All right, it is 6:34 p.m. on Wednesday, August 20th. I am going to call this
meeting to order of the Mattress Planning Commission. Um, we'll first do
a roll call. It looks like um you can start. Commissioner Eder is here.
Commissioner Urban is here. Commissioner Kendall is here and we have
Commissioner Garrett and Commissioner Reynolds absent this evening. Do we have
a quorum? Chair, you have a quorum. >> All right. All right. We will move on
with our consent agenda. We can approve. These are all from four
different meetings. Um we do not need to approve them individually, but has
everyone had a chance to review the meeting minutes?
I'm gonna always correct. >> They are. Uh you guys are very accurate
on those. Um so if I can get a motion to approve the and you can say the four
dates that are listed here and we can approve them all at once. This is
Commissioner Eder and I approve the minutes for April 2nd, 2025, May 21st,
2025, June 4th, 2025, and August 6th of 2025 for the planning commission. And
» I second the motion. >> All right, I have a first and a second.
All those in favor say I. >> I.
» I. I. All right, everybody here says approved. Moving on, we will move on to
the public hearing. The public hearing is MP-25-1
Mule Deere Estates Master Plan Development. For those that are in the
audience, we kind of go through a set agenda on these um as far as the order
of the meeting. I'm going to read a document that is a lot of um words so I
try to say it fast but just in general the um we'll open the hearing I'll read
this complex document then staff has a chance to report on the proposal and
then we hear from the applicant we hear from any uh proponents
which are people that are for we hear any neutral testimony and then we will
hear from opponent testimony. Sorry. During that section, we will have the
opportunity to hear comments from um you if you are here to make a comment and
then the applicant will have a chance to talk about anything that was mentioned
in those three sections above. And then after that, we will see if we have any
other questions for staff and then we will have a the commission will have a
chance to discuss the item before us um before we decide to make a decision or
keep the public hearing open and make a decision later. that type of thing. So,
here we go with the long statement. Please stay with me. This is the time
and place set for hearing on planning file number MP25-1.
The hearing is now called to order. The hearing will proceed as follows. Staff
will present the staff report. Applicant will present its application and
supporting evidence. Any interested persons will then be provided the
opportunity to present testimony or evidence in support, evidence that is
neutral, or evidence that is in opposition. Applicant, as the party
bearing the burden of proof, will then be afforded an opportunity to present
rebuttal testimony. Staff will provide closing comments. Any party may request
that the written record remain open to respond to testimony presented at the
hearing. At the conclusion of this hearing, the planning commission may
close the public hearing and deliberate towards a decision, close the public
hearing and defer deliberations towards a decision at a date and time certain,
or continue the public hearing at a date and time certain. All testimony,
argument, and evidence must be directed to the applicable criteria or any other
approval criteria you believe to be applicable. Matters unrelated to the
application are not pertinent to the planning commission's decision in these
proceedings. Failure on the part of any person to raise an issue that is not
specific enough to afford the planning commission and parties to this
proceeding an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the city
council and land use board of appeals on that issue. Failure of the applicant to
raise constitutional or other issues relating to conditions of approval with
sufficient relevance to allow the local government or its designate to respond
to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. Commissioners
must disclose any exparte contacts including site visits, biases or
conflicts of interest. Does any commissioner have anything to disclose
and if so please state the nature? >> This is Commissioner Eder and I do not.
Commissioner Kendall, I do not. >> Commissioner Urban, I do not.
Does any party wish to challenge any member of the hearings body based on
exparte context, biases or conflicts?
Okay, seeing none, we will now listen to the staff deliver the staff report.
Okay, thank you. So this is file uh MP 25-1.
It's for the um the lot shown on the screen. It's identified as 1113 12CA 900
and 600. You'll see on your agenda um we're discussing this in two separate
items. We've split it between the master plan development and the subdivision. Um
this is just to kind of break things up um administratively for you all. The
master plan is more of a bird's eye view of the development. Um while the
subdivision we can get into the nitty-gritty kind of lot development
standards um specific. So uh here you can see that the proposed uh development
is on southeast McTagert um Southeast 10th Street and Southeast J
Street. It's composed uh of two lots. Uh the kind of the demarcation line is up
here um on the northern knob. It's an acre and a half zoned R1 and to the
south it's uh zoned R3. The total site is 13 acres in size and they're
proposing 21 hound town homes in 47 single family dwellings for a 68 lot
subdivision. Um you'll remember from our housing
capacity analysis that um all housing in Madress is uh needed housing. We require
affordable housing um high income housing and all different types single
family building and town and town homes and uh per uh Oregon statute OS197
uh307 we need to adopt clear and objective
standards to review this development. So we can't take a discretionary path when
um reviewing this criteria. Some of that criteria is making sure that public
facilities have adequate capacity to serve the development. We also look at
our municipal code and requirements as far as um how many uh housing types are
proposed on the uh development based off of the the lots proposed and then um
compliance with uh applicable code requirements.
So, taking a look at the plat here, let me move this so you can see it.
Um, you can see that they're proposing a mix of town homes and single family
dwellings. Code requires that if you're doing more than uh 50 lots in a
subdivision, you need um at least two dwelling types. So, they meet that
requirement. And they can't um propose say like 48 single family dwellings in
two town homes. it has to they can't exceed or yeah exceed over 80% of a um
single housing type. So this breaks down to about 70% single family dwellings and
30% town homes. Um we've looked at density. So this northern part here, you
can see this blue line is kind of where you see the R1 zone and the R3. R1
requires uh at least four dwellings per acre and they uh are proposing 4.1. And
then down here in the R3, it's six dwellings per acre and they're proposing
6.1. So they're kind of on that lower threshold, but they're still meeting our
requirement. And we also looked at um our code requirements for uh
infrastructure. Specifically, uh we looked at the traffic impass impact
analysis provided. So the key point points from that um is that no capacity
mitigation mitigation is required. They're not going to need to install any
kind of traffic lights or special turn lanes um for this development because
they're on the lower capacity of um density. They are actually like 50% of
the uh maximum theoretical that the site could be developed to. So that's uh good
for the area. And um all study intersections will continue to meet the
city's level of service standards and ODAT ODOT mobility targets. So, I'll
leave um this plan up here if you guys want to refer to it while asking
questions and give Craig a chance if he wants to chime in on anything.
Does the commission have any questions for staff at this point?
» No. >> Okay. So, now we will hear from the
applicant. If the applicant would like to come
forward, state your name. You've been here before.
It's been a couple years.
I think the red light. Yep. Okay. Uh, good evening, commission. My name is
Hayes McCoy. I'm the civil engineer for the applicant who's Gary Alers, who is
here this evening. And, um, I don't have much to add to, uh, Bethy's report. The
one reason I the one reason I wanted to state why we were on the lower of the
density is there's a lot of topography on this site and if you've seen it
driving down Jane Street and how couldn't you um there's a big drop off
so the trying to meet you know be uh it
lends itself to a lower density otherwise uh
uh higher density will require a lot more grading. Now we have some with town
homes. Um but uh if we had say apartments or anything uh it would it
would really increase the cost of the project. So anyway that's all I have to
add is the reason for the density. Do you have any questions for me?
» So I guess I do have a couple questions. So, the neighborhood that's across from
the street, the street on J Street has very steep lots and fencing around
um >> I know which lots you're talking about.
» Is that a similar look or is this um are you know is this development
going to have I guess a better setback elevation
change? >> Okay. because you're you're talking
about those lots where the fence goes way down and towards the intersection of
Mlofflin and J Street. Uh th this one would look different. We don't you know
the closest thing we have is up on phase 4. Um
and I can't read the lot number there. So there's a handful that get close to
that. Lot 65 I think is what it looks like near phase four. So, there's a
handful that could enter that criteria, but um I don't think those lots are
nearly as big as the ones you're referring to at Strawberry Heights.
» These lots will have a grade. >> Those ones will uh 65 would be one. Um,
» and all it looks like from just the schematics that we have that the
entrance and exits to these lots would be from an interior street as opposed to
J Street itself. >> Correct. Your public works director
would not allow me to access J Street, but we we'll have a pedestrian trail
connection actually that's intended to be lined up with the intersection of
where um 10th comes in. >> Oh, good.
» From the south, it doesn't show up on that map, but uh that was one thing that
we were asked to put in. Well, it does seem we know that this lot is crossed a
lot by people who live in the adjacent subdivision. Um, so just making sure
that that pedestrian traffic that's going to the schools, you know, I assume
the sidewalk will be >> on J Street and 10th.
» Well, we we'll have a sidewalk along J Street. It'll be adjacent to the curb,
but we'll also um we're also supposed to have a pedestrian
connection. And that one will be u there's there's a drop off from there.
So, it'll have to come from J Street and it'll kind of come down like a ramp.
» Okay. >> And then go between two lots, then it'll
enter the subdivision. And the nice thing about that, I think the city, what
this reason the city was asking us to do that is it gets kids who would be
walking to Buff Elementary, walking through a neighborhood instead of J
Street, which you know, sometimes people speed on that street.
» Yeah. No, I I've definitely seen some things happen on that street that
shouldn't happen. So, >> okay. Walking through a neighborhood is
safer. >> Yes,
» definitely. That's That's where I'd prefer my my kid to go.
» Um, do you anyone have any questions for the applicant at this point?
» Uh, what phase are you working on presently?
Are you trying to get approval for? Is it phase
because you've got phase three, phase two?
Yes, that's >> we have them all, but which ones are
you? Is phase one going to be the first one?
» Yes. So, >> phase four is where there's that real
» phase four has some topographic challenges. So,
» right now we're just approving for phase one or are we approving for
the whole thing? I believe it's for all the whole thing, but I believe in the
packet there's a page that has the expected date for each phase
implementation. Perfect. That might give you some information
there. >> Okay. So, fall of 25, phase 2, 26, phase
three. Okay. So, it's spread out. >> 24 9 six 21.
» And so, the town homes would be all part of phase three.
» Three. Correct.
» Um I don't know if this is relevant or not, but is this like more affordable
housing or is this along the medium um price housing of the area?
» Um market rate, there's no affordable housing or or goal to meet an AMU. It's
what the market allow. >> That's right. Okay.
This isn't relevant, but I just feel like in the morning it's crazy on Jay
and and is it buff >> with the stop sign with this growth. I
really feel like at some point public works will have to put in a light there
with with how bad the traffic will get. >> But that's not relevant to your guys'
plan. I'm just I'm just commenting that traffic there in the morning. and I go
every morning and it is that stop sign is crazy.
» Can I respond to that just a little bit though because maybe maybe it's well
more traffic is always frustrating. So, uh one of the features one of the things
that public works did ask us at our southeast corner. You'll see that
rounded off lot right there. And the purpose of that is in the future when
traffic is more crazy than maybe it already is, uh, the city hopes to have a
roundabout there to to help with traffic and turning vehicles. So,
um,
» any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you.
» Thank you.
» Okay. Uh, we will now receive public testimony. When you testify, please
state your name and address for the record. All testimony shall be directed
to the planning commission and not to the applicant, staff, or other members
of the audience. If you have a question for another party, please direct your
question to the planning commission chair, and the chair will determine
whether a response from the other party is appropriate. Please keep your
testimony concise and relevant to the issues before us this evening. It is
perfectly acceptable and encouraged to indicate that you agree with the points
made by another party instead of reiterating the point. Testimony will be
received in the following order. Persons persons speaking in support of the
application, persons who wish to provide neutral testimony, and then persons who
wish to provide opposition testimony. Finally, we will hear rebuttal argument
from the applicant to the testimony provided. Who would like to testify in
support of the application? Is there anyone here or online
who would like to provide neutral testimony? Neutral testimony is
testimony that does not express an opinion or an approval or denial of the
application but addresses the issues involved in the proceedings such as site
design, conditions of approval or similar items.
Anyone online for neutral? >> Chair, I believe we have someone for
neutral. >> Okay, go ahead. Looks like it's Jerome.
» Hello. >> Can you hear me?
» Yes. Thank you. Jerome, can you please state your address for the record?
» It is 811 Southeast 10th Street, Madress, Oregon 97741.
My full name is Jerome Turbate. Um,
» go ahead. >> So, I have a question because on the
plans of this, a portion of the culde-sac in phase 4 is part of my
property line and I haven't had a discussion with anybody about this. Um,
if you guys approve this, like is this something that you guys are you allowed
to just take part of my property for this development
or is this something that needs to be discussed between myself and the owner
of the land that's developing this? >> No, I believe that the city probably
provided you a notice, but that is not normal uh course of action for the city
to take a property. There may be an easement um that is part of that, but I
can maybe have staff respond to that if possible.
Um so I would maybe like the applicant to respond to that if that's possible.
If you Okay, that'd be great. Would would you mind going on?
» The applicant is going to respond to your question. And just to be clear, do
you do you know which lot we're talking about here? I don't. It's the lot just
north of phase 4. That like rhombus rectangular lot.
» So I think is it the one that says TL700?
» Yeah, I think so. It's a little blurry the presentation so it's hard for me to
see but yeah. Yeah, TL700. That one right there.
» Okay. And I know when when I first bought this property three years ago,
somebody I think the owner of this came and talked to us about this about it
possibly being future plans, but that was the only discussion I had about this
subject until I received um the letter about this meeting.
» Okay, go ahead applicant. >> Okay, good evening Jerome. My name is
Hayes McCoy. I'm uh representing applicant. So to answer questions, uh
no, you don't have to give up your land. um we would need to approach you and in
this process first we're trying to seek an approval of this development. Now
phase four is one of the later phases but at that as the time we are getting
closer to where we're planning the construction
uh myself one of the owners the developers perhaps
with the city would discuss potentially uh purchasing or asking you to dedicate
that rightaway at that time and that can be negotiated. Now, you may decide, you
know what, I really don't want to do that. And that's fine, too. And we would
need to modify our subdivision accordingly. Um, the reason we show it
where it currently is, which does show us, assuming we could acquire your
property, is because we would be directly across Sun Drive. And at
intersections, we we want to try to line up those streets as best as possible.
» I'm guessing this is his, but see, it would come this is probably his property
line comes here. So, it's a it's the road. Can you put the map back up? So,
it's the road going into the culdesac that's on his property.
» Yes. >> Yeah. There was a there was another
photo earlier that showed the where that road was overlapping as well.
» Yep. No, I see that. So, the culde-sac would be
» Yeah. >> through kind of the end part of your
property there. >> Yeah. which I am, you know,
» I'm totally up foreigner >> um, you know, discussion if the plans
get approved. Uh, I just wanted to make sure that the city approving the plans
didn't like, you know, I didn't have to forfeit that portion of the land because
it's in the plans because I'm not, you know, I'm not a lawyer. I have no idea
what the, you know, legality of that is. >> No, that I think that's a valid question
that you have, but no. Um, as uh, um, Mr. Hayes has said that that is kind of
wishful thinking on their part after they come together with an agreement
with the current property owner for those lines.
The question before us today is more about
the master plan big picture items, right?
» It's not the specifics and and that would not be a normal process where we
could approve in a meeting like this somebody losing a portion of their
property. So, it sounds like you will be approached at some point to talk about
that and then it would be up to you to decide whether or not you are willing to
come to terms with that. If not, then the property owner would have to adjust
their plans for that phase. >> Okay. No, that totally makes sense. I
just wanted to double check. I do have other questions about the development as
well. Um, if that's okay. >> Sure. Um so is is this development going
to be because of the increased traffic of you know 68 homes I believe it was um
some of them town homes the you know it's a pretty it's a few hundred people
that are going to be in the area. Is there going to is there going to be like
any effort for noise dampening with J Street right there, which is a pretty I
mean Tenth is also a super busy street. Um and Jay's pretty busy as well. And so
I think the increased traffic might just create more natural noise because it's
going to be busier. Are there any has there been any thought on that? So, um,
as mentioned earlier in the meeting, whenever a master plan comes forth, we
do have to work with the public works director and also the Oregon Department
of Transportation to review the plan to make sure that it meets the thresholds
for the roads that are currently in place. Um, also any new developments
have to meet the design code set forth by the city. Um, so those questions have
been answered during the applicant process of of just filling out the forms
and coming forward to the city. Um, so from what I understand, those questions
have been addressed through those analyses from the public works
department and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Is that correct, staff?
They have um placed conditions of approval for improvements, but they have
not stipulated anything as far as um noise dampening.
» Okay. And all this information is in the previous meeting notes that led up to
the the master plan being brought forth. Right.
» So when uh a plan like this comes forth, usually the applicant meets with city
staff over multiple time periods and over multiple document reviews. and it
usually comes to the planning commission at a point where um they've been able to
say these are the things that must happen in order for this to be approved.
Um so those discussions have happened from the city and they are all part of
the big block of papers that we've reviewed in this hearing and that packet
is available in your uh publicly if you wanted to download that. But you also
are welcome to schedule a meeting to talk with staff about any questions or
specifics that you have outside of this meeting because this is still in
development phases and um they have the knowledge to answer questions um in
their office at any time. >> Okay. Uh and then this you're saying
this information is available in the packet that's attached to this meeting.
» Okay. Perfect. All right. I'll just I'll look through that and if I have
questions I'll I'll get with one of the staff members.
» Definitely. And and even if it's that you just want to talk with them, the
city planning people would love to hear more from people who live in our area
who have general questions. I think even just hearing more about how this process
works is helpful to people. So, um even if you just wanted to meet with them
about how things work, um they would be happy to meet with you.
Okay. Yeah, totally. I appreciate it. Thank you.
» You're welcome. All right. Do we have any other neutral
testimony? All right.
So, we now will listen. Thank you for coming forward. We will now uh accept
testimony in opposition. Do we have any testimony in opposition?
Anyone online?
Okay. Do you does the applicant uh feel like you need to provide any further
information from what has been discussed?
» Okay. Does the staff wish to provide anything further at this time?
» No. >> Okay. So now commission we have three
options. We can close the public hearing and deliberate towards a decision or we
can close the hearing and defer deliberation to a time and date certain
or we can continue the public hearing to a date and time certain. How are you all
feeling? >> Um I have just one additional question.
» Sure. Um that's to staff with regards to uh
the gentleman Jerome had asked all those analysis of extra traffic and
all those things have been done and have met the criteria. Um but there with his
um concern about noise, is there something specifically that addresses
that in our code or is that just in general part of the analysis?
We do have noise ordinances. Um but I don't believe that that's included in
our traffic impact analysis unless I'm mistaken.
» No, no, there'd be nothing applicable to the master plan or subdivision that's in
the code. uh you know related to noise mitigation or anything like that.
There's making sure there's not an undue impact on infrastructure, sewer, water
streets, but nothing particular to the noise that would that would come from
kind of those >> J street is a busy street. It's um high
traffic no matter what. So anytime you build more, it's just going to add to
that unfortunately. >> Yeah. Okay.
» It's a private development project, so they're obviously having to work through
the code. If it was a public works project that they were taking on, that
might be something that they that they have discretion over engage more with
the public on. >> Okay. Thank you.
» I would like to um close the hearing and deliberate towards a decision. You guys
are good. >> Um I second. All right. I have a motion
on the floor to close the public hearing and move towards deliberation. All those
in favor say I. >> I. I motion carries. All right, the
public hearing is closed. Okay, so let's see. Do you guys have any questions
specifically for staff at this time?
» I um the last two meetings we've kind of seen more infill type projects, which I
think is exciting because they use current roads, current infrastructure,
current sewer. um that I feel like that is a good use of our um resources. I do
understand that every house that is next to a vacant lot that is hard to see new
things coming in, but that is part of our job is to make sure that land is
being used thoughtfully and appropriately. And this subdevelopment
is a similar to other developments near it and would fill in a blank space in
our community. Um, and provide more housing for new people to move here or
people who've been living in apartments to move into houses. So, um, I look at
that as a an exciting project, but also knowing that growth sometimes is is hard
when we live in a small community.
» Agree. It's a It's a great spot. I drive by it every day and um see the kids
walking through it. So, it's great location for the schools and I think
it's a it's exciting for our town. >> I do have a question. I'm not sure who
to address it to, but because it's near the schools is the bus route
» on off of J. No buses come through that to pick up
kids. It's all walking to Buff and middle school and high school. Okay.
» There is a spot that the kids get picked up for the middle school and it's a
little bit more down the road by the pines.
» Okay. >> And they have a few of those spots for
the middle school kids. >> Okay.
Okay. So, foot traffic. >> Okay. Thank you.
So, if we don't have any more discussion, I can take a motion to
either approve or not approve. This is Commissioner Eder, and I would
make a motion to approve the master plan development for the Mule Deer Estates.
» Is this the master plan or we're doing
I second the motion. >> All right, I have a first and a second.
All those in favor say I. >> I.
» I. I. Motion carries. All right. We will now move on to the mu
deer estate subdivision application which is related.
Okay. So, do I need to read the same thing? Oh,
great. Okay. I'm sorry. Um, we will now hear the our I'm opening
the hearing for planning file number SP or SD-25-1,
the MU deer estate subdivision application. The hearing is now called
to order. We will proceed as follows. The staff will present, the applicant
will present, and then any interested persons will then be provided the
opportunity to present testimony in support that is neutral or that is in
opposition. The applicant then can respond to that. The staff will provide
closing comments and any party may request that the written record remain
open to respond to testimony presented at this hearing. At the conclusion of
the hearing, the planning commission may close the public hearing and deliberate
or close the public hearing and defer deliberations
or they can continue the public hearing at a date and time certain. All
testimony, argument, and evidence must be directed to the applicable criteria
or any other approval criteria you believe to be applicable. Matters
unrelated to the application are not pertinent to the planning commission's
decisions in these proceedings. Failure on the part of any person to raise an
issue that is not specific enough to afford the planning commission and
parties to this proceeding an opportunity to respond to the issue
precludes appeal to the city council and land use board of appeals on the issue.
Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating
to conditions of approval with sufficient relevance to allow the local
government or its designate to respond to the issue precludes an action for
damages in circuit court. Commissioners must disclose any expiree contacts,
biases, or conflicts of incidents. Does any commissioner have those?
» Uh, Commissioner Kendall, I do not. Commissioner Eder, and I do not.
Commissioner Urban, and I do not. Does any party here wish to challenge those
statements? All right. Seeing none, we will move on
to the staff report. Okay. Thank you.
Um, for the sake of the record, this is SD25-1
and it's for tax lots uh 1113 12CA 600 and 900. So, we did discuss um some of
the components of this subdivision application, namely the infrastructure
improvements. Um, as mentioned, we sent out um notices to our public works
director and he provided a memorandum stipulating certain conditions of
approval for this development. Um all roads are required to uh dedicate
rightaway to meet our major collector uh road standards. Um those familiar with
the area know that uh Southeast McTagert does not have a sidewalk here on the
west side. So they'll be required to do a six-foot sidewalk and planter strip on
there. Along um Southeast 10th Street, uh the same condition applies where
they'll have to do a planter strip and sidewalk as well. Hayes pointed out that
um there will be a pedestrian crossing from Strawberry Heights to J Street.
That includes ADA ramps um those blinky pedestrian crossing signs and um street
lights. There will also be another one to the north um to the south um driveway
to Buff Elementary School there. So that'll improve a lot of connectivity
for um children walking to school every day. It'll give them a place to cross
safely. Um
yeah, and as mentioned, so all um access to the lots is from those local streets.
So we're kind of avoiding a situation you get like on B Street where
somebody's going 50 miles per hour and somebody's trying to back into their
driveway there. So um it should keep things relatively safe um as far as
access into those lots go. Um lot development standards. Um, as I
mentioned, there's two different zoning districts and two different housing
types. So, those have their own specific um, lot size requirements. The applicant
has met or exceeded those requirements. Um, we also have frontage requirements.
So, the lot has to be extended a certain length along the roadway depending on
where it is, culde-sac or a regular lot or a town home. They've met those as
well. Um, and block lengths and perimeters. So the block that they
proposed uh meets all of those requirements as well because there is uh
town homes proposed um they are required to do uh 200 ft of or square feet of
common area per town home development. Um that's going to be located to the um
west of the town home development there. uh it comes out to a requirement of
about 4,200 square feet of common area and they've exceeded that. They're
around I think 5600 a little over 1,000 square foot. Um so
they've met that as well. Um basically they've met all of the design standards
um that we look at when we review these subdivisions. So is there any questions
you guys have?
are the in our in our map it shows the ones lower that are closer together
that makes that L those are the town homes.
» Yeah, I can pull up um there's a probably a better photo where they're
all highlighted green. >> Yeah. So, all of these green ones here
are town homes. And then this kind of hashmark area is the common area back
here.
» What is this lot here? >> So, on that schematic, um, Commissioner
Kendall is noticing that there is a little block that says future middle
housing. Is that a city thing or is that from the applicant or
that is from the applicant? Um, I assume that they just have not decided as far
as what type of development they want to put there. Probably multiple town homes
or detach duplex. Go ahead. Yeah, the applicant will speak to that.
» Yeah. >> Do we have any other questions for staff
at this point?
Okay. So, now we will hear from the applicant.
You get to come up again.
It works out that way. Uh, okay. So, the only thing I would like to speak to is
the middle housing. Of course, if you have questions, please ask. So, the
middle housing is not shaded uh green because it's not going to be platted as
a town home lot. Instead, it's going to be platted as a separate unit of land.
And then we have to use a different process to create that as a town home
lot. And um middle housing was passed, Greg probably knows, but uh a few years
ago, which allows for higher density. And so when we were putting together
this subdivision, that middle housing area would not quite meet the regular
subdivision code, but it meets middle housing criteria. And since it's around
a bunch of other town homes, it it will end up looking like a town home in the
end. It's just the process we have to use as middle housing to get it there.
» How many acres is it? >> Oh, I don't even know if it's a quarter
acre. >> It's pretty small.
» So that's more of a lot size that just has to fit a different process. Yes.
» And a different criteria. >> Yes.
And would access from to that be from within that Sun Drive?
» Uh, no. Access would would be a private shared driveway across the front of lots
49 and 50. >> Okay. But not from J Street.
» No, not from J Street. >> Sort of an easement.
» Oh, okay. Um, it would be through an easement. Correct. and we would run
utilities through an easement. So the middle housing
is part of lot 49. So uh lot 49 overall including the area that's not green
would be 6768 square feet. And then we would come back through through a middle
housing land division and create three town homes there that would look real
similar to the other town homes in the area.
» Okay, that makes sense. So, the green shading on that particular lot is a
little misnomer, but >> it gives me something to talk about.
» I don't see where they would enter into that because
» through lot 48. So, whoever purchases lot 48, they will
know that they will be sharing an easement.
Um it wouldn't be I don't it might be partially through lot 48 but when we
plat the subdivision we'll provide there will be an easement
an access easement and um I think our plan is to put it across the front of
lots 50 lot 50 and 49. So the driveway would be there and be shared between lot
50 and 49. >> Okay. So they would come in up on
lot. No, it looks like you have an opening up
on lot 51. >> It could be there, too.
It could be both 50 and 51, but at least 50 because we'd want to have about 20
feet for the access.
Okay. And so whoever purchases those three lots will know ahead of time that
they will be sharing an easement. >> Yes. But the process usually is the home
gets built and then platted and then the buyer's building a home. So all those
encumbrances, it's seen there's a driveway there. It's
u it's not somebody buying a bare lot and realizing later, oh my gosh, there's
a driveway through the front of my property.
» They will know ahead of time. >> Yes.
» Okay.
» Anything else? >> No.
» Okay.
» So, they are pointing if maybe Yep. Bethany. Yep. right there at the the
last lot there is where the future middle housing it's in little tiny print
but that's the three lots that we're kind of talking about the lot 49
» 50 and 5 >> 50 and 51 as they may have a portion of
a street there but from what the applicant was saying those will be
developed the town homes will be put on it and then it will be noted for sale
this isn't like you were getting at someone purchasing bare land and
building this as part of a planned subdivision.
» Correct. >> Everything will be
brought forth to the people, the buyers. We'll know ahead of time
» and to to make sure of that because we'll have to put an easement on our
subdivision plat otherwise it won't be there and then lot 49 won't
be able to be developed into three units. We kind
» it wouldn't be accessible then. >> Yes. Then then we would have boxed
ourselves into a corner that we don't want to be in.
» Exactly. So you do those easements through the city planning and we have
everything in place for that. >> Yeah. When they come through that for
that final plat. So this is the preliminary approval. They come through
the final plat engineering does do a review of that to make sure that all
necessary easements where they be access utilities are on that plat um before it
gets recorded with the county and that any purchaser of that property is going
to be able to identify any easements that exist on that property. Excellent.
Thank you. >> You're welcome.
» Thank you. >> You're welcome. Do
» you have any questions? >> Okay. So, now we will receive public
testimony. When you testify, please state your name and address for the
record. All testimony will be directed to the planning commission and not the
applicant, staff, or other members of the audience.
Um, please keep your testimony concise and relevant to the issues before us
this evening. It is perfectly acceptable and courage to indicate that you agree
with the points made by another party. Uh, do we have anyone speaking in
support of the application? Anyone online?
Do we have anyone with neutral testimony
or general questions like Jerome in the previous discussion?
» Yeah, I do again. >> Okay, great. If you can state your name
again, we can get your address from the last.
» Yep. My name is Jerome Turviate. Um, and you don't need me to do my address
again. I don't think you need to. Thank you.
» Okay. Um, so question for the development is I look through I'm
looking through the packet and I don't see
um a ton of stuff about dust abatement. Um, when it comes to construction
because there's a lot of I mean there's a lot of dead trees and stuff out there.
There's going to need to be some sort of excavation done. It's a lot of dust to
be kicked up. There's quite a few people that live in the area um that don't want
to really be exposed to a ton of silica. Is there the only thing I'm seeing is
that there hasn't been really a plan submitted and in other areas it says
that they'll obtain a permit from public works uh for excavation that requires
dust abatement. But does that like uh does that make them uh beholden to some
sort of requirements for like is there a certain level of dust exposure that's
allowed? Uh and then I also have a question about
fencing. Um I don't see much about fencing. It just says it'll be used
where required to uh let me see here. To avoid disrupting like the nature around
is basically what I'm understanding. Um
» those are both good questions. I will have staff respond to those.
» Okay. So, um they will be required to get a
grading permit from public works and they will address any kind of um dust
control. Um they'll also be required to have a pre-construction meeting before
they begin construction and they'll also address that and mitigation. I know our
public works department keeps a close eye on development and um especially if
any complaints are made by um neighborhoods to um to address those
with the developers. Um, as far as fences go, we don't require uh permits
for fences, and that's more of a a civil matter. Um,
so I think that's separate. >> Yes. And I believe in prior um
subdivisions that we have come through here, fencing is not usually a required
element unless it is in a zone that requires fencing for commercial
property, storage facilities, that type of thing. Um, so most of the time people
like in the new subdevelopment by LAS, people are choosing to build fences, but
that's not something that the city can necessarily require um from a um
standard. Um, is that correct?
» Yeah, that's true. So usually you use f fences will be required as like a
transitional element between um conflicting zones or zones uh
particularly like a commercial to residential just to mitigate any of the
impacts that come from headlight glare that sort of thing. Residential there's
there's usually there's no standard attached defenses as part of a a
transitional element to kind of pro provide a division between the
properties. So you wouldn't see that in residential, nor there's is there a
requirement in the code for it. >> Is there a a requirement for fencing
where there's a street
» where the house butts up against the street or or is it the responsibility of
each individual owner? >> I would that would be the responsibility
for each individual owner. Um I mean typically where where codes are going
they're trying to eliminate fences because they create a canyoning effect
right along the roadway. So you know a lot of times we're going to you know if
you can front uh houses and that sort of thing on streets it gives a different
character. So there is no requirement to build uh you know a fence to delineate
the backyards from the road >> from the road.
» Right. But the developer does have the option uh to build those
» out of courtesy. They can build the fence. They could
» that goes along the roadway. >> I mean you have
yards and children
» typically. I mean what you'll see from developers is some sort of continuity.
So they'll build the fence all along there uh along a busy road uh versus
just getting kind of a hodgepodge of fences being built by individual owners.
So, um I don't know if they've contemplated if they're going to add
that feature to the subdivision or not, but it is an option that they would
have, >> but it's only volunteer. It's
voluntarily >> correct.
» Done. Okay.
» Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Did that answer your question, Jerome?
» Yes. >> Okay. Thank you.
» All right. Do we have any testimony in opposition?
Anything online?
Okay. So, would the applicant like to respond to anything that has been
discussed?
Okay. Applicant says they're good. All right. Um, let's see. We will or
actually staff, do you have anything that you'd like to provide? All right.
commission. We now have those three options again where we can close the
hearing and deliberate or we can close the hearing and defer deliberation to a
date and time certain or we can continue the public hearing to a time and date
certain. How does the commission wish to proceed?
This is Commissioner Eder and I would like to close the public hearing and um
deliberate on a decision.
Commissioner Kendall, I second the motion.
» All right, I have a first and a second. All those in favor say I. I.
» I. I. All right. Motion carries. All right. Anything to add here or
questions to staff? I think it goes right with uh what we did with the uh
master plan.
» Okay. Then the next step would be to submit
either a motion to approve or this is commissioner and I approve the
the SD25-1 mule deer estates subdivision
application. Um
I I can second that. Do a first and a second.
Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor say I.
» I. >> I. I..................... All right.
Motion carries. All right. Thank you. Thank you for
attending. Um we now will move on to any other items that staff would like to
comment or talk about our next meeting. Um our next meeting is scheduled for
September 3rd, but we don't currently have any items for that agenda. So, I'll
reach out to you guys as it gets closer and see if we either um cancel it or and
see your attendance as well. Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you. Thank you everyone for
attending this evening. We will adjourn the meeting at 73 or 7:27.