Nibley City Planning Commission

Sorry, didn't call cuz guess I wasn't showing online. My bad. If if uh Sorry, where was I? If the if the planning commission chooses to uh approve this tonight, it would have to be in uh a conditional upon city council approving the uh reszone. So, so this is what's being proposed on the property. Uh there's about 70 lots here. I'll go through the breakdown of it all, but but as you can see more to the to the east of the development and to the north, you can see where the homes are clustered. And then as you go toward the west, there's a little over six acres of open space proposed to be uh dedicated to the city and and also pres preservation of of as many of the outbuildings as as possible to to support the the open space there with the idea and there has been um there was a joint I think I believe it was back in October there was a I believe the majority of you were in that that meeting. There was there was a joint um meeting with city council to discuss this item. This idea that if if an open space subdivision were approved, the city could um utilize that space for Morgan Farm for expanding their operations. they they've expressed that they don't have enough room on the current property to house in particular all the horses that they would like for you know the 4 age kids to to raise and so that was it could be used for for that if approved. Uh now at the north edge of the property uh so there's about five acres for that. the north edge of the property, there's a storm water basin. Um, and then also a trail that runs along the existing canal and and they proposed to pipe that. So, go into more detail on these next slides, but just wanted to describe so you can see in front of you there. So again, about a little over 19 acres and and with an open space subdivision, uh the it's regulated by uh how much basically the more open space you give, the more the more lots that that you get um for for that. So and that that's all codified in the open space subdivision. So net developable land is a little under 16 acres. They're proposing 6.37 acres of open space. So that's uh 40% of of the land toward of of the net developable land toward open space. So with that with with an R2A subdivision, you could fit 50 homes on there. But when you when you add 40% to that, that that allows 70. So that's and that's and that's what they're proposing is 70 lots. Um they they meet the thresholds for average lot size or they they're they're below the or I guess above that slightly and then they're they're right at the minimum lot size for some of those lots of 5,000 square ft as well as minimum frontage of 50 ft. So you know staff's finding on that is that they meet meet those zoning requirements when look at sensitive areas. So other othering canal on the north edge of the property and private lateral the entire area. So they they they did describe they did provide a map of sensitive sensitive areas that is required by by the code and and it's just described as pasture and farmland. uh look at canals. The canal on the north edge of property is supposed to be pipe with a trail sharing that canal easement. And then um on this next point on utilities and storm water, I have I have you bullet points here, but I'd like to turn the time over to Tom a little bit from engineering on this. There's there's uh just just to speak about it. And again, this is at a preliminary stage. There's going to be further review on this, but but Tom's done a lot of review on this and so just wanted to give it to to him to speak to that.

»Hey, thanks Levi.

»So this is culmination even the preliminary plan is culmination of several months of working with the engineers. I've met with property owners in the subdivision to the east which would be highway states. I've met I haven't met with anyone in uh Heritage Crossing, but there there are like three or four houses on the north end of there that'll have the trail coming through. But there on the west end of the Heritage Crossing, they've experienced some flooding with some irrigation water recently. the proponent or the applicant has agreed to pipe that whole pipe, install a trail, and the city would help with that cost obviously because it's it's offsite utilities. The storm water and the groundwater were really concerning to me and we again we spent hours and hours and days and days working with the engineers uh several iterations. Um the the natural topography slopes to the west and it also circles around the highway state. So what that tells me is when Highway Estates came in, they built them up a little bit. So that just forced the water around them and in ponds directly west of Highway Estates. So through meetings with the property owners on Highway Estates and working with the applicant and the engineers, they've agreed to bring in some fill material that will address the standing water issues. And they also agreed to a regional plan to help with a regional plan. that's way off sight of here. It comes out from the north and west corner. Installing a very large storm water pipe that will help not only this area, but it also has potential to have future help to the subdivisions west and downstream. What this does is pipes from this area all the way down to the Slooh south of Maloof. Um the other the other utilities, water, sewer, they're pretty reasonable. they there's there's plenty of capacity in that area for both both of those utilities. But again, just I'll just reiterate the the storm water and the groundwater and the irrigation. We're we spent a lot of time on there and I I feel although we're we're threading a needle, I feel it's a it'll work.

»Thanks, Tom. Um, as far as transportation goes, just go into that a little bit. The local street, uh, the local streets that are proposed are in conformance with city's design standards in the master plan. So, cross-sections TS13 and that's generally so 60 ft of rideway, uh, 29 ft of of asphalt, 7 ft of park strip, and then sidewalk 5 foot sidewalks is is what you see there. So it's it's kind of it's just a you know a standard local street that you see on a lot of sub subdivisions in the city. Uh they are proposing traffic calming at the entrance of 3200 South which is required uh at all entrances of arterial roads. So they're they're propo just proposing some curb cuts in there just to slow traffic as they enter and exit the property. uh already mentioned the trail. This this trail on the north edge of the property is uh is within is in active transportation plan which acts as the the trail master plan for the city that was recently adopted. Um and then they've also just just of note there's a pedestrian ride ofway on the northwest corner that connects to that trail. Um and and also a a trail, not not just right away, but dedication dedication there of a trail. And this will break up that that longer block. There's not there really isn't an opportunity to connect to adjacent properties cuz it's all built out, but there there is a an opportunity to connect to the trail, which would um eventually connect beyond the property as well. Oh, so we want to go into open space here. Um, so the within the open space subdivision, there are there are specific standards for for open space and whether to accept it within a subdivision. So I'll speak to that and where the where they are proposing to dedicate it to the city. Um, there's some considerations there that I'll get into. Ultimately, that's a decision of the city council um of whether to accept land, but uh but but I'll present it here as well. So, 6.4 acres of open space. It's about 5 acres of that that pasture with the agricultural buildings and then and then remainder with storm water basin and trail. uh as I mentioned previously that that pastures intend to be used by morning farm for keeping of animals and pres preserving agricultural use and just in general and the applicant has has provided a justification within a preliminary maintenance plan uh as required by the city code but but the within the city's code the there's three open space design standards that need to be met and staff has found four of them has been have been met. So significant areas of natural landscape. Uh they've they've noted they're preserving standing trees, barns, and pasture area. Agricultural land is is the proposed use of land as I've already mentioned in agricultural use. So that's that one's met pedestrian access with the trail provided uh public access to the open space. And then uh contiguous land. So all the land is contiguous to each other. It's not fragmented. Uh there it although it does point to also being with adjacent open space, there really is no opportunity to connect to open space, the surrounding areas, it's all it's all built out u with homes. So it's really just all all the land is contiguous within there, which is another point within the within the code of of meeting that standard. When you think of uh the the open space itself and whether the city should should acquire that open space, our our parks, trails, and open space master plan. It does it does focus on, you know, being strategic about taking on additional open space. That's additional maintenance and and there's there's a lot of things to consider there. There's some guidance within and and it was in the packet, you know, kind of word for word of what's in the master plan. Just some considerations here. And again, this one is going to be uh city council will make the final decision on on this particular item of well, should the city take this on or not? But you can make definitely make a recommendation on this. Um so in general working farm is suitable use for the space and would further the mission Morgan farm. Uh the pro the preservation of open space is in line of the focus of our current mass uh general plan that you know focuses on rural preservation as we develop use of the space would support the focus of that. This the city should consider the broad community benefit of the proposed use. So it, you know, it will, it will be used from the standpoint of the kids in the community that that need space, for example, for for animals. Um there there's a benefit of of people being able to um preserve that that heritage, I guess, of of the area. Uh it's not the same as if it were a park space though, you know, where it's wide open to the public necessarily, but it could be it could be an opportunity for more openness than if it were private. Um structural condition of the proposed building uh needs to be evaluated. There there there is an evaluation of structures on currently under review. I know there's there's some details on that. I don't know if we I don't know, Tom, if you want to get into that or or if that's still kind of pending. Um yeah. Um maybe we'll maybe we'll get into it a little later just so we can get through and allow the public there. Um the area is is subject to flooding. We talked about that. Um although the proposed open space will likely benefit the broader community, it's only accessed through this neighborhood. And then on on the open space master plan, there's a map that uh focuses on whether the city there's a inclination or a disinclination for the city to acquire new open space. This area is shown as disincin inclination. The reason for this is because the property al is is in close proximity to other existing and planned parks but it's not contiguous with them. So in general in acquiring new open space and and you know it's focused on park space in particular uh there's there's more of an inclination like if there's an existing park to build upon that park or if it's in an area where let's say it's a mile away from the closest park that would also be an area to focus. Well this area is kind doesn't really do either of those because there are there is some open space nearby. Some of it's planned. Uh, for example, south on 1200 West, there's a there's a larger planned park there. It's not in right now. And then Meadow View has a a small kind of pocket park in that in that area. So that's why it's showing us disincclination. And also looking at the projected annual O on andM cost operation maintenance cost for the open space about and this is rough numbers but about 13,000 for you know maintaining the farm as well as maintaining the the storm water um basin and the and the trail. So for this item um and this is kind of out of order, right? because this is this is the the third item you'll consider for this applicant. But um but the staff's recommendation is approval for this preliminary plat adopting the following findings and conditions. So application complies with minimum standards of open space subdivision provided that the proposed resone is approved by the city council. application complies with infrastructure standards of uh 2112 and the proposed open spaces of benefit nibly city and is in support of the general plan for the conditions the property must be reszoned R2A by city council the proposed development agreement that'll be the next item I talk about includes the dedication open space and other terms and conditions must be approved by city council so there's there's several items on on that development agreement that I'll get into that aren't on this list, but they're they're included within that agreement. So, just for sake of of brevity, that they're not included right here. Provide a note on the plat that property owners adjacent to 1300 South will install and maintain landscaping and clear sidewalks. Water model be run to update the water model, ensure adequate flows are maintained. Costs will be build with development fees. The sewer model will be run to update the sewer model and ensure adequate flows. Cost will be built with development fees and then the indoor and outdoor water use calculations and certificate for equivalent shares. Financial shy and payment of development fees are required. Time of final plat. Uh and these last two work with the applicant on structural deficiencies of existing structures to remain as noted by structural engineer. Last one is developer must submit and receive approval for runoff management plan reference and development agreement. So I feel like I'm talking a lot. Sorry, but just want to give you that I'm on the home stretch of this uh presentation. And that's just getting into the development agreement. I I thought for context of of the development agreement, I I thought it made the most sense to to explain what's going in the subdivision. So the development agreement includes the you know the following terms and conditions. It does reference open space restrictions for for the open space that to be dedicated um to the city. There's there's one exception to city code that's being recommended within this development agreement and that is that the open space parcel dedicated will be treated as as an agricultural zone rather than an R2A zone um as it relates to animal land use regulations. The reason for this is it really couldn't be used for its intended use otherwise uh which is to house horses and and other animals. The the current animal land use code does not allow large animals in an R2A zone regardless of the lot size. So even though it's over 6 acres, you couldn't have any large animals on the property without this exception. With this exception, there are still restrictions, but this the the same restrictions applies if it were an agricultural zone. So, um wanted to note that that exception to to the ordinance just just to make this um usable for its intended use. Uh this this does include dedication of the open space within the development agreement and then the developer would need to install three rail fence around the perimeter of the city dedicated space and divide the storm water basin. And the reason for this again it points to the intended use of of the open space without a fence. uh probably don't want to just let horses out loose and then that cost would be um borne by the city if if not you know put on by the developer um developers to dedicate required water shares and provide street trees as as required by city code and there and there's some ter trees there's a few different ways they can go about it they can put them in or they can pay the city and so there's that option in there and that's all spelled out in the development agreement. The developer must pipe the canal and build the trail and then the developer has also agreed to build the trail adjacent to the property on Heritage Crossing. So when Heritage Crossing went in, they um they paid a fee in lie of the of the trail or half of the half of that trail, but the city hasn't built it yet. So, what's what's being proposed that that would be built by the developer so that it would actually connect to 1200 West, but the city would need to bear the cost of that short section of the trail as well as piping that canal because it's beyond the boundaries of of that of this subdivision. And then developer needs to provide a a runoff management plan for uh for potential runoff on the property. Um so staff's recommendation for this is to recommend approval of of this development agreement. Want to get into more detail, Tom? Is it can't remember specifically. We can get that. Yeah, we could. Do you want to add that as conditions? Sorry.

»I'd recommend work something.

»Yeah. So, go ahead and speak to that.

»So, he asked if

»I mean we have we have it in the preliminary plat. Sorry, we do have that in the preliminary plat as condition. He he was asking about the structures. Um there that is a recommended condition in the preliminary plat, but we could we could add um that that be incorporated into the development agreement. So Levi mentioned that there's been a structural evaluation of the structures that are to remain there. There's a large stable barn that was built I don't know looked like in the 80s maybe late 70s. And then there's another structure built about the same time that's a lot smaller and it has some open stables connected to it. This development would sever those open open stables and be able to salvage both the other buildings but there are some structural deficiencies that were identified by the structural engineer. I only have a preliminary report. Um I won't have the final report with more detail for a week or two. But with regard to the development agreement, it is referenced as a condition of approval on the pre-plat, but we still need to work out details on cost estimates to upgrade these two structures to meet code so they're not going to collapse. Um, not that they they will they've been there for 40 50 years, but just I think we need to make a condition to modify the these conditions to include that in the development agreement. Once we refine those numbers, again, it'll be a week or two before we can even have an idea what those look like though. Anything else?

»That's it.

»Okay.

»For that one. Before we move into the public hearing, just some common guidelines to follow, you might be given a three minute time limit per person and you'll go and how you signed up on the sheet first. Then please come to the microphone, state your name and address and so it'll be recorded into the minutes. So with that, we'll open the public hearing now and we'll call Clint Jones. Hello, my name is Clint Jones. I am a resident of Heritage Crossing. I live at 3152 South 50 West and feel that I am directly impacted by the decision that is made here. I am firmly against the proposed resoning. I do believe that it is contrary to the goals that Nichol City has presented as discussed primarily being keeping Ni a rural area. This highdensity housing is the opposite of rural and does not comply. This also will decrease the value of all the homes around it. So I believe that the council should either deny this claim, this reszone, or send everybody a check for the difference in the home. Thank you.

»Thank you, Jared Willis. All right. So, I'm Jared Willis. I live in 31 South 1250 West. Um, if you pull up that picture of just kind of the whole plot zone map. So, I happen to I'm kind I know city can't please everyone, right? It's not helping that corner lot right then. Lot seven. You can kind of see how it's like how with this new density housing, it puts clearances a lot closer. House is a lot closer. When I bought last year or the year before, built my next house in November, I'm pretty sure I bought it from Josh here. I kind of was under the understanding that that I knew that field would be developed, but I was kind of under the understanding that it would be similar stone bridge. And it's like they say the zoning's the same, but it's not really the same. I mean, you can kind of tell by looking from their view that these lots aren't the same, even if they have the same zone code on them. So I mean I have a lot of friends who want to move to Nibbi and the reason they want to move to Nibbli is because you have baby lots, you have a yard, you have a place you can raise a family, you can have a garden, you can have those things and it's a kind of a destination place, not stepping stone. And me as like a businessman, I look that subdivision and that's a great idea as far as business goes. I mean, I wish I don't have land, you know, but it's like as far as wanting to bring a family here, I don't think I would want, you know, I'm little corner. I'm 5t off the fence, you know. I don't need to be happy about it, but it's kind of are those going to be available for the public to purchase or is it going to be a mass builder? Because like affordable I work in construction. I do construction and I know when you do construction and you do a big subdivision, a lot of the money saved by making a smaller lot usually isn't passed on to the homeowner and usually you make it in the business. That's why you make a small lot is it's more profitable, but it usually doesn't get passed on all that well. So that was another question is it's like are people going to be able to buy it or they have to buy it through a builder? Um and then also is there I was just curious about your material because I'm going to have two houses 5T off my fences both sides you know. I'm like, am I going to be looking for vinyl, you know, outlining the bills now or uh and then all the waters can run west? Is that Did I understand that right, Tom? We'll we'll answer the question at the end of the curious. We'll try to answer houses maybe just match the surrounding area. I understand well creating open spaces part making it really well for the family. I kind of agree with whoever evaluated the open space of nibly. It's like that open space doesn't really benefit many people except for 4 kids which is great. Most people could do 4 also know 10 acres somewhere else for a horse. Oh, dude. Kyle. Oh, okay. You have you marked written notice. You had submit a written notice. Oh, what? Written notice.

»Oh, I thought that was how I was notified of the Oh. Oh, hey. I received it in my map.

»Okay, you're good. Thank you.

»So, I'll try and stay on track here. So, good evening. I'm Kyle. I live at 2984 Stomage Drive here in Nibi. My house and property is directly north of the proposed fields at Niby on the parcel on the the parcel. You know, I'm here to ask you to please deny the res this resing development agreement. This isn't just a zoning matter. It's a question of safety, neighborhood character, and respect for residents. My wife has a disability and relies on a low hand cycle. Since the city added the chicanees, the amountable islands and the Jersey barriers on 1200 West, her visibility at intersections has plummeted. Now consider that the in now consider that the Institute of Transportation Engineers states that a single family home generates an average of 9.44 vehicle trips per day. Um, with 70 homes, that equates to about 660 daily trips up to 700 cars per day on that same compromised road. That's not hypothetical. danger and my wife and I have looped on that bike trail on 1200 and every time she comes up on her handle she can't see a single corner they can't see her because she's down low to the ground. So that's the biggest reason I was opposed to that in the original um in other meetings that the city has. This proposed density doesn't reflect our neighborhood. They're they're proposing less than 9 and a half buildable acres for 70 homes which works out over to over seven homes per acre or 0.1 to 0.15 acres compared to the average 0.25 to.3 acres lots that we currently have. So these lots are less than half the size, but the developer is calling this suburban development. That that's a mismatch. The towned open space is hardly a gift. It's mostly a storm water basin and the walking trail exists only um because the pipes they have to pipe the canal and granted that east window that ride away for the canal. There's no park, no shaded area, no playground, just what meets the bare minimum for approval. In September 2023, as you guys mentioned earlier, this property was resolved from agricultural to R2A or R2 um amid significant concern over the long-term impacts. Nothing in the has changed since. The only thing that's changed is the ordinance now allows for smaller lots and the developers using the this to pack and increase profits. We're not against growth. We're against the growth at the cost of our safety and property values in our neighborhood sold. This isn't smart growth. its density on someone else's doorstep and ended up in return. Please don't let this be our legacy. Protect our families. Preserve the character of Nidley. Reject this proposal. Thank you. So, my name's Nick Galvo. I live at 3186 South 1250 West. And to be honest with you, I didn't know about this ordinance until this weekend. My neighbor sent it out. So, the notifications are honestly really poor. Um, and honestly earlier this year, you repaved for a street and I didn't know until there was a sign blocking the road telling me I could park my own driveway. So that needs to be corrected. Looking at this plat and you see all the surrounding neighborhoods, this doesn't complement it at all. Oops. It's really oneird of the piece of property I have there at the bottom. And the other issue I have with it is, you know, as these other guys say, you have big bill visionary or Jay Thomas. Class action lawsuits out against those guys because they're poor quality workmanship that's being provided. And the issue that we're all having as residents, as citizens, is that the city isn't holding them accountable. When we built our property, we had to tear down the fence in order to build the house because electrical boxes were installed in correct over the boundary that you guys were allowed. The builder owns this rock trees. There's a lot of stuff the builder and the developer never finished that the city's not holding them accountable for. So, I understand that you guys have come up to an agreement. these developers. I trust that you're gonna hold them, too. And now when we look at this slot, I mean, it's it's branded. You know, I grew from Delaware two years ago. You guys ever been to the East Coast? It was a beautiful place. Lots of farmland, lots of beaches. They kept selling all the farmland to build properties like this. And now people are priced out of their homes. You can't live. Traffic's a nightmare. You know, be honest with you. I understand you guys have those reservoirs where rain water play. It's never enough. prime example what's going on in Texas and all the other states right now they get big range which do come always floods and I can tell you I serve with fire department cash search and rescue you know inadequate we don't have fire station we rely on that's 10 minutes away we don't have any search rely on volunteers who are kind of had their legs off and you know we're not supporting the neighborhood and the citizens we currently have before we're opening this up to sell to big profit and big business. So before we do this, I say you take care of the citizens we have. Ensure that we're maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood and communities we have. So I strongly oppose it. I'm sure most people here do as well and they're going to have different opinions as I do and different points, but I've taken into consideration key. I actually live in the Elhorn subdivision and I can contest to this. We built our first home over 20 years ago, 25 years ago now. At the time it was also a controversial development. We brought in time zone ordinances at that particular time where uh anything less than a half of an acre was not permittable. And we've over time have slowly seen that urban established community dwindle into now we're accepting high density to the tune of existing now well over 300 homes just in a single development where the city and all of the development that's been going on with those has not been able to keep up with the infrastructure. structure in order to support it. Like was mentioned before, the the ambulance fire is not adequate in order to be able to handle this. We're now want to crowd in single family residential homes within proximity of each other to where one of them were to catch fire. By the time this fire department is able to respond to that fire, the existing homes next to a have higher risk and more danger than what you would have had stay with the initial master plan with even as I reduce down to 30 acre parcel allowances. So the more we do this, the impact that it has onto us, not just in tax effect and the property value stagnation and potential for it to actually dwindle. We also are introducing a home style that is for it's a stepping stone purchase. It's not like we had 50 years ago when people purchased a home with the intention of living in it for 50, 60 years or until they were gone and passed it on to their their children. We're now seeing people who are using this as an investment step. They either buy or in it for less than 5 years and then either turn around, rent it out or sell it off and exit the community. We have been traditionally a community where people came to not stepping stones through. So this type of a development although grow and I'm fine home builder myself I'm fine with having homes in there but it needs to be with what the intent of the community has always been and that is that we welcome residents and the growth for us to develop a community that doesn't just pass through. That's all happens.

»no. I I just I thought I was just signing in.

»Okay. Is there anyone else who'd like to make a statement? Some people on this list.

»There's two there's two public hearings, but but if they but if I mean they want

»you can come to Mike. Well, they're not holding the public yet.

»Hi there. Uh, my name is Justin Anderson. I'm also in one of these private neighborhoods. I live on 3179 South, 1250 West. I'm paramed Salt Lake City and also local business here in Caps Valley. So me and my family chose this neighborhood just recently moved in January, just got married. Uh was a single dad of two girls for the last four years. So married my wife and we decided to buy the home of our dreams and we moved into this home with the intention uh that there was going to be nice open space. It was kind of a like a forever home for us, not a stepping stone, right? Um so this land is one of the few remaining open spaces that helps preserve the peaceful spacious feel that we have in your neighborhood and it contributes to the rural rural character that makes ny such a special place to live. Devel developing it into high density housing fundamentally changed the nature of our community and not for the better. As uh the owner of local Kirby business, as I mentioned, I've worked closely with neighborhood and nonprofit organization here in town. I personally installed K subdivisions in the last few months alone. I fully understand uh the need for affordable housing and I support it. But I also know firsthand there's no shortage of these types of developments. It's clear that we are not lacking small lot housing opportunities. What we are lacking and what is rapidly disappearing is our open space. Uh beyond aesthetics, there are very real concerns in increased density brings increased traffic and safety issues. Uh especially in uh our neighborhoods that are not designed for it. Um infrastructure such as roads, water systems, everything else has been mentioned. But cities like Nibi uh which are still growing have an opportunity to be intentional about development. Prioritizing thoughtful land use over quick expansion. Preserving open space can be an investment in the city's identity and desiraability for decades to come. Once land like this is gone, it's gone forever. I urge the can council to consider long-term community values over short-term growth. Um, the last example I threw out there, and I know my time's probably done. Uh, I owned a property in Hide Park. So, one of our neighbors in an acre with some home out there. I wanted to build a second home. That was the intent before I chose to move to Navy. And unfortunately, I couldn't because I only had 90 additional feet of frontage. And they weren't going to let me build two homes on an acre equivalent. If you were to take that same acre and a half that I had in Hide Park and put it in Nibi, according to this plan, you could have built 17 homes.

»So, we already have one of the lowest frontage requirements in Cash Valley at 100 ft. Right? If you remember during this presentation, each of these homes are 50 ft. I mean, I think we should just take a moment and think about that. Thank you.

»Is there anyone else would like to make a statement?

»Sunset circle which is west. um all our buildings to the west pretty much on TV uh pumps here. Uh now you're probably have storm water directed all the way to the west. Uh that is going to put me as a single parent with three kids and every single one of us in there in big danger. It doesn't sound like we are resolving the water problem community. It's sounding like we're creating more water problem for the west side of the subdivision. Um I'm sorry emotional because it is very stressful now what I'm seeing what's going to happen to my house right next to the open space area right of 6.41 acres and I worry about every single one of my neighbors going up and down the west side. Um, I propose that I'm against this subdivision definitely. There's a lot more water on the north as well, west side and it doesn't look like the city is preventing. We're just putting a vente on the bottom. Thank you.

»Thank you. There anybody else? Yeah. up. My name is Jonathan Mill. I uh I live at 3170 South 1350 West that long right there in highway states. I'm assuming we didn't really expect highway state to have anybody show up because there's six of us. I don't get an invitation. So I had this is I heard about this when I got on work today. This first time I saw the plan. Okay. I don't I don't know if any of you guys were here during the flood of 2017, but we're not threatening to heal. This is serious. I guarantee you those houses will be underwater at some point because directly across from me fills up every year, every spring. The lots that live directly across from me have to put a sub pump out in their yard to keep the water at bay every year. So you're not threading a needle. You're playing with a time bomb here. So I would say vote no on it for sure.

»Yeah. Chris Asher, 129 West 2890 South. I live just a little bit north what you can see on the map there. not too far away. And uh I don't know if you can answer questions from me or not, but my question seriously be if you considered it or if you lived in any of the houses that people have mentioned already, you want that there. In all reality, like I'd love to hear response to yes or no if that's allowed. If that's not, it's all right. But

»we can try to answer it later.

»Love to hear it. Thank you. Appreciate it. Is there anyone else? Please come to mic.

»Hello. Um, I'm Quinn Johnson. I live on 3050 South, so 12:30 West, 3050 South. Um, the only thing I would say is, you know, I think, you know, we know is going to grow, right? We chose to move here. So, you know, I I moved in a little less than a year ago, so there's no no expectation that construction is not going to happen. But I would say as the proud owner of $30,000 worth of dirt, we can say that the builders aren't necessarily trustworthy to bring in the dirt to avoid flooding, right? You know, my foundation walls are six feet tall because I had to bring in dirt. So, I think, you know, there's something to be said for just considering what are these impacts to, you know, that made my house less affordable for sure. And I think if affordable housing is the goal, let's consider all of the impacts to that. Let's consider are these lots ready for development upon completion. So, that's all I have to say. Thanks. Thank you, Hello, my name is Tyler Hanning. I live in the Stonebridge community on uh 122 West 2890 South. Um also here to um encourage you to to vote no on this as as many have said. Um I think that you know a lot of us in the neighborhood we look at that plan like that and it's our first thing. We we certainly want the community to remain similar to what it is now. Um to say that this is an R2A zone that is the same as the other RTA zones is um it's a false equivalency, right? There was an amendment that made it so that the smaller lots could be built. So when the lots were built back then, there was a different different definition, right? So same label, but they're not equivalent. Um I get worried about um certain things such as you know traffic like other people have worried about how it's going to affect our school systems. Um I know we already have uh the need for parents to go into the elementary school to help with the teachers. Um so certainly certainly that would be impacted. Um my my one question would be there was mention of a uh some sort of traffic safety um improvement that would happen on the 3200 South. If that is anything similar to what we got in front of Stonebridge, I would say no. Thank you.

»Is there anyone else? Please come forward. Hi, my name is Britney Davo. I'm in 30 3186 South 1250 West. Um, my job at home is to appeal to everybody's emotions. So, that's what I'm going to do here because I'm not as smart as everybody else that welcomes the construction experience. Um, like Nick said, we moved here about two years ago from Delaware. And I've already seen one state completely ruined in my 32 years of living there um by overdevelopment. And there's like everybody's saying, there's nowhere for the water to go. Everywhere floods. The houses are built by, for lack of a better crappy builders that don't care about the people that they're building for. Not everybody, not every builder is as awesome as Cody and Chris when they build. So, um, so I urge you to think about that if you've never lived somewhere else. And I get that like development to like nobody moved here thinking that there would never be another house behind them inside of them. But building something like this doesn't match anything that we all thought. So if you've never lived anywhere else and never seen anywhere else ruined, I could see how you could overlook this and see that it doesn't really matter. But it doesn't matter because they moved here and a lot of people have moved here because it's a safe place for our kids and just the beauty of the area and it's just like doing something like this is just going to distance. I urge you to think about that. Thank you. Okay, we'll go ahead and close the hearing this time and uh we'll try to go through and answer some of these questions. Um I lived in Nib for close to 50 years, so I understand where a lot of you are concerned in the water in certain months. So that farmer's gold property change owner gift trying to respect the right of the property. So just so you know can I cla I speak to a few of

»the question

»few of the questions um there there was a question about what type of materials for the homes. So that is something that the city cannot regulate um design of homes. I mean it has to meet building code. It has to be safe. But as far as what material, what colors, the state has outright said you cannot regulate single family, two family homes. Um the design of them. So what's going to go there will be whatever the demand is for, you know, the whoever whoever is building the home. Um, there was a question about, you know, whether whether this would be a uh I I think whether it would be a developer builder type project or if they'd be selling individual lots. I I don't know if uh Josh, you want to speak to that. I mean, we we typically don't, for one thing, we we we don't regulate based on that. What I've heard is that they will be sold, but I I don't I don't know.

»It could be either, right? So, I guess I guess we don't know at this point in time, but the city doesn't the city doesn't nor can it discriminate based upon that factor, I would say. Um, at least at least in the in the approval of a subdivision. So, uh I don't know, Tom, if there were any other question. I know there there were a lot of comments. I I don't know if there's any questions that I feel like I could address, but

»I took pretty good notes here.

»Jared Willis asked about the storm water, how what direction that flows. Generally, it flows to the north and the west, but it also when Hideway Estates was developed, they built up. So, it kind of goes around there. So, it it comes down and and around. The exact low spot is down toward that little Can I use your here?

»Yeah, it's not unless I push escape.

»Look at three lots up right in between those two backtoback lots, right? Um

»anyway, if you count three lots up from 3200 South in between those two lots, that's about where the lowest point of the subdivision is.

»You're talking about right here

»down right there. That's the the low low point along with that northwest side. So part of this request to bring fill material in and sat and mitigate that flooding that flooding. The applicant has agreed to do that as part of this this development. Um there were there was some un there's some other comments about 12 West and 3200 South. 12 West. It it did it's one of our our interior roads as is 3200 South. So these are designed to accommodate the higher traffic. Um the 1200 West in particular was designed with a a more narrow lane width to help control speeds. If you go south of 3200 South where that lane width is not controlled, we're getting speeds on average of 50 to 70 miles an hour down through there. So, it's been pretty effective that design and that configuration there. See, there was the flooding. Again, the engineer and I have spent hours and hours of of analyzation of this and uh we believe that the design is going to work. I don't there there's some other comments about schools and things like that. I don't know if if the commission wants to. Is there any other questions that were asked that you'd like me to answer?

»The concern about emergency vehicles. I mean, Hyram City used to be the volunteer fire department when I was a kid and even now they're actually paid full time.

»Well, hold on. Let's Let's There's two paid fulltime. That's just for volunteers. are volunteers.

»Yes.

»My wife shall hire them and the alarm would go off and hire them. They all run to the fire department. So they follow the fire trucks to the fire.

»Yes. I just want to make that clear. It's not fulltime set.

»So two at each at each location.

»There's one location and there's two Monday through Friday.

»Okay. Because there's one on close to the west. That's

»question. So,

»apologize just for taking and then see if we can pass. So, one of my biggest concerns with this is the impermanal services were revealed. When you guys did your assessment on this, was the housing improvement surface taken in consideration? Because it is often over and if it has with the drainage that is in it, is there enough of that drainage allowed for even a 50-year flood or 100year flood for that to be able to exit within the plan that they have presented as the developer? because what I was hearing before is that is still under review and has not pulled against.

»So we vetted out the storm water and it's a it's a calculation based on I don't know how deep you want to get into the storm water. I have vast experience in storm water design and design review. Uh the way this works is you take a raw piece of land and you evaluate it in its raw condition in historic runoff conditions and you and we run the 100year storm about 3.02 in. Then we remodel that with the impervious areas of roof space, driveways, patios, and you take an average. Obviously, some some will have more impervious area than others, but average throughout the valley is about 3,000 square feet of impervious area, loop space, driveway, etc. So you take the now these two models are compared and you take the difference and you try to mimic the historic by putting in a storm water pond and the storm water pond will collect all this runoff that's excess and will control the flow outward with an orifice or other flow control device. So yes, we have done all that through these evaluations and the models.

»L that has that been compared to what they are presenting as the developer for their drainage plan?

»Yes.

»Okay. Then the second question is what is taking place with the French drain that you're creating with your sewer water system that you're going through this? Because as of right now, we've done two homes in the Heritage Crossing and both of which as soon as we broke into the sewer system in order to tie into it, we had well over I mean I we were running running 6in pumps off of it and wasn't able to keep up. So putting all that impermeable surface in pushing it into a located area and then that all has to go into the ground and then we drain it through all our sewer and water systems and there's no plan for what's taking place underground like we are above ground. So when we're talking about the existing sump pumps that are constantly running now, we're going to overwhelm those with anything that we're pushing through the ground with the water tables. I'm not sure your question.

»Has it been taken into consideration?

»So, I'll give you the history on me. I came here almost three years ago. Heritage Crossing was already approved when I got here. First thing I noticed was the groundwater and it's we have plenty. I don't know. You can look at it and it started weeping sometimes. First thing I did was with utilities, we put I identified this underground French drain that you're talking about because when you when you build infrastructure, it's piping and then you surround it with gravels and sands and things and so it it creates a conveyance, right? So what we do what we did was change the standard. It was unc it was it was unregulated before I got here. We install clay dams every 200 feet. So, it's no longer going to be free flowing through these these trenches. Um, we've also I also worked with the design engineer and we're going to put a a uh I can't remember who was who mentioned the concern for their neighbors to the to the subdivision to the west, but there will be an underground French drain or an underground land drain that's installed on that west boundary that'll take it to this pond through the pond and convey it into the the piping. you're you're and and this this pond isn't designed as a retention pond, which a retention pond would hold the water and seep it into the ground. This is a a detention pond, which just controls the flow outward to try to mimic that historic flow so you're not overwhelming the the receiving waters. Did that answer your question?

»Yeah, I'm again still concerned with where the exit for all that is. that's up on the northwest corner and it'll go into a piping system that's going to go all the way to the Slooh that is south and kind of west of Maloof.

»Is that like an existing line already or has responsible for putting that outside? We're we're cooperating with the the developers and this is that's a master planned storm water project and we have it budgeted for this year.

»Thanks.

»Thanks for that question. Any other question? So, so that master's plan storm water drain none of that was here when we had the floods. Correct.

»That's that's correct.

»Did the plan to put that in exist prior to the flood? I think it was kind of like a result of what happened to mitigate future advances.

»If you It predates me. I don't know the timing of when that was. That was in place when I got here and I've been planning for that since I've got here. That was that was one of the the big projects that Justin aware made me aware of. He's like, "You need to be aware of this area." And so when this project came in, luckily my memory worked. I said, "Hey, we need to look at this master box."

»Yeah. I mean, everyone who's living in Mills, we get surface flooding that area. It's not on the maps. It's not it's not 100year flood plan, anything like that. Um, so essentially the way I'm doing this is the engineering that you've done should mitigate and should prevent some of the damage caused from the from the flood a couple years ago. Yes. And just my experience here also I believe that flooding predated Heritage Crossing as well if and because of that I believe the drainage patterns have changed. What was described to me by the Hideway Estates residents on the west side. I talked to three of them. One of them's fairly new but the other two had some pretty good history on it. There used to be some flooding that came through from the north side and cut across their their area. After this this development was put in, they didn't have that even in that big storm, that big snow that we had a couple years ago. They didn't have that same flow pattern through their yards. It still got wet over there, but it didn't flow through their yards like it used to before that subdivision was installed or constructed. Sorry. Now this this is just hearsay third party of people that live there that have lived there for years. So the way the way that subdivisions are right now so if I'm reading it correctly basically we're not getting the same west

»that was my impression from what they were telling me. Yes. Is that is that now going into system or like where where is that where is that not collecting now?

»I I think I think 12 West kind of created a dam for it. Let it seep into the ground. I think the development raised the the uh the ground level in that area. Um it just isn't flowing freely like it used to. And then with piping the canal on the north end, that should actually help even more. So because that that canal can get that ditch, I guess that ditch runs east to west on the north boundary of this property. And then on the west boundary, it splits. It'll go kind of to the north and and water some of those fields that that receives both runoff and they have control flows from the canal company that that it comes from just north and on the the east side of the what's that that open space there

»uh Nibbly Gardens or

»I guess it'd be Nibbly Gardens that open space there there's a diversion that that can push water north and south church and right by the the wellhead right there do. So anyway, that's just the impression I'm getting from people. It's they tell me, "Yeah, we didn't get it the last big snow year." And my impression is because of the heritage crossing. Now mention it was was it Jared who who just came up here talking about Thank you, Jared. So you said there there's another kind of nuance that happened about the time they were building those. We had a a waterline main broken. It was broken right around 10th west 11th west. It was the old 12th 12th west alignment. There was an old hydrant T that came in by I don't know if you know the stops right there by the roundabout that that hydrant went to a h there was a T that went to a hydrant. They they finally f this thing finally came to the surface of when they we were getting complaints clear on the other side of 12 West probably I think one lot past the hideway estates project. The water was actually surfacing there from this water main break and and it it was just traveling through the ground through these conveyances that are created with the the infrastructure. But once that was repaired that all dried up too. So that might might have been some of the experience on the high water flows that were found when that was constructed as well. We don't know how long it was leaking, but that that leak was there for at least 2 years that where it was surfacing at that hole. So the way the way that the engineering has been done, no water should flow to the west end of this prop the the heritage farm. the open space like there's no water flow space.

»No, it should all be collected into the street into the storm water system, conveyed up through piping to that pond to the north and and the groundwater and and any surface flow that's west of that roadway, that's going to be captured with this land drain that with the the design engineer. I just want to know to get to the moving properties. There's two houses that border there. How do you go through that pond to the properties? He's asking about you get the drainage into the

»two houses that you have the pond. If you could come up to the mic just just on the pond, you say it's going to flow into your blue property. That pond's going to be flowing water. How do you get through there when there's two houses that up to each other there?

»So there there's uh there's a canal that runs through there already. it goes kind of south through the the little pieshaped properties to the west on the north end here that so there through inherently there's a prescriptive easement through there and with that there's also a prescriptive easement for storm water runoff to go there as long as you don't increase flows you're allowed to to maintain the historic flow direction so that that's how it's going to happen I'm also working with the property owner trying to secure a a trail easement to connect the trail on the north to keep it going along the loop's property there.

»So that canal that's piped on the last corner there on the northwest it has access to take that pond through too. You're saying

»there's a prescriptive even for the canal and all the receiving storm water that that canal received over the years. So there Mr. Chairman I need to uh I need to leave pretty soon my motions.

»Yeah item number four. Are we on discussion? We'll do that now. Go ahead.

»You were trying to study uh this large.

»So, and and Tom, you can speak to this. They were just under that threshold. So, over 20 acres. Um we we didn't require one, for example, for Mount Vista or Nibbly Farms. a very similar scale to this one as far as the number of homes. So it it wasn't required for this one.

»It's based on acreage

»acreage and and there's other factors. Maybe Tom, I don't if you want to speak to that any but but it was

»yeah code governs it by acreage.

»Yeah. Unless there's a condition set by clinic commissioner or city council otherwise that's not by acorage. I think we need to feed this a bag,

»right? It's it's I mean it is 70 homes.

»So this question is based on not based on how many single family homes you're building

»both.

»I I those those are considered by by staff. There is there is some discretion with the city engineer to ask for it if if it's needed, but that's that's the starting point within the within the so so the numbers that were expressed by the the speaker there. They're accurate for an overall traffic study. Um but there's also other things you look at is peak hour. That peak hour is usually 065 trips per per unit. So with that, that means that in that peak hour when when you're going to have that highest congestion, you you'll have about 45 vehicles running through during that peak hour. That's less than one a minute.

»Um question is um can we make the screen zone contingent? The developer must build an open space subdivision. The reason why bring that up is what happens if we vote to reszone this and it it says city council it and we put sufficient conditions on the developer but they don't want to build space going forward. What can we do to protect this process or if we resone this but it's going to be a public place division? That is that is an option of the city and if you want to recommend that you could if it you conditional reszones are allowed. Um we it seems like more often than not the reasons that we've had are conditional. We try to be a little bit careful with too many conditions because in 20 years tracking all that down is a little bit difficult. I don't think something like that especially given that that's what's being proposed right now is is too unreasonable. I think if you if if you were approving it and they wanted to do something completely different. I mean I guess you could always revert back to the old zony, right? I mean that that's that's the thing you could see and I would probably suggest to give a time frame even if it's 5 years that an open otherwise it it may revert back because the city's code's going to change. Who knows if we're even going to have the open space subdivision code in 3, four, 5 years. And so to to to reference So to reference it specific in a reasonzone, you know, the reason is going to stick to the land for it could, you know, it could for 50 years. It could it could never change, but the the open space subdivision changes over time. Um I mean the zoning could change as well but it is an option to to answer it more more briefly

»also given the fact that this is four items on the list tonight I I don't talk about the the design of the neighbors but just want to think we should consider I'm sure going to be an ho Who's going to maintain the city's going to maintain the maintain the open space?

»That's what's being proposed.

»If the city decides not to not to take on that responsibility, how would they do that? Would they would they do an HOA? How they maintain the open space including the fence? Even if the city takes that responsibility, he maintains the fence.

»Yeah. And and I should mention I I I I I would suggest uh chair to to give the developers some time to speak to any anything but um that is what's being proposed is that is that it's dedicated to the city at this point in time and maintained by the city. So it wouldn't wouldn't necessarily require an HOA but

»Josh would

»sure is to wait maybe until there's no questions then

»okay

»instead of going back and forth

»we can do that

»might be a better

»I just wanted to point that out because sometimes we've been through meetings where we don't even give the applicant a chance and we decision and I think it's I think it's good to give them a chance just just suggesting it 2023 and definitely empathize our val. I'm a half valley native and it's not fun going down Main Street compared to when I was a kid. And but we all have uh needs uh in the real estate market and this is going to definitely meet one of the needs which you know smaller lots are needed more affordable lots. Um but we didn't just come to this trying to maximize what we were making. uh but rather uh for the last year and a half I've been working with neighbors and council members and listening to people and trying to come up with a solution that will maybe not make everybody happy but certainly make the majority of people happy. So, the open space um you know, we we put surveys out trying to figure out what people wanted. This is what kind of came back that there was a need with Morgan Farms that Morgan Farms had um was bursting in the seams and and needed another location. It was a diverse um instead of just having a soccer field or a baseball field where a lot of people felt there were plenty um we we went ahead and tried to keep it as a as possible and it seemed like a lot of the neighbors were happy about that. That's kind of when I came uh last time. Um some of the objections were they wanted to keep it um similar to how it was and and so we listened. Um what other Oh, as far as what are some of the other questions that you feel like needed addressing? There was something on traffic going into on the 3200 South on a version for safety that slow it down. So that's not going to be on 3200 South. That's going to actually So So our code does require traffic homing at intersections on interior roads. Um what they're proposing here is kind of like a a bulb out chicane type of not a chicane but a bulb out type of flare that restricts the throat with the curb. So they're not isolated bulbs like uh what you'd see on what you see on on the retrofit on the intersections north of here.

»It's the same the same as what you basically what the same as what you see on Heritage Crossing there.

»Yeah. And I guess one other thing that I would like to say because I feel like it's been addressed a little bit, but there this area has had a lot of flooding in the past and I'm I've gone and spoken with a lot of the neighbors about that and I feel like we've been very thoughtful in our approach to addressing this area. Um, and I feel like we're going above and beyond in a lot of the areas to try to um resolve current issues that that are going to, you know, happen regardless to whether four homes are built in this area or it's just kept the same. I feel like we've been a good partner generally.

»I the public hearing closed at this moment.

»There will be another public hearing.

»Yeah, I can stay after

»all the questions weren't answered from the original meeting. We asked who is responsible for holding the developer account what you got and we were asked we asked about how people were not even notified even here which seems pretty sex. So um the the city the city is responsible for ensuring that the development agreement is adhered to city I guess in general that would be uh you know it usually goes on city staff but ultimately city council uh to to ensure yeah to ensure that that happens. As far as notification, uh this this was properly not notified which which is um all properties within 300 ft of this were were notified as required by state code and just in general um the the city's notifications mirror what is required by state code. So all properties within 300 ft. It was posted on the public meeting notice, the Utah uh public meeting notice website, the city website um here at city hall as well. Um and I I just I just want to note this that you know with with everyone here uh that it you can go on the public meeting notice website and subscribe to Nibbly City and you will be notified in your inbox every time a meeting um happens. I would I would suggest that if you are interested in um being informed about what goes on in the city that that you do that. Um I know I I do that with with with other cities that are nearby so that I'm informed what's going on in Logan and Milville and and and other cities, you know, that may impact Nibbly City. It's it's a pretty quick notification and then you get that and and you you know what's going on. Uh but beyond that, you know, we it's it's within 300 feet, which really that that is what's required. Beyond that is is a significant cost to the city. Um so unless we're directed by the city council to to go beyond the the the minimum, uh that's that's what we do because because the cost and that's what's and that is covered by the developer by the way on on their application. And there's a public notification fee and that. So

»well the public site is

»um so it's Utah public if you if you Google it Utah public notice.

»Yeah. um utah.govpmn I think.

»Thank you.

»Yeah, I would I would suggest you do that then then you'll be informed about that and yeah, someone from the city could help you if you have any trouble getting through that.

»Okay. Thank you. Any other comments from the council either have anything green? I was just I wanted to add if it's appropriate just mentioned something housing cost. Would that be appropriate? Um I looked up the cash valley association realtor's report on prices and in May 2025 the average was $5,838. and looked up how much income that would would be needed to qualify for that mortgage. So the minimum income or no other debts is $17,000 a year, but the ideal income $17,000 a year. So I will appreciate all of you being here and sharing your input. we're also in a in a position to think about the future and plan for future growth um and how to make it more affordable for people. Um there was there's a study that came out that the Utah price by 2030 will be $958,000. That's statewide. But Utah has the ninth most expensive housing market in the country. So it's a great place to live. You know it's a great place to live. That's why we're here. This is for our kids and grandkids. Thank you. I think my concern on this development was regarding the water. I have a friend that live on the west side. I know some of the pain that they have with the flooding and stuff and from things that has went over. Sounds like a lot of thoughts and dedicating that potential on the yearly occurrence. So, and that was kind of I mean thanks all thanks for speaking that.

»Thank you. Um they said the water shares are going to be given to the city. That's his development part. Does that include the water shares for the 6.4 acres too?

»Yes. Yeah, that's in the proposed development agreement.

»So would the 6.4 4 acres keep water shares for air

»if the city cho if the city chose to we we could right

»and if it's I'm assuming once it's dedicated given to the city could it be reszoned is that five acres

»it could be reszoned uh but it the reason why it's being proposed to just put put put it in the development agreement. It's just to true up the open space subdivision and the regulations within that. So you have to have it zoned R2A the entire in the entirety to Yeah. So yes, the city could do that, but rather than kicking the can down the road and and saying, "Okay, well, yeah, we'll we'll reszone that a later," we felt it would be better to just be explicit up front on what the intended use was and and and just allow it. the on Brett's comment earlier on the additional approval um requiring the open space subdivision. Um would would part of that be a fail back to the current zone if uh within 5 years if nothing happens or

»Yeah, it it's really up to it's up to you how you want to craft that. That could be um I I guess the question you want to ask is do you want this type of development specifically open space subdivision or are you okay with something more in line with uh you know like right next door heritage crossing that that scale. If you really don't want that, you want the preservation of open space and that's part of a package deal, then I would I then I would suggest to then do do a conditional resone. It's just just be cognizant of the ongoing monitoring of that because that does thing things. Uh I think there was a gentleman that talked about Elhorn um subdivision and and some of the controversy with that. I know that if we at the city tried to go back and get the doc do documentation on what happened at the time of Elhorn subdivision that would be difficult. Now, it's recorded and we could record it on the property, but if you get into if it if there's a lot of nuances there, 20 years down the line, it gets a little bit difficult to administer as all is just one thing I would caution on a conditional reszone.

»Uh, Mr. Chairman, I have a motion. Uh, motion for approval of recommendation for ordinance 2526 on the result from R2 to R2 with the conditions recommended by staff. Well, there were there were no conditions for the reason. Sorry, I I put everything on there.

»Yeah. Yeah, there's been a motion by uh Troy and a second by Kina. Any other discussions?

»Yes, I I do think we should additional that the result is permissible only space. Do you want to make an amendment to the motion?

»Um, yeah. I'd like to say that the recommendation for resistance condition um the proponents approval of the open space.

»I'll second there's been a motion for an amendment with a motion by Tyler and a second by Troy. So that's on the table now. Is there any discussion?

»Can I can I just clarify the motion? Is that approval of the preliminary plat, approval of the final

»plat? The the actual subdivision of the property recording recording of a subdivision. Okay.

»Just wanted to clarify that

»they don't then the result can't perfect. Not. Are we okay with that?

»I mean, I recommend that we explain to the people here what this process really is. This is a recommendation to city council and city council is the the authority in these decisions. Yeah, this is we're not approving the R from R2 to R2A. We're making a recommendation to city council that they approve it and they're the legislative bodies that will actually make the decision happen. So, does that make sense? Okay. Let's go ahead and vote. Want to do a roll call vote?

»We typically don't do that in planning commission. Yeah.

»All in favor say I.

»I. It's four to zero. It passes. Moving on to the public hearing ordinances 257 development agreement. build 70 lot open space subdivision 19 acres by west. Yeah, this is this is where the discussion about actually the 70 lot happened. That one strictly just resolved.

»Yeah. So, so this it may maybe I'll I'll clarify. So, the first item on that they just that they just made a recommendation to city council on was to reszone the property. So, that's that's just to change the zoning from R2 to R2A. Not again not a final decision because that goes to city council. This is actually about the

»Yeah, this this this next item is for the development agreement for the fields at Nibbly Meadows and and for for the public that remains on the council. The reason typically we don't actually list this as a separate item. The reason this is listed as a separate item is because again this is this is a recommendation to city council where the next item after this the preliminary plot is the final approval. So we we split those two apart and the reason why it is required that city council look at this and and consider the development agreement is for two reasons. one, the city would take on additional open space, you know, the open space. So, the city doesn't have to do that. If the city decides, you know what, we don't need this. It's too much maintenance. We're not we don't we don't want it for whatever reason, the city could say no. Um that's a discretionary decision. Uh the other reason is what this exception to the city code and really it's to the animal land use regulations uh which I would say uh isn't necessarily uh essential for for the subdivision, but it does clean it up and make it uh so that it can be used for what it's proposed to be used for, which is the housing of animals. Um, I guess you could put chickens and ducks on the property, but you couldn't put horses if if without this exception without violating the city code. So, those are the two reasons. Now, everything else on this development agreement is also part of the package that goes to city council. But just want to be clear like that's why this is this is a separate item and is being considered uh separately from from the subdivision itself.

»With that, we'll open a public hearing. I have Justin. So he signed up on the list the first list. Gotcha. Hey, there's nobody else on the list that's open up public hearing. Please come forward and say your name. And can I just clarify before we get into this? So again, the last one was just approval of change from R2 to R2A and this one is solely the development as is presented in the notice.

»This is the It's a 70 mil size to but the exception to the orange is we allow large animals and the whole agreement

»six acres that is intended for

»among other things there there's some performance measures on participation in the the runoff management plan and things like that but this is pretty much the governing document for the subdivision which will be heard in the next one

»of the city council

»no can be heard the next agenda the next next after this after consideration of the agreement then comes the subdivision itself.

»Okay. So this is just a glimp you guys will decide and you'll recommend that to the city or that would be

»no. So so the planning commission is the approve is the approval authority for preliminary plat. Um once they approve it, it's a it's a it's actually the city manager that's the approval authority. Um, it used to be city council until recently, but state code changed that said city council can can't get involved in subdivisions after well, city council can't get involved in subdivisions after

»outside of a reszone or a development agreement such as this, which involves the um dedication of open space and an exception to our code. Well, there's that one exception. So th for those two reasons, that's why it's going to city council. That's all I was explaining. But really, there's a lot more detail in this agreement. It's the governing document for the for the development in general.

»It is.

»We're just trying to follow the rules. I tried to kind of through the plans at least I assume that I wouldn't even go on the website was the approved plan and all that but I mean I guess am I speaking to the actual 70 acre the 70 homes and then the the a change really is that it or is it just the a change I want to understand but I guess I think it's just as confusing

»I so I sorry this is buried in like the 28 slides I gave on this. Uh the the development agreement terms are are summarized on the screen in front of you. So I mentioned those those first two already, so I won't rehash that. Developers required to install a fence. They're required um to give water shares, street um provide street trees, build build a canal and trail, provide this runoff management plan that these are these are the m there there's there's some more detail in there. For example, the the restrictions on the open space. So, it's this what what is um this the public hearing is for is for this agreement. I could bring it up. It's going to be a lot more words on the paper. This is a summary of what of of those of those words that are in within the development agreement.

»No, thank you. Thanks for clarifying.

»Y everybody was just as confused, but

»it's confusing.

»It's a lot but yeah,

»so I again Kyle 2984 Stonebridge Drive, Middle Utah.

»Um so again, my property is other side of the fence of this. Um, one question I would ask for you guys since we're actually addressing this, but I didn't get clarified in the last um, discussion that was happening was you mentioned the canal has a right that you know there's a rideway. I think you were trying to speed which I get it but the canal as Mr. Ruby was asking about goes basically behind his property and it goes out to Maloo. And the thing that didn't make it that I was unclear of and maybe you guys clarify this is basically are you saying that we've got a rideway there and that whoever deals with this canal is going to dig through their properties to take down fences whoever homes that are in the way to make that canal go to the Malo to the south side of Malo. So that's a concern that I have on that. Um I think and I don't know that that was very clear before. Um, you know, I I don't I'm still against this whole development plan. I know it's considered open space by the definition or textbook, but I mean a drainage canal that's not or a drainage property that 3 acres or whatever the back corner, that's not open space. That's just graph that's there to direct water. And the farm, I mean, yeah, like was mentioned earlier, it benefits a few people. So, I would consider that open space. I would consider more of exist like storage for these other lots where you've got larger space between homes. I consider that more of an open space than and I know the definition is against them. So anyway, those are my thoughts. I really don't I mean if we have to choose, you know, which devil we want the worst and maybe I guess leaving the the farm there would be better, but but I don't love the 70 homes. I think that's going to destroy my property value. That's two of the vehicles. Thanks, Chris. Anyone else would like to make comment?

»Yeah. Can I drunk just west? So, when you talking about, you know, that that flood, um, I was there. I was one of those guys. Um, her house, she currently lives at that free song wall, right? the house across from me. We were building a dam with sand. I'm sure some of the people say city council. I live right across from them. Um when Mal's foundation got put in, I now have a flooding basement. So my question is what is going to be done north and south to keep that not just the the top water but also the the water that's running underneath? I think you you provided a couple things. Um, sorry, I don't know why I'm emotional. Um, but we we watched uh five foot of water spray out of the bottom stairs of my neighbor's house because there's so much hydrostatic pressure. Um, my you know, aside from developing the houses, I just want to know what's going to mitigate that north and south up against those houses. If if you've been out to a I don't know their address across the street from me. Um there's the house that burned down. You guys know where I'm talking. They actually put a giant barrier in the backyard and sideyard between the current law to help mitigate that. That's that's a temporary fix. That's a dam. Um there there is kind of a ditch that runs along there. Is there plans for a drain like French drain or something to kind of protect and mitigate the water from that development? Thank you. Anybody else? Please come.

»So, some of you know me because I've called the city, but I own the home now that goes with the horse ranch. I will say based off of what was proposed before with the water.

»Can you state your name and direct?

»All right, Dellson.

»Um, it's nice to see that there's a proposal for where the water can go because what I saw last time was just a subdivision with 45 homes and no retention pond, no space. So, I think what I've seen is better. 70s a lot. Um, but what I do like say is my home is Oh, right. So, the new proposal gets put in. There's like a storm drains around me. So, I won't be the lowest spot because there's a road next to me and in essence farm behind. So my fear is if we don't propose this, the existing homes that are lowered will get flooded, which is the hideway, their backyards will be flooded because if the original 45 lots go in, they'll all raise their yards and it'll just push the water more into Maple Valley. I have another home I did in at 1509 and we've remodeled our basement twice because of the water coming up. Not so much because of rain. So what I see is better than what I've seen in the past as long as there's a good way for all of that water to truly go to the storm drain or to them. And more as a side note because you posted that on the website. I know I live there, but there's a lot of curless people coming to look. So, I'm gonna put up private driveway because I own the driveways to the barns. I'm not necessarily going to follow through with anything. The city's welcome to go back there and look what we need to do, but I'm hoping to slow down some traffic. That's it. Anybody else would like to make this? Sorry if we disturb you. I know I was one of that.

»Um, I just I hope you understand.

»Please restate your name for some circle which is directing with that me. I really hope you understand the the water there it takes. I just would like to help you understand that I take two centrade generator pumps. Have you seen those? They're like generator pumps too in my backyard and I pump water through big pipes like this big from my backyard on the street. Gators will let you know how much water is in my backyard. And would I like for this development to improve the situation we've all experienced on the west side? Absolutely. But I do not see where the water is going to be. Sorry, I still stop talking to you. Um, I do not see where the water is going, how we actually going to eliminate the water, but I have videos and pictures from two years ago, and every year I I take them of my children in water like this in my backyard. Nothing has been improved with construction of the newer developments. And it's all of us. It's not just me. My house. Yes. It sits very low.

»With pipes, the green ones, green ones that she put when developers like this water flows from each side of my head. So, will this development improve the overall situation or is it going to make you nervous?

»Our neighbors used to in July water their grass with our

»and this was a dry year.

»This was 19 years ago they were doing that and when when the rest of the development went in it it got a lot worse. We didn't have water issues. We didn't have pressure cracks. when it started being built around us, we started seeing that. And then that year, what 2017? Yeah. It I couldn't believe that that was my neighbor's funeral. I'm actually in that video

»drinking sandbags for my neighbor who wasn't even home, you know, breaking into his house with his permission to get into the basement and watching 5t of water spring out, you know, and and I'm not against development. just there there needs to be some really, you know, deep thought and I'm sure you have like you're an engineer. You're smarter than I please. If all the water is supposed to be looking at it is all going to accumulate if it like right if I can show you my house that we're placing which is going to be a beautiful view just by swim. It's right outside my house and it's scary. we'll go ahead close the public hearing this time and try to answer some questions here as we go. Um, have you looked at their water issue their house? So, I'm gonna ask a couple of questions. The first question on the canal piping, I sorry if it's legal ease, but that that's that's basically what it is. There's certain rights that people have that allow them to continue flows through there as well as improve those flows because they have their pervator water. So in the case of the the canal sorry so in the case of the canal company they have the right to go in and pipe their system and the current route of that system comes along this ditch here and into these two yards. That's the current and then it splits there and it goes right along this way and it goes to the north. So there's that there's that perpetual easement allows them to both maintain it, improve it. There's also the the historic right of this property that all the storm water that's been collected, groundwater flows in that normal direction. Well, they have that right to collect and control that flow to pre-developed rays and that's what that pawn is doing. So, did I answer the question this time?

»Yeah, I apologize. Try to say that I just I don't think it's clear that that was what you were saying is that they have the right way to dig through their property. I understand that you guys have the rights the canal company has any easements. I'm aware there's one that goes through my parents room. I just didn't think it was clear that that what the intention was and the plan is that they're going to dig that canal through those properties and then whatever you guys have to do to re or do to put it back the way it was. That's right. Oh, okay. So, I did fail you in that point. So,

»yeah. So, there there's getting into the weeds here. There's two different sorts of there's a public utilities and pee. Those are usually recorded through a conveyance document or shown on a plat or subdivision. Now if any disturbance through maintenance improvements or whatever that is they come through and do any work there they are bound to restore those things. Now canal companies and things are different. They they're not required to restore that. They have the right to go in just do mass mayhem. But I don't know of anyone that does. I I I can't say what I can't say what's going to happen here because the city will hold them accountable for anything in here. And and and I said earlier that I'm negotiating for a trail easement and things with the neighboring property and we're looking to maybe relocate that canal ditch there underneath the trail rather than have to go through the the historic prescriptive easement. And in that case, it would be conveyed through a document. And in that case also gives a little more control to the city that we can now make sure that the restoration is done right to protect the property that's impacted there. Hopefully hopefully I answered the question there.

»Yes. No, thank you.

»So the other the other one was the comment 70 homes if I remember right on the math. There there can be up to 50 homes without any open space

»or more. Right.

»And and so

»in the 19 acres

»in the 19 acres. So there's 20 less. It's I don't know, but you're losing out on the open space. I'm I'm not saying one way or another. I'm just kind of pointing that out that that they can come in here and not have to go through this process even. It's just a simple subdivision and they can have up to 50 homes if I remember right. And then it it the city also loses the ability that we've negotiated all these mitigations on the flooding on the piping and this master plan storm water system. We lose all of that if if this open space R2-way subdivision goes away. So I'm I'm not saying this is the right thing to do. I'm not saying it's the wrong thing to do. I'm just pointing out facts. Um the groundwater issue for Dorian, Miss Bundy. Um I we're very aware of what's going on there. I I have a video from 2017 flood. I sent it to the engineer and I'm going to put the engineer in the lime bite right now. Michael Taylor and I have worked for months together on this. He he's been very responsive. He's he I think he fully understands what's going on with this. Michael, would you just give a is if this is okay with with commission. Is this okay? Michael, I want to just give you the opportunity to tell what work has been done, how how we've uh mitigated some things. And then the question on the the uh north and south what what we're doing. There's going to be a road there. That road's going to be 3 to four feet higher than the existing ground. That's going to help with that surface flow. There's also in my under my insistence, Michael agreed to put in a land drain that goes north and south right on the west boundary over here. So

»between our houses and the open space.

»Yes. Right in right in that area. So Michael take one minute not too much longer but kind of go through the process if that's okay.

»Yes. Thank you.

»I appreciate commentation Tom. Yeah. So I mean we have tried to be as comprehensive as possible here. I I've personally worked on projects in this area for the last 10 years having done a lot of work for the loop subdivision. Uh so I'm familiar with the issues. We've seen footage. We've seen Yeah. So I mean as far as drainage with the subdivision itself, the subdivision is going to be built in raised condition two or three feet above existing grade. Um all of that is going to drain to that pond which is a detention retention pond. It will be held there for a short period of time in a 100redyear storm. Uh that pond will be built above grade and then go through the regional drain which will head out. Um we are tightening the canal which will reduce all of that leakage and infiltrations having water table and we're putting in that land draining entire boundary of the subdivision. So on the French train you know it's got a perfect pipe it's got a column of gravel water migrates underground above hits the trench turn goes into that pipe. It will go north to that corner and then straight west a half mile slope. Um we're also addressing uh the hideaway storm water pond and the carriage crossing pond that project. Those will be piped through this system as well. Uh currently that water goes nowhere. It just says but those two ponds will get drained into this master system and head west. Um and then if there gets that low point there in hideway too which is going to be there's some earth work there. the landscaping between the developer code. I think that we've tried to be seriously as comprehensive as we possibly can with this approach. Um I don't know if there's any aspects that I'd love to cover there,

»but no thanks. You did point out a few things that I failed to mention was the existing ponds in the hideway and the the heritage crossing. Those are going away with this this

»Yeah. Yeah. We're and there will be no basement on this on this uh subdivision. We recognize that this is a uh already an ongoing regional issue. We are trying to fix that as part of this project. Uh the developer is collaborating in a significant amount of off-site should this be approved off-site infrastructure which is typically not part of their scope. Um you know they very much are interested in being part of the solution not for us. Commission, do you have any questions for him while he was here? I say take advantage of it, please. Okay.

»Yeah, sure.

»There was uh one other question that was posed to me out in the hall. He was a little too shy to to ask.

»Okay.

»And it may not be at this point in the development agreement, but it was with regard to the width of the road. Will on street parking be allowed? And we can address that now or I can wait till the

»Thank you. parking work. Um any other the comments from the council question? I was just addressing said um Josh, what what's kind of the plan for CCNR style of homes or are we talking vinyl aluminum? We talking stuckle and hardy plank sighting like what what are your thoughts on?

»Yeah. Um we're discussing that right now. So I

»I mean I know it's not something we can impose bonding but just for the community wants to know.

»Yeah I would say similar similar with the surrounding areas HOA.

»No no H

»you know uh they being in real estate over 20 years in the valley HOAs haven't been overly popular in cash.

»I do have a question. What would be the average of

»Oh, I I'll bet that'll be anywhere from 12 to 2400.

»Thank you.

»Yeah, I I I did have a question. Um Tom kind of touched on this um but I just wanted to make sure like all the different items were kind of covered. So if city council doesn't approve uh the open space of division um and uh this uh reverts back to an R2 R2 zone um the proponent or maybe they decide to sell and another bug comes in decides to just build a regular R2 subdivision. what would be required if it was just a normal zone like what are we losing out mentioned obviously all the the open space the horse stables all that gets torn down the trail the French drain can you speak to some of those items

»so the trail is required regardless um we we require it in all subdivisions. I think we get more opposition from developers and and questioning the um the validity of requiring it, the proportionality of of you know that there there's there's some state code on exactions, what we can exact and it needs to be roughly proportional to the impact and but I think I would think in an R2 subdivision we could still require the trail. uh we couldn't require any more open space. I guess I'll let Tom speak to the other the other

»Yes. Uh the other things they'd still be required to manage storm water to a certain degree, but we're not going to get it'd be more difficult to get the regional this this master plan storm water system, this underground land land grant. We we basically lose negotiating power because a reszone is a legislative decision which we have a little bit of negotiating power there. Um this development agreement is also a legislative decision. We have that that negotiating power. We lose that if it's just a standard subdivision

»as a standard R2. You said it' be approximately 50 lots already. This is a standard two.

»Well, that that would be for R2A. It would be 50. It'd be 50 lots. Uh for R R2

»R2 I don't know if it's about 40 I'm guessing is what could fit in there may may be 43 or so you know 40 to 50

»really

»right That that's probably the the that's probably for R2A. I'm I'm guessing for R2 you're fitting 35 36 home, but I mean that hasn't been necessarily vetted, but indeed.

»Any other questions or discussion? Motion. Make a motion that make make a motion to approve the development agreement subdivision 7 open space subdivision approximate parks 5 west south for the conditions recommended by a second

»that be to recommend approval just to clarify. Recommend approval. A motion to recommend approval of this by Tyler and a second by. Any other discussions? Seeing none, we'll move to a vote. Favor say I. I. Four to zero. It passes. Um, moving on. Item number seven, discussion of approval of preliminary plot plus for the build on 70 lot open space subdivision approximately 19.23 acres at 1405 west 3200 south. We open up for discussion of the council. I think so.

»This is where you can you can cover yours.

»I I don't I don't know if there's anything else I need to add that hasn't already been said.

»So, there was a question posed to me out in the hallway on street parking. So, the proposed street section through the local portion that loops through into Heritage Crossing from 3200 South to 12 West, they're proposing 29 foot of pavement. It's a 60-oot rideway with 29 foot of pavement that does allow parking usually on one side. If if you start parking on both sides, it kind of narrows things down into one like I think they were concerned that it would be

»the

»Oh, yes. Yes.

»Just the preliminary file. I could I could pull up just a second. I think I'll pull I'll pull up the document because I I believe it does show the actual cross-section is our typical local road. Yes,

»this is the same as

»curb gun side

»almost every curb gutter side. Yeah,

»just a second. Let me

»And in this case, it's 29 foot of asphalt. We do have another section that's 60 foot that has 22 foot of asphalt and the developer gets to choose which one they they prefer. So, the section here that we're looking at is 29 foot of of asphalt, which would allow parking on one side and and cars to travel, but we usually don't post on no parking on one side or the other. So, it's just first come, first serve. And if two cars are parked on opposing on opposite sides, then it narrows it down to, you know, they're going to have to wait for an oncoming almost like an advisory lane. Um, this sort of section is is ideal to slow traffic down, especially with the parking. It's more ideal to have no parking on the street and a narrow lane, but in this case, it with that parking, it will self-regulate the traffic speeds by kind of giving that side friction. So, the more parking is the better. And I think the concern was it's going to be too narrow to allow parking and and people driving. But I I think in a neighborhood it's it's a a benefit to have that that friction and that narratives.

»Yeah. I mean I think I think there's a lot of precedence there because um if you look at the majority of the recent subdivisions, you know, Nibbi Farms, this is this is the section they use. For example, this is the the majority of subdivisions. This is this is what you see. Some of them, like you say, are a little narrower. There aren't any local roads recently that have been approved that are wider than this. There's some older ones that have, you know, 32 ft of asphalt, for example, but for a local street, there aren't we don't have any any standard crosssections that are greater than 29 ft of asphalt.

»With the known water issues we have, are they proposing curbing gutter or swells? It's curb and gutter on each side there. They do requirement or is that just the discussion? I think that we should the design that the dam

»keep it from continuing to flow laterally. I think we should make that a requirement. Um

»that's a good point.

»We have swells that can just fill up and fill up and then we we don't trap and cure.

»That's a great point. Um I don't know that it was ever mandated. This was the design selected by the developer and the the designer. Um, what do you have as far as like are you doing swells or curbing gutters or sewer?

»Uh, yeah. The current plan is certainly gutter. I think you know I I would personally recommend a conveyance water out of the roadway. Uh, your bad infiltration series.

»Yeah. It swells all the markings make that requirement conditions like I

»it's already

»Yeah. I mean it's already in the preliminary plaid. So I think when you approve it, this is the design you approve. It doesn't have swailes. It can't.

»No. And I mean, unless they unless they just kill the whole thing, for example, and they they don't approve the reason and they don't approve the

»But this But what's in front of you is you're you are the approval authority. It just needs to be a conditional approval because it can't go forward without the reason and without the development agreement. I don't know if we want to restrict it. I think it'd be good to allow it on

»No, that's great.

»No. and and uh I did request that in one of the first uh plan reviews and they agreed to put in a curb cut and and provide an area for parking

»is aware of this don the property donation.

»Yeah. So I actually met with them was it a week or two ago? I I brought them in and we walked through the structures that we with the structural engineer. Um, actually it was after we visited with the structural engineer. I had a separate meeting with Roxy and and Mike and uh they were really excited. They really wanted to try to save the open stables that I mentioned. If we can go back to the aerial.

»Yeah. Okay. Good.

»So the roadway is the roadway is going to be going right near this area. So, we couldn't spare these open stables here, but we're able to sever them and have this smaller building with this larger stable. This larger stable building right here. This one that's got to go. There's no way we're going to be able to repair that one. It's falling down. There's structural failures.

»Kind of.

»It's just a pole barn and it's being held up by straps, like ratchet straps and things. This one here, yes, this one here we'll be able to salvage, but it it did have the same deficiencies identified as here. There's some lateral deficiencies, some vertical deficiencies and beams and and trusses and things, but the these were they we just couldn't spare those.

»Yeah.

»So, is there a breezeway through that those barns? I mean, like they walk in and there's a stable.

»No, these ones are just open stable. So it's just kind of like an awning. Picture an awning where they can go under.

»Yeah.

»And then then there's some panels through here. The other one the other one are actually this one in here is actually stalls with with st.

»Yeah. Yeah.

»I'd like to make a recommendation committee that I don't know if you read the rest of the agenda but state passing ordinances on parking. We used to require two parking styles in addition to what's the garage. We know a lot of use that as a minimum but I think because the densities acknowledgement that we have high density more cars more people I think we need to set a minimum on this one as three parking stalls. Um we're with the snow rule the concerns we have we're not going to be able to we have to have off street apartments and if we do that we can make that administratively on this list when we part of the approval and regardless of what we do in the parking ordinance later still stick to this

»I would say

»sorry I would say sorry I I I think that would be something to put into the development agreement I don't know if it's appropriate to impose that on the preliminary plat if it's not required by code. Now,

»did we approve a final development agreement or did we approve

»you made a recommendation to city council for approval already? So, I don't know.

»Yeah, lot 12,000 foot lot like there we need to ensure that like I I lived in neighborhoods in Cedar Hills like this and the off street parking was a huge problem. need to require more off street parking. So whatever happens the next discussions won't impact and change.

»Yeah. Now now in practice what you're the only time they wouldn't get three parking stalls is if they had a onecar garage and and one if they have two two cars and they have they're going to have two stalls. So really they'll have four stalls. I haven't seen a onecar garage in quite a while for for a single family home in Nibbi. I don't know if I've seen any, but

»but that's but that that's just

»I just want to ensure there's plenty of options.

»The other option is that's the next that's one of the next items on the agenda, but you could require that of all

»single family.

»Right. Right.

»Right. I I guess I'm just saying the preliminary PL this is an administrative approval. If there's something that doesn't meet code, this is the time to say, "Oh, it doesn't meet that. You need to change this or you need to address this." But to add additional requirements, I would say that would be something to impose in a devel in the development agreement city council would consider. Levi, I question for you. Would it be appropriate if the commissioner had the concern that they could express that directly to the city council? Cuz

»I mean that's that's another option.

»They the city council will be considering this at their next council meeting.

»Yeah. Because I this is semi- loss in the current market. This is going to be bu built out in multiple phases and as we saw with Stonebridge residence here there are it changes as things go based on economical factors. So we're saying right now there's no single family a single car with us. 5 years when this thing wraps up we don't know what kind of conditions.

»Stonebridge is still working on our phases.

»Yeah. And that's 15 years.

»Yeah. That's 15 years. So

»So we can't we already recommended approval for the development agreement. So I can't we can't open that back up. So, the only thing I can do is go stand up on city council and say, "You need to cons I I just I just don't know if it's appropriate to do it at this stage of the of an administrative approval of a preliminary plot. If they if they meet the code, they meet the code and that's that's imposed at the time of building permit. those those parking requirements.

»Development requires parking.

»Can the commissioner make a recommendation to revisit that?

»How does that work? How does that work? I don't know if we've done that.

»First on following previous Yeah, that hasn't happened the five years I've been here. So, I I don't know.

»Can you recommend it to

»recommend?

»Well, I don't I don't know if

»that was a that was a concern that was expressed. Yeah.

»We have We have a motion. We

»Yes, we have. We do have

»well no we don't have a milk now but we will need to make

»yeah the subdivision on three acres and West 32. Okay, we have a motion. Is there a second? Were there any?

»Yeah, there's there's several findings and conditions that are recommended by staff that I would suggest. Um, let me pull those up. Yeah. So, there's the findings. I I mentioned them previously, so I don't know if I need to rehash everything. uh just in general they they meet they meet the city standards. Um open spaces benefit and support of the general plan. And then this is a list of of conditions that were also mentioned previously including the conditions uh recommended by staff. Okay. Do we have a second?

»I'll second the motion. There's been a motion by Troy to approve the PLA with the conditions stated by staff and a second by Karina. Um, any other discussions? Seeing none, we'll take it to a vote. All in favor say I.

»I.

»Four to zero. It passes. And moving on, item number eight. So that's what you're telling you guys. When will that be discussed by city?

»Sure, you could add something.

»When will be discussed by city council? Uh the next meeting is July 31st. A little over two weeks.

»Yeah. [Music]

»Okay. Moving to the public hearing. Um for oranges 25 titan 23 amending NCC 1924.160 accessory dwelling unit standards including parking requirements for single family and two family dwellings. You want to introduce us to that?

»Yeah. So th this is uh this is in direct response to Senate Bill 181 which was enacted this year by the Utah State Legislature. Um there's a number number of different regulations within this this Senate bill, but there are two restrictions and in staff's review that the city is not currently compliant with. Although we just went through the a very extensive process on updating the city's parking code, um there the state has come in and imposed two restrictions which at least from from the review of staff we're we're not compliant with. So one is specified municipality may not restrict twocar garage from satisfying two parking spaces as as part of a minimum parking space requirement. So for a a single family home it would within within the ordinance it basically states that two stalls are required but you cannot count the garage space or carport space. The state has come in and said no you have to count that. So it's simply crossing that out. Um, I would say that you could choose to add an additional stall if you think, you know, as Tyler mentioned. Um, but staff's recommendation is just to cross it out. Part of that is when we did do all that research, you know, just looking at the empirical data and looking at the, you know, of of uh at the time we used the um it so institute of uh transportation engineers um parking generation manual two stalls is is just right for single family homes. So that's that's that's the like the 85th percentile is right about two stalls. So in the vast majority that's that's going to be sufficient um for for this type of you know kind of suburban context. Um so anyway that's what staff's recommendation is is just simply to cross that out. Uh it would also so the other thing that that is being recommended is that one additional stall is required if there is an ADU or a secondary dwelling. Uh currently it's actually it requires two stalls if it's detached ADU but only one stall if it's attached. The state has said that you can only require one stall for an attached ADU, but for some reason detached, they've said, "Oh, it's okay. You we're not going to tell you how many stalls." So, the city at this point has said we require two, but at this time staff is recommending to just say one um just simplify it. I don't think there's any uh justification for two or a detached ADU compared to for example an attached that would probably have that likely have the same demand for parking. So that's what's being proposed there. Uh they've also said a specified municipality may may not restrict an unobstructed tandem parking space from satisfying two parking spaces a part of a minimum parking space requirement. Currently within the accessory dwelling unit the ADU code uh it says that it cannot block another parking space. So that that's not compliant with this provision of state code. So, we don't count, for example, that there's a twocar well, we we currently don't count the twocar garage anyway, but let's say someone has a long driveway and they've got two enough room for two parking stalls. And let's say they had enough room for another stall or two, we wouldn't count those. They would have to put it on the side of the property somewhere else. And it does. And I think in some instances if it's if if it's constrained it makes it more difficult to provide that parking and the state just has said you can't do that. You can't you have to count that tandem parking. Um

»so the law

»you do have

»you do that's what the state has said. So um so these proposed amendments would bring the city in compliance with state code. Um and I think there is a little bit of wiggle room if you want to if you want to discuss that you know where where you have some wiggle room if you want to go a little bit different than what staff is recommending. what's in front of you uh is you know what I've explained there and and it seems appropriate and efficient and in support of of the city's goals and general plan and being cognizant of of affordability. you know, parking does uh impact the affordability every, you know, it's not it's not just putting in the the driveway, but it's the the land. All of that adds to the the cost of housing. And this this is, I feel like, more appropriate and more in line with the other parking changes that were just recently passed. So although the state's telling us to do it, um staff is in support not be not begrudgingly on this time. Sometimes we we do it because we have to. I I think in this case these these are positive changes.

»Thank you. Open the public hearing. Anybody like make a comment? Okay. Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing still.

»Commissioners, if I may interrupt, I just wanted to ensure that my best educated guess was correct. So, I checked with my uh senior u city reporter. Since it passed unanimously, um it can be well actually doesn't need to be unanimous, but everyone was on the prevailing side. So we just need someone on the prevailing side to make a motion to reopen that up and to provide discussion and then amendments can be made such as what was proposed earlier and then passed again.

»So it just need to be someone from the prevailing side which luckily on that one everyone was the previous

»for the development if you want to revisit that.

»If that was Commissioner Brad's question if we could open it back up. Yes.

»Okay. you want to open that up, you know?

»Um, I I'd like to just I know I'm not going to be in I'm going to be out of town, so I won't get so I should be

»if you do if you're if you can show up to talk to council and say we because of the density of homes and not have we don't need.

»Okay. Yeah, I'll be there. cross my fingers if nothing bad happens. I mean, he say we reduce the amount of parking space so we can force more tickets for stone.

»Did you get one?

»No, but all my neighbors 60 degrees.

»No, I get for parking lot. Um, okay. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing. We'll open up number item number nine, discussion, consideration for recommendation of oranges on 25 and 23 and amending these ores for parking. I I disagree with analysis what you said they like because we just rewrote the ordinances when we were very specific to not include garage spaces because we want to assure the ADUs, the second homes, the basement apartments have plenty of parking to keep the cars off the road because we feel that is a concern for the safety of the neighborhoods and this this neighborhood specifically. You say you can't put cars on both sides and the economics garages will be removed, things will be removed. If you look at other urbanization of of of areas, you will go to a single car garage. So, I agree. We got to comply with the state code and we're going to count the two spaces in the garage and not exit. But we need to increase the minimum parking requirements to move three for a single family home and four for a two-lb home. Um, again, we hired a code enforcement officer to make sure people don't park in the winter time. we have to require in a code will allow for the conditions in which we live, you know, satisfy the needs of our residents. Um, I've been in those neighborhoods on 8 to 8 year lots and you get Yeah, it is a dangerous neighborhood for kids and affordability if you have cars park both sides of the road. So, let's comply. But I am absolutely against having anything less than a minimum of three spots for a single family dwelling to four spots for a zuc I I disagree. Um I I think uh you're talking about having cars parked on both sides being more dangerous. Um, we actually just had a wedding on our street uh this past week and the entire street and cars park both sides down the whole street and it was fantastic. I loved it because normally cars would fly down our way.

»Um, now that was a one time event. We don't have

»Yes. But that's the difference. But with the wedding and the DS parked both sides, cars driving through the neighborhood were tremendously slower. 5 miles from way safer for pedestrians, for kids, anybody walking around, whatever way safer of traffic. Um and then on requiring requiring parking for our citizens, um it it is up to the citizen on how many vehicles they have, right? So if you're if you're requiring more, you're imposing additional cost on family that may not want or need the space. Um, so we're talking 9 ft. That's the minimum requirement for steak is 9 ft

»and yeah, 9 by 18. So,

»so yeah, about two close to 200 square ft of of the

»you got we got a proponent right here just said how dangerous is this for your your hand. If you're under four feet tall, it's insane to think it's not more dangerous to have two cars parking. If you're over four feet tall, And these are going to be affordable housing families with kids,

»young kids,

»young kids. Like I'm I'm okay with smaller lots. I'm not okay with the streets being loaded up, especially in the summertime when everyone's out on the ground running from house to house fast. But again, on one voice, you're one voice, Karina. And what do you guys think? So, what would that look like um for three spots on a single family home?

»Automatically default. You say three. If you have a two-car garage, two's in the garage, one it's always going to be. If you do a one car garage, then you have one parking space and one on it really doesn't change the functionality with the 56. But again, I'm been here for eight years. I'm really afraid of the unt But I mean the setback what's been a setback on It's it's 20 ft for over sideard it's 5T

»for for this one for the one that was proposed. It it scales depending on the the development.

»Uh it's 15 in the in the subdivision that was proposed tonight. It it again it depends on on the lot size there. There's within the open space for the rear, but for the front it's 20.

»Yeah,

»20 feet. So, it's enough room for a vehicle. I I I think you're just you're if it's not going to make a difference, I don't see a reason on imposing it. And if you do impose it that it is additional cost should people not. So if somebody came and said I don't have to build and we are only a one family I only need one garage. Now I'm forced to build based to build it. They're forced to buy some rooms. If I'm building my house, right, I have to build that into

»or buy lots of

»Yes.

»But that first subdivision with one car should impact those six million people.

»I don't see how they're impacting other people. They only had the one car. They're the only people on the street. So I think I think we firm yes, confirm no. We got two other people.

»So I I have a question. So there's Jon's homes in they have the home accessory. So there's two they don't have they have by the statute. Yeah. That would be two cars in the count two inside the garage and then if you have a twocar garage you're automatically have two cars on. So that would satisfy statute. So the current inventory in stock of the building right now would automatically this is

»not potentially this is trying to predict the future

»ADU currently require two cars

»total

»total floor. Yeah.

»But the current housing stock have not there's nowhere in cash. Well, there's low micro six but um in there's not not an issue just where we are talking about smaller lot density I think we need to just make sure we keep cars off the street as much as possible. Well, if we want to be cars off the street, we could just require 22 foot streets and most pardon the street. Anyways, Claire, what do you think? Um, yeah, I I was when I was reading this, I was sad here. I come down to reducing the number of cars parking because I see people use their garage as another spare room or they open a business in it. long or something like that, which takes away heart, but it still counts as part.

»Well, yeah, that's that's a good point. We're not going to go back and tell people if someone maybe we would maybe we would deny a a building permit if they took out that parking if they didn't have adequate parking. But we would not count we would not count something that isn't parking as parking. and and if city had the chance to review that. Now, if they went in and they did it without a permit, that's another thing. But that's something maybe maybe that's a a recommendation of something for us to uh consider is when because people do convert their garages.

»Hey, if they convert their garages, ensure that there's parking somewhere else. And we could do that as as staff at least if they if they get a permit. the same the know they convert it into another bedroom or

»well

»sewing room

»they should get a permit they should get a permit but

»but that's not

»even it's not commercial it's just it's insulated and

»they got lighting in there changing the structure of the building or anything they're just using it for another purpose

»right yeah and but yeah you're right if they just go in there and I mean Garage Band I had a garage band. We pretty much lived in there in the summertime. Couches everywhere. We didn't need a building permit for that.

»Converted garage. It's cold.

»It's colder. The heat's not as good. But

»brother,

»you think we increase the middle to still be in compliance and keep the same code?

»I don't think we need to reduce the you because I I I see that being an issue down the road.

»Well, and to be compliant though, we have to increase the minimum requirements. So then we can count for the garage spaces.

»We have to increase what are we at now? Two.

»Well, the way the code reads now parking spaces not counting garage

»basically. And I can bring up the specific code language if you want to start

»making modifications to that. You'd say

»and then what that does is that will automatically come two garage and get two inside the garage, you get two outside the garage. Just the way that I do like that because then you protect yourself from and I guess you can deny a business license if somebody wants to open a a salon or something in their garage.

»Yeah, we we can deal with that code. that just I've seen families in shadow boat close their garage off to use the extra space or family living space and that you don't know the garage door still there. They're insulated, they're wided.

»Those are all third and half.

»Yeah. We're talking

»they're a third acre I think.

»Yeah. versus

»I I think I think maybe kind of getting to the spirit of the law of what the state is saying is they don't want they don't want cities meddling in what goes on behind those garage doors like just count it as just count it as parking space. It could it could be used as parking spaces if they choose to use it for something else. If they have a car, if they have somewhere else to put their cars, they can use it for something else.

»Yeah.

»I think I think that's kind of where they're trying to get with this is like it it was built originally for parking,

»so why not count it?

»Yeah.

»Even if it's not being used for that long term.

»Built by with the two cars. I think the intent at the state is saying if you got two cars right there on a town hall that is on the sidewalk that counts as part don't don't think it complimented when they get sorted

»right but but they just I don't think they want us to because I think that justification of oh they're there they're using it for storage or something else that's why that's why cities including Nibi have have that baked into the code and They're just they're just saying no, it's it was built as a parking as parking counted as parking.

»They do choose how but then if it pushes them onto the grass for a violation or on the street or whatever violating which then limits the number of houses cars. Now, what what I I will comment that what Tyler um s Tyler's suggesting from the way I read state code, it is allowed to do that. Not any higher than that though because once you get to four, you can't get more than four for a two family. That's that's your max.

»And

»I think you do. I think you do. Um, if if that's if that's the way you want to go, like just just to back up, sta I guess staff's recommendation is based upon the data that we that we gathered and and the observed uh parking generation, which is about two stalls. If you go above that, yeah, you've got a cushion for when people do have more more vehicles. And if you want to if you want to do that, you can. But weighing that out with the additional cost that could be imposed, you know, as as Troy mentioned to to someone that doesn't need that parking, they just they're just out required to build it. just not not making it mandatory to have more. I would say although although this is a requirement now, uh the state's not going to come in and break down the door and tell us we're going to jail for not doing this tonight. Um

»so so it's up it's up to you what you want to do. Like there's not a ton of urgency here. I think if you don't at the time we don't pass it and if the instance came where we weren't compliant, we would default the state code and we would probably say basically what is in this ordinance. So whatever I guess indecision doesn't necessarily say we default to what's here. We will default to the state code and not count the parking. But you can you can take your time, figure it out with this one.

»Maybe I'm not the best person, but three of them are show cars. So obviously I'm not going to put starting storage units.

»I need to go to a storage unit. Yeah, they're safe.

»So um yeah, maybe we need to table it.

»And just as a note, our city reporters asked that we continue with a specific

»um I guess I'm

»direction to

»Yes. direction continue to the next meeting. Continue until this has been done if that makes sense. Rather than tableabling an item

»but continue and sometimes it's direction to staff, sometimes it's

»continue to the next meeting.

»I mean,

»it sounds like it sounds Yeah, I know Brett Brett's concerned about parking because they make sure he always can park in his garage

»and you got a stalemate. But so what's your other option, right?

»I I need to do it.

»Well, no. I Yeah. Yeah. You need you need Yeah. You should you should make somebody if if that's what you choose to do.

»We have a motion on the table. There a second.

»There's a second. There's a motion to table this item for parking till the next planning and zoning meeting by Tyler and as such by Karina. All in favor say I.

»I.

»All opposed.

»Three to one table it. Okay. Moving item number 10 public or 25 hyphen 24 amending NCP 19.20.0. 010 classification of new and unlistable uses. Setting forth the pro progress for classification use of legislative action for new and unlisted uses.

»Okay.

»So again this this is in reaction to state code or yes to to the state legislature Senate Bill 179. Uh so this they've required to have a process for reviewing a business use not listed as an approved use an existing ordinance of of it's in in some ways this ordinance is formalizing what is already done and just putting a process in place but it also adds another process. So, I'll explain. Um, the proposed ordinance would establish a process to classify uses in this. It would make the city planner the authority for saying if someone comes in and they describe what the use is, they look at the code, they say, "Okay, this is what um this use is classified as." That this is already what is done when people uh apply for a business license. If if I look at a business license application and determine it is a permitted use, planning commission never sees it. Now, if I do say, "Oh, it's a conditional use and it does come to counsel and it does come to planning commission," you could disagree with me, I suppose, and and and make a I I mean, I don't think that's ever happened, but but you could say, "You know what? This isn't the right classification. We're going to call it something else." With this one, it it just says the city planner is and if they don't like that, if they they could appeal it and it would go to our appeal authority and they would make a determination.

»That's kind of a situation I call about the wedding reception center. Right.

»Right.

»Perfect example.

»Yeah, that's Yeah, that's a that's a good example that sometimes it's hard to determine where that is, but at the end of the day, someone's got to make make a determination and what's being proposed. And really this is partly for efficiency. If they have to come to a a planning commission meeting or a city council to discuss and determine what that use is, that's going to that's that's going to really I mean it's 9:30 tonight. We we'll probably, you know, add an hour to each meeting to to do that. So it it's just saying the city the city planner will do that. they don't like that there is a process to appeal it and and it'll it'll be it's it's an administrative you know it's a legal process so that would be kind of quas quas judicial process of the appeal authority saying you know what no I disagree with the city planner it's actually this if that ever happened I don't really think it's going to be a huge issue I I don't know if anyone's really ever disagreed with staff on on that determination but this does have a process. A lot of the language that is that is in this ordinance. There's kind of a lot of words in this and I can I can pull up the ordinance if you'd like. Uh they they it was borrowed from Hurricane City who recently adopted these ordinances and just checking that against what's in state code. It it basically just says find out what what their business is, find out what what your ordinance says, the definition is, and apply it. So there's that.

»Okay. Thanks. Yeah. So establishes that process. And then this next part is a little is a little different. Um I'm I was struggling with with this one, but it is required by state code, so it is in there. It establishes a process for legislative action for new or or unlisted business uses. So, if someone comes in, let's say they have a a retail shop of sorts um and it is unlisted, meaning it's not allowed in that zone, they could then say, "Oh, well, I want it to be allowed." Currently, what we would do is we'd say, "Okay, petition the city to amend the code." Well, the state has come up with a new process. It's not a code. It's not the It's kind of separate from a code amendment, although it's very similar. They call it a a legislative action for new or unlisted business uses. They're essentially going through the same process as a code amendment, but there's a time limit and and the state actually doesn't require that it goes through planning commission. It has to go to city council. What is in the recommended ordinance is that it does go through planning commission, makes a recommendation, and then it goes to city council. And that whole process can't take longer than 60 days. So, it needs to be pretty quick, relatively quick, right? Couple months. So, it's got to get on the next agenda. Planning Commission's got to consider it whether to add it to that that zone, potentially other zones. Same thing with it unlisted. Let's say it's just not on the chart. Currently, it's not permitted. So, it's not going to uh my first answer to them would be, well, it's it's not allowed. Well, then they could say, "I want it to be considered." Okay, we'll put it on the planning commission agenda. They'll determine whether to add it to the chart and then it'll go to city council. Very similar to a code amendment. I would say the main difference here is that is that they can appeal that decision. Um, I mentioned that they could appeal the classification of uses. They could also appeal the legislative action to our appeal authority. Now, I don't know what they would do when it got in front of the appeal authority um for a legislative action. That's not typically what they do. They usually heal here hear appeals on on an administrative action. So, if someone appeals an administrative decision, like for example, let's say tonight you were to deny that applicant that preliminary plaque because you came to the determination that oh, there's too many homes there and and they disagreed with that and it went to our appeal authority. He could look at the facts and look at our ordinance and make a decision. I don't know what he would do here, but the state says that's what that's who has to hear it. It's not normally a legislative action can only be referred, not appealed. So there could be a referendum on it, but it's a little weird to me, but that's what they passed in state law.

»So it says anything specifically list is not permitted. You can't make decision. It's only if we haven't mentioned. Is that correct?

»Sorry. That's subsection 6C.

»Yeah, I'll pull up I'll pull up the

»way I read this is the city planner will make the interpretation if if the business purpose is not listed the code is permitted conditional or not permitted. So if we don't want strip clubs we have to specifically say strip clubs are not permitted.

»If we didn't say that then you could make then then they could kill it. It's a six.

»So number six is the conditions of which I I guess you should read the first first line of condition six. Um class for so to for the city plan to make interpretations it has to meet these things and subsection C says if it lists specifically not permitted. Yeah.

»No no it's not allowed. Oh, wait. No. Oh, you're saying that. So, is it D? No use interpret shall allow use. No, sorry. Which subsection are you referring to? Any use specifically listed as not permitted in the land use charter shall not be allowed in that zone? So, it's Yeah, it's not allowed. And that's and that's currently how it is. That's that's not any change.

»Yeah. I I I would I wouldn't I wouldn't I would be forced to say, you know what, this isn't listed. It's not permitted. And so you're you have a choice. You can either appeal that or you can uh you can uh ask to add it to the chart.

»Yeah. We have a pretty extensive list of conditional uses for but if it's not specifically listed in agriculture for some for some reason say agriculture zone we don't say that a liquor store is not permitted in agricultural zone I the Why I'm reading this is that means they can build and say because you didn't waste it now I can make the bill that I can

»uh they they could yeah they they can ask you but the city council will determine whether it can or can't. We'll go through the process. It'll be considered. That's it. They I can't say oh yeah it's not it's what what I do stays the same. So

»it's not permitted. I can't allow it. It's not listed. It's not permitted, but they can go, well, I want it to be permitted and I I I petition the city council to consider it. And then it goes to planning commission. Planning commission says, "Yay or nay." I mean, it really is a very similar process to just a code amendment. I guess that's

»but what I this is we're we're giving authority to city planner so use authority city planners authorized use classification provisions and title and any rule regulation adopt pursuit of thereto as provided the section and then the section goes on to say that if the if it's not listed the city planner will make interpretation of the existing code and say it's permitted business or it's not a permit. No, that that's that that goes to the legislative that goes to the next one. So C says any use specifically listed as not permitted for particular zone shall not be allowed. So I'm just going to say it's it's not allowed.

»That's that's

»Oh, I see. If it's unlisted,

»so not permitted. Yeah, that's not the intent. Um, if it's not listed, it's not allowed. And our code already says that does it conflict with that? I don't see I don't see where it conflicts with it.

»The standards for use classification interpretation following shall apply to the use classification. The classification interpretation is defined that city planner will make those decisions subject to section, you know, subset a through.

»So the only way that you're not required or permitted to make classification is if we specifically call it's non permitted use. And then my my concern is and this this isn't reflection of you again. unintended consequences. I'm not really willing to supersede authority for our city planner to interpret permitted uses of business because that will be interpreted to be too strict or too lenient if it's not. And so before I'm ready to agree to do this, I want to revisit all the initial uses and see the businesses that we have completed the businesses we we want because someone come here and want to offer an open wedding facility and conflict of interest or dislike between the city staff that will be interpreted as not allowed.

»So I'm not just saying this is going to strip balls, but also might not allow legitimate business as well.

»But I I want to revisit There's a there's an appeal process if if but there currently is no appeal process. This this puts a I I don't you can look into this closer but I I guess I'm not seeing eye to eye on you on this one because I don't I don't see how it changes at all the way the the process that's currently in place. If it's not listed, it's not allowed. Now what the city what the city planner does determine is what the use classification is. What are you calling that business and is it in that chart and is it substantially there there's a provision in there where um it needs to be substantially similar. So if a proposed use is most similar to so E and F no use interpretive shall allow use in particular zone unless the use is substantially similar to a use allowed in the zone. If a proposed use is most similar to a conditional use authorized in the zone which is proposed to be located any interpretation allowing such use should I require that the use be approved only as a conditional use. So I don't see I I guess I'm I'm not seeing anything in here that says if it's not listed then the city count the city planner can say oh yeah it's allowed or no it's not allowed. It's just not allowed until they go through that process with planning commission and city council of adding it to the chart or not.

»So if it's omitted,

»it's omitted, it's just not allowed. And and I mean we can go through the chart again, but I don't I don't think that this is necessarily a reason to do that. That I mean, we went through I think it was last year. Was it last year? We went through a long extensive process of going through all the uses. Maybe it was the year before. Um, we can do that again. I don't I don't know. I don't know if this is a reason to do that just because it really doesn't change it all that much. It just formalizes it and provides a process. And but if you want to review this more, if you don't if you think there's some unintended consequences here, by all means, do I'm just I'm just not seeing it. Was that a public?

»Sorry. Sorry about that. Open public. It

»probably went Yeah. Any comments for the public here? We'll close the public here. Thanks guys.

»Thank you for coming. Have a good evening. Um discussion. Okay. Um, we'll go to the discussion on this. I guess that it's not omitted. It could be appealed the city council for

»Yeah. Any other discussion? I understand what Tyler is trying to what Tyler is saying. I'm not sure my position was though. This doesn't change the provision in code which states if it's not listed it's not permitted. That is that that's it's not that that language is not in this ordinance but it's it's in another part of our code. So it's already it's already covered. So unless there's something here I'm not seeing that conflicts with that, I don't think it changes it. I I really don't.

»Any other D question? Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion approval of recommendation for ordinance 254 20110, a classification of new uses a setting for the process foration of uses and legislation legislative action for new or unlisted. There's been a motion. Is there a second?

»Second.

»There's been a motion by Troy for approval of this amending the code there's excuse me. Seeing none, we'll move it to a vote. All in favor say I.

»I.

»Any opposed? We're to zero. It passes.

»You do you do great, Claire. That's why a lot of fing the 19.010 on a blackbox including allowing black box along the arterial roads. Um Levi, any you want to lead us in?

»Yeah, so this was this was discussed I believe back in March and it's been put on the back burner. Uh staff has done a little bit of research there. There's some different things we could do with our flag lot ordinance, but at this point in time, staff is simply recommending to lift the requirement or the the restriction on flag lots on arterial roads. Uh, currently currently you have a flag lot if it's if it's an arterial road is listed in the city's master plan. Uh, we discussed that previously. In general, I think the discussion was there's not necessarily um opposition to having flag lots on arterial roads. I think there's some other things to consider there, you know, additional accesses and and things, but uh that is all that's being considered with this. We could open up the flag lot ordinance and get into it. Uh the the reality is it's going they're going to work in very limited uh places. And this I believe this ordinance at least opens the door for flag lots to go on lots where you know places like 3200 South not just the city's lot. I mean that the city's lot is what brought this up. If you recall, we have this lot next door and the city's thinking about maybe selling it. Uh haven't made a final determination there, but this could provide more of an opportunity to sell, you know, one of these long deep lots on 3200 South so they can build a house in the back um and have access to it. There's a lot of other details we can get into on fly lots, but that's all that's being proposed with this one. Once we're done with the public hearing, if we can take a 5-second pause. The audio file is getting too big and I need to check.

»Jay, there's no comment. We'll close the public.

»Still 947.

»Okay. Good. Okay. We'll open the discussion. This is our last item for the recommendation ordinances 2525 amending the NCG 19 hyphen 010 flat restriction reducing restriction. Any discussions I I agree with you. I mean, like some of the other items, there's a class that we probably dig deep into on everything other flags, but we have stated it's pretty good. I don't

»No, no,

»I like it. I My only concern is it's pretty deep on 3200 South. There's a lot of 1acre lots along there. So, are we opening tenner works? Well, probably not because most of those are too narrow for a flag lot. If they happen to be wide enough or maybe they do a lot line adjustment so they get enough width with their neighbors or something,

»there'll be there'll be a few here and there. I I think it's I mean the city passed a wide reaching ADU ordinance that could go on any lot.

»That's true.

»And this last year we got two. I think we've had 10 since that was passed in 2020. 10 to 12 probably.

»It should be road that's subdivided and

»No, it's priv it's private. It be it's private lane for the access. Yeah, that that's how that's flag lots there.

»Yeah. Does the the zoning requirements is will it just comply with the current zoning overlay?

»Yeah, I mean zoning still applies.

»Yeah,

»right. Yeah, it does. We could get into all that of whether but what's being proposed tonight is just it's just this one thing.

»It, you know, Yeah. Go ahead.

»I'd like to make a recommendation to approve um make recommendation to amend locks and to allow fee along arterial roadways. There's been a re a motion to approve the recommendation to include flag walks along exterior roads points and a second by Troy. Any other discussions? See none. Let's bring it to a vote. All in favor?

»I.

»It's four to zero. It passes. So,

»Levi, uh, just just want to mention our our general plans in full full swing. Um, Troy Troy uh was at Heritage Days helped me out there, just talk to people. And at uh we also had a public open house that Troy and Nick were at last month and uh we would have liked to have it would have been nice to have all the people here come to that. I'll just say that it there there there were it was a good discussion and we had um but we were hoping to get a few more people there. Um but it was it was great. the people that were there offered offered some great suggestions. And anyway, we're we're wiggling that down. We're get we're getting to a point and just thinking out loud here that we probably ought to bring something to the planning commission of some kind of a update or or something there of where we're at in the process. We have a steering committee that's been involved, Claire and and Nick. Um, but I think uh it's it'd probably be good to give some kind of an update there. So maybe I'll I'll do that in the next meeting just kind of off you know that the this

»the team seems on top with us.

»Yeah. Yeah. The consultants it's marching along. You know it's

»probably going to be a ninemonth process which could a lot of a lot of cities go 18 months with these and we're just we're get we're getting through it. We're getting it done. We got a lot of master plans to get through. So, we're trying to just march forward with this one. And and I I I'm positive, you know, it we don't know at this point where it's going to land. I'll just say that there's not there. We've had a lot of public engagement, a lot of analysis. We don't quite know exactly where it is. That's kind of the next step in the process is coming up with some drafts to actually react to. And that would be a good time to put them in front of you. give you an idea of this is what we've heard. This is this is some initial drafts for you to react to there. So,

»do we know like how many uh individual feedback we've gotten from community with regards to the survey heritage days?

»Yeah, heritage days. I mean, I would say well, we talked 30 40 people maybe there throughout the day. Um, I think we've gotten about 200 responses on the survey. Not as high as the part of the reason it's still open. It's not as high as I'd like. I'd like to make another push. I think I've realized that people don't get as excited about general plan as they do about recreation open spa or, you know, a rec center. And we've surveyed a lot and but we've pushed it. We really have pushed this survey and we've texted people. I don't know if you guys have gotten texts about it or you've seen it in the newsletter. We're trying to get feedback. Uh we we really pushed that that open house. We didn't get the numbers that I thought we might get. We I think we got 2530 maybe. I was hoping to get 100. Um people aren't excited about this stuff as you and I in general, but It was good. Yeah, we we've had some good engagement. I don't mean it I don't mean to shed a negative light because I think the engagement we've had it's it's it's been good and we've been hearing voices that I feel like are representative of the cross-section of our community. new people, older people that have been in town and and you know, our community has changed a lot since the last general plan 2016. There's a lot of new residents and we are hearing those voices. I'm just hoping we hear a few more before we kind of finalize that public engagement. Yeah, the last couple weeks I've spent a lot of time reviewing development plans, including the fields that we just heard tonight.

»Yeah.

»Several phases in Nibbi Meadows. There's revisions to phase four. They're moving forward with phase five and seven. We have Apple Creek, a small subdivision. It's a revision of a conservation law. They want to subdivide and work out a development agreement. And that'll be coming to you soon.

»Next agenda. Yeah. Um, there's the LDS church site near 3,400 South on 12 West going through. We did our first round of uh site plan review on that one. They really want they're pushing to get started real quick. So, I I'd imagine that'll be on a really soon agenda item. There's a new subdivision that that it's public record, but it's just west of Todd Stimpson's Johnson Meadows. There's about 14 lots right in there that they didn't

»on the other side of canal.

»Yes, on the other side of canal on the other west south of Apple Creek.

»So they're about 14 lots. It was an incomplete submitt, but we're working through that to to move forward with that. And then Ridgeline Park, they're working on their last plat to build that out aside from the the commercial site along the highway there. So it's just been really busy. spent a lot of time on that. I also have some uh some construction projects underway. 1300 West Half Road, we should be wrapping that up with asphalt Friday. And then there's still some landscaping and some striping and stuff, but we're we're getting close on that one. And then 12,200 West, the final phase of that. This one connects 2500 South to 2200 South. And there's a gap of about a half a block that's going to be newly constructed. The rest will be reconstructed. They start that on July 28th and that will extend through October, midocctober before they finish that one up. The intermittent closures throughout that proc the whole project duration. We're also working on a new well. This well is planned to go at um the green waste site. We just secured approval, not quite noticeable of award, but really close to $3.8 million loan to help fund with that. that'll be repaid with with water impact fees, future growth. That'll part of the the funding also comes from two other grants that we secured a year or two ago. One is 700 $760,000 from the Department or Division of Water Resources. And then there's another $400,000 that we're finalizing that grant for $400,000 from the Bureau of Reclamation. So combined with a million dollars in impact fees, we have about $5 million to do this, drill a well, equip it, and then connect it to our system. That'll be probably a year-long process. The initial drilling is really quick, but then we have to build the structure and things. So, um, we're working through that. with that. There is a public hearing on the 31st of July at city council to tell if you have any concerns with the funding source and and it allows people to discuss or hear about this loan, provide public input and then uh it's just part of the process to secure this loan and finalize the closing of it. Anyway, little busy on my part. I do have an intern now who works once a week. not once a week.

»He's he's great. He's uh he's actually a dear friend of mine as well, but he he used to work for Park City. He now works for the federal government, and he's looking to get back into the RS. He says, "Just let me shadow you for the day." I go, "You're going to learn everything I know in about two days." So, I go ahead. But he's a great resource for me. It's good to have his insight. So, he's very experienced in road construction. He's a geotech engineer. But do you have any questions of what I'm doing, how I'm getting there? Okay,

»that's good.

»All righty. I'll be brief with my last portion so we can all head home. Um, just furthering on what Tom said about that water improvement bond um on our city website um provided with information from Tom and Justin, I created a question and answers page. So, please uh publicly share that. It goes over some common questions. Visa, also talks about breakdown of funding, also addresses our water um base increase and the tiers that were adjusted back in um April. Um and then it has links to those meetings. So just use as much as you can and share that. Um another thing, our next meeting is August 7th. um for that meeting, we've already sent out, as Levi addressed earlier, we follow state code um straight as an arrow. And so, we've already sent out um the letters to everyone within 300 ft of the proposed amendment for the Apple Creek phase one uh first amendment. We've sent those out yesterday, got everything out. So hopefully at least they need to make sure that the public grounds are about um and it should be I should mention well

»and then the last thing um the mayor for specifically commissioners Brown and Obre the mayor did ask um staff to make polo shirts and um dress shirts and so hopefully you got those today. If you have any issues just reach out.

»One sorry one one more thing one more thing to add. Uh I I it sounds like you guys are having trouble getting into Teams. So uh at least this last meeting or two, there's been some issues there. Our um our IT guy suggested that we go toward giving you guys a city email address. The reason why that there's just a lot of online security with exterior emails and so probably expect that in the coming weeks. We got to make sure we've got it in the budget and everything. There's a little bit of a cost there, but we get a get a city email address and yeah, be official that way.