who cares? Is it on? I mean, really. Yeah. Especially for the cost of doing it, and you have to have a permit to put up a sign, don't you? I mean, you can put a banner, but you can't put a a sign on a permanent sign on the side of the building without a permit.
There's probably enough. I agree with what the statement is on the business signage. If they go out of business, it's gotta review move in thirty days. If they're out of business, who cares? Is it on? I mean, really. Yeah. Especially for the cost of doing it, and you have to have a permit to put up a sign, don't you? I mean, you can put a banner, but you can't put a a sign on a permanent sign on the side of the building without a permit.
Yeah. And currently, most of them require conditional use permit. If it's a permitted use, we don't really have a a process of ensuring that they Take it down. That they adhere because we don't really have a signed permit provision. We just have conditional use permit, and we're suggesting to replace the conditional use permit with a with a just a staff administered sign permit. K.
Yeah. And currently, most of them require conditional use permit. If it's a permitted use, we don't really have a a process of ensuring that they Take it down. That they adhere because we don't really have a signed permit provision. We just have conditional use permit, and we're suggesting to replace the conditional use permit with a with a just a staff administered sign permit. K.
I'm I'm good with that. I don't see anything. I don't see glaring issues coming from it. Again, we're recruiting the EMT permit and just making it a sign permit. Yeah. So it's it's like the new issue, I should say, really would have been mute other than the sign.
I'm I'm good with that. I don't see anything. I don't see glaring issues coming from it. Again, we're recruiting the EMT permit and just making it a sign permit. Yeah. So it's it's like the new issue, I should say, really would have been mute other than the sign.
Yeah. I mean, they they they wouldn't have had to come to to planning commission for this sign The EMD point itself. They had to come to they because they actually came in for legislative action to amend the code for EMD signs. I'm not sure if that was before you were here. Okay. I can yeah. But so they would have had to do that, but they wouldn't have had to bring their actual application in. That would have been a staff administered action if if, you know, this were passed.
Yeah. I mean, they they they wouldn't have had to come to to planning commission for this sign The EMD point itself. They had to come to they because they actually came in for legislative action to amend the code for EMD signs. I'm not sure if that was before you were here. Okay. I can yeah. But so they would have had to do that, but they wouldn't have had to bring their actual application in. That would have been a staff administered action if if, you know, this were passed.
So far, even the temporary signs, ironically, have not been that bad. The posters nailed to the telephone pole, maybe it looked questionable. So Yeah. Those are always gonna They don't place care of that. Do we have a motion?
So far, even the temporary signs, ironically, have not been that bad. The posters nailed to the telephone pole, maybe it looked questionable. So Yeah. Those are always gonna They don't place care of that. Do we have a motion?
Okay. I move to approve ordinance 26.13, admitting NCC nineteen point two four point one five all permitted signs, including provisions related to political and temporary signs that act and permit requirements.
Okay. I move to approve ordinance 26.13, admitting NCC nineteen point two four point one five all permitted signs, including provisions related to political and temporary signs that act and permit requirements.
Hey. We have a motion. We have a sec there's a second by. Any other discussion? None? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and vote. All in favor? Any opposed? It's five to zero in favor. And we're going through this quick. We we need to stall and take a break. No. I'm joking. We'll move on to the staff report.
Hey. We have a motion. We have a sec there's a second by. Any other discussion? None? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and vote. All in favor? Any opposed? It's five to zero in favor. And we're going through this quick. We we need to stall and take a break. No. I'm joking. We'll move on to the staff report.
Yeah. Maybe just a few things to update you on that that, passed through city council. One was the Dove Creek subdivision. The the development agreement was approved, and they did require that the trail the full alignment of the trail be be incorporated. The applicant did provide kind of a concept plan of of the alignment of the trail, which would kinda bend it around around the the ridge similar to what when when they were here that Mike was kinda pointed pointing to that that alignment on the map. So that one passed the Kartchner annexation. That one took quite a while to get through. Some of you might remember when that that came through. They the council did approve, and they approved with the RM zone on one of the parcels and the r two a on on the other. So that's that's what was approved with with the development. They did require an annexation agreement with it, and that's that they would improve the whole right of way of 1500 West. There's a gap, in between the development where Nibley ends, and the council wanted to make sure that that came in. They can enter into Pioneer pioneering agreement so that future anyone who develops in the next ten years would have to pay them back for those improvements. But, you know, if there if no development happened in the next ten years, then they would just have to There's a cost. Eat the cost. But yeah. So that that was approved, and then the ADU changes were approved as well. So pretty much as recommended. So that I think that's I think that's all I got. There's a
Yeah. Maybe just a few things to update you on that that, passed through city council. One was the Dove Creek subdivision. The the development agreement was approved, and they did require that the trail the full alignment of the trail be be incorporated. The applicant did provide kind of a concept plan of of the alignment of the trail, which would kinda bend it around around the the ridge similar to what when when they were here that Mike was kinda pointed pointing to that that alignment on the map. So that one passed the Kartchner annexation. That one took quite a while to get through. Some of you might remember when that that came through. They the council did approve, and they approved with the RM zone on one of the parcels and the r two a on on the other. So that's that's what was approved with with the development. They did require an annexation agreement with it, and that's that they would improve the whole right of way of 1500 West. There's a gap, in between the development where Nibley ends, and the council wanted to make sure that that came in. They can enter into Pioneer pioneering agreement so that future anyone who develops in the next ten years would have to pay them back for those improvements. But, you know, if there if no development happened in the next ten years, then they would just have to There's a cost. Eat the cost. But yeah. So that that was approved, and then the ADU changes were approved as well. So pretty much as recommended. So that I think that's I think that's all I got. There's a
Yeah. So if you if anyone's able, even if you're you're only able for a day out of the two, the, American Planning Association, Utah chapter, they're they're holding a conference down in Davis County, at the Davis County Convention Center, September eighteenth and nineteenth. So if any of you like to attend, let me know. I I'll sign you up. It's it's good conference. There's good track on I'm interested for one day. For one day? I'm not sure which day. Yeah. Thursday is kind of the day that I think has more content geared toward planning commissioners, the nineteenth, if if you can make that day work. But, yeah, let me know what day you want to because I think you have to select a specific day. Right.
Yeah. So if you if anyone's able, even if you're you're only able for a day out of the two, the, American Planning Association, Utah chapter, they're they're holding a conference down in Davis County, at the Davis County Convention Center, September eighteenth and nineteenth. So if any of you like to attend, let me know. I I'll sign you up. It's it's good conference. There's good track on I'm interested for one day. For one day? I'm not sure which day. Yeah. Thursday is kind of the day that I think has more content geared toward planning commissioners, the nineteenth, if if you can make that day work. But, yeah, let me know what day you want to because I think you have to select a specific day. Right.
You're struggling with. Yes. Yeah. Yeah.
You're struggling with. Yes. Yeah. Yeah.
It's probably gonna be on Saturday then.
It's probably gonna be on Saturday then.
No. It's September.
No. It's September.
I'm I've got that wrong. It's probably ninth and tenth. I don't know why. I'm thinking of another something else. It's the it's the ninth and tenth. I'm sorry. I had something else going on that day. Yeah. Good. Sorry. The so the Utah League of Cities and Towns is October twenty seventh and twenty eighth, And I'm not a 100% sure. I'm guessing the twenty seventh is the full day. Right? So that's probably the day that if you're only gonna pick one day to go, that would be the the day. And they usually have a fair amount of content on planning as well. So towns in Salt Lake down at the
I'm I've got that wrong. It's probably ninth and tenth. I don't know why. I'm thinking of another something else. It's the it's the ninth and tenth. I'm sorry. I had something else going on that day. Yeah. Good. Sorry. The so the Utah League of Cities and Towns is October twenty seventh and twenty eighth, And I'm not a 100% sure. I'm guessing the twenty seventh is the full day. Right? So that's probably the day that if you're only gonna pick one day to go, that would be the the day. And they usually have a fair amount of content on planning as well. So towns in Salt Lake down at the
Salt Salt? Salt Palace. Salt Palace. They're so tall of that. Yeah.
Salt Salt? Salt Palace. Salt Palace. They're so tall of that. Yeah.
Another one, there is one that will be here locally. I don't know if I have a specific date, but it's, like, mid October. Stay tuned for that one. That's the they called it the Cash Summit before. I guess they're calling it the Brick Summit now because they're trying to make it more broad, Box Elder County and and Cache County, but that one that one will be in Logan. I'll let you know when that one comes up. That's like the
Another one, there is one that will be here locally. I don't know if I have a specific date, but it's, like, mid October. Stay tuned for that one. That's the they called it the Cash Summit before. I guess they're calling it the Brick Summit now because they're trying to make it more broad, Box Elder County and and Cache County, but that one that one will be in Logan. I'll let you know when that one comes up. That's like the
So Yeah. Yeah. So, anyway, yeah, let me know if if you want me to sign you up for any of those.
So Yeah. Yeah. So, anyway, yeah, let me know if if you want me to sign you up for any of those.
Oh, no. I'd like one. September. Yeah. I'll just
Oh, no. I'd like one. September. Yeah. I'll just
I'll go. Soon yeah. As soon as you know, let me know what what day works for you. Yeah.
I'll go. Soon yeah. As soon as you know, let me know what what day works for you. Yeah.
I I know you guys have RSVP'd for the party on Monday.
I I know you guys have RSVP'd for the party on Monday.
Oh, yeah. That too.
Oh, yeah. That too.
No. Well, be sure to come. I know you have your Hawaiian shirts. You all look like Hawaiian shirt guys. Wear those. There will be a contest, and come enjoy some. To what? 06:00?
No. Well, be sure to come. I know you have your Hawaiian shirts. You all look like Hawaiian shirt guys. Wear those. There will be a contest, and come enjoy some. To what? 06:00?