Nibley City Planning Commission- 3/20/2025

Hey, Karina. Can you test your audio?

Yes. Can you hear me okay?

Yep.

Yep. Thank you. Thank you.

I

think we're just gonna keep

Paul, any commissioners online, please begin with the agreement?

Sorry. I just turned audio off, so she might she might have just got the tail end of that. Karina,

do you wanna

you roll call?

It's all Karina Brown.

Right about Nick Henska?

Staff? What name is Levi Roberts, city planner.

Tom Dickinson, city engineer. Hey, Marshall. How does the core?

Tom Leglow, office specialist.

Thank you. And then I'd like to also recognize,

mayor Larry Jacobson

as well. And with that, we'll go ahead and move to the first item, on our agenda, which is to approve the approve the agenda. So do we have any motion to approve tonight's agenda as presented?

I'll make a motion to approve the agenda.

Yep. Any discussion? And can I have my motion, please?

And accept the minutes Okay. Previous meeting. We'll go ahead and any any discussion for that? And with that, we'll take the motion to approve the agenda as presented as well as the consensus to approve the meeting notes from 02/06/2025, which next meeting.

All in favor?

Aye. Karina? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? I see no opposed. That'd be five yeses, four noes. K. Great. We'll go ahead and move to item number one on the agenda, which is a public hearing for the for ordinance twenty five two rezone Parcel 32274 located at 1500 West, 2600 South from Residential R 2 to commercial. Yevai, do you wanna open up for disc or Jeremy, do you wanna make a statement about Troy's point? Oh, that's right. With well, if her screen is online voting, then Troy is not No. No. No. Troy is free to vote. Yeah. So I would basically say that. Well, I'm not going to remember everything. Thank you. Appreciate it. Yeah. That's me. That's that's Troy. That's a That's a that's a that's a that's a that's a that's a that's a that's a

that's a on Westinghouse Farm property, 1500 West 2600 South. So right there at at the corner of 2600 South And Highway 8991, just South of 2600, You can see the, the property there. It's a almost an eight acre property. This is just an applicant save statement from what he submitted with this application. The the the purpose and need for for the rezone commercial develop the developer wants property for development. The the benefit is for commercial opportunities. I that's that's probably all I need to say about about that. You you can see that on the screen. So as far as the general plan goes, the this this is in support of the general plan. The future land use map shows shows us as commercial medium to high density residential. The land use goal one taught I I I won't recite the whole thing, but it but it talks about encouraging a mix of uses, commercial, residential, light industrial. Land use goal two points to using using the future land use map, which I already mentioned, and and other goals, principles, and projects for to to to guide land use and growth decisions. And then commercial and economic development goal two is points to a sustainable economic base and providing tax revenues to increase local and increase local employment convenience of shopping. So this this application, it it it does, you know, definitely support these these goals and the future land use map. The the existing zoning of R 2, you you could argue it also fits within that medium density residential, but but the but the commercial opportunity here with it being on the highway seems like, you know, it it it seems like the the right zone for this location to have to create that opportunity for for economic development for the city. So with that, the staff's recommendation is to approve this rezone ordinance twenty five twelve with the findings that the proposed commercial zone designation is compatible with commercial and medium high density residential designation and city's adopt future land use map, and the rezone will support commercial and economic development goal two to create and maintain a sustainable economic base for Nibley City. They'll provide tax revenues and increase local employment convenience of shopping. I did notice, just just so you know, that one of, one of the applicants' representative looks like he's online, Trent. I don't see anyone anyone else is with you know, from representing the applicant. But but if you wanted to ask any questions, I think Trent Trent could speak to those. K.

Did we have anyone sign up on the role? Obviously not. Or any submissions to you, Levi, in general or any public comments? K. Well, Trent, we'll go ahead and hold off if that's okay with you until maybe we open up our discussion. If we have questions or if you'd like to say anything about this particular parcel in the rezone, maybe we'll hold that for the discussion consideration part if that's okay with you. Not if you're No. I'm okay waiting till discussion. Great. Thank you. K. Well, with that, we will close the public comment period for this agenda and move on to item number two, which is discussion and consideration, for the recommendation for ordinance twenty five twelve rezone of Parcel 32274 located at 1500 West 2600 South from Residential R 2. Obviously, I just presented this specific item and staff's recommendation details. Trent, do you have anything you wanna say before we get into discussion with the commission?

No. We appreciate staff's thorough review of this. And and, you know, we're as as the future agenda items come up tonight, you know, we're thinking bigger picture here. So this this definitely ties into the next stuff we'll be talking about as far as the cohesive plan for all the Wesley Nelson properties. So we just we appreciate staff's recommendation, and, yeah, I'm happy to take any questions if you have them.

K. Great. And to transfer that, we'll open it up to discussion with commissioners.

Mister chairman, make a motion to recommend approval for ordinance 25 dash 12, rezone partial zero three two two seven zero zero zero four located 150 West 2600 South in residential or two two commercials.

Thank you, Brett. So Brett made a motion to write for approval of the recommendation for ordinance twenty five two rezone of the parcel as stated, from residential r two to commercial. Gotcha. K. Karina, is Karina gone? Karina is still on? I yes. I vote yes. Oh, okay. I just wondered if you need anything to add before we take it to.

Thank you. Okay.

Then we'll go ahead and, with that, I think we're ready to make a vote. All in any all in favor?

Aye. Any opposed?

Nope. So that passes five in favor, zero opposed. Right? Item number three then. Moving to item number three. Discussing and consideration for the recommendation for ordinance twenty five seven amending Nibley City code nineteen two forty, mixed use residential zone RM, adding a 5.2 acre portion parcel parcels, 32272 and 3271 located at 1425 West 2600 South to the RM location map. Now I know we discussed this in the last commission meeting, these parcels and these these projects, but I don't know if, Levi, if you had

maybe you wanted to give us a quick a quick recap from the last meeting just to Yeah. Yeah. I think I'll give an just just a quick recap there. I mean, I I I did provide this presentation at the last meeting as there was there was a public hearing on this item. But but just as a reminder, it's it's been a it's been a little bit there. So just just to bring everyone up to speed. So the applicant is is proposing a rezone of of a portion of property, and I'll I'll kind of orient you with that on on the next slide. That's just north of of the pre previous item, 2600 South and or and the planned, Heritage Drive. The the current RM zone only allows to to rezone property to RM if if they're on a the map, the eligibility map. And so this first item is a recommendation of whether to add this this property to the map, which would then make it eligible for for rezone. The the applicant provided a a concept plan, which is is really a reflection of an existing pre preliminary plat application for a townhome development in the area, and this this is proposed to be a a portion of that of that townhome development, a a 5.2 acre portion. The property, just as a little bit more history, the property was recently rezoned from residential r two to commercial on 06/08/2023. And it also includes a portion of an area that was recently approved for newly marketplace concept plan. That was, I believe, in 2024. I don't have the date up on the screen, but the give a little more context with from the applicant from the the applicant statement that they provided with their application. What's the need of of the zone change, change residential to join residential RM? The public benefit is great more first first time homebuyer housing opportunities that again, housing opportunities to support the general plan. How they anticipate use is appropriate for surrounding area. Have residential RM zone to the East and commercial to the West. This last question, what public infrastructures in place serve the type and intensity for proposed use? If needed, could the infrastructure be reasonably extended at cost of property owner or developer? Heritage Drive needs to be built for the commercial development. That needs to be coordinated with Nelson Farms, the commercial developer, and the city. I think it's TIF in parentheses. The the really, the as far as the general plan goes, and this is this is right in close proximity to the last, item that was on the agenda, these these same goals, I, staff feels apply, and it and it's the same future land use map, the commercial medium, high density residential. And, again, trying to balance between commercial, residential, and light industrial uses. You know, the city does does have a vision for for a balance of all of those uses. The and and but looking at economic development opportunities and, you know, the limited opportunities within Nibley City currently. So just kinda getting into that a little bit further. Both the existing zoning of of not r two, r r m and commercial are consistent with future land use map designation for this parcel, commercial immune to high density residential. So I think it could be argued, you know, either one could be in support of that. However, the general plan encourages a mix of uses, and and and at this point, there's very limited commercial use in Nibley City. In gen in general, you know, based on based on staff's experience, there's there's limited areas where commercial really can thrive within Nibley, and additional commercial development would would support the goals for for commercial and economic development. And it's it's apparent, you know, with this site that there is there is some potential for for commercial development here. So just to orient you a little bit more, this is the this is the current RM. Oh, change that. This is the current RM zone where my cursor is, the kind of the tan area there. And it and this red area roughly is is what's proposed for the RM zone. This is just an overlay that shows the the, current, preliminary plat and and layout of that that you see. So kind of what what they've intended. And and to be clear, this this application, if if if this rezone approved, it doesn't it doesn't automatically approve this preliminary plat. But this is what what they've put as as they've intended. It's currently under review. This this application this preliminary plat applications, staff staff is, coordinated with the applicant on that. But that but you can see their, you know, townhomes for this area is what their intention is. Just as additional context, this was in front of the planning commission last year. Was this commercial proposal for for a concept plan proposal that that showed this area with with commercial uses. And with that, it it's it's apparent that there is some potential for commercial here with Heritage Drive with its with its proximity to, you know, 2600 South into the highway. There there is some potential for commercial there that the staff feels that the city, you know, should take that into into consideration with with this application. The oh, that is, I think, a duplicate slide. So, you know, both the both the existing zoning and the proposed zoning is consistent on the future land use map. General plan encourages a mix of uses. The, the modern income housing plan does does include a strategy to consider areas to rezone for densities necessary to facilitate production of moderate income housing. However, there are limited areas in Italy to support viable commercial and economic development. And and these our two roadways, Heritage Drive and 2600 South has potential to support access for commercial development. And and, you know, given this recent concept plan, which it it's understood that the plans change, you know, with property owners and developers, but but this area seems appropriate for for commercial. And so with that, it is staff's recommendation to recommend denial of of this this ordinance. That would add this area, this RM application map to the to the Nibley City code. And I guess I'll I'll leave out item four for now, but, really, this was all within the same same application for both of those items.

K. Thank you, Levi. We'll open it up for discussion amongst the planning commission. Karina, did you have anything you'd like to discuss about this item in particular? Yeah.

If I if I'm understanding correctly, Levi, you're recommending denial?

Correct.

Okay. So you're saying that you recommend that it not go from residential to commercial?

No. That it doesn't go from commercial to residential. So it's currently zoned commercial. Oh, okay. Yeah. It's currently zoned commercial. And for this Okay. For this item, they're recommending and it and it really takes two steps of one, the question is, do we add it to the map for the RM zone as an eligible, rezone area? And two, do we do we do you recommend this area to be rezoned? The item right now is is whether to add it to the map.

Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Do you have anything else, Corina?

No. Thank you. Sure.

Earlier in the application, it it it mentions,

if

is I'm I'm assuming that's referencing back in your mental banding.

That in that accurate that that's what I'm referencing. Is that a a developer carry or a security carry? Who's carrying that one?

Oh, I mean so with with taxing or financing, that's that's typically through a community reinvestment area. I will say that's not really what's being considered with this application, but I I think what that alludes to is is is the community reinvestment area potentially providing funding for that for that infrastructure. The the way that that is carried out is, again, through tax through tax increment. So so as as property values rise, then then you take the increment of the of the of the tax taxable value there.

Yeah.

Right? We're gonna have higher tax base and that would get paid back.

We've heard the rather than decide not so much. So I'm just Yeah. How that would be in there? That's a good question.

No. I'm not I'm not talking about Brad, did you have anything? No.

I'll just say having a bit of a dog riders. I understand the work this project needs to be developed or

I also understand how the work is to the state.

We need to really consider all sides of this and

very complicated situation in my view. And I I appreciate the

the staff and their

and their viewpoint on this and the and the and then and then and they're they're one of you. So, like, the other one they do every day, and I feel like I'll talk. Trust me. Where? Just some clarification. It's mentioned the the lot 001. Isn't that correct already? The one in the Co Q, and I know this is 002. It's. So we're just adjoining those two pieces into one?

It's what what is being proposed is it's really a portion that affects both of those properties a little bit, primarily 002, I believe. 0002. There's there's a a a small sliver of of the other property that's that's included here. But but it would be staff's recommendation that if if the city I I'll I'll point that out that if the city did want to move forward with this and and maybe the you know, this speaks a little bit more to the to the next item. But if the city did wanna move forward with this rezone, it'd be recommended that that it wouldn't split any any slots, any parcels that whether through lot line adjustment or through subdivision, that that they would be be one piece. Yeah. They they wouldn't be split.

We based on the development

of an Yes.

Right. I mean so I get I guess that depends on on the decision of but but it's likely that the the road is going to be needed both for the commercial and for the proposed residential or or, you know, it could be I it's probably gonna be needed for both of those of those projects and be utilized for both of them.

So if it's approved, the road can be shifted or moved in each direction as long as there's road or eliminated?

No. So the Heritage Drive is a master plan road. Yeah. So according to Nibley City code, they they do need to provide that master plan road roadway connection. We've had we've had different discussions in the past of the alignment of that road, and this is this is where and and through the concept plan and where the city has said, yeah, this is where the road should go. Through that concept plan approval was kind of the last time the city said, yep. We want the road in that location. But but no. I Carriage Drive is is a planned kind of frontage road along Highway 9990. Well, well, it's it's already zoned commercial, the area at the top. What's on the screen now is was a previous approval of a concept plan. The red the red is what's pro proposed to change from commercial to to RM. The remainder would all remain commercial

in in either case. But they could have commercial.

They could. They could have commercial uses. They are they are allowed in in RM. That that's not what they've shown that they're intending on doing in their application, but that is that is a possibility.

I

think for me, I mean, outside of the decision like this that we make up here that truly affects the public health and safety to kind

of re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re re

has a vision for their property, but we also have the Arizona city and the city's needs. And for me, it's like, you know, commercial in terms of land use, you know, it's best the highest and best use of of the potential economic opportunity of any Right. So I I kinda just did some independent research myself of, like, you know, this kind of five acres, how many theoretically or how many, you know, townhomes can could be put in there and just just did a basic, like, property facts, you know, again to the city, and I did something similar to a couple of commercial buildings, like, in Providence nearby. I know there are different sites, and I get it. But but what kind of what my finding is is it it was basically just from the property tax analysis alone, they basically zeroed out, essentially. So to me so what that told me was it even if a commercial development of this size makes 1p in sales tax from from the city's benefit, that's that's kind of how you approach this. And also so that's kind of how I was thinking about this in terms of how it's gonna be a cost administering my personal loan. Just thinking of the city and the and the residents of Italy where what do we have? Do we even have 15 commercial parcels in total?

Oh, yeah. You asked me about that. I I started I started getting into that. So you see.

These decisions are to say. They're trying to be expectable to involve. And for me, especially since we've had this commercial site plan that is that we reviewed and improved. And so we that's where I'm just internally, like I don't even know if we'd given this on a long time to just to see if it could be successful. Right? And so yeah. I mean, this is it's hard to consider, you know, the site when you're thinking about, you know, the will of the applicant team developer like you're saying, but also just trying to navigate the needs of the city and citizens of the entity as well. So, yeah, it's really easy. So and that's kind of my piece for this specifically. Does anyone have anything else you don't wanna clarify or any further questions? I just wanna say, like, I I agree 100% where you're kinda around. I think you You said my my only

reputation is with the other plot that we just discussed, it needs some commercial. And having those three lots with commercial, is there enough population around these commercial sites to justify enough development to fill up those three sites, or does this site go undeveloped for another fifteen years because there is no desire there because of the population here? Yeah.

And, yeah, it is a chicken or the egg thing. And you could counter that or you need to you know, if a scale the development of this scale come you know, eventually becomes realized, all the vacant member happens in the years. So it is the it is the classic I mean, Brad, I mean, you you being a developer yourself, you have

I know. You want to know? Okay.

Right? Where you see that experience. Right? And, you know, like, businesses. Right? Like, you have to imagine them casting you, you hundreds of feet of net for households. They're looking for a client. Yeah. That that's a good Sure. Karina, did you have anything else? Any questions?

I'm just curious what if it remained commercial, what commercial project was originally planned for that for that parcel? Or is the applicant in the audience?

I I can address that. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. The applicant would like to take some time.

Feel free to Yeah. And I mean, do you I can answer that question. I'd be happy to take just a little bit more time to talk through the project in general, if that's alright. Sure. So as far as the commercial goes, there's nothing specifically planned for those. In fact, when we do these commercial layouts like this and And this wasn't done by myself or Ensign Engineering. We've done one similar, and we were working with the commercial developer on this because they're tied to residential and commercial. When they master plan these out, usually, they have an anchor store, grocery store, some sort of big box store, something like that. And that's what starts then the whole development of a commercial process there. And so you want the big commercial anchor to come in, and then you do a bunch of outbuildings. So they're just concepts, but those change as specific people wanna come in. You know, you get a McDonald's or you get a Chick fil A or you get a a car wash and or you get, you know, whatever, a bank, you know, or or a bunch of small fast food restaurants. Like so as each of those different types of commercial come in, they'll come in and and look at what lots out lots are there, but then they do their specific site plans for those. So what's shown as far as around that are are very loose concepts of what could be there. But generally speaking, there's not we don't know exactly every one of those out lots, what they will be. So that I hope that answers your question there. To kinda talk about the the project in general is absolutely we'd love to have commercial there. As we work through the process, the original what was the four lot split of of these that created the the the commercial that you just rezoned South Of 2600, and the three lots that were north of it. The original plan working with, previous concepts and the previous staff was a different alignment of Heritage Drive. And as as we work through this and we we get more and more into the details and working with Tom and Levi, it's been decided that this is the the alignment of Heritage Drive. Commercial broker's okay with that. The residential developer is okay with that. And and so that necessitated a change in our layout. And, obviously, the commercial plan that was shown has the current layout of Heritage Drive, but it just made the the the residential a little bit tight because of some of the the area and zoning requirements that are part of this. And so we've worked with the commercial developer. He is onboard and approving of this current layout and the rezone here. And that's why we presented the other area South Of 2600 to show not only, like, hey. We understand that you're losing some potential commercial base in this five acres, but here's another large chunk of land that we're willing to commit to and and put forward and also work with a commercial developer that says, yeah. You know, you're helping us out here because this works better for the residential. Here's some more area that if the growth does happen, that you can move into and start growing into immediately because it's already now zoned commercial. Final final thing I just wanna throw out there is kind of from just a a design constructability and flow of a development. It's never great to have commercial right up against residential if you can avoid it. And we're gonna have industrial on North End for a portion of this. And so I know that goes against some of that that standard practice of of layout and design. But if you can split those by a road like Heritage Drive, it it it gives a good buffer between what is someone's backyard and a fast food drive drive in that's open late into the night and the complaints that come from that. And so we feel that this is really just a better overall product for the residents that will be living in here and not having, you know, parking lot lights in their backyard on all all hours of the night or or traffic going through there on a fast food that's driving in late and the speakers and and that type of situation.

Thank you. Anything else from the commission? Any other questions or discussion?

Just north of it. Oh, it's commercial. It's the the welding shop and a couple other commercials. So I don't know how much people talk to the room there.

Just to be aware of that. Right. It'll be surrounded by

Well, it's it's saved by Levi. Commercial land is scarce in the wood, and for for that reason, that's

I'll just no. We're we're done. I've got three. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Mister chairman, I'm making a motion

to recommend denial.

Ordinance twenty five dash zero seven, nineteen point two point zero four zero. Mixed residence with zone RM adding a 5.2 acre portion parcel 03 Dash 227 Dash 002 and 03 Dash 227 Dash 002. 1425 Address, 2600 South to the RM application application map.

Thank you. So just for the record, Brett,

recommend denial of order in 257.

City code 191240. Mixed use residential RM by adding the five and two acre portion of process three two two seven two and three two seven one to the application. I'll second. Seconded by Claire. Any further discussion?

I'm trusting staff on this because I have mixed feelings on both sides. I understand both ones, but yeah.

Yeah.

I

I'm I will I think either way is fine. You know, like, on the RN zone, even though the current plan is townhouses, zone still does accommodate commercial air. So it's not like we're vanishing commercial if it is rezoned.

But yeah. Brenda, anything further?

No. Thank you.

Yep. And similarly, it's Fred. I mean, I feel like, you know, even if we vote to not allow our two for these portion of these parcels to go from to to add our two to the map. It's effectively reasonable to use portion of these parcels. Right? I feel like it would be a bit of a too early of a decision to make this choice without even letting the market decide, you know, what the viability is of what what a preexisting preexisting zone commercial area is. You know, it could be a couple years, whatever, and then have to revisit this. And then, yeah, maybe it could

discussion. But

to I just need to be a bit narrow narrow. Not mine. Just in terms of the temp the the timing context of this to just not let let the market decide, bear out what the opportunity is for nimbly

in this area.

May may I ask the question of the the commission?

Yep.

So so with with that discussion, I totally understand what you're saying there, especially where it's buzzed so recently in the last two years rezone. But doesn't that handcuff the property a little bit where we actually have a viable residential ready to go in right now. And you're in that argument saying, well, let's wait and see. Maybe it's five years, maybe it's two years, maybe it's ten years. Aren't you then essentially putting handcuffs on this property? Because what if it doesn't where you have a product right now that can go in? And and I don't wanna use the word condemned, but you you're essentially condemning that to time to see what happens.

Trent, I fully understand your comment and question. That's why my me personally, when I mentioned speaking earlier, like, outside of, you know, decisions we make, whether it's us or council or I've actually for them as well, you know, these type of decisions outside of something that's directly related to public health and safety, these ones I have to in in your difficult decisions that you made as a entity. Again, you you know, look into the landowner who has vision of the site and their property, but we also have to represent Niddly, the city, and the city and citizens of Niddly. And that's a holistic point of view, especially in terms of economics and taxing as a as an entity. Right? And so, yes, I I totally understand your point, Trent. And my point of view strictly personally myself is is kind of our priority stated, you know, commercial zoning in terms of its potential economically for our for a city. Right? Typically, that is the the highest level of zoning available for the benefit of the city, which is that both property and sales tax. So, yes, I appreciate your comment. I do. It's it's not easy. Right? What is this going to say, counsel? If it goes.

If if you if you make a decision on this tonight, it would go on the April 11 as their next meeting.

Al, did you have anything you'd like to say?

I'm wired with Citi's concerned about So imagine some of the committee's data, this is that. If the market's not there, we're saying that we gotta do this. The problem is, no one's been involved with those discussions. I'm the only one who's been involved with those discussions. Okay. You those discussions have been very tough. Work. No one here in the staff. No one here has been involved with those discussions I have. We just spent an hour in phone with two developers.

I've been on the third. We've talked about rid of this very issue.

And there's always a comment. We were talking about this. There's a statement. Pigs get rich, pots get slaughtered. If we ask too much, everything collapses and falls. And the reason that this got changed to RAM is because the grocer ones switched to develop the direction of the store. That's really what it came back to. And so that thing is weak, very challenging. I'm not gonna lie to you. It's it's a challenge because you're trying to get everyone in there. And the point here is I will tell you that that property will just save me. It won't it won't be anything because and I'll I'll tell you exactly what we said. We can't get anyone to go that far away from making money, and that's why we proposed the swap lots. Yeah.

I think discuss. I

think we'll discuss. I believe we would respect that. We have done this on a week from the city. Now every time we try to do some, we have got a variable waiting in seventeen thousand years.

I mean, we need to build on that plot. And we're making it a new mix.

But the thing that we're doing here is we've got several big peoples in the balls and trying to work together. And we start to maybe this and saying it's just gonna be this or that. That makes it on the workbook. Because now we're doing nothing ahead of any. And so that's just we can

do it you can do it. You can do it. You can do it. You can do it. And

for people that can I I just sit there, and I I have to talk a little bit how somebody's come to tier, and then, like, it's gonna be that and it's gonna be from the staff? And I'm like, I just I just sit there and I hope he would say, let's work with the property owner to make this work. Because if it doesn't,

it's gonna blow up. And I'll be able to the last few days

have been experienced challenge Trying to hold everything together. I just wish I could tell you a tenth of what's going on and just tell you you're trying to work this out and appreciate what we're trying to do here. What we have about any appreciation is to say, you gotta do this, you gotta do that, you gotta do that. And we're like, how can we do that? How can we do that? We got and you you got a great point. We talked about this for eighteen months. We have you wanna sign 20 some 26 acres of commercial land? Do you think that's really gonna be a sellable opportunity for commercial retailers to come in here? I mean, that's part of the challenge that we try to sell is to say we're building that repair. But that's not fair. It's one of the issues that we're dealing with with the brochure is to say, we hire these residential because they look at all the residential

units. They're, like, the quarter after about country.

They say, we gotta fix it for units.

So that's a big thing. You mean the electricity store there? That's a big deal.

So we're trying to put that together. So if we have to go back to the, it will cause some challenges. So even you know, make decisions about how every team in the next three or four days as things are finalized, one of those tonight will be involved right in the middle of those negotiations. And they they gave exactly how that can work. Because we cannot put ourselves into a terrible position and just say, well, we got this commercial property, but we haven't committed to do that.

We need engineers.

We don't need people telling us what to do. We need partners to say, this is what we got. This is how we will do. That's all we've been asking for.

We haven't quite got it.

It's been telling us what to do, and it's been a challenge.

And it's been really difficult.

I would reach out to your say, listen now and walk through it. He can let me walk you through

it. But I can show you.

Some of the things I can't, you know, obviously, are non public, and I can't disclose those things. And so every time like, you know, the challenge here is having some you know, here's saying, well, you gotta do it this way. And and and I'm sitting there going,

how do we make this work?

How do we make this work? We had 26 acres of commercial land. We just gave seven acres up, and we don't need a clean return. We're trying to make it a trap deal with reasons to come. If it's too big, it will collapse. I promise you, it will collapse. So and that's my note to you. So, anyway, I'm not gonna say it anymore. It's kinda dealing with negotiating for the next week, and it will depend on what happens. So so

Just one question on you're saying that commercial your commercial in the next few days, you're back ready to go first before residential, depending on this five acres we sell from commercial. You're right. So commercial is your first step and then residential is your second option? Well,

they would at least came to us with commercial and swap those properties. They were we didn't go to them. They said, let's do this. And so we said, you know, like Frank talked about, it's hard to have residential backed up to commercial.

It's a problem.

This is where should you divide things, you know, where your issue is, you know, how can you divide it? No things about that. They have problems down the road. And so they came to us and said, let's do this. Let's swap this and make this work. The biggest thing on that, Claire, is I just was saying,

anyone's late. You know?

I'm straight up with it. These things are very tenuous. And I just wish I could just lay it all out and say, can you see my background? This is what's happening. And I just I think it'd be a great thing, but if we're stuck with all this other stuff, I didn't make concerns. Really big concerns, you know, that you know, I wish New York was here and say, okay. You're gonna put 20 some odd acres in commercial. Can you sell that? So I wish someone would talk to me first and say, what's going on there? Before they come out and say, well, they won't want this. Because I get to the I'm trying to make it work. The city then then it's in day park. It's been really hard because we haven't built this work. We really haven't. So Thank you. Thank you.

I kinda just wanna point out some similarities. Like you mentioned, we're seeing at some commercial lots in in Providence. So, like, if you look at Macy's and the surrounding area that's zone of commercial, that's smaller than this area. And it was forever after Macy's was built before other commercial started coming in. And it really wasn't until, like, all of the condos and townhouses that were being built on the backside before that development started taking off in the front. And I just kinda

Is that we gotta go all the way with the or the Docker spot? Is that the back piece too?

I think that might be there in all the way to the back of the.

That's I understand.

Looking around at the basics of the.

Probably close to 30 acres. Including the.

I don't know who he just got fired.

There's a lot of vacant land there. And, again, I'm going back to, like, that my question is if if this is not just significant and the city is responsible for paying back, right, the the financing of at this room, there's no income at all.

Yeah. And I'll just clear it up that there's no there's at this point in time, to to my acknowledge, if anyone wants to speak to that, there's no obligation for that for for the city's contribution, not definitively at this point.

That's all I'm gonna do. Well,

that that hasn't really because the because the developments haven't come through, that that haven't that hasn't been that that hasn't been decided on who on who pays for what. Typically, the developer pays for master plan roads. That's that's what's in our that that's that's what's in our standards and that you know, it it needs to be proportional, and it needs to be there needs to be a nexus and everything, but that that's that's typically what what is required.

You

know, to anyone? I just wanna remind everyone

that we are just a recommended recommended body.

The city council will

can override anything we do or support it, whatever they wanna do whatever they wanna do. But I do wanna say in defense of the staff that

they've been a lot of time in

discussions on this.

And and I do looking outside in more than any other development you've ever had. So

I believe they have been listening, and they're considering all the options for citizens or even developer or everyone that's involved.

So so k.

Let's go ahead and put it to a vote. Just to just as a as a reminder, Brett voted to deny the recommendation

of the Motion. Or the motion. Motion

for for the recommendation of ordinance twenty five seven amending to add these to Staten Island, second by Claire. So just just as a reminder as to how the vote is in front of these. So I don't know if you wanna go for individual on this one. There may be some questions that will vote maybe individually. Karina, how do you go?

So they're so sorry for another question. Yep. So Claire and Brett voted to deny staff recommendation.

Correct. The motion That's the motion.

That's the motion. Oh, the the motion to deny the staff recommendation.

No. Deny deny the proposal to to add this to to the map Oh, okay. Which which is consistent with staff's recommendation.

Oh, okay. Okay. I vote nay.

Yes. Yes. I vote yes as well. That would be three votes for yes, two rates for now. K. Moving on to item number four. Discussion and consideration for the recommendation for ordinance twenty five eight rezone of a 5.2 acre portion of Parcel 32272 And 3271 located at 1425 West And 600 South from commercials to mixed residential. Procedurally, how does this

since we just wanted to I don't I I don't really have any additional background information. All all the same findings are apply that applied to the previous item, applied to this one. It is staff's recommendation for denial for this rezone. For for those same reasons, I I don't I don't really need to I don't feel like I need to go into any more detail there. This is pretty much saying today. Yep. Well, yeah, the the difference here is this this is a recommendation to actually rezone it. The the previous one, we just opened the door to a rezone, where this one would recommend whether or not to rezone it. So they're they're connected, but because of that restriction in the RM zone, it was necessary to have the two the two items. But for the same reasons and and findings that, you know, that were stated earlier, it's it's Steph's recommendation to deny this this this rezone.

Yeah. Address in prior item.

Yeah. On the conversion, the is twenty five hyphen zero eight. We resolve 5.2 meters of fourteen zero three hyphen 22700032. Excuse me. Not so 032227001. Okay. And working 25 West, 2600 South Commercial To Mixed Residential 229.

K. So, Claire, any motion to deny the recommendation for ordinance twenty five eight rezone of a five twenty 5.2 acre portion. So 32272 And 32271 located at 1425 West 26 North South from Marshall to. Second. Brad, can you have further discussion? Karina, did you have any further discussion?

No. Thank you.

K. We'll just go ahead and vote individually. Can you hear Karina? Well, this one, you can he could come back later and say, hey. It's not working. It's commercial, and we can, like, sell it to that cost some more money.

Yeah. There is, yeah, there is an application fee with that. Yep. Okay. At at any at any point, anyone can apply for for a rezone, or the city could choose to rezone it without an application if if the city If we're not here. If the city chose the I mean yeah. I mean, if the city wanted to right now I mean, it's not typically what happens. We we typically respond to applications, but the city could rezone any any property going through the proper process.

May I, again, just for clarity's sake since the question was brought up again? I, you know, I know we we just got recommended Nile on the first one, but, yes, it can be rezoned. But please understand that we have a preliminary plat application in that has townhomes there and ready to go. So so the the first denial, obviously, this one that follows will now then, if we can't get this through a city council, necessitate a complete redo of the residential application that's already in, the monies that cost and go with that, and the loss of the townhomes that that go along with that. So there there would likely be no No. Rezone in the near future because of that. Right? Because we're actively working on the residential because the decision's made tonight.

Yep. Yeah. I mean, that there was an application submitted that didn't meet the existing zoning, so that didn't necessitate this application.

Any further Rina, did you have anything else?

No. Thank you.

K. Go ahead and go to vote. Rena, how do you vote?

I'm nay.

Troy? Yes.

Yes. Both yes as well.

Three votes yes, two votes. Okay. Item number five. Discus discussion and consideration for a conditional use permit for white YTricity. Say it again. I think so. A research and development business located at twenty days forward south, Griffith Drive. Levi, do you wanna go ahead and introduce this? Yeah.

So so a business license was was submitted for YTricity, which is which is located actually just north of of the property we we just discussed in a commercial zone on on Heritage Drive there, 2340 South Heritage Drive. And And I'm just gonna read from the applicant just so you know what what what this business does. The off office primarily does research in the area of power electronics in order to assist in the development of standards for wireless charging systems for electric vehicles. This consists mainly of computer research and simulations using software. Computer software team also makes presentations to standard bodies on their findings. Occasionally, they test some of the products, which consists of wireless charters for golf carts. These tests are using electronics testing equipment to test voltage and current. Proposed hours of operation are nine to five, Monday through Friday. They're not proposing any changes to the building, parking, landscaping, any any anything within the site. It is located within a commercial zone and this and, you know, adjacent to other commercial properties as as well as Thomas Edison Charter School, you know, just just to the east. But this the the category of use research and development is a conditional use, which is why this isn't in front of you today. Just a little more context as you can see where it's at there. I I already kinda described that on the screen, but they're at the corner of Heritage Drive, Nibley Park Avenue just off Highway 89. So looking at Nibley City code, a conditional use should shall be approved if reasonable conditions are imposed to mitigate the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects of the proposed use in accordance with applicable standards. Just to remind you, with the the recently adopted parking ordinance, parking requirements are actually not imposed. And in a case like this, I'll go with with a business going into an existing building, not new construction, so so parking really isn't isn't a consideration here. The and and just in general, this this the staff doesn't see any significant detrimental effects based on the description of the business of of of what's going on there and and and the the site context. It it really seems to fit with with the context of of that of the area. The only recommendations that staff would provide is and and this is this is the fire inspection is is already required with with a a business license, but but just to be clear with staff's recommendation to require that conditional use permit as well as well as a building inspection. And the building inspection is just just to ensure that the building is safe and and meets intended use and occupancy. So that those are the only conditions that staff recommends. So staff does recommend approval of this conditional use permit. The findings that the proposed use compatible with the site context, there's no anticipate detrimental impacts to neighboring properties. To ensure the site is fire safe, fire inspection is required and to to ensure the building meets intended use and occupancy. Building inspection is required in the recommended condition. The building must be inspected by county fire marshal, certifying compliance with fire code, and a building inspection must be conducted to ensure the building meets intended use and occupancy for the building.

Great. Thank you for the intermission.

Discussion on commission. Trina, do you have anything?

I'm sorry.

No. I don't have anything. It sounds

Sure. No? No questions or policy?

Right? Mister chairman, if I may,

we can motion to approve the conditional use permit for YTRAX at Citi, a research and develop development business located 23 Port South Lewis Drive with

the recommended admissions stated by staff. Thank you, Brett. So just to reiterate, Brett recommended to sorry. Hold on. I'll just yeah. Again. Sorry. So Correct. To for a motion to or approval of the conditional use permit for White River City, a research and development business located at 2340 South Heritage Drive with the conditions of. We have second? Sure. Any further discussion?

They get they're gonna do wireless charging stations for golf carts?

Yeah. That's part of it. Get that off.

This is this is more the research leaning side of r and t. Right. Right. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I mean, they they identified as a research facility, but research and development is kind of the category. Yeah. Yeah.

K. With that, we'll go ahead and take it to a vote. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? That would be five in favor. Yeah. Post. Alright. Moving to item number six. Favorite thing. Workshop. No. We're back. We couldn't get it up. We have updates, please.

Yeah. So I I did include in the packet a draft ordinance, and I I'll just say it's, like, it's a rough draft. It it's a it's staff's first stab at this, not necessarily a recommendation at this stage, but just to put in front of you to to try to get at some of the discussion that has been had at previous workshops. And so I'll just I'll just summarize, and we can bring up the exact language on the on the draft. But but summarize some of some of or each each of the recommended amendments to the RM zone. So one is and I I know there was different discussion on how to how to handle this, but what's in the current draft is to amend the design standard and and require rear loaded, ingress and egress for multifamily housing. There was some discussion of whether to allow some front loaded, but but maybe have, like, separation between driveways or or limit the width of driveways, we we we we could discuss that. But at this point in time, that's that's what is in there just for just for sake of discussion of just requiring reloaded access. Next is removing the RM application map. So one of those items on the agenda wouldn't have had to been discussed necessarily, but but we we we talked about that. I I won't I guess I won't go through all of the reasons for all of these. I think we've we've discussed and had the back and forth, but I'm just gonna summarize right now kind of what's in there. We get into the more more of the reasons later, but there there is although it's hard to pull those apart for some of these. So so there is a slight modification to the setback standards for reloaded housing. So currently, there's a 20 foot setback, front load or front yard setback and a 15 foot rear setback for with within the RM zone. It's it's recommended that that be flipped if it's rear loaded. So you have 20 foot in the rear and 15 foot in the front. There there was kind of an interesting case on this in in Ridgeline Park where they they have some, they have some alley loaded single family units there, and they have a they have a 20 foot setback. But with the 15 foot setback, it makes it a little bit the driveway becomes kind of not very usable because you can't really fit a car in 15 feet. And it so it becomes just that, a driveway. It doesn't really become a parking space. So so if you flip it and you allow a little less setbacks, you still have the same building envelope. If you do if you do front loaded, you have that 20 foot setback, then you can have you know, you have enough space for a driveway if it's reloaded. So that that's kind of the reason for that. There's there's some different ways you can do that, but reduce the building height to 40 feet. So currently, it's 50 feet, but if it's if it's within 300 feet of these existing residential zones, there there's some discussion and worry about its proximity to and maybe 300 feet is is a is a big number, but but that was kinda to be consistent with this other 300 foot buffer. So it'd be reduced to 40 feet if it's if it's close to those residential zones, so 300 feet, which is which is the building height max for most of the most of the residential zones at the city. And then there was there was a desire to modify the language that requires single family within 300 feet of adjacent single family. So instead, it'd be it's it's limiting construction to two stories and no more than a 100 feet in building length as a transition area. So it doesn't necessarily have to be single family, but it it allows for kind of that transition into a single family where you don't have something so big and imposing right right next to a single family neighborhood. Remove clubhouse pool or splash pad from list of required amenities that was discussed. And then there is some language there that that probably needs a little bit of work, but it's kind of our first stab at a fee in lieu option for required open space and amenities. And and the way it's currently crafted is amenities you you could do a fee in lieu for amenities just based on the value. For open space, I I have to bring the language up. There's some logic there, but I I got I gotta I gotta bring up what exactly what that is. But there there's some standard for for the open space as well.

This is this is on smaller lots. I mean, smaller less than 40 acres, right, is what we're talking about.

It could not necessarily. I mean, it it could be less. It could be more that there's no there's no minimum or maximum in the RM zone. There can be. Right? That that that's that could be another but but in the current in the current standard, there's not. And just kind of one more bullet point here that I I that I think it would be worth looking at the RPUD standards. Once once the if the planning commission wants to move forward with some changes to the RM standards, I think we should consider applying applicable to the RPD code as well. But we can we can work on it in the RM, and then once there's some consensus there, maybe we'll fold in and bring in things to the RPD as well. Because a lot of these, it doesn't make sense to just have it one and not the other.

Yeah. I think that we and Lou, we were talking about there was a context of, like, does it any quite frankly, any development that's directly adjacent to our where we have preexisting amounts of open space. Is open space on open space? The idea we always wanna push a lower fee and move because it's the proximity of our a preexisting network of open space. You know what I mean? Yeah. Yeah. And, like Yeah. That's me.

Let's see here.

Trying to find a Open space for OpenSpace, where B and Blue might be better options to target that to a bigger consolidated area because Washington's

I'm hoping I didn't leave it out of the packet because I'm not seeing it here. It's not gonna be happy. Did I not did I not put it in the packet? That's that's an issue. Go watch. The draft the draft code changes. I think I might have left them out of the packet. That's my pro. That's my bad.

Yeah.

Because I put in the goals there right after the Waitricity thing. I think I messed up.

No.

It's there. Is it there?

Like, a couple of days out of the.

Oh, it's in the.

Why am I not finding it? It's

the back of 137.

Listen to everything you just What are are you talking about actually the

the code itself? The code. Yeah. The code changes. I know I know I put it in the agenda item report, but I don't I think I might may have left it out of the packet. My that's my bad.

Guess we just have to wait till

Yep.

I'm yeah. I I so the, yeah, the what I do have a draft. I I inadvertently left it out of the packet, but it what I described is

Yeah. Summarizes that. I think everything you proposed, I think it's summarizing it. Most of the salient topics and discussion points we've been tagging over, I guess, within this zone. Fundamentally, I still always cling back to based on maybe what Tyler's thoughts were in terms of the concerns about this zone. Like, I would have been curious, you know, had we asked what council would have done. Like, do they does the council legitimately feel like this is a viable zone for Nibley? They sent it back to us. Because we've not seen this zone in crackles. Right? So we don't know.

But They looked at the one on 1200 West. That is once RM mix. We united to an RM 2, and they sent that back to us because of the RM mix. It felt like all of it.

Yeah. I mean, I I guess we do have the so the Wesley Nelson Residentials parcel is R 2. RM. Yeah. RM. Excuse me. Yes. Thank you. Alright. Yeah. So we'll see that in practice, but we just that's where it's hard. It's like, we've been haggling over this zone. We don't even see it in the real world yet. Yeah. I I think it would be helpful to understand

because we have the RPUD, and we have this zone to understand, you know, in what if if we're going to have this zone, where does it make sense to do this versus an RPUD? In in my in my mind, maybe this is for smaller scale, higher density development, and RPED's larger scale. Maybe that's how we look at it. If there's if there's places so maybe there's a maximum.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So

so maybe maybe we have a maximum.

This week, you need a 20. Make this maximum.

Well, what do you do with this?

I'm thinking this is how I ask questions. Yeah. That has been problem. Yeah. Yeah. I think this is the middle group. We are two a and are you where are you? Well, this It's it's higher density. Yeah.

Set back. Yep. And also the night. The car that would match up more next to residential.

I mean, do we do we need to rethink this? Hate to do this, but altogether where it's just like, this can only happen directly adjacent to. I'm blanking that. People would be more copy. Because remember, the whole idea was the the application was at some island, later down by the industrial part of neighboring, bordering higher. Yeah. And we're in Tyler's reservation once that this thing would be on file. We you know what I mean? It's off on its own. We don't really know. It's like, well, kinda we don't. Well, it's true, but we don't know if if it could be successfully because we haven't seen it. So maybe

But we Nelson want an RM. Well, they do. North of it commercial.

Yeah. So that's what I'm saying. Maybe it's like you know, that could just be a part of the consideration when we legislate these decisions. It's like if it's directly adjacent. And I thought it would be probably

there. It's set back in the backyard of 15 feet, so they're really close to the commercial. And they said they want a buffer. That's not much of a buffer. Oh, it's fine.

Oh, yeah. If it's

changed Yeah. But theirs is already approved. So there's there's I mean, do do

do you all feel like 10 acres is would be a maximum to you, your gut instinct, or would you One big one what I can start is we start messing with what

which so qualifies based on size. Yeah. CFO are starting to make manipulate that. Right? Yeah. Partial, and we start carving that so they can qualify for either

You're right. For other That's a good point. Yes. That's a good point. Yeah. Yes.

Yeah. I I I think I think Brett raises a good point. I I think it could it's I mean, a rezone decision is a case by case basis. And is it is it too I think if you think it's too big, then it's too big. Right?

Yeah. Right? Like Right. Yeah. Because because I mean, because of his. It's a need consideration.

It's really it's really not on the map here. The map. Find it really anywhere, is it? Well, it it doesn't it doesn't specify.

Right? So so the future land use map, it you currently uses terms like low medium low medium high density. Yeah. And we we discussed that with the general plan as as we kicked it off that we'd like in the update to define at least what what that means. What is what is low density? What does high density mean?

Well

Well

Yeah. Yeah.

Well

Sir, certainly, I mean

So

I think what the council did was continue proposal to the south until, like you, better understood what these are and things all the way. So we are looking for your help on that. So thank you for wrangling this out, and we'll wrangle with it too. Yeah. But the same hesitation, I think, that planning commission had and that is maybe we should better understand casting on the side on the RN zone before we get too far. So I'm not I'm not sure we kicked it back to you, Clara. It sounds like we're searching for our

responsibilities, but we We're playing a group like you're. Yes. I guess I've ordered it for you.

You're great. Thanks.

I I do like I do like the adjustments, the height, and the setback, the back or the back increase in the rear loaded. Parking.

I like how fast you're say you see a problem Right. In real life. Maybe make a we make a judgments.

Yeah. And also, like, the two story, so it's not, like, three or four stories that's Right. For condominiums.

Just Yeah. Right. So maybe these are incremental improvements. I don't know if they get at the heart of some of people's reservations with the zone.

But We may never get there. But yeah.

Yeah. Maybe they would have cleaned these flashes.

My kid my kids loved them when they were younger.

And I really think just moving forward, if RM and some of it may just I still would would would to get some more feedback from counsel on what they think this zoning should be. But, really, then it's just up to the legislative bodies to decide where it it actually runs.

I like what you proposed. The 100 p, that's still pretty long, but not really long.

You measure it. That's Might be a five plex Yeah. At most. Four or five plex. Some of these are eight plexes behind us. Yeah. They're pretty

the the distance. Mhmm. What do we think? That might be a.

I like all all the changes,

recommendations. My my one question was on on swapping the syntax. So, like, I when my when I'm picturing rear loaded, I I have a whole bunch of different things that I'm picturing.

I'm trying to think of, like, a local example.

Maybe not the prettiest, but, like, in Hiram, like, 300 South where the old turkey sheds are. You're familiar. There's, like, some townhomes over there.

You just like boobs? Yeah. Oh,

Yeah. Fancy?

Yeah. Yeah. There's some townhomes back there that are I guess you can call them reloaded on kind of alleyways, and there's no setback there. So we're talking more like here at Bridgeline with I I guess my question is with the setbacks, does that include the main building or any building? So, like, if there was an attached garage, is that 15 foot setback, or is that can be

just off of that? So the the set setbacks for detached accessory buildings are different than than for the main building, and those are set by the underlying well, I guess the RM is is a is a zone in of itself. But I believe the way we have it in our code and if we don't, we should clarify that. That's a good point. I I believe we have similar setbacks for RM as we do for others, which they are less. So, like, for example, a a detached garage is one foot in the rear and three foot on the side unless it's over 15 feet, and then it's 10 feet is what is generally what we have, and it needs to be in the rear yard.

Still clarifying that. Yeah.

So so I guess the question I have is, should I bring this back for consideration? You know, get get the verbiage right even though I don't have it in front of you right now. But but get get everything kind of cleaned up and bring this back for public hearing and consideration, or should I bring it back for another workshop with with the words on on paper? What what would you like to do? I feel bad because I thought I gave them to you, and I didn't. But

Is there an an upcoming council meeting? So it's going to further discuss this before we will?

To your knowledge? Now that I'm remembering Levi, help me with this. So I referenced the proposal to the south from Emery. I believe the council adopted your recommendation

for first reading to sell all of that to R 2 A R 2 A. Yeah. And

noted that if there was going to be something besides R 2 A, specifically RN, it would be after we understood the we had combed through the with your help, the RN zone. Right. The council adopted we we often very often take two runs at things, first reading and second reading. So adopted your recommendation on first reading for all of that property to be

Right. What's three. What they did continue was whether it was whether to add it to the map, the area as RM. I I They didn't they didn't they they continued that item, but but they did, for first reading, go with the planning commission recommendation, which was r two a.

Which is Yeah. I mean, realistically, there's no to me, there's no issue with allowing me by the move this forward even to the point to where we make a type of public hearing, open it up for discussion and consideration to the simple fact that that doesn't mean we have to start applying RM anywhere. Right? So if we're at a minimum, we feel like we're making our more comfortable in the concept of what it could be. Right? That doesn't mean some of you are just gonna start literally applying it here. You still get to make that decision as to the location.

And and if you're not comfortable in the next meeting, you can continue it. Yeah. You know? I would I know we've already I know I know we've already continued to discuss this, but if you're like, you know what? You need to do more work on this. We need to look at this. We we you can continue it, and we can bring it back. Honestly don't need one.

Right. Yeah. Because we still have that option to deny an application if one comes. And then even if we recommend it for approval and cancel denies, then that's good feedback for us.

Yeah. That's kind of the point.

So be prepared to have to do

something we create. Yep. Well, I think that that recently You change your call, did you kinda be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be I see here. Yeah. And if right. If that's your concern, then do we need to entertain any idea of identifying zones,

proxy or proximity to other zone? We should consider that. Yeah. This would make sense. See this time control. Yeah. Is it otherwise, you tell people no, and they're gonna say why. Yeah. We don't want it there. Exactly. That's not not good enough. Right. Political answer might be legal legal legal legal. Okay. Yeah. You could you could this is just thinking out loud. Something you could say is this this shall only apply in areas designated as high density residential or yeah. Yeah. So it'd be that would be good. Yeah. And then and then you don't necessarily have a map there, but but we have a the future land use map, which we're gonna amend again this year.

Yeah.

That's That at least limits it. Right. Yep. Right.

We we could be treated with the general plan, valid. And the definitions Yeah. Are really reading this again to fit the interpretation on.

K. They help me, Mike. Yeah.

Yeah. So I I think I think next meeting, which isn't till the twenty fourth, I'm not gonna put it on the back burner, but got a little bit of time to to comb this over and and get it ready for public hearing for the next one.

Right?

Right. Good. Awesome. K. Moving on to item number seven, planning commission goals for 2020.

Alright. So a little bit late on this, but but the planning commission, we usually like to set goals near near the beginning of the year. The the first thing we'd like to do is is look at the status of the goals we we made last year, and you see the summary on on the screen there. There's there's some things that we we didn't quite get to. There's others that we completed. We didn't quite get to the access connectivity intersection spacing standards. We did complete the parks and rec master plan, active transportation plan, the modern income housing plan. We we completed strategies that were that were identified there. We're compliant with state code. Good there. We have started the development of the general plan, and this this Highway 165 study that's referenced here is in progress. It hasn't hasn't started yet. It's a little out of the city's hands, but the but the funding's there, and it's it's about to kick off. And then we have started this process with with Cache County to develop a town center master plan. Just some other things of note that were accomplished as updated parking standards. And by the way, these are typically outside of the administrative process. I guess it's I guess it's it's implied that that the planning commission's going to make good decisions on on on those those types of processes. But the this really is is going beyond that and looking at our plans and and codes and ordinances. There was an update to the a d u or ADU ordinance that that the planning commission worked on, and and this is adopted. And this that was in support of the modern comp housing plan. And then there was an update to open space subdivision ordinance that included updated standards for our two a zone. Those those are just kind of some highlights of of some things that were accomplished 2024. Going forward, these this is the goals that staff drafted. And and I'll just point out if if there's anything else you want to add or change to this list, that's that's really the point of this agenda item. So first, completing some of these items that were already listed in 2024, the access connectivity intersection spacing, the Highway 165 corridor study, which is through partnership with Cache County, And and the Nibley town center master plan, kind of a a recent development is not just coordinating with Cache County, but also with the USU landscape architect program. We had we had a good meeting today with with a couple of professors on that and some there there's there's some possibilities of of getting some assistance from students to to get help with their design studio, to help envision the the town center area. And they as part of that class, they do public and stakeholder engagement, which I think is is also valuable. So, anyway, that that's something we're we're hoping to pursue and continue to implement strategies of the moderate income housing plan. It's about time that we probably ought to look at that and update it because we're getting to the point where we either implemented or already looked at almost everything in there. And so what do we wanna do next? I wouldn't say we necessarily we don't need to do it this year, but that might be something to look at next year. The probably the biggest one here is complete the development of the general plan, and we did just kick off that that process, update the RM and RPD zoning standards, which we're working on right now, review and update design standards for commercial and institutional uses. These these standards are pretty outdated, and, Phil, there's there's a need to to look at these. And it was actually just pointed out in a city council meeting and recommended to do that. And then this last one, which we just just getting a summary from the legislative session, updating the code for compliance with state code. So just keeping our code up up to up to par with what the state requires. That's what we have. There's more we could potentially do, but trying to be realistic. So any anything else or any any modifications to these? Just wanted to put these in front of you to kinda have a clear idea of where we're headed this year. Other than, obviously, all the applications and everything we received, this is kind of anything we do beyond that.

Well, that it sounded like where'd that come up in the getting counsel? Yeah. Development. You see for patients. Yeah.

It it could be a a big project to do. It's likely to be a pretty big project, and we need to decide how we want to approach that because it's it's kind of those standards are kind of a beast. And we can at least I think we can start with a discussion of how how we wanna approach it, how we how we see commercial development and and Nibbly going forward, and then starting that. Yeah. So any comments or anything? Are we everyone good with those?

Sure. I'm trying to remember the intersection

that we that the developer is supposed to

decide to keep the money and Yeah. Being what it is. It's I don't think that's been decided.

That's a good that's a good comment.

3200 and and Highway 8991 or Highway 165 Main Street. I I one thing I should say is this year, we're doing the general plan. Next year is we're likely gonna do the transportation master plan. And I'm not saying that can't come ahead of that, but that could be I I know that's kind of a hot spot for traffic, so it it should be something maybe it should be looked at.

Mhmm. Yeah. I'm just saying if we can stay at a steady

Yeah.

Good point.

Can I give you an update on this is all public knowledge? A council of government's proposal that Millville has made on that intersection, and they are they they are looking for I'm not even a top policy. They're looking for newly support to make 3200 South and Highway 165 a full doorway intersection. They wanna go straight east. K. This is nonsecret. They've made cog applications. They're trying to get With a new bridge? Yes, sir. A new bridge and everything. And that would again, just information. That would mean Nibley would build part of that road and own half of that bridge.

So my suggestion is money or build payment that Richlight would have used to build out that

access to the 135.

Let's spend it on the thumbnails.

Yeah. It is kind of interesting, right, that it it narrows it narrows out when

Yeah. Well, it's

exactly. You know, they they have received money for engineering. One of the big questions is, well, there's already a bridge there that, you know, comes down by the maverick. What's wrong with that? And they the city count that Millville was here at city council last time. So she that bridge. So what do we do with that bridge? We have two bridges. What what what?

But I think the only way Millville can

pull this off is if they receive COG funding, which there is a match. There's, like, a seven or 8% match.

I can tell you what's wrong with it. Sixteen, seventeen, 18 year old drivers

twice a day going through there.

Going to the ridge on it, including my son.

Yeah. I found out kids weren't

our daughters weren't going out to the light on 165. Instead, they were coming through the back of Melville. It's like, what? Why don't you go out to where there's a light? You can get on 165 safely. Yeah. Takes too long to cycle through it all later. How much? Quicker. Yeah.

And that's a good point. Not necessarily. I mean, head nods is is good if you alright.

K. K. We'll respond to this back and forth.

Bye. Alright. Just wanted to point out general plan was kicked off yesterday because I think it's gonna be a great process. There will be and, you know, Claire and Nick were were at the, the kickoff meeting. There there's separate, one on one meeting with Troy and if and Brett, Karina, or, you know, if any of you wanna wanna have one of these kind of one on one conversations to to talk about kind of your your viewpoints, happy to facilitate that with the consultant. Just they're trying to get a variety of different perspectives on it right now. Or if there's on top of that, if there's people that you think should be consulted for a one on one conversation that would contribute to that discussion, also, you know, send them send them my way.

We're we're Let me wait. Send us some questions we could give some thought to. I'm I'm better if I have time to think about it. Yeah. Yeah. For sure.

Just do it on do it on the spot, then you can then you're ready. Yeah. Yeah. I'll I'll request that from the consultant just to be consistent with with the other ones and yep. For sure. K. I think that's all. Though the the one other thing, I I I didn't quite get to the flag lot items. I I I started on it, but that might be ready at the next meeting. But we'll see how far I get. K.

David, are you? Down? Larry? K. All of us need to. Thank you.

Got through.

Bye, Karina.