[0:01] Okay, we are live.

[0:04] » Okay, uh we would like to welcome

[0:06] everybody to the Alpine City Planning

[0:08] Commission meeting on this uh Tuesday,

[0:10] June 16th, 2026. The meeting is being

[0:13] held live at City Hall, 20 North Main

[0:15] Street, Alpine, Utah.

[0:17] Uh we are also uh

[0:19] casting live on YouTube if anybody would

[0:22] like to tune in.

[0:24] So, uh welcome everybody. We appreciate

[0:26] all those that are here. Uh also

[0:28] appreciate the representatives of the

[0:30] city that we have here with us, Marla

[0:31] Fox, Caden Lyon, and Jason Judd.

[0:35] Uh and also like to recognize all the

[0:37] members of the Planning Commission we

[0:39] have. Uh Jeff Davis, Sue Wittenberg,

[0:42] Greg Greg Butterfield, myself Alan

[0:44] McDonald.

[0:45] I've got John McKay, Michelle Shermer,

[0:47] and Troy Slade.

[0:49] Uh so, with that, uh let's go ahead and

[0:52] begin the meeting with an opening prayer

[0:54] that will be given to us by

[0:56] uh Greg Butterfield, followed by the

[0:58] Pledge of Allegiance, uh which will be

[0:59] led by John McKay.

[1:04] » Our dear kind heavenly Father, we come

[1:06] before thee on this beautiful Tuesday

[1:07] night and give thee thanks for all our

[1:09] many blessings. Heavenly Father, we're

[1:10] grateful for the opportunity we have to

[1:12] live in Alpine, for all our wonderful

[1:13] family and friends that we are

[1:14] surrounded with. At this time, we would

[1:16] invite thy spirit to be with us. Bless

[1:18] us that our minds might be sharp, that

[1:19] we might be able to have open hearts

[1:21] that will be civil, that we will be able

[1:23] to talk about those things that are in

[1:24] the best interest of all

[1:26] the Alpine citizens, that we might be

[1:28] able to be faithful to our stewardship,

[1:30] that we might be able to do the things

[1:31] that thou would have us to do. And we

[1:33] say this and give thee thanks once again

[1:35] for all our many blessings, and we say

[1:36] this in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

[1:38] >> Amen.

[1:42] » Please rise and join me in the Pledge of

[1:43] Allegiance.

[1:45] >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[1:47] United States of America, and to the

[1:50] republic for which it stands, one nation

[1:53] under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[1:56] justice for all.

[1:59] » Okay, thank you

[2:02] Greg and John, much appreciated. All

[2:05] right, let's jump right into reports and

[2:06] presentations.

[2:08] The agenda notes that there are none.

[2:10] Caden, is that still the case?

[2:12] >> That is the case, yes.

[2:13] >> Okay.

[2:13] Then we will jump right into action

[2:17] items and discussion items. And Caden,

[2:19] it's my understanding that item number

[2:21] one, review of the 512 commercial site

[2:23] plan has been pulled.

[2:25] >> That's correct. So, it will just have to

[2:26] be postponed to a future meeting as a

[2:28] motion.

[2:29] >> All right.

[2:30] Oh, we do need a motion to actually

[2:32] postpone that, even if it's been pulled?

[2:34] >> That's what I've been told. So,

[2:37] >> Okay.

[2:37] >> I don't think

[2:37] >> we've ever done that before, but that

[2:39] should be an easy motion. Anybody like

[2:40] to make a make a motion?

[2:42] >> I'll make a motion.

[2:43] >> [laughter]

[2:44] >> Let her ride.

[2:45] >> Hi. Oh, turn mic. Hi.

[2:49] We remove actually

[2:50] >> sorry, we still can't hear you.

[2:52] >> Here we go.

[2:54] I move that we remove item A, our action

[2:57] item number A of the 5.12

[3:01] commercial site plan.

[3:02] >> Okay, we have a motion by Sue

[3:03] Wittenberg. Do we have a second?

[3:04] >> Second it.

[3:06] >> Okay, we have a second by Jeff Davis.

[3:08] All in favor?

[3:09] >> Aye.

[3:10] >> Okay.

[3:11] Item number one has been removed and

[3:13] will be postponed for future date and

[3:16] time

[3:18] to be determined.

[3:19] All right, just one quick comment.

[3:22] Caden, I don't believe that any of the

[3:23] action items require a public hearing,

[3:25] correct?

[3:25] >> No, no, they do not.

[3:27] >> Okay.

[3:28] All right, let's dive right into action

[3:31] item B, then, which will be review of

[3:33] Long Range Shooters of Utah commercial

[3:35] site plan. Caden, could you introduce

[3:37] that for us?

[3:39] >> All right, thank you.

[3:41] So, this is a commercial site plan

[3:44] proposed off of 200 North and Main

[3:46] Street in Alpine. It's called the Long

[3:47] Range Shooters of Utah.

[3:49] The building is proposed to be a space

[3:52] for a small retail gun shop, a

[3:55] warehouse, a space for an office, and a

[3:56] space to film content in for the shop.

[4:00] It will also include a one-bedroom

[4:01] apartment above the office area.

[4:04] Um, so the applicant has provided a site

[4:06] plan that meets the requirements of the

[4:07] business commercial zone and the Gateway

[4:09] Historic Zone.

[4:10] There's a few adjustments that needed to

[4:12] be made to the materials per potentially

[4:15] uh to make them

[4:16] uh in line with the Gateway Historic

[4:18] Design Guidelines.

[4:20] Uh, the parking requirements were met.

[4:22] Uh, it was determined that 3.5 stalls

[4:24] were needed per the 1,000 square feet.

[4:27] Uh, the building's about 1,600.

[4:29] Uh, and that includes the two spots in

[4:31] inside the building for the apartment

[4:33] above.

[4:34] There uh is a requirement that the

[4:37] one-bedroom apartment above be

[4:39] owner-occupied, which the applicant is

[4:41] aware of

[4:42] and is determined to comply with.

[4:45] And uh there is also there was an

[4:48] adjustment to the site plan that they

[4:50] added a 10-ft public utility easement

[4:53] along the front property line, and so

[4:54] that should also be met uh as well as

[4:56] the other sections in uh in code four of

[5:00] DCA.

[5:02] So, that is the proposed site, kind of

[5:04] the vicinity map, really just right

[5:07] here, kind of around the corner from us.

[5:09] >> [snorts]

[5:10] >> And so, I'll just jump right into the

[5:12] staff recommendation. After our review

[5:14] of all these codes, we would recommend

[5:16] that the Planning Commission consider

[5:17] sending a positive recommendation

[5:20] to the [snorts] City Council for the

[5:21] proposed site plan for the new Long

[5:23] Range Shooters of Utah Commercial Site

[5:24] Plan

[5:25] based on the condition that all exterior materials uh be met

[5:30] for the Gateway Historic Design

[5:32] Guidelines.

[5:33] So, I'll just jump right into the plan

[5:35] now.

[5:38] So, as I just said, we we feel as staff

[5:40] that they did meet the code requirements

[5:42] for this type of plan.

[5:45] There's another vicinity map.

[5:48] Make it a little bit smaller.

[5:53] Jump here to the site plan.

[5:57] So, they are they have the seven spots

[6:01] parking stalls outside the building and

[6:03] then there's two more proposed for

[6:04] inside the the building for the

[6:06] apartment.

[6:08] Utilities are met. The landscaping plan

[6:10] was reviewed and determined to be

[6:11] compliant with the landscaping

[6:13] requirements of 314 in the code.

[6:17] You can see it right there.

[6:21] And let's see. Let's jump to the

[6:23] elevations.

[6:28] So, here's the elevations

[6:30] and the proposed materials for the

[6:32] exterior of the building.

[6:35] See, there's a lot of stucco here on the

[6:37] north elevation.

[6:39] ACM panels proposed here on the south

[6:41] elevation.

[6:45] And then the applicant informed me that

[6:47] this is I don't think it's labeled, but

[6:49] it is brick a brick material.

[6:53] And I believe this is continued stucco.

[6:59] And you can see the exterior entrance to

[7:00] the upper part of the building. I

[7:02] believe that's for the accessory

[7:04] apartment.

[7:07] Lighting plan also was submitted.

[7:10] >> Hey, Gabe, real quick, before we leave

[7:13] the exterior materials, could you go

[7:16] back? I just had a question.

[7:19] And

[7:19] I on my way and I did see a gentleman

[7:21] carrying a brick, so

[7:23] >> Yeah, they they they did want to present

[7:25] the the exterior materials.

[7:27] >> We'll get to that in a second.

[7:28] Excellent. Thank you. We're hoping it

[7:29] wasn't meant for you.

[7:31] >> [laughter]

[7:33] >> Um okay, what what are ACM panels?

[7:36] And is that are you going to show us on

[7:38] the the rendering?

[7:39] >> Yeah, I'm not 100% sure. I'm sure the

[7:41] applicant could address that question

[7:42] more directly.

[7:44] Here is the rendering.

[7:48] » Do you want me Do I Do I need to come up

[7:49] to explain what those are?

[7:51] >> Uh yeah, we'll we'll have a we'll we'll finish with Cayden. He'll

[7:55] introduce, we'll go through everything,

[7:56] and then we'll have you come up if

[7:58] that'll be okay, and and we might have

[8:00] some questions for you. Thank you.

[8:03] >> [snorts]

[8:03] >> Yep, so here's the rendering. This is

[8:05] the I believe the garage entrance to the

[8:07] warehouse here,

[8:09] uh pedestrian entrance here.

[8:12] And I believe that's it for me. Um and

[8:15] then we just have the lighting specs.

[8:17] >> Continuing after this.

[8:18] >> So, okay, if I'm just looking at this

[8:20] rendering then, there's, you know, some

[8:21] cars that are put in there, a little

[8:23] white pickup truck, and maybe a little

[8:24] 4Runner or something next to it. And

[8:26] that material right in front of that, is that

[8:29] Do you know what that is? And if not,

[8:31] Cayden, that's fine. We can

[8:32] >> I believe that is the ACM. That's my

[8:34] understanding, but the applicant can

[8:36] clarify if it's not.

[8:39] >> Okay.

[8:40] All right. Anything else, Cayden, as you

[8:41] were going through?

[8:43] >> That is it for me and for for staff.

[8:47] >> Okay. Um we can

[8:49] >> [clears throat]

[8:49] >> Do anybody have any questions for Cayden

[8:51] before we

[8:53] chat with the applicant?

[8:55] Okay. I might have some questions, so if

[8:59] uh Is there a representative of Long

[9:01] Range Shoot uh commercial site plan

[9:03] here?

[9:04] Okay.

[9:06] >> [clears throat]

[9:06] >> If you could, just tell us your name and

[9:08] >> Uh Rick Christensen, owner of the Bend N

[9:10] Build Construction.

[9:11] >> Rick, could you turn on the microphone?

[9:13] It's back behind the

[9:15] Uh it's on the mic itself. There's a

[9:17] little button on there at the very

[9:19] bottom of the base.

[9:20] >> Yeah, there you go.

[9:22] >> Is that better?

[9:23] >> Yeah.

[9:25] Is that on? Okay.

[9:26] >> Yeah, it is. Okay, Rick, so So, I think

[9:28] that the question we would have for you

[9:30] is we just, you know, as you're aware,

[9:31] that the building sits in the Gateway

[9:33] Historic District, and you're aware of

[9:34] those guidelines.

[9:36] Um just to refresh you briefly, design

[9:39] standards, the use of stone, brick,

[9:41] wood, or stucco is encouraged for use as

[9:43] a primary exterior materials.

[9:46] Um

[9:47] So, Kaden's let us know that I think for

[9:48] the most part the plans comply with

[9:51] setbacks and there was a public utility

[9:53] easement that that you've taken into

[9:55] consideration, etc.

[9:56] So, I think some of the questions we'd

[9:57] have for you just really are exterior

[10:00] building materials.

[10:01] >> Okay.

[10:02] So, that the ACM panels which we're

[10:03] proposing, that's a metal panel that is

[10:08] really flat and it's got a gap lines

[10:10] around it. It's folded, it's lasered.

[10:13] It's really sharp looking.

[10:14] Um

[10:16] We would like to use that. That's their

[10:17] hope. So, [snorts]

[10:20] um

[10:23] I don't know how else to explain it

[10:24] besides that. I mean, you can make the

[10:26] panels any size you want, so it fits in

[10:28] between the windows.

[10:30] You know, so all the windows will have

[10:31] It almost looks like a recessed panel

[10:34] when you put it up.

[10:36] Um what are those lines?

[10:38] um

[10:41] where the panels are seamed or are they

[10:44] Yeah, so engraved some sort some way or

[10:48] Yeah, so it's totally completely sealed.

[10:50] So, the panels come, they overlap each

[10:52] other, so the water can't penetrate any

[10:54] of that metal.

[10:55] Works really well. It's used a lot in

[10:57] commercial upper end commercial

[10:59] buildings.

[11:03] I think

[11:04] What's it made out of, brick?

[11:06] >> It's just metal. It's like a So, it's

[11:07] going to be a black matte black like

[11:10] finish.

[11:11] Um If you could compare it to the color

[11:13] of a

[11:14] black metal roof, you know, that that's

[11:17] kind of what the color would be.

[11:19] >> And you can fabricate those so that you

[11:21] can have vertical or you can do all

[11:23] kinds of shapes.

[11:24] >> Yes, you can do whatever shapes, bigger,

[11:26] smaller, you know what I mean? So, you

[11:27] have some design.

[11:28] >> The stripe is where it's all part of the

[11:30] panel. That's what keeps [clears throat]

[11:31] it and then

[11:32] >> Yes, comes back out. Yeah, it's So,

[11:34] it's, you know, kind of like the front

[11:36] of your desk here a little bit, but the

[11:38] panels come out and the the, you know,

[11:41] the skinny part goes back in.

[11:45] » And those vertical windows, are those um

[11:48] I mean they're they're they look like

[11:49] they look rectangular. Are those

[11:50] black-framed windows? They they they

[11:52] look dark. Yes, which I mean they look nice.

[11:55] Um

[11:57] Okay.

[11:58] Um oh

[12:00] One thing I was going to ask you,

[12:00] Cayden, is is I'm not aware that there's

[12:03] any issue with the the the retail use a

[12:06] gun shop is a permitted use

[12:08] in in Alpine in the Gateway Historic

[12:10] District, etc. I don't know. I'm just

[12:12] >> Yeah, so

[12:14] >> That's a great question. I actually

[12:15] don't think the code mentions at all

[12:18] guns specifically, and so this was taken

[12:20] as a retail use, which is permitted in

[12:22] the BC zone.

[12:24] And is what it will be along with the

[12:25] other amenities the other things they

[12:27] will need to be able to do that retail

[12:28] use.

[12:29] So, that's how it was determined as the land use classification.

[12:34] >> All right. Yeah, I just wanted to make

[12:34] sure the use was a permitted use. It's

[12:37] pretty just been here on this commission

[12:39] for a while. This was the first gun shop

[12:41] we had, so welcome to town.

[12:43] >> To kind of tag along on Alan's question

[12:45] there, I mean, I don't know

[12:47] [clears throat] if this is anything

[12:49] I- and if it was a public school,

[12:50] probably be a

[12:52] an issue, maybe. There's that little

[12:53] private school across the street. Is

[12:55] that I mean, is that is that any kind of

[12:57] an issue or

[12:59] >> That's You mean You mean kitty-corner?

[13:01] >> Mhm.

[13:02] >> No, across the street. That little

[13:03] preschool daycare.

[13:04] >> Oh, yeah. That's right.

[13:06] Okay.

[13:06] >> Yeah, there's a preschool and daycare

[13:08] right there.

[13:11] It's the Utah code.

[13:12] >> I I just didn't know if there's a code

[13:14] or

[13:15] anything.

[13:16] >> Yes, sir.

[13:17] >> So, we met with

[13:18] >> Want to see Yeah, could we could we get

[13:19] your name?

[13:19] >> Yeah, Bryce Bergin. I'm the owner and

[13:21] founder of LRSO Long Range Shooting in

[13:23] Utah.

[13:24] So, when we met with Ryan previously, he

[13:26] contacted the city attorney. He did his

[13:27] research, gave us the approval that

[13:29] there was no law state federal or

[13:31] otherwise that would preclude preclude

[13:33] us from having a gun shop there. I think

[13:35] it's also important to note that this is

[13:36] not a typical gun shop. We do very very

[13:39] low volume, very high-end products. So,

[13:42] this isn't going to be an open door

[13:43] anybody can walk in where they want to

[13:45] pick up a handgun. It's exclusively

[13:46] precision rifles

[13:48] for long-range shooting and optics and

[13:50] things like that. So, it's more or less

[13:51] going to be more appointment only than

[13:53] it is going to be open hours where

[13:54] people can walk in and walk out. So,

[13:56] currently I do that business in my home.

[13:58] It's a home-based FFL.

[14:00] >> Do you know a guy named Clint Adams?

[14:02] >> You know Clint Adams? Big dude.

[14:03] >> Clint is my cousin.

[14:05] He got all He got He got all the size. I don't know what happened there. It's

[14:09] um

[14:09] >> He killed the bear with a pickax.

[14:11] >> Yes, he did.

[14:13] I was going to ask you I was going to

[14:14] chat with you about that afterwards, but

[14:15] you did bring that up. It's quite the

[14:16] story. If you ever look at Utah man

[14:19] bears ice ax in grizzly bear's back,

[14:22] you'll find my cousin. My cousin's name.

[14:24] But, um Okay. So, uh um it just it just

[14:28] might be worth thinking about in in a

[14:30] motion on this that it could that a

[14:32] condition is that um

[14:35] the proposed use is consistent with all,

[14:38] you know,

[14:39] local, state, and federal laws. Sounds

[14:41] like it probably is, but I just it's worth It was a good question. Okay.

[14:47] Um

[14:48] Okay. Then,

[14:50] what do we need to know about the

[14:52] apartment or the accessory? Uh

[14:56] >> So, our objective there was really just

[14:57] >> Bryce, sorry. Could you turn on your

[14:58] mic? Sorry.

[15:02] » Better?

[15:03] So, our goal there was just to maximize

[15:04] the use of the space. We also have kids

[15:06] that are 14, 15, 16. I expect them to

[15:09] probably, you know, get married in the

[15:10] next 6, 8, 7 years, something like that,

[15:12] and need a place to live, and I'd love

[15:14] to have my kids help me run my business

[15:16] and live there and

[15:16] >> So, you're not going to stick your 14,

[15:18] 15-year-olds in there cuz that would be

[15:19] a dream. I was just saying, "What a

[15:20] great idea."

[15:21] >> like to, depending on the day.

[15:23] >> Yeah. Okay. So, you have no issue with

[15:26] the the requirement that it be

[15:27] owner-occupied.

[15:29] >> No.

[15:29] >> Okay.

[15:30] Um probably likewise a a something to

[15:33] consider for a condition.

[15:34] >> What's the square footage up there?

[15:36] In the apartment?

[15:38] Like 700?

[15:39] >> Yeah.

[15:39] >> 700 square feet. It's a one-bedroom,

[15:41] one-bath with a kitchen.

[15:44] » Very likely going to be used for

[15:45] storage, too, if there's not a family

[15:47] member living there, so it's more or

[15:49] less we have the room, how do we

[15:50] maximize the space and put something

[15:51] that could be useful.

[15:53] >> Um okay. So,

[15:56] I would say the only thing I can think

[15:57] of is that we are constrained somewhat

[15:59] by well, not somewhat, we are our our

[16:03] the

[16:04] arbiters, I suppose, not interpreters,

[16:06] but the the gatekeepers of the Gateway

[16:08] Historic District. Um I think my only

[16:11] concern and something that we'll need to

[16:12] chat about is the use of the metal

[16:16] siding, I guess, for lack of better

[16:18] term, and how that is consistent with I

[16:20] mean, I think it looks good, and you

[16:22] know, we're definitely looking for a

[16:23] more traditional looks with the brick.

[16:25] We've got a lot of brick. We like the

[16:26] windows. Um one thing we'll have to just

[16:28] discuss is

[16:30] the use of that um

[16:33] is that correct to call it metal siding?

[16:35] >> Yeah.

[16:35] >> Called ACM panels.

[16:37] >> Is ACM panels?

[16:37] >> Aluminum composite material.

[16:40] >> Oh.

[16:48] » Yes. Yes.

[16:50] Is it the

[16:51] Helman Hue, the the old car wash, and I

[16:53] think the new gym?

[16:56] It's very popular. Hospitals use it a

[16:58] lot.

[16:59] >> [clears throat]

[16:59] >> And you might remember we

[17:02] >> Is that what's on there, building?

[17:03] >> Yes.

[17:04] >> Yeah. Okay.

[17:06] All right.

[17:07] >> You might remember we came and presented

[17:09] a kind of a preliminary thing about a

[17:10] year ago, and we wanted to do a lot of

[17:12] that, and you more or less said that

[17:14] we'd like to see more natural materials,

[17:16] and so that's why we've come back to the

[17:17] drawing board and done a lot more brick

[17:20] and

[17:20] >> Yeah. Yeah, it's a great difference.

[17:21] Looks nice.

[17:23] >> meet in the middle and make that happen.

[17:25] >> Okay. Anybody have further questions for

[17:28] uh Rick or Bryce?

[17:30] >> So, it's really not retail. You're not

[17:31] selling a lot of guns and stuff.

[17:33] >> I hate guns.

[17:34] >> No.

[17:34] >> Low volume.

[17:35] >> They are They are selling guns.

[17:37] >> We are We are selling

[17:38] >> Yeah, but

[17:39] >> All right. So, tell me the

[17:41] I know my or a really cool rifle or

[17:44] versus a handgun.

[17:45] >> Sure. So, the the primary business is

[17:47] actually a shooting school. So, we're a

[17:49] world-renowned provider of shooting

[17:51] training. So, people come from all over

[17:53] the world to Utah. We teach the classes

[17:54] in Price at a range down there. But we

[17:57] have a massive social media following,

[17:58] and so people follow us for that and

[18:01] then come out and take classes from us.

[18:02] We bring a lot of business to the city

[18:04] of Price, Utah, and and hopefully to

[18:06] Alpine, too. But when students come out

[18:09] and take the class and they like what

[18:10] rental rifles they use and like the

[18:12] things we offer, then they'll want to

[18:13] order it. Usually, we're shipping that

[18:15] out across the country just to another

[18:17] FFL somewhere else. But obviously, we do

[18:19] get a lot of people from Utah, and

[18:20] they'll want to come and pick them up.

[18:22] But there's not a gun range, and then

[18:23] there's nothing It's just them

[18:24] [clears throat] coming and picking up

[18:26] the rifle and and leaving with it.

[18:27] >> I mean, the classroom,

[18:29] no glass cabinets with guns all

[18:31] displayed.

[18:32] >> I mean, there'll definitely be guns

[18:33] displayed. I mean, it is a retail shop.

[18:35] That is the intention is to sell the

[18:37] firearms, but again, it's not going to

[18:39] be a

[18:40] open you

[18:40] >> pawn shop.

[18:41] >> Yeah, it's not a pawn shop by any

[18:43] stretch. Yeah, generally, our rifles are

[18:44] going to be Someone's going to walk out

[18:46] of there spending five to twenty

[18:47] thousand dollars on a setup.

[18:49] So, it's it's not

[18:51] run-of-the-mill. Anybody strolls in

[18:53] there and says, "I want to pick

[18:53] something up." It's very much an Alpine

[18:55] level type

[18:57] purchase.

[19:01] » Okay. Any further questions for the

[19:03] applicants? Okay. Thank you, gentlemen.

[19:04] Appreciate it.

[19:05] >> Thank you.

[19:07] >> Um okay. Does anybody have any follow-up

[19:09] questions for Cayden?

[19:11] If not, let's go ahead and open for

[19:13] discussion.

[19:17] » Well, I think it looks good.

[19:18] >> Okay.

[19:19] >> It's kind of good.

[19:22] » You You You really cannot hear you on on

[19:25] YouTube.

[19:26] >> YouTube.

[19:27] >> Yeah.

[19:27] >> It looks really good.

[19:29] >> Okay.

[19:30] >> [laughter]

[19:30] >> Thank you, Sue's.

[19:31] You don't necessarily love the product,

[19:33] but you like the building.

[19:34] >> Well, I can see if it if it's functional

[19:38] like in resist probably resist rust. I

[19:40] mean, I'm sure this is a new

[19:43] metal that's being fabricated for

[19:44] weather and and stuff like that.

[19:46] Probably really

[19:47] >> Yeah.

[19:47] >> much better than

[19:48] >> Yeah, and and

[19:49] >> some of the things that are out there, I

[19:51] think even stucco, but that's just a

[19:53] personal opinion. I just think it looks

[19:54] so good with the brick in the dark. But,

[19:57] um we were pretty picky about those materials we kind of settled on. But, this is in

[20:03] other places.

[20:05] So, we have to remember that, too.

[20:06] >> This is what?

[20:07] >> It is in other places.

[20:08] >> On Main Street?

[20:09] >> Yeah. On Main Street.

[20:11] >> Yeah, and and it's also true as we've

[20:13] looked at a lot of the more kind of

[20:15] I mean, traditional materials in a

[20:17] modern building, a lot of them do

[20:19] incorporate the

[20:20] >> Mhm.

[20:20] >> um

[20:22] the the a aluminum ACM, aluminum

[20:24] composite material. You know what? The

[20:26] acronym makes sense if I know what it

[20:28] stands for. So, all right, the ACM

[20:29] material. I mean, it is in a lot of the

[20:31] newer buildings using traditional red

[20:33] brick and awnings and other things that

[20:35] we've looked at that we, you know, think

[20:37] would look good in the future. So,

[20:39] >> um Okay. Thank you, Sue's.

[20:41] >> Mhm.

[20:42] >> So, just confirming there's not a

[20:43] shooting range in the building? It's

[20:45] just retail.

[20:46] >> It's too long range.

[20:48] >> The building's not big enough.

[20:49] >> The building wouldn't last very long.

[20:51] >> Yeah, I was going to say that.

[20:52] >> That's what I learned in that school. I

[20:53] learned about [laughter] guns. Learned

[20:54] about that. That's cool.

[20:57] >> I I have a question about the rendering

[20:58] here. The

[21:01] lengthwise road is actually 200 North.

[21:04] Is that right?

[21:04] >> Yes.

[21:05] >> Yeah.

[21:06] >> That's correct. Yeah.

[21:08] >> So, in the renderings for

[21:10] >> pretty accurate with the colors and

[21:12] everything. It's Okay.

[21:14] >> Looks good.

[21:14] >> Yeah, as you come up Main Street to 200

[21:16] North, turn left. I I John, you drove right past it, I

[21:20] think, cuz I pulled it I I turned right right after you. So, we drove

[21:23] right past it. Right next to the kind of

[21:25] the cabin on the corner.

[21:27] Or the the cabin type home on the

[21:28] corner.

[21:29] >> Oh.

[21:30] >> [laughter]

[21:34] » Oh, oh, you're going to have some Okay.

[21:36] I just wanted to I thought you

[21:38] >> Um yeah, I I don't want to put words in

[21:41] the applicant's mouth, but with respect

[21:42] to traffic concerns, I think it's very

[21:45] low volume.

[21:46] Probably

[21:48] I don't know if it's quite appointment

[21:49] only, but almost appointment only sales.

[21:52] Um I I I don't I would just

[21:57] I mean, I suppose we could have the

[21:58] applicants come up and and um

[22:01] address the traffic issue. Your thoughts

[22:02] on traffic?

[22:06] It is worth asking the question.

[22:08] >> Yeah, absolutely. So,

[22:10] I should have looked up the numbers

[22:11] before I came down here, but I would say

[22:12] in a given month

[22:14] I might have a dozen people come by,

[22:17] if that. Um

[22:19] and they're there for

[22:20] usually for 15 minutes to pick something

[22:22] up, sometimes longer to chat about

[22:24] things. So, yeah, I mean, traffic is

[22:26] shouldn't be a concern. I'm doing this

[22:28] out of my cul-de-sac in my home right

[22:30] now, and my neighbors have no complaints

[22:32] or issues with it. So, my goal is not to

[22:34] have a huge high volume. If anything,

[22:36] I'd like online to be the prominent side

[22:38] of it. I don't want to be there all day

[22:39] long. I do software sales, and I teach

[22:41] people how to shoot long range. I I

[22:43] really don't want to sit there all the

[22:45] time. It's really

[22:46] >> Well, I know my cousin's a talker. If he

[22:47] shows up, he will be there all day long

[22:49] with you.

[22:49] >> That's fine. It's just

[22:51] >> Okay.

[22:53] >> As far as the parking, the sidewalk, are

[22:55] you that whole area will be open to the

[22:58] street?

[22:59] >> I I that's the idea.

[23:01] >> There won't be any buffer. The parking

[23:03] lot will dump completely onto the street

[23:06] and the sidewalk will end for that full

[23:07] span.

[23:10] » That is how it's designed right now,

[23:13] because the parking is just in the front

[23:14] right there. So, the sidewalk will go

[23:16] through.

[23:18] But, you know, yeah. But, it will be

[23:20] just connected to the street.

[23:23] >> Well, if you go back to the last

[23:24] rendering, it ends

[23:26] >> It had a little

[23:27] >> in a circle.

[23:29] >> median the strip, but I don't think

[23:31] that's

[23:32] >> It will have to end in a in a low down,

[23:34] right? A walk down? What do you call

[23:36] that? A ramp?

[23:36] >> Yes. Yes. A ramp. Yes.

[23:38] >> It will really end in a ramp.

[23:38] >> Yes.

[23:39] >> Not this rendering here.

[23:41] >> Yeah, that's probably not.

[23:43] >> Both sides will be ramped.

[23:44] >> Uh yeah, so the sidewalk from the

[23:47] driveway side would just ramp down into

[23:49] the asphalt there. And that little

[23:51] pinnacle comes out right there, and

[23:53] that's kind of showed on the you know,

[23:55] where that would be tied together right

[23:57] there.

[24:00] So, both sidewalks will ramp down into

[24:03] that parking.

[24:06] » [clears throat]

[24:06] >> Yeah, if I under- stand the site plan

[24:08] correctly, Commissioner, I think it's

[24:09] pretty similar to our parking out here

[24:11] in front of City Hall.

[24:13] I think that's how it will be.

[24:17] » So, no sidewalk.

[24:21] Do we have a sidewalk out here? I can't

[24:22] even remember right now.

[24:23] >> No.

[24:24] >> With the sidewalk though, so better than

[24:26] we have out here.

[24:31] » I'm I'm hearing two two different things

[24:33] here. You're saying no sidewalk,

[24:36] that it's ramping down on both sides

[24:37] going into the parking lot.

[24:39] Or you're going to carry a sidewalk

[24:40] across?

[24:41] >> Well, so the sidewalk over there right

[24:44] now, there is a curve

[24:46] that goes, you know, to to the sidewalk.

[24:49] >> Yeah.

[24:49] >> But, to access the parking lot, we would

[24:51] have to cut that.

[24:53] You know, and make it uh uh,

[24:55] approach, if you want to say

[24:57] >> city hall

[24:59] has a concrete sidewalk that you

[25:02] walk and drive over, right?

[25:04] >> Yeah. So, that's what I was thinking.

[25:06] >> You were thinking concrete all the way

[25:09] in front of the asphalt.

[25:11] >> Yeah. So, you'd come up the ramp over

[25:13] just kind of like a normal driveway.

[25:14] You'd come up over the ramp onto the

[25:17] cross the sidewalk and into the parking

[25:18] lot. But, that sidewalk with the back

[25:21] side of the parking lot would be the

[25:22] same level as the sidewalk.

[25:25] >> That's fine.

[25:25] >> Cuz it is There is a curb, yeah. You

[25:27] know, from the sidewalk to the road, so.

[25:29] >> Got it.

[25:31] Okay.

[25:37] thank you.

[25:39] Appreciate it.

[25:42] Okay, further discussion, concerns?

[25:45] Questions?

[25:46] >> I mean,

[25:47] here's my concern.

[25:50] And that is what are we going to do with

[25:52] the site plan?

[25:54] And what are we going to allow and what

[25:56] are we not going to allow? So, this

[25:58] clearly is not something that we've

[26:01] considered

[26:02] even though it exists. So, are we going

[26:05] to change the site plan and stick to

[26:07] that or or what? So, that's my question.

[26:13] » I'm sorry, we hadn't considered what?

[26:15] Siding, is that what you're saying?

[26:16] >> No, the the the site plan, the what

[26:19] we've been talking about for the last

[26:20] year

[26:22] on materials.

[26:23] ACM is not listed.

[26:26] >> No, it's not.

[26:26] >> Yeah.

[26:27] And it and and especially the last month

[26:33] we've had these discussions over and

[26:34] over again about what we want. Now, we

[26:37] could say, "Oh, it's on 200 North. It's

[26:40] off of Main Street, so we're not going

[26:43] to consider it." But,

[26:45] that's that's an option, right?

[26:47] >> Well, it's actually on Main Street.

[26:48] Alpine Fitness Center is made out of the

[26:50] same things.

[26:51] >> That's correct, but this is not on Main Street. This is on 200 North.

[26:56] It's just off of Main Street by one

[26:58] house.

[26:59] >> But it's still Gateway Historic

[27:01] District.

[27:03] >> I think so.

[27:04] >> Correct.

[27:04] >> I I don't I don't know how far east or

[27:08] far or how far west

[27:10] that Gateway Historic goes.

[27:13] >> I believe it goes a few properties

[27:15] further

[27:16] >> What What's What's a few?

[27:17] >> from this one?

[27:17] >> Two, three, tens?

[27:19] >> No.

[27:20] I think max three.

[27:22] >> Three?

[27:22] >> Yeah. Might be less.

[27:24] >> Okay. Well, we need to know.

[27:26] >> Yeah.

[27:26] >> And

[27:27] >> Well, it would be allowable anyway.

[27:30] Long as it's in the commercial district.

[27:32] >> You're saying two different things.

[27:32] >> Yes.

[27:34] >> You're saying that it's not part of the

[27:35] commercial district ACM?

[27:37] With the site plan, the new historic

[27:39] gateway.

[27:40] >> Me?

[27:41] >> Yeah.

[27:41] >> Yes, correct. That is That is not been

[27:43] something that we have considered in the

[27:45] last year.

[27:46] >> True.

[27:47] >> Okay. That's That's where I'm saying we have a dilemma. We continue to have a

[27:52] dilemma.

[27:53] So

[27:54] >> Yeah, so I think So, let me just just

[27:56] summarize what you're saying is that I

[27:57] think we're all going to agree that this site plan in front of us is within

[28:02] the Gateway Historic District.

[28:04] >> I I want to ask I Okay.

[28:06] >> It is.

[28:07] >> Correct.

[28:07] >> Okay.

[28:07] >> Correct, Hayden?

[28:09] >> Yes.

[28:09] >> It is. All right.

[28:10] >> Okay.

[28:10] >> So, it is subject to the

[28:14] design standards.

[28:15] Right? Of the Gateway Historic District

[28:17] Design Guidelines.

[28:18] >> Yes.

[28:20] >> We do state that the use of stone,

[28:22] brick, wood, or stucco is encouraged for

[28:24] use as a primary exterior material.

[28:28] We do not have that We do not have a

[28:30] within those design standards

[28:32] ACM or metal siding.

[28:35] It is also true that projects from the

[28:38] past, including

[28:41] the fitness center,

[28:43] um

[28:44] >> [clears throat]

[28:45] >> do have some version of

[28:48] some form of a of a metal siding,

[28:50] whether it's ACM or whatever type of

[28:52] metal siding.

[28:53] >> Correct.

[28:55] >> [clears throat]

[28:57] >> So, all those things are true.

[28:59] >> And again, it's the it's the dilemma.

[29:02] >> It's We're not ex- The guidelines do not

[29:05] specify these are the only materials.

[29:07] >> Right. We we can't approve them.

[29:08] >> They're the primary materials, and it

[29:10] further states that other alternatives

[29:12] >> Correct.

[29:15] >> Right.

[29:15] >> Well, let's say you have okay. So, under

[29:17] the current guidelines, right?

[29:18] Innovative use of other materials that

[29:21] mimic the primary exterior materials

[29:24] listed may be considered, okay?

[29:27] >> Which this does not.

[29:28] >> Which does not, right? Because we do not

[29:30] have a primary primary material that is

[29:32] metal.

[29:33] >> Correct.

[29:34] >> Okay. So, Jeff's correct about that. I

[29:36] would also say, right? Or I know

[29:39] for example, we had a

[29:43] application in front of us just a couple

[29:45] of weeks ago

[29:46] >> Yep.

[29:47] >> where we were discouraging the use of

[29:50] for example that was painted ceramic

[29:53] siding, right? Which is

[29:58] not anywhere delineated in the design

[30:00] standards.

[30:00] >> Correct.

[30:01] >> Um and also we were

[30:04] um

[30:05] >> [clears throat]

[30:06] >> not enthusiastic about

[30:09] faux wood siding or synthetic wood

[30:11] siding, right? Even though

[30:13] you know, that that's under bullet point

[30:15] B or second bullet point, innovative use

[30:18] of other materials that mimic the

[30:19] primary exterior materials like wood

[30:23] listed may be considered. So,

[30:26] >> [clears throat and cough]

[30:27] >> Jeff is not wrong when he indicates that

[30:29] there is nothing in our gateway historic

[30:32] district design standards that allow

[30:34] the proposed ACM material.

[30:37] >> But it's not

[30:39] Would you consider it a primary

[30:40] material? Cuz I mean, the brick is like

[30:42] 2/3 or 3/4 of the building.

[30:45] >> Brick is not 3/4 of the building. Put it

[30:47] Put up the thing again.

[30:48] >> Stucco and the brick it is.

[30:49] >> Yeah, okay.

[30:50] Yes.

[30:52] >> I don't know.

[30:53] >> So, that's my question.

[30:56] I have one for you.

[30:57] >> Well, yeah.

[30:58] >> mimic versus complement?

[31:00] >> I'm sorry?

[31:01] >> It really complements those those things

[31:03] we have put in. I think it complements

[31:06] it, but mimic it's

[31:08] >> I'm not saying that this is not

[31:09] beautiful. That's not what I'm saying.

[31:12] we are continue to have an

[31:15] issue

[31:17] as a planning commission.

[31:19] And it's like what are we What standard

[31:21] are we going to have in the main in the

[31:23] Gateway Historic District?

[31:26] And this This is not what we've talked about the last year.

[31:31] So, I'm like, okay, are we going to Are

[31:32] we going to start the discussions all

[31:34] over?

[31:36] Or not?

[31:40] I mean that That's the struggle. And

[31:42] then and then and then we have City

[31:44] Council and I'm sure there's the City

[31:46] Council members that are listening

[31:48] tonight. And we we've gone round and

[31:50] round this last 6 weeks with the fire

[31:53] station.

[31:55] And And so, I'm like, okay, well, what

[31:57] are we going to do? Is this beautiful?

[31:59] Yes, it's beautiful.

[32:02] And And And do we want to take a poll of

[32:05] the whole city and go, is this what we want? Well, that's what

[32:09] we've been working on for 2 years.

[32:11] This is not

[32:13] This In my understanding, this is not

[32:16] what all of the money and time and

[32:18] effort has come to say, this is what we

[32:21] want

[32:22] Main Street to look like.

[32:25] Is it beautiful? Yeah, but that's But

[32:27] that's not, you know, and you can go,

[32:28] well, what about Alpine Fitness? Yeah,

[32:30] well, that happened before we started

[32:33] this 3-year or 2 and 1/2 year process.

[32:37] >> It was it was approved with the same

[32:39] design guidelines that we're looking at

[32:41] today, which is all we can do.

[32:43] >> Right.

[32:44] Yeah.

[32:44] >> And and we're still waiting for the

[32:47] >> I I I agree.

[32:47] >> small

[32:50] >> put into ordinance what we want.

[32:52] >> Yeah, I agree.

[32:53] >> know why you're dying on your hill here.

[32:56] >> Because because it's like

[33:01] in my opinion, we're like, "Okay, we're

[33:05] just going to keep going down down this

[33:07] path

[33:08] against what we've tried to work through

[33:12] the last 2 and 1/2 years." That's what

[33:14] I'm That's And And we did that with the

[33:18] fire station.

[33:21] And, you know, and one could argue that

[33:23] what we ended up with number two was

[33:26] worse than what we started with.

[33:28] You could argue that.

[33:31] But, again, we were trying and we spent

[33:33] so much effort

[33:35] to say, "Okay, we want to we want this

[33:39] look, you know?" And we've given this

[33:41] name of Utah historic. Well, that this

[33:44] definitely is not Utah historic.

[33:47] It

[33:47] unless someone wants to redefine Utah

[33:50] historic for me. All right? So, I'm not

[33:53] saying it's not beautiful.

[33:56] But,

[33:58] you know, we'll we could just throw out

[34:01] every all the effort and just say,

[34:03] "Okay, we want stuff that looks like

[34:05] Alpine Fitness Center and this building.

[34:07] That's what we want on Main Street." We

[34:09] could do that. But, that go to me that

[34:11] goes against

[34:12] all of the effort that's happened in the

[34:15] last 2 and 1/2 years.

[34:17] >> So, um just so so a little additional

[34:19] color, and this is again the fire

[34:22] station's a bit of anomaly for for

[34:25] reasons that that we kind of know,

[34:27] right? For example, planning commission

[34:30] came in came in front of us late in the

[34:32] game.

[34:33] And you know, we won't say much more

[34:35] about that.

[34:36] And [clears throat] we also know we're

[34:38] kind of in a transition from the current

[34:40] guidelines which

[34:42] we need to apply.

[34:44] And

[34:46] future

[34:47] recommendations that we have discussed.

[34:50] For example, last time that that I think

[34:52] you weren't at I think you were out of

[34:53] town for the last meeting.

[34:55] So um

[34:57] during the just

[34:59] communications portion, right? I took

[35:01] about 15 minutes and just had a little

[35:03] discussion [clears throat] over

[35:05] you know

[35:06] what do we want buildings to look like

[35:08] in the future, right? Again, to

[35:10] understand that right right now we're

[35:11] applying current guidelines.

[35:13] We're in the process of working on

[35:16] future architectural guidelines for the

[35:19] Gateway Historic District. Um

[35:22] I brought pictures and showed examples

[35:24] of

[35:25] buildings that we thought were

[35:27] attractive. For example, down in in

[35:30] Pleasant Grove along the whatever that

[35:32] new drive is all the way down to

[35:35] Yeah, North North County Boulevard.

[35:38] Um

[35:38] those red brick buildings with black

[35:40] accents, some you know, what do you call

[35:42] them, John? Concrete lintels or whatever

[35:45] with with black metal overhangs, timber

[35:48] supports, dark

[35:51] fixtures that come out of the building.

[35:52] Very nice looking, right?

[35:54] And

[35:58] just the name that we have come up with

[36:00] is you know, perhaps not you Utah

[36:02] traditional Utah historic. We're still

[36:04] working on that, right? So in other

[36:06] words, it's not going to necessarily

[36:07] look like a building that's 100 years

[36:09] old, but a

[36:11] bit of a modern interpretation of with

[36:13] those types of materials, right? Red

[36:15] brick,

[36:16] black framed rectangular windows,

[36:19] some metal accents, overhangs,

[36:22] those types of things with then you

[36:24] know, again, so of the architectural

[36:27] um

[36:31] accents that that we've talked about.

[36:34] Um which

[36:36] um

[36:37] this building

[36:39] But we have but one thing we haven't

[36:40] really talked about is this metal

[36:42] siding, right? Is that something that

[36:44] you know, it's it has happened in Alpine in the

[36:48] past.

[36:49] It's not necessarily in the current

[36:51] architectural guidelines. It may or may

[36:54] not be

[36:56] I would say it wouldn't be out of

[36:58] character if

[37:00] we ended up with

[37:02] amendments to the small area plan that

[37:03] we have proposed and then we took those

[37:05] amendments and implemented them as we

[37:08] amended the guidelines and then

[37:10] recommended to city council, right? So,

[37:13] but that's a give-and-take process. I

[37:15] don't know where that's ending up

[37:16] either, right? It's

[37:18] you know

[37:20] forward-looking Utah traditional if I

[37:22] don't I don't we you know, we're still

[37:24] what we're still struggling with all

[37:25] that. But but what we do you know, what

[37:27] we do have is what's right in front of

[37:28] us. So, um

[37:31] I guess it comes down to just a

[37:34] of

[37:36] >> personal preference?

[37:37] >> Well, not really personal preference

[37:39] because I I you know, I mean I mean I'm

[37:40] not I'm I'm not insensitive to what

[37:42] you're saying, right? I mean we talk

[37:43] about stone, brick, wood, or stucco.

[37:45] >> One thing that really

[37:47] was illuminating to me in our meeting on

[37:50] Wednesday

[37:51] >> Yeah.

[37:51] >> afternoon

[37:53] uh Chrissy Haneman

[37:55] said or I I I I threw something out. I

[37:57] said, we ought to create a table

[38:00] uh of all the kinds of little

[38:01] embellishments that we're looking for.

[38:04] >> Mhm.

[38:04] >> And we don't want every building to look

[38:06] the same.

[38:07] But if if

[38:09] each

[38:11] project that comes along can

[38:14] create a scoreboard

[38:16] of or scorecard

[38:19] where they get 10 points by selecting

[38:22] certain elements. We can even

[38:25] put different point values on the

[38:26] elements.

[38:28] >> So that we have

[38:29] consistent elements presenting

[38:31] themselves, but they're not all looking

[38:33] the same. We're not trying to create a

[38:34] bunch of bungalows.

[38:35] >> Sure. Sure.

[38:36] >> Um and as I look at at what's before us,

[38:40] we have several of those kinds of

[38:42] elements. We've got uh can you pull the

[38:44] rendering back up?

[38:50] So we've we've got this

[38:52] uh

[38:53] canopy over the

[38:55] uh garage

[38:57] with some supporting decorative

[38:59] elements. What's this vertical black

[39:00] thing? Is that a light fixture?

[39:02] >> That would be where the placement of the

[39:05] sign is going.

[39:07] >> Okay. It's a vertical sign. Okay.

[39:10] got it.

[39:12] All right.

[39:13] We've got the black windows,

[39:15] uh

[39:16] the vertical kind of framing on the

[39:18] windows.

[39:20] The We've got the black garage door,

[39:22] which is also kind of in that same

[39:24] historical look. So I would score this

[39:26] if we had this hypothetical table that

[39:29] we were scoring from, I could throw

[39:32] three to four elements that qualify

[39:35] under this

[39:36] traditional Utah traditional

[39:39] style.

[39:40] And and I would I would say that passes.

[39:44] If we if we end up in that kind of a

[39:46] framework.

[39:47] >> Sure. And then would the would Did you

[39:50] guys also talk about like, "Okay, and

[39:52] then there's an

[39:54] a second table that's like, we're not

[39:57] going to have these things."

[39:58] >> Yeah.

[39:59] >> Okay.

[40:00] >> Yeah.

[40:02] » You know, whatever those are. I mean,

[40:03] I'm

[40:04] >> Yeah, I mean, this this is all, you

[40:05] know, not even wet clay, but it's

[40:08] >> Yeah.

[40:09] >> I

[40:12] » You go ahead. You go.

[40:13] >> I just think that the

[40:16] large flat roof mixed in with the ACM

[40:19] panels is what's throwing it to very

[40:21] modern

[40:23] more warehouse look.

[40:25] I think it's that combo. If we go back

[40:26] to our design standards, there's really

[40:29] no flat roof completely flat like this

[40:33] that that doesn't have any kind of

[40:37] uh variation change grade you know in

[40:40] elevation

[40:42] in those pictures on our Gateway

[40:44] Historic District.

[40:46] >> Is Is the roof elevated it looks like

[40:48] where the glass is?

[40:49] >> Yeah, so that's all flat.

[40:50] >> It did it is like a standard

[40:52] >> That's a shed roof.

[40:53] >> It's a shed to the back slants.

[40:55] >> So the flat roof is above the brick

[40:57] above the garage door and above the

[41:00] apartment area that's kind of that

[41:01] recessed area.

[41:02] >> Yeah, but it slants.

[41:03] >> Everything else is a big slope with big

[41:06] overhangs.

[41:07] >> Yeah, it's slanting away to the back of

[41:08] the property instead of gabeling or

[41:12] >> But that is an element.

[41:13] >> elevation

[41:14] >> Um

[41:15] >> It's a very modern element.

[41:17] >> But we talked about

[41:19] potential criteria as we revise the

[41:22] ordinance to create relief from the in

[41:25] the facade showing different set you

[41:28] know

[41:29] forward back kinds of

[41:31] >> Gives it dimension.

[41:32] >> Yeah, and and this accomplishes that as

[41:35] well.

[41:37] >> The reason for the flat roof was to try

[41:39] to keep the height of that building

[41:41] down over that brick because if that

[41:43] would have been a roof

[41:45] then we're up a lot higher at that

[41:47] point.

[41:47] >> Remember the height.

[41:49] >> Uh that's the tallest point right there

[41:52] is that's about 21 ft

[41:56] >> And by the time you put a peak on that

[41:57] that'd be

[42:00] I mean if you listen to city council you

[42:03] know

[42:04] Nick Geraci's warehouse is facing the

[42:06] same questions.

[42:09] Yeah, we we tabled it last week.

[42:11] >> Yeah.

[42:12] >> Uh

[42:13] and they realized it's a bigger project,

[42:15] bring it back to something that would

[42:17] be compliant.

[42:18] >> Yeah. And again, beautiful. I

[42:21] you know, Nick's not going to Nick Nick

[42:23] will put forth something that's

[42:25] beautiful.

[42:26] But again, it comes back to my question

[42:28] of what do we want?

[42:31] I mean, we're going to be held

[42:33] responsible for decisions. And I mean,

[42:35] ultimately, it's City Council. So, we

[42:37] could make a recommendation and then

[42:39] City Council go, "Ah, no. We're we're

[42:41] going to we're not going to do it or

[42:43] we're going to do it." You know, they end up getting to have the last

[42:47] say.

[42:48] But I think we as a commission

[42:51] really need really need to try to be

[42:54] united in what we want this

[42:59] Main Street corridor to look like.

[43:02] >> Jeff, you're right. We've we've taken

[43:04] years years years to come up with a

[43:06] standard.

[43:07] >> Right. Right. You Yeah, you got to talk.

[43:09] No, you cannot hear your I you cannot

[43:11] hear yourself on YouTube.

[43:12] >> So, we've taken years to come up with a

[43:14] standard. I I I really love what you're

[43:16] saying because we've it's nice to have something that's like here's what we take into

[43:23] consideration with all of these

[43:24] different things. With these different

[43:26] buildings coming in.

[43:27] So, I get what you're saying. Do we

[43:29] throw a lot of that out just because we,

[43:31] you know, the standard really has been

[43:33] established after a lot of work.

[43:39] So, I get what you're saying, but I can

[43:41] all

[43:42] I also see that being something we

[43:44] probably didn't consider as being a very

[43:46] weather tight element in our climate.

[43:52] And it does look good with what we've

[43:53] talked about.

[43:54] >> Okay, so hypothetical for you, right? Um

[43:57] >> [clears throat]

[43:59] >> we we had the 512

[44:03] project that was supposed to be that was

[44:05] supposed to be here tonight that was

[44:06] pulled. And it has or had elements of uh

[44:11] painted ceramic siding, which obviously

[44:13] we don't have any here in the

[44:15] guidelines. And also had um faux wood,

[44:19] >> Fake wood.

[44:20] >> which is probably a a little closer, at

[44:22] least in our guidelines, but we also you

[44:25] know, discourage that as it was also

[44:27] discussion piece in the fireplace I mean

[44:29] the fireplace the fire station, right?

[44:31] So,

[44:33] I I mean, to to Jeff's

[44:36] comment just about consistency in

[44:39] applying the guidelines,

[44:41] I mean, hey, that that's so I

[44:43] acknowledge you know, recognize the

[44:44] problem. But so,

[44:46] Jeff, just a just as a for example, if

[44:48] you looked at this rendering right here

[44:50] and you took out the, you know, I'm not

[44:52] necessarily asking you to be an

[44:53] architect, but apply the guidelines, uh

[44:56] what would you replace the ACM with?

[44:58] Stucco?

[45:00] Stone?

[45:01] >> Don't do stucco.

[45:02] >> More brick?

[45:03] >> Probably brick.

[45:04] >> All brick?

[45:06] >> That's probably what I would do.

[45:09] Because the brick goes more to

[45:15] the look that we've kind of tried to

[45:18] get.

[45:20] >> If you put brick in the main area where

[45:21] you have the two windows, but you kept

[45:23] the ACM, which is the aluminum framing

[45:25] that's kind of framing out the windows,

[45:27] would you have a problem with that?

[45:28] >> No, I would not have a problem with

[45:29] that.

[45:31] >> The the recommendation being what?

[45:33] Say again.

[45:34] >> The area that's in the middle between

[45:36] the garage and uh retail shop, if that

[45:40] ACM was brick,

[45:42] the question was, would you be fine with

[45:44] the ACM that's surrounding the main

[45:46] windows on the right-hand side of this

[45:49] picture?

[45:50] And the answer was, no, I'd be fine with

[45:52] it.

[45:56] » I'd probably be more comfortable with

[45:57] that personally trying to be consistent

[45:59] with our guidelines.

[46:00] >> You what?

[46:01] >> I would I would be more comfortable with

[46:02] that recommendation

[46:04] >> Yeah.

[46:04] >> that that Greg put out there. I would

[46:08] It it's

[46:10] Look, it's

[46:12] tasteful and it's attractive as it as

[46:15] the rendering. It's not terribly

[46:17] consistent with our guidelines and it

[46:20] >> It's so close.

[46:21] >> makes it very difficult 2 weeks from now

[46:24] or 3 weeks from now when we have another

[46:26] applicant before us

[46:28] and we are

[46:30] not consistently applying guidelines.

[46:32] So, I I think I'm

[46:35] with probably with just personally with

[46:37] Greg and Jeff on that that if that

[46:39] little area

[46:40] uh were

[46:41] brick as well instead of ACM

[46:44] um and the rest of the project were you

[46:46] know as the as shown in the rendering, I

[46:49] think that's more consistent with our

[46:51] guidelines.

[46:52] >> I would agree.

[46:52] >> Cute little awning above there.

[46:56] » Please.

[46:56] >> Sure, please.

[46:57] Help us out of this quagmire.

[46:59] >> So, so when I designed it, the reason I

[47:02] went to the ACM is cuz around the

[47:04] windows

[47:05] So, our first thought we were going to

[47:06] use like a black wood siding.

[47:10] And

[47:11] but I didn't like the little tiny pieces

[47:13] going around the windows.

[47:15] So, we could put black vertical siding

[47:18] [snorts] in that center section. It'll

[47:20] keep the same look

[47:22] but it would be a wood siding. Not a not

[47:25] a faux wood, a real, you know, cedar

[47:28] wood siding that's stained black.

[47:30] And then we could keep the ACM around

[47:32] the windows because it's just the way it

[47:34] basically looks like a whole commercial

[47:35] storefront

[47:37] right there with the metal windows.

[47:39] And that would stick kind of into the

[47:43] your guidelines.

[47:45] I think if we do brick, I my opinion

[47:48] designing is that just going to look

[47:49] like a

[47:50] >> It's heavy.

[47:50] >> It's not going to look as good.

[47:52] >> Is Is that

[47:53] >> I like it broken up.

[47:54] >> Is that cedar siding what's on Mondella?

[47:59] There's a

[48:00] small amount of on Mondella that has the

[48:04] I don't know what the wood is though.

[48:06] It's the wood that has the little piece

[48:08] in between it.

[48:09] >> Well, that's a board and batten. That's

[48:10] board and batten. I've got a sample of

[48:12] the black siding in my truck that I

[48:14] forgot to bring in. If you give me a

[48:15] minute, I'll run out there and bring it

[48:17] in.

[48:17] >> I think Mondella has some board and

[48:19] batten in in the upper

[48:23] kind of upper eve area.

[48:24] >> What the point he's making is if he puts

[48:26] wood in there that it does meet the

[48:27] city's historic standard.

[48:29] >> It does.

[48:29] >> Does

[48:30] >> Okay.

[48:31] >> Does is the wood as durable? I mean,

[48:34] cuz I see a lot of

[48:35] you know, siding things that

[48:37] look pretty bad if you don't maintain

[48:39] them.

[48:39] >> Well.

[48:40] >> That's that's an argument that ACM is a great product. I own a company

[48:46] that fabricates ACM and I think it's a

[48:49] great product. All I can say.

[48:50] >> And and and it may be it may be a

[48:53] material that we consider future for the

[48:56] future, but it is

[48:59] not a material currently in our

[49:00] guidelines.

[49:01] >> Being consistent is a big deal right

[49:04] now. Jeff, you're right.

[49:06] What's going on?

[49:08] >> Where are you thinking

[49:10] Michelle on Mondella?

[49:13] >> As I drove past it tonight,

[49:17] there's some

[49:19] I just saw it.

[49:20] >> I mean, it's basically stucco and stone.

[49:23] >> See that top layer where there's black.

[49:25] >> Oh, on at the very Well, on the roof?

[49:28] >> Near the roof.

[49:29] There's black up there.

[49:31] >> What at the very top of the chimney?

[49:33] >> Yeah, near the the top. Well, everyone

[49:35] has a different look. It was on an

[49:37] interior one.

[49:39] You've got a swing into the

[49:44] Are you on the

[49:45] >> Yeah, I'm just looking at it.

[49:46] >> Yeah.

[49:48] >> I'll say nothing and won't say anymore,

[49:49] but as I just listened, and ACM is not

[49:52] on the excluded list unless I missed

[49:54] that. I heard an excluded list and I did

[49:56] not hear ACM.

[50:00] » We didn't know about it.

[50:03] Let me see that.

[50:05] >> Yeah, we don't really have an excluded

[50:07] list.

[50:07] >> Yeah, there isn't I was just cuz there

[50:08] really isn't an excluded list. It just

[50:11] says

[50:11] >> future ordinances.

[50:12] >> Yeah, yeah.

[50:13] >> It has a primary setback rate and then

[50:16] Yeah, I mean we redesigned the entire

[50:17] building based on the last meeting we

[50:19] had where the same material was shot

[50:21] down then as well. So, we pretty much

[50:23] went from

[50:24] flip-flopped, right? We've gone all

[50:26] brick even though that wasn't

[50:27] necessarily what we wanted, you know,

[50:28] brick and stucco with just a little bit

[50:30] of what we wanted. The other comment I

[50:32] would make is you mentioned the

[50:34] buildings down on Pleasant Run Boulevard

[50:36] and down towards the play at the town

[50:37] that very that same look. Also, over by

[50:40] the Walmart in Cedar Hills. That's

[50:41] exactly what we had.

[50:42] >> ACM.

[50:43] >> Inspiration.

[50:44] >> That was literally the inspiration

[50:45] photos we sent. So, we're literally

[50:46] trying to go for that very traditional

[50:48] red brick, old glass look with just

[50:51] a touch of

[50:53] modern to make it look like a new

[50:54] building and not an old

[50:56] brick fortress.

[50:57] >> Right.

[50:58] >> Meant to have a beautiful aesthetic

[50:59] value that it really fits with the

[51:01] aesthetic of Alpine. It's a beautiful

[51:03] high-end community.

[51:05] So, how was that then?

[51:10] » I don't think that even

[51:14] » Mhm?

[51:14] >> I don't know what we're going to do for

[51:15] now.

[51:20] Okay.

[51:30] » Mr. Chairman, does the code say that it

[51:32] can assimilate an approved material?

[51:35] Because ACM, I believe, can have

[51:37] multiple exterior

[51:40] looks. So, you can get ACM so it looks

[51:42] like wood.

[51:43] >> Yeah, they showed us that a year ago.

[51:45] They brought in the ACM that looked like

[51:47] wood. I remember we

[51:49] >> Oh, that's right. That was

[51:51] >> We said no.

[51:52] to the

[51:53] >> It wasn't It wasn't attractive. It It

[51:54] looked like siding.

[51:55] >> It Yeah.

[52:11] » What are you circling?

[52:13] >> [laughter]

[52:15] >> Underline.

[52:17] >> Exclamation mark.

[52:19] >> Yeah.

[52:19] >> Highlighter.

[52:21] >> If I could make one more comment, I

[52:23] mean, we need to do

[52:25] vertical wood paneling,

[52:27] I think it was looking exactly like the

[52:29] ACM. It just wear out and fade and

[52:32] >> The maintenance.

[52:33] >> maintenance, whereas

[52:34] >> Oh, sure.

[52:35] >> It's true.

[52:40] » That's kind of 20-year guarantee stain

[52:42] on

[52:43] the stuff.

[52:45] That is That is solid wood.

[52:46] >> Yeah.

[52:48] there is a maintenance problem.

[52:50] I hate maintenance.

[52:51] >> good.

[52:51] >> Does it smell The ACM doesn't smell like

[52:53] that.

[52:54] >> [laughter]

[52:55] >> Smells like Is that treated wood?

[52:56] >> Like a hamster cage.

[52:58] >> That's actually two pieces of southern

[52:59] pine that doesn't have knots. It's

[53:02] grade one, so

[53:05] Yeah.

[53:09] What?

[53:10] >> We're checking these out for you.

[53:11] >> Oh.

[53:15] » Thanks a lot.

[53:21] » You want to see this?

[53:22] >> Yeah.

[53:23] >> You want to touch it?

[53:24] >> I see I Yeah, it's awesome. It's just a

[53:26] lot of maintenance.

[53:28] Sorry, Jeff, but I see that as

[53:29] maintenance.

[53:32] Thank you.

[53:33] >> me to take it off your hands?

[53:34] >> Yeah.

[53:35] >> Thanks for bring Thanks for bringing

[53:37] that.

[53:37] >> out back.

[53:38] Not getting hit. I know.

[53:41] Oh.

[53:41] >> [laughter]

[53:42] >> And then, sorry from the traffic

[53:45] tonight.

[53:47] » Okay.

[53:48] Yep, go ahead.

[53:50] >> Stand in front of the first row.

[53:53] >> I held that vertically.

[53:55] >> I get it right there.

[53:58] » So you see that little bit of help.

[54:00] On the vertical side.

[54:02] >> That looks to me

[54:04] like the ACM will

[54:06] >> Yeah.

[54:07] that's similar to that.

[54:08] >> You can make the ACM gaps bigger or

[54:10] smaller.

[54:11] You can make the gaps whatever you want.

[54:14] >> I don't think you're going to tell a

[54:15] difference.

[54:16] >> Not from a distance. You won't tell

[54:18] anything.

[54:18] >> But then again, if

[54:20] you know, it's the letter of the law,

[54:21] then I mean, maybe we should you know.

[54:24] Well, okay. Two things are true, right?

[54:26] Let me go through guidelines real quick.

[54:28] Cuz this is

[54:31] what we're doing our best to apply.

[54:33] >> Yeah.

[54:34] >> Guidelines, new developments should

[54:37] mimic details of older buildings,

[54:40] use similar materials,

[54:42] make mundane uses look good, include

[54:44] design features on blank walls, okay?

[54:47] So, those are guidelines as to new

[54:49] developments.

[54:52] >> [clears throat]

[54:56] » And then, as we've stated,

[54:58] um

[54:59] >> [clears throat]

[54:59] >> again, these guidelines predate us, but

[55:01] they are what we do our best to

[55:03] interpret.

[55:04] The use of stone, brick, wood, or stucco

[55:06] is encouraged, as circled by my friend

[55:10] Mr. Butterfield,

[55:11] is encouraged for use as the primary

[55:13] exterior material.

[55:15] Innovative use of other materials that

[55:17] mimic the primary exterior materials

[55:19] listed may be considered.

[55:25] » Okay, when those were given to us,

[55:27] this ACM probably wasn't on the market.

[55:31] So, we're going backwards as far as that

[55:33] goes with

[55:34] maintenance and all those different

[55:35] things that are such a positive. Jeff,

[55:38] do you agree?

[55:39] >> I would I would agree.

[55:40] >> So, the look to me

[55:43] is the same, what we're going for,

[55:45] but it's something that's going to be so

[55:47] much weather better for weather, sun,

[55:50] everything. No Nobody wants painted wood

[55:52] on their commercial building.

[55:55] I don't know. That's just me. And we're

[55:56] trying so hard to honor that and to be

[55:58] true to it, but if we're looking at

[56:00] something that wasn't even on the market

[56:02] when that was written,

[56:04] >> And I

[56:04] >> we're just like going backwards.

[56:07] But,

[56:08] >> I agree with Sue's

[56:09] >> I want to have that what you're saying.

[56:11] We got

[56:11] >> Yeah, I mean, we There seems like

[56:13] there's two issues. There There's a

[56:15] material thing, right? And so, on the

[56:17] material side,

[56:19] I I'm really not against going, "Oh,

[56:22] okay.

[56:23] Maybe ACM is

[56:27] a material that we can that we can accept."

[56:33] We can We could do that. You know, we

[56:35] could make a recommendation and and say

[56:37] we want to we That That's That's one of

[56:41] the issues. Is Is ACM going to be an

[56:44] approved material, right?

[56:48] Or not. But, the But, the And the second

[56:51] is

[56:52] okay, is this Is this the look that we

[56:56] want?

[56:58] So, that's That's That's what I'm

[57:00] getting at here. There's two things.

[57:02] Material

[57:03] and is this the look?

[57:05] >> Does this look too modern to you?

[57:07] >> [clears throat]

[57:07] >> Is that what you're Cuz those look a lot

[57:09] like the pictures we looked at last

[57:11] week.

[57:11] >> Yeah. It It does It does look modern.

[57:14] >> bugging you?

[57:15] >> It's not that it's bugging me.

[57:17] What's bugging me is

[57:21] can we Can we come together as a

[57:24] commission

[57:26] and say this is the look that we want?

[57:30] Maybe this is the look. Maybe Maybe the

[57:32] look is Alpine Fitness and this.

[57:36] But I don't I don't think that that's

[57:40] what the community has asked for.

[57:44] So that's that's what I'm saying and and

[57:47] I could be wrong, you know, could be

[57:49] you know, uh six to one.

[57:52] And that yep, six people say, "Yep, this

[57:54] is the look that the community has asked

[57:57] for. So we're overriding you, Jeff."

[57:59] >> think if I zoom in with something

[58:01] similar, say somebody builds right here

[58:03] and they see

[58:03] >> Well, I know what's I I know what's next

[58:05] to it. What's next to it? Right next door is the is the Pan's

[58:11] Cabin.

[58:12] Which is not any quarter close to this.

[58:15] >> Yeah, but that's totally residential.

[58:17] That's kind of This is commercial,

[58:18] that's residential.

[58:19] >> Well, you you have you have residential

[58:21] on both sides.

[58:22] >> Yeah, you do.

[58:23] >> But they're zoned commercial.

[58:25] >> Yes, I I agree. Yeah, I agree.

[58:28] >> But yeah, what's hard is you're not

[58:29] seeing in this picture the real life

[58:32] image. It's been left off what's to the

[58:34] right and the left of it.

[58:35] >> Yeah.

[58:35] >> They've shown, you know, 20 ft of grass.

[58:38] Well, that's not correct.

[58:40] >> Yeah.

[58:40] >> This is a 10 and a 20-ft setback with

[58:42] the home right really pretty pretty

[58:44] tight.

[58:45] >> Yeah.

[58:45] >> And so it's hard to see the whole view

[58:47] because we're given this memorialized

[58:51] [snorts]

[58:51] view.

[58:52] >> True.

[58:53] >> Yeah.

[58:57] So you know, so again, it's this

[59:00] I I I hope we can, you know, and and

[59:03] Allen already said, you know, they I

[59:06] wasn't here, you know, at our last

[59:08] meeting, but you went over pictures and pictures. And so does does

[59:13] this match what

[59:17] you guys talked about or not?

[59:19] >> If this Planning Commission and the City

[59:24] Council were to adopt and use a lot of

[59:28] the the pictures in the more

[59:29] contemporary red brick buildings uh

[59:33] going in up and down the the North Utah

[59:36] County corridor.

[59:38] This would fit

[59:40] >> Okay.

[59:40] >> with those.

[59:41] >> Okay.

[59:42] >> Yeah.

[59:43] And even things that could be same

[59:45] material.

[59:46] >> I mean if you Yeah, if you look at the

[59:47] Cedar Hills fire station, if you look at

[59:49] the the the red brick buildings that

[59:50] have gone in and in and around you know,

[59:53] right there by the um shiny shell cars

[59:55] or whatever. It's just south of just

[59:57] south of uh

[1:00:00] um

[1:00:01] Walmart. And we also looked at those

[1:00:03] Ezra Lee condominium buildings that are

[1:00:06] just they're on the roundabout just

[1:00:08] behind the Walmart. Uh we look at those

[1:00:11] which this would be quite consistent

[1:00:13] with.

[1:00:14] And then again, we talked about the uh

[1:00:16] um

[1:00:16] the buildings as you get down, you know,

[1:00:18] on the right side as you're headed

[1:00:19] south, a lot of those red brick

[1:00:21] buildings with a lot of the black fascia

[1:00:24] canopies

[1:00:25] uh broken up with, you know, I I I had

[1:00:27] to look what kind of dark materials it

[1:00:28] is, but some kind of dark material.

[1:00:31] >> Uh sure.

[1:00:32] >> That's the new police department in

[1:00:34] Lehi.

[1:00:35] Downtown Lehi brand new building.

[1:00:37] There's multiple uses in there, but

[1:00:39] I got a terrible picture. You can tell

[1:00:42] it's from the video we talked to y'all

[1:00:43] about last Saturday.

[1:00:44] That right there is probably exactly

[1:00:46] what the police

[1:00:47] So, do you think that would do you think

[1:00:48] that would work?

[1:00:49] Like you can blend with that is all I'm

[1:00:51] saying.

[1:00:52] >> Yeah.

[1:00:53] >> What do you think about Jeff?

[1:00:54] >> I don't know.

[1:00:55] >> Okay. I think we've I think we know the

[1:00:57] issues then. Um

[1:00:59] does does any further discussion or does

[1:01:01] anybody want to make a motion? Let's

[1:01:02] just see where we are as a commission.

[1:01:04] >> Yeah, let's let's see.

[1:01:05] >> Yeah.

[1:01:06] I I am.

[1:01:07] >> But that could go with that, right? Like

[1:01:09] you

[1:01:10] those could go

[1:01:11] >> I kind of like not adding ACM to our

[1:01:15] recommended primary materials list

[1:01:17] because then that kind of gives us the

[1:01:19] option that we have now.

[1:01:21] We have the option to sure, sprinkle it

[1:01:23] in there or whatever, right? I think,

[1:01:25] but

[1:01:26] anyway,

[1:01:27] just to kind of address I don't think

[1:01:28] >> Sure.

[1:01:29] >> adding it as

[1:01:30] >> I I think that's a good point, Troy.

[1:01:32] >> Maybe.

[1:01:34] » Ready for a motion?

[1:01:36] >> I am.

[1:01:38] >> Well, we are.

[1:01:39] >> All right, I'd like to move that we

[1:01:42] approve to the city council of the

[1:01:44] proposed site plan for the new Long

[1:01:46] Range Shooters of Utah commercial

[1:01:48] building

[1:01:49] with the following conditions or

[1:01:51] recommendations. Number one, that the

[1:01:53] city make sure that

[1:01:55] uh

[1:01:56] from a legal standpoint or statute

[1:01:58] standpoint, city state laws allowing

[1:02:00] guns to be sold uh near residences or

[1:02:05] the school

[1:02:07] that we ask that the builder and the

[1:02:10] owner

[1:02:11] make sure that we're compliant with the

[1:02:14] uh sidewalks, so that there is a

[1:02:16] sidewalk prior to going into the parking

[1:02:19] lot.

[1:02:21] And to get us to a point where we are

[1:02:25] sh-

[1:02:26] minding the gap relative to uh ACM not

[1:02:29] yet being approved that in the center

[1:02:32] section from where the garage is and the

[1:02:34] retail store is, instead of having ACM,

[1:02:37] which is metal, not approved yet, not on

[1:02:39] the list, that we use the wood that is

[1:02:43] stained the same color as the ACM metal

[1:02:46] that goes around the windows on the

[1:02:48] retail side.

[1:02:52] » Okay, we have a motion by Greg

[1:02:54] Butterfield. Do we have a second?

[1:03:03] Okay.

[1:03:04] Uh we have no second then, so the motion

[1:03:08] fails.

[1:03:09] Uh what is the reason that that there is

[1:03:11] no second on the motion?

[1:03:13] Is it the Is it the discussion over the

[1:03:16] wood versus the ACM?

[1:03:18] >> Yeah.

[1:03:18] >> Mhm.

[1:03:19] >> Okay.

[1:03:20] Then

[1:03:21] >> Well, I'll second.

[1:03:22] >> Okay.

[1:03:22] >> I'll second this motion.

[1:03:24] >> Okay. So, we have a a belated second by

[1:03:27] Michelle Shermer. Okay.

[1:03:29] Um that's right. All right. Any

[1:03:30] discussion on the motion?

[1:03:33] >> And do you need to have them say

[1:03:35] anything about the 10-ft easement?

[1:03:39] PUE

[1:03:44] » That is on the current site plan.

[1:03:47] It's

[1:03:49] So, I think that the applicant has met

[1:03:51] that requirement.

[1:03:54] Let me pull it back up.

[1:03:55] >> Yeah, that was my understanding uh

[1:03:57] Marla. It indicates that um

[1:04:00] Let's see.

[1:04:02] Have also been evaluated and affirmed

[1:04:03] compliance as long as there is a 10-ft

[1:04:06] PUE along the front property line.

[1:04:10] >> Yep.

[1:04:11] >> So,

[1:04:12] K, that's already confirmed in the

[1:04:14] planner or does it need to be a

[1:04:15] condition?

[1:04:16] >> No, that is there already.

[1:04:17] >> Okay. All right.

[1:04:18] >> Thank you.

[1:04:20] >> Okay. Um we have a motion and a second.

[1:04:22] Discussion on the motion?

[1:04:32] Okay.

[1:04:33] Uh

[1:04:34] shall we go ahead and vote?

[1:04:37] All right. All in favor, I.

[1:04:39] >> I.

[1:04:41] >> Okay, we have an I from Greg Butterfield

[1:04:43] and an I from Michelle Shermer. Um

[1:04:46] did I get them all?

[1:04:47] Okay. All opposed?

[1:04:49] >> Nay.

[1:04:51] >> Okay, motion fails.

[1:04:53] Um

[1:04:54] all right, then we'll need to entertain

[1:04:56] a second motion.

[1:04:58] And I'm going to assume that the basis

[1:05:00] for the nays is the requirement to the

[1:05:03] condition that the painted wood

[1:05:06] be used instead of the ACM.

[1:05:09] Is that

[1:05:10] fair from the nays?

[1:05:13] >> The other way around, right?

[1:05:14] >> way around.

[1:05:15] >> What did I say?

[1:05:16] >> would be used instead of the

[1:05:17] >> ACM.

[1:05:18] >> wood, right?

[1:05:18] >> Yeah.

[1:05:19] >> That's what he said.

[1:05:20] >> That's what I said. No, I said the

[1:05:21] motion failed because the nays, right?

[1:05:23] >> I thought you got to I don't know.

[1:05:25] >> Did I say that wrong?

[1:05:26] >> No, we're you're great.

[1:05:27] >> You said it right.

[1:05:27] >> Okay.

[1:05:28] >> you wrong.

[1:05:28] >> That's what I heard.

[1:05:29] >> Okay.

[1:05:29] >> I'll make a motion.

[1:05:30] >> I just want to clarify the issue so

[1:05:31] we're not sitting here all night, you

[1:05:33] know,

[1:05:33] >> Crazy, I'm sorry.

[1:05:34] >> you know, shooting blind on motions. And

[1:05:36] all right. John?

[1:05:38] >> I I move to recommend approval to City

[1:05:40] Council of the proposed site plan for

[1:05:41] the new Long Range Shooters of Utah

[1:05:44] commercial building finding

[1:05:47] that the exterior materials

[1:05:51] substantially comply with the historic

[1:05:54] gateway district requirements

[1:05:57] and specifically that the ACM material

[1:06:01] mimics um

[1:06:05] the treatment of a wood

[1:06:08] uh

[1:06:08] cl- cladding

[1:06:10] and that it is compliant with

[1:06:13] the historical

[1:06:15] historic district design guidelines.

[1:06:18] We further recommend that

[1:06:21] the um

[1:06:23] apron leading into the parking lot

[1:06:26] uh

[1:06:27] be clearly identified and integrated

[1:06:30] with the sidewalk

[1:06:31] that the city confirm that there are no

[1:06:36] local, state, or federal uh

[1:06:40] ordinances or laws that uh prohibit the

[1:06:42] sale of firearms uh

[1:06:46] adjacent to residential and or um school

[1:06:51] buildings.

[1:06:53] >> Okay. Have a motion by John McAtee. Do

[1:06:55] we have a second?

[1:06:55] >> I'll second it.

[1:06:56] >> Okay, second by Troy Slade. Discussion

[1:06:58] on the motion.

[1:07:02] Okay. All in favor, I.

[1:07:03] >> I.

[1:07:05] Any opposed?

[1:07:06] >> Nay.

[1:07:07] >> Okay.

[1:07:08] So, we have eyes from Troy Slade, John

[1:07:11] McKay, Alan McDonald, Greg Butterfield,

[1:07:14] and Sue Wittenberg. We have nays from

[1:07:16] Jeff Davis and Michelle Shermer. Is that

[1:07:19] accurate?

[1:07:20] >> Yeah.

[1:07:20] >> Okay. Motion passes five to two if I can

[1:07:23] do my math. Okay. Thank you.

[1:07:27] Can we jump into

[1:07:33] action item C?

[1:07:36] » All right. Thank you, Commissioner.

[1:07:42] All right. So, this is a item for a

[1:07:45] preliminary plat approval

[1:07:48] for the Page Senior Housing Plat A.

[1:07:51] This is The applicant is Patterson Homes

[1:07:54] and the location is 242-243

[1:07:57] East Red Pine Drive.

[1:08:00] This is in the senior housing overlay

[1:08:01] zone.

[1:08:04] And it is an acreage of 3.23 acres.

[1:08:08] There are 20 lots.

[1:08:10] Each lot is 0.06 acres.

[1:08:13] And the request is that the preliminary

[1:08:15] plan be approved.

[1:08:19] The Planning Commission is the land use

[1:08:22] authority for this item.

[1:08:24] And then the final plat will be a city

[1:08:26] staff approval if if the preliminary

[1:08:27] plat is approved.

[1:08:31] So, uh the Page Senior Housing

[1:08:34] Preliminary is on a approximately one

[1:08:35] and a half separate parcels of land,

[1:08:37] both owned by Patterson. There are stub

[1:08:39] road connections on the south side of

[1:08:40] the parcel along Red Pine Drive.

[1:08:44] The parcel already went through a

[1:08:45] rezoning process with the city. I

[1:08:47] believe the commissioner saw that uh

[1:08:49] sometime in the past.

[1:08:51] Uh and that's what is allowing this

[1:08:53] development today.

[1:08:56] The parcel abouts a senior housing

[1:08:58] project River Meadows The River Meadows

[1:09:00] PRD to the east.

[1:09:03] Here's the vicinity map. You can see the

[1:09:04] parcel there.

[1:09:06] The roundabout is right here in the

[1:09:07] bottom left corner.

[1:09:09] Just to get an idea of where that is.

[1:09:12] So, there is no minimum lot size for

[1:09:15] lots in the senior housing overlay zone.

[1:09:17] Um there's just a minimum acreage of two

[1:09:20] and a maximum of six for a senior

[1:09:22] housing project

[1:09:24] with only eight units allowed per acre.

[1:09:26] So, this project meets that requirement.

[1:09:29] Uh it does allow as well the senior

[1:09:31] housing overlay zone does allow as well

[1:09:32] for two twin homes attached to be

[1:09:36] in the zone.

[1:09:37] Um

[1:09:39] for the use, uh

[1:09:41] like I just mentioned, that it is for 20

[1:09:44] twin twin homes.

[1:09:47] Uh there's a proposed private trail

[1:09:49] along Dry Creek uh according to our

[1:09:52] current master trail plan map.

[1:09:54] So, uh discussing with staff, Shane

[1:09:57] Sorensen, city administrator, there are

[1:09:59] some

[1:10:00] potential constraints for the exact

[1:10:02] location of the trail.

[1:10:04] And so, uh it might have to be relocated

[1:10:07] to somewhere else

[1:10:09] uh between Red Pine Drive and 100 South.

[1:10:12] And so, that should be determined before

[1:10:14] the final plat is approved.

[1:10:16] The parking requirements are met for

[1:10:18] each unit. I know the commissioners are

[1:10:20] aware of the

[1:10:22] uh requirements that parking cannot be

[1:10:25] in the

[1:10:26] uh in the setback area cuz we've talked

[1:10:29] about that on a former project. And so,

[1:10:32] there are some stalls that encroach into

[1:10:34] that setback from what I can from what

[1:10:36] staff could see.

[1:10:38] Uh but they're not stalls for the

[1:10:40] individual units. They're just

[1:10:41] additional visitor type stalls that are

[1:10:44] on the site plan.

[1:10:46] So, um that will have to be addressed or

[1:10:49] given permission by the commissioners.

[1:10:52] Um there's no amount of additional

[1:10:54] required spaces that are required for a

[1:10:57] project like this, that's determined by

[1:10:59] you as the commissioners.

[1:11:02] Um and then the only other thing would

[1:11:03] just be that the developer will need to

[1:11:06] work with the Alpine Irrigation Company

[1:11:07] to satisfy the city's water share

[1:11:10] requirements

[1:11:11] and will need to be met before the final

[1:11:13] plat can be recorded.

[1:11:15] And also in the senior housing overlay

[1:11:17] zone, a developer's agreement is

[1:11:18] required. And so the applicant will have

[1:11:21] to enter into that with the city council

[1:11:23] before the final plat can be approved.

[1:11:26] Um these comments down here from the

[1:11:28] city engineer, if you have any questions

[1:11:30] for him, please feel free to bring them

[1:11:31] up. I'm just going to jump them for now.

[1:11:34] He answered everyone really well and and

[1:11:37] can answer any questions you might have.

[1:11:39] So the findings for this for this

[1:11:41] proposal is that it complies with the

[1:11:44] zoning ordinances of the business

[1:11:45] commercial zone and the senior housing

[1:11:47] overlay zone.

[1:11:49] All of the new construction that's being

[1:11:51] proposed is outside of the flood flood

[1:11:53] zone

[1:11:55] and there are no exceptions required for

[1:11:58] this to be approved. So the staff would

[1:12:00] recommend the Planning Commission

[1:12:02] uh make a motion to approve the proposed

[1:12:04] preliminary plat for the Page Senior

[1:12:06] Housing A Subdivision

[1:12:08] just with the conditions that the trail

[1:12:10] location be determined before final plat

[1:12:12] approval, developer's agreement be

[1:12:14] entered into before that approval and

[1:12:17] the additional parking spaces be

[1:12:18] adjusted before that final plat approval

[1:12:21] as well. And if there's any

[1:12:23] uh minor redlines on the plat that they

[1:12:24] be corrected. I know there is one that I

[1:12:26] think with the two projects the

[1:12:28] developers doing, they might have

[1:12:29] mistaken a number or something like

[1:12:31] that, but just very minor redlines that

[1:12:33] need to be made.

[1:12:36] All right, so let's jump in and look at

[1:12:38] it unless there's any questions as of

[1:12:40] right now.

[1:12:41] >> I have a quick question on the trail trail

[1:12:44] constraints.

[1:12:45] >> Okay.

[1:12:46] >> What

[1:12:49] On those trail constraints

[1:12:51] Yeah, bring will you bring that up cuz

[1:12:53] that's a wonderful addition to have

[1:12:56] there. Are you Will you give me the

[1:12:58] coordinates of that?

[1:13:02] » Sorry, the coordinates whose?

[1:13:03] >> Yeah, it's so it's Dry Creek. So, the

[1:13:06] Dry Creek Trail, just tell me

[1:13:10] that is coming across that crosses over

[1:13:13] Main Street. And then it So, how do I'm

[1:13:15] just wondering how you're going to

[1:13:17] connect those across the road like that.

[1:13:19] Anyway, we don't want to talk about it

[1:13:20] right now. I just think the trail should

[1:13:22] certain certainly be there. There'll be

[1:13:24] people that will really want to use

[1:13:25] that.

[1:13:26] >> Yeah, and that that is a great question.

[1:13:28] It is an open discussion right now. Um

[1:13:31] Shane Sorensen, city administrator, was

[1:13:32] thinking

[1:13:33] >> Let's wait on it. I'm sorry. Let's wait

[1:13:35] till you have information.

[1:13:36] >> Mhm. It could be something along the

[1:13:37] sidewalk, up the up the private lane,

[1:13:40] and then along the trail, or something

[1:13:41] like that, but that's something that

[1:13:43] needs to be determined. Yeah.

[1:13:44] >> Got it. Is there current access right

[1:13:46] now as a trail through there, or is it

[1:13:49] just a right-of-way that people have

[1:13:50] been taking?

[1:13:52] Cuz people talk people came to a

[1:13:57] public hearing and talked about the

[1:13:58] trail, but is it official, or is it just

[1:14:02] a deer trail?

[1:14:02] >> my understanding is there's a proposed

[1:14:04] private trail that is supposed to go on

[1:14:07] there according to our master trail plan

[1:14:08] map.

[1:14:09] >> And in the past, there's not a current

[1:14:12] official trail there.

[1:14:14] >> That's correct. That's my understanding,

[1:14:16] yeah.

[1:14:22] » Is it Is this the first time we've seen

[1:14:24] the plans of the houses?

[1:14:26] >> Yes.

[1:14:27] >> Okay, so they weren't presented to us

[1:14:28] earlier in the meeting. Okay, cuz I was

[1:14:31] surprised that they were two-story.

[1:14:34] >> Yeah, we can take a look at those. Let

[1:14:35] me pull up the elevations. Um

[1:14:38] So, yeah, here is the site plan.

[1:14:42] Jump to this. Here's a proposed floor

[1:14:45] plan for those units.

[1:14:49] And then

[1:14:54] let's see.

[1:14:59] Let's jump to the elevations. So, these

[1:15:00] are the proposed elevations for the

[1:15:02] units.

[1:15:04] >> Cuz if I can remember right, it seems

[1:15:06] like the first time they presented it, was like they were supposed to be

[1:15:09] just like the houses that were kind of

[1:15:10] built there, but maybe I'm

[1:15:13] I don't know. Do you guys remember that?

[1:15:15] >> twin homes next door

[1:15:15] >> Yeah, like like the

[1:15:16] >> They don't have a

[1:15:17] >> Like the single family homes that were

[1:15:19] down there existing.

[1:15:21] Yeah, so that's kind of

[1:15:24] surprise, but

[1:15:29] guess it's zoned for that, so.

[1:15:34] » Do we have that elevation?

[1:15:36] And are both styles being

[1:15:39] built?

[1:15:41] We have two different frontages. Are

[1:15:43] both styles being built?

[1:15:44] >> One's front and back.

[1:15:47] >> Yeah, there's the front elevation and

[1:15:48] the rear.

[1:15:50] >> Yeah, but but if you keep going down,

[1:15:51] there's another set.

[1:15:54] There's another option. So, I was

[1:15:56] confused.

[1:15:57] Is it

[1:15:59] or

[1:16:00] like this one where the two garages both

[1:16:02] have symmetrical peaks versus

[1:16:05] asymmetrical peaks?

[1:16:07] >> Yeah, that's a great question we can ask

[1:16:08] the applicant. Um, I'm guessing they put

[1:16:10] two different styles in and then one

[1:16:13] will be determined as the

[1:16:14] >> So, they're going to do both. They're

[1:16:17] These are your two options.

[1:16:18] >> I guess I'm not 100% sure, but we can we

[1:16:20] can ask the applicant. That is a good

[1:16:22] question.

[1:16:22] >> Yeah.

[1:16:26] » So, do you want to know the elevation?

[1:16:29] Do you have that measurement?

[1:16:30] >> Caden?

[1:16:30] >> Yeah.

[1:16:37] » Commissioner, are you asking about the

[1:16:38] elevation of the site itself or

[1:16:40] >> Just want to know the elevation of the

[1:16:42] house.

[1:16:42] >> How high is it?

[1:16:45] The height of the house, I guess.

[1:16:49] Yeah, I'd be under 30, I'm sure.

[1:16:52] I'm curious how high it is.

[1:16:55] >> Yeah, Troy, it seemed to me originally

[1:16:56] there was just at least in the rendering

[1:16:58] they were um

[1:17:00] one stories. These look like maybe

[1:17:02] they're maximizing the the space and

[1:17:04] making them two stories, but I think

[1:17:06] that's

[1:17:07] >> Yeah.

[1:17:07] >> I I either way as long as they meet

[1:17:09] height restrictions, right? I don't

[1:17:11] think there's

[1:17:12] I'm I'm I'm not sure I see an issue

[1:17:13] there.

[1:17:14] >> Yeah.

[1:17:15] >> And we can ask about that. I don't think

[1:17:16] we received a a set height restriction

[1:17:20] on the on the twin homes.

[1:17:25] » Yeah.

[1:17:26] yeah, they're yeah.

[1:17:28] >> I don't remember them wanting us to tie

[1:17:30] it in with the other homes because that's a a whole

[1:17:33] different development on that Redpine

[1:17:35] Drive. This is back in its own little

[1:17:38] it's kind of private in there.

[1:17:40] >> Uh, they're just across the fence.

[1:17:41] >> Yeah.

[1:17:42] >> They share but not but they don't share

[1:17:44] >> They're going to share a driveway in the

[1:17:46] back.

[1:17:47] >> Oh, in the very back.

[1:17:48] >> Where the house is currently.

[1:17:49] >> Okay, cuz the one on Redpine they would

[1:17:51] >> Well, they're joining their HOA.

[1:17:53] >> I know that and their HOA

[1:17:54] >> So

[1:17:55] >> It's it's a wonderful little thing they

[1:17:56] got going on over there.

[1:17:57] >> Yeah.

[1:17:59] >> It is. It's been great.

[1:18:01] >> So, let me show you real quick. So, the

[1:18:02] parking I was mentioning, I think some

[1:18:04] of

[1:18:05] a few of these lots, maybe this one on

[1:18:07] the end here and these ones at the the

[1:18:09] front near the right-of-way of the

[1:18:10] development might be in the setback.

[1:18:12] >> Mhm.

[1:18:13] >> And so, they'll have to receive

[1:18:15] uh

[1:18:16] an exception from the commissioners if

[1:18:18] you'd like to grant that or be

[1:18:20] rearranged.

[1:18:22] >> Tonight?

[1:18:23] That exception needs to be granted

[1:18:24] tonight?

[1:18:25] >> Correct.

[1:18:34] But, Cayden, real quick just for

[1:18:36] clarification, these are um kind of

[1:18:40] bonus visitor parking places. They're

[1:18:43] not required

[1:18:45] for

[1:18:47] They're not required to meet the the

[1:18:48] minimum number of parking

[1:18:49] >> Each unit require is required to have

[1:18:51] two spaces and

[1:18:54] each one of each unit should be meeting

[1:18:56] that requirement.

[1:18:58] And then any additional parking the

[1:19:00] senior housing overlay zone says that

[1:19:02] the planning commission can determine

[1:19:03] how much extra parking

[1:19:05] >> they might need.

[1:19:05] >> So an exception isn't required to get

[1:19:08] the minimum parking.

[1:19:10] >> Right. They're They already are meeting

[1:19:11] the minimum requirement of number of

[1:19:13] stalls. It's just the location of it.

[1:19:16] And the setback.

[1:19:17] >> So so the setbacks are going to be

[1:19:20] encroached on by the pavilion

[1:19:24] and all

[1:19:26] four parking spot or all four

[1:19:29] How many How many stalls do we have in

[1:19:31] the front on the south side?

[1:19:33] >> Is it where the lines are? It looks like

[1:19:34] you

[1:19:35] >> It's like you have five stalls here.

[1:19:36] Yeah.

[1:19:37] Two and three.

[1:19:38] >> But you're losing two out front and two

[1:19:41] on the back. Is that that

[1:19:43] straight line is that where the requirement is? So you'd lose one.

[1:19:49] >> Yeah, so this

[1:19:50] >> You know what I'm saying?

[1:19:50] >> This one might actually be okay because

[1:19:53] it really just depends on the back

[1:19:54] property line and I think that actually

[1:19:56] might be out of the setback here.

[1:20:00] Um this line doesn't call out the

[1:20:03] setback, but I so I'm not sure if that's

[1:20:05] what that is. I think it might be.

[1:20:08] So

[1:20:09] but the back property line is right here

[1:20:11] through Dry Creek.

[1:20:14] So if it's outside of that 20-ft

[1:20:17] setback, then that one actually might be

[1:20:19] okay. It's more of these front ones that

[1:20:20] are looks like they're encroaching.

[1:20:22] >> Do we know like Red Pine Circle

[1:20:25] is red lined on one side. You're not

[1:20:28] supposed to park on it because of the

[1:20:30] fire engines. Is that the same thing for

[1:20:32] Page Lane? Is its width

[1:20:35] too narrow

[1:20:37] for park for

[1:20:38] curb side parking?

[1:20:40] Do we know?

[1:20:41] >> I am not aware of that.

[1:20:43] >> Cuz

[1:20:43] >> Yeah, I don't think you I don't think

[1:20:45] you could have

[1:20:47] parking in front of those houses.

[1:20:49] >> Yeah, like on like on Red Pine Circle.

[1:20:52] >> Yes. Yeah, same.

[1:20:54] >> because of the fire engine.

[1:20:58] So, they do need these visitor parking.

[1:21:01] Um I think it's essential.

[1:21:04] I just don't like the front ones in the

[1:21:06] setback. Yeah, the back ones don't

[1:21:09] bother me, but the front ones

[1:21:11] >> Same.

[1:21:12] >> Yeah.

[1:21:13] >> Look, cuz that's all those neighbors in

[1:21:15] there. What about that?

[1:21:16] >> What?

[1:21:16] >> That's right in the middle of that

[1:21:17] neighborhood, too. I get that. I totally

[1:21:19] agree. Michelle.

[1:21:21] >> If my memory's correct, when we had the

[1:21:23] open meeting,

[1:21:24] the neighbors did ask for a concession

[1:21:27] also from a sign standpoint. And so,

[1:21:30] I don't know if that was brought up, but

[1:21:31] the parking stalls where you enter and

[1:21:34] the signage there, making sure that that

[1:21:35] looked consistent or they were

[1:21:37] opinionated about what happens there.

[1:21:40] >> that.

[1:21:43] » That's a good comment, and I do think

[1:21:44] it's this one stall right here that is

[1:21:46] encroaching into the side setback as

[1:21:49] well.

[1:21:51] Okay.

[1:21:54] » And then they connected with the

[1:21:56] existing space for safety, right? So,

[1:21:58] ambulance and fire truck.

[1:22:00] >> Correct.

[1:22:02] >> But that existing will be used full-time

[1:22:05] or just for emergency purposes?

[1:22:09] The back connector.

[1:22:12] >> Uh so, there is no proposed

[1:22:14] >> No, I meant in the back there.

[1:22:16] >> off Red Pine Circle.

[1:22:18] >> [clears throat]

[1:22:18] >> Where the home is currently, that

[1:22:20] >> did the rezoning, it was it was to be

[1:22:22] left open.

[1:22:22] >> It was to be left open permanently.

[1:22:24] >> Yeah, I believe so. Yes.

[1:22:26] >> Yep.

[1:22:36] » Okay, the bananas.

[1:22:42] All right, Kaden, did you get any did I

[1:22:44] know we interrupt you a couple times

[1:22:46] with questions. Did you get through

[1:22:47] everything?

[1:22:48] >> I think that should be all for my side.

[1:22:49] Yes.

[1:22:51] » Okay, um

[1:22:55] besides the issues already raised, any

[1:22:56] further questions from Kaden on the

[1:22:59] introduction of the action item?

[1:23:07] Okay.

[1:23:08] Uh any discussion?

[1:23:12] Uh do we have a petitioner here, Kaden?

[1:23:15] >> Yes, the applicant is here.

[1:23:16] >> Okay, sure, love to.

[1:23:20] » [snorts]

[1:23:22] >> Good evening.

[1:23:23] Ross Welch, uh representing Patterson

[1:23:26] Homes.

[1:23:27] So, I want to clarify a couple things.

[1:23:29] So,

[1:23:30] the standard plan of these homes is to

[1:23:34] be one level.

[1:23:35] Um

[1:23:37] the dormers and other things are just

[1:23:39] for aesthetics,

[1:23:41] but there is an option if they want to

[1:23:43] put a bonus room up there, we can access

[1:23:46] it at that point.

[1:23:48] Um

[1:23:49] we originally, when we came in and

[1:23:51] sought the rezone, had a site plan that

[1:23:53] was part of that. And if you recall, it

[1:23:56] had 24 units in that site plan. We've

[1:23:59] reduced this down to 20 units.

[1:24:01] Um the reason is because we couldn't get

[1:24:04] a floor plan that we liked for this

[1:24:07] marketplace.

[1:24:08] Uh one thing we realized in the one next

[1:24:10] door is that the footprint's a little

[1:24:12] too small. And so, we reduced this down

[1:24:15] by four units so that we could make the

[1:24:17] footprints larger. Uh the each of these

[1:24:20] on the main floor will be close to 1950

[1:24:23] square feet with one bedroom. So, it

[1:24:25] gives nice usable space. And then the

[1:24:29] basement area uh

[1:24:31] to use as well.

[1:24:33] Um yes, as far as trails go, that is a

[1:24:36] consideration. We're we're fine to put a

[1:24:38] trail wherever, but currently there's

[1:24:40] not anything we're connecting and

[1:24:42] accessing. And so, that's why that's

[1:24:45] there. Uh

[1:24:46] parking

[1:24:49] we appreciate any parking we can get. Uh

[1:24:52] we think it's useful and beneficial.

[1:24:54] The

[1:24:56] connection with the existing River

[1:24:58] Meadows 55 and older community

[1:25:00] uh I I sit on the board of that group,

[1:25:04] and there was concern about the traffic

[1:25:06] flow coming. And I said, "I'm not sure I

[1:25:09] know of anybody who would want to turn

[1:25:12] to then turn to then go down to the road

[1:25:15] to get out."

[1:25:17] People are just going to go down the

[1:25:18] street and get out. It's there for in

[1:25:20] case of an emergency, something gets

[1:25:22] blocked, we have an access. Just like in

[1:25:25] the existing River Meadows utilizes the

[1:25:27] assisted living parking lot to get out.

[1:25:30] So,

[1:25:31] >> So, you assume most of the ingress

[1:25:32] egress is off of Red Pine?

[1:25:34] >> Yes. Yeah. It's a direct shot, so I

[1:25:36] assume everybody's going to go straight.

[1:25:40] Um

[1:25:41] and

[1:25:43] yes.

[1:25:44] So, that just wanted to give that kind

[1:25:45] of background and and where we're at.

[1:25:47] Any other questions you may have?

[1:25:49] >> So, do you know where your your property

[1:25:51] line is on the back?

[1:25:56] » Well, I

[1:25:57] could adjust it cuz I own the property

[1:25:59] to the north. So, I can make it wherever

[1:26:01] I need it to be.

[1:26:02] >> Okay, well, that takes care of those

[1:26:03] ones then anyway, right?

[1:26:04] >> So, that take care of a problem by

[1:26:06] moving over 5 ft, then I don't have a

[1:26:08] problem with setback on the parking.

[1:26:09] >> Yeah.

[1:26:10] >> I like that.

[1:26:11] >> So, do you own Dry Creek? Is or is that

[1:26:15] >> We don't.

[1:26:16] >> city property?

[1:26:17] >> It's

[1:26:17] >> No, it's it's a waterway and so the waterway

[1:26:22] you have your property line, but I don't

[1:26:24] control the creek, obviously.

[1:26:26] >> Right, but up to the up to the bed?

[1:26:29] Or where is

[1:26:30] >> adjoining property that you own.

[1:26:31] >> To the adjoining property goes all the

[1:26:32] way through.

[1:26:33] >> All the way through.

[1:26:34] >> Right.

[1:26:38] » Okay, well that's

[1:26:39] that any issues of

[1:26:43] granting an exception for parking on the

[1:26:45] rear stalls

[1:26:47] we ought not make a

[1:26:49] an exception for.

[1:26:52] We just make it compliant.

[1:26:54] The front, I don't know. What are your

[1:26:55] thoughts on the front stalls?

[1:26:57] >> Well,

[1:26:59] help me understand your concerns with

[1:27:01] the parking in the in that area. What have been the issues you've seen by

[1:27:05] being in that area?

[1:27:09] » On the front?

[1:27:10] >> Yeah.

[1:27:11] >> It's just the setback issue.

[1:27:13] >> But what what what by the setback

[1:27:15] meaning what does that cause?

[1:27:17] >> we have guidelines that you have to

[1:27:20] have structures set back so many feet

[1:27:23] from the street.

[1:27:26] >> Right.

[1:27:27] And that that asphalt is considered a

[1:27:29] structure then or

[1:27:31] >> It's part of the setback. Yeah, I mean

[1:27:33] we have the same issue right right here

[1:27:35] on the corner that we had to talk about

[1:27:37] the setbacks for the parking that's come

[1:27:39] by station.

[1:27:40] >> Just just because normally you're going

[1:27:42] to have an aesthetic, right? Where

[1:27:43] there's a setback and it's typically

[1:27:44] landscape. There's trees or grass or

[1:27:47] bushes or something in that setback so

[1:27:49] it's an aesthetic where we

[1:27:50] typically like the the the

[1:27:53] that area to be landscaped and then

[1:27:56] um

[1:27:57] parking and

[1:27:58] buildings etc. You know, not encroach in

[1:28:00] that setback and it's a it's an

[1:28:02] aesthetic issue.

[1:28:03] >> there's a park strip area, but then

[1:28:05] you're saying you'd prefer to have grass

[1:28:07] there instead of the

[1:28:09] Got it.

[1:28:10] >> And also there was just some of the

[1:28:11] neighbors that across right directly

[1:28:13] across the street.

[1:28:14] >> Uh-huh.

[1:28:14] >> They had contacted them and that was one

[1:28:16] of the things Greg was referring to too

[1:28:18] with the signage and stuff. It just

[1:28:20] feels

[1:28:21] for them,

[1:28:22] you know, just have parked cars out

[1:28:24] there and even though it's been like

[1:28:25] that little junkyard

[1:28:27] >> Well, no. I'm I'm humored by that cuz I live there

[1:28:31] and that red pine is a parking lot for

[1:28:33] that home across the street. But anyway,

[1:28:35] >> I know.

[1:28:36] >> [laughter]

[1:28:36] >> Yeah.

[1:28:38] >> But yeah, okay.

[1:28:39] >> But there just was some talk about that.

[1:28:41] Do you remember?

[1:28:43] >> So we're we're in that I mean we're talking

[1:28:45] about two parking spots, right?

[1:28:49] » Maybe about

[1:28:50] >> There's at least

[1:28:54] I mean I if that line that runs through

[1:28:57] there is the setback line, I'm just

[1:28:59] there's one, two, three, four, five five

[1:29:01] spots so it impact two.

[1:29:03] >> Yeah, this here is the setback line

[1:29:04] right here.

[1:29:05] >> Oh, okay. Okay. I'm it's a different

[1:29:07] one.

[1:29:08] >> All five of those are in the setback.

[1:29:12] Yeah, just to add on to what the

[1:29:13] commissioner is saying, it's just also

[1:29:15] it's just a requirement if if the

[1:29:17] parking lots are in the setback, they

[1:29:19] have to give an exception to it. Yeah.

[1:29:23] Let me let me show it right here.

[1:29:27] So it says no portion of the setback

[1:29:28] area adjacent to a street shall be used

[1:29:30] for off-street parking.

[1:29:31] >> Okay.

[1:29:35] Well, that's pretty cut and dry.

[1:29:37] >> Yeah. Yeah, that's that's

[1:29:39] >> Well, John, we can make it more vague if

[1:29:40] we need to.

[1:29:41] >> [laughter]

[1:29:45] » We don't like to go there.

[1:29:46] >> Okay. All right. I'm good. I'm good.

[1:29:53] Okay.

[1:29:54] Anybody have any further questions for

[1:29:56] Ross?

[1:29:57] >> Um yeah, may this is probably this is

[1:30:00] probably just mostly for my personal

[1:30:02] information.

[1:30:04] Uh

[1:30:05] Caleb's Caleb read has some information

[1:30:07] about uh water.

[1:30:09] >> Yes.

[1:30:10] >> So, this is in Alpine. So, why is there water shares that have to

[1:30:17] because

[1:30:18] that is separate now? Is that's all

[1:30:21] >> I think it's

[1:30:22] I think it relates more that the density

[1:30:24] has changed here with the overlay and so

[1:30:27] more water is needed. Possibly that's

[1:30:28] the issue.

[1:30:29] >> is that is that what the issue is,

[1:30:31] Jason?

[1:30:32] >> And we have a lot of water banked with

[1:30:35] the city, so it's not an issue for us.

[1:30:36] >> Okay. Okay. So, you're So, Patterson is

[1:30:39] just going to trade whatever that

[1:30:42] density is and say, "Okay, we're going

[1:30:44] to make up for it by giving the city X

[1:30:46] amount of shares."

[1:30:47] >> Right.

[1:30:48] >> Okay. Okay. Cuz I I don't believe we've

[1:30:52] faced that at least my time on the

[1:30:54] commission where where that was an

[1:30:56] issue.

[1:30:57] >> Every development that comes into the

[1:30:59] city, [clears throat] if these were all

[1:31:00] single-family homes, they would still

[1:31:02] have to bring water in.

[1:31:04] >> Okay.

[1:31:04] >> Any development that comes into the city

[1:31:06] does.

[1:31:07] >> But typically

[1:31:10] that's already It's part of that, you

[1:31:12] know,

[1:31:13] uh

[1:31:14] I mean, it

[1:31:15] the people that had the the land before

[1:31:18] already had water, and so

[1:31:21] >> Not always.

[1:31:23] >> Okay, not always.

[1:31:23] >> There There are times It depends on the

[1:31:25] landowner. It depends on the landowner,

[1:31:26] but in this case

[1:31:29] they needed to get water rights through

[1:31:30] the city.

[1:31:31] >> Okay.

[1:31:36] Any further questions for us?

[1:31:38] >> So, is that is that damaging if we uh

[1:31:41] can't give you the parking lots on the

[1:31:43] street?

[1:31:47] » What What did you ask, John?

[1:31:48] >> If it was damaging to the project by not

[1:31:51] being able to grant

[1:31:53] >> Yeah, or or or since Ross

[1:31:55] since they own the property to the

[1:31:57] north, could always pick those slide the

[1:31:59] whole thing.

[1:32:00] >> That That way

[1:32:03] bear with me here.

[1:32:04] >> Oh, yeah. we got a creek in the way.

[1:32:06] >> [laughter]

[1:32:08] >> Okay. Thank you, Ross.

[1:32:10] >> Thank you.

[1:32:13] » Okay.

[1:32:15] >> Are are

[1:32:16] is there is there a requirement on the

[1:32:19] park on the number of spaces? There's

[1:32:21] not, right?

[1:32:23] >> By ordinance, but it just they aren't

[1:32:25] covering for visitors really, except for

[1:32:27] these back parking stalls.

[1:32:28] >> Yeah, but they're

[1:32:29] >> It's a convenience issue, but they don't

[1:32:31] need those stalls on Red Pine to meet

[1:32:33] their minimum parking requirements.

[1:32:35] >> Okay.

[1:32:37] >> [snorts]

[1:32:39] >> Okay.

[1:32:40] Um,

[1:32:41] just just couple guidelines remember

[1:32:43] that I think

[1:32:44] Kate and Craig will find wrong, but this

[1:32:46] is where the land use authority on this,

[1:32:48] so we are just making a motion. It's not a recommendation that

[1:32:53] goes to City Council.

[1:32:55] Okay, just a point of order for the

[1:32:57] motion.

[1:32:57] >> Moving to approve.

[1:32:59] >> Yep.

[1:33:02] » All right, any discussion or is anybody

[1:33:04] >> So so we have parking slash

[1:33:08] >> Well, I think we've got under the staff

[1:33:09] recommendations that the trail location

[1:33:11] needs to be determined before final plat

[1:33:13] approval.

[1:33:14] >> Okay.

[1:33:15] >> Um, that the developer's agreement be

[1:33:17] entered into with the city before final

[1:33:19] plat approval, and then probably uh

[1:33:21] depending on on how the motion goes with

[1:33:23] the parking spaces, there there would

[1:33:27] need to be an exception

[1:33:29] to the off-street parking requirement

[1:33:32] if you're going to allow those five

[1:33:33] spaces on Red Pine.

[1:33:39] » I just have a quick question for Ross.

[1:33:40] How many of the lots have sold? You

[1:33:42] don't have to come up, I'm just curious.

[1:33:44] Has that been have they mostly sold out?

[1:33:47] >> No, we haven't started to market yet cuz

[1:33:49] we

[1:33:50] first need to get a plan approved. And

[1:33:52] then once we have that

[1:33:54] >> Smart of you.

[1:33:55] >> Yeah.

[1:33:56] And then we have to get it developed.

[1:33:57] And then point.

[1:33:58] >> The way the market is

[1:33:59] >> Just remind Sue that we have an

[1:34:01] emoluments clause and she is not able

[1:34:03] to, you know, make a condition here that

[1:34:05] you give her a call about a sale.

[1:34:08] >> Sorry.

[1:34:09] >> Don't start.

[1:34:10] >> Are on your two options of the design, are you using both or are

[1:34:15] you choosing one?

[1:34:16] Your

[1:34:17] >> The girl in the

[1:34:17] >> Yeah.

[1:34:18] >> Well, the back is different, too, on

[1:34:20] each of them.

[1:34:21] >> We are debating. We kind of like to have

[1:34:24] some uh

[1:34:25] >> I need some units.

[1:34:26] >> variety so it's not totally homogeneous.

[1:34:29] So, it does make it easier to figure out

[1:34:31] which one's your unit if you

[1:34:33] >> Yeah.

[1:34:34] You come home a little tired.

[1:34:37] So, you are using both?

[1:34:39] >> Yeah. And

[1:34:40] >> Okay. Yes.

[1:34:43] » Okay. Any further discussion?

[1:34:54] Anybody like to make a motion? I'd

[1:34:55] entertain one.

[1:35:07] » What what's this What's the developer's

[1:35:10] agreement to be entered into with the

[1:35:13] city? What what What What agreement are

[1:35:15] we talking about here?

[1:35:16] >> So, yeah, per the senior housing overlay

[1:35:18] zone requirements, it is required that

[1:35:21] the developer enter into an enter into a

[1:35:23] developer's agreement. I

[1:35:24] >> Oh.

[1:35:25] >> development agreement, I think is

[1:35:26] same thing.

[1:35:27] >> Just for the senior overlay.

[1:35:29] >> Correct. Yes.

[1:35:30] >> Okay. That Yeah, but that that it's that

[1:35:34] and only that.

[1:35:35] >> Correct.

[1:35:36] >> Okay. Yep.

[1:35:38] >> What?

[1:35:38] >> It's good, Jeff.

[1:35:40] >> Uh what We got a little powwow over

[1:35:42] here.

[1:35:46] » Caden, can you pull up the uh off-street

[1:35:49] parking requirement?

[1:35:52] And and what are the criteria to grant

[1:35:54] an exception if any?

[1:35:57] » Yes, it's right here in 324-060.

[1:36:01] It's the same one we've looked at

[1:36:02] before. These four criteria.

[1:36:15] » Okay, so this

[1:36:15] >> There's There's There's nothing about

[1:36:17] number.

[1:36:18] >> Is that what you're looking for, John?

[1:36:19] >> no.

[1:36:20] Two things. First, we can't grant that.

[1:36:23] It has to be

[1:36:24] approved by the city council.

[1:36:30] » What What's the exception that we're

[1:36:31] looking for? The setback?

[1:36:33] >> To to to put parking in the setback.

[1:36:36] >> Yeah.

[1:36:38] So, is but is our land use authority

[1:36:42] isn't one of the options is to

[1:36:46] eliminate

[1:36:48] I mean, I guess if we eliminate the

[1:36:50] front ones, we still have that one stall

[1:36:54] in the back that is partially

[1:36:56] encroaching.

[1:36:56] >> he can uh

[1:36:58] move

[1:36:59] >> Okay.

[1:37:00] >> He can he can move that property line to

[1:37:02] be com-

[1:37:03] >> Okay.

[1:37:06] » So, it's just the front.

[1:37:08] >> Yeah.

[1:37:08] >> But But I think Kadner Kadner said it or

[1:37:11] John said it that again, no portion of

[1:37:13] the setback area adjacent to a street

[1:37:15] shall be used for off-street parking.

[1:37:16] Exceptions to the off-street parking

[1:37:18] location requirement may be approved by

[1:37:21] the city council after recommendation.

[1:37:23] So,

[1:37:24] I would I would assume if we were so

[1:37:25] inclined to we

[1:37:28] would would we have would we because we're not sending

[1:37:34] I mean, we're we're approving or not

[1:37:36] approving. But if there were a setback,

[1:37:39] that would have to I mean, per

[1:37:41] ordinance, that's got to go to city

[1:37:42] council.

[1:37:43] >> Yeah.

[1:37:43] >> Just say

[1:37:45] ignorance on our part,

[1:37:47] Let's take them off.

[1:37:49] >> Okay.

[1:37:50] >> Here is our mistake.

[1:37:51] >> All right. Very good.

[1:37:54] Makes it easy. Thank you.

[1:37:55] >> Oh.

[1:37:56] >> We got our sandwiches over here.

[1:37:57] >> Sure.

[1:37:59] >> You don't have to come up. Just Chase

[1:38:01] eating.

[1:38:02] >> No, we don't It's not a public hearing,

[1:38:03] but we certainly don't don't want

[1:38:05] somebody not be

[1:38:06] Excuse me.

[1:38:07] Oh, [laughter] okay. Oh, got you.

[1:38:10] Oh, okay. I was going to All

[1:38:13] Oh, all right.

[1:38:15] >> That That is a good point though. I

[1:38:17] think it might be something we have to

[1:38:18] clean up in the code because you are the

[1:38:20] land use authority. So, I'm not sure why

[1:38:22] it would have to go to the city council.

[1:38:24] >> Yeah, I don't even Yeah, I was thinking

[1:38:25] how would it How does that even work?

[1:38:27] So,

[1:38:28] yeah. You might You might mention that

[1:38:31] to the city attorney.

[1:38:32] >> Yeah, but this is This is a general

[1:38:35] ordinance

[1:38:36] uh street parking. So, it's not we're

[1:38:39] dealing with a specific land use case.

[1:38:42] This is more gen- At least in my my

[1:38:45] understanding, Alan, this is more

[1:38:46] general

[1:38:48] uh off-street parking.

[1:38:51] Yeah.

[1:38:51] >> Okay. Well, I think it's a moot issue

[1:38:53] because it's it sounds like it's not an

[1:38:54] issue. Okay?

[1:38:56] All right.

[1:38:58] Good clarification. Anybody interested

[1:38:59] in making a motion?

[1:39:00] >> Okay.

[1:39:02] I I'll I'll I'll make a motion.

[1:39:05] Um I move to approve the preliminary

[1:39:07] applic- application of the

[1:39:10] Page Senior Housing Plat A as proposed

[1:39:14] with the following conditions that the

[1:39:17] trail location be determined before

[1:39:19] final plat approval.

[1:39:22] And the developer's agreement be entered

[1:39:25] into the city before final plat

[1:39:27] approval.

[1:39:29] And the

[1:39:31] and that the additional parking spaces

[1:39:33] in the back be adjusted to meet DCA 3.24

[1:39:40] before final plat approval.

[1:39:43] And the parking spaces in the front be

[1:39:47] removed from the final design.

[1:39:50] >> [snorts]

[1:39:50] >> Okay, we have a a motion by Jeff Davis.

[1:39:53] Do we have a second?

[1:39:54] >> I'll second it.

[1:39:55] >> Okay, second by Sue Wittenberg.

[1:39:56] Discussion on the motion.

[1:39:58] >> We don't need to address the other stall

[1:40:00] on the other side of the property.

[1:40:02] >> Do you get he'll just take care of that?

[1:40:03] >> Well, well, he

[1:40:05] Yeah, I think he he did mention it in

[1:40:07] the motion.

[1:40:08] >> did you Okay, didn't Okay. All right.

[1:40:10] >> Do we have to keep the minor thing in

[1:40:11] the [clears throat]

[1:40:12] the minor red lines?

[1:40:15] Does that have to be in there?

[1:40:16] >> What's that?

[1:40:17] >> The minor red lines that continue down

[1:40:19] the creek.

[1:40:21] >> Oh, oh, the last one. Any minor red

[1:40:23] lines?

[1:40:25] Oh.

[1:40:27] I don't think you

[1:40:29] Caleb, did you discuss any minor red

[1:40:32] lines in your presentation?

[1:40:34] >> So,

[1:40:35] >> I don't recall.

[1:40:37] >> I think there was just one correction on

[1:40:39] the plat that that the number was just

[1:40:42] incorrect.

[1:40:43] >> Okay.

[1:40:43] >> So, that's that's the reason that's on

[1:40:45] there.

[1:40:45] >> Yeah, that is minor.

[1:40:46] >> Okay.

[1:40:48] All right. So, we have a motion and a

[1:40:50] second. Discussion?

[1:40:54] Okay. All in favor, I? I. Any opposed?

[1:40:58] Okay, motion passes unanimously.

[1:41:01] All right,

[1:41:02] um

[1:41:03] Caden, not Caleb.

[1:41:05] >> Caden.

[1:41:06] >> Okay.

[1:41:07] My mistake.

[1:41:09] >> Um

[1:41:11] >> [clears throat]

[1:41:11] >> Sue, I thought you would enjoy me

[1:41:13] reminding Jeff that he misnamed Caden.

[1:41:17] That was for you. That was for your

[1:41:18] benefit. Okay, you're welcome.

[1:41:20] >> So, you can [snorts] poke him next to you there.

[1:41:22] >> I I know better.

[1:41:23] >> Okay, let's

[1:41:24] uh

[1:41:25] Caden, if you could introduce the final

[1:41:28] action item for us, please.

[1:41:30] >> Thank you, Jeff.

[1:41:31] >> And don't worry about that, Jeff, cuz

[1:41:32] Don Quigley has called me Caleb multiple

[1:41:34] times as well, so.

[1:41:36] >> Don't tell him that.

[1:41:37] >> get it right. It's only Katie.

[1:41:38] >> It's a common common thing I've I'm used

[1:41:40] to.

[1:41:40] >> Thanks for coming tonight.

[1:41:48] » All right. So, this final item is

[1:41:50] related to the senior housing project.

[1:41:57] It is the other part of the property uh

[1:42:01] of Mr. Roswell's property um

[1:42:04] uh on the north side. So, the applicant

[1:42:07] again is Patterson Homes.

[1:42:09] This is 242 East 100 South. So, coming

[1:42:11] off 100 South there.

[1:42:13] This is the TR-10,000 zone.

[1:42:17] The remaining acreage after the approval

[1:42:20] of the senior housing, if it gets

[1:42:21] approved, would be 1.53 acres. And so,

[1:42:24] the proposal is to use that remaining

[1:42:26] acreage for three lots

[1:42:28] between 0.23 and 0.62 acres

[1:42:32] for that uh for that remaining acreage.

[1:42:36] So, it's on half a parcel of land owned

[1:42:39] by should be Mr. Welch here, but I put

[1:42:40] Patterson. Um there are stubbed road connections on the north side of

[1:42:44] the parcel.

[1:42:45] to the south that went

[1:42:47] through the rezoning of the senior

[1:42:48] housing as we've just discussed.

[1:42:50] So, the

[1:42:52] applicant is working with the

[1:42:53] neighboring parcel to the west to allow

[1:42:55] for a new cul-de-sac on this property

[1:42:57] that we will look at briefly.

[1:43:01] Um so, here's the vicinity map. You can

[1:43:03] see it's that top part of the same same

[1:43:06] parcel here.

[1:43:08] Um the lot width there's no minimum lot

[1:43:10] size for lots

[1:43:12] uh

[1:43:13] Oh.

[1:43:15] That might not have been updated.

[1:43:17] Apologies for that. I was still talking

[1:43:18] about the senior housing.

[1:43:20] Um

[1:43:22] Am I on the right one?

[1:43:23] >> Yeah, you are.

[1:43:24] >> Oh.

[1:43:27] Okay, I guess that didn't get updated.

[1:43:28] Sorry about that.

[1:43:30] Um but basically yeah, the lot

[1:43:32] uh the use is what we've already

[1:43:33] discussed. The trail would be the same

[1:43:35] situation as the as the last one.

[1:43:38] Um, the main concern on this one would

[1:43:40] be the roads. Um, so the proposed

[1:43:43] cul-de-sac for these three lots is only

[1:43:45] meeting half the requirements um, for

[1:43:47] the cul-de-sac development. Uh, and

[1:43:50] that's because it's what's on the uh, at

[1:43:53] the proposed change of property. So, um,

[1:43:58] we I think, uh, we're assuming that they

[1:44:01] the applicant is

[1:44:03] assuming that the neighboring property

[1:44:04] will take on the responsibility of

[1:44:06] finishing out the full width

[1:44:07] requirements when it develops, if it

[1:44:09] does.

[1:44:10] So, the applicant and neighboring parcel

[1:44:12] need to go through an exchange of

[1:44:13] property or receiving approval on the

[1:44:14] boundary line adjustment for the

[1:44:16] possibility of the cul-de-sac. Uh, when

[1:44:19] doing the adjustment, staff recommends

[1:44:20] that the boundary adjusted meet the

[1:44:22] right-of-way requirements of cul-de-sacs

[1:44:24] in the code.

[1:44:25] Um, because if it's not, then it will be

[1:44:27] have to be re- readjusted later through

[1:44:29] a plat amendment.

[1:44:31] So, that was the the main thing we

[1:44:33] noticed there.

[1:44:34] And then, just the other is the same as

[1:44:36] the the last one, provide Alpine

[1:44:38] irrigation water shares to satisfy the city's water requirements.

[1:44:42] >> So, so, Kaden, just a quick question on

[1:44:44] that and and just pardon my ignorance,

[1:44:46] but, um, this isn't a cart before the

[1:44:49] horse situation. I mean, shouldn't, for

[1:44:51] example,

[1:44:52] should that already take place with the

[1:44:54] neighbor before this comes to us or

[1:44:57] it just seems odd that we're kind of

[1:45:00] making the the Mhm. I mean,

[1:45:04] >> Yeah, I think it could be done that way

[1:45:07] because this is preliminary plat plat

[1:45:09] approval and this applicant's been

[1:45:10] waiting for a long time to get this in

[1:45:12] front of you. We determined that it

[1:45:13] would be fine to to bring this to you

[1:45:15] that's to see the plan. Um, but

[1:45:18] obviously, it couldn't be done without

[1:45:20] that boundary line adjustment.

[1:45:22] >> So, so, you're bringing it you're

[1:45:23] bringing it before us, but it is a

[1:45:25] condition.

[1:45:25] >> Yeah.

[1:45:27] >> Correct.

[1:45:27] >> I think that's

[1:45:30] >> Ross, you have a comment?

[1:45:31] >> Mhm.

[1:45:32] I think we're good.

[1:45:34] Take your time.

[1:45:35] >> Should we go ahead and and if go ahead

[1:45:37] and finish your your presentation?

[1:45:38] >> Yeah, and I know the applicant has

[1:45:40] talked to us

[1:45:40] >> on that one.

[1:45:41] >> Yeah, the applicant has talked to us

[1:45:42] about that they've already been in

[1:45:44] contact with the neighboring property

[1:45:45] and that they're working to do that.

[1:45:48] Um

[1:45:50] and so

[1:45:51] because of that as well, we determined

[1:45:53] that it would be fine to come as as a

[1:45:54] preliminary approval today.

[1:45:57] So, just to finish this up, yeah, the

[1:45:59] findings would be that it complies with

[1:46:02] the TR 10,000 zone. Um the all the new

[1:46:05] building footprints that are proposed do

[1:46:07] not include areas of floodway.

[1:46:09] Um they may include areas of the flood

[1:46:11] zone and require additional approval

[1:46:14] from from FEMA and that this should be a

[1:46:16] note on the plat.

[1:46:18] Um and it meets all requirements of the exception to the ordinance as

[1:46:23] long as they are able to do that

[1:46:25] boundary line adjustment.

[1:46:27] So, our full recommendation would be to

[1:46:29] approve the preliminary plan with the

[1:46:32] conditions that the trail be determined

[1:46:33] as the last one that the same as the

[1:46:35] last

[1:46:36] application. A boundary adjustment be

[1:46:38] completed between the applicant and the

[1:46:40] neighboring property that allows the

[1:46:41] full size of the right away before final

[1:46:43] plat approval.

[1:46:45] The plat includes a plat note dedicating

[1:46:47] the proposed public streets to Alpine

[1:46:48] City.

[1:46:49] The plat includes a plat note that says

[1:46:51] that any building footprints in the

[1:46:52] flood zone require additional approval

[1:46:54] from FEMA.

[1:46:57] » Okay, can you just clear something up

[1:46:58] for me, too? Then, on the lot width,

[1:47:01] area, and shape, there was a mistake in

[1:47:03] our packet cuz you

[1:47:05] indicate here there's no minimum lot

[1:47:07] size for lots in the senior housing

[1:47:09] overlay

[1:47:10] zone. So, this is not this So, each of

[1:47:14] these lots, there's what, three?

[1:47:16] >> Three.

[1:47:16] >> Okay. Yes, and they all do meet the lot

[1:47:18] width requirements.

[1:47:20] >> my I see that one's 10,000 and change.

[1:47:22] 10,000.

[1:47:22] >> Yeah, sorry. I guess in the in the

[1:47:24] shuffle of putting this packet together

[1:47:25] that

[1:47:25] >> And and the other two are okay.

[1:47:27] >> Yes, they do all meet the lot right with

[1:47:29] requirements here alongside the

[1:47:31] cul-de-sac right away.

[1:47:33] Yep.

[1:47:34] >> Yeah, and and before we next month when

[1:47:37] we approve all of this,

[1:47:40] probably ought to fix fix that. So

[1:47:42] >> Yeah.

[1:47:44] That will be updated.

[1:47:48] Right, so

[1:47:50] let me just show So this is the Let me

[1:47:52] jump to actually the plat. This is one

[1:47:54] of the pages in the plat packet.

[1:47:56] Let me go to the actual plat.

[1:48:06] Maybe that's a little too small.

[1:48:09] So here's the actual plat.

[1:48:12] Um this is only three lots. A minor

[1:48:15] subdivision in our code allows for three

[1:48:17] lots or less to be just city staff

[1:48:19] approval.

[1:48:20] But because of the new cul-de-sac

[1:48:22] proposed, that's why it's coming before

[1:48:24] you today.

[1:48:25] >> Okay.

[1:48:27] Yeah, I was wondering why that was the

[1:48:29] case. So great.

[1:48:31] So it's just because of that cul-de-sac.

[1:48:33] >> Correct. And what I was discussing in

[1:48:35] the packet above is um a cul-de-sac

[1:48:38] requires a 60-ft

[1:48:41] uh radius, so 120 across the entirety of

[1:48:44] the turnaround.

[1:48:44] >> Yeah.

[1:48:46] >> And so we noticed they're maybe a maybe

[1:48:48] a little short here.

[1:48:49] Um the right-of-way distance here should be

[1:48:53] 54 ft. They have 27 on this side, so

[1:48:56] that meets that half, but then it's

[1:48:57] obviously too short on this side.

[1:49:00] Again, that's probably because they're

[1:49:01] expecting that when this southern

[1:49:03] property or

[1:49:05] to them the western property develops

[1:49:07] that they'll they'll finish out that

[1:49:09] right-of-way.

[1:49:10] But because they'll need to do that

[1:49:11] boundary line adjustment anyway to

[1:49:13] adjust this bold property line,

[1:49:16] the staff recommends that they just do

[1:49:18] it according to the right-of-way

[1:49:20] requirements for a cul-de-sac at that

[1:49:21] time. If that makes sense.

[1:49:23] >> Well, at that at that time. Okay.

[1:49:28] And is that just a vacant lot right now

[1:49:29] or just dirt? There's not a home or

[1:49:31] anything in there that needs to be

[1:49:32] adjusted with the current owner?

[1:49:36] >> The property to the west are you talking

[1:49:37] about, Commissioner?

[1:49:38] >> Where you

[1:49:39] the south side or the bottom side of the

[1:49:42] cul-de-sac.

[1:49:43] >> Yeah, I believe so. Yeah,

[1:49:45] the up There is a home there. Okay.

[1:49:52] » Yeah, there there is a home back there.

[1:49:57] » And I believe that's all I have. If you

[1:49:59] have any other questions, feel free to

[1:50:02] let me know.

[1:50:03] Okay.

[1:50:05] >> So, I go down to page

[1:50:07] 83. Is that 83?

[1:50:10] 84. Is that where it's showing the home?

[1:50:14] » What I was trying to find out if it

[1:50:17] put them out of compliance in any way.

[1:50:20] It's back further.

[1:50:21] >> Yeah, it's back it's back four.

[1:50:24] >> And you can see these dash lines here.

[1:50:25] These are

[1:50:27] potential opportunities for this

[1:50:29] property owner to subdivide in the

[1:50:30] future. Yeah.

[1:50:34] » Maintaining that front distance, right?

[1:50:40] » Yeah, that's right.

[1:50:41] >> Yeah.

[1:50:43] It's pretty small on that cul-de-sac.

[1:50:46] Does it Does that meet Does that meet

[1:50:48] their requirements on that big parcel?

[1:50:53] In the cul-de-sac, that little front.

[1:50:55] Not that one, keep going or that. Yeah,

[1:50:57] keep going all the way. That one right

[1:50:59] there.

[1:51:00] Is that Is that big enough?

[1:51:05] On the Yeah, right there.

[1:51:09] » That's a good question. I'm not sure. We

[1:51:11] haven't investigated [clears throat]

[1:51:12] fully the

[1:51:13] this proposal cuz it's still again it's

[1:51:15] in

[1:51:16] hasn't been a

[1:51:18] proposed at all as an application.

[1:51:21] » Yeah, um

[1:51:24] Can Berg at the required front yard setback, it

[1:51:29] meets the 90 ft.

[1:51:30] >> Oh, it does. Okay, that's 90 ft. Okay.

[1:51:32] >> On the cul-de-sac, you don't measure

[1:51:34] right at the cul-de-sac. You measure at

[1:51:35] the at the setback. So, that's why it

[1:51:37] widens out.

[1:51:38] >> Okay. Okay.

[1:51:41] >> And then we we show the right of way

[1:51:43] line or our proposed plat boundary

[1:51:47] um

[1:51:48] behind the curb and gutter. So, you have

[1:51:51] all the street improvements for the

[1:51:53] cul-de-sac. We have just not

[1:51:57] proposed building the sidewalk

[1:52:00] >> Sure.

[1:52:01] >> there along the adjoining property

[1:52:03] owners side.

[1:52:03] >> Sure.

[1:52:04] >> Yeah.

[1:52:05] >> Okay.

[1:52:06] >> For this point, that was kind of what we

[1:52:08] negotiated

[1:52:10] with the property owner. So, you can

[1:52:11] make the cul-de-sac functions, the

[1:52:13] roadway functions.

[1:52:15] If you go to back to that first page,

[1:52:17] that's why we drew in the proposed

[1:52:20] sidewalk.

[1:52:21] >> Okay.

[1:52:21] >> You know, so you can see that it ends at

[1:52:23] the end of the

[1:52:23] >> Okay, sure.

[1:52:24] >> 103.

[1:52:25] >> Yeah.

[1:52:26] >> And then we show the the trail

[1:52:28] portion there along

[1:52:31] 101 and 102 being full.

[1:52:33] >> Okay.

[1:52:34] >> You know, there's no planter there. It's

[1:52:35] just all sidewalk.

[1:52:36] >> Yeah. Okay.

[1:52:37] >> So, regardless of what happens with the

[1:52:39] adjoining property

[1:52:42] >> There's no half weird cul-de-sac.

[1:52:45] >> It'll be fully

[1:52:47] 60 ft 120 ft diameter

[1:52:50] on the on the

[1:52:51] >> The right of way will not be We we were

[1:52:53] short on the right of way there, but the roadway asphalt will

[1:53:01] The cul-de-sac will function. He the

[1:53:04] adjoining property owner, as you can see

[1:53:06] on the grading plan,

[1:53:08] we were also negotiated a grading

[1:53:10] easement for him. He didn't want

[1:53:14] He wanted to maintain as much of his

[1:53:16] property

[1:53:18] without impacts that he's using right

[1:53:21] now.

[1:53:21] >> Sure.

[1:53:22] >> And so we started the grading

[1:53:24] on the back of the curve instead of

[1:53:26] another

[1:53:27] 10 ft into his property to construct the

[1:53:31] sidewalk.

[1:53:31] >> Okay.

[1:53:32] >> That was his concern. That was a

[1:53:34] concession that he asked and

[1:53:36] that's what we're proposing.

[1:53:37] >> Okay.

[1:53:39] Can I interject here, Ken? Um can you

[1:53:42] just So

[1:53:44] property lines are a foot behind

[1:53:46] sidewalk.

[1:53:47] So if they ever do develop this, they're

[1:53:49] going to have to come in and do a plat

[1:53:51] amendment and change all that anyway. So

[1:53:54] why not do it right now?

[1:53:55] >> when they develop, they will have to

[1:53:57] dedicate the rest of that right-of-way

[1:54:00] when they dedicate their lots

[1:54:03] as well.

[1:54:05] >> So they'll

[1:54:05] >> So they have to do a subdivision

[1:54:07] >> plat map

[1:54:08] >> anyway.

[1:54:09] >> Yeah.

[1:54:10] >> So they'll have a pub they'll have their small portion

[1:54:14] of a public road

[1:54:16] dedication that we do the sidewalk.

[1:54:18] >> Okay.

[1:54:18] >> Would that Would that work, Jason?

[1:54:20] >> It yes, it it will.

[1:54:22] >> Yeah.

[1:54:22] >> It we just figured why not do it now.

[1:54:25] >> And we proposed that but that was part

[1:54:27] of his uh I want to maintain as much of

[1:54:32] my property

[1:54:34] as as he has it.

[1:54:35] >> Okay.

[1:54:36] >> Yeah, that's fine.

[1:54:40] » Okay.

[1:54:40] >> And just to clarify, this is a straight

[1:54:42] line right now.

[1:54:44] >> Yeah.

[1:54:45] >> And so that's why the whole boundary

[1:54:46] line adjustment topic has been brought

[1:54:48] up that they need to adjust that

[1:54:50] boundary or else if they do get approval

[1:54:52] for this,

[1:54:56] I mean, this property will have an

[1:54:57] adjusted boundary without any

[1:54:59] improvements and so

[1:55:00] >> it doesn't work.

[1:55:01] >> Yeah.

[1:55:01] >> Right.

[1:55:03] >> Okay.

[1:55:07] Um

[1:55:09] Uh

[1:55:10] Jason, Cayden, anything else?

[1:55:12] On this?

[1:55:14] Okay.

[1:55:15] Um does anybody have any further

[1:55:17] questions for Ken or Ross before we

[1:55:20] discuss?

[1:55:25] » I don't care if you don't have a

[1:55:26] question, I got a comment.

[1:55:27] >> So, [laughter]

[1:55:28] Ross Welch again.

[1:55:31] I love the idea that this could be Ross

[1:55:33] Welch's property. Unfortunately, I am

[1:55:35] not in that financial situation.

[1:55:38] >> So,

[1:55:39] >> Cayden, I just represent Patterson

[1:55:40] Homes.

[1:55:41] And um

[1:55:43] on this project,

[1:55:45] I would love to say we have a written

[1:55:47] agreement. We have a verbal agreement.

[1:55:50] We're getting it done in writing.

[1:55:52] There's been a land swap done. The

[1:55:55] existing land owner to our west realizes

[1:55:58] the benefit that's happening that in the

[1:56:00] future could easily be subdivided in

[1:56:02] three and five. We will stub utilities

[1:56:05] to That's part of the arrangement. We'll

[1:56:06] stub utilities to the three.

[1:56:08] That's why we kind of diagram them out.

[1:56:11] Uh but in the interim, he preferred not

[1:56:14] to have a sidewalk because he doesn't

[1:56:16] want that public. We are putting a

[1:56:18] privacy fence along there to

[1:56:21] help him maintain his privacy for

[1:56:24] to that point he decides to subdivide.

[1:56:27] So, I just wanted to clarify that.

[1:56:29] >> Okay.

[1:56:30] >> Yeah, I'm guessing we'll we'll we'll

[1:56:32] just make comments in our motion, right?

[1:56:43] Yeah.

[1:56:44] >> Well,

[1:56:44] >> Yeah, I I mean I suppose it's a it's a

[1:56:46] timing issue where there there's

[1:56:49] conditions and requirements that we put

[1:56:51] on the approval.

[1:56:53] >> Yeah, exactly.

[1:56:54] >> they're ultimately not able to work

[1:56:55] those out, then

[1:56:56] >> Yeah.

[1:56:57] >> there is no

[1:56:57] >> what I'm saying. it doesn't go forward.

[1:56:59] >> Yeah.

[1:57:01] Staff has done a [snorts] good job

[1:57:02] identifying

[1:57:03] >> Yeah, I think so.

[1:57:03] >> I agree.

[1:57:05] >> Okay.

[1:57:06] Um

[1:57:06] any further questions, discussion

[1:57:08] points, clarifications?

[1:57:12] » Mr. Landowner's hesitancy again about

[1:57:15] signing it off, why don't you have

[1:57:17] something

[1:57:18] in writing?

[1:57:19] What's his hesitancy?

[1:57:21] >> Because because Ross apparently isn't

[1:57:23] doing a very good job getting any

[1:57:25] signatures on the piece of paper, so

[1:57:27] Sue's thanks for really nailing him on

[1:57:29] that.

[1:57:30] >> No, I just sometimes, you know, you

[1:57:33] don't want to be sorry.

[1:57:35] >> [laughter]

[1:57:43] >> Oh, we Oh, we like we like to blame Will

[1:57:44] for everything, for sure.

[1:57:47] Okay.

[1:57:47] >> Okay, I'm just saying. I'm I'm old

[1:57:50] school.

[1:57:50] >> Sue's always gets right to the heart of

[1:57:52] the matter.

[1:57:53] >> I do.

[1:57:54] Want to see it done right.

[1:57:55] >> Okay.

[1:57:56] Um

[1:57:56] >> That's just me.

[1:57:58] >> Sue, do you got a motion for us then?

[1:58:00] >> Come on.

[1:58:01] >> Okay.

[1:58:02] >> I'm not going to do one.

[1:58:03] >> Any other brave soul?

[1:58:05] >> Greg, you got one?

[1:58:06] >> I already done one and it failed.

[1:58:08] >> [laughter]

[1:58:08] >> Oh, come on. Come on.

[1:58:12] Hey, there's no There's no hard feelings

[1:58:15] here.

[1:58:15] >> [laughter]

[1:58:18] » We've all been there.

[1:58:20] >> [laughter]

[1:58:20] >> Left stranded.

[1:58:21] >> Yeah, except Sue's.

[1:58:23] >> Page, can you bring the motions up,

[1:58:24] please?

[1:58:25] >> I'm going [clears throat] to throw up.

[1:58:29] » But to answer your question, worst case

[1:58:30] scenario, he just doesn't get it

[1:58:31] approved.

[1:58:32] >> Yeah.

[1:58:33] >> Not subdivided.

[1:58:35] >> That's right.

[1:58:37] >> Yeah, and that's that's why we can put

[1:58:39] that those stipulations in the motion.

[1:58:42] >> [snorts]

[1:58:42] >> Get it in writing.

[1:58:44] >> There you go.

[1:58:45] >> Go for it.

[1:58:46] >> You're the one who's asking.

[1:58:47] >> [clears throat]

[1:58:51] » All right, I move to approve the

[1:58:53] preliminary application of of the Page

[1:58:55] Court Plat A

[1:58:57] with the following conditions:

[1:58:59] the trail location be determined before

[1:59:01] final plat approval.

[1:59:05] >> Marla, did you get that?

[1:59:08] » Sorry, I'll do it again.

[1:59:10] Uh I move to approve the preliminary

[1:59:12] application of the Page Court Plat A

[1:59:15] subject to the following conditions:

[1:59:16] that the trail location be determined

[1:59:18] before final plat approval,

[1:59:21] a boundary adjustment be completed

[1:59:22] between the applicant and the

[1:59:24] neighboring property that allows the

[1:59:25] full size of the right-of-way before

[1:59:28] final plat approval,

[1:59:30] the plat includes a plat note dedicated

[1:59:34] uh

[1:59:37] » Sorry, dedicating

[1:59:38] >> dedicating the proposed public street to

[1:59:41] Alpine City, that the plat and final

[1:59:45] and finally that the plat

[1:59:47] includes a plat note that says that any

[1:59:50] building footprints into the flood zone

[1:59:53] um what's AE?

[1:59:58] » That's just a type of flood zone that

[2:00:00] this would be in.

[2:00:02] >> into flood zone AE require additional

[2:00:05] approval from FEMA.

[2:00:07] >> Yeah.

[2:00:12] » Okay, um

[2:00:14] okay, did we get everything in that

[2:00:16] I wasn't sure if there's anything that

[2:00:17] came up in discussion that wasn't on the

[2:00:21] proposal. Okay, we have a motion by John

[2:00:25] McKnight. Do we have a second?

[2:00:26] >> Yeah, I'll second it.

[2:00:27] >> Second from Jeff Davis. Discussion on

[2:00:29] the motion.

[2:00:32] All in favor, I.

[2:00:33] >> I.

[2:00:34] >> Any opposed?

[2:00:35] >> I got one.

[2:00:36] >> We want to go home, Ross.

[2:00:37] >> I do, too.

[2:00:39] When somebody says I, you just kind of

[2:00:40] >> You just sit down.

[2:00:41] >> I know, but the motion had one

[2:00:45] I can't comply with,

[2:00:46] >> Okay.

[2:00:47] >> Which is the full right-of-way at

[2:00:50] recording of the plat or final plat. I

[2:00:53] can give you a full road.

[2:00:56] But I can't give the right-of-way on the

[2:00:58] neighbor's property for the sidewalk.

[2:01:00] Right?

[2:01:01] >> I don't think we're asking I don't think

[2:01:03] we're

[2:01:03] >> Well, that's you said a full

[2:01:04] right-of-way.

[2:01:06] So, just as long as we say it's the

[2:01:09] >> Oh, that that Okay, yeah, you're you're right. So, we we would have to we

[2:01:14] you'd probably have to

[2:01:15] amend amend that.

[2:01:18] So, so So,

[2:01:19] >> So,

[2:01:20] >> if I can jump in, sorry. I think the

[2:01:21] intent is to say that the boundary

[2:01:24] adjustment allow for the full size of

[2:01:26] the right-of-way.

[2:01:28] Not that the applicant has to complete

[2:01:29] the full right-of-way.

[2:01:30] >> No.

[2:01:32] The boundary is for

[2:01:34] the full road access,

[2:01:37] which is all we need to comply with.

[2:01:39] We're not giving the city it's part of

[2:01:42] the

[2:01:43] Yeah, we're doing basically the

[2:01:45] requirement of a

[2:01:47] road

[2:01:49] asphalt.

[2:01:50] Yeah.

[2:01:51] >> Curb curb and gutter, right?

[2:01:53] >> Yes.

[2:01:54] >> For the three new homes, and then it's

[2:01:56] up to the personal owner of the property

[2:01:58] now to get

[2:01:59] the other stuff approved.

[2:02:00] >> Well, it it'll be curb and gutter for

[2:02:01] all six lots.

[2:02:03] >> Yes.

[2:02:04] Right now. I mean, when you when you

[2:02:06] build

[2:02:09] » So, that's my concern. It'd be great if

[2:02:11] he was here.

[2:02:12] >> But the right-of-way goes into the

[2:02:14] median strip for the sidewalk.

[2:02:16] >> Yeah.

[2:02:16] >> And that's what they're not

[2:02:19] >> They they they want to make sure they're

[2:02:20] not held to that.

[2:02:22] Yeah, I agree. So, it seems to me like

[2:02:24] we have to make a

[2:02:26] an amendment to the motion.

[2:02:31] » I just wish the land owner the land

[2:02:33] owner was here.

[2:02:35] Just so

[2:02:35] >> Okay. So, let me think through Robert's

[2:02:38] Rules here, damn it.

[2:02:40] Um

[2:02:41] okay. [clears throat] So, we've got a

[2:02:42] motion.

[2:02:44] >> It was seconded by Jeff Davis.

[2:02:47] >> Yep.

[2:02:48] >> Um, then upon discussion, it appears

[2:02:50] that there needs to be, um,

[2:02:53] an amendment.

[2:02:54] >> voted on it.

[2:02:56] >> [laughter]

[2:02:56] >> Uh, what's that?

[2:02:57] >> You forgot that we actually voted on it.

[2:02:58] >> Yeah, um,

[2:03:00] >> [clears throat]

[2:03:00] >> Never done that.

[2:03:01] >> Well, we didn't quite get through the

[2:03:02] vote. So,

[2:03:04] >> It what It didn't get counted.

[2:03:05] >> No, no. So, um,

[2:03:07] >> rescind that vote.

[2:03:08] >> Yeah, so we will rescind the vote

[2:03:10] because the vote was not completed

[2:03:12] because there was an objection to the

[2:03:15] marriage

[2:03:17] from the cheap seats. So,

[2:03:20] um, okay. So, let's just assume that

[2:03:22] we've got a motion and

[2:03:25] uh, a second, and then in in discussion,

[2:03:29] uh, there arose an issue with the

[2:03:32] language of the right-of-way. So, um,

[2:03:35] >> [clears throat]

[2:03:36] >> Jeff, are you okay with us taking with

[2:03:40] John taking a moment and amending the

[2:03:42] motion with respect to the right-of-way

[2:03:45] language?

[2:03:46] >> Yes.

[2:03:46] >> Okay.

[2:03:47] Um, John, do you understand the

[2:03:49] objection and do you have language that

[2:03:51] would that would likewise accommodate

[2:03:53] the concerns of the city?

[2:03:56] To amend your motion with respect to the

[2:03:58] right-of-way.

[2:04:05] Or, Caden, could you suggest language

[2:04:08] that accommodates the city?

[2:04:09] >> than a little the right-of-way as shown

[2:04:12] on that plat, right? That shows the

[2:04:14] right-of-way of the property

[2:04:17] right there.

[2:04:19] That That That adjustment is done in

[2:04:22] accordance with this exhibit type thing.

[2:04:25] >> Okay, what what what page are we on?

[2:04:28] >> 92.

[2:04:29] okay.

[2:04:32] So, bring bring the, uh,

[2:04:35] motion.

[2:04:36] There we go, okay.

[2:04:39] so [snorts] we are amending

[2:04:42] our uh

[2:04:43] approval

[2:04:45] just just to say that

[2:04:48] the boundary adjustment to be completed

[2:04:50] between the applicant and the

[2:04:51] neighboring property

[2:04:53] shall reflect

[2:04:56] that

[2:04:58] right of way shown

[2:05:00] on page 92

[2:05:04] of the in the uh

[2:05:06] meeting packet.

[2:05:10] » Sure.

[2:05:10] >> Uh okay, Jeff, do you accept the

[2:05:13] uh amendment?

[2:05:14] >> Yeah, it's it's not specific, but we can

[2:05:17] go off of that and the language is

[2:05:19] there, so yes, that's fine.

[2:05:21] >> Okay, we have a motion by John McKay, an

[2:05:23] amended motion by John McKay, and a

[2:05:25] second by Jeff Davis. Any discussion?

[2:05:31] » Do we know the landowner? Can we know

[2:05:33] the landowner's name?

[2:05:35] >> Well, it's on there, it's on the

[2:05:36] >> owned by the Devys.

[2:05:38] >> Last name was Devy, I think. It's still

[2:05:39] owned by the Devys.

[2:05:40] >> Is it What is Which Devy is it?

[2:05:45] » Well, Ryan Devy lives there. His dad,

[2:05:48] Lee Devy

[2:05:49] >> Yeah.

[2:05:49] >> It's his estate. It's Lee's estate.

[2:05:54] And Lee's

[2:05:55] passed away.

[2:05:55] >> Yeah.

[2:05:58] So, Ryan lives there.

[2:06:00] And so it's part of the estate.

[2:06:01] >> not Does he own it?

[2:06:03] >> No.

[2:06:03] it's

[2:06:04] >> He doesn't own it, though.

[2:06:05] >> Yeah, the family the estate, it's the

[2:06:07] trust.

[2:06:11] » So, basically we're saying they've got

[2:06:12] to get all that in writing.

[2:06:14] >> Yeah.

[2:06:14] >> That's kind of what we're saying.

[2:06:15] >> How old's Ryan?

[2:06:18] Oh, really? How old is he?

[2:06:19] >> [laughter]

[2:06:19] >> How old is he?

[2:06:20] >> Yeah.

[2:06:21] >> Uh I would guess I'm around 47,

[2:06:24] maybe.

[2:06:28] » Is the concern it's in a family trust,

[2:06:30] it's not going to ever be approved, and

[2:06:32] it's going to be ugly without it being

[2:06:33] finished with sidewalk.

[2:06:35] >> trust could get sideways with each other

[2:06:37] about stuff?

[2:06:37] >> Right, but if but

[2:06:39] >> get

[2:06:39] >> But but but I think the whole point is

[2:06:41] that I mean

[2:06:42] ultimately

[2:06:44] Pattersons and Ross will work with

[2:06:47] the owners

[2:06:49] and and to come to accommodation, or

[2:06:51] they won't. And in the case that they

[2:06:53] don't, then they don't meet the

[2:06:54] conditions, then the project doesn't go

[2:06:56] forward.

[2:06:57] >> Exactly.

[2:06:57] >> It's merely preliminary plat approval

[2:06:59] subject to these conditions.

[2:07:00] >> why he's hesitant.

[2:07:02] If that's all been talked about.

[2:07:04] >> Well, no, it's just it's

[2:07:07] >> What? What is it?

[2:07:09] >> Uh may

[2:07:10] >> [laughter]

[2:07:11] >> All right, so I'll

[2:07:12] >> Is that I mean, is that relevant to our our our motion?

[2:07:15] >> sure. Do you want me to put this on the

[2:07:16] record?

[2:07:17] >> Not really.

[2:07:17] >> I don't understand why.

[2:07:18] >> I I don't know. I don't think we need

[2:07:19] to. I don't think we need to.

[2:07:21] >> Don't we just need a written

[2:07:23] thing?

[2:07:23] >> No, I I mean I mean I think I think it's

[2:07:25] between the applicant and the the the

[2:07:28] landowner, and and not not

[2:07:30] >> Not us.

[2:07:31] >> Yeah, not us.

[2:07:32] >> It's not my fight.

[2:07:33] >> Okay, we have a

[2:07:35] amended motion

[2:07:36] and a second on the motion. Any

[2:07:39] discussion?

[2:07:41] Okay, all in favor, I. I.

[2:07:44] Any opposed?

[2:07:45] Okay, motion passes unanimously.

[2:07:48] Okay, thanks to all concerned.

[2:07:50] We appreciate it.

[2:07:54] Okay,

[2:07:55] we are down to communications. Anybody

[2:07:58] have a have communications to bring

[2:07:59] before the commission?

[2:08:02] >> The only thing I was going to say

[2:08:05] and you know, Spencer this is

[2:08:08] for Spencer's benefit, but Utah code

[2:08:12] specifically states that cities cannot

[2:08:17] pass

[2:08:18] ordinances that disallow the sale of guns.

[2:08:24] So, we couldn't as a city go, "Uh, we do

[2:08:28] not allow that."

[2:08:29] That's actually illegal.

[2:08:31] >> Yeah.

[2:08:32] I I think the only issue was

[2:08:34] is there some type of ordinance about

[2:08:36] the sale of guns within a certain number

[2:08:38] of feet of a preschool or Okay.

[2:08:41] >> There's not There's not at the state

[2:08:42] level.

[2:08:44] Alpine doesn't have it. There isn't at a

[2:08:46] state level. And there's not at a

[2:08:47] federal level,

[2:08:49] either. So, it at all three levels that that does not exist.

[2:08:53] >> Okay. Thank you, counselor.

[2:08:54] >> So, and I and I only bring it up because

[2:08:56] people called me prior to this meeting

[2:08:59] very concerned.

[2:09:01] So,

[2:09:02] um so, you know,

[2:09:05] the commissioner should know that by

[2:09:07] state law, we cannot do that.

[2:09:09] >> Okay.

[2:09:10] That's actually a very good

[2:09:11] clarification. Thank you.

[2:09:13] >> Oh, and one more thing, if you want.

[2:09:14] >> I would I would love one more thing.

[2:09:17] >> On on the on the flood plain,

[2:09:20] the the AE the E's the engineered. So,

[2:09:23] it's actually been engineered. So, to

[2:09:26] check, you know, for that for that flood

[2:09:29] plain.

[2:09:29] >> Okay.

[2:09:30] >> So,

[2:09:30] >> it is actually it's very awesome that we

[2:09:33] have one of the premier water experts

[2:09:35] sitting on our commission, actually. It

[2:09:37] is very helpful. Thank you, Jeff. We do

[2:09:38] appreciate that, actually.

[2:09:39] >> Tomorrow night's meeting, we should all

[2:09:40] go to that. Because we should tell Russ

[2:09:42] we don't have any water.

[2:09:43] >> You could You could come, yeah. Yeah,

[2:09:45] come to our water meeting tomorrow

[2:09:47] night.

[2:09:47] >> All right. Further communications.

[2:09:49] >> So, just one more thing. I've got a lot

[2:09:50] of stuff going in my neighborhood with

[2:09:52] that the just off of

[2:09:55] As you go down at at the end of Thinking

[2:09:58] North, Bob's Mountain Drive, that's all

[2:10:00] going to go now into those subdivisions.

[2:10:02] Remember when we had all that

[2:10:03] discussion?

[2:10:04] I just looked at the new plan, and I I

[2:10:07] have so many people calling me about

[2:10:08] this. I can't even go on the trails

[2:10:10] without being stopped. I I mean, it's

[2:10:11] just a concern. I just think we need to

[2:10:14] maybe make sure we revisit just like

[2:10:17] when when we moved there, we had to give

[2:10:20] up so much like a big chunk of our yard,

[2:10:23] because it's on a trail. So, they're

[2:10:25] trying to reroute with this new with

[2:10:27] this new developer,

[2:10:29] and they need to be sure that they when

[2:10:31] somebody's on a city trail, they have to

[2:10:33] be able to give some space. And I just

[2:10:35] haven't I want to find out who I've

[2:10:37] talked to Breezy, but who else is Maybe

[2:10:39] Marla can help me, but that probably

[2:10:41] should be given to this developer.

[2:10:43] >> If Marla's on, she might have heard you.

[2:10:45] >> Yeah. Well, I've been talking to her

[2:10:47] this week about it anyway, because

[2:10:48] they're trying to I have so many people

[2:10:50] that are so sick about what's happening

[2:10:52] to the trails up there. So, technically,

[2:10:55] they did post a sign that said you're

[2:10:57] now entering private property. They've

[2:10:58] been kind of let us cut through, but

[2:10:59] that's the only access that the people

[2:11:01] on that side of the town can get over to

[2:11:04] Lambert Park. So, if they're going to

[2:11:06] they said, "Oh, we're putting a road in

[2:11:07] along the little ditch." But the people if

[2:11:10] they're buttoning up against that, they

[2:11:12] have to give like everybody else has to

[2:11:14] a city trail, and I don't think that's

[2:11:16] known right now, cuz the developer

[2:11:17] [snorts]

[2:11:18] kind of changed the the way

[2:11:21] So, anyway, if we who should I really

[2:11:24] talk to about that? I said, "I'm going

[2:11:26] to talk to my little friends here and

[2:11:27] see."

[2:11:28] >> Well, um I I I I don't exactly know. I

[2:11:31] mean, I I

[2:11:32] >> There's our trail here.

[2:11:33] >> It hasn't come before us, but I would

[2:11:34] think that it was if you talked to Will

[2:11:36] Jones or Breezy Anson.

[2:11:37] >> And they got the authority to

[2:11:40] >> Well, I think they have a lot of the

[2:11:41] information for you on that. It's not

[2:11:44] anything that that's It's not anything

[2:11:45] come before us, nothing I know about.

[2:11:47] >> them your email. You're welcome.

[2:11:50] No, but you'll probably That's helpful.

[2:11:52] Um anyway, just that's just

[2:11:54] >> K- Kayden, you have a thought that if uh

[2:11:55] who who would be the contact person at

[2:11:57] the city if there's any questions about

[2:11:59] trails?

[2:11:59] >> and for me and Shane.

[2:12:01] >> Okay.

[2:12:02] Thanks for Thanks for

[2:12:03] >> Let the record reflect that if anybody

[2:12:05] has issues or questions about a trail in

[2:12:08] Alpine City that currently the people to

[2:12:10] talk to are Shane Sorenson and or Kayden

[2:12:13] Lyon.

[2:12:15] Or Sue Wittenberg.

[2:12:15] >> That's right.

[2:12:16] >> When they see her on the trail.

[2:12:17] >> Apparently, that's who they're talking

[2:12:18] to.

[2:12:19] >> All right. Any

[2:12:19] >> further communications?

[2:12:22] >> Our next [clears throat] planning

[2:12:22] commission is on July 7th. Or yes.

[2:12:26] >> That's correct.

[2:12:27] >> Okay. So we have minutes that

[2:12:28] [clears throat] we need to and I think

[2:12:29] we've got several meetings worth of

[2:12:31] minutes that we need to approve. So has

[2:12:34] anybody gone through those minutes and

[2:12:35] prepared to make a motion?

[2:12:37] >> year's last week's or last two weeks of

[2:12:39] >> Okay. Well, do we need to go through

[2:12:40] these one at a time? Why don't we Why

[2:12:41] don't we do them one at a time? Let's

[2:12:42] first go through the minutes of March

[2:12:44] 31st, 20 26.

[2:12:47] And um has somebody reviewed those

[2:12:49] minutes for accuracy and can we have a

[2:12:51] motion on those minutes from March 31st,

[2:12:54] 2025?

[2:12:55] >> I move to approve the minutes from the

[2:12:57] planning commission meeting held on

[2:12:58] March 31st, 2026 as written.

[2:13:03] >> Oh. Okay. Oh, yeah. Sorry. I didn't have

[2:13:05] my glasses on. My bad. That is 2026.

[2:13:07] Okay. We have a motion to approve the

[2:13:09] minutes of March 31st, 2026. Do we have

[2:13:12] a second?

[2:13:13] >> I'll second it.

[2:13:13] >> Okay. All in favor?

[2:13:15] >> I agree.

[2:13:15] >> I.

[2:13:16] >> Sorry. Let the record reflect that

[2:13:17] Michelle

[2:13:18] seconded that motion. Okay. Uh next we

[2:13:21] have minutes from June 2nd, 2026. Has

[2:13:23] anybody reviewed those minutes and would

[2:13:25] they like to make a motion?

[2:13:27] >> I move that those are accurate from June

[2:13:28] 2nd, 2026.

[2:13:30] >> Okay. We have a motion to approve the

[2:13:31] minutes from June 2nd, 2026 by Sue's

[2:13:33] Wittenberg. Do we have a second?

[2:13:35] >> I'll yeah.

[2:13:36] >> Second by John McKay. All in favor?

[2:13:39] I.

[2:13:40] Uh finally we have minutes from June

[2:13:42] 3rd,

[2:13:43] 2026.

[2:13:44] >> I don't know if that was yesterday or

[2:13:46] last

[2:13:47] >> It was the

[2:13:47] very next day.

[2:13:49] >> This was the special work session.

[2:13:51] >> Yes.

[2:13:51] >> Okay. So

[2:13:52] >> this coming to the planning commission

[2:13:54] and not city council?

[2:13:56] >> Because it was a joint work session.

[2:13:58] It's going to both planning commission

[2:14:00] and city council.

[2:14:01] >> Okay.

[2:14:02] >> Oh.

[2:14:05] Yeah.

[2:14:05] >> Oh, this was the Wednesday meeting.

[2:14:06] Okay. Well, then that would have That

[2:14:08] would That motion would probably need to

[2:14:09] come from either you or John then.

[2:14:11] >> Yes.

[2:14:12] >> I make a motion to approve the minutes

[2:14:14] from June 3rd, 2026.

[2:14:16] >> Okay, we have a motion from Michelle

[2:14:17] Shermer to approve the minutes of June

[2:14:19] 3rd, 2026. Do we have a second?

[2:14:21] >> Second.

[2:14:22] by John McKay. All in favor?

[2:14:24] >> Aye.

[2:14:25] Any opposed?

[2:14:27] Okay. I have motion to adjourn.

[2:14:29] >> I'll do the motion to adjourn.

[2:14:33] >> So moved by Jeff, seconded I think by

[2:14:36] Greg. All in favor? Aye.

[2:14:38] >> Aye.

[2:14:40] >> Meeting adjourned. Thank you.

[2:15:21] » It's a little crazy actually.

[2:15:24] Yeah, I'm going to smack you upside the

[2:15:29] » How much more discussion

[2:15:32] words coming out

[2:15:36] 4 years

[2:15:45] » I dropped it off.

[2:15:46] >> Oh.

[2:15:50] » No, I think I think it's

[2:16:06] » It's going to be ours.

[2:16:07] >> I told you

[2:16:12] It's a lot.

[2:16:23] Please.

[2:16:48] That's it.

[2:16:54] I see it. I see it.

[2:17:01] Yeah.

[2:17:05] I'm sorry.

[2:17:07] I know.

[2:17:13] I told you.

[2:17:18] I know.

[2:17:30] That's what I know.

[2:17:38] This is the one.

[2:17:39] >> Okay, so I don't

[2:17:41] >> Other than it

[2:17:43] » No, I'm like okay.

[2:17:47] » That's what we tried to

[2:17:48] This is the one.

[2:17:50] >> He already

[2:17:50] >> I know.

[2:17:51] >> Jake has a

[2:17:52] >> I know.

[2:17:53] >> World play.

[2:17:56] I don't know what

[2:17:58] That's all

[2:17:59] just I know.

[2:18:40] Thank you.

6.16.26 Planning Commission Meeting

Transcript