[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