[0:02] Hey Brian, would you mind doing a mic

[0:04] check? Can you hear us?

[0:05] >> Good morning. Can you hear me?

[0:07] >> I can We can hear you. Can you hear us?

[0:09] >> Perfect. Yes, I can, sir. Thank you.

[0:11] >> Thank you.

[0:13] Hey,

[0:14] thank you.

[0:15] Hey,

[0:16] it's 10:00 a.m. and we'll get the June 22nd, 2026 DRC uh

[0:24] agenda get the meeting started.

[0:27] Um move right into new business. The

[0:29] first item on the agenda is the review

[0:32] of the Taco Bell site plan.

[0:34] >> Hey John, did you say What did you say

[0:36] for the date?

[0:37] >> 23rd?

[0:38] >> You said 22nd.

[0:39] >> say 22nd. Okay, June 23rd.

[0:42] Thank you.

[0:43] Um

[0:45] the Santaquin Taco Bell, this is located

[0:48] on the west side of the Macy's parking

[0:50] lot.

[0:51] Um we've reviewed this this will be a

[0:54] couple of times. There's some parking

[0:57] um items they had to do to get taken

[0:59] care of on this. Um and I believe we've

[1:01] worked through those.

[1:03] Um

[1:05] and so it was tabled uh last DRC and

[1:08] this is the submittal to address the the

[1:10] comments related to that. Again, those

[1:13] comments were number of parking stalls

[1:15] and also we had the

[1:19] um location of water lines and those

[1:20] type of things. Make sure they were

[1:22] included on the plans.

[1:23] Um the set of plans does include that

[1:26] and believe they have addressed the

[1:28] parking issues on there. So,

[1:30] um with that, we'll go around the DRC

[1:33] with any comments you may have starting

[1:35] with Aspen.

[1:36] >> We have no comments. All our previous

[1:38] redlines have been addressed.

[1:40] >> And what was the ended up being the

[1:43] resolution to the parking?

[1:45] >> Uh they were able to subtract the

[1:46] bathrooms and storage area to meet the

[1:48] parking requirement. So, they have 17

[1:50] stalls cuz they added those three back

[1:53] from the original

[1:55] that we saw. Yeah, those three diagonal

[1:58] ones.

[1:59] >> Okay.

[2:00] Sounds good. Thank you.

[2:02] Randy, building?

[2:04] >> Uh, nothing.

[2:05] >> Okay.

[2:05] >> We're good.

[2:06] >> Jason, with public works?

[2:09] >> I know we discussed the PI meter last

[2:10] time. It did show it on the landscape

[2:12] plans, but that meter is being used, but

[2:14] I think we'll be able to still come off that line. We'll just have to kind

[2:18] of field fit it when we

[2:20] get on site.

[2:21] We'll have have them get hold of public

[2:23] works and

[2:24] we can figure something out.

[2:26] >> Okay. Yeah, so Brian, it may be good

[2:29] just to put a note on there to

[2:30] coordinate the PI connection, the

[2:33] secondary water connection on the plans

[2:35] there to help help with that.

[2:37] Just so the contractor will know that

[2:39] they have to coordinate with public

[2:40] works. We'll also, in a pre-construction

[2:42] meeting that we'll have with them, we'll coordinate as well, but sometimes

[2:46] it's good to have a note on there.

[2:48] >> Absolutely.

[2:50] >> Hey, Mike with police?

[2:53] >> No, nothing. It just those parking

[2:55] stalls on the

[2:56] I guess my right if I'm looking at this

[2:58] screen, which would be on the east side.

[3:00] I see those ones they added. Does that cover all of them with just

[3:04] those four there?

[3:05] >> So, you're talking about these three

[3:07] right here on the

[3:08] Or are you talking about

[3:10] >> No, if you go even farther than that.

[3:12] Yeah.

[3:12] >> Oh, over here in the Macy's parking lot?

[3:14] >> Yes. Did they have to have those on

[3:16] there to account for the square footage?

[3:18] >> No.

[3:19] >> Okay. Then no, I have nothing.

[3:20] >> Okay.

[3:22] Alan, with fire?

[3:23] >> Uh, we had no issues with the submittal.

[3:27] >> Okay.

[3:28] Jason, admin?

[3:29] >> Just a note, do we have the applicant

[3:30] here?

[3:31] >> No, he's on He He is. He's on via Zoom.

[3:34] >> On via Zoom. Okay. So, just wanted to

[3:35] make mention to you, when you have your uh

[3:38] architectural renderings or elevations

[3:40] ready to go, uh just reach out to me and

[3:42] we can get an ARC meeting set up. Uh

[3:45] it's it's done on an as-needed basis, so

[3:47] as soon as we get those plans and we can

[3:49] do kind of a rough uh initial look at

[3:51] it, make sure the objective requirements

[3:53] are met, then we can we can set that

[3:55] meeting up and get your architectural

[3:57] review taken care of.

[3:59] >> Thank you. And can you remind me who

[4:00] this is? I'm so sorry.

[4:01] >> This is Jason Bond.

[4:03] >> Okay. Yeah, thanks, Jason.

[4:05] >> But in terms of the site plan, I got

[4:06] nothing more. It's just helping them

[4:08] understand another another step that

[4:10] needs to happen.

[4:11] >> Thank you.

[4:12] Appreciate it.

[4:13] That'll need to be done before building

[4:15] permit is issued, right?

[4:17] >> That's correct.

[4:18] >> We also haven't seen any sign permit

[4:20] submittals, and they'll also need to do

[4:22] that separate from the building permit.

[4:25] >> Yep.

[4:28] >> Okay. Any other thoughts or comments,

[4:31] questions?

[4:34] Seeing none. Um

[4:35] this is a

[4:37] uh

[4:37] DRC is the final approval body for the

[4:39] site plan.

[4:41] Um so I would look for a motion

[4:43] on that.

[4:45] >> John, I make a motion that we approve

[4:46] the Taco Bell site plan.

[4:49] >> Okay.

[4:50] Got a motion?

[4:51] >> I'll second that.

[4:53] >> Seconded by Alan.

[4:54] >> Was there any additional redlines, John?

[4:58] >> Uh the only redline that would be to put

[4:59] a note for the PI meter.

[5:02] >> I would just maybe make mention that any

[5:04] redlines be addressed as well.

[5:05] >> As part of the motion.

[5:08] >> Uh

[5:08] I make a motion that we approve the Taco

[5:10] Bell site plan with

[5:12] uh any redlines addressed.

[5:14] >> Okay. Alan, you're good on that?

[5:15] >> And I will second that.

[5:17] >> Okay.

[5:18] Um okay. Motion and a second. All in

[5:21] favor, please say I.

[5:23] >> I.

[5:24] >> Any opposed? Okay. Motion passes.

[5:27] So

[5:28] >> Thank you all.

[5:28] >> Yep. Brian, we'll get these sent over to

[5:30] you. Um

[5:32] and we'll have Aspen include Jason's

[5:35] email on there, so it's easy to reach

[5:37] out to for the ARC.

[5:39] >> Awesome. Really appreciate you all's

[5:41] help, and we look forward to being a

[5:42] bigger part of the community there. So

[5:43] thank you very much.

[5:44] >> Sounds good. Thank you.

[5:46] >> Okay.

[5:48] Um and with that, cuz we don't have

[5:50] anyone else on Zoom, I'm going to close

[5:54] Zoom so I don't have to worry about that

[5:56] one as well.

[6:06] Okay.

[6:08] Next item on the agenda

[6:10] is a review of the new commercial site plan

[6:15] for the Maverick gas station.

[6:18] This site, the proposed site is at the

[6:23] is a retrofit or a remodel of the

[6:25] existing

[6:27] Chevron Cars gas station located

[6:30] in the northeast corner of Summer Ridge

[6:33] Parkway and South Ridge Farms Road.

[6:37] They've Maverick is looking at it

[6:40] modifying the site and expanding it as a

[6:44] part of this site plan application.

[6:46] And this is a site plan application

[6:48] similar to the last one.

[6:50] DRC is the final approval body for this

[6:52] application. Um so

[6:56] again, some of the options are are a

[6:58] table with comments, approve with

[7:00] approve, approve with

[7:02] comments being addressed um

[7:05] are are the options that the DRC would

[7:07] have at this point in time with this.

[7:09] >> Can we Do we have the applicant here for

[7:11] this one?

[7:12] Are you Brad?

[7:13] >> Yes.

[7:13] >> Okay.

[7:14] >> Yep. I'm Jason and so

[7:17] >> So if you could say your name and

[7:18] >> My name is Brad McDougal. I'm the senior

[7:20] director of real estate for Maverick.

[7:22] >> Great.

[7:23] And so

[7:25] um

[7:26] I guess the question I would will say

[7:28] similar last one, we'll go through the panel, see if there's any comments

[7:31] that we'd have to add. Then we will go

[7:33] through and talk about any of the red lines that are listed here that aren't covered

[7:39] with the rest of the the

[7:41] so.

[7:42] Um

[7:44] So, with that

[7:45] >> [clears throat]

[7:46] >> Excuse me.

[7:46] Um we'll go around the DRC with any

[7:49] comments or questions starting with

[7:50] Aspen.

[7:51] >> This is more for the DRC, but the drive

[7:54] aisles are already 50-ft wide. We just

[7:56] need to make sure to

[7:58] do an approval for that.

[8:00] Um the one that you are widening right

[8:02] here, you will need to verify with UDot

[8:05] that it's okay.

[8:06] >> Yeah, we've been in with UDot already on

[8:07] that access point, so.

[8:08] >> Perfect.

[8:09] >> Now, Brad I I talked with Brad Giles

[8:12] yesterday and yeah, so he talked about

[8:14] that they're already knee-deep in in

[8:16] UDot approval for that.

[8:17] >> We may have that approval already, but I couldn't So, as long as you provide an

[8:22] email to us, you know, forward an email

[8:24] from UDot or ask UDot to send basically

[8:27] that

[8:28] so that we're aware that they're okay

[8:29] with it.

[8:30] That's uh that's all we're we're looking

[8:32] for on there cuz they

[8:34] um this is part of their

[8:37] grand plan with I-15 and the access on

[8:40] and off that freeway. So.

[8:42] >> Perfect.

[8:42] >> If they're if you're working on that

[8:44] >> are okay with an email

[8:46] >> I'd be yes. Basically an official email

[8:48] from say with documentation from them

[8:51] that they're okay with that that

[8:53] adjustment.

[8:54] So, but as Aspen was saying for us as

[8:57] the DRC um we just have to include it in

[9:00] our motion basically that

[9:02] we're okay with that 50-ft

[9:05] uh drive approach into the site.

[9:08] >> Can you remind me It seems like we have

[9:11] a provision that talks about uh when

[9:13] it's wider than 30-ft I think it's going

[9:15] to have the exception.

[9:16] >> Correct. So,

[9:17] >> than 30-ft. So, do we need to just have

[9:19] that part of the our motion or do we

[9:20] need to have that as a separate motion?

[9:22] >> Just a part of the motion that's made.

[9:24] It does not need to be a separate one.

[9:26] >> I just can't remember how we've done

[9:27] that in the past.

[9:29] >> So, hey, anything else, Aspen?

[9:31] >> Um just a couple things on landscaping.

[9:33] I know you mentioned that in the planter

[9:36] islands you're putting streetlights. We

[9:38] do require a tree in the parking island,

[9:41] so we need to talk about that. And then

[9:44] um

[9:44] our code also requires the trash

[9:46] enclosure there to be landscaping on

[9:48] three of the sides.

[9:50] >> Okay.

[9:51] Can you Can you go back to the site

[9:52] plan? Well,

[9:53] I just want to see where that trash

[9:54] enclosure is. I'm not

[9:56] >> So, the This is the Yeah, this is the

[9:59] storm drain. Well, it's not the

[10:01] Uh let me see if I get the landscaping

[10:03] real quick. Sorry.

[10:05] >> I think it's picture eight.

[10:05] >> Yeah, I thought it was backed up to the

[10:07] building, so it maybe Is there a way to

[10:09] get an exception for that where you only

[10:11] have two sides that are possible to

[10:13] landscape?

[10:15] >> Yeah, if it's on If it's against the

[10:17] building, then we would just require

[10:18] those two sides, but it does require at

[10:21] least four shrubs.

[10:22] >> Okay.

[10:24] >> On each side.

[10:26] But, pretty minor.

[10:28] That's all from planning.

[10:30] >> Okay.

[10:30] And are there Are there any exceptions

[10:32] to that? I'm just looking There's a handicap Yeah, it appears

[10:35] there's a handicap parking stall.

[10:36] There's some hatching there.

[10:39] >> Yeah, these are two two handicap parking

[10:41] stalls related to it.

[10:42] >> I was looking at the rear adjacent to

[10:44] the park There's some hatching there,

[10:45] and I'm just trying to

[10:47] right next to the dumpster pad right

[10:48] there.

[10:49] >> that's just a hatch out for parking

[10:51] stalls or walking area

[10:53] >> Yeah.

[10:54] >> back out.

[10:54] >> So, we'd have to figure something out in

[10:56] that area.

[10:57] >> [clears throat]

[10:57] >> Okay.

[10:58] >> Yeah, just so the people aren't parking

[10:59] in there.

[11:01] Uh cuz you can't fit a parking stall in

[11:03] that dimension.

[11:05] So, all these

[11:06] uh

[11:07] period of line up there. I think that's

[11:08] just what that hatching is indicating.

[11:14] Okay.

[11:15] Any other last one?

[11:16] >> Nothing else.

[11:17] >> Okay. Randy, building?

[11:19] >> The only thing I have is that that we

[11:21] talked about earlier about the address

[11:23] adjustment on the property

[11:24] >> Yep.

[11:25] >> to match what's across the street.

[11:27] >> So,

[11:28] th- this is really um

[11:30] >> Yeah.

[11:31] >> it's more of a

[11:33] uh

[11:34] a historical

[11:36] item that's kind of been in place. Right

[11:38] now, this parcel is addressed 14 I think it's 1423

[11:45] uh South Summerchase Parkway.

[11:49] is not a South, it's an East-West

[11:51] corridor. And so, um

[11:55] it's a it's a recordation of an

[11:57] affidavit on our side, but I know it

[11:59] impacts the property ownership a little

[12:02] bit on there.

[12:04] Um we'd just like to work in the process

[12:06] of getting that updated, so its

[12:08] address makes more sense.

[12:10] >> Is it Is that something you guys do or

[12:12] is it you just tell us what it is and

[12:14] we'll

[12:14] >> Yeah, we prepared an affidavit and we'll

[12:16] give you that address. In fact, we are

[12:18] it's 990

[12:19] West.

[12:20] >> Okay.

[12:21] >> Summerchase Parkway.

[12:23] >> Whatever you tell us that, we'll make

[12:24] that

[12:24] >> Yeah, and we'll prepare that and then

[12:26] we'll get it recorded with the county,

[12:27] so it'll show that corrected address.

[12:30] >> Yep.

[12:31] >> Yeah, and that that's all on us, but we don't like to do it without you guys

[12:35] being aware that we're changing it, cuz

[12:36] I know all of your real estate documents

[12:39] and stuff reference a different address.

[12:41] >> We'll try and get those updated once you

[12:43] tell us what that address is.

[12:44] >> Does that work for you, Mike and and

[12:46] Alan, public safety?

[12:49] >> Yeah, I have no issues with that. In

[12:50] fact, it makes more sense to me as well,

[12:52] so.

[12:53] >> Yeah, same.

[12:55] >> And so, it's not it used to be its own

[12:57] little building out there, kind of

[12:59] floating, so it's easier to But now with

[13:01] all the development that's occurring

[13:02] around it, it's a good time to get that

[13:04] updated, so.

[13:06] Okay. Anything else?

[13:08] >> No, that's it.

[13:08] >> Okay.

[13:09] Um

[13:11] on that uh still with building, just so

[13:13] you're aware, you there are is a

[13:15] demolition permit that you'll need for

[13:17] the existing car wash building

[13:19] uh before that's that's demoed. So, you

[13:21] will coordinate with Randy on that. Um

[13:24] >> That's part part building This is part

[13:26] of the building for me.

[13:27] >> any demolish that. We'll

[13:29] >> need that uh

[13:30] permit applied for and then you also

[13:32] need to have an asbestos study done

[13:34] prior to obtaining that.

[13:38] >> So, okay.

[13:40] Jason, public works.

[13:42] >> Yeah, this site has two culinary water

[13:45] meters, one for the car wash and then

[13:46] one for the building. We'll have to make

[13:48] sure we disconnect the one for the car

[13:50] wash along with the sewer line when we

[13:53] demo it.

[13:55] Um

[13:56] other than that

[13:58] uh I would also like to ask that if the owner would I know that there's not

[14:03] an RP backflow preventer

[14:05] only on the fire riser.

[14:08] There's not one on the main building. I

[14:10] don't know if this would be a good time

[14:11] to put that in.

[14:13] If you got a

[14:13] >> We we can look at designing that in and

[14:15] see what that that entails.

[14:17] >> Okay.

[14:17] >> I don't see a real issue with that. It'd

[14:19] just be functionally how does that work?

[14:21] >> Yeah.

[14:22] >> In the design.

[14:22] >> can help with that, you know, we can go

[14:24] out and take a look and see.

[14:26] >> I'm sure we'll just get our engineers

[14:27] involved and say, "Look, how do we how

[14:29] do we get a backflow preventer

[14:31] engineered into the system?"

[14:32] >> Okay.

[14:33] >> Shouldn't be a real issue.

[14:34] >> Yeah, that's

[14:34] >> I don't see it. I don't foresee it being

[14:36] an issue.

[14:37] >> Okay, cool. That'd be good for us. Thank

[14:38] you. That's all I have.

[14:40] >> That So, we do have on the other plan we

[14:42] show an RV dump.

[14:44] Um could we use the and I'm just trying

[14:46] to think

[14:47] while I've got you all here, could we

[14:49] use that sewer line for the RV dump or

[14:51] is [snorts] there a separate

[14:54] W- we're trying to phase this and this

[14:56] may be a few a future conversation, but

[14:57] the construction we'd like to phase it

[14:59] into two phases because the remodel should go in about 30 days

[15:03] with the asphalt we're proposing, but

[15:06] the additional lanes there will take us

[15:08] about 90 days. We don't want to shut the

[15:10] store We want to keep the store shut

[15:11] down for as minimal as possible.

[15:14] So, trying to think through how we tie

[15:15] in that um

[15:17] >> [snorts]

[15:18] >> the RV dump, that may allow if If use

[15:21] that

[15:22] line the sewer line if if flows work and

[15:24] everything if we can use a sewer line

[15:25] that's connected with the car wash that

[15:27] may make things work a little better.

[15:29] Um

[15:30] I'm not sure how we're showing to tie

[15:32] that in right now.

[15:33] That was a question.

[15:34] >> That is a question that that I had.

[15:36] There's um like how how are you getting

[15:39] a water line out to the hydrant on the

[15:41] RV dump? That's not necessarily shown on

[15:43] the um

[15:45] the plans on their site plans. Um

[15:49] but you say interior lines like that um

[15:55] they're they're more on the on the

[15:57] owner's responsibility there so it's not

[16:00] too big of an item but

[16:01] for sewer my understanding on how sewer

[16:04] gets there is it sewer just comes from

[16:06] the north and serves the whole site. If

[16:09] I based on our mapping and granted this

[16:12] is older mapping so I'm exactly sure how

[16:15] accurate it is but our mapping shows the

[16:18] sewer flows to the north out of the

[16:21] site.

[16:21] >> Okay.

[16:22] >> And so to run

[16:23] >> north or it

[16:24] >> It flows north into the into the

[16:27] frontage road

[16:28] >> Okay.

[16:28] >> and then it makes its way uh further to

[16:31] the west along railroad tracks but um

[16:33] for the site itself

[16:35] based on our information the sewer

[16:38] lateral was installed runs north and out

[16:40] of out of the site so

[16:44] » Yes, there are.

[16:45] Yep.

[16:51] And then so to get a a line down to

[16:54] the RV dump yes you could

[16:56] uh I think you're going to be running a

[16:58] different line just because of where

[17:00] it's run from there so

[17:02] >> Yeah, there's a there's a manhole just

[17:04] on the northeast corner of the building

[17:06] in between the car wash and the and the

[17:08] building. They probably run one from

[17:11] there.

[17:11] >> where his hand is?

[17:12] >> Yeah, roughly about

[17:14] >> in that area. Okay.

[17:14] >> Yep. Exactly.

[17:15] >> That should make it easy.

[17:16] >> And then just be able to

[17:17] >> into that manhole. run it down and

[17:18] through. So, um anyway, that's you got

[17:22] something we can

[17:23] uh

[17:24] got to repurpose that and reuse that. Um

[17:28] that does kind of um lead to a little

[17:31] bit. Something that we still need to

[17:33] review with staff is uh potential impact

[17:36] fees related to an RV dump. There is a

[17:39] car wash there that probably offsets

[17:41] that, but we just have to confirm that

[17:43] in relationship to that.

[17:44] >> Okay. Hey, Jason. If if I might jump in

[17:47] cuz this is kind of on the related

[17:49] topic. Uh

[17:50] we met

[17:51] uh and talked about the site plan in

[17:53] preparation for this meeting yesterday

[17:54] and and

[17:56] eventually we're going to start talking

[17:58] about not not anything that was going to

[18:00] affect you requirement-wise, but just

[18:02] like the natural flow and and stuff of

[18:04] how people go in there and how they get

[18:06] to the RV dump. The RV dump's kind of

[18:08] down there in the corner, which makes,

[18:10] you know, longer vehicles and that sort

[18:12] of thing with the turning radius a

[18:13] little bit tricky. I mean, I'm just

[18:15] going to throw this idea out there as

[18:17] we're talking about it, but uh

[18:19] you know, obviously you're going to get

[18:20] rid of the car wash and that's going to

[18:21] substantially change. You've got a

[18:22] little bit of storm drainage that's up

[18:25] there in that area. Does it make sense

[18:27] to move the RV dump up where the car

[18:29] wash was? Instead of having it down

[18:31] there and maybe you can take some of the

[18:32] parking that that you have in place of

[18:34] the car wash and move it down into the

[18:36] into that corner where where you've

[18:37] currently shown the RV dump, but I don't

[18:39] know. I think with with sewer lines in

[18:41] there and and I don't know if that makes

[18:43] it easier for the turning radius of of

[18:46] people cuz people will naturally get off

[18:48] the freeway

[18:49] and they'll want to turn in immediately

[18:51] right off of Summer Ridge Parkway. And

[18:54] right now they have to kind of either do

[18:55] a weird U-turn or go up around your new

[18:58] gas pump or go around the store

[19:00] altogether or

[19:02] once they they they know about it, they

[19:04] might have to even go down to um South

[19:07] Ridge Farms Road and go up and enter in

[19:09] the other way, but I don't know. I'm

[19:10] just

[19:11] uh posing the idea because as we looked

[19:13] at the turning radius of of your site

[19:16] and people with long trailers going in

[19:18] there, we were just trying to to

[19:20] envision how that was going to work with people trying to turn their

[19:23] trailers around so they can get their vehicle situated on the right side

[19:28] uh for the RV dump. So, I don't know.

[19:32] I'll just throw that out there since you

[19:33] were talking about sewer uh up by the by

[19:35] the car wash. I don't know if maybe

[19:37] there's some consideration there to make

[19:39] your site flow a little bit bit better

[19:40] for the RV dump purposes.

[19:42] >> Yeah, we can look to optimize that a

[19:44] little better. Um one of the challenges

[19:46] is, you know, as we get RVs coming in

[19:49] and if we get our tanker coming in at

[19:50] the same time is just trying to manage

[19:52] all of that at the same spot. We we'd

[19:54] like to keep those people that are

[19:56] dumping kind of out of the way so that

[19:58] they're not

[19:58] >> Well, that's the thing is is but we can

[20:00] look at

[20:00] >> There's nothing that you have that's

[20:01] against requirements. It's just if you

[20:04] know,

[20:05] now why we can catch it and maybe look

[20:07] at at a more efficient

[20:09] uh orientation of things.

[20:12] >> Yeah, I don't I don't see a problem. We

[20:13] could probably look at pushing it

[20:15] further to the northeast or northwest up

[20:18] where that almost where that yellow

[20:20] truck, you know, the the turning

[20:21] template stops. Probably a little

[20:22] further up so that people can get out of

[20:24] those lanes.

[20:25] But if we could shift uh some of that

[20:28] parking as long as it's not against any

[20:29] other city regulations, we could open

[20:32] that up a little bit and and and

[20:34] relocate it to a more suitable spot.

[20:36] >> Well, obviously you guys already have a

[20:37] Maverick here in town uh on our main

[20:39] street and change. It's really busy.

[20:41] Holiday weekends, I think we've all seen

[20:42] and experienced the people with their

[20:45] camp trailers, boats, you know,

[20:47] uh

[20:49] trailers with with other recreational

[20:51] vehicles on it. They they park wherever

[20:52] they can.

[20:54] I think naturally people in with those

[20:57] types of vehicles and trailers are going

[20:58] to want to park in that southeast

[21:01] corner.

[21:02] >> Yeah.

[21:02] >> And so, it's going to kind of just get

[21:03] all kind of a messed up down there and

[21:06] you know, they're going to box each

[21:08] other in. People are going to be trying

[21:09] to get to the RV dump and and your your

[21:11] gas

[21:12] uh

[21:14] you know,

[21:15] tanker will will be in there trying to to do his his thing. So,

[21:20] just something to throw out there. Like

[21:21] I say, nothing against our our code, but

[21:24] uh

[21:24] we want to make sure this site works

[21:26] definitely best for you and and for the people that will use it.

[21:29] >> We'll We'll take a look at it and see if

[21:30] there's a better spot to to kind of take

[21:32] that into consideration.

[21:34] >> Yeah.

[21:35] >> No other

[21:36] Yeah, we'll get to that. We'll

[21:38] um

[21:40] Mike, do you have anything with police?

[21:44] >> In general, no.

[21:45] >> All right.

[21:46] >> No, we don't. Um as far as that, I I

[21:48] don't really know if there is a better

[21:50] location. I get what you're saying, but

[21:52] if you put it, like you're saying, more

[21:54] north,

[21:55] you're going to jam up the trailers

[21:56] trying to get out of those pumping

[21:57] [clears throat]

[21:58] lanes, so.

[22:00] >> And my only thought was if we could

[22:01] maybe push that landscape area, open

[22:04] that drive aisle up a little more so you

[22:05] could have three vehicles. You know, one

[22:08] could be dumping and then you'd have

[22:10] the lane's big enough for two to pass.

[22:12] You know, maybe 30, 40 ft should be

[22:14] sufficient. Maybe we go 50,

[22:17] even wider. We just would cut down some

[22:19] of that landscape buffer or that

[22:21] landscape area to open up that drive

[22:23] aisle. That that may be good enough, but

[22:24] we'll look at those templates and see if

[22:26] there's a an option to to make it

[22:28] better.

[22:29] >> Just know that you can't cut that

[22:30] landscaping buffer too much cuz I think

[22:32] you need 5 ft in between

[22:34] for the

[22:35] >> 5 ft from the property line.

[22:36] >> From the property line, so.

[22:37] >> But I'm thinking to the south on where

[22:39] the parking stalls are.

[22:41] Uh I'll show you.

[22:47] » If we just cut into that, it looks like

[22:49] it's detention or retention or something

[22:50] there.

[22:51] >> Correct.

[22:52] >> You can't read that dimension, but open

[22:53] that up.

[22:54] >> Yeah.

[22:55] >> Then the RV can park here, and then as

[22:57] long as this one could swing and you

[22:58] could get two vehicles plus one parking

[23:02] That may give us the best place, but we

[23:03] can

[23:04] >> And I think that's the point is just to

[23:06] maybe think about that

[23:07] to to see if there's a way to design

[23:10] that cuz as we looked at this the sheet

[23:12] right here

[23:14] we were we were a little concerned that

[23:15] there might be some turning radius

[23:17] issues and it might just be

[23:19] kind of create a difficult situation for

[23:22] your site for your future business.

[23:26] >> Say RV dumpsters are used. There's a lot

[23:29] of campers are making their way through

[23:30] so I'm sure you see that with the one on

[23:33] Main Street so.

[23:36] » Okay,

[23:37] anything else Mike?

[23:40] » No, my only other question is I know we

[23:43] have regulations but is there a reason

[23:46] we can't open up that one along Summer

[23:48] Ridge Parkway wider and number one then

[23:50] you take away that radius trying to turn

[23:52] in there.

[23:54] >> They they already have a lot wider than

[23:55] what it is now.

[23:56] >> understand that but can we not even go

[23:58] wide like kind of like we did with the

[23:59] holiday down there?

[24:00] >> You're on Main. Correct. Yep. That's

[24:01] what we were talking that's why I was

[24:02] talking about earlier.

[24:03] >> is our process for

[24:04] >> And maybe you don't want to do that. I

[24:05] don't know.

[24:05] >> No, we like bigger.

[24:06] >> Well, me too.

[24:07] >> Bigger's better.

[24:08] >> You and me both but some some people

[24:10] don't

[24:10] >> you need space.

[24:14] » Yeah.

[24:15] >> Doesn't turn as sharp as this this

[24:17] drawing makes it look like.

[24:18] >> Well, that's if they follow that radius

[24:20] but anyway so

[24:23] we've we've kind of mirrored our our

[24:26] widths of drive approaches similar to

[24:28] what you got does.

[24:30] Um you got typically they say you're 30

[24:34] ft wide

[24:35] unless

[24:36] they I mean they don't even

[24:38] it's more difficult even to get much

[24:41] wider than 30 ft through you got unless

[24:43] you're saying I've got large format a

[24:45] lot of large format vehicles going into

[24:47] there. So

[24:49] um 50 ft wide that's kind of how we've

[24:52] mirrored things how we've how we've

[24:54] approached things. You start getting

[24:56] much more in that, people don't

[24:58] people start

[25:00] cutting corners more and more as they

[25:03] start to enter in. So,

[25:05] um again, 50 ft is our current maximum

[25:08] that we allow for drive approaches.

[25:10] >> What about the radius? Can we open the

[25:12] rate I mean, keep the throat at 50, but

[25:14] if you open that radius, so it's

[25:16] a bigger radius, then it allows those

[25:18] trucks to turn.

[25:19] >> If you want to add more to the flared

[25:21] end to wing that out a little bit

[25:23] further,

[25:24] >> And on the inside, could we open that

[25:26] radius up as well?

[25:28] >> You say open up the

[25:30] this radius here?

[25:31] >> Yeah, so as a as a truck's turning in,

[25:33] if they're towing.

[25:34] >> I don't There's no concern or anything

[25:36] on our side of things that would

[25:40] that says it has to be a 26-ft radius on

[25:43] that one. If you want to widen that out,

[25:46] there's nothing no There's no

[25:48] regulations on our side that would come

[25:50] with that.

[25:55] Oh, we might come in up real quick.

[25:57] Sorry. Just so

[25:58] >> Yeah, let let him talk. He's the

[26:00] engineer.

[26:00] >> [laughter]

[26:01] >> I'm just a real estate guy.

[26:04] >> Hey, sorry. I was

[26:04] >> No, you're good.

[26:07] >> We want to have that be about 60 ft

[26:09] wide.

[26:10] >> This width here?

[26:11] >> Yeah, that one up there.

[26:12] If we can at all. It is a little bit

[26:14] tight. Right now, it's only 50.

[26:17] >> And again, our code currently, as it

[26:19] sits, only allows up to 50-ft wide.

[26:23] >> Okay.

[26:23] >> It is what our is our current If we if

[26:26] that wanted to be proposed to be

[26:28] changed, which I think we just changed

[26:29] it a year ago.

[26:31] >> Yeah, it was a change on

[26:31] >> So, with the the Holiday Oil to that 50-ft wide, and that was to

[26:36] accommodate for um

[26:38] to and that's where we had the

[26:40] conversation with you, Todd, and cuz it

[26:42] was it was a Holiday Oil down here on

[26:44] Main Street.

[26:44] >> Okay.

[26:45] >> Um

[26:47] uh again, it can be discussed to have it

[26:50] wider, or we can look at ways to

[26:54] you know, put a little bit more wider

[26:55] concrete apron there.

[26:58] Right through here to help accommodate trucks along there.

[27:02] So

[27:02] >> we can't really

[27:04] put a radius on that concrete apron cuz

[27:06] we're we are close to the our property

[27:08] line we don't want

[27:08] >> Right here. Yeah.

[27:09] >> encroach into the next person's

[27:11] property.

[27:12] >> Yeah, on the south side of that there's

[27:13] a PI meter, too.

[27:14] >> There is there is a bunch of utilities

[27:16] [clears throat] there on that right

[27:18] there, but

[27:19] >> I don't know if we want to preserve them

[27:21] there or relocate them, but we do have a

[27:23] we have a PI meter and we have

[27:27] just a couple telecommunications boxes

[27:29] there, too, that would need to be moved.

[27:30] >> Yeah, relocated, but

[27:32] >> So, yeah, so currently as our code says

[27:35] 50-ft wide is the max. If we wanted to

[27:38] look at making that wider per our code,

[27:41] that would be a code amendment that

[27:42] would need to be done

[27:43] >> Okay.

[27:43] >> as as a part of that. So, if that's the

[27:45] direction you'd like to go, we can we

[27:47] can help facilitate that.

[27:48] Um but right now 50 that's that's our

[27:51] max width.

[27:52] >> And then as far as like the the RV dump

[27:54] goes

[27:56] and trying to cut into our landscaping

[27:59] and that landscaping is pretty pretty

[28:01] special. It's for storm drain and

[28:04] retention and

[28:05] >> Right. Right. Right.

[28:05] >> stuff like that. So, if we rob Peter to

[28:07] pay Paul, that's probably not going to

[28:09] work.

[28:09] >> Oh, I I get that. You'd have to you'd

[28:11] have to redesign and figure out where else to put that. I'm just saying

[28:15] uh

[28:16] there there might be some it might be

[28:17] worthwhile to you to to think about that

[28:20] just because, you know, we have this

[28:22] problem all the time. You know,

[28:23] Santaquin has a lot of large vehicle

[28:26] large trailers and so

[28:28] uh we just think about those sorts of

[28:30] things and and the way you've got it

[28:31] designed right now probably could work,

[28:33] but they're probably pose some

[28:34] challenges for people with with those

[28:36] longer vehicles. I mean, we were talking

[28:37] about maybe there's some sort of like

[28:40] asphalt striping or parking cuz like I

[28:42] say those those

[28:44] vehicles with trailers are naturally

[28:45] going to to park over there cuz there's

[28:47] nowhere else for their vehicles to fit.

[28:49] So, if they're parked over there and

[28:51] they're just

[28:52] kind of parking however they,

[28:54] you know, naturally park, is it going to

[28:56] be kind of a mess there of of trailers

[28:58] that are trying to maneuver around each

[29:00] other and then you got an RV dump there

[29:02] people trying to get to that. Uh

[29:04] just like I say,

[29:06] nothing that you have right there on

[29:07] that that topic is against code and you

[29:10] could get approved that way, but

[29:13] it might be worthwhile looking at just

[29:14] so that

[29:15] um

[29:16] you know, you're you're not going to

[29:17] hurt your business in the future with kind of a mess of trailers and

[29:21] stuff that are trying to move around

[29:22] each other.

[29:22] >> Okay.

[29:23] What if it was along that landscape

[29:25] strip along the front of each road over

[29:27] there?

[29:29] >> So, sorry, what's that, Randy?

[29:31] >> Along the front of each road heading

[29:32] towards town.

[29:34] No, go back. Yeah, right up from there

[29:36] along that heading north along there.

[29:38] >> Yeah.

[29:40] If you put it put it on that side right

[29:42] there and that way the RVs can can line

[29:45] up over there. I don't know what the

[29:46] solution is. I'm just spitballing ideas

[29:48] out there, but but uh it might be

[29:50] something worth looking at.

[29:52] >> Okay.

[29:53] And again, as Jason said, these are more

[29:55] suggestions.

[29:56] >> Right.

[29:56] >> If there's

[29:58] um there's nothing specifically in our

[30:00] code that says

[30:02] you have to put those large format

[30:03] parking stalls or

[30:05] along those lines. They're just things

[30:07] that we've

[30:08] um experienced with with similar

[30:12] uh facilities here. So.

[30:13] >> And then as far as the RV

[30:16] dump connection, there is a stub out

[30:19] um from a previous design when they were planning on expanding, but

[30:24] there is a stub

[30:25] just uh north yeah, just north

[30:27] >> Correct.

[30:28] >> going to put a manhole on that stub and

[30:30] then get the 4-in

[30:32] uh sewer

[30:33] lateral from the RV dump over to there.

[30:36] That makes

[30:37] a lot of sense, but if we need to move

[30:38] that, we can look at

[30:41] some other way to utilize that or

[30:43] abandon that that uh stub out.

[30:45] >> Yep.

[30:47] Yeah, cuz there is an existing 2-in

[30:49] that comes off of our of the 8-in that

[30:52] loops around the building. There is a

[30:53] 2-in stub line there that you could

[30:56] that could potentially be connected to,

[30:58] but again, you'd have to do a meter or

[31:00] something there to set that. So.

[31:06] K.

[31:07] Alan,

[31:08] do you have anything?

[31:09] >> Uh we had nothing from the fire

[31:11] department.

[31:12] >> K.

[31:13] Jason, do you have anything else?

[31:15] >> Uh maybe just a note and again, I don't

[31:17] think this is a requirement. Um

[31:19] right now the existing site has

[31:21] connectivity to the the property next

[31:23] door. You're looking to take that

[31:24] connectivity out. Uh I I think we always

[31:27] like to see that connectivity and and uh

[31:29] with, you know, future property

[31:32] you don't have to keep that, but that is

[31:34] something that we would encourage so

[31:35] that as future development happens,

[31:37] there's there's good internal

[31:39] connectivity and people aren't having to

[31:40] go out and into the the the public

[31:42] right-of-way in order to get to the

[31:44] neighboring property. Again,

[31:46] that might conflict with where your RV

[31:48] dump is. Uh

[31:50] something to think about, but but

[31:52] we we like to see connectivity and that

[31:54] helps a lot with with uh

[31:56] you know, as as this area de- develops,

[31:59] um

[32:00] you know,

[32:01] that connectivity is important to to get

[32:02] people around where they they want to

[32:04] go.

[32:04] >> K.

[32:07] Um we'll go through any comments that

[32:11] we haven't real quick, we haven't

[32:13] discussed. Um

[32:16] we already talked about addressing.

[32:22] Uh talked about that one.

[32:24] Um

[32:26] >> Oh, hey John, and maybe while you're

[32:28] going to the next page. So,

[32:31] it's kind of kind of hard to see and I

[32:32] think everybody maybe sees it now, but

[32:34] you're taking the drive-thru out

[32:35] completely cuz you usually have like a

[32:37] Is it Bonfire pizza that goes in

[32:39] Mavericks?

[32:40] >> Yeah.

[32:41] so we have a like a proprietary

[32:45] food service program inside our stores.

[32:48] But the drive-thru, because of the way

[32:50] our buildings are set up, and I'd have

[32:51] to I'm not sure on the design, but yeah,

[32:53] I don't we don't like the drive-thrus.

[32:56] >> Okay, so they're removing the drive-thru

[32:58] on the back, putting parking stalls, the

[32:59] dumpster enclosure, and then there Is

[33:01] Are you going to expand the building

[33:04] where the drive-thru was? Or is it just

[33:05] going to be

[33:06] >> Just close it off. We're not expanding

[33:08] the building.

[33:08] >> Are you putting landscaping in there or

[33:10] is that

[33:10] >> The footprint stays the same. They are

[33:12] putting landscaping along the side.

[33:15] >> Okay.

[33:15] >> Where the drive-thru is at currently.

[33:18] >> Okay. I I think that was just a

[33:21] point that

[33:22] would be helpful to point out.

[33:25] >> Okay. Um

[33:36] I think you'll like the new offerings.

[33:38] I hope so.

[33:40] We're gambling on it.

[33:41] >> Sourdough is one of a kind.

[33:47] » What would What's the process to work

[33:49] through a development plan to kind of a

[33:51] staging or a phasing plan of of

[33:53] construction?

[33:55] Is it just we would submit a phasing

[33:57] plan with our building permits and talk

[33:59] through that or is it something we could

[34:00] discuss here or should we discuss

[34:02] >> be good to include

[34:05] um

[34:06] your proposed uh

[34:08] um

[34:11] uh as a

[34:12] um it'd probably be good to include that

[34:15] your proposed phasing with the site plan

[34:17] application. Cuz that What that does is

[34:21] when it comes to So, I'm assuming you're

[34:23] going to be closing the build the

[34:24] business the building down for as you

[34:26] said for 30

[34:27] >> We hope it's 30 days. That would be It

[34:30] takes us about 30 days to remodel a

[34:32] store like this, but we think that

[34:34] adding the tank and the high flow lanes

[34:37] will take or the RV lanes will take

[34:38] about 90 days with everything that's

[34:40] involved there. So,

[34:42] we we want to we'd like to get the store

[34:44] up and as quick as we could.

[34:46] Um

[34:46] >> Yeah, probably it would be good to

[34:48] submit a sheet showing your proposed

[34:50] phasing.

[34:51] >> Okay.

[34:51] >> Um and and one that allows that makes it

[34:55] so it's clear to everyone from building

[34:56] site plan so that we know what's

[35:00] installed, what needs to be installed

[35:01] prior to the C of O being being issued.

[35:04] >> Yeah.

[35:04] >> If if I there's not other phasing

[35:07] related to that, then

[35:09] um that's something we'd have to look through. Typically, site plans

[35:13] aren't phased.

[35:15] So, we'd have to

[35:16] >> Right.

[35:16] >> look at see how that fits within our

[35:18] code and how we can logistically make

[35:21] that work. Um

[35:23] but that's that's something that you

[35:25] guys would propose and we could look through it.

[35:27] >> Okay.

[35:27] >> And but that would be uh part of the DRC

[35:31] review

[35:32] >> Okay.

[35:32] >> um on that side of things. So,

[35:34] >> to come back to DRC with that phasing

[35:36] plan.

[35:37] >> Yeah.

[35:37] >> Well, I I'm trying to think about that

[35:39] cuz you're right, John. Usually, site

[35:40] plans we don't have phasing that

[35:42] happens. Uh I think it'd be good for us

[35:44] to see, but I mean if if they weren't

[35:46] planning to shut down the business, I

[35:48] mean well, it's it's already occupied.

[35:51] >> Correct. But, because of the changes

[35:53] they want to do with it, a building

[35:54] permit's going to be needed. And so, a

[35:56] new C of O is issued with a new building

[35:58] permit.

[35:59] >> Okay.

[35:59] >> And any modifications and so, that's

[36:01] where that kind of comes into to play.

[36:04] >> guess what I'm getting at is is that

[36:05] something that that we could look at

[36:07] kind of internally or is that something

[36:09] we need to have come back to a formal

[36:10] DRC?

[36:11] >> I would pro My initial thought is it had

[36:15] to come back to the DRC, but uh I

[36:17] haven't thought through that and

[36:20] specifically looked at our code to

[36:21] confirm that.

[36:22] >> Yeah.

[36:22] >> And we've given you a lot of suggestions

[36:23] and I know when talking with Brad Giles,

[36:25] he's he's uh

[36:27] you know, would like to see this this

[36:28] move forward for obvious reasons, but uh

[36:32] again, a lot of suggestions, no no

[36:34] requirements, but uh I think it's

[36:36] worthwhile your

[36:37] for you to look at at these things and get it done right rather than just

[36:42] rushing to get something uh

[36:44] modified and and renovated.

[36:46] >> Yeah.

[36:47] >> Oh, yeah, we want to make sure it's done

[36:49] right. Right.

[36:50] >> It look like to me you you're going to

[36:51] need the um demo permit for the

[36:55] car wash.

[36:56] >> Yeah.

[36:56] >> And then a building permit for the

[36:58] revisions and the adapt ability of the

[37:01] store itself. And then we could do the

[37:04] island and the pumps out there as a as a

[37:06] separate permit.

[37:07] >> As a third permit?

[37:08] >> Yeah, that way you can get a C of O on

[37:10] the building without that other part

[37:11] being finished.

[37:13] >> Yeah. That would just kind of sound of

[37:14] what site improvements are needed

[37:17] for the modifications to the building to

[37:21] so that

[37:22] basically, cuz our code does you have to

[37:25] have, you know, landscaping and all that

[37:27] kind of stuff installed related to it.

[37:29] Um and that way it at least give us

[37:32] the ability to make sure that if a

[37:34] phasing plan is proposed, that we're

[37:36] doing according to our code requires.

[37:38] And so,

[37:39] um along that side.

[37:41] >> So, just so I'm clear, we get a couple

[37:43] of options. One would be a phasing plan,

[37:44] which would probably come back to DRC.

[37:47] Uh

[37:48] >> Correct.

[37:48] >> Other option would be three separate

[37:50] permits, a demo permit, a remodel

[37:52] permit, and then

[37:54] the additional items.

[37:55] >> So, site plan would be different than

[37:57] building permit because the building

[37:58] permit is after the site plan's

[38:00] approved.

[38:01] >> Yes.

[38:01] >> And so, site plan with a phasing,

[38:04] potential phasing,

[38:06] could be done, but then after that is

[38:08] when you pull the building permit.

[38:09] >> Perfect.

[38:09] >> You can submit a building permit, and a

[38:12] demolition demolition permit could

[38:13] probably go on at any point.

[38:15] >> We could start building permit now with

[38:18] a demo permit. Get that stuff going as

[38:20] well. We'd probably

[38:22] >> just know

[38:22] >> that the building permit's not going to

[38:24] be issued until the site plan is

[38:26] approved.

[38:26] >> Got you.

[38:27] >> And we've got that taken care of. I

[38:28] mean, that would save you a couple

[38:29] weeks.

[38:30] >> Why would you need phasing of the site

[38:32] plan?

[38:33] >> That's And that's what I'm trying to

[38:34] work out my head is this isn't like a

[38:35] subdivision phasing where

[38:37] >> Well, every site plan

[38:39] if like we'll take the most recent one

[38:43] here, the

[38:44] uh Taco Bell that was just just

[38:46] approved. There's landscaping related to

[38:49] that site that has to be installed or

[38:52] bonded for prior to a C of O being

[38:54] issued on the commercial site plan.

[38:56] Homes and stuff, residential, no, we

[38:58] can't hold up a C of O on those.

[39:00] >> Right. But how our current code's

[39:01] written that if all the site plan

[39:04] improvements including landscaping are

[39:06] not installed, a C of O isn't issued on

[39:08] the building.

[39:08] >> Is there There's no landscaping out

[39:10] around those islands over there though,

[39:11] is there?

[39:12] >> There's still landscaping related to the

[39:14] whole site.

[39:15] >> All around the perimeter there.

[39:16] >> Correct.

[39:17] >> Could we get a temporary CO?

[39:19] >> We don't do

[39:20] >> temporary COs.

[39:22] So

[39:23] >> So I think

[39:24] >> This isn't

[39:25] >> I think that some of these discussions

[39:27] may be good

[39:29] not in DRC cuz there's some code

[39:30] references that we have to figure out

[39:32] and determine on that. I know we want to

[39:35] and say in

[39:38] There there's because of that cuz right

[39:39] now we hadn't contemplated a phasing

[39:42] related to the site.

[39:44] >> Well, maybe the answer to you, Brad, is

[39:47] there's things that you can be working

[39:48] on if this gets tabled

[39:50] >> for 2 weeks.

[39:50] >> We can just keep going with plans.

[39:52] >> You can start to work on a demo permit,

[39:54] things like that. Uh

[39:55] but uh

[39:57] yeah, this is like I say, this is just a

[39:59] unique situation that we have an

[40:00] existing existing site with with almost

[40:02] all of the the improvements that are

[40:04] already in and

[40:07] yeah.

[40:07] >> Yeah, and we just want to make sure we

[40:08] get you what you need so we can

[40:10] >> Right. Right.

[40:11] >> keep moving, but it sounds like we've

[40:12] got some work we can continue and then

[40:14] get a phasing plan together or work

[40:16] through how does this work with with you

[40:18] all and then bring it back to DRC if we

[40:21] need to or cuz there may be some

[40:23] landscaping just because of the nature

[40:25] of construction we want to hold off on.

[40:28] That may be kind of hard to define at

[40:29] this point. But say, you know, I'm I'm

[40:31] just thinking of the con-

[40:33] It's so hard to I need a I need a laser

[40:35] pointer.

[40:35] >> [laughter]

[40:36] >> Are you guys okay if I walk up there?

[40:38] >> You're fine.

[40:38] >> Just just thinking through how

[40:40] construction's going to work on this.

[40:42] We want to get kind of this portion

[40:46] open.

[40:48] Our drive aisle comes in through here,

[40:49] the existing one. We want to keep that

[40:52] open and then 30 days get this store

[40:54] back up and running as quick as

[40:55] possible.

[40:56] And then we would work on this kind of

[40:57] this area right through here would be

[40:59] the second phase. It would start at the

[41:01] same time. It'll just lag because it's

[41:03] going to take us 60 additional days

[41:05] about.

[41:06] But there may be some stuff up here that

[41:08] we just don't want to finish because

[41:09] someone may drive over it or there's

[41:11] going to be some asphalt work that's

[41:12] going to have to be tied in and then

[41:14] down through here where we're putting in

[41:15] a new

[41:16] access point. We're going to have to

[41:18] figure out how do we tie all this PC in?

[41:21] There's just some some weird things that

[41:22] happen during that construction phase.

[41:24] And so

[41:25] we just want to make sure that that

[41:27] we're open with with the city so you

[41:28] know what to expect

[41:30] we don't run into issues during

[41:31] construction. But really the idea is we

[41:34] want to get this store back up open,

[41:36] shut it down for a short period of time,

[41:38] get it up and running as quick as

[41:40] possible and then fix the rest of it as

[41:42] we're

[41:43] >> And I think it really just comes down to

[41:44] making sure that is documented so that everyone understands on that side

[41:50] of things cuz um

[41:52] again, how our you say how our current

[41:55] code is

[41:56] um those are items that that we need

[41:58] clarification on and making sure we're

[42:00] not we're cuz we can't deviate from what

[42:03] our code requires.

[42:04] >> Understand. We'll we'll go back and I'll

[42:05] talk with the team and say is it best to

[42:07] do a phasing plan? Is it best

[42:09] it three oh permits? How do we work

[42:12] through this and then we can

[42:13] >> Cuz really what you're talking about is

[42:15] construction phase.

[42:16] >> Yeah.

[42:16] >> It's not necessarily phasing at the

[42:17] site. I mean, there's already a a second

[42:20] undone phase of the site and you're you

[42:22] have a CFO. So, we'll we'll talk

[42:24] internally. I don't think it's a big

[42:25] deal

[42:26] >> Perfect.

[42:26] >> to wait 2 weeks cuz there's some things

[42:27] that you can be working on. Like I said,

[42:28] >> working on design.

[42:29] >> I would just stress some of those

[42:30] suggestions we looked at. We we want

[42:32] your business to be successful as well.

[42:34] Be thinking about if there's there's

[42:36] things you can optimize the the turning

[42:38] radius of these larger vehicles and and

[42:41] I I think it it'll it'll be you know, it

[42:45] won't be that that that much of a delay

[42:46] for you.

[42:47] >> Perfect.

[42:49] Okay, um we'll go through some of these

[42:51] just real quick. We've already talked

[42:53] about those.

[43:01] I believe that was it.

[43:04] The landscaping comments we've already

[43:06] discussed.

[43:13] Let's see. Yep, already mentioned that.

[43:15] That's

[43:18] Okay.

[43:19] And that's just a note basically

[43:22] referencing what Jason mentioned about

[43:23] ARC.

[43:24] >> Making sure that we get that

[43:26] >> I guess

[43:26] >> scheduled.

[43:27] >> To address that, if you're not doing

[43:28] much to the building and you're just

[43:29] changing the sign, there's no ARC

[43:31] pre-approval that needs to happen. But

[43:32] if you're going to do anything more to

[43:35] change the building, then you'll need to

[43:36] submit something and we'll need to look

[43:37] at that.

[43:38] >> working on some architectural. We'll

[43:39] probably paint, pull out. There's some

[43:41] dental molding at the top we may pull

[43:43] off.

[43:43] >> Okay.

[43:43] >> Change the canopy, that type of stuff.

[43:45] >> Like like with the last applicant, just

[43:47] give me the the renderings, the the

[43:49] elevations and stuff like that and we'll

[43:50] we can we can do an ARC meeting as

[43:52] needed to

[43:53] >> And that's just we just schedule that

[43:54] with you.

[43:54] >> Yep, and that's anytime. You don't have

[43:55] to wait for site plan approval or

[43:57] anything else. You can do that anytime

[43:58] you want.

[43:58] >> Awesome. Thank you.

[44:03] Okay,

[44:04] um I believe that's it. Anything any

[44:06] other comments or questions?

[44:10] Seeing none, I would I would look for a

[44:12] motion

[44:13] on on this application.

[44:18] Again,

[44:19] our options are to table with until

[44:21] redline comments are addressed, approved

[44:23] with conditions, or approved. So,

[44:28] » John, I'll make a motion that we

[44:30] table this until the phasing plan and

[44:33] the redline issues have been addressed,

[44:36] and then we can move forward with a

[44:38] potential site plan.

[44:39] >> Okay.

[44:40] Motion to table.

[44:42] Any Is there a second?

[44:45] >> Second.

[44:45] >> Seconded by Randy.

[44:47] Uh

[44:48] any discussion on the motion?

[44:51] Seeing none, we'll go to vote. All in

[44:52] favor, please say aye.

[44:53] >> Aye.

[44:54] >> Any opposed?

[44:55] Okay.

[44:56] We'll get these comments over to you.

[44:58] We'll get them sent over, and then um we

[45:01] can coordinate about uh

[45:03] items to help move it forward. So,

[45:06] Okay.

[45:07] Um the next item on the agenda

[45:12] is a review of the Heritage Circle

[45:14] subdivision.

[45:16] This is the a second review of this.

[45:18] is a preliminary application uh for

[45:20] proposed six-lot subdivision

[45:23] uh located at the corner of 100 North

[45:25] and 100 West.

[45:27] Um this application it was tabled a few

[45:30] months ago. Um

[45:32] a deferral agreement was approved by the

[45:35] city council

[45:36] to defer the subdivision improvements

[45:39] along 100 North and 100 East um related

[45:44] to to the site. So, the app the plans

[45:47] are not including installing those

[45:49] sidewalks and the roadway improvements

[45:51] along those two frontages.

[45:54] The improvements inside and for the

[45:57] cul-de-sac interior are going are to be

[46:00] installed

[46:01] um as a part of that deferral agreement.

[46:04] And so

[46:05] Um

[46:06] with that we'll go around well

[46:09] a couple of

[46:11] I'll address a couple items real quick

[46:12] before we go around the DRC. One there

[46:15] are some there is some information not

[46:18] included on here that is needed for

[46:19] preliminary application.

[46:21] That includes plan profiles for

[46:25] the sewer as it extends out of the site.

[46:29] Um

[46:30] And so that that's missing. Um

[46:34] elevations for the the proposed curb and

[46:38] gutter

[46:39] are missing in relationship to that. And

[46:42] so there's there's some some significant

[46:44] items that are missing that need to be

[46:47] provided with the plans for it to to

[46:49] move forward. And so my recommendation

[46:52] would be to table once other redlines

[46:54] are addressed. But I do want to go

[46:56] through the DRC to give you guys an

[46:58] opportunity to make any other additional

[47:01] comments or

[47:02] items on this. So

[47:04] starting with Aspen.

[47:06] >> Just a reminder with the frontage for

[47:09] lot two and five they are not 80 feet

[47:13] which is the R8 zone requirement. They

[47:16] could apply for infill reduction that

[47:18] would require planning commission

[47:20] approval.

[47:22] And then

[47:23] just another repeat comment about the

[47:25] double frontage. That either needs to be

[47:28] a no or we recommend installing a fence

[47:33] so that

[47:34] they don't create driveways from both

[47:36] sides.

[47:38] >> There would be limited access for these

[47:40] three lots off of 100 West. They'd have

[47:43] to have access off the cul-de-sac.

[47:46] >> Yeah.

[47:48] I think that's everything from planning.

[47:50] >> Okay.

[47:51] Randy building?

[47:53] >> I don't have anything at this point so

[47:55] for preliminary.

[47:56] >> Okay.

[47:57] Jason?

[47:59] >> No questions.

[47:59] >> No, just what we talked about in the red

[48:01] lines yesterday. I think we'll go

[48:02] through those.

[48:03] >> Mhm. Yep.

[48:06] >> Mike?

[48:07] >> We've got nothing.

[48:08] >> Alan?

[48:09] >> Nothing from the fire department.

[48:12] >> Jason?

[48:13] >> Just like Jason, let's let's go through

[48:14] the red lines.

[48:16] >> Okay.

[48:18] Um say already mentioned that, provide

[48:21] the plan and profile

[48:23] for the site subdivision.

[48:26] Ashton's already talked about these.

[48:28] Um

[48:30] when it comes to

[48:32] uh storm drain

[48:34] um

[48:36] currently as the proposed site shows,

[48:38] they've got a

[48:40] uh 12-in pipe that runs back from the

[48:43] cul-de-sac into the northeast corner of lot four. Um

[48:50] that's not that's problematic on a on a

[48:53] few different items. Um one, when it

[48:55] comes to overall maintenance of

[48:57] the

[48:59] uh

[48:59] storm drain facilities, access to the to

[49:02] the site. Um cuz right now as it's

[49:05] showed, it is it's an easement

[49:07] on on that existing property owner. So,

[49:10] the future owner of property owner of

[49:12] lot four

[49:13] um

[49:15] would be limited on what they could do

[49:17] for that site. Also comes down to

[49:19] overall maintenance of of that

[49:23] on um on our guys if they need to get in

[49:25] there to take care of that if there's an issue and so

[49:29] um do recognize that they're well

[49:33] currently there's not a specific

[49:35] easement

[49:37] for um

[49:39] for the storm drain pipe that's shown

[49:41] through there. Um also for the sanitary

[49:44] sewers that makes its way to the to the

[49:47] from the cul-de-sac to the northeast.

[49:50] Um

[49:51] there are those are not

[49:55] the city's facilities for storm drain

[49:57] and sewer

[49:58] don't qualify for a public utility

[50:00] easement. They are public utility

[50:03] easements are strictly for uh

[50:05] private utilities. I don't know why they

[50:08] call it public utility when it's

[50:10] private utilities that that use it such

[50:12] as Dominion Energy Sorry, Enbridge.

[50:15] Um Rockingham Power, communications,

[50:18] those type of

[50:19] facilities are only allowed to use

[50:21] those. So, separate easements for those

[50:24] two facilities would need to be provided

[50:26] on there.

[50:28] Um

[50:30] >> And maybe on that, we we talked about

[50:32] this when we're brainstorming of ways

[50:34] cuz that's kind of a weird place to have

[50:36] it uh in someone's lot. Would it be

[50:38] fenced? That sort of a thing. A an idea

[50:41] that that we thought of was

[50:43] you have that snow storage easement

[50:45] already. Is there something that you can

[50:46] do to put infiltration galleries in that

[50:49] easement? And And maybe

[50:51] you know, closer to the right-of-way

[50:53] like like a lot of infiltration

[50:54] galleries will be done. Uh just again

[50:58] throwing out ideas of of ways to to

[50:59] maybe avoid having a pond

[51:02] uh

[51:03] you know, in someone's lot that's that's

[51:04] a pretty decent size.

[51:07] >> There are We have in some other

[51:08] locations um have used the There is a

[51:12] distance requirement needed between any

[51:14] infiltration gallery and the curb and

[51:16] gutter. There needs to be a 5-ft

[51:19] separation between those two.

[51:21] But um

[51:22] to do a you know, an infiltration

[51:24] gallery in this corner or split between

[51:27] these two lots

[51:28] could be an option that could be done.

[51:30] And so, it's something that can that can

[51:33] be worked out through there. So,

[51:36] um

[51:37] >> [clears throat]

[51:37] >> That would be a lot easier to maintain.

[51:39] >> Yeah.

[51:40] >> Jared, you got anything?

[51:41] Do you mind saying your name for the

[51:43] record?

[51:44] >> Jared West, Atlas Engineering. Um

[51:47] the the problem is is the space we're

[51:50] already limited on the frontages as

[51:53] we've talked about for the galleries.

[51:55] And you do look at the pond and then to

[51:58] when you do the infiltration

[52:01] the storm tech chambers or whatever,

[52:02] they actually take up more room than the

[52:04] pond.

[52:06] And the And then also that's a down

[52:07] sloping cul-de-sac to the north. It

[52:10] falls about 5 6 ft. And so if those

[52:13] chambers fell, the thought was

[52:15] is that

[52:17] it'll go to that storm drain box or to

[52:19] the pond which could be accessed from

[52:23] that street 100 West. So as far as

[52:27] maintenance and stuff, I don't see the issue. We could dedicate

[52:32] that to the city if they wanted.

[52:34] Or we could put a note on there that it

[52:36] has to be opened or the pond a fence on

[52:39] the

[52:40] uh what west side of that pond or

[52:42] something. So they could access. I think

[52:45] it's really accessible. And then if that

[52:48] pond fell, then it would do what you

[52:50] know, then it's in the street not in

[52:52] somebody's lot.

[52:53] >> Mhm.

[52:54] >> So that that was kind of the thought

[52:56] with

[52:57] what we did there.

[52:58] >> Okay.

[53:00] And so yeah, it does

[53:02] it Um so for this option again,

[53:06] um

[53:07] there those are

[53:10] is items that need to be fleshed out cuz

[53:11] on this not quite sure how deep this

[53:13] pond is.

[53:15] Cuz we don't have any There's no

[53:17] grading.

[53:18] >> I think it it's 2 ft.

[53:20] >> A 2-ft depth so you have

[53:22] a foot of free board on there?

[53:25] >> Correct. Yeah.

[53:26] >> So um

[53:27] >> And And we could do 3 ft and make it

[53:28] smaller, put it more towards the corner,

[53:31] you know, maximize that.

[53:33] Well, that was something we just thought

[53:35] we'd work out at final.

[53:37] >> And I think part of the concern is if

[53:38] that pond fails, it's not going to go in

[53:40] the street. It's going to go into the

[53:41] homes that are are north of this site.

[53:43] So,

[53:44] uh

[53:46] Yeah, I I see your point. I think there's just a lot of

[53:49] information we didn't have on this pond,

[53:51] and and so we were

[53:53] like I say, brainstorming ideas of of

[53:55] alternatives that could maybe address the storm water as well, but

[54:00] >> Can Can you go to the grading plan? I

[54:02] don't think it'll go to the house, but

[54:04] >> No, or yeah, this is the current rating

[54:06] >> See how the swell There's a swell right

[54:08] there in the

[54:10] in between the right-of-way and the edge

[54:11] of pavement over by the pond.

[54:14] Oh, you're

[54:15] >> Right there. This is the only grading

[54:16] plan that we have.

[54:17] >> Yeah, so see if that pond when that if

[54:20] it overflowed, it would overflow into

[54:22] this into the swell in the street in

[54:24] between the edge of pavement and the

[54:25] right-of-way.

[54:28] >> Yes, I'm not seeing that. These These

[54:30] Usually these dash lines are existing or

[54:32] current existing, correct?

[54:34] >> right here. If that pond fell, it's

[54:37] going to go out right

[54:38] >> You're saying it's going to go right

[54:38] through here based on that.

[54:40] >> Yeah.

[54:41] See the B on that.

[54:43] >> Yeah, this one right here.

[54:44] Yep.

[54:45] >> Is that on on the plan there and and

[54:47] just looking at the aerial, that that

[54:48] home labeled Carol Greenhall or

[54:51] Greenauch, is that Is that a going to be

[54:54] taken out?

[54:56] >> No, this is a neighbor parce-

[54:58] neighboring parcel.

[54:58] >> Right, but it looks like the structure

[55:00] on this plan the structure's

[55:02] into the PUE of the subdivision.

[55:06] » That's correct. I didn't I didn't notice

[55:08] that before, but it does look like the

[55:09] building

[55:09] >> It's not the structure, that's the

[55:11] fence.

[55:12] >> That's just the fence line?

[55:14] >> Correct.

[55:17] » So,

[55:17] have Have we checked the setbacks from

[55:19] the existing home that's to the north?

[55:21] Cuz there's a home right

[55:22] It's right north.

[55:24] >> E- Yeah, that's that ho- That's That's

[55:27] not the home, that's the fence. We can

[55:29] put the home on there.

[55:30] >> Okay. And I'm just making sure that

[55:31] we've got the

[55:32] >> It's not showing up this way.

[55:34] >> side setback and

[55:35] for that home to the property line.

[55:38] >> It's not shown, so it's uh so we weren't

[55:40] able to verify that.

[55:41] >> Okay.

[55:43] Yeah, if we can add that to the red

[55:44] lines, Aspen.

[55:46] >> Um

[55:48] a couple other questions, just basically

[55:50] with this power line that runs back

[55:52] through here.

[55:53] Um I know we've reached out to Rocky

[55:55] Mountain Power or

[55:57] Kirk has about the

[55:59] overhead power that runs along First

[56:01] West and First North. Um

[56:04] I'm not sure if any conversation was

[56:06] held regarding the existing power that

[56:07] goes goes to back here. So, whatever's

[56:10] needed particularly on there, we're not

[56:13] aware of that's a Rocky Mountain Power

[56:14] facility, but whether the

[56:17] um they're okay with the PUE

[56:19] on there, which it would be located in a

[56:21] future PUE um

[56:24] related to that, so it would be um

[56:27] that would just have to be confirmed

[56:28] with them.

[56:29] >> Great.

[56:29] >> Yep.

[56:31] Um

[56:33] their uh street lights aren't shown. So,

[56:36] you need to show where right now there'd

[56:38] be one street light.

[56:40] Um

[56:41] well, two of them, one at the

[56:42] intersection here. I know there's one

[56:44] located here. But, at every intersection

[56:46] a street light's required as well as one

[56:49] in the back. So, street lights need to

[56:51] be shown.

[56:54] » John, will it be on a

[56:56] uh meter?

[56:56] >> It would be metered.

[56:58] >> Yes.

[57:02] » And

[57:05] those are I think we've gone through all

[57:06] the other red lines.

[57:14] Yep. Oh, um verify your closures. When

[57:17] we ran closure checks, they didn't close

[57:19] all the way up.

[57:20] So.

[57:22] >> Okay.

[57:23] >> Thank you.

[57:24] >> Yep.

[57:25] Any other comments or questions on this?

[57:30] If not, I'd look for a motion. And this

[57:32] is a

[57:33] DRC is an approval body for a

[57:35] preliminary application. So, the option

[57:37] would be to to table

[57:40] or forward a recommendation to

[57:43] >> DRC is not the approval body for

[57:45] >> DRC is not. Did I say it was? I

[57:46] apologize.

[57:47] >> DRC is not the planning commission

[57:49] recommendation.

[57:50] >> Thank you, Jason.

[57:51] Um on there. So, the motion would be a

[57:53] recommendation or table.

[57:56] Recommendation to the planning

[57:57] commission.

[57:59] >> Based on that, Jason, I I think I'm okay

[58:01] with with a a forwarding a

[58:04] recommendation to the planning

[58:05] commission

[58:06] uh with the condition that we we get

[58:08] more of the information that we need uh

[58:11] redlines be addressed, but and that that

[58:13] happen before we put you on a planning

[58:15] commission agenda as long as we can look

[58:17] at that. Um

[58:21] That'd be my motion.

[58:21] >> Okay, we've got a motion. Is there a

[58:23] second?

[58:24] >> Second.

[58:26] >> Seconded by Randy.

[58:28] All in favor,

[58:29] please say

[58:30] >> Randy, are you are you comfortable

[58:31] >> Not necessarily with that. I mentioned

[58:33] before in the when I first started, I'm

[58:35] not necessarily comfortable with that.

[58:37] >> So, is there more engineering that that

[58:39] >> There's a significant There's a lot It's

[58:40] mostly engineering. I recognize that,

[58:42] but

[58:42] >> We don't have Yeah, we don't have

[58:44] profile.

[58:45] >> for

[58:46] storm drain, sewer, or

[58:47] >> Let me change that motion to table until

[58:49] we get more of the engineering

[58:51] information that we need for for DRC to feel comfortable sending that that

[58:56] recommendation forward.

[58:57] >> Okay, so the original motion was

[58:59] removed.

[59:01] Is there a second on the new motion to

[59:02] table?

[59:02] >> I'll

[59:03] add my second.

[59:04] >> Okay, Randy seconded that.

[59:06] Any other discussion?

[59:09] Seeing none, all in favor, please say I.

[59:11] >> I.

[59:12] >> Any opposed?

[59:13] Okay, motion's tabled.

[59:16] We'll work on getting these sent back

[59:17] over to you to address and discuss and we'll move forward. Thank you.

[59:24] Okay, and the next item on the agenda is

[59:27] a review of the meeting minutes from

[59:29] June 9th.

[59:31] Is there If I don't have any motion or

[59:33] any discussion, I'll look for a motion

[59:35] to approve all those.

[59:36] >> John, I make a motion to approve the

[59:37] minutes from June 9th, 2026.

[59:40] >> Okay.

[59:41] Is there a second?

[59:42] >> Second.

[59:43] >> Give it to Allison.

[59:45] She beat me. Um

[59:47] all in favor, please say aye.

[59:49] >> Aye.

[59:49] >> Any opposed?

[59:50] Okay, minutes are approved.

[59:53] And if there's not anything else, I'll

[59:54] look for a motion to adjourn.

[59:56] >> Motion to adjourn.

[59:58] >> We are adjourned at 11:00

Santaquin City Development Review Committee Meeting - June 23, 2026

Transcript