[0:07] I might be here.

[0:08] >> You're

[0:09] >> I meant mentally. If you were going to

[0:10] show up.

[0:11] >> That's what I'm saying. I I don't know.

[0:12] Yeah.

[0:13] >> Still still deciding.

[0:15] >> Yeah.

[0:15] >> Trying to figure it out.

[0:34] Did you write or who wrote the develop

[0:36] the proposed development

[0:39] >> the city the

[0:40] >> ter

[0:49] that's something I want to see let's

[0:51] start off with that put on the agenda

[1:09] We can start.

[1:13] » Yep.

[1:18] Welcome everybody out to our work

[1:19] meeting

[1:21] to Can I get a volunteer for

[1:33] » the two guys that aren't here yet? Do

[1:35] it.

[1:35] >> That's

[1:43] grandpa.

[1:49] » Great. Um, so the first action item,

[1:54] I guess the minutes,

[1:56] everything I didn't see anything out of

[1:59] order on the

[2:01] >> look good to me

[2:02] >> to me. And then

[2:06] the first one is that conditional use

[2:08] permit that wasn't

[2:11] they didn't receive the notices in time.

[2:12] So that's back and it's the only

[2:18] I guess it's just

[2:20] height they're going

[2:28] to

[2:30] everything fine.

[2:36] Any other questions you guys have on

[2:38] that one?

[2:41] And then

[2:43] this other one I think it was just a

[2:45] height.

[2:50] because of the lot size.

[2:52] an zone.

[2:54] >> Oh, he's zone.

[3:18] That's what he's under process.

[3:21] Okay.

[3:47] And then you'll have I'll turn some time

[3:49] to re

[4:01] What's What's the

[4:02] >> height in?

[4:06] » We didn't change anything in that as

[4:07] well, did we?

[4:13] » Yeah.

[4:15] >> The address on that one like you drive

[4:18] butts up to the back of

[4:21] actually right

[4:24] >> the same type of stuff

[4:26] >> I'd say even bigger than what he's

[4:28] >> yeah West Haven will allow bigger

[4:30] >> like I feel like I feel like the

[4:32] neighbors along his back have

[4:35] >> bigger buildings

[4:37] >> opportunities for the same or bigger

[4:39] >> I drove by that house actually and I

[4:42] think it'll do improvements to that

[4:44] property to allow him to have a shop

[4:46] because he had a lot of vehicles so I

[4:48] think the neighbors will actually be

[4:49] thrilled to See,

[4:50] >> he had a side by side in the front yard.

[4:52] He had two trailers on the side of his

[4:54] house. So, I think that there's a

[4:56] potential that it actually will improve

[4:57] the neighborhood allowing him to have

[4:59] some storage space. So, I mean, based

[5:02] off of a two second drive by, I thought

[5:05] it might actually improve the

[5:06] opportunity for the neighbors. One side

[5:08] note on that just since it got brought

[5:10] up as it relates to this a lot of cities

[5:12] do be do like hey 25% just you know a

[5:16] lot of cities just have a threshold that

[5:19] we've always been conditional uses we

[5:20] might want to look at a way to approach

[5:22] that but let's change we may sit for six

[5:25] months for a while see

[5:29] many but eventually we could change and

[5:32] then if we did get a little more

[5:33] aggressive we're not doing

[5:36] oversized

[5:38] code is

[5:42] a lot of other cities like you can't go

[5:43] past 25

[5:47] but right now I think we have had less I

[5:50] know it feels like a lot lately but

[5:52] there have been that

[5:57] it's been affected

[5:58] >> to an extent

[5:59] >> I think that good data to bring back

[6:02] just to see how many

[6:05] we're seeing to see

[6:09] Hey.

[6:09] >> Hey, Travis.

[6:11] >> Apologies. My boss called.

[6:14] >> Not the one I'm married to. I actually

[6:15] work for him.

[6:20] » They were going to force into the

[6:21] prayer, but I I told him I wouldn't let

[6:23] you do that.

[6:24] >> Hey, be careful what you wish for.

[6:27] >> It might be a little more uncomfortable

[6:28] for you than you think. [laughter]

[6:31] >> Now I want it.

[6:32] >> Yeah.

[6:34] >> Let's get some excitement in here. Got

[6:35] to liven this place up.

[6:37] >> Scratch my name out. [laughter]

[6:40] >> All right. You're volunteering. Travis.

[6:46] » Um Travis or Bryce or Blake, did you

[6:49] have anything on the minutes or

[6:51] >> No, I thought I thought the minutes were

[6:53] clean.

[6:53] >> Okay.

[6:54] >> You just got to read them better.

[7:02] um briefly discuss the Dubach

[7:07] permit, but it's pretty much just the

[7:09] same one that'll be public that did last

[7:11] time that has the correct notices. So,

[7:15] they're just asking for the 500

[7:17] allowance and then the half

[7:20] on the building.

[7:24] Hey, on those um somebody refresh me.

[7:28] Why why are we doing public hearings on

[7:30] all those conditional use? I know it's

[7:32] an option, right?

[7:33] >> Well, this one was 6 in over.

[7:35] >> Well, that one makes sense for the

[7:37] height,

[7:38] >> but is anything outside of spec are we

[7:40] going to do public hearings on or what

[7:42] do you guys

[7:43] >> only if it's outside of spec?

[7:46] >> Yeah. As on the next one or like I

[7:51] thought all of these

[7:53] have a public hearing.

[7:55] >> Yeah. And that's what do we do we have

[7:57] to have a public hearing form or is it

[7:59] just the right thing to do which I'm

[8:00] okay either way.

[8:02] >> I just had somebody reach out and ask me

[8:03] that like do we do public hearings on

[8:05] everything? I

[8:06] >> mean my opinion is anytime the public

[8:08] has an opportunity to express their

[8:10] feelings like we well we're ti we're

[8:12] legally tied by what we're legally tied

[8:14] by but

[8:15] >> I I'd love to hear their opinions one

[8:17] way or the other. I think it helps us be

[8:19] better serve the community.

[8:20] >> It doesn't hurt. doesn't hurt anything

[8:22] like

[8:23] >> express their concerns and make some

[8:26] >> sometimes it's helpful and sometimes our

[8:27] hands are tied by existing ordinances

[8:29] and it doesn't matter anyway. So if it

[8:30] was my opinion I would say let's hear

[8:32] them just to hear them.

[8:33] >> I like it just somebody ask question

[8:36] >> seems like if you send the notice out

[8:37] and then you don't give them the chance

[8:39] to come in and express

[8:42] >> concern is like

[8:44] >> by the way we're doing this not by the

[8:46] way we're talking about them. There's quite a few of them now that

[8:50] >> just get approved

[8:51] >> that fall.

[8:52] >> Well, yeah, they're just going to fall

[8:53] within guidelines. So maybe that is the

[8:54] better play if it falls because if it

[8:56] falls outside of guidelines now

[8:58] >> then we or they have a small lot like

[9:00] the ROS zones or R2 zones.

[9:06] » It's over by the 500 ft and that height

[9:09] right there.

[9:12] But as far as the building looks, it

[9:14] doesn't look

[9:16] excessive in what I fine.

[9:21] And then the bottom one on the it's in

[9:24] the R zone that Malcolm told us. And so

[9:27] it's 1,200 ft there and 1,800 1800.

[9:34] So the additional

[9:38] surrounding buildings appear to be

[9:42] as large as this one.

[9:50] » I think both of those are pretty

[9:51] straightforward.

[9:56] » Does anybody else have any concerns

[9:57] about either of those?

[9:59] >> No sir.

[10:05] Now we are on to

[10:08] so discussion items would be

[10:12] the group home

[10:14] added

[10:17] verbage that we requested at the bottom

[10:20] there.

[10:25] through that

[10:27] and thought the changes address some of

[10:30] our concerns

[10:32] and answered.

[10:52] Hopefully that made sense.

[10:55] pretty simple

[10:57] with big group homes. We had an

[10:59] application just to give perspective

[11:04] an old one other

[11:11] use. But as we do our code, our prior

[11:15] definition of family was up to eight,

[11:20] which was aggressive for just a

[11:23] permitted group home use, right? I don't

[11:25] think it was intentional

[11:28] change modifies our family definition.

[11:38] » Yeah. And then it just spells out. So

[11:40] essentially if you had a group of four

[11:42] and under or a family in this case

[11:45] you could princing

[12:06] and I think it's pertinent to the

[12:07] approval. I think this shores up our But

[12:10] everything above really should be housed

[12:12] in that related discussion

[12:15] where we need to have the broad

[12:17] definition comfortable definitions for

[12:19] you know we're going to have something

[12:20] that's more commercial based right like

[12:22] a children treatment facility or we've

[12:24] had a drug alcohol application we need

[12:26] to make sure we eventually I'm not

[12:28] saying for tonight but those are things

[12:29] that we want to make sure we understand

[12:31] the zones those are peritted in and

[12:35] what the numbers are sometimes the

[12:37] numbers feel a little arbitrary

[12:41] home group is six. That's not

[12:44] >> why is foster home seven. Why don't we

[12:46] push that back to 6 to 12 like we do the

[12:49] treatment facility

[12:52] >> arbitary a little bit

[12:54] tighten them up we go

[12:58] discussions

[13:00] >> I think another one

[13:02] >> you have any data from other

[13:08] prepared to discuss it.

[13:16] » But yeah, I guess that's all

[13:18] >> at least make it look a little more

[13:19] intentional.

[13:21] >> Have certain requirements that we're now

[13:23] meeting. We actually were excessive and

[13:25] our allowance now we're tightening it a

[13:27] little bit complying and make sure we're

[13:29] comfortable then everything eight and

[13:30] above really we want to be comfortable

[13:32] with the commercial applications of

[13:34] these different things whether they're

[13:36] in a residential zone or commercial some

[13:38] of these are I tried to go through and

[13:40] kind of call out where they're

[13:41] conditional and things like that give

[13:43] you just a rough idea but if there's one

[13:45] particularly that you know I know drug

[13:48] alcohol was one we went through a couple

[13:51] times those are condition office

[13:53] residential some not I don't think

[13:55] they're peritted like commercial

[13:57] settings but are they peritting

[14:02] resit

[14:19] is going to get classified into

[14:21] something so Yeah.

[14:33] » I think our group want to be

[14:37] [clears throat]

[14:38] hand

[14:43] uses here and there, but even that one

[14:44] was total

[14:47] state license call,

[15:00] right? So why

[15:03] is it

[15:14] time to further discuss agreement

[15:19] as well.

[15:19] >> Yeah.

[15:22] I don't know if

[15:25] you guys can talk to me about either way

[15:28] conflict today, but I realize that if

[15:31] you guys are preparation

[15:34] on this, you're going to have a lot of

[15:35] questions for Nick. So, it's a little

[15:37] bit peaceful. We're discussion here.

[15:39] We'll talk with the development team.

[15:41] I'm hoping you guys can get your

[15:42] questions out. opportunities

[15:45] to talk

[15:47] a little.

[15:59] » Well, anybody have any other questions

[16:01] or we'll bring

[16:04] up and let them kind of present what

[16:06] they have for us?

[16:09] >> We are ready for you when you are.

[16:14] through the door.

[16:20] » I know we're a little bit early, but

[16:22] >> back

[16:26] my recommendation over time a lotment

[16:28] for this would be you present the

[16:30] concept.

[16:31] >> We'll split it here. I'll try and

[16:33] >> Yeah, we have you guys present the

[16:34] concept. choice slide here present the

[16:37] concept over 15 30 minutes and then I

[16:39] just highlighted a few things that I

[16:40] think are pertinent to your guys's

[16:42] discussion but we'll go through slide by

[16:44] slide we'll take the rest of the 30

[16:47] minutes 40 minutes to go through that

[16:49] yeah Troy if you can introduce

[16:51] your project about your slides here

[16:53] >> yeah and and then part of this is the

[16:55] development agreement we're trying to mesh uh the the ribbon

[17:01] with the development agreement so we

[17:03] want to make sure we've got uses

[17:05] uh conducive to what you want there. So

[17:10] >> will you get a chance if we get time?

[17:11] I'd like to hit them all.

[17:13] >> Yeah, I'll make sure I address kind of

[17:15] the way we're planning on approving it

[17:18] and that is with the developers

[17:20] agreement. Make sure we get uses

[17:22] identified. So we'll talk through that.

[17:24] >> We have Troy's booted up there.

[17:27] >> Yeah, you just take however long to

[17:29] introduce the project and we'll go

[17:30] through the DA kind of through pieces I

[17:32] think are really important for them.

[17:33] They

[17:35] forward that.

[17:36] >> Okay. Hopefully most everybody's

[17:37] familiar and I'm Troy Wolverton from AWA

[17:40] >> and I'm Stuart Adams with Terrace the

[17:43] developer

[17:44] >> but hopefully everybody's familiar with

[17:46] the majority of the project is pretty

[17:48] much those hayfields there that are

[17:50] mowed um that you can kind of see in the

[17:52] [clears throat] picture to the left of

[17:54] the project is a residential subdivision

[17:58] existing and the smallest lot that I

[18:01] could find in there was about 12,000

[18:03] square feet and ranging being probably

[18:06] the biggest one. There might be some on

[18:08] the culde-sacs that are a little bigger,

[18:10] but anyway, they're a little less than

[18:12] what I call a third of an acre or 15,000

[18:14] square feet. As you move to the north,

[18:17] you can kind of see there's the road

[18:19] continues up, kind of makes a wind there

[18:21] north and to the left. Those are oneacre

[18:24] lots and then straight north, they're

[18:27] two to three acre lots. As we really

[18:30] tried to figure out what's the best way

[18:31] to kind of lay out this property, we

[18:35] really kind of looked at how do we

[18:36] transition densities and different

[18:38] things away from the commercial that's

[18:40] proposed. So, keeping that in mind on

[18:42] the north from a land planning

[18:45] perspective, it's a little hard to tell.

[18:47] Will those two to three acre lots one

[18:49] day have the rear portions of those lots

[18:53] infilled or will they continue to remain

[18:56] two to three acre lots? And I'm not

[18:58] trying to make a prediction for

[18:59] [clears throat] any land owner out

[19:00] there.

[19:01] >> I'm just saying one day it might make

[19:03] sense to infill those back areas. I

[19:05] don't know. So as as we look at this

[19:08] transitioning away from the commercial,

[19:09] just kind of keep that bigger picture in

[19:11] mind, if you will.

[19:12] >> Well, it's I I think it's also

[19:13] important. It's not on this map, but if

[19:16] you go even further north, that's my

[19:18] neighborhood and those are 30acre lots

[19:21] >> pretty.

[19:23] So you've got the lower density there,

[19:25] but then it gets more back in my

[19:28] neighbor.

[19:29] >> And then uh [clears throat] one change

[19:31] to uh the original project, some of you

[19:34] may have seen the original project did

[19:37] not include what I call Conniey's

[19:39] property. Uh

[19:41] >> I was going to ask about that

[19:42] >> and uh we have since acquired Conniey's

[19:45] property. So

[19:46] >> I assume with how the line looks.

[19:48] >> Yeah. So So that that's a change and

[19:51] you'll see it here clearly, but I wanted

[19:53] to make sure

[19:56] Three paths are currently shown across

[19:58] the front to the left that I would say

[20:00] is a little different than what has kind

[20:02] of been shown

[20:03] >> property there.

[20:05] >> And then what we tried to do is just

[20:08] really kind of infill in the back

[20:11] portion what we've kind of always called

[20:13] residential, but really just kind of

[20:14] give an idea of what it might look like.

[20:18] And this is where it becomes really

[20:20] important to get a feel for

[20:23] your the local commissioners as well and

[20:27] get your recommendations of, you know, more about the local

[20:32] conditions than I do. Um, I'm originally

[20:35] from a little bit further north, but

[20:37] Hoper's changed a lot, and so I have a

[20:39] lot of this area around since I lived up

[20:41] here. And so, this is where it's an

[20:44] opportunity for us just to listen and to

[20:46] learn from you as we talk about this.

[20:48] >> And could I maybe go up to the screen? I

[20:50] have a tough time with that. I'm a

[20:53] physical guy, you know.

[20:54] I'd rather have a paper map than I would

[20:56] scream. But before I think property was

[21:01] probably right in here somewhere.

[21:04] >> So before we showed this as a PUB just

[21:08] this piece right in here

[21:11] and now we have this additional right

[21:16] here.

[21:18] And there is a there is a thought

[21:21] hanging bit in the back of at least my

[21:23] mind.

[21:25] It's right now because of Amazon and

[21:29] most home deliveries.

[21:31] Uh, small box retail

[21:34] pretty much doesn't exist anymore unless

[21:37] you're in what they call a power center.

[21:39] You have like Riverdale or some place

[21:41] like that or you know very high density

[21:44] just because there's not enough volume

[21:46] for them to survive because everybody's

[21:49] like my wife truck show up quite often

[21:53] and it just the small retailers

[21:55] [clears throat] are not staying in

[21:57] business. So to put put small box retail

[22:00] in here doesn't work anymore but there

[22:03] may be some

[22:05] we we did a Smith with the wheels in

[22:08] Springfield. I have no idea where that

[22:10] demand is there but that could be there

[22:14] too maybe and I just haven't figured out

[22:17] whether there's whether there's I don't

[22:20] know it's been so so fast that we

[22:23] acquired

[22:25] what

[22:27] We're putting in residential because we

[22:29] don't think the market's there. We don't

[22:31] think there's an EOS still come here. We

[22:33] don't don't spread that rumor around.

[22:35] Okay. We have no public meeting probably

[22:37] here, but we don't know what's there.

[22:39] But that's at least something that was

[22:41] in the back of our mind. But we've we've

[22:44] adopted residential there instead. Okay.

[22:47] >> A lot of the pad

[22:49] uh details that are shown there, and the

[22:51] pads being the buildings that are out

[22:53] away from the major anchor, are what

[22:56] could go there. and we would be able to

[22:59] say for certain that the fuel center

[23:01] would be there and the grocery anchor

[23:02] would be there. The others are tenants

[23:06] that they're representing tenants that

[23:08] Steuart's worked with in the past in

[23:10] other shopping centers. Uh but really

[23:12] it's based on demand getting this out

[23:15] there and so forth. But really we can't

[23:17] do any of that until we've established

[23:20] zoning and basically a framework to be

[23:23] able to build this. And I'll spend just

[23:25] a minute on that and listen. Uh in

[23:28] Cisville, the mayor in Cisville was very

[23:31] [clears throat] impressive and wanted a

[23:33] Neers and a Jimmy John's

[23:36] >> specifically

[23:37] >> and uh and we actually went to Neers and

[23:40] told him the marijuana them and they

[23:43] ended up in case

[23:45] and we did the same with Jimmy Johns.

[23:48] Now I don't know whether that'll happen

[23:49] here but we don't know whether it be

[23:51] Jimmy Johns or Jersey Mike. We if it'll

[23:54] be America First or Golden West or Key

[23:57] Bank or or there will be a bank here

[24:02] about credit institution somebody

[24:05] and I don't know what kind of sound we

[24:07] shot but that that'll all be determined

[24:10] and we really can't go talk to him very

[24:12] well until we have we're down the line

[24:14] with the city.

[24:16] >> So would your plan be to build the

[24:18] shells and then try and fill the shells

[24:20] or build the suit

[24:22] >> so they those empty until you have

[24:25] interested.

[24:26] >> Well, we won't start uh we typically

[24:29] don't start an inline shop building

[24:32] >> until we have half of it sold

[24:35] >> and then after we have half of it

[24:37] [clears throat] sold, we'll expect the

[24:39] other two. Uh but most of the demand we

[24:42] have high demand for dry books

[24:45] co change the the market significantly

[24:49] and then we'll have maybe some single

[24:53] users whether you get you won't get

[24:57] we'd love to have Chick-fil-A. They're

[24:58] probably not going to come. Okay. But uh

[25:01] but you'll get some single pad users

[25:03] like you know that type of user

[25:07] might be

[25:12] residential

[25:14] right the blue and green

[25:17] >> it's about that green line was where her

[25:18] stopped. Yeah, that's they stole this.

[25:21] >> These units here are new res.

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

[25:25] >> And is that detention bas?

[25:28] >> Yeah. Where it says [clears throat]

[25:30] >> you would be opening a flag space

[25:33] scenario in this spot right there.

[25:36] If we were to re like a flag space,

[25:38] >> it could become residential or

[25:40] commercial.

[25:41] >> Yes, I would love that. So, I would like

[25:43] the time to go look for it. And I was

[25:45] going to ask you whether you'd look at

[25:47] something like that. It's mixed use or

[25:49] whatever you might call it flex zone. I

[25:51] don't care what the name of it is. But I would like if you want it, you know,

[25:56] that'll be your decision, not mine, but

[25:58] I would I would like the opportunity to

[26:01] go to try to look at something

[26:03] additional if you could do that. Okay.

[26:07] >> I think in a limited application, it

[26:09] would make some sense on a small piece

[26:11] that maybe commercial like that.

[26:15] >> We do need a place to put storm water,

[26:17] but if there were a for that under again

[26:20] the depth of there is a lot of

[26:23] information we don't know about this

[26:24] property I don't know anything about the

[26:26] geotech I don't know the depth of the

[26:27] ground water [clears throat and cough]

[26:30] uh I don't really know the topography of

[26:33] it yet we're in the process of flying it

[26:35] and establishing topography and getting

[26:37] more information gathered we do need a

[26:40] place to put storm water and like I say

[26:43] we we've reserved a spot but that spot

[26:45] might have to be a little you know,

[26:48] modified if that

[26:50] >> and that spot is specifically a

[26:51] retention basin concept at this point or

[26:54] would you consider like a storm tech

[26:55] system under the parking lot or

[26:57] potential options?

[26:58] >> A lot of that depends on the depth of

[27:00] the ground.

[27:01] >> True. Yeah, you wouldn't. Yeah, you'd

[27:02] have to have some kind of percolation

[27:03] with the storm.

[27:04] >> That's kind of why I threw on.

[27:06] >> We we got a lot of options, but we just

[27:08] don't know for sure the details.

[27:11] >> But the flex space idea, a dental

[27:14] office, some kind of a professional

[27:16] office, they They do tend to work in

[27:19] where it does take commercial.

[27:21] They could even go out more on the

[27:23] frontage for that side as well. But

[27:26] again, it just kind of depends on what

[27:29] stewards.

[27:30] >> Yeah, we can't put drive ups everywhere.

[27:32] We know that. But we usually put them on

[27:34] the ends of the building to then fill

[27:35] the middles with uh cutters

[27:42] » this that northeast

[27:44] two parcels up there. empty point to it.

[27:51] » We don't own them.

[27:52] >> They're homes.

[27:53] >> Yeah,

[27:54] >> they're already they got home.

[27:56] >> But they we have talked those are part

[27:59] of the family

[28:01] and we are reszoning those in our

[28:03] reszone effort. Uh

[28:06] and again uh the farthest north piece

[28:10] Malcolm

[28:12] that that parcel right there my

[28:14] understanding is acre lot almost, but

[28:18] even though it's almost an acre lot, it

[28:20] doesn't have the frontage to be built on

[28:22] it. So, uh, they would like to build

[28:25] eventually on that for one of their

[28:27] kids, I think. And so, we're reszoning

[28:31] at half acres zone. And the halfacre

[28:34] zone isn't necessarily for them to

[28:36] divide it to half acres. It's in order

[28:39] for the frontage to work so they can

[28:40] build because the frontage requirements

[28:42] are different in a halfacre zone and

[28:44] they're in an acre zone. Is that explain

[28:46] that right?

[28:47] >> Yes.

[28:48] >> So that is part of the reason

[28:49] application is are those that's part of

[28:51] the

[28:53] uh and the uh

[28:57] blue is being

[29:00] >> so under under current zoning for what's

[29:02] there right now for all the property and

[29:05] then you're picking up the Christensson

[29:06] property. Yeah, that's roughly 70 homes

[29:10] could be built in there right now

[29:12] without any zoning changes

[29:14] >> probably without

[29:17] >> and how many houses are on here total

[29:20] residences

[29:22] >> 129

[29:24] >> is that

[29:25] >> and the residential portion is 26.06 Six

[29:28] acres currently show.

[29:31] >> So was the 20 was the 27 based on an

[29:34] acre one acre lot?

[29:36] >> Is that what you were?

[29:37] >> Yeah.

[29:41] » Could already be there versus what we're

[29:43] asking to increase.

[29:45] >> It's a good [clears throat]

[29:50] » So the T's the smaller the sixlexes

[29:53] there that are shown and then there's

[29:54] some other smaller units. Those are the

[29:56] town homes. developer. Um, we we we have

[30:02] direction from Stuart that main road up

[30:03] the middle. We got to fix that. He

[30:05] doesn't really like that. But

[30:07] >> yeah, I think it I you I'd rather open

[30:10] space or spots buildable area, but it

[30:14] would roads and I think you only need

[30:16] I'm hoping you only need one road going.

[30:18] >> Well, will DOT even allow it since it's

[30:21] a state road and you only can get so

[30:23] many openings?

[30:25] >> Well, because that that kind of Because

[30:27] when I saw this, that kind of reminds me

[30:29] of that Smith's property in West Point.

[30:32] >> Yeah.

[30:32] >> And the housing, it it's messy right

[30:35] there.

[30:36] >> So, we're collision.

[30:38] >> We're going to work to try to clean that

[30:39] up. So, we we'd like your We're They've

[30:42] got a lot of work to do on the side.

[30:44] Okay.

[30:44] >> I know the engineer who did that

[30:46] shopping center. He was younger then.

[30:49] [laughter]

[30:50] >> He's not talking the shopping center.

[30:52] residential

[30:55] weird collision of roads and

[30:58] >> it's yeah

[31:00] >> we can work on that uh

[31:02] >> behind those the multif family the

[31:04] center you're referring to that's where

[31:05] the potential is

[31:06] >> so we're struggling a little bit with

[31:08] the lift station [clears throat]

[31:10] not only paying for it but locating it I

[31:12] don't know

[31:14] >> yeah and it's probably I should have

[31:16] brought a laser

[31:18] but uh what has been discussed

[31:21] originally started to kind of be in

[31:24] about this area here. In fact,

[31:27] >> I want to see Yeah, it's like right in

[31:29] here.

[31:30] >> It really doesn't fit there is the

[31:32] problem. In working with the grocery,

[31:35] there's been some interest of possibly

[31:37] cornering it here. We don't want

[31:39] obviously to be an obstruction through

[31:41] this, but the thought was what could be

[31:45] a pad. Maybe it's a place for a

[31:47] structure. We also talked about putting

[31:49] it back in this location. required quite an expense in additional

[31:55] infrastructure as well as the wet finger

[31:59] and there was just some concern.

[32:02] >> From a from a maintenance perspective,

[32:04] it'll be it would potentially cause a

[32:07] maintenance nightmare to have it in the

[32:08] corner of the parking lot if we need to

[32:10] get in there quickly with a back truck

[32:12] and it's blocked off by cars that are in

[32:15] there.

[32:17] Sounds like from experience

[32:18] >> it might cause some headaches to get

[32:20] into a lift station in the corner of a

[32:22] parking lot.

[32:23] >> Yeah. Then it would redesign the parking

[32:24] lot, I guess.

[32:26] >> We cut down some stalls right here and

[32:29] be able to provide access.

[32:30] >> Yeah, that's that would be my main

[32:31] concern in the busy zone getting in and

[32:34] out in an emergency. Nothing's worse

[32:36] than having a lift station fire. We

[32:38] probably circle it with a drivable area

[32:41] through [snorts]

[32:42] >> like a like a road around it.

[32:44] >> But we that's the kind of thing that

[32:47] when we get to that point

[32:50] the thing I'd like to say makes me a

[32:52] little bit different is I want to talk

[32:53] to the people who maintain it and make

[32:56] sure that we are addressing those

[32:57] concerns.

[32:58] >> So those are that's an issue that's side

[33:01] plan issue

[33:03] particular area. Thanks.

[33:05] >> So this one just kind of focuses a

[33:07] little bit more on the commercial and we

[33:09] did try to provide a little bit of

[33:10] information about half of it is the

[33:13] commercial shopping center the 22 acres

[33:16] and just kind of showing some of the

[33:17] information.

[33:18] >> Can you cut down the store to 100,000?

[33:22] >> Yeah, 124 you'd get you're very

[33:25] observant there. It's now 100. Do we

[33:27] have any elevations?

[33:29] >> Yeah, there there's one. And then I know

[33:32] we're doing this in Eagle Mountain. This

[33:35] is not a typical Smith store,

[33:36] [clears throat]

[33:37] but it has more of a rural feel to it.

[33:40] >> And it's got the barn doors and it's got

[33:42] some things that are kind of more

[33:44] untypical to Smith.

[33:46] >> So, we we've made the store a little

[33:48] smaller. We've heard, you know, some

[33:50] thoughts about that. And we've uh tried

[33:53] to make it more

[33:55] rural.

[33:57] >> What What are they pulling out?

[33:58] Clothing. What are they What comes out

[34:00] of that?

[34:04] That's the only reason I want to go

[34:05] there.

[34:07] >> I shop at West Point.

[34:12] » We're not done with

[34:17] » that's good input. I want to

[34:19] >> take out the take out the cheese

[34:21] station.

[34:22] >> The cheese.

[34:23] >> I agree with that.

[34:24] >> We don't need

[34:27] [laughter]

[34:27] >> plenty of cheese.

[34:30] >> Keep going. What's Oh, this is fuel. the

[34:32] fuel center and just to kind of give you

[34:33] an idea of what is [clears throat] a

[34:36] standard package fuel.

[34:37] >> How many pads? How many pads this

[34:40] representative actual size?

[34:42] >> Yeah, this is what we refer to as a

[34:43] seven MPD or a seven multi-product

[34:46] dispenser. Uh there it ends up with 14

[34:50] fueling station

[34:51] >> 14

[34:52] >> seven seven lanes 14

[34:55] >> 14.

[34:56] >> The back seven stations would have

[34:58] diesel and then the forward seven

[35:00] stations would regular and there hasn't

[35:03] been a determination of whether they

[35:05] only go E here. Most of the places that

[35:08] were now most of the fuel centers that

[35:10] we're building in Utah to compete

[35:12] against Maverick, they have made the

[35:14] decision to also have E.

[35:16] >> Yeah.

[35:18] >> And that just means that there's

[35:20] three or two hoses basically in the

[35:23] front seven become they just have a blue

[35:32] This is a depiction again uh it's the

[35:36] elevation that was provided for the

[35:37] Smith again we were seeking input we

[35:40] have reheard you know would you would

[35:42] Smith be opposed with wagon wheels and a

[35:46] hitching rail and and I took that back

[35:48] to them and they said this store that

[35:52] we're doing in Eagle Mountain and the

[35:53] only other places of fries in Gilbert

[35:55] Arizona are [clears throat] the two

[35:57] places where use this elevation. They just said, "Why don't you show them

[36:02] this and then see if you can give us

[36:03] some additional feedback on what they

[36:05] might like?" And then these uh pad

[36:09] elevations are really just drawing from

[36:11] the materials.

[36:13] Every one of those materials up on the

[36:15] materials legend, it just says color

[36:19] match the grocery anchor. And I just

[36:21] covered that up because at this stage we

[36:24] just asked to not indicate who the

[36:27] grocery is until they got more of a

[36:29] commitment to what

[36:32] they are in front of this.

[36:34] >> Yeah.

[36:38] » And then this just kind of focuses on

[36:40] the residential portion. The town homes

[36:44] of course are the T units. Those are

[36:46] currently drawn at 30 feet wide across

[36:50] the front and 50 ft deep. A real town

[36:53] home, if Stuart, he he's going to turn

[36:55] to me and say [cough] too big.

[36:58] >> They're really 26 by 46 or something

[37:01] along that line. It's just easier at

[37:04] this stage to draw the the 30 by 50. And

[37:08] then we'll dial that in. It allows us to

[37:10] kind of get a little tighter as we learn

[37:13] more information. The type that are

[37:15] shown up the left side there. Those are

[37:18] they have 100 foot fronts on them. So

[37:19] they easily accommodate a home with a

[37:21] threecar garage and then they are 150 ft

[37:24] deep. So that makes them pretty much

[37:26] exactly 15,000 square ft. The homes

[37:29] along the top are also the same way.

[37:31] >> They wrap the third acres around the top

[37:34] of the toition to the other

[37:37] >> just the way it like those were half

[37:39] acres before

[37:40] >> and if you remember that first slide.

[37:42] >> So we need we need some direction there.

[37:45] as to whether that's even we don't want

[37:47] to bring something in next month if that

[37:50] isn't possible. Okay. So that's probably

[37:52] something we need to hear from

[37:54] >> where the tag 20s

[37:59] previous halfacres across

[38:01] >> originally a band was provided to show

[38:03] that there were going to be halfacre

[38:05] lots. It when we really got dialing into

[38:08] it, it just kind of didn't make sense to

[38:12] put

[38:13] about a halfacre lot and the size of

[38:15] home that goes on a halfacre lot that's

[38:17] a million dollar home and does a million

[38:20] dollar home want to look across the

[38:21] street at some smaller cluster cottages

[38:23] and so forth. So when we really got into

[38:26] what could fit on the property

[38:28] [clears throat] it just kind of didn't

[38:29] make sense but we did want to

[38:31] acknowledge we tried and that's the

[38:34] reason why they're not shown. Those 15s

[38:36] along the top used to be the half acres

[38:39] and when we really kind of like I say

[38:42] got into it just

[38:44] really nice lots are by 150. That's a

[38:47] really good lot.

[38:48] >> I I don't see

[38:52] >> I mean we talked about that kind of that

[38:54] flex zone at the bottom. I don't see a

[38:55] park. I don't see any green space at all

[39:00] in that if the flex if the commercial

[39:03] down at the bottom became the flex space

[39:06] we would need to have and really we need

[39:08] to work with Stuart on the value of the

[39:10] property because if there's a price

[39:13] point where underground detention

[39:15] becomes affordable or it makes sense and

[39:18] if the [clears throat] value the square

[39:20] foot value of the ground and so forth

[39:22] gets to that point then there's a

[39:25] justification to go underground but if

[39:27] not then you want to use the open ground

[39:30] and that where the commercial is could

[39:32] be multiuse and I would agree with you

[39:35] that there we we know that's needed but

[39:39] we just wanted to give some direction

[39:42] So the location the location of that

[39:45] hasn't as functionality as far as the

[39:49] flow of water but

[39:51] >> where that commercial part that part is

[39:54] that that is detention based and that

[39:56] can actually be a park

[39:58] >> could be could be multi-use and it's just an opinion but I don't think

[40:02] that's the right place for a park.

[40:04] >> Yeah. So that's what

[40:05] >> out against the road against

[40:07] >> with the commercial.

[40:08] >> Yeah.

[40:10] [clears throat]

[40:11] That's good. We're hearing that input.

[40:13] That was one of the questions I had. So,

[40:16] you brought it up.

[40:16] >> The smaller lots with the C's on them,

[40:19] we would just refer to those as

[40:20] cottages. They would just have a small

[40:22] single family home on them. And then the

[40:24] CC's are what's referred to as clustered

[40:27] cottages. And you can see that they

[40:29] would share a drive aisle basically to

[40:32] get to those units. Now, the smallest

[40:34] unit here that's shown is a tenth of an

[40:36] acre. And that's 4,356

[40:40] ft. There is a reference to a

[40:44] development up between Far West and

[40:47] Plane City. It's actually developed in

[40:49] Weaver County. And that development by

[40:52] Nelson Homes has been referred to a lot

[40:54] both by people from the city and others

[40:57] as maybe something that might work here.

[41:00] And so we looked really closely at that

[41:02] development. We hold the design

[41:04] standards a lot of information and have

[41:07] really geared this toward that concept.

[41:10] Now, as we present it, it'll be an

[41:13] opportunity to say, I don't want you to

[41:15] have to hold your nose to accept it.

[41:17] It's just is that or not? And if it's

[41:20] not, then we'll look at it. What I

[41:22] wanted to point out though is the lots

[41:25] in the development to the north that I

[41:26] referred to, they're 06 and 07 acres.

[41:32] So, would be a little bit larger but not

[41:35] a lot.

[41:36] >> And I pointed out the smallest lot in

[41:39] that aggregated area

[41:41] >> in the in the cluster cottages. How wide

[41:44] is that drive? And I'm assuming they're

[41:46] going to have garages like single car

[41:48] garage facing each other.

[41:50] >> They would Yes. The the driveway or

[41:53] referred to a lot a lot in these type

[41:55] developments as an alley and the

[41:57] driveway would then offload from that

[41:59] driveway.

[42:00] >> How wide is that? The driveway is 20T

[42:05] >> is 20T

[42:07] size of the roads out west. My road

[42:10] truck my road's 21 ft wide.

[42:13] >> You're not getting your truck in that

[42:14] garage.

[42:15] >> Oh yeah.

[42:17] I think that's a [clears throat] lot of the problem is your their garages

[42:21] aren't very long and the driveways only.

[42:24] >> So I know in the Weaver County reference

[42:26] the JDC ranch is referring to Wever

[42:28] County made them say you have to have so

[42:30] much of a driveway. So someone has a

[42:33] Toyota Tundra, it's not sticking out the

[42:34] back.

[42:35] >> Basically, you have to seat the house

[42:36] back far enough on the lot to allow for

[42:38] so much driveway space.

[42:40] >> So that way you can actually fit

[42:41] something there

[42:42] >> without it sticking into the 24.

[42:44] >> I noticed that at JBC.

[42:45] >> Yeah.

[42:46] >> If you can kind of envision those lots,

[42:48] the idea is for those the home would

[42:50] face towards the driveway.

[42:52] >> And the idea is that 10 [clears throat]

[42:55] ft of the front yard would be taken up

[42:57] by the driveway. Now, in a lot of these

[43:00] design standards that we looked at, they

[43:01] have 25 foot setbacks. So, there is a

[43:04] little bit of a 15 foot front yard. Now,

[43:07] that could be adjusted a little bit.

[43:09] They also have like a 30 foot backyard.

[43:12] Now, if the home were able to be shifted

[43:14] back, say 25 ft, they can put five more

[43:16] feet in the garage.

[43:18] >> So, again, that's kind of the feedback

[43:20] again that we're looking for. And if we want to accommodate whether

[43:25] they're Silverados or King

[43:29] I I don't want to take sides. So,

[43:31] >> well, I I think what ends up happening

[43:33] with those smaller shallower garages,

[43:35] they end up just becoming storage sheds

[43:37] and you've got cars spread everywhere

[43:40] trying to find places to park.

[43:43] >> So, that's another that's another thing

[43:45] we'll work on. And we're ways we're long ways away from a cycle,

[43:49] [cough and clears throat]

[43:50] but we don't want we're trying to give

[43:52] you I think we're trying to but you got

[43:56] to have something

[43:58] on.

[43:59] >> So, we're trying to be uh little as

[44:02] transparent as we can to say this is

[44:04] what the zone may do. And then if we did

[44:07] it, you're saying I hear the open space

[44:10] and I hear the uh I hear some comments

[44:14] about making sure the garages are

[44:16] functional. That's the turning radius.

[44:20] >> I thought back I thought back in the

[44:23] early stages we talked about all these

[44:27] around here and then having a park or a

[44:31] >> green space.

[44:33] >> That's where it should be

[44:35] >> somewhere here. So all these people had

[44:37] somewhere to do whatever from here and

[44:41] from here that would mean maybe you put

[44:45] another cluster of T's down here.

[44:48] >> Yeah, I would almost

[44:49] >> take away

[44:52] even if you shifted this tri as far as

[44:54] getting the right amount of units. Even

[44:55] if you shifted this cluster to here and

[44:58] have green space here in the center. So

[45:00] definitely a far more functional

[45:02] >> you may get on the back.

[45:03] >> Are you are you saying you got to have

[45:05] 129 doors to make this work? Is that

[45:08] what

[45:09] >> or is that just

[45:10] >> that's a steward?

[45:11] >> No, we're we're saying we're trying to

[45:13] make it work the way the city wants it.

[45:16] >> Okay. And it has to work for both of us.

[45:18] >> Yeah.

[45:18] >> Has to make sense for you and has to

[45:19] make sense for us.

[45:20] >> So

[45:21] >> now this shows an aerial view of the JDC

[45:24] and I really kind of put this in here to

[45:28] so you can see that those blue rooftops

[45:31] are town homes and over on the left side

[45:33] are kind of the cluster developments.

[45:36] They have shared driveways. You can kind

[45:37] of see there's four cluster, six

[45:40] cluster. The plan that we saw before had

[45:42] an eight cluster, eight unit cluster.

[45:45] >> You're talking the ones in the bottom

[45:47] here in the gray.

[45:48] >> Yeah, gray. [clears throat] And then as

[45:50] you go up,

[45:53] >> so just south of the bottom side is a

[45:56] sports and we'll just call it their open

[45:58] space might be as big as our entire

[46:00] residential project. I'm over

[46:02] exaggerating there. So, so our our our

[46:06] scale is going to be quite a bit

[46:07] [clears throat] different.

[46:11] These are what I call

[46:14] >> where these ones over here are six

[46:16] clustered units and you can kind of see

[46:17] there's that

[46:19] >> and then just to north is a standalone

[46:20] single that other section single family

[46:23] standalone. Correct.

[46:25] >> That that'd be your C's.

[46:26] >> Pretty cute in that they rather than

[46:29] coming off of a cluster drive, they just

[46:31] front right up to the drive. I

[46:33] >> mean, I do like the concept of putting

[46:34] green space closer to the TE's because

[46:37] those are the families that use it the

[46:39] most because they don't have their own

[46:40] yards. The people in the seas, they're

[46:42] just going to enjoy their own backyard.

[46:44] Well, and this like

[46:44] >> they are pretty big.

[46:45] >> We we've also got to remember like green

[46:47] space here isn't going to be just for

[46:50] these homes cuz like so believe it or

[46:52] not, we're going to have a freeway

[46:53] that's going to cut up in half.

[46:55] >> Everything east of there, there's one park and that road's going

[46:58] to wipe it out. It's that little tiny

[47:01] >> place. That's it.

[47:04] >> West Haven has one on 4700, but there's

[47:06] nothing else east in Humper that

[47:09] resembles green space.

[47:11] >> Correct.

[47:12] One one thing that makes our ability to

[47:14] match GDC is the size of the GDC versus

[47:18] the size of this property and it's

[47:20] really important just to recognize scale

[47:23] is one of the reasons why it's just

[47:26] [clears throat] the size of the park

[47:28] shown there. This is just kind of a mix.

[47:30] You can kind of see the these would be

[47:32] the cluster units. You can kind of see

[47:34] there's the shared driveway and then

[47:36] here's like the back of town homes. And

[47:38] we don't have anything this tight on the

[47:41] plan. But again, if we looked at uh, you

[47:47] know, opening up some green space and

[47:48] that kind of thing, we might have to get

[47:50] a little bit tighter, which it's really

[47:53] just kind of again, we're here for some

[47:56] feedback so that we can kind of go back

[47:58] to

[47:58] >> But I I think I think we I think we need

[48:01] some green play with more green space in

[48:03] the plan. And whether that means a

[48:06] little little more density and and some

[48:08] of the other areas. I don't know. But

[48:10] let's let us go to work to try to find

[48:12] that.

[48:13] >> This is just a picture that was on the

[48:15] website.

[48:16] >> It's not the coolest town homes I've

[48:18] ever put a picture up, but you can kind

[48:21] of see with the grass and stuff. This is

[48:23] really just

[48:26] And that's why I thought this was kind

[48:28] of a valuable picture.

[48:30] >> I apologize it's grainy. It was a much

[48:32] larger picture on the website, but it

[48:35] really just kind of

[48:38] feel like walking around this

[48:39] neighborhood. What would it look like

[48:41] driving through? That's more what the

[48:43] intent.

[48:44] >> So, it's actually really

[48:47] [clears throat] It's actually really

[48:48] cool because they mentioned So, these

[48:51] houses, they share the driveway, their

[48:53] front front doors to the drive their

[48:56] front doors here. There's like I said,

[48:57] it's walkable. There's sidewalks

[49:00] everywhere. I mean, you can get here

[49:02] over here all on sidewalks.

[49:05] there's a sidewalk.

[49:06] >> It's more community friendly because

[49:07] they're facing their neighbors and they

[49:09] just pull into their

[49:09] >> back doors [clears throat]

[49:11] >> which really does help the community.

[49:13] >> Yeah.

[49:14] >> If they're backed like these ones that

[49:16] are shown, usually what there is is

[49:17] there's about 15 ft in length that may

[49:21] not accommodate the tund and stuff we

[49:22] talked about, but the idea is to provide

[49:26] >> those square boxes on the side.

[49:29] [clears throat]

[49:30] But if it's say it's a 20 foot setback,

[49:33] that gives you essentially parking stall

[49:36] to have in the driveway for parking. So

[49:40] on the street now, if I have a family

[49:42] party, sure.

[49:46] » And this one's kind of I just thought

[49:47] this was more finished and it just was

[49:51] quite pretty. But you can see there's

[49:53] the alley driveway and then here's the

[49:55] sidewalk so that I can go out the front

[49:57] door and walk up to

[50:01] causes interactivision

[50:05] in west of

[50:08] >> hill farms hill farms like that one's a

[50:10] really welldesigned community friendly

[50:13] density

[50:20] » it's a great community and it worked

[50:22] honestly the biggest challenge I see

[50:24] with those little guys

[50:26] >> ility similar to that I would love to

[50:27] see

[50:28] >> would Would you make those those six

[50:30] packs? Would you say those are private

[50:32] road going in or private drive? So the

[50:34] city's not maintaining those.

[50:36] >> Yes.

[50:37] >> Yeah. So one of the things that we run

[50:39] into with JDC is the utilities. So like

[50:42] you just got to make sure on the plat

[50:44] it's written well that they can have

[50:45] access and then making sure there's like

[50:47] a full-on manhole in the back so that

[50:49] you can clean it a lot easier.

[50:51] >> Yeah. Nothing wants anything in

[50:53] >> Yeah. We can avoid possible for

[50:55] maintenance situations. Well, those are

[50:57] some of the things that we

[50:59] >> and then storm water. We've had them

[51:01] where they where they slope back down to

[51:04] the the city road or county road and

[51:06] then everything just kind of flows

[51:07] across the sidewalk. So, that's kind of

[51:09] something we've tried to say, well, is

[51:10] there a better way to do it? What JDC's

[51:12] end up doing is trying to go slope away

[51:14] and they have just a stone rain box in

[51:16] the back they time to. The other thing

[51:18] JDC's done a really good job at cuz I

[51:21] imagine have to you know build stuff

[51:23] bring in fill and things like that just

[51:25] to get storm ra stuff to work is they

[51:27] put um yard drain boxes along all these

[51:30] smaller lots. That way when you build up

[51:33] the house and you go to landscape

[51:35] there's not just these holes and water

[51:37] just finds it. put all these yarn drain

[51:39] boxes in between these especially next

[51:41] to these bigger lots in the fields

[51:46] >> everything everything will drain to then

[51:48] >> so that's something to think about

[51:49] >> in my younger days I worked as the

[51:51] assistant to the Roy city engineer

[51:54] >> so I I I'm not trying to say that

[51:56] Hooker's like Roy I'm just saying I

[52:00] >> think you just said it [laughter]

[52:03] >> Troy

[52:05] that's not what I said

[52:06] >> you're doing so wellro

[52:08] We're going to have to we're going to

[52:09] have to have another for all like the

[52:11] basement.

[52:13] >> Just just let me finish.

[52:14] >> All I was trying to say is every one of

[52:16] those I've been in a lot of people's

[52:18] backyards up there and they're asking

[52:21] why is my swing set in the squishy

[52:23] ground.

[52:23] >> Yeah.

[52:24] >> And why when I kids play on the swing

[52:26] set can [clears throat] they not play on

[52:27] the swing set because it squishes in the

[52:29] ground. And there's a need for that

[52:32] drainage that you're just talking about

[52:33] there. And I just I don't want to be the

[52:36] guy that gets those calls and I don't

[52:38] want anybody.

[52:39] >> Yeah, that's

[52:44] » that's the keep giving us more that it's

[52:46] really helpful.

[52:47] >> I got a few things that we could use

[52:49] some input on as we work with Troy to

[52:52] build this out. So, just to give you

[52:54] guys a heads up, this is coming pretty

[52:57] quick as you probably noticed in the

[52:59] packet. Might have been a little bit of

[53:00] a shocker, but we're trying to get this

[53:01] moving. We've been talking about it for

[53:03] a long We'd like to get it through here.

[53:05] So,

[53:06] >> yeah, we'd like to get some action

[53:07] moving on it. Um, the process we're

[53:10] looking at, and you guys can we'll talk

[53:11] with Nick a little bit when we have

[53:12] time, but we need to get a resone, a

[53:14] general plan amendment. The DA that was

[53:18] proposed contemplates an ordinance

[53:19] update that would probably be done

[53:21] simultaneously to ensure that our

[53:23] community zone accommodates the

[53:25] residential you talked about. Then that

[53:28] would be one that would be one phase. I

[53:30] would say that would be a resone. Then

[53:32] we need to go through After that

[53:34] there'll be some binder grain or

[53:36] engineering but final plat approval. But

[53:40] the essence of this is we need to get

[53:41] the general product layout and the look

[53:44] and what we're going to get out of this

[53:46] down as part of our reszone and we can

[53:49] work through some of the engineering

[53:51] things of that nature for

[53:53] any questions about actual approval

[53:56] process how it will look as we navigate

[53:58] it. Not so much the approval process,

[54:00] but I do. So, when you're setting all

[54:02] this up, are you planning on setting

[54:04] some of this up as a PUB or is this

[54:06] going to be HOA? How's all that all the

[54:09] little lawns and everything going to get

[54:10] or take individual owners? How are we

[54:13] what's it look like?

[54:15] >> It'll be it'll be common area because it

[54:17] has to be common area.

[54:20] >> It'll either be some type of but HOA one

[54:24] or two and depending on how we get it

[54:27] done, but they'll be maintenance common

[54:29] ownership there'll be a fee that they'll

[54:32] be assessed and maintained and then

[54:34] they'll be will be common you have to in

[54:37] this type of project

[54:38] >> and then at what point or is it even our

[54:40] in our wheelhouse like talking about

[54:42] things like deed restrictions where hey

[54:44] that's got to be owner occupied for x

[54:46] amount of years so it doesn't turn into

[54:48] rentals

[54:50] >> because I I like I'm not interested in

[54:53] 130 rental properties

[54:54] >> agreed so JDC Ranch they did that in

[54:57] their agreement. There's something

[54:58] written in there that talks about owner

[55:00] occupied for

[55:01] >> 10 years so many years like that. Yeah.

[55:04] >> Was there anything on there? You said

[55:07] cottages, but does that include like

[55:10] >> patio homes?

[55:11] >> Homes?

[55:12] >> We had talked about patio home

[55:14] >> there. That [clears throat] could be a

[55:15] product. Patio is kind of more of a

[55:17] single level unit.

[55:18] >> And the the common thing that seems to

[55:21] be more popular now is is particularly

[55:23] all the good grounds gone. So I can't

[55:25] build a basement in the ground. I just

[55:27] put the basement on the second level,

[55:29] but a single family.

[55:33] >> Have you looked at the one we have over

[55:36] here just by the culinary water?

[55:39] >> I have.

[55:39] >> He's seen it.

[55:41] >> And then where mom's at and Wilkies are

[55:45] at right the old Sodbuster turf farm.

[55:47] Have you been over there and seen that

[55:49] in North?

[55:51] >> I could we could drive

[55:52] >> just east of White Barn.

[55:55] >> Okay. on the ground.

[55:57] >> Yeah,

[55:57] >> I haven't seen

[56:00] >> I mean they're they're fairly nice homes

[56:03] for I mean they have most of them have

[56:05] bonus room over the garage and mom's is

[56:09] twobedroom

[56:11] with living and dining and everything

[56:14] else. So I think something like that

[56:17] would work a patio home. Okay, we could

[56:20] certainly

[56:21] >> So, Malcolm, question on that general

[56:23] plan amendment. We're currently going

[56:25] through the process of a of like

[56:27] reviewing our general plan anyway. Will

[56:29] we So, we'll just basically do an

[56:31] amendment to the current general plan

[56:32] and then that'll be in direct

[56:34] consideration for the review that

[56:36] they're that they're working on anyway.

[56:38] >> We have to do we have to

[56:39] >> Yeah, this amendment would come before

[56:40] our

[56:41] >> That's what I thought because we're 10

[56:43] months out on the review major amendment

[56:45] >> of our general plan update. So, we need

[56:47] to

[56:48] >> be nice if the changes we make are

[56:51] comfortable with even you know I mean

[56:53] there will be changes and there will be

[56:54] things in the development agreement that

[56:56] are particular to them but be nice if

[56:58] the changes to our ordinance are ones

[57:00] that we're comfortable with just

[57:02] maintaining changes so we don't have a

[57:04] lot of redundancy very a lot of change

[57:06] but

[57:06] >> okay I that's what I figured was

[57:08] happening

[57:09] >> so I understand that though uh as we

[57:12] come in for the reszone you could do the

[57:14] rezone and the general plan amendment

[57:16] together

[57:18] So they you know so okay just want to

[57:21] make sure at the same time

[57:23] >> all of the general plan or just the

[57:25] commercial

[57:27] portion

[57:28] >> there and then it would be

[57:31] portion and that would really probably

[57:33] be it. I think the commercials probably

[57:37] facilitated. It's just not

[57:39] >> it's probably contemplated enough. We

[57:41] don't need to amend anything but we just

[57:43] need some standards that they're helping

[57:44] us with through this agreement.

[57:46] >> So we really standards for our C2 zone.

[57:49] We have the zone. We want it. It's in

[57:51] our general plan.

[57:53] Good. Doesn't need to. It's really just

[57:55] a P zone that hasn't been in place.

[57:58] Needs an amendment.

[58:01] >> We hope to do that in the development

[58:03] agreement.

[58:04] >> I would make you then you can make your

[58:06] ordinance.

[58:07] >> I would make a subtle comment. I'm not

[58:08] trying to split. I think I'm confident

[58:10] the general plan contemplated C1 here.

[58:13] It's just not a reality. It's going to

[58:15] be we're looking

[58:18] where that is. I think that we thought

[58:20] we'd have limited residential, you know,

[58:24] retail sales throughout, but we're going

[58:26] to have a larger scale development like

[58:28] this. There's never been any interest so

[58:29] far. No one's come to me with a small

[58:32] mom or pop shop yet. This is what's

[58:35] going to come near 515.

[58:37] >> Well, I think that would be the other

[58:39] major. I guess maybe we would be

[58:40] clarifying with the reason that this is

[58:42] getting this is going from a commercial

[58:44] to officially a C2 zone.

[58:47] >> I think part of that though Stuart

[58:50] talked about is everything's online now

[58:53] so it's hard to get a brick and mortar.

[58:55] >> I think our general plan will identify

[58:58] areas where those will happen at 55 and

[59:00] 55 some things like that. have some nice

[59:02] areas where we have more local sales.

[59:05] But

[59:06] >> well, you can you can still get them on

[59:07] like I know a lot of people, you know,

[59:09] they're voice and they want like a small

[59:11] mom and pop restaurant. So something

[59:13] still has to draw them to that.

[59:15] >> Yeah, we'd be open to that. U we have in

[59:18] one of our projects a a pizza shop, Se

[59:21] Brothers Pizza. I think they're the best

[59:23] pizzas in Utah, but they only have two

[59:26] locations.

[59:27] But uh they it's really they really make

[59:30] great People

[59:33] love them. But you got problem is they

[59:35] aren't Little Caesars and nobody knows

[59:37] their name

[59:38] >> and they just don't. So if you ever go

[59:40] to the Lake Parkway exit, go in and get

[59:43] a either their accommodation or their

[59:46] barbecue chicken and you'll go back and

[59:48] get back again. But but those type of

[59:51] small shops, I love them.

[59:52] >> But but it's [clears throat] hard for

[59:54] them to make money too. So they they got to

[59:58] >> but they got to be tied to the anchor

[1:00:00] because tied to a Smith or to a grocery

[1:00:02] store, they just go out of business.

[1:00:04] They just don't have the ability to

[1:00:06] advertise and stay in business.

[1:00:09] >> Could you guys look at

[1:00:12] 152 in the DA2?

[1:00:23] » So, these are design guideline elements.

[1:00:25] This is where we're at with uh Troy and

[1:00:28] the AWA group is we're gonna he's kind

[1:00:31] of recommended some design elements.

[1:00:33] We're going to solidify that list and

[1:00:34] he's going to help procure that. Troy is

[1:00:37] speaking if I'm over commenting here,

[1:00:39] but as we get some of those put

[1:00:40] together, these are things you guys

[1:00:41] could anticipate seeing to help you make

[1:00:43] your reason.

[1:00:45] >> I think the fine distinction area where

[1:00:46] we want to be reasonable is we're going

[1:00:48] to try and put any reasonable items that

[1:00:50] we can at the plat approval level. We

[1:00:53] don't want them incur an unreasonable

[1:00:55] amount of costs, but we need to be able

[1:00:57] to see and feel how this development

[1:00:58] looks enough that you guys can

[1:01:00] comfortably

[1:01:01] any other items besides what's listed

[1:01:03] there. There I have a couple in mind,

[1:01:04] but they might come with the plat. So

[1:01:07] anyway, go ahead planning commission and

[1:01:08] Troy if what things will come and what

[1:01:10] you really feel like you need to see to

[1:01:12] comfortably recommend this one way or

[1:01:15] the other.

[1:01:17] So we we have this is a copy of the JBC

[1:01:21] Ranch design guidelines and there are

[1:01:26] more products listed in here than we can

[1:01:29] accommodate. But again with that

[1:01:32] direction we can go back and trim down

[1:01:35] the list and go to the maybe three or

[1:01:38] four products that we have and if

[1:01:39] there's an interest in patio homes that

[1:01:42] can be accommodated as well. But really,

[1:01:44] it's very without the zoning, without

[1:01:47] [clears throat] establishing what is the

[1:01:48] minimum lot size, that kind of

[1:01:50] information, it's very difficult to get

[1:01:53] a home builder involved because the hey,

[1:01:55] do you want to buy this land? What can I

[1:01:57] build there? I don't know. So, it

[1:02:00] doesn't see it just doesn't work. So,

[1:02:02] the first step is really just trying to

[1:02:04] establish what does it have to look like

[1:02:06] when it's built, which is the purpose of

[1:02:08] design guidelines, and then what's the

[1:02:10] tolerance for the zoning? And

[1:02:12] essentially that's density and minimum

[1:02:14] lot size and then the type of product

[1:02:16] even if that's something that's of

[1:02:18] interest and then if there's other

[1:02:19] restrictions that need to come that's

[1:02:21] best put in the development. I think

[1:02:24] just to kind of stress that as you guys

[1:02:25] are probably really aware we don't have

[1:02:27] great design guidelines. You probably

[1:02:29] look through and notice compared to

[1:02:31] maybe Wever County we don't have when

[1:02:32] they're not in place. We uh so things

[1:02:35] you want to see we're going to try and

[1:02:37] depict them through you know elevations

[1:02:40] site plans you're real comfortable with.

[1:02:43] So there anything specific concern about

[1:02:46] added

[1:02:47] >> I think lighting is probably a big one

[1:02:49] because we still have a little bit of

[1:02:50] dark sky out here

[1:02:52] >> and I think lighting needs to be very

[1:02:54] focused on

[1:02:56] >> so the direction we've received so far

[1:02:59] 25 foot mounting heights for

[1:03:02] >> parking

[1:03:03] >> a lot of times they're higher than that

[1:03:04] >> oh 40 is

[1:03:10] 25

[1:03:12] But

[1:03:13] >> more posts, more lights, but but that's

[1:03:17] the cost of it. But it actually then

[1:03:19] doesn't spread.

[1:03:20] >> But we will lighting plan.

[1:03:22] >> Yeah. The same type thing. If if there's

[1:03:26] some like, hey, we're good with your

[1:03:28] site plan that, you know, kind of a

[1:03:30] thing. And obviously we got to get

[1:03:32] through the process, but we can get a

[1:03:34] phototric plan for that site plan. So

[1:03:37] you can see the number of light folds,

[1:03:39] what's the intensity of lighting?

[1:03:41] jurisdictions look for the number of

[1:03:43] lumens per acre foot candles per acre.

[1:03:46] However you want to you know whatever

[1:03:47] gives you kind of a feel and maybe it's

[1:03:50] I do happen to have a light meter and if

[1:03:53] I need to go to some shopping center and

[1:03:54] say here's what the lighting is or

[1:03:56] because you're familiar with the West

[1:03:58] Point Smith store I can just share that

[1:04:00] photometric plan with you. Now it's

[1:04:03] probably a little dimmer the lighting

[1:04:04] there because over time the pictures get

[1:04:07] dirt and [clears throat] that kind of

[1:04:08] thing. So it's not like when the lights

[1:04:10] are brand new. That's what they're

[1:04:12] actually set up for on the plans. But I

[1:04:14] can share that.

[1:04:15] >> What's What's across the main road from

[1:04:16] that West Point Spitz? Is that

[1:04:18] commercial or residential?

[1:04:19] >> Residential.

[1:04:20] My concern is the folks on the other

[1:04:22] side of 5,500 and the folks on

[1:04:25] >> 47 that

[1:04:29] >> there's there's a lot of sophisticated

[1:04:31] lighting right now and we can we can we

[1:04:33] can bring in uh those that don't leak,

[1:04:36] you know, and that are actually very

[1:04:38] direct

[1:04:38] >> the with the LED lighting that we have

[1:04:41] now. I'm just doing a sim very similar

[1:04:44] shopping center in Draper and we have

[1:04:46] similar the city has extremely

[1:04:51] be glad they have extremely

[1:04:53] sophisticated lighting standards and a

[1:04:55] lot of different things. They they do

[1:04:57] not allow spill over the property line

[1:05:00] >> at all. So, so I can tell you with

[1:05:04] confidence the 25 foot light poles

[1:05:07] >> I can get as close as foot

[1:05:09] [clears throat] candle spilling over the

[1:05:10] property.

[1:05:12] >> What we ended up doing on some of those

[1:05:14] perimeter lights is we had to reduce the

[1:05:15] height even further than 22 and 1/2 ft

[1:05:18] >> to get that to be zero. Against the

[1:05:21] residential there are post and panel

[1:05:23] concrete walls and we actually have to

[1:05:25] model the wall to show that as the light

[1:05:29] comes down it's the wall

[1:05:32] to be able to come up with a model that

[1:05:34] shows that there's not you can see the

[1:05:36] light when you look up but the the light

[1:05:38] coming down is not coming

[1:05:41] >> and then things around like noise

[1:05:42] standards that would be more ordinance

[1:05:44] not design

[1:05:49] » and I agree like lighting is one thing

[1:05:51] that they're going to get the biggest

[1:05:52] feedback from residents about I grew up

[1:05:53] in late and and we lived across the

[1:05:55] street from where they built the camper

[1:05:57] world that's right there off the freeway

[1:05:58] and the biggest complaint that whole

[1:06:00] neighborhood had was the lights that place produced.

[1:06:03] >> There's no place. I wonder how they I

[1:06:05] can see that all over the town. How they

[1:06:08] >> I know. I don't know how we live

[1:06:10] literally.

[1:06:10] >> That is not a That is not a commercial

[1:06:13] that they snuck that in.

[1:06:15] >> They lit it up like on top.

[1:06:18] >> We won't do that.

[1:06:19] >> You guys

[1:06:23] two something

[1:06:25] on that would be helpful.

[1:06:30] uses prohibited uses going to be allowed

[1:06:32] us. I want to make sure you guys look

[1:06:34] through the table for allowed uses in a

[1:06:37] P allowed us in a C2 and make sure

[1:06:39] there's no uses need to clear those up.

[1:06:42] And then also are there any uses you

[1:06:45] want to call out you don't want? We

[1:06:47] threw out some examples. It's just

[1:06:49] examples. don't need to be prohibitive

[1:06:59] propane tanks and things like that that

[1:07:01] you might want place where people can

[1:07:02] swap tanks normal things like that.

[1:07:05] >> The only thing they currently do is they

[1:07:06] have a blue Rhino propane tank so you

[1:07:08] can change out little five gallons for

[1:07:10] barbecue grill.

[1:07:12] >> They don't do the larger propane set.

[1:07:14] >> That's just and it's just they just have

[1:07:17] a cage. You bring the They stick it in

[1:07:19] the cage and give you a full one and the

[1:07:21] guy comes and picks up the

[1:07:23] >> if you were to bring in a small Anyway,

[1:07:25] but yeah, just about

[1:07:28] loaded in there. I don't know why car

[1:07:30] washes would be restricted where they go

[1:07:33] in there and take they're in there

[1:07:34] currently with this version.

[1:07:37] That's a big deal.

[1:07:39] >> We So the current commercial uses that

[1:07:41] you have in your very current code, they provide all the uses we're looking

[1:07:46] for. What Malcolm's really

[1:07:49] is there's some things in there you

[1:07:50] probably don't want. And there are some

[1:07:52] things actually in there that a grocery

[1:07:54] won't want. They won't want um sit down

[1:08:00] alcohol sales in their shopping center.

[1:08:03] Like point of consumption versus point

[1:08:06] of distribution. They'll you can take

[1:08:09] your pack [clears throat] or whatever

[1:08:11] home with you, but they don't want

[1:08:13] somebody sitting in the parking lot or

[1:08:15] out in outdoor seating area drinking.

[1:08:18] And so that's just the the kind of thing

[1:08:20] that you'll

[1:08:21] >> also restrict

[1:08:23] >> having done they'll restrict us from

[1:08:27] other type uses that they'll

[1:08:29] >> otheries

[1:08:30] >> they won't let us put a pharmacy in they

[1:08:33] won't let

[1:08:35] >> yeah they won't let us put other

[1:08:37] >> some other examples

[1:08:38] >> and they you know there's some other

[1:08:40] those type of things we'll get another

[1:08:42] layer of restrictions from them so you

[1:08:43] know

[1:08:44] >> this calls out some and that was just we

[1:08:46] just pulled Those aren't anything we're

[1:08:48] set on. They're just examples. Get your

[1:08:50] mind on things and we'd have to adise

[1:08:52] with Nick on anything that could get rid

[1:08:54] of it. But some other examples like

[1:08:57] auditoriums, charter schools, hospitals,

[1:09:00] reception centers. Um in a P zone, you

[1:09:03] probably could have an assisted living in a residential zone

[1:09:09] right next to this thoughts. Would

[1:09:13] assisted living be

[1:09:16] a proh

[1:09:18] I can't good or bad I have no idea we do

[1:09:22] get a question we have people

[1:09:24] >> I mean you go down the would be in that

[1:09:26] PUB zone so from a density standpoint it

[1:09:29] would be interesting good or bad I don't

[1:09:30] know but you had a resident you know you

[1:09:33] got five units [clears throat] to the

[1:09:34] acre and then we placed it

[1:09:38] somehow got worked in

[1:09:42] I guess

[1:09:44] >> it'd be interesting. They got they got

[1:09:45] one on Parkway

[1:09:49] come off the West Davis and head to the

[1:09:51] hospital.

[1:09:52] >> Yeah,

[1:09:53] >> they got a memory care right in

[1:10:00] » so

[1:10:00] >> because it's on the other side street of

[1:10:02] the hospital.

[1:10:02] >> We do have a we do have doctors and

[1:10:04] things like that at our commercial

[1:10:06] centers, doctor offices.

[1:10:08] That's not

[1:10:11] but I would

[1:10:14] I do I'm aware of a assisted living

[1:10:17] center that's out looking right now but

[1:10:19] is that something I don't know but is

[1:10:23] that give me some feedback

[1:10:30] » possible

[1:10:33] » they're talking about they are five

[1:10:35] acres size

[1:10:38] How many beds does that

[1:10:40] >> I don't know what that converts

[1:10:43] >> many.

[1:10:43] >> What's that one right there? They just

[1:10:46] put west of

[1:10:49] >> South Fork hardware.

[1:10:53] » So they did the one

[1:10:55] >> I know I know one they did. It's down

[1:10:57] that Lake Parkway. You go all the way

[1:11:00] out to Angel Street.

[1:11:02] Uh, and it's on the southeast corner

[1:11:06] across the street from the dentist

[1:11:08] office.

[1:11:08] >> Yeah, which one I'm talking about?

[1:11:10] >> Is that the one you're talking?

[1:11:11] >> It's the memory care assistant living.

[1:11:14] >> And I, you know, there's probably half a

[1:11:17] dozen buildings in there. They're all

[1:11:18] single story. They're all

[1:11:22] >> I guess that would depend on you because

[1:11:25] then that would take away if they're

[1:11:27] going to need three to five acres and

[1:11:29] there goes some of your housing.

[1:11:32] And I don't know there's room for both

[1:11:33] here. So that's why I'm not sure I'd

[1:11:34] like them. I'm more I'm more curious to

[1:11:37] whether I even entertain them. If

[1:11:38] there's if there's adversity in this

[1:11:40] group, I don't even want to talk to

[1:11:41] them. If kind of the kind of sixes,

[1:11:44] maybe I would. Okay.

[1:11:46] >> In my opinion, I think it's sixes. I

[1:11:48] mean, our population, you can tell we

[1:11:51] got that that patio home place is build

[1:11:53] out and so now the population getting to

[1:11:57] the point where we got to go to Lotus.

[1:12:00] We got to go to a place there by cancer

[1:12:03] beehive house or peach tree

[1:12:08] >> there in West

[1:12:18] but not right there

[1:12:21] you don't get it approved thoughts have

[1:12:23] any considerations I don't none of those

[1:12:26] are necessarily problematic

[1:12:30] you got up the discussion. Uh

[1:12:32] >> these are a couple before we leave that

[1:12:35] car washes. I'd like to know. So that's

[1:12:37] probably a big deal.

[1:12:38] >> Yeah.

[1:12:39] >> We got a lot of demand for car washes.

[1:12:45] » Pardon me.

[1:12:48] » Long as they can fit a duty truck.

[1:12:51] >> Put a good one in that will fit

[1:12:52] everything

[1:12:53] >> out here in the country.

[1:12:55] >> Yes. Okay.

[1:12:57] >> Not not prohibited at least. It's

[1:12:59] already being permitted.

[1:13:01] >> I don't see a problem with the car wash

[1:13:03] in an area like this. It seems to fit.

[1:13:05] Well,

[1:13:05] >> yeah. Just not in Roy there. Got 75,000

[1:13:08] of them.

[1:13:09] >> Okay.

[1:13:10] >> Vehicle repair. I assume that means like

[1:13:12] an actual mechanic shop, not like an

[1:13:15] auto zone.

[1:13:16] >> Yeah. It seemed like it had verbage in

[1:13:19] there for like limited. So yeah, I would

[1:13:21] imagine you could something like auto

[1:13:23] parts sales, maybe like a loop shop, but

[1:13:25] it probably prohibit

[1:13:27] >> because later in the development

[1:13:28] agreement, it does mention automotive

[1:13:29] service.

[1:13:30] >> So they kind of conflict each other and

[1:13:32] I assumed one was leaning towards

[1:13:33] AutoZone.

[1:13:35] >> So we put a val in Springville and it

[1:13:37] went really well. It actually sits next

[1:13:39] to the fuel center. You you don't even

[1:13:42] know they're no different than than a drive up window. The question

[1:13:47] would probably be more would you want to

[1:13:48] restrict mechanic shops to where

[1:13:52] >> we would probably have that restriction

[1:13:54] of Smith

[1:13:56] now I don't know do they I think they

[1:13:59] probably restrict even the tire

[1:14:02] >> brothers

[1:14:03] >> maybe we have to look at that or you

[1:14:07] could ask for exception because they

[1:14:09] don't sell tires but it's really they

[1:14:11] just don't want they don't want uses

[1:14:13] that are going to occupy their

[1:14:17] They get even in their inline shops,

[1:14:20] they don't like dentist office because

[1:14:22] they sit there

[1:14:24] too long.

[1:14:27] >> Beyond use is another buzz word that got

[1:14:29] kicked around a lot. Something we can

[1:14:31] work with Nick on, but I want I don't

[1:14:32] want it to be a hard point when we get

[1:14:34] to there as our phasing plan. Um

[1:14:40] there's discussions obviously early on

[1:14:42] of ratios of completion.

[1:14:46] I'm not overly familiar with it, so I'm

[1:14:48] not going to act like I am, but it might

[1:14:50] be something we want to have discussions

[1:14:51] with this team here about what's

[1:14:53] reasonable and what could be

[1:14:54] accommodated

[1:14:56] >> as far as what gets filled out first

[1:15:02] » like when you phase a plan together like

[1:15:04] this, do you you start with commercial?

[1:15:06] Do you move from outside in, inside out?

[1:15:09] >> Uh,

[1:15:12] it'll be done and I

[1:15:15] There's a there's a big there's a big issue here. It's the sewer list

[1:15:22] station

[1:15:24] and you you can't fund the sewer list

[1:15:27] station

[1:15:28] with even the density even increased

[1:15:32] density of residential.

[1:15:34] There's no there no way economically to

[1:15:36] pay for that station with 20 acres of

[1:15:39] ground.

[1:15:40] >> Okay, even 40 acres of ground. So you

[1:15:43] got to have the commercial to fund the

[1:15:44] list station. So you either got to have

[1:15:47] the commercial being built or you're not

[1:15:49] it can't be a residential. But to put

[1:15:52] restrictions on how you time the project

[1:15:58] just because you can't build the

[1:16:00] listation without the commercial, you're

[1:16:02] going to get the commercial with the

[1:16:04] residential. But [clears throat] but but

[1:16:07] the government to restrict the capacity

[1:16:10] of the private sector to be able to make

[1:16:12] it work

[1:16:14] >> that becomes a little problematic as you

[1:16:16] understand how it functions. You got to

[1:16:18] but you're going to have but the but the

[1:16:20] pure fact that you can't sewer those

[1:16:23] homes without the lift station. You

[1:16:26] logically you can't have the lift

[1:16:29] station without the commercial.

[1:16:30] >> Correct.

[1:16:31] >> You're going to have them together. So

[1:16:32] how would you anticipate how would you

[1:16:34] anticipate this be built out? What would

[1:16:36] come first in actual construction

[1:16:39] >> grocery anchor would drive the

[1:16:40] commercial. There isn't a tenant that

[1:16:43] would come.

[1:16:43] >> So you anticipate likely

[1:16:45] >> say that say that because I think the

[1:16:48] public doesn't normally understand it.

[1:16:51] >> Yeah.

[1:16:51] >> Oh the ger anchor is what creates the

[1:16:55] trips

[1:16:56] >> that benefit the other paths and

[1:16:58] tenants. And you will not you will not

[1:17:01] get anyone here.

[1:17:02] >> I think I'll say I know everybody thinks

[1:17:05] it'll come but it won't

[1:17:07] >> without the anchor

[1:17:08] >> that are you is that's Willis Smith

[1:17:10] yours. Did you do that development?

[1:17:13] >> That was Perry. I should have built

[1:17:16] [snorts]

[1:17:16] >> that's because I I watched that one and

[1:17:17] they built the Smiths first and now

[1:17:19] they're almost completely built out.

[1:17:26] » They did all that.

[1:17:27] >> You know that guy

[1:17:30] Perry would let us in.

[1:17:32] >> What about the residential? When does

[1:17:34] that

[1:17:36] >> would again zoning drives the builder

[1:17:40] and then the builder would

[1:17:42] >> So we're we're going to try to do it all

[1:17:44] together. Just that's what we're going

[1:17:46] to try to do. But but but you talk to a

[1:17:50] builder, they're not going to build all

[1:17:52] at once.

[1:17:53] >> They're going to like anything else, the

[1:17:55] market is the market. And they'll come

[1:17:57] in and build as much as they can and the

[1:18:00] market will assist.

[1:18:01] >> Well, I I don't know what's worse from a

[1:18:03] res from the residents around. Is it

[1:18:05] better to draw out the whole building

[1:18:08] process? Think of all the construction

[1:18:10] vehicles and people and everything

[1:18:12] servicing that or is it better to just

[1:18:14] get it all done at once?

[1:18:15] >> I don't know. We live in Utah.

[1:18:19] » You're not wrong.

[1:18:20] >> So, would it be

[1:18:23] >> would it be unreasonable to have some

[1:18:26] type of requ and the DA for a level of

[1:18:30] completion with the not the pads but the

[1:18:33] ger anchor the anchor prior to

[1:18:38] any I I

[1:18:43] to put it in the agreement I think makes

[1:18:46] it harder it just comp then then you're

[1:18:50] trying to explain to somebody that you

[1:18:52] can't

[1:18:54] it's going to happen all at once and you

[1:18:56] want You're not going to get you're not

[1:18:59] going to get I mean we've got people on

[1:19:02] 4700 one of the family members that's

[1:19:04] paying the sewer fees he tells me and

[1:19:07] it's not able to build a ton because it

[1:19:09] doesn't have a list station

[1:19:11] >> and so even if you you're not going to get it you got to

[1:19:15] have that list station built and the

[1:19:18] only way you're going to build that is

[1:19:19] with the commercial and but then to try

[1:19:22] to tie them together you got to have so

[1:19:23] much of this or so much of that it You

[1:19:27] got to let the market work that and find

[1:19:29] a way to get it built. And you can

[1:19:32] restrict it, I guess, and but the

[1:19:34] restriction is going to probably

[1:19:35] represent what's going to happen anyway.

[1:19:37] >> But I but I but I think not to have

[1:19:39] confidence that it's going to have to

[1:19:41] happen that way, I think, is is not

[1:19:44] sensible.

[1:19:46] [clears throat]

[1:19:48] >> For the whole thing to work, the the

[1:19:49] anchor is going to have to come.

[1:19:50] >> Yes. because that's what funds it and

[1:19:52] also that's what it doesn't reasonable

[1:19:56] to have some contemplate language of the

[1:19:58] anchor to an extent that you're

[1:19:59] comfortable have some

[1:20:01] >> Yeah. But do we hold the sewer on the

[1:20:03] residential till the anchor is built or

[1:20:06] do we do we can we put the sewer in or

[1:20:08] do we side plan or we put curb gutter

[1:20:10] in? Are we selling lots and the anchor

[1:20:13] isn't totally built but but no one's

[1:20:15] going to sell a lot. They don't have a

[1:20:16] sewer list station there. Nobody's going

[1:20:18] to have a sewer list station. the

[1:20:19] anchor's not underway, but we got to go

[1:20:21] back and look at this leak. We got to

[1:20:23] have an attorney review it to see if

[1:20:25] we're stepping over the line or

[1:20:27] violating the ordinance. And it just

[1:20:29] seems it seems it seems good, I

[1:20:33] [clears throat] suppose, politically,

[1:20:34] but it seems cumbersome to function.

[1:20:37] That make sense?

[1:20:39] They're most likely and I realize the

[1:20:41] greatest confidence comes from seeing

[1:20:43] you in writing that anchor drives the

[1:20:46] whole show

[1:20:48] >> and and to put a stipulation on the

[1:20:51] anchor. They would probably ask for it

[1:20:52] to be a bit little bit longer

[1:20:55] just so that there's

[1:20:58] rooftops, whatever to support that.

[1:21:00] >> I mean, the anchor's interested in the

[1:21:02] residential being behind it because

[1:21:03] they're going to shop. That's what drove

[1:21:05] where your new Home Depot's going. Them

[1:21:08] other pads.

[1:21:09] >> Once the Home Depot went in, your Home

[1:21:12] Depot them pads started popping up.

[1:21:14] >> Yeah. The pads some of them are already

[1:21:16] sold now.

[1:21:18] >> But it was the Home Depot that drove.

[1:21:20] >> Yeah. And so and it may be I mean if

[1:21:23] delayed [clears throat] six months, but

[1:21:25] the CRA can be put in place and uh it's

[1:21:29] funding the sewer lift station. Do we

[1:21:31] have to wait six months before we

[1:21:34] the line, but nobody's going to sign on

[1:21:37] the bottom line for for CRA if Smith

[1:21:41] isn't signed on the line to build. But

[1:21:43] if they're delayed six months, can we

[1:21:45] now delay the entire residential project

[1:21:47] six months? What does that do

[1:21:49] economically to the builder? It just

[1:21:52] feels it's all going to have to happen

[1:21:54] to make it work. But I don't to try to put it in an attorney's hands

[1:22:02] rather than a builder's hands. I get a

[1:22:04] little nervous about

[1:22:06] >> um amenities, open space. The PV zone is

[1:22:09] a 40% open space. Um we'll have to look

[1:22:12] what we got and work through that and

[1:22:14] see if I said we can amend certain

[1:22:16] things. U [clears throat]

[1:22:19] current PV zone is four units max

[1:22:21] attached. They're proposing six. That

[1:22:23] could be an amendment to the zone.

[1:22:26] But what do you guys got on amenities?

[1:22:29] Pocket parks, trails. We talked a little

[1:22:32] on a little bit of connectivity, too. I

[1:22:33] don't think we got anything. I know

[1:22:34] there's some thoughts maybe a pavilion,

[1:22:36] things like that would be nice for

[1:22:38] people to have lunch.

[1:22:40] Go ahead. That's what I would like to

[1:22:42] see. But we're going to put green space

[1:22:45] when we're talking about smaller units

[1:22:46] and more dense. You can't kick a ball

[1:22:48] with your kid, right? You I I need to

[1:22:52] focus on that. I want I want power.

[1:22:57] >> Yeah.

[1:22:57] >> First home that I owned was Stone in

[1:22:59] Stone Creek subdivision

[1:23:00] [clears throat and cough] in West Haven.

[1:23:01] Our lot was 10.

[1:23:02] >> There's value in those lots. Like it it

[1:23:04] served my family well, but we played at

[1:23:07] the park at the end of the subdivision

[1:23:08] every day

[1:23:09] >> cuz my kids could not enjoy our 25 by 25

[1:23:12] backyard very well as we started to grow

[1:23:14] a family. So, I've lived that life and I

[1:23:17] agree like

[1:23:21] » one of the So, when you've got up here

[1:23:23] on walking trails, too, one of the

[1:23:24] things like my wife and boy like to ride

[1:23:27] their bikes all over town and they

[1:23:29] constantly end up over in Green Farm

[1:23:30] because they've got an amazing just

[1:23:32] walking. It's a sidewalk, but the way it

[1:23:36] goes through and the way they've done

[1:23:37] kind of the amenities before it leads

[1:23:38] into the houses, you've got shrubs and

[1:23:40] trees and it just it's kind of a natural

[1:23:42] thing. And you see people

[1:23:45] all the time over there.

[1:23:46] >> Creates community.

[1:23:47] >> Yeah. Go to that JDC ranch in the

[1:23:49] evening like about this time.

[1:23:51] >> Great. JDC is if you have

[1:23:54] >> every [clears throat] single trip.

[1:23:55] >> We'll go look at it, too.

[1:23:58] >> We don't have time, so this really isn't

[1:24:00] overly pertinent, but I do want to make

[1:24:02] sure we address it. A large section of

[1:24:05] the DA that will come is related,

[1:24:07] they're calling it infrastructure

[1:24:08] financing.

[1:24:10] that contemplates

[1:24:12] working together to find financing

[1:24:15] mechanisms.

[1:24:17] That'll be a lot in the you know up to

[1:24:19] the city council how that's done. But uh

[1:24:22] just to put it out there I mean

[1:24:23] obviously tax finance something about

[1:24:26] this looks like we're talking about a

[1:24:28] CRA specifically. We've also done some

[1:24:30] work on our end for a grant. want to

[1:24:32] make sure aware of that. for some grant

[1:24:34] money for sewer infrastructure that we

[1:24:36] could likely apply and then we've done

[1:24:38] pioneering agreements in the past and

[1:24:39] there's others.

[1:24:40] >> So that's that's one of that's one of

[1:24:42] the things I want to ask Nick about

[1:24:43] tonight too is like there were some big

[1:24:45] hangups previously as this came through

[1:24:47] planning commission what hangups over

[1:24:51] financing and I'm I don't know what our

[1:24:53] role in that really is because we're not

[1:24:55] the legislative part of the city as it

[1:24:58] relates to ne necessary infrastructure

[1:25:01] and that there could be discussion, but

[1:25:04] ultimately I don't think it'll be overly

[1:25:05] >> No, I I think our role is to say we have

[1:25:07] to have the infrastructure and then the

[1:25:10] >> they got to figure out figure it out how

[1:25:12] they're going to do it. that we're

[1:25:13] recommending

[1:25:15] they figure out

[1:25:16] >> and I would say just from experience if

[1:25:19] you're going to you need it and there's

[1:25:22] no other project that I've seen that

[1:25:24] that's type of thing because you've got

[1:25:25] an infrastructure

[1:25:27] >> nut that is bigger than anyone project

[1:25:31] >> and that's where that type of

[1:25:33] >> that's how it should be used

[1:25:35] >> but but but if you make it big enough

[1:25:37] there are other things inside the city

[1:25:40] >> that actually probably need to be dealt

[1:25:41] with that probably could be part of that

[1:25:44] and that's where you could make

[1:25:46] recommendations as to the size. I would

[1:25:48] like to see there's definitely land

[1:25:50] around there to the west and to the east

[1:25:54] and to the south that is undeveloped to

[1:25:58] explore pioneering agreements with those

[1:26:00] developers [clears throat] that have

[1:26:00] already submitted plans to have them

[1:26:03] participate in the sewer infrastructure

[1:26:06] as well that can keep I know you said

[1:26:09] you can't no number of homes would allow

[1:26:11] you to do the infrastructure but we also

[1:26:13] like there's land around there that's

[1:26:15] going to be developed once the sewer

[1:26:17] Everybody's waiting for this.

[1:26:20] >> It'll trigger a bunch.

[1:26:21] of And I I would

[1:26:23] like to see that explored with those

[1:26:25] vacation plans that have plans submitted

[1:26:28] to the city already to make

[1:26:30] >> Yes. They're just sitting back waiting

[1:26:31] for somebody else to fund that. And

[1:26:33] that's where you want to put together an

[1:26:34] impact fee that pays back

[1:26:36] [clears throat] covers and helps recover

[1:26:38] >> kind of like a pioneer that pays to

[1:26:43] just maybe give a little bit of light

[1:26:45] not to get into things that are over not

[1:26:48] relevant but I think we're at a about a

[1:26:50] $2.5 million list station to get that

[1:26:52] done and then we have a force name about

[1:26:55] a million dollars is what

[1:26:58] I don't want to we don't know for sure

[1:26:59] on numbers but it is a significant

[1:27:01] infrastruure

[1:27:03] That's why the financing is being

[1:27:04] discussed.

[1:27:06] >> So, what to facilitate land use that you

[1:27:08] guys are looking at?

[1:27:10] >> Where does that lift station, what's the

[1:27:11] concept of where it's going to pump to?

[1:27:13] >> To the 4700 West Haven line that we're

[1:27:16] renting

[1:27:16] >> or to the

[1:27:18] >> It'll pump to 51 and go down our line.

[1:27:21] better than me. But this might

[1:27:33] » y

[1:27:37] » I don't even know this. I just know that

[1:27:39] where it is in our project.

[1:27:41] >> It's where your mouse is currently.

[1:27:44] >> It's right there. That's where That's

[1:27:45] our project.

[1:27:46] >> You are here.

[1:27:47] >> But it but it services all that yellow.

[1:27:50] In theory, that's what our engineer is

[1:27:52] telling us. Yeah.

[1:27:54] >> I mean, it's logically going to flow to

[1:27:56] 5100 eventually because that's where our

[1:27:58] larger pipe is and it's going to flow up

[1:27:59] to central Weaver from there's

[1:28:02] >> on 5100

[1:28:05] runs straight north on 5100 all the way

[1:28:07] to

[1:28:09] gravity until it hits Central Weber

[1:28:12] sewer

[1:28:13] 2550.

[1:28:15] You guys can read through.

[1:28:19] You can provide any input on any of the

[1:28:22] other items that we talked about

[1:28:24] specifically. Um,

[1:28:26] I don't have anything specific. We're

[1:28:28] going to get these items out as quick as

[1:28:30] we can with them and get them back to

[1:28:32] you so you can review them.

[1:28:34] >> Yeah, we'd like your direction so we

[1:28:36] come back next month where where we got

[1:28:40] this for

[1:28:42] >> the future.

[1:28:44] We won't do it.

[1:28:45] >> Are you going have to change your future

[1:28:47] as part of amendment?

[1:28:50] >> So that'll be part of your general plan

[1:28:51] amendment.

[1:28:54] >> So Malcolm, will the

[1:28:57] development agreement contain the zoning

[1:28:59] and the general plan amendment? Will

[1:29:01] there be elements in there or will they

[1:29:02] just be ordinances that will be adopted

[1:29:04] in addition to

[1:29:06] >> Sorry, say that one more time.

[1:29:08] >> The the general plan amendment and then

[1:29:09] the reason will those be elements of

[1:29:13] development agreement or will they be

[1:29:15] ordinances occurring separate and apart

[1:29:18] from

[1:29:19] >> time [clears throat]

[1:29:20] and Nick will be here so our meeting and

[1:29:24] we have time to talk

[1:29:26] >> I kind of anticipate those generally

[1:29:28] would be maybe referenced in the

[1:29:30] development agreement but they would

[1:29:32] take place a separate action

[1:29:35] that's as well

[1:29:37] >> that's why he he's here that's why we

[1:29:39] don't answer question

[1:29:41] >> thank you appreciate your

[1:29:43] Yeah, we're looking for Thank you.

[1:29:45] Appreciate

[1:29:45] >> the

[1:30:07] » Tell my wife that.

[1:30:10] Oh, that's right.

[1:30:29] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:30:42] [laughter]

[1:30:43] Feeling [clears throat]

[1:30:53] strong, Jamie.

[1:31:03] » Talk about it later, too.

[1:31:05] >> Hey,

[1:31:08] Fourth of July.

[1:31:32] Say hello.

[1:31:59] Christian.

[1:32:33] So fast. So fast.

[1:33:10] like to welcome you out to our July 9th,

[1:33:13] 2026 planning commission meeting. I'm

[1:33:15] Commissioner Corn. conducting the

[1:33:17] meeting. Begin our meeting. I'll lead

[1:33:20] the pledge of allegiance and we'll have

[1:33:21] a reference a prayer given by

[1:33:23] Commissioner W.

[1:33:30] » I pledge algiance to the flag of the

[1:33:33] United States of progress

[1:33:35] >> and to the republic for which it stands,

[1:33:39] one nation under God, indivisible, with

[1:33:42] liberty and justice for all.

[1:33:47] » [clears throat]

[1:33:54] » Father in heaven, we're grateful for

[1:33:55] this day. If we can meet together

[1:33:58] tonight as

[1:34:00] community members here at Her Pray that

[1:34:02] we can

[1:34:05] have a good meeting. Pray that we'll be

[1:34:06] able to

[1:34:11] have a a good sense of community and

[1:34:14] peace here.

[1:34:15] We're grateful for

[1:34:18] uh the community that we live in,

[1:34:20] grateful for the country that we live in

[1:34:21] and the freedoms that we enjoy.

[1:34:24] We pray that uh

[1:34:27] those who protect our our freedoms will

[1:34:29] be blessed as well as their families.

[1:34:31] Pray for our first responders and

[1:34:34] those who serve in our communities.

[1:34:37] For all we have in Jesus Christ, those

[1:34:39] who protect our our freedoms will be

[1:34:43] spoken.

[1:34:46] >> [cough]

[1:34:46] [clears throat]

[1:34:47] >> Sounds a lot like you. I know a handsome

[1:34:49] guy.

[1:34:51] >> Thank you, Commissioner.

[1:34:53] First item of consent is the approval of

[1:34:56] last meeting's minutes dated July 11th.

[1:34:59] Did anybody see any corrections or

[1:35:01] anything that needed to be amended in

[1:35:04] those minutes?

[1:35:08] » I didn't see anything. So, I'll make a

[1:35:10] motion to approve the minutes from June

[1:35:11] 11th, 2026.

[1:35:14] I'll second.

[1:35:15] >> We have a motion from Commissioner White

[1:35:17] to approve the minutes and a second from

[1:35:19] Commissioner Woodson. All in favor?

[1:35:23] >> Minutes are approved. Now, on to our

[1:35:26] action items that we have tonight. The

[1:35:28] first is an is a conditional use permit

[1:35:31] for Jed Jed Debuk for an oversized

[1:35:34] structure located at 4704 South 5950

[1:35:38] West. The request is for 3,000 square ft

[1:35:41] and 25.6

[1:35:43] height. I'll turn some time over to

[1:35:45] staff for review of the site.

[1:35:49] This has been reviewed by staff.

[1:35:53] Just pulled a couple things from the

[1:35:54] application there. 3,000 foot structure

[1:35:57] and uh just over 25 ft high. It's going

[1:36:00] to be used for storage, no plumbing,

[1:36:03] electrical. Um you see a simple

[1:36:06] elevation drawing there on the site plan

[1:36:08] meets all the setbacks and

[1:36:12] Good to go. If you have any questions,

[1:36:15] let me know. Thank you. Is

[1:36:18] representative from Jac here to come

[1:36:20] forward and kind of just explain your

[1:36:22] project, what you want to use your

[1:36:23] building for and

[1:36:25] just come to life and then just

[1:36:29] um just basically storage cars and

[1:36:34] stuff and whatever

[1:36:36] right now storage building.

[1:36:39] >> Thank you. Right

[1:36:43] now I walk in just the right time. You

[1:36:45] got all taken care of. [laughter]

[1:36:49] » Now entertain a motion to enter a public hearing.

[1:36:55] >> I'll make a motion that we enter a

[1:36:57] public hearing for the conditional use

[1:37:00] permit for Jed Dub. Second.

[1:37:02] >> We have a motion from Commissioner Sing

[1:37:05] and a second from Commissioner Bates.

[1:37:07] All in favor? Hi. All right. If there is

[1:37:11] anybody here that would like to come

[1:37:12] forward and state any questions or

[1:37:15] concerns or about the oversized

[1:37:18] structure, they may come forward. State

[1:37:20] their name that they're a resident of

[1:37:21] Hooper Hooper City. They'll have three.

[1:37:24] You have three minutes. Watch Jamie.

[1:37:26] She'll be pulling up cards. So, at this

[1:37:28] time, any residents may step forward and

[1:37:30] express your feelings.

[1:37:36] Seeing no public comment. I will have a

[1:37:40] motion to close public comment and turn

[1:37:43] to the regular meeting.

[1:37:45] >> So

[1:37:47] second have a motion from Commissioner

[1:37:49] Bates, a second from Commissioner

[1:37:50] Woodson. All in favor?

[1:37:52] >> I.

[1:37:53] >> Okay. Um

[1:37:57] does the planning commission have any

[1:37:58] discussion or questions for staff on

[1:38:01] this project?

[1:38:03] >> Maybe just explain why this is here.

[1:38:05] What's it what is the

[1:38:08] what's above and beyond what our coast

[1:38:10] is just aware.

[1:38:11] >> Uh the most recent update we had to our

[1:38:14] accessory structure the halfacre zone

[1:38:16] can be 2500 ft. So it's 500 ft larger

[1:38:20] than what is principally permitted and

[1:38:22] then 25 foot is the maximum height. So

[1:38:26] this is half taller. So this is a

[1:38:29] conditional use for an oversight

[1:38:30] structure. There's nuance there we can

[1:38:33] discuss in greater detail broader policy

[1:38:34] if we move along but that's specifically

[1:38:41] But even on the half it meets all the

[1:38:43] setbacks and the

[1:38:45] everything else.

[1:38:47] >> Yeah. Meets all this accessory structure

[1:38:51] setbacks.

[1:38:52] >> We have nothing as far as impervious

[1:38:55] surface or anything like that that we're

[1:38:57] approaching.

[1:38:58] >> I haven't done an impector

[1:39:03] prior to the building permits, but it

[1:39:05] doesn't appear. I've seen a lot more 65%.

[1:39:19] » Any other discussion or a motion to

[1:39:25] » on the request?

[1:39:27] >> I'll make a motion to approve the

[1:39:29] conditioning permit for Jed Dub at 4704

[1:39:32] South 5950 West.

[1:39:35] We have a motion from Commissioner W and

[1:39:38] a second from Commissioner White to

[1:39:39] approve the oversized structure. All in

[1:39:41] favor?

[1:39:42] >> I

[1:39:45] condition use pass. Um onto our next um

[1:39:49] action item is another conditional use

[1:39:51] permit for Franklin Huff for an

[1:39:53] oversized structure located at 4942 West

[1:39:57] 4825 South. The request is for a 1400

[1:40:00] square foot structure with a height of

[1:40:03] 23 ft. We'll turn some double over staff

[1:40:07] to give us a presentation on site plan

[1:40:13] elevation rendering.

[1:40:17] It's an R zone. So this one had some

[1:40:19] strict we've actually never as the

[1:40:21] planning commission revisited zone. It's

[1:40:23] actually zone that's not replaced

[1:40:24] anymore but as it lies and implies they

[1:40:27] have a 1200 foot max.

[1:40:29] 14 ft and they have an 18

[1:40:32] foot maximum height of building and

[1:40:34] they're going for 23 foot.

[1:40:37] It meets all of the setbacks for the

[1:40:39] zone

[1:40:41] including any of that nature has been

[1:40:44] accommodated that way. So that's

[1:40:46] everything's good to go as it relates to

[1:40:49] site plan.

[1:40:53] » Thank you. Is there a representative

[1:40:54] from Franklin Huff that would like to

[1:40:57] come forward and kind of explain your

[1:40:59] building? What would you like to use it

[1:41:01] for?

[1:41:01] >> Yeah, Franklin Huff. Um, just pole barn

[1:41:04] just for storage for side by side with

[1:41:06] toys or bikes. Just extra room. That's

[1:41:09] all.

[1:41:11] >> Is there is there room in there for like

[1:41:14] an ADU or anything like that? Like a

[1:41:16] living living space or inside the

[1:41:20] >> No, it's also small.

[1:41:24] What's the distance from the boulevard

[1:41:27] to the back of the house?

[1:41:29] >> 10 foot.

[1:41:30] >> 10. Is that

[1:41:32] >> their minimum require 10T between

[1:41:34] buildings? Yep.

[1:41:38] » Says your employ

[1:41:41] >> just like saying like so my kids ride

[1:41:44] their bikes just washing machine. Just

[1:41:45] simple things like that out there. Keep

[1:41:47] it out of the house. We're very outdoor

[1:41:50] kids.

[1:41:52] wife gets tired of it being in the

[1:41:53] house. [laughter]

[1:41:58] » Thank you.

[1:41:58] >> Yep.

[1:42:01] >> I'll entertain a motion to enter.

[1:42:07] » We we need to enter our public hearing.

[1:42:09] >> Hold on.

[1:42:10] >> And then

[1:42:13] » just just a second. We have to end our

[1:42:15] public hearing first and then we'll give

[1:42:17] you time to come.

[1:42:21] I intend a motion to enter a public

[1:42:23] hearing for the condition use permit for

[1:42:26] Franklin Health.

[1:42:26] >> So moved.

[1:42:27] >> Second.

[1:42:28] >> Have a motion

[1:42:30] by Commissioner Bates and a second from

[1:42:32] Commissioner Woodson. All in favor?

[1:42:34] >> I.

[1:42:35] >> Okay. Any any of those that would like

[1:42:38] to come forward and make public comment

[1:42:40] come forward. State your name now and

[1:42:44] you'll have three minutes. Watch Jamie

[1:42:46] for your time and time is now yours.

[1:42:49] heart.

[1:42:52] >> My name My name is Wayne Goldber. I live

[1:42:54] right behind Frankie and I say let him

[1:42:56] do it.

[1:42:58] I My shed is 30 by 50. It's going to be

[1:43:02] right behind his and it's about almost

[1:43:05] 30 feet tall, so it won't obstruct

[1:43:08] anything that I've got going.

[1:43:10] >> Thank you.

[1:43:15] Any others want to come forward for

[1:43:17] public comment?

[1:43:19] Seeing no more, I'll entertain a motion

[1:43:22] to return to the regular meeting.

[1:43:24] >> Make that motion. Second.

[1:43:26] >> Have a motion from Commissioner W,

[1:43:28] second from Commissioner Seing. All in

[1:43:30] favor?

[1:43:31] >> I

[1:43:33] um bring back to commission for

[1:43:34] discussion and motion on the conditional

[1:43:36] use permit.

[1:43:39] My thought there was even though it's 5t

[1:43:42] higher than what we allow buildings

[1:43:44] around there like his neighbor said are

[1:43:47] higher or equal to that size. So I don't

[1:43:50] see why it would be obstructing

[1:43:52] anything. So I I see nothing holding us

[1:43:56] back for approving this for me.

[1:44:03] I'll make a motion to approve this

[1:44:05] condition permit for Franklin H for the

[1:44:08] structure located at 4942 West, 4825

[1:44:12] South.

[1:44:14] >> Second.

[1:44:15] >> Have a motion from Commissioner Wake to

[1:44:17] approve the structure and a second from

[1:44:20] Commissioner Wson. All in favor? I

[1:44:22] >> I Commissioner le permit approved. Okay,

[1:44:25] now we are on to our discussion items.

[1:44:29] Um the first item is the group home

[1:44:31] ordinance creation and amendment to

[1:44:33] Hover City Code 10-1A-1.

[1:44:37] Um in the packet there was um material

[1:44:40] that was kind of set forth to kind of

[1:44:43] make these amendments and the changes um

[1:44:46] that we've discussed at last meeting as

[1:44:49] well as um at this time we could get any

[1:44:53] comments from Nick on the attorney

[1:44:56] Nick's comments on that ordinance

[1:44:58] creation as well or any discussion that

[1:45:01] the planning commission would like to

[1:45:02] have on that ordinance.

[1:45:09] Um, so last time we were here, we kind

[1:45:11] of discussed this and um, I've done a

[1:45:14] little research on um, group homes and

[1:45:16] such. I think the reason we're making

[1:45:18] these changes and I'll let Malcolm jump

[1:45:20] in because he did kind of jump into this

[1:45:22] midstream is currently our code defines

[1:45:24] family in three ways. It's two people

[1:45:27] that are living uh, a person living

[1:45:31] alone or two or more persons related by

[1:45:33] marriage. It's a group of 10 people that

[1:45:36] are not related by marriage or it's

[1:45:38] eight or fewer um disabled or you know

[1:45:42] handicapped people that are living

[1:45:43] together and that creates some legal

[1:45:47] liability for the city. We should really

[1:45:49] just have a family be I guess what we t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t

[1:45:53] call traditional nuclear family, people

[1:45:55] that are related by blood or marriage or

[1:45:58] a set number for all people without

[1:46:01] calling out whether they are um

[1:46:05] you know in any kind of ADA restricted

[1:46:08] um group. And so this would clean that

[1:46:11] up and it would create a lot more

[1:46:13] clarity in the code. There's also some

[1:46:15] definitions for what is an elderly

[1:46:18] and group homes for people with that are

[1:46:21] elderly and have disability and then it

[1:46:25] establishes some areas where they can go

[1:46:28] and some guidance there. Um,

[1:46:31] >> we really got to put an age on elderly

[1:46:33] person. [laughter] I kind of relate to

[1:46:36] that

[1:46:37] 60 or above.

[1:46:38] >> As I said, I jumped into this in the

[1:46:40] middle so I didn't write this.

[1:46:45] » That hurts. I actually have one

[1:46:47] question. When we're on under the family

[1:46:51] section be up to four unrelated persons

[1:46:55] with or without children. So does that

[1:46:57] mean four people and they can each have

[1:46:59] four kids? So there could be 16 people

[1:47:01] living within that house.

[1:47:02] >> Where you at?

[1:47:04] >> Family

[1:47:06] right above elderly person.

[1:47:11] » Four unrelated people in the house

[1:47:14] >> total. Total. Okay.

[1:47:18] And that specifically ties into our

[1:47:21] definition of a group home

[1:47:24] conditional and allowed uses.

[1:47:26] >> Yeah.

[1:47:27] So [clears throat] this would allow

[1:47:28] anything. If you had a group home, if

[1:47:30] somebody wanted to develop a group home,

[1:47:32] they wanted to have house three people,

[1:47:35] they wouldn't need to come get a

[1:47:36] condition use between four and eight.

[1:47:39] No, sorry, more than four and less than

[1:47:41] eight. have to come before this body

[1:47:44] condition and then more is just not

[1:47:46] allowed if I if I understand that

[1:47:48] correctly

[1:47:56] and they did a good job of explaining

[1:47:58] it. I agree it's just adding clarity and

[1:48:02] helping us comply with what is required

[1:48:05] for group home. It's just an ordinance

[1:48:07] we hadn't looked at in a while. We had

[1:48:08] an application it didn't quite fit. We

[1:48:10] realized we were

[1:48:12] higher than what was required to help us

[1:48:14] implement some reasonable accommodations

[1:48:17] to facilitate these. There's a process

[1:48:19] I'm going to go so far as to call it an

[1:48:21] application, but it'll have a review to

[1:48:23] ensure that we're facilitating these and

[1:48:26] they're meeting the requirements. Then

[1:48:28] as was called out four and under will be

[1:48:31] permitted in residential zones above

[1:48:34] four will be a C. And then that's the

[1:48:37] final point I would note and I don't

[1:48:38] want to get the disc discussion off

[1:48:42] topic but eight and above does then

[1:48:45] become at times commercial use becomes

[1:48:48] other types of uses within that we have

[1:48:51] ordinances and definitions that

[1:48:54] facilitate those types of uses. However,

[1:48:58] those might be uses we want to look at

[1:49:00] long term as we've sometimes had

[1:49:02] difficulty still you know certain ones

[1:49:04] of those uses within those Those might

[1:49:07] you want to look at as we go. Some of

[1:49:09] them the numbers still a little bit

[1:49:10] interesting. We you know if we're going

[1:49:12] to have a be a number some we hit six

[1:49:14] and things of that nature might be

[1:49:16] things we want to clean up. But as it

[1:49:17] relates to group homes we have a good

[1:49:19] ordinance that cleans up groups homes

[1:49:20] and then the idea here would be that we

[1:49:22] could confidently build a public hear

[1:49:24] for a recommendation at the next meeting

[1:49:26] so that we can get it to city council

[1:49:28] for just a simple update to the code.

[1:49:30] But

[1:49:32] that's everything. Nick, as you during

[1:49:34] your review, those numbers that Malcolm

[1:49:37] was mentioning, you know, they're not

[1:49:39] should would it just be more clean to

[1:49:41] make congruent across

[1:49:44] the instead of having 06 here?

[1:49:48] >> Maybe

[1:49:50] an example just to help with the

[1:49:52] discussion.

[1:49:54] Daycare home group establishment or

[1:49:57] portion there ever going six but no more

[1:49:59] than 12. Um, another one here foster

[1:50:03] home group which seems like a similar

[1:50:06] and a foster home group in that we call

[1:50:08] it provides foster care for seven to 13

[1:50:10] children. So

[1:50:12] >> yeah, those are all things that we're

[1:50:13] going to work on and I think uh the

[1:50:15] direction that Malcolm and I and Darren,

[1:50:19] my partner at the law firm would like to

[1:50:21] do is just un make those universal so

[1:50:24] that it's just easier for staff, it's

[1:50:27] easier for residents and applicants that

[1:50:30] they know we're talking between a and then and then if there's valid

[1:50:36] reasons to maybe vary from that as we do

[1:50:39] further research on this then we would

[1:50:40] certainly do that but you know to have

[1:50:44] eight in a group home and six in a

[1:50:45] daycare and 13 in a foster care is

[1:50:49] pretty confusing for everybody and I

[1:50:51] think it also exposes the city to

[1:50:55] um I don't want to say abuses but people

[1:50:58] come in and they say this isn't a dayare

[1:51:01] this is a foster home and we want 13

[1:51:04] kids and it forces staff to make and

[1:51:07] planning commission to make some hard

[1:51:09] judgment calls and if everything's the

[1:51:11] same that is reasonably the same

[1:51:14] obviously then it allows uh it allows

[1:51:18] things to get put in the right

[1:51:19] categories and not that kind of

[1:51:22] monkey reaching to get it to work into a

[1:51:24] different category.

[1:51:27] >> Thank you. Any other comment on that

[1:51:33] code or those changes?

[1:51:39] » I I think we have forward looks pretty

[1:51:41] good. We can look at something final,

[1:51:44] get it approved or sent over to the city

[1:51:45] council next [clears throat] meeting.

[1:51:51] On to our next discussion item is

[1:51:53] further discussion on the

[1:51:56] development agreement and density bonus

[1:51:59] for the project that we discussed in our

[1:52:03] work meeting today at 4700 west and 5500

[1:52:06] south.

[1:52:11] Um, one thing that I didn't we didn't

[1:52:13] really get to discuss in our work

[1:52:15] meeting and it's not really our role to

[1:52:18] decide on as Commissioner Bates pointed

[1:52:21] out in the work meeting, but I do think

[1:52:23] it's important that we give city council

[1:52:25] all the necessary tools and not hinder

[1:52:27] them in any to make a decision that puts

[1:52:30] the best

[1:52:32] possible path forward for the city and

[1:52:34] that includes exploring CRA agreements

[1:52:37] but also pioneer agreements and looking

[1:52:40] at ways to reduce that risk for the city

[1:52:43] and get the most benefit out of that

[1:52:45] development. So I think some of the

[1:52:48] things we discussed as far as the open

[1:52:50] space and the park I think need to be

[1:52:52] addressed in that development plan but

[1:52:55] the density and things like that.

[1:52:59] Uh to make it I think to make it less

[1:53:04] burdensome on the city from a list

[1:53:08] station development standpoint, we have

[1:53:10] to grant some of that greater density to

[1:53:13] kind of help approve some of the reading

[1:53:16] through the development agreement. as

[1:53:17] far as like the width of the road and

[1:53:19] access and then the city doing those

[1:53:22] improvements. I think that's more to me

[1:53:25] that feels more like the developer

[1:53:27] developing the land and being

[1:53:29] responsible for those. But as far as

[1:53:31] like the list station, I can see the

[1:53:33] city helping out in some sort of way in

[1:53:36] that development just because there are

[1:53:38] residents that have been waiting for a

[1:53:40] long time to develop that property that

[1:53:42] haven't that don't have the chance

[1:53:44] because that lift station is not there.

[1:53:46] So, I want to give them the opportunity

[1:53:48] to

[1:53:49] explore creative ways that could that

[1:53:52] could be that could happen. That's just

[1:53:54] kind of what I we didn't really get to

[1:53:56] that point, but then what I do think

[1:53:58] needs to be addressed in that developer

[1:54:00] agreement how it works looks when it

[1:54:03] comes back to us.

[1:54:04] >> Well, that's to to kind of expound on

[1:54:06] that to your point, we don't want to

[1:54:10] handcuff

[1:54:12] the city council with that, but again, I

[1:54:15] don't That's our role to really even get

[1:54:18] into the discussions around financing

[1:54:21] and all that kind of stuff. And we

[1:54:22] definitely want to deal with the zoning

[1:54:24] things that we would like to see in

[1:54:25] there. But um I just I think we get hung

[1:54:28] up in that. We're not elected. So we

[1:54:32] don't hold the purse strings and I think

[1:54:34] that's something that should fall on the

[1:54:35] mayor and the city council to determine

[1:54:37] like financing options and things like

[1:54:39] that. So thanks for helping me clear

[1:54:41] that up. One of the one of the things

[1:54:43] Malcolm, can you put that back. That's

[1:54:46] not in our packet. Can you email that to

[1:54:47] us?

[1:54:49] That's a [clears throat] good bet.

[1:54:53] » Yeah, they provided it about an hour

[1:54:55] before just for their presentation

[1:54:56] purposes. So, it wasn't included in the

[1:54:58] packet, but we facilitated that. Let me

[1:55:01] find it. So, if we want to while you're

[1:55:03] finding that, if we want to start

[1:55:04] talking about things that we'd like to

[1:55:05] see in the developer agreement, the the

[1:55:07] park is one that I keep hearing a lot

[1:55:09] about and you know, from people and

[1:55:11] where the green

[1:55:14] You know, because currently, you know,

[1:55:15] the discussion that we're meeting, they

[1:55:16] were kind of looking down around the

[1:55:18] commercial. I think it needs to be more

[1:55:19] centralized in the development so it's

[1:55:21] more useful houses.

[1:55:24] >> Yeah. And I I think we need to define

[1:55:25] what a park is, right? A park isn't just

[1:55:28] lawn with one jungle gym. Like I I would

[1:55:31] like to see a picnic table with a cover

[1:55:34] that's powered, something that people

[1:55:36] want to use and and and go to. Um

[1:55:41] so that I would like to see on green

[1:55:44] space is something usable more central

[1:55:47] in the actual wherever the residential

[1:55:49] ends up lining other than so Nick the

[1:55:52] part that they were talking about if you

[1:55:54] see the commercial zone down there at

[1:55:55] the bottom.

[1:55:56] >> Yeah, absolutely.

[1:55:56] >> That's what they were kind of floating

[1:55:58] maybe putting something there that's

[1:55:59] nowhere close to any of the housing

[1:56:01] >> and you'd like to put it more

[1:56:03] >> central.

[1:56:05] Yep.

[1:56:07] >> Um

[1:56:08] >> and have and have some kind of bery and

[1:56:12] playground.

[1:56:12] >> Yeah. Yeah. Make trails also I talked

[1:56:16] about and even going through those call

[1:56:20] six packs or whatever just to make the

[1:56:22] whole community walkable I think would

[1:56:24] be huge.

[1:56:26] I mean we talked a little bit about the

[1:56:29] outs on the edges path.

[1:56:32] >> Yeah. Yeah. Might be tough on the

[1:56:35] outside of those. What we say they were

[1:56:37] 30 acre lots.

[1:56:38] >> Yeah.

[1:56:38] >> Might be tough on those but for sure

[1:56:41] that the whole town home area and those

[1:56:44] cottages and stuff. Um, the other thing

[1:56:47] too is that I mean I'm assuming the list

[1:56:50] station we built to size this kind of me

[1:56:53] this whole area coming together. I don't

[1:56:55] know if you need to define that in there

[1:56:56] somehow in the development agreement

[1:56:58] that it's not it's not size just for

[1:57:00] this right size for the whole

[1:57:03] area going into there. We okay with the

[1:57:06] sixack? I think our ordinance says four

[1:57:08] now.

[1:57:09] >> Yeah, you have the four units attached.

[1:57:11] So, right six.

[1:57:15] >> So, that would be that would be a

[1:57:17] modification to our code that we need to

[1:57:19] call the DA and then modify code

[1:57:23] that be

[1:57:24] >> I would say I know this gets into the

[1:57:26] purse strings, but if we're going to

[1:57:27] grant the higher density and the sixacks

[1:57:30] and things like that,

[1:57:34] the fin there has to be financial

[1:57:36] incentive for the city to grant that to

[1:57:37] them. I know we're getting the Smith and

[1:57:39] I think the city needs the Smith and

[1:57:41] it'll bring it'll help out the city a

[1:57:43] lot in the long run, but the higher

[1:57:45] density and things like that, I think

[1:57:47] they can support that as well. So as

[1:57:52] long as that is just not if we if we do

[1:57:54] want to grant that I don't see

[1:57:59] you you go look at the Smith and West

[1:58:01] Point I know the roads are

[1:58:05] not great in there but I feel like it

[1:58:07] flows from

[1:58:11] commercial center to town houses out to

[1:58:14] larger lots pretty efficiently and I and

[1:58:16] I do like how they aligned. Another

[1:58:18] question I have for Malcolm, they

[1:58:20] mentioned something about the back side

[1:58:22] of those um

[1:58:25] the third acre lots that they have going

[1:58:27] along the that be the north side now at

[1:58:29] the top about those being two to three

[1:58:32] acre lots. How are those people like if

[1:58:35] they do decide to develop like are we

[1:58:37] gonna how would they access how how

[1:58:40] would how would those the back of that

[1:58:42] access um

[1:58:45] utilities and things like that if those

[1:58:47] people

[1:58:49] do decide to do something or maybe they

[1:58:52] maybe we don't even want to consider

[1:58:53] that but most of the time we in a

[1:58:55] development we plan like ST roads into

[1:58:57] those different parcels that could

[1:59:00] potentially have developments. I don't

[1:59:02] know if we need to

[1:59:04] have any of that conversation with them.

[1:59:07] >> So, you're talking about the north side

[1:59:09] something

[1:59:10] >> instead of just the one to the east and

[1:59:12] then the one to the west.

[1:59:14] >> One fair comment, there's some large

[1:59:15] pieces back there that they've mentioned

[1:59:18] in that would probably be hard to

[1:59:19] facilitate without some type of stuff.

[1:59:21] So, we can, you know, we haven't done a

[1:59:23] formal TRC review on this, but uh

[1:59:26] Jared's reviewed it and he didn't

[1:59:28] mention anything on interlock, but I'll

[1:59:29] have our engineer review it and see if

[1:59:31] we need to facilitate stuff to the

[1:59:33] north.

[1:59:34] >> Maybe we don't. Maybe those.

[1:59:36] >> Yeah, we can look at our master

[1:59:37] transportation plan and consider it. But

[1:59:40] yeah, a little hard because they are

[1:59:41] existing lots. So, you know, we could at

[1:59:44] least discuss it for sure.

[1:59:45] >> Well, now because somebody this this is

[1:59:47] going to look different. Somebody

[1:59:49] brought that up at work meeting that

[1:59:50] road that comes out to 5500. UD might

[1:59:52] not even allow that.

[1:59:54] >> Yeah,

[1:59:56] >> because that you 5500's going to widen

[1:59:59] with West.

[2:00:01] quarter, whatever they're calling

[2:00:02] that out here.

[2:00:03] >> So, they have that one at the end and

[2:00:04] the one up in the middle too.

[2:00:09] [clears throat]

[2:00:10] >> 47. It's still, right? Or this is this

[2:00:14] is 47.

[2:00:23] Yeah, that's something I think they

[2:00:24] develop agreement to do a better job

[2:00:26] contemplating to make sure it's

[2:00:28] integrated, but they call out some of

[2:00:29] the improvements here, but a lot of this

[2:00:31] will do. You know, they'll need a cap

[2:00:33] permit, an encroachment permit. That'll

[2:00:35] all come in part approval, but you know,

[2:00:39] I would imagine a 660 requirement. This

[2:00:41] road here is existing.

[2:00:45] They'll need to meet that or get some

[2:00:47] type of variance that will require in

[2:00:49] the

[2:00:50] facilate all the

[2:00:54] I I think one of the things when we so

[2:00:56] we were talking about the six-pack. I

[2:00:57] think something that makes a lot of

[2:00:58] people nervous is just what the sideline

[2:01:01] looks like, right? So, if you drive

[2:01:02] through like Clearfield and some of

[2:01:04] these cities where it it's closing in on

[2:01:07] you, but where they're actually looking

[2:01:09] at the more the higher density, you're

[2:01:13] not even going to be able to see that

[2:01:14] unless you're in the middle of the

[2:01:15] higher density. So, you know, you you

[2:01:18] might be able to see it from Smith

[2:01:19] parking lot, you're not going to be able

[2:01:20] to see it from

[2:01:22] or 47.

[2:01:24] So, you're not going to get that kind of

[2:01:25] closed in feeling. So, I don't know if

[2:01:27] the difference between four and six

[2:01:28] really matters unless somebody's just in

[2:01:31] there counting doors. You're saying for

[2:01:33] the test town homes?

[2:01:34] >> Yeah, I agree with you.

[2:01:38] >> What about patio homes?

[2:01:41] >> I I I was with you because there's nothing single

[2:01:46] >> there.

[2:01:48] >> That's why I asked him how many doors he

[2:01:50] needed.

[2:01:51] make this project work because if you

[2:01:54] put patio homes in, you make them work

[2:01:56] wherein cottages are

[2:02:00] >> versus the

[2:02:02] know what they are cottages or single

[2:02:04] family cottages

[2:02:07] the seat.

[2:02:09] Well, that's that was I was looking at

[2:02:11] that on the map earlier and I didn't

[2:02:12] really get a chance to ask him that, but

[2:02:14] the properties that are going to remain

[2:02:17] that's kind of a I don't want to call it

[2:02:19] a collision, but when you look at how

[2:02:21] dense that is backing up to two three

[2:02:24] acre lots

[2:02:27] >> that's not going to be on the northeast

[2:02:29] corner.

[2:02:29] >> Yeah.

[2:02:30] >> And one of those one of those you

[2:02:32] mentioned that he wants to reszone to

[2:02:35] split it, but like how does that look?

[2:02:38] But how does that look?

[2:02:39] >> Oh yeah.

[2:02:46] » So that road that is continuing there

[2:02:49] just continue into that and those two

[2:02:51] lots will be split right there and they

[2:02:53] access it from

[2:02:55] 47.

[2:02:56] >> Yeah.

[2:03:02] I mean the different

[2:03:03] configurations they're talking about

[2:03:05] this is going to be unpopular with half

[2:03:09] the population here, but the change is

[2:03:12] coming. We're got a big road coming. The

[2:03:15] growth is inevitable. And nobody wants

[2:03:20] like in your heart of hearts, nobody

[2:03:21] wants more and more and more, but we've

[2:03:26] got to have affordable options. And we

[2:03:29] we've got a chance to kind of control

[2:03:31] this before the state steps in and tells

[2:03:34] us exactly what we're going to do with

[2:03:35] this.

[2:03:36] >> We also We also discussed

[2:03:39] having an agreement in there that it's

[2:03:42] a owner occupied

[2:03:45] >> owner occupied for so many years

[2:03:48] now with JDC.

[2:03:49] >> Yeah, I think that's a I think that's a

[2:03:51] big deal. Yeah, you don't want

[2:03:53] >> 12

[2:03:55] rentals. That's not that's not if we're

[2:03:57] going to do this type of density. We

[2:03:59] want people to live here and have have

[2:04:02] kind of skin the game for the city. So

[2:04:04] Nick, is that I know that the

[2:04:07] development we're talking about plane

[2:04:08] cities got like a 10year de restriction.

[2:04:10] How far can we legally go? I mean, we

[2:04:13] can't obviously say forever, but

[2:04:16] >> yeah. So [clears throat]

[2:04:18] it's what you put in the development

[2:04:20] agreement and then what you actually

[2:04:21] enforce on are kind of two separate

[2:04:24] issues. I'll address those.

[2:04:25] >> So uh by by contract per contracts in

[2:04:29] perpetuity are frowned upon. So you

[2:04:31] can't contract 10 years, 15 years, that

[2:04:34] sounds reasonable. Uh like I think

[2:04:36] that'd be easily defensible. Um

[2:04:41] the difficult part is like it forcing

[2:04:43] it, right? Because

[2:04:46] the city's not in a great position. No

[2:04:48] city I know, even large city, Salt Lake

[2:04:51] City or whatever, you're just not in a

[2:04:52] great position to go around knock doors

[2:04:54] and say,

[2:04:56] >> "Are you renting? Are you know but the

[2:05:00] nice and the deed restriction is sure

[2:05:01] nice and uh and it does inform people

[2:05:05] about what they're going to do and I

[2:05:07] think it's largely effective.

[2:05:09] >> Now does that also cover short-term

[2:05:10] rental?

[2:05:12] I guess it wouldn't for that occupied.

[2:05:15] >> Cities cities can I think cities are

[2:05:18] more effective at regulating short-term

[2:05:20] rentals than you know long-term rentals

[2:05:23] but

[2:05:25] >> but we could certainly put those in the

[2:05:27] development agreement and uh put

[2:05:30] restrictions and those kind of things in

[2:05:32] place

[2:05:33] >> which are helpful.

[2:05:34] >> One of the So Malcolm one of the other

[2:05:36] things that we brought up when they were

[2:05:37] talking about too is lighting

[2:05:39] restrictions making really good stuff in

[2:05:42] there as far as trying to keep the dark

[2:05:44] sky as dark as we can. And I know some

[2:05:47] of that's inconvenient, it's expensive

[2:05:49] for them, but that would be something

[2:05:50] else we want to talk about.

[2:06:00] » We addressed that at an earlier earlier

[2:06:02] meeting that I was at and they were able

[2:06:04] to [clears throat]

[2:06:08] fancy word for it. We call it a photo

[2:06:11] plan. They'll submit a photo plan and

[2:06:13] we'll light that to

[2:06:18] make sure that you know yet not too much

[2:06:22] lean on them a little bit too. Another

[2:06:25] question Nick that got discussed a

[2:06:27] little bit

[2:06:29] want to make sure the city has good

[2:06:31] perspective on the phasing element of

[2:06:34] this

[2:06:36] how it relates to residential and then a

[2:06:39] commercial project go city has

[2:06:41] particular interest in the commercial

[2:06:43] project

[2:06:45] would obviously consider concession to

[2:06:47] facilitate it there ways to help

[2:06:50] navigate that

[2:06:52] response

[2:06:54] Let the market dictate these as they

[2:06:56] come in and help drive that.

[2:06:58] >> Yeah, we've written develop development

[2:07:00] agreements before they require you know

[2:07:03] 50% commercial before 50% residential or

[2:07:08] something like that. you I mean the

[2:07:10] developers right you got to allow the

[2:07:11] developer some amount of

[2:07:14] wiggle room to keep the project going

[2:07:17] and sometimes residential sells faster

[2:07:19] than the commercial but um I've written

[2:07:22] we've written similar clauses that

[2:07:24] required the commercial to go first and

[2:07:27] they've been successful

[2:07:31] » in doing that I guess maybe I'm a little

[2:07:33] naive but what I guess what risk are we

[2:07:35] afraid of happening if we don't have

[2:07:39] ing agreement in there. I think the

[2:07:42] general risk is that most cities have is

[2:07:46] you're going to grant a lot of not a

[2:07:48] lot, but you're going to grant density

[2:07:49] that you otherwise wouldn't. And then

[2:07:51] developers going to pull all those

[2:07:54] residential permits, build out the

[2:07:56] residential, and then just kind of sit

[2:08:00] on the commercial and try and sell that

[2:08:02] off. And it's the commercial never will

[2:08:04] materialize in the way that that they

[2:08:07] sell it.

[2:08:09] How often that happens in practice, I I

[2:08:12] don't know because right now on the

[2:08:14] Wasach front, commercial real estate

[2:08:16] seems to be doing just fine. But that's

[2:08:18] the worry that cities have is you're

[2:08:21] going to you're going to give them all

[2:08:22] this residential. They're not going to

[2:08:24] build the commercial. Then they're going

[2:08:25] to come back and tell you they just

[2:08:27] can't get to take [clears throat] the

[2:08:28] commercial space. So give us more res.

[2:08:31] their natural phasing plan and their

[2:08:33] confidence in the

[2:08:35] natural development process felt very

[2:08:38] aligned with a phasing agreement that we

[2:08:41] just shorted up. I don't see a big

[2:08:44] conflict but I understand we don't want

[2:08:46] to overreach but just seem like

[2:08:48] something we can short for reasonable

[2:08:50] protection but I agree there it doesn't

[2:08:52] you know I do think it should develop

[2:08:54] out well together it seemed like they

[2:08:56] want to push for commercial the tanker

[2:08:59] first almost I was worried that that's

[2:09:03] their kind of way in is to get

[2:09:05] dismissive we'll do some housing around

[2:09:08] it so I I almost say it's almost the

[2:09:10] opposite of what you said

[2:09:11] >> is they want bring a commercial and then

[2:09:13] they'll drag maybe on the house and

[2:09:15] maybe not. And so I think I think you're

[2:09:18] right. I think there needs to be some

[2:09:19] type of phasing thing, but also they

[2:09:22] make a good point as you don't want to

[2:09:25] hand and say you have to do certain

[2:09:27] things. But I think that's something to

[2:09:29] talk about.

[2:09:31] What I've generally seen is that they'll

[2:09:33] say before [clears throat] you can start

[2:09:35] the residential, you have to have 25% of

[2:09:38] commercial or 30% or something like

[2:09:41] that. And then usually a developer and

[2:09:45] terra

[2:09:48] reputable developer, they've already got

[2:09:50] tenants lined up. They're not concerned

[2:09:52] about that.

[2:09:55] >> Nick, could I uh just throw one

[2:09:57] additional thing we used? And again, I'm

[2:09:59] sorry this was a little peacemail we

[2:10:01] didn't catch in work meeting and I'm

[2:10:02] glad you're here. I wanted to just give

[2:10:05] the planning commission ample

[2:10:06] opportunity to talk with you about the

[2:10:10] process and I know we're going to flesh

[2:10:13] this out. You're obviously extremely new

[2:10:15] to our city, but generally it's kind of

[2:10:17] been divided right about here at the

[2:10:18] preliminary plat approval where we need

[2:10:20] a reszone. Our general plan requires an

[2:10:23] amendment to put this PUB zone that

[2:10:25] they're contemplating. Um, also probably

[2:10:28] to get the C2 flushed out the the

[2:10:30] commercial and that would likely require

[2:10:33] either updating our ordinance or housing

[2:10:36] it really well in our DA. But either

[2:10:38] way, those are the actions that will

[2:10:40] likely come to them within the next

[2:10:42] reasonable amount of time. I don't want

[2:10:43] to speak specifically on live

[2:10:44] application, but if they were to, for

[2:10:46] instance, snifferies only have

[2:10:47] requirements to get that in front of you

[2:10:49] within a certain time frame, which could

[2:10:51] be pretty quickly. Obviously, they're

[2:10:53] going to want to build their application

[2:10:55] to an extent that you guys are

[2:10:56] comfortable with a good recommendation,

[2:10:57] but I know they're aggressively trying

[2:11:00] to move this forward. So, wanted to make

[2:11:01] sure. And then after that we have

[2:11:04] preliminary plat and final plat

[2:11:06] questions and things that I need to work

[2:11:08] on with our legal council and things

[2:11:10] that we'll make sure are really well put

[2:11:12] together and constructed. We want to

[2:11:13] make sure that we you know have the

[2:11:15] project fully housed whether it be in DA

[2:11:18] or an ordinance format that's completely

[2:11:21] compatible and works well. And then also

[2:11:23] that these uh

[2:11:25] the big here the big thing here from my

[2:11:27] perspective is we have limited

[2:11:30] ordinances to for some of these things

[2:11:32] you're talking about seeing a lighting

[2:11:34] plan is a really good example. We don't

[2:11:35] I'm not aware of lighting standards

[2:11:37] within our code. I mean I don't know

[2:11:40] that we have them. We have to get that

[2:11:42] done. So once the resone's done, I'm not

[2:11:44] so sure we can really enforce any of

[2:11:46] these lighting standards that are

[2:11:47] important to the functionality. And I

[2:11:49] agree is a great company. I think you

[2:11:51] know you saw they're really really

[2:11:53] knowledgeable and I think they'll do a

[2:11:54] good project inherently. But it's it's

[2:11:57] good just to have you know have those

[2:11:59] standards in place. So those are things

[2:12:01] we so with that is there there are

[2:12:03] certain things we're going to require up

[2:12:05] front and that are reasonable prior to

[2:12:07] the reason and then there are other

[2:12:09] things that we're going to push off to

[2:12:10] apply approval with some of the more

[2:12:11] heavier engineering that'll have some

[2:12:13] costs there that'll be done but just

[2:12:16] want to make sure you guys have a chance

[2:12:17] to talk with me about any questions when

[2:12:19] it comes to approval and the things that

[2:12:21] we can raise request of the different

[2:12:23] phases in approval. You'll get to see it

[2:12:24] again at preliminary plat but your hands

[2:12:26] will be tied to an extent I would

[2:12:27] imagine that preliminary cl approval by

[2:12:29] what the been granted and what's some

[2:12:31] places ordinances. So just a kind of a

[2:12:34] word mom there why we're talking about

[2:12:36] this and you got Nick here to answer any

[2:12:39] quick questions but want to talk about

[2:12:41] it just have one bullet point probably

[2:12:43] the first bullet point in the process is

[2:12:45] the development agreement and then the

[2:12:48] reason

[2:12:50] >> so one of the questions I've got I don't

[2:12:51] know if it's something we add to a

[2:12:53] developer agreement or where we put it

[2:12:54] but when you think about the build out

[2:12:56] of this

[2:12:58] can we restrict or How do we how do we

[2:13:00] determine like you know there's going to

[2:13:02] be hundreds if not thousands of large

[2:13:04] trucks moving equipment and product in

[2:13:07] there. How do we protect 4700

[2:13:11] that we just finished resurfacing? It's

[2:13:14] a beautiful road and you start running

[2:13:16] all that heavy equipment over it. Is

[2:13:18] that something we even need to worry

[2:13:19] about? Something we can restrict like

[2:13:21] hey access for all this needs to come

[2:13:22] off of 55.

[2:13:24] Is that

[2:13:26] >> you're Are you um are you talking about

[2:13:29] construction traffic?

[2:13:30] >> Correct.

[2:13:30] >> Ongoing the ongoing I know we can you

[2:13:34] can restrict ongoing as far as truck

[2:13:36] entrances kind of.

[2:13:37] >> Yeah.

[2:13:37] >> But I'm talking mostly construction

[2:13:39] phase because that's going to be a lot.

[2:13:41] >> Yeah, absolutely. As long as there's on

[2:13:43] [clears throat] 55 that can be part of

[2:13:45] the development agreement.

[2:13:51] » Quick question. Can you go back to that

[2:13:52] rehab those bullet points?

[2:13:56] So, so I'm guessing they'll submit a

[2:13:58] reason which will then trigger because

[2:14:01] the reason that they're requesting

[2:14:02] doesn't follow our general plan. So that

[2:14:05] reszone will trigger the general plan

[2:14:07] amendment. Right.

[2:14:09] >> Correct.

[2:14:09] >> And once we kind of start going the

[2:14:11] reszone and they're kind of comfortable,

[2:14:12] we're comfortable with certain things

[2:14:13] and they'll get a development really

[2:14:15] heavy to make sure things fall. state

[2:14:17] development is going to be up front even

[2:14:19] though we don't have reason because

[2:14:21] imagine they don't get too far in

[2:14:22] building if you don't have warm fuzzies

[2:14:24] about

[2:14:25] >> they're going to have the ideal way you

[2:14:28] do that is this the city has the most

[2:14:31] leverage prior to the reszone

[2:14:34] is a legislative decision so if you

[2:14:38] contract with a development agreement

[2:14:40] usually the concession that the city has

[2:14:43] the contract right contract I give you

[2:14:46] give me something. Uh the thing we give

[2:14:49] as a city is the reason

[2:14:51] >> the thing they give is construction

[2:14:54] access plan phasing that it's a fair

[2:14:58] point though something we've been

[2:15:00] balancing this whole process and you

[2:15:01] know we're having the general plan

[2:15:02] update as a whole that'll help us to

[2:15:05] require less upfront because we'll have

[2:15:07] good standards and you know we still

[2:15:08] want to be reasonable but there are

[2:15:10] certain things that we need to see to

[2:15:11] make sure they're in place before we

[2:15:13] resone and there are other things that

[2:15:15] it They felt a little bit of pressure

[2:15:17] from us. Well, man, are we how much

[2:15:18] money are we going to spend here prior

[2:15:20] to? Grallyfully, you know, we really

[2:15:21] haven't requested much yet that we have

[2:15:23] a draft uh we have a draft uh DA, but at

[2:15:27] this point in time, we are going to go

[2:15:28] through that and say, okay, you've

[2:15:30] suggested, you know, comfortably that

[2:15:31] these are items that you want in a DA.

[2:15:33] We're asking them to build those, as

[2:15:35] you're well aware, and they're going to

[2:15:36] go out and, you know, have some cost to

[2:15:39] develop these standards that are going

[2:15:41] to be housed in these exhibits that they

[2:15:42] haven't put together yet. kind of a

[2:15:45] balancing act and I'll obviously

[2:15:46] navigate that to make sure things we

[2:15:49] really feel we need up front are good to

[2:15:51] be in the day and then we'll have other

[2:15:52] things that come down the road such as

[2:15:54] probably a traffic study I don't think

[2:15:56] require anything by approval rather than

[2:15:58] up front but some examples

[2:16:04] so on that note the development

[2:16:05] agreement coming first and I know this

[2:16:07] goes back to the CRA funding but part of

[2:16:10] that development agreement was the

[2:16:11] infrastructure and they're reading that

[2:16:14] phase it seems like a city was on the

[2:16:16] hook for a lot of those

[2:16:19] >> all of it.

[2:16:21] >> Yeah. I just don't know like to me that

[2:16:24] didn't seem

[2:16:27] >> like like it seemed like the there was

[2:16:29] no mutual agreement or like hey we're

[2:16:31] going to do this. It's just like well

[2:16:33] you guys are getting the benefits pay

[2:16:34] for all this which

[2:16:36] >> in the develop this one we got looks

[2:16:39] like the city was going to be on the

[2:16:40] hook for about three million bucks

[2:16:43] >> right off the estments haven't been put

[2:16:45] together yet, but yeah, it anticipates

[2:16:46] that we jointly with them would

[2:16:48] facilitate financing mechanisms that

[2:16:50] would pay for all largely all

[2:16:52] infrastructure.

[2:16:53] To this point, the list has been the

[2:16:55] primary discussion. We'll bring it to

[2:16:57] our city council and have your

[2:16:58] discussion. The way they form or phrased

[2:17:01] it to me is that we just didn't want to

[2:17:02] feel there was any we don't they don't

[2:17:05] feel like the council's expressed fully

[2:17:06] the things they're open to or not. They

[2:17:08] don't want to limit them. They want it

[2:17:09] to be in there, but it'll get fleshed

[2:17:11] out as we go. the specifics of what

[2:17:13] you're getting financed through us or

[2:17:16] not. But yeah, it's a

[2:17:18] >> I guess that's a hard approach hard for

[2:17:20] us to look at that be like, "Oh, yeah,

[2:17:22] this is a great recommendation without

[2:17:26] having details on that, which I know is

[2:17:29] like they're sitting shaking before they

[2:17:31] start reading."

[2:17:33] these these TIFF and CRAAS I get I get

[2:17:36] nervous with them just because you're

[2:17:38] putting a lot of tax burden on these new

[2:17:41] future homeowners

[2:17:43] um and the they're kind of kind of wild

[2:17:46] right you can build a lot of things with

[2:17:47] these with these uh incentives but in my

[2:17:51] opinion it works great for like a sewer

[2:17:53] regional sewer station that in my mind

[2:17:55] that's what it should be used for

[2:17:56] shouldn't be used for developers main

[2:17:58] road into their thing right and so I

[2:18:01] That's a good way to go forward but

[2:18:03] really go much past the listation that's

[2:18:05] regional for the whole area like the

[2:18:07] bill is my mind should be on the develop

[2:18:16] we'll make sure we flesh it out as well

[2:18:18] city council

[2:18:19] >> and Jay's ask was absolutely great point

[2:18:22] as well I don't know who researches this

[2:18:25] or how we start this process but other

[2:18:28] developers that are lined up and

[2:18:31] just kind of waiting for this project so

[2:18:33] they can hook into a sewer. How do we

[2:18:35] go? How do we start that process of

[2:18:37] pioneering agreements with them? Because

[2:18:39] I don't think that's fair that they sit

[2:18:41] back and Hooker City, Weaver County

[2:18:44] taxpayers and

[2:18:47] terrorista end up paying for this and

[2:18:49] then they come and hook into it with a

[2:18:51] basic impact fee.

[2:18:55] Was that in the form of a question?

[2:18:58] It was supposed to be.

[2:19:00] Okay.

[2:19:03] [clears throat]

[2:19:11] Those will be what those what those will

[2:19:13] look like.

[2:19:14] >> We also have city work with uh

[2:19:18] Rob and Cody

[2:19:20] for agency creation and development.

[2:19:24] That's something that I don't know how

[2:19:25] those can relate or play together.

[2:19:26] That's why we're working with some

[2:19:28] professionals. we can discuss with them

[2:19:30] as well as is there a way to implement

[2:19:32] some pioneering you know Stuart for

[2:19:34] instance he's obviously an expert his

[2:19:36] own right said impact fees you implement

[2:19:37] impact fees and I don't know how those

[2:19:39] directly go back your bonds etc I don't

[2:19:41] know but we have an expert that will ad

[2:19:45] we we're counting we run into issues

[2:19:48] where we have this collection to pay

[2:19:50] back and then go can't call it no fee

[2:19:52] because it's now built and there's

[2:19:55] anyway I'm sure you'll get into this one

[2:19:58] thing is I think it's

[2:20:01] with this regional sew station coming in

[2:20:05] and looking at the general plan like J

[2:20:06] said looking at these other um these

[2:20:09] different properties around it we look

[2:20:11] at like are these going to be resone to

[2:20:14] similar densities or stuff like that cuz

[2:20:16] what we don't want to happen is build

[2:20:18] this location with you know this is this

[2:20:20] density here but then across the street

[2:20:22] still at acre and half acre and then in

[2:20:25] 5 years we see million down here that

[2:20:27] station's no longer

[2:20:28] near the capacity of what it should be.

[2:20:31] So I think it it might be good to kind

[2:20:33] of look at out this the surrounding

[2:20:36] properties to see if that's something we

[2:20:38] want to entertain is going a little more

[2:20:41] dense or going to stay the same as our

[2:20:43] future lings map says

[2:20:47] a good question as well. I think to

[2:20:50] summarize this comment I think Nick

[2:20:52] could appreciate this uh the developer

[2:20:54] agreement feels like it's written as if

[2:20:56] it's very uh

[2:20:58] open to it obviously contemplates tax

[2:21:02] financing or some other form of

[2:21:03] financing.

[2:21:05] It leaves it really wide open and you

[2:21:08] know that we will be using this. I don't

[2:21:10] know how much we can work with the DA to

[2:21:12] have it be an option that you know

[2:21:14] because we have a land decision in front

[2:21:16] of us and that's important and I can

[2:21:18] understand why it's a little bit

[2:21:19] difficult to maybe view it as okay I'm

[2:21:21] going to recommend this to the land use

[2:21:22] but I clearly see that there's some

[2:21:24] heavy financing that we'll work with

[2:21:26] council but those could also be things

[2:21:28] that are options you know the language

[2:21:30] to get a little bit less strong that you

[2:21:33] could use those type of financing

[2:21:35] mechanisms and you could come back for

[2:21:37] approval for those you know the that

[2:21:39] they've been seeking and then let them

[2:21:40] go to work to look at some of these

[2:21:42] financing mechanisms and also protect us

[2:21:44] with zoning reverting and things of that

[2:21:46] nature coming back to protect us. But

[2:21:48] them being able to go to work because

[2:21:50] that's been the big expression from the

[2:21:52] development team is we just feel like we

[2:21:53] can't even you know explore CRA

[2:21:55] confidently without a reason. We want to

[2:21:57] meet them in the middle potentially have

[2:21:59] the option to resone, but that doesn't

[2:22:01] mean that, you know, that's the only

[2:22:02] option. They could continue with the

[2:22:04] project regardless, but right now they

[2:22:05] act like that's the primary option that

[2:22:07] they could be the project's approved.

[2:22:08] You could look for those and get an

[2:22:10] approval for those as part of our

[2:22:12] creation, but it could be a whole flip

[2:22:13] in this whole thing on its head. We'll

[2:22:16] talk through that. I'll talk through

[2:22:17] that with legal. We'll try and have it

[2:22:19] be a little bit less a little easier to

[2:22:21] swallow from decision as well.

[2:22:35] discussion on the density or anything

[2:22:38] else in the agreement that we want to

[2:22:41] see

[2:22:44] explore. We talked about

[2:22:47] um

[2:22:49] on the what were they called the cluster

[2:22:51] cottages? We were talking about having

[2:22:53] to make sure

[2:22:55] that garages are actually usable. That

[2:22:59] was one of the things we were talking

[2:23:00] about like when you look at some of

[2:23:01] these that are higher density that they

[2:23:03] call it a single car garage that

[2:23:05] basically turns into a tough shed

[2:23:07] because you can't actually get a car in

[2:23:08] or out of it and that was something they

[2:23:10] took notes on as well. That's something

[2:23:13] I'm just waiting to see if they come

[2:23:14] back with or just as

[2:23:16] we

[2:23:19] engineering team hasn't actually got to

[2:23:20] do a review of this fully. There's some

[2:23:22] interlocking activity that you brought

[2:23:23] that I'll put a note. That's a great

[2:23:26] comment. Something obviously they want

[2:23:28] the way we want it. So,

[2:23:30] >> the other one I think is important is

[2:23:32] you don't just want like a 5ft driveway

[2:23:35] either that you can't park the car on

[2:23:37] like a ton of the stuff you see out and

[2:23:40] lay on the golf course, but your

[2:23:43] driveway has to be functional if that's

[2:23:44] where you're going to be parking your

[2:23:45] vehicle as well. So, make that there.

[2:24:01] Well, when we're talking about parking,

[2:24:03] we

[2:24:05] Can you pull that back back up one more

[2:24:06] time? Sorry, man.

[2:24:13] » Cuz that would also be my concern as

[2:24:15] well is with the parking. So, if you

[2:24:18] look down around the cluster units, you

[2:24:20] can see there's a little bit of parking.

[2:24:23] It looks like they've got a little bit

[2:24:24] just Yeah. Right there. Because that's

[2:24:27] something else we want to ask for with

[2:24:29] that many houses. To Jason's point,

[2:24:32] you're going to get one car in the

[2:24:34] driveway. If you've got up to four

[2:24:36] individuals living in that house, which

[2:24:38] you can legally have, where are they

[2:24:40] going to park cars?

[2:24:43] And we don't want them just on the

[2:24:44] street.

[2:24:45] >> Yeah. I think we have some we standards

[2:24:48] for a unit a dwelling unit and this

[2:24:51] isn't enough right so we'll address that

[2:24:55] >> yeah is that something that we can say

[2:24:57] around this kind of housing there's just

[2:24:58] no on street parking

[2:25:01] >> okay

[2:25:03] fire district I don't know how they're

[2:25:06] proposing those roads within the town

[2:25:10] but yeah

[2:25:15] say no parking at

[2:25:22] We can require disperse that parking so

[2:25:25] it's not one parking lot those that unit

[2:25:28] right next to it loves but everybody

[2:25:30] else never uses

[2:25:41] » when he was saying sorry about removing

[2:25:44] the road in the middle he talking the

[2:25:46] one that connected into the Was he ding

[2:25:49] this road right there?

[2:25:50] >> Yeah,

[2:25:52] that's when he was talking about taking

[2:25:55] out. He didn't like that coming on the

[2:25:56] 5500.

[2:25:58] So, does that mean all the way through

[2:26:01] or just to the commercial?

[2:26:04] [clears throat]

[2:26:07] We don't want all these resid

[2:26:11] in the way. We don't want people using

[2:26:12] the existing sodium to the west there.

[2:26:15] He's gotten

[2:26:18] is our minimum 60.

[2:26:21] >> What is our minimum

[2:26:22] >> 60

[2:26:26] right away? Yeah, I guess that's what

[2:26:28] he's calling that the surface

[2:26:33] or rightway that's

[2:26:36] >> Yeah. So yeah,

[2:26:39] this is this is my first time seeing

[2:26:41] this one just part of it as well. So

[2:26:45] to get it.

[2:26:46] >> Yeah, I just think access in the

[2:26:48] development for the the single family

[2:26:51] dwellings and towns that's that's going

[2:26:52] to be huge because we don't

[2:26:55] [clears throat] right now they can just

[2:26:56] access it off road through a sub

[2:27:00] existing subdivision, right?

[2:27:02] >> Yeah.

[2:27:04] >> And there's some fencing there, you

[2:27:05] know, some separation uses we might want

[2:27:07] to consider. Do we

[2:27:09] talk a little bit more about that? Do

[2:27:11] you want to see access throughout the

[2:27:12] residential for the commercial? You want

[2:27:14] to blocked off

[2:27:17] some walking connectivity obviously

[2:27:19] would be really nice. I don't know about

[2:27:21] like you said we want people

[2:27:23] are coming the house coming your

[2:27:26] questions

[2:27:29] probably something to especially in the

[2:27:32] back of the the grocery

[2:27:36] that just seems like

[2:27:41] something

[2:27:42] >> there's a lot of semi traffic

[2:27:55] with them switching to

[2:27:57] 30 acres all the way around. Did that

[2:28:00] bother anybody but up against those on

[2:28:02] the north side instead of the halfacre?

[2:28:08] » No. But what that would require as they

[2:28:11] talked those

[2:28:14] north of that or

[2:28:16] acre acre and a half and if they ever

[2:28:19] want to develop it then they've got to

[2:28:21] put their own road in.

[2:28:23] >> Yeah,

[2:28:26] I think the comment they made made sense

[2:28:28] but you don't want you know big home

[2:28:31] right next to them. So I think if we say

[2:28:33] no we won't have Baker I think we have

[2:28:35] to shift everything down that makes

[2:28:38] sense outside the road be third and then

[2:28:44] half something you really want. I think

[2:28:46] it's going to push everything down. You

[2:28:48] don't want to have big on that.

[2:28:50] >> If we're really about talking about

[2:28:52] affordability, like those smaller lots

[2:28:54] are just going to be more affordable.

[2:28:55] That's what the market's trapping

[2:28:59] right now.

[2:29:10] Do you have any other bullet points or

[2:29:12] anything [clears throat] that we might

[2:29:15] need to address?

[2:29:19] A lot of work to be done on our end. So

[2:29:22] we'll get to work on our

[2:29:26] plenty to talk about for sure.

[2:29:31] » Did you say we didn't have a lighting

[2:29:33] standard?

[2:29:35] for commercial use. We probably have

[2:29:36] like res homes requirements

[2:29:39] >> a little bit 10-4E-6

[2:29:42] talks about height poles.

[2:29:44] >> Yeah, we imposed that on we require that

[2:29:47] one 30 foot. We did 25. Is that Yeah, we

[2:29:49] made go 25. Was there other things

[2:29:51] besides height poles? But it gets pretty

[2:29:54] technical as you saw him talk about. I

[2:29:55] was all over my head. But there's

[2:29:57] balloons and there's there's things that

[2:30:00] we need candles. That's one favorite.

[2:30:07] Yeah, I'll review that standard though

[2:30:09] when you see anything else

[2:30:11] >> that I guess.

[2:30:13] >> Yeah, we need a signage plan for sure.

[2:30:15] Have a lot of signs and then we submit

[2:30:17] signage plan. I don't we have sign

[2:30:20] ordinance for homes use but I don't

[2:30:22] think we have a real robust one for

[2:30:24] commercial.

[2:30:25] >> Do we have anything on landscaping? I

[2:30:28] mean the big push right now.

[2:30:33] » Yeah, they'll provide a full landscape

[2:30:35] plan that'll be required. Uh they did

[2:30:37] mention in a prior meeting uh recently

[2:30:40] that they do very limited saw they kind

[2:30:44] of do a zeroscape approach. So we'll see

[2:30:46] how that looks

[2:30:50] about the design standards for buildings

[2:30:52] aesthetics. We have something like that

[2:30:54] in place. We hope to rely on some of

[2:30:57] those elevation drawings that they

[2:30:59] provided. So, one thing I did notice,

[2:31:01] for instance, when they provided them,

[2:31:02] they saw they provided some for the

[2:31:05] We'll need to see some building

[2:31:06] material, percentage of building

[2:31:08] material. They call it out, but

[2:31:10] >> we'll need to see like how much of this

[2:31:12] is hardy, how much of this is stone. It

[2:31:13] seems like a lot of hardy on this

[2:31:15] building for instance, etc. So, we'll

[2:31:17] need them to call out those ratios.

[2:31:19] We'll have to I think the idea was to

[2:31:21] rely more heavy on this, but with that,

[2:31:23] we'll need a little bit of text. I see

[2:31:25] the material, but it' be nice to see the

[2:31:27] percentages of primary versus secondary

[2:31:29] materials, things like that.

[2:31:31] >> I like the idea of that one show with

[2:31:33] the barn doors.

[2:31:36] >> Yeah, that was for the anchor tenant,

[2:31:37] right? Did you guys like the look of

[2:31:39] that one? Pretty good.

[2:31:40] >> I just would hate for him to show us

[2:31:43] this come [clears throat] back and since

[2:31:45] we don't have anything in place, we get

[2:31:47] a full standard block building. Looks

[2:31:50] like Walmart.

[2:31:52] >> Nick, do you think we'll be fairly safe

[2:31:53] relying on

[2:31:55] exhibits that if we call out the

[2:31:57] percentage materials or

[2:31:59] >> Yeah, I've seen that work pretty well

[2:32:01] where you reference the the exhibits

[2:32:03] they presented and then also require

[2:32:06] it's got to be XML masonry XML

[2:32:11] or whatever.

[2:32:14] » The other thing that I thought was the

[2:32:17] development agreement put a 20 year

[2:32:20] timeline on this project. Is that a

[2:32:23] common

[2:32:25] number or is like that seemed

[2:32:27] >> like Yeah, like that seemed excessively

[2:32:30] long time for it to be there. The other

[2:32:34] thing is they they said about the right

[2:32:38] to sell it to a different developer. Do

[2:32:40] we want to

[2:32:43] can we state language that the city has

[2:32:45] to be present to approve that sort of

[2:32:47] thing together? I think that needs to be

[2:32:50] in there as well.

[2:32:55] I can see him selling the residential.

[2:33:01] [clears throat]

[2:33:06] » I just I'm going to be really interested

[2:33:07] to see what they come back with for

[2:33:09] ingress and egress because where they

[2:33:12] removing those roads and then

[2:33:15] it's going to force everybody out.

[2:33:17] They're on 5500. Is it 5500 where

[2:33:19] they're going to end up worn out?

[2:33:21] The first thing you do is put a damn

[2:33:24] median in there. You can't make a left

[2:33:26] hand turn.

[2:33:27] >> Well, I'm looking out the I'm talking

[2:33:28] about out the west side.

[2:33:32] >> West side.

[2:33:32] >> That's what 5725

[2:33:40] » I thought.

[2:33:45] So there's lot

[2:33:52] here's what I'm talking about 5300.

[2:33:54] >> So this will go down

[2:33:57] there.

[2:33:58] >> But that because right now you've only

[2:34:00] got one entrance here

[2:34:02] >> and then 5300. So if you look at like on the Google there's also a stub road

[2:34:11] >> three houses out.

[2:34:14] Can we have them complete that? Because

[2:34:17] it just dead ends right here, but that

[2:34:20] would give another way to get it out of

[2:34:21] that neighborhood.

[2:34:23] >> Oh, so it doesn't complete that.

[2:34:25] >> No, that's there's a fence right there.

[2:34:27] So, they got an ATV trailer parked

[2:34:29] against it. Taylor and Jerry are amazing

[2:34:32] with

[2:34:34] grass. We also have a little bit. They

[2:34:36] haven't this. They have, but they

[2:34:38] haven't seen this site. The residential

[2:34:40] was never built out until tonight was

[2:34:42] always just

[2:34:44] meeting. So, I don't think they were

[2:34:46] supposed to. I anticipate they probably

[2:34:48] have to drag something to 4700, but

[2:34:50] we'll see.

[2:34:51] >> Well, because that's something we've got

[2:34:52] to consider as well with that new

[2:34:54] highway coming in because we have no

[2:34:55] idea if it's going if it's traveling on

[2:34:59] 51, which it's going to We don't know if

[2:35:01] 5300 is even going to exist, like what

[2:35:04] we have no idea what 5100's going to

[2:35:07] turn into. So, then they could

[2:35:09] completely be blocked in

[2:35:12] Another neighborhood that's walk

[2:35:18] [clears throat]

[2:35:27] [laughter]

[2:35:30] » to work on good projects.

[2:35:32] >> I think it would be a good benefit to

[2:35:33] the city to have the tax revenue and

[2:35:36] things that could help us fund some of

[2:35:38] the improvements to the roads and things

[2:35:40] like that. that we're going to be bound

[2:35:42] to be faced with.

[2:35:45] No other comments. We'll move on to our

[2:35:47] citizen comment portion of the meeting.

[2:35:50] Citizens wishing to make a comment will

[2:35:52] be allowed three minutes. Please come to

[2:35:54] the mic. State your name that you're a

[2:35:55] resident of city and Jamie will be your

[2:35:58] flash card and letting you know when

[2:36:00] you're done.

[2:36:02] >> Really hand

[2:36:04] love listening to you guys. You guys are

[2:36:06] thinking this thing through very very

[2:36:07] well. We appreciate that.

[2:36:10] A couple of things um in the work

[2:36:13] meeting listened to 20 foot wide

[2:36:15] driveways which I think we need and I've

[2:36:20] done some uh stuff over in JBC in that

[2:36:24] subdivision. One of the things they

[2:36:26] mandated over there was that the

[2:36:27] driveways were long enough for a

[2:36:30] fullsize pickup truck to park without

[2:36:32] being across the sidewalk.

[2:36:35] I would encourage you to look into doing

[2:36:37] that. So, the biggest vehicle, not not a

[2:36:40] motor home, but a a fullsize pickup

[2:36:42] truck with a bumper hitch that came out

[2:36:44] the back needs to be long enough to

[2:36:48] accommodate that. Um,

[2:36:53] patio homes, I think, having had several

[2:36:57] conversations with the state regarding

[2:36:59] moderate income housing, some patio

[2:37:01] homes would be really helpful here. And

[2:37:03] that's something that as you guys look

[2:37:05] into this, I would uh encourage you to

[2:37:08] get from the developers and price

[2:37:11] estimates maybe on what some of these

[2:37:13] smaller lots are going to be basically

[2:37:17] to keep within state standards. We're

[2:37:20] going to probably have to find some

[2:37:22] places that are going to be 450,000 or

[2:37:24] less to even come close to qualifying

[2:37:27] for moderate income housing statute.

[2:37:30] Okay. That's something that is very real

[2:37:33] as um

[2:37:35] >> Travis.

[2:37:36] >> Mr. Travis. Yeah, I know. But I'm going

[2:37:38] to get an official title.

[2:37:39] >> I appreciate that.

[2:37:40] >> Yeah. But it's stated the state is we we

[2:37:44] need to keep them happy. Okay. We don't

[2:37:46] want them coming in. Um some of the town

[2:37:50] homes over in JBC actually have built-in

[2:37:52] attached dwelling units into some of

[2:37:54] them. They are they are designed so that

[2:37:57] they could another unit

[2:38:01] inside the own their own house. So

[2:38:04] something to look into. Owner occupied

[2:38:07] definitely 10 years 10 years minimum. I

[2:38:11] think I've talked to some bankers. They

[2:38:13] said they banks don't like to go much

[2:38:15] more than 10 years. So I'm thinking

[2:38:17] maybe look at 10 years. Um one water

[2:38:21] issue is we have lots of u culinary

[2:38:24] water. That's an issue but secondary is

[2:38:27] obviously an issue. [clears throat]

[2:38:28] Um

[2:38:30] zero escaping as much as we can.

[2:38:33] conversations

[2:38:34] with the developer.

[2:38:36] I'm thinking we can get no grass

[2:38:38] basically whatsoever in the commercial

[2:38:41] or very very minimal amounts of grass.

[2:38:44] Um, another thing too on the the lift

[2:38:49] station, Coper City currently has 600

[2:38:52] homes, maybe more than that, that are on

[2:38:55] the line with West Haven. They want us

[2:38:57] off and so part of this lift station is

[2:39:00] going to be dealing with some of that.

[2:39:02] Um I'm fairly confident that we are

[2:39:06] running out of um or we are looking at a

[2:39:10] grant very seriously.

[2:39:19] » Sherry again like thank you so much for

[2:39:21] all you do and really think seriously

[2:39:24] about some of these amenities as you

[2:39:26] drive through different subdivisions.

[2:39:28] One of my favorite is Green Farm. We've

[2:39:29] gone through the JDC.

[2:39:31] I mentioned before, you know, in over at

[2:39:34] Green Farm, they have what they call the

[2:39:35] barn, that little community center, and

[2:39:37] it's not a really large building, but

[2:39:39] it's big enough for a lot of things they

[2:39:41] do. They have a sidelong side of it,

[2:39:43] which would fit really nicely. They have

[2:39:45] a small playground, a pickle ball court.

[2:39:47] Across the street is a pavilion. I would

[2:39:50] like to see somewhere where we could

[2:39:52] have Santa come to town that we could

[2:39:54] have, you know, something there, some

[2:39:56] indoor space that if we needed to, but

[2:39:58] also some outdoor space. So, drive

[2:40:01] around and look at things. You know,

[2:40:02] that's one of the benefits when cities

[2:40:04] say, "Hey, we will give you a a density

[2:40:06] bonus, but what does the city get back

[2:40:09] in return?" So, I feel like you're

[2:40:11] really in an ideal spot that we can be

[2:40:13] planning something because we don't have

[2:40:15] anything like this yet. And so, really

[2:40:18] drive around and look at different

[2:40:19] things and see if some different things

[2:40:21] that you might think that our residents

[2:40:22] would want. So, again, thank you for all

[2:40:24] you do.

[2:40:27] Any

[2:40:32] other citizen comment?

[2:40:35] Seeing no comment, I'll entertain a

[2:40:37] motion to adjourn the meeting.

[2:40:41] >> I'll make a motion.

[2:40:43] >> Second. A motion from Commissioner Se

[2:40:46] from Commissioner Wson. All in favor? I

[2:40:55] » recording

July 9, 2026 - Planning Commission Meeting

Transcript