[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