to our mountain planning commission
meeting um work session. Um we're going
to go ahead and begin. It is 5:32 p.m.
And first on our work session agenda
item is a training by Rob
Megan if you wouldn't mind. Thank you.
Hopefully it'll There we go.
So, our training is going to be a little
bit about trains and make a little bit
of fun uh time between us and then also
some insights perhaps or thoughts about
going forward in our neck of the woods
with any kind of real uh version of
rail system.
Let's see if we get this to play.
Oh, how did that happen?
Our fanatics on bring a trailer.
Oh, I guess it's just a commercial.
I've seen enough.
Ignore all that.
There we go. [music]
I couldn't get it to quite synchronize
how I wanted. A little song for you.
It's been a long day. I can't take
anymore. I got to get away and head down
the track
[music] and looking back.
Feelath
you notice in that fun little song and
it's a nice one to drive home with
sometimes
but there was a special door and
attraction that I I think infatuated
America more years ago with trains.
Certainly before the advent of the
airliner as a regular commuter vehicle,
if you will, and our use of cars as much
as we have now entered into using trains
were a big deal. And when you talk about
legends of the rails, there were quote
unquote legends of the rails. So you had
for example uh New York Central and
Pennsylvania with their timed and
competing rail systems that went for
example from say New York to Chicago and
they'd have these limited excursions
that were full of passenger all the
time. They even decked them out like
five-star hotels. U get this to advance
here. Sorry.
Steam engines u since their development
were improved upon and improved upon.
This engine here with Pennsylvania
Railroad was one of the last of the
steam engines that was crafted by by
people and shops that really knew what
they were doing and trying to maximize
the benefits that a steam engine could
provide. People don't realize the power
and the might of those things. You know,
you had engines like this one back in
the day, if you will, that could easily
pull a train of several thousand tons
and they would go 100 miles an hour on a
regular basis.
Here's another example of one that got
the art deco treatment that became
popular. You heard last time we met Dave
talk about the uh you know the movement
towards beautifification, the city
beautiful movement of structures and
cities and sort of in that same era you
saw an outgrowth of not only in with
trains but of course other manufactured
goods but the same kind of idea of
adding some art and in this case
streamlining
to uh the equipment they were using
particularly the engines.
See if I can get this one to work. It'll
probably be another silly ad, but
has been ranked number one. Insurance
customer.
I'm Alison Victoria and when I'm styling
a space for hosting, I always start with
how I want people to feel. So, I
separating the train back door. And what
makes this?
Imagine you were driving home from work,
just minding your own business, when all
of a sudden you were passed by a train.
And not just any train, but a gigantic
steam locomotive just feet from your
driver's side door. Now, I have seen
many trains run parallel to major roads,
but usually they have fences, bushes,
trees, and sidewalks separating the
train and the cars on the road. I have
never seen one run down the middle of a
freeway and never so close to the cars.
This train track is on the I 10 freeway
that runs through Los Angeles to San
Bernardino in California. What makes
this stretch of train track so special
is it's on the median between lanes on a
major freeway with about 6 ft separating
the train from the driver side door. And
what makes this footage really special
is the train in it. The train is the
Santa Fe 3751 steam train built in 1927.
This train may be a steam train, but it
seems to be lacking the one thing you
associate with a steam train, and that
is the billowing white or black smoke
out of the engine. The reason this train
has no smoke is because the fireman, the
guy who makes the steam for the engineer
to use, is firing the engine
efficiently. He is using as little fuel
as possible to make as much steam as
possible. This means there is little to
no smoke. Also, this engine does not run
on coal anymore. It was converted in
1936 to burn fuel oil, which also
minimizes the billowing smoke we are
used to. You will also notice there is a
diesel engine behind the steam train.
The reason that it's there is to provide
electrical power for the coaches as well
as dynamic braking and also acts as a
backup in case the steamer fails. To be
honest, the steam train is cool and all,
but I was more amazed at how the train
ran down the middle of the freeway with
little to no gap from the cars. I guess
city planners needed to be creative and
use every bit of space they had for a
train track. Either way, it's something
to look at on your way home. Anyway,
that's the end of this video. Thanks for
watching and we'll see you next time.
Slideshow.
I like this one.
Okay, that sorry
keys don't advance.
Escape doesn't want to do it.
Did you hear
While Rob's working on getting that back
up, I I was the one that asked Rob um to
to work on [clears throat]
to to present a training to you or a uh
to to bring a discussion item about uh
rail because I
we'll get into some more information
here in a little bit. So, you won't just
be looking at movies if I get this thing
to behave itself. But I wanted you to
see some of the dynamics you don't see
these days before we talk about
I guess we're having a little battle of
the whistles.
So you see it's a passenger consist of
course going past there with some old
streamliners
aluminum clad.
You can tell I kind of favor the steam
engines I guess already. But um I wanted
to give you a little quick course on how
they're identified in case you happen to
go somewhere and see one sitting out in
a park or in a museum. The American
system for identifying and naming a
steam engine was different than what the
Europeans used. We looked at the wheel
configurations. As you see in that
picture, we counted what in this case is
termed an Atlantic by looking at the
number of wheels on the rails. So up
front you had what they called a truck,
which is this supporting structure right
here where my cursor is and had a couple
of axles as you can see. And they had a
total of four wheels obviously to each
side. Then you had what were termed the
driver wheels,
smaller radius or diameter ones for
freight engines, larger for passenger.
And then the trailing truck back here
which had in this case just two wheels.
When you look at the quantity of
different types of in this case steam
engines still you see that there were
quite a few in America. In fact over 90
91 I have not in the slide but those are
the most common ones. And you can tell
probably that or imagine that the ones
that had more wheels of course were
bigger. That steam engine that you saw
in that video going down that uh center
section the freeway in California
uh was probably representation of one of
the bigger ones. You know, if you want
to classify small, medium, and large, so
to speak. It was not an articulated
engine with split out sets of driver
wheels, but still it was big. Anybody
care to guess about how much that thing
weighed?
Just a random guess in pounds.
How much?
Well, no, a little more than that.
About a million, literally. Just over a
million, actually. Yeah. So, you're in
the five 600 ton range.
Yeah. Well, yeah. You had the tender in,
you got more.
So, a little bit now going into just
some numbers.
I already mentioned it as you saw that
steam engines varied in as of course in
in a lot of things like cars and pickups
and tanks and ships and airplanes, you
name it. But they're labeled different
ways and they serve different purposes.
Uh we had particularly freight and
passenger engines. Typical weights you
see there listed. Um
just give you a second to take a quick
look at that.
Your lengths on the bigger ones like
that one we were looking at are around
100 feet long.
your heights. Uh you're at 12 to 15 feet
tall. You get up the top of that what
they call the boiler, that long
cylindrical center where all the steam
is warmed up to be used.
And then your horsepower, uh
you know, a lot of those produced as
much or more than some of our diesels do
today. They could be 5 to 8,000
horsepower per unit or less. It just
depended on the engine, obviously.
uh the Pennsylvania Railroad
uh they were developing I think probably
towards the last of their life as a
company some of the more powerful and
bigger engines. There were others
working with the same idea to try and
maximize steam but look at this one down
at the very bottom 7,987 horsepower.
Well, time moved on and steam engines
were eventually because of the cost of
maintaining them particularly
uh replaced by diesels, diesel
electrics.
And the earliest ones uh for the most
part are what I've pictured in the uh F
units they termed them, which were the
silver ones with the orange striping up
at the top row. That style, that body
style was kind of some of the first to
come on the scene. And more or less
consecutively with that came what's
underneath it at Tennessee Valley was an
Alco RS unit. So you had different
companies building different engines of
course competing with each other. Um
Alco electromotive a couple of examples
of that. The uh engines were sometimes
relegated to more passenger versus
freight service just like the steam
engine. So the top left Santa Fe engines
those two the Alco PA they termed it
passenger engine and that slant nosed um
E unit it was termed were both examples
of that and they would often put them
together in what they called lashups.
So you'd have one of those units with
another engine behind it and maybe two
or three more for example some of them
without cabs.
Well, of course time has advanced and if
you were around in the 70s and 80s you
saw a lot of what you see there in the
Southern Pacific photo in gray.
And now of course if you look at the
rails you'll see what's at the bottom.
Still units are hovering around four to
5,000 horsepower each. They can be at
the head end of a train obviously or
inserted in the middle or at the end
anywhere as helpers.
And uh maybe Helper Utah and I don't
know this fact at all but I'm I'm
wondering if that's where they got their
name because maybe that was a place
where they laid in with these extra
engines to help with a grade.
Uh you already know probably from your
days of experiencing rail crossing um
trainings either as a child or older or
watching videos online that these things
don't stop quickly. Usually if they're
moving at speed, they're heavy enough
and have enough mass behind them that
they will absolutely just keep on going
and take out anything gets in their way.
Sometimes a long train will take a mile
literally to stop.
Here are some examples of electric
trains. uh just so you can have a look
at them. Uh that also were competitors
with the diesels and still are in
places. Some of the earest examples are
what you see in that lower left corner.
New York Central actually started using
a little electric engine and developed
more of them over time because they had
I can't remember the year 1927. I could
be way off but they had a a wreck in
their tunnels down underneath the city.
And a lot of it was due to they figured
the obscure obscurement of the smoke
coming out was an engine of steam
engines. So there was a public outcry
and they banned steam engines from
within the city till still to this day
and that began for them the process of
developing electric engines and using
them and requiring them over there in
the metropolitan area.
Well as already noted kind of in passing
uh steam was replaced by diesels because
of again cost efficiencies.
Uh you had as I've noted in here, a lot
of servicing requirements for steam
engines. Um, you had um
the fact that a lot of them were down.
You know, it would be normal for a large
railroad, say like Union Pacific, to
have about a third of their fleet down
at any one time, just ballparking.
And it was easier for them also to run
the the engines back and forth in the
directions they needed. So, with a steam
engine, you could run it backwards, but
generally speaking, you'd want to run
it, of course, going frontwards, but if
you had to turn it, you either had to
use a Y or you had to put on a turntable
and crank that around. And it was a slow
process. Where diesels, you can just run
them each direction and you put a cab on
each end, you it works out pretty well.
Faster startup. Uh, diesel engines, it's
just like turning over your car almost,
and you can get going. And then, as it
notes here, smaller crew requirements,
less people to to deal with running the
engines and maintaining them.
Uh again, longer time between servicing
for diesels. They're more available now
and they found them over time to be more
reliable. Not to say steam engines work
pretty good, but a cleaner operation as
I've noted.
And you can, as I already noted too,
lash them together for multiple unit
const. So if you need a more horsepower
tractive effort, so either torque or
horsepower or both, you could you could
combine them to get that.
Um,
steam though had some advantages.
Uh, while they could run a lot of
different fuels, I shouldn't say a lot,
but basically three, coal, wood, and
oil. Uh, they still had compared to a
diesel engine higher startup tract of
effort. So, if you needed something to
really get moving and pull that mileong
coal train, steam engines still
generally speaking on some of the
electrics were kind of your best bet.
And some of the railroads, they because
they were so invested in They held out
for a long time before they wanted to
change over to diesels.
But again, in a one sentence summary,
diesel's advantage was that they
delivered better or similar at least
hauling performance while requiring less
fuel and so forth maintenance.
So like any place, railroads had a place
in time and still do for helping build
out our country and other places in the
world. Obviously
uh they are very well equipped to move
overland people and freight in large
quantity. Uh basically they
ended up being a a replacement in a
sense for your fairies for your old you
know river boats basically and overland
with wagons and everything else. Well
they do upend to what they are now
today. And you had a lot of communities
as we know that were built around where
there were rail centers.
There were uh there was real competition
in the US early on to try and get rails
across as we know the entire US
countryside if they could. And we have a
famous location here in Utah where they
were able to connect from east to west
coast basically.
So I'll let you take a quick look at
that if you want rather than try and
talk it through. I'll see the slider for
a second.
Okay.
By the way, this picture is of what you
see uh in Europe. I'm guessing that's
probably an English steam engine there.
They had a tendency to try and decorate
their engines like that and streamline
quite often. Still do for the ones that
they restore.
Uh so again kind of reiterating that
real has some efficiencies that it can
use if you will to benefit um those are
going to try and take advantage of it
make it work for a community or for a
state or company
and
thoughts have been voiced about well
couldn't we have eventually maybe
something like that in Ule Mountain
and to gain traction
on an idea like that you of course have
to have some demand. Uh so sometimes
it's one of those matters where you put
the rail in and let's build it and they
will come and sometimes it's an industry
is in an area and they say hey we'd
really love to have the benefit of
having a railroad spur coming into us of
course or more than that
and then there becomes a matter of well
how do we plan that and how do we um
make that happen financially coming from
for the most part of my life uh the
Boisee area tell you that they had an
idea to have a light commuter rail run
right down Union Pacific tracks with
trackage rights between Boisee and Nampa
Caldwell area which are about 20 to 30
mi apart at most and they they uh
tinkered with that for a long time it
seemed like they never could quite get
it done and part of the problem probably
was it just was and I don't know but it
may have just been too much interference
with Union Pacific's main freight run
through there plus they probably figured
they weren't going to get enough traffic
they already had BRT
more than we have here and pretty
straight shot on the freeway back and
forth like we do up and down the 15.
Uh but it didn't manifest itself.
And u I'm kind of the opinion that in
the case of Eagle Mountain, we might be
hardpressed to justify something like
that or see it happen if it's for
commuter service.
However, uh freight might be a different
matter. So just so we understand though
there's a cost of course associated just
like building roads with uh building
railroads and these numbers are off the
internet. I can't vouch say for the fact
that they are or are not exactly
accurate but if they are you can get an
idea that if we start adding in per mile
cost for introducing a rail system
you're now looking at much more than
just standard roads. So, and this these
numbers you see, they could be anywhere
three to $20 million a mile
because you've got to remember you've
got not only the trackage, you've got to
get the the rights for it, you know, the
rightway just like we have to first
street, but now you've got to build the
subroad bed, you got the ballasting, you
got the machines now that put down the
tracks and uh the ties and everything.
So, uh it still ends up bringing up a
cost.
some ideas. If we were to come from Lehi
somehow off the hub there, uh you're
looking at a pretty substantial
investment
and of course you've got to have a
justification for expenditure like that.
So the companies are going to trigger
that.
Uh probably where there might be some
opportunities
economic development seems to agree with
this idea would be centered around some
kind of freight service. It would
probably be low uh low numbers of of
trips we would see I'm expecting for
now. Typically the old freight service
you'd see would be large manufacturing
plants or industries, mines, etc.
Um but out here we may find some reason
to have them and and so if you look at
the different kinds of commodities that
could be shipped not atypical would be
construction materials for our area
cement direct gravel industrial products
transformers stuff maybe to serve the
data center stuff you know area the comm
communityities on a truck who knows
give you a second to look at that slide.
And maybe we'd end up with a teamster
track, which is basically where
industries co-share a single spur
usually.
But we don't have a high density
compared to some places.
So maybe we could reduce trip, truck
traffic, excuse me.
Maybe there's room for tax based growth,
but you got a capital cost expenditure
there. That noted that possibility
if that's freight focused, then you move
down a passenger and it adds a whole
another element to it.
As I noted, you know, express bus or
more than one would be a lot cheaper
than trying to run a railroad in here
besides trying to blitz, you know, how
you going to condemn property to get
through where they need to if they come
from Lehi. Are you going to go all the
way out around Twillow or out around,
you know, the Lake Mountains to try and
connect somewhere else?
Well, kind of a summary statement there
in top paragraph.
This is just opinion.
So that said,
you know, obviously as it says in the
slide, we don't need to decide today,
but it should be decided at some
juncture if we want to provide an
opportunity for somehow this to to
manifest itself.
uh feasibility, what's going to
determine that market demand, right of
way being made available
or put together, if you will, connection
points.
So, we got delivery model, then you got
your environmental study stuff.
And credit to Abby, she uh provided a
couple of tidbits of information these
slides included, but she wanted to point
out that where those arrows u point. Uh
seems like she was thinking there would
be some possible connection points there
to run off branch lines. I haven't
investigated it, but she's giving
distance to the city area.
And we had uh she had actually in an
email to me forwarded what one comment
or one excuse me, from a local civil
engineer from a company we all know, but
I didn't site who gave that uh comment
to us
and a little bit of history.
So, the more likely area to do anything
is he says southwest parts of the
community and beyond.
I think that's a bit of a summary
for you of what we might see here. And
then like I said, I want to give you a
little bit of intro. Sorry for the
technical glitches, but but uh as an
advocate of model railroading too, I
have one in the basement.
It's a fun hobby. So, it's been a joy to
try and learn about the history of
railroading in America and other places
as part of that quest to try and build
something fun like that. Anyway,
appreciate you.
Thank you, Rob, for that presentation.
And uh things to think about potentials
and I'm sure we visited in our in
previous life experiences in areas we've
lived before or visited. We can see um
the influence of other modes of
transportation including trains or rail.
So, thank you for doing that
presentation.
Um any
discussion with the commission for Rob?
Thank you again, Brandon.
I I did ask Rob to to do this and the
main point was to try to hit get to the
point of this is actually a a form of of
transportation particularly the freight
that could be a big benefit to us. Abby
was with her yesterday and she told me
that um there are she she's constantly
Aby's like a p power dynamo. She's
constantly she's like the Tasmanian
devil going around trying to always find
ways to bring business to the city and
she does a really good job at it. One of
the things that she runs into is the
question of well do you have do you have
uh rail service in the valley and she uh
obviously says no at this point and
there there are those industries that
won't consider us because we don't have
it. Um Rob's map up there showed FA 11
miles away. She was telling me and I
don't know how accurate this is but she
was It's a million dollars a mile to lay
down a track. And if it's 11 million
dollars or $15 million to to bring a
line to the city boundaries or if we
need to go 30 miles, you know, if if
it's really a million dollars a mile to
lay track, I think that's a pretty
nominal cost for the big companies she's
been talking with, frankly. And and some
of these companies are willing to help
pay for some of that infrastructure.
Um, so I I just, you know, it is this
the most pressing thing for the city?
Probably not. But it may end up being
quite an economic boom for us and might
bring some significant benefit to the
city. So, I just I know there's been a
lot of discussions by staff behind the
scenes talking about this and I just
wanted to make you guys aware of of that
potential
real significant benefit for potential
benefit for the city. So,
yeah,
I have a question. Has Eagle Mountain
considered an inland port?
Yeah, they have. Um, it was proposed uh
and I if I recall correctly, I think the
Some on the council wanted to wait and
see if there kind of there were some
thing moving pieces in the last
legislative session that made them feel
a little uncomfortable with approving it
when it came through last last spring.
They wanted to see if there were going
to be some changes to how
how the legis the inland port worked and
who was manage the inland port. Um, and
so that that question could come up
again, but it it has been considered by
the city and and you're right, like the
inland port, a big part of that is is
rail. So,
thanks.
Appreciate Brandon.
Yep.
Um, next on our agenda for our working
session is um also presented by by Rob
the um temporary use code draft. You
want you ready to present that, Rob?
Yeah, thanks.
I thought we had that solved last time.
I think you might need to drag it over,
Rob. We've I've always had to.
Like it's not on your screen. You have
to put it Okay,
there's a picture I found of Rob right
there, too.
I like it.
Okay,
let's get down to here. I get out of
that. Come here.
There we go. Thanks. So
I would consider it somewhat inevitable
in the course of a town especially a
growing city and the bigger cities to
end up with a slew of what we would term
in our vernacular temporary uses. They
are those things that you see, those uh
activities or commercial enterprises
that frequent uh street corners and
commercial parking lots and they
have all sorts of products and wares to
sell typically and services even. The
problem in our city is we have arguably
no code to deal with them whatsoever. We
have temporary site plans uh referenced
in our code, but they go up to city
council.
My suspicion is, and I don't know this
for sure, that they were probably
thinking of those back when they
authored that code section being
something that was more holistic in
terms of an entire site having some kind
of use that was, you know, there for a
while and gone versus sort of a pocket
use, if you will.
And so
the other day I thought, you know, while
I'm out and about for a second, I'm
going to take a few pictures of just
what's in a quick runabout. That was
down
the ranch's parkway and then a left on
Pony and down to Ridley's. So Ridley's
parking lot, not expectedly, for
whatever reasons, they have some
shipping containers there for storage.
And you see those as you know a lot of
times especially in holiday seasons when
like Walmart for example overflows and
has to put stuff somewhere else besides
in their back store area. And then you
have like we just had fireworks stands
and other seasonal holiday sales. Then
you have the snow shack or shaved ice
places and their kin if you will. This
one I thought also was worth taking a
picture of because you'll note that what
was probably intended to be a two-way
service drive is now occupied in part by
that building with its ice container out
there. Expectedly allowed by Ridley's or
whomever owns or manages their property,
but now it's choked that down. And if
there was a temporary use code on the
books, my suspicion is we would not
allow for that to be right there. And
there are some basic guidelines in this
draft code that have worked well in
another area. U
well well ex u received by the community
and the decision makers uh that would
help
u move something like that to a little
better location.
And here's another one.
They tend to grow these kinds of places
as you've noted probably
your adventures and travels.
That's over by the chevron. Don't know
what that's for. assume it's it's you
know a little more permanent looking. So
yeah, but then we got a shipping
container. It's it's like a 40 footer
almost.
And then you have this in the same
parking lot now selling vegetables and
honey or little farmers stand.
And then out right next door to our
offices you have a paved uh loop and
you've now got an impromptu totally
unregulated by us anyway, the city I
should say I guess. uh other maybe a
building made of get permits and
anything. What you have an unregulated
food court? Well, in this case, uh taco
kind of court.
Couple more pictures.
Now, these kinds of, as you may already
know or would guess, these kinds of
setups can work really nicely. You know,
I worked in Holiday for a while and they
have over there a Soho food court and
it's set up with paved spaces. utilities
almost like a little RV park of sorts
but small and it's just kind of circular
and it fronts them their main road some
landscaping grass and park bridges like
this and uh it's been a real attraction
for them in their downtown that they
redid some years ago and made much more
beautiful than it used to be.
But the purpose of having a temporary
code is is not for the city to go out
and try and uh regulate lemonade stands
or to make a bunch of pocket money. It's
simply to bring some reasonable
standards that can be addressed through
an over-thec counter basically type
permit if you will or in this case now
through our portal but where we just
basically are saying things to a use
like okay well let's not have you let's
make sure a little simple site plan or
plot plan that they would give us as
part of their application that you are
we're double checking you're not going
to put that in the way of a service
drive like we saw in that one picture or
in way of ADA spot fire hydrant
uh or other loading unloading area that
should be restricted etc. You know, some
of that should just be common sense, of
course. But in dealing with this for
some years, that doesn't always win the
day. And then you get them in the vision
triangles. And then you get signage up.
And then you get more than one on a
property. And then they spread. Not
always, but places they can. And then
you have questions about how many should
be on property. And what about their
operating hours?
Uh, and then what about a parking
becomes a big deal sometimes when they
you almost end up with an impromptu
parking lot in places where it shouldn't
be.
just by nature the way these things
morph. So in the code
u rather than list out pages of
different types of common temporary uses
that a group like our staff would run
into or deal with decided better to
group them together in bundles uh based
on the kind of temporary use basically
that they are. Well, that brokered the
need in part to create a definition for
temporary service businesses, which is
the first page
of this draft amendment that we're
looking at. And I didn't put this in a
slideshow,
but uh if you happen to open up the
attachment for this item or have a way
to do so and you'll see the changes
proposed,
but and we're just discussing this in
theory right now and what you think of
it generally. So, uh, plane director,
our staff would administer a temporary
use permit, just like a fence permit,
for example.
And we have couple little standards on
who uh would review it if there was an
appeal. This is all basic stuff. Sorry,
I just flipped the pages for a second.
Where I want to be,
which is basically the heart of the
code.
So again, classification tables, if you
didn't uh happen to look at them, then
of course encourage you to do so. The
numbers within them were used in other
places. They don't necessarily
absolutely fit us. They might. But I
guess that's my way of saying we should
feel free to obviously and would happen
going through hearing process anyway,
but massage these things a little bit.
They're not totally out of the hat,
numbers out of the hat, but they are uh
subject to change obviously. So the
classes we've got proposed are
temporary sales uses. So that includes
all your seasonal sales, your pumpkin
stands, your fireworks, your Christmas
tree lots, yada yada, and transient
merchants.
And notice these are all relegated to
commercial zones, right?
With the exception of one type. Then
you've got your mobile food and beverage
vendors or uses. So your taco trucks for
example.
Uh little food kiosk, coffee st. I mean
that can be a variety of different
stuff.
Temporary commercial events. Uh we
haven't seen those really here that I'm
aware of, but it's not to say they won't
come someday. So we got vehicle sales
events. Those were popular in place
where I worked where they'd say, "Oh, we
want to have an off-site vehicle sales
event and we're going to take from XYZ
Ford dealership a bunch of cars over to
here at this shopping center. We're
going to put them out there over the
weekend and we're going to try and sell
them from there."
Um,
and then you had I mentioned they even
had petting zoo. That's what I had in
there, believe it or not. Carnivals and
circuses, small carnivals. Uh if you
looked at one old mall that was kind of
defunct called Carter Mall, that was one
of the old school ones like you see over
on State Street. Uh
maybe Taylor'sville area I think about
well they put these out again the
parking lot and you've got this mini
carnival. You see it with farmers
markets now like we have you know
Springville had one just recently and
they had set up in their park area.
Well, this is for that
and uh
contractors, trailers, office storage
containers, temporary gravel parking
areas, batch plants. They follow that
class 4 construction development support
uses type. And then you have a class 5
residential agricultural support uses.
And I forgot to mention in the first
one, the services bracket, you've got
even things like windshield repair,
which you'll start seeing probably more
eventually. So again, rather than list a
whole bunch of them, did that once
before, this is I think a little better
just to keep it simpler.
So now a little more the meats and
potatoes stuff I mentioned.
[clears throat] Excuse me. What are we
looking for when we look at one of
these? It comes in, hits the desk and
say, "Well, okay, Joe Makatelli wants to
put his uh sunglasses sales booth or
tables on this corner. This commercial
business has approved it and he's if you
can do it. Well, we're obviously going
to check for uh property owner's
permission first thing just about making
sure it's okay that they be there. Then
we're going to look at some of the
things that are mentioned in this code
as I already went through. Fire lane
access spacing not being impeded, fire
hydrants not being blocked, access
routes not being blocked.
Um
the utilities are not blocked off where
nobody can get to them. And some of this
is going to be quick. Oh yeah, that's
fine. But sometimes they take a little
more scrutiny that pedestrians can get
around them. ADA is not conflicted with.
And then there's some private locations.
See if you like these ideas. Not in
vision triangle areas. Not over required
ADA parking spot or lighting zone. Not
over a public sidewalk. Not in a
required fire lane area. Not within a
public rideway without council's
approval with the corrosion green, which
they probably wouldn't do anyway for
something temporary. Not within public
easements if we know can find them or
identify them. But that maybe is
something we can make exceptions to. Uh
and ideally not within setbacks just to
give some buffering room and keep them
away from properties edges a little bit.
But again, maybe that's not a
sword to fall on, so to speak. Some kind
of surfacing requirement would be
beneficial. At least hardcape some sort.
Ideally, it' be paving, but if not,
maybe it could be hardened surface,
gravel, dirt, whatever.
Or somebody want to be in the grass. And
besides that, we'll look at sanitation.
Do they have access to a bathroom? So,
does that mean a porta potty or do they
have permission to go in to a store for
example nearby and use their restrooms?
We'd want to have something that sort
of, you know, says that in writing.
Uh, and then of course with these a big
deal is removal. How do we make sure
that they are at the end of the day
taken away?
And so that' be a condition of their
permit. We'll get to a little bit more
on that in a second. Do we want to
control and number allowed. Right now,
it's proposed that there be quote no
more than one temporary use that shall
occupy a property at any given time
unless expressly approved by the plan
director or designate. Obviously, that
favors the smaller properties and
disfavors the larger ones. Uh which
could be one of the reasons why I say
it's fine. There's one over here and one
way over here in the other end of the
parking lot 500 ft away.
And then there's some specific uh
criteria for the different uses. For
example, fireworks have standards
outdoor lighting controls, health
department stuff, outdoor dining,
electrical permits being needed. In some
cases, maybe a traffic control plan,
probably not very often or likely, maybe
dust control. And again, depends on
temper use.
So, we spell it out in part to help us
remember what to look for and part for
them to be thinking about, oh, there
might be a little bit more to it than if
I just go to place this shack on this
property and start selling whatever from
it to think about. and that the city is
concerned about and partly too for
aesthetic reasons frankly.
Uh
so there are some exempt activities and
just to highlight those fast, we have
stuff that we don't necessarily want to
touch. We don't want to be on the news
being the people that came and told the
poor kids at the lemonade stand to shut
down because oh they're in zoning in
violation of zoning code.
So, for example, the ones that I've
listed as being exempt, again, subject
to change are garage sales and yard
sales, farmers markets, political
activities and campaign events, school,
church, and nonprofit fundraising events
lasting seven days or less, city
sponsored events, weddings and funerals,
very unlikely, on-site agricultural
produce sales, activities conducted
pursuant to another city process or
permit process, or some other similar
activity to those that the director says
Well, this is pretty minimal. We're not
going to fuss about it too much.
Okay. And then there's a little
application set, some signage controls,
a little appeal process, and a process
for revoking
uh a permit if we need to. And we'll
thank Marcus for his uh kind review of
that and suggestions which were built
into this. And at the end of the day,
basically like if they're violating
their permit andor code and we've given
them fair warning to try and summarize
things nicely, we'll just tell them
we're sorry, we're revoking your
temporary use permit. You can appeal if
you want to, but basically otherwise you
need to be gone. And
and that's kind of a summary of it. So
in principle, the question I guess for
the commission is
what do you think? Are you agreeable
with anything like this? Some version
it's more fleshed out, some it's done
way down. don't even want to think about
it. I'll take it to council and ask
their opinion too, of course.
Yeah. I I guess a question I'd have for
you um in the city is are are these
temporary
food court trailers or food trucks or
popup fruit stands that show up? Are
they required to have a business license
in the is is that part of this process
or this would be in addition to a
required license to sell commercially?
You know,
do you have a question? Answer
what they what should they be doing? Not
necessarily. What are these folks doing?
Stephen, give some insight. Maybe.
So, I know as far as business licensing
go, they're not required to get a
business license with the city. They
have to business license out of the city
that they're located at.
Oh, okay.
Um, but then they're operated to I think
they're authorizing them to sell here.
Um,
yeah. And then other than that, we don't
like Rob said, they probably should be
following a temporary site plan. that
with us, but they don't.
There's nothing
nothing to limit someone to other than
the a property owner who they would
likely go and hey, we're
Yeah, of course.
sell this stuff.
So, like Stephen said on the food stuff.
Yeah, I remembered when he said that
they have a headquarters they have to
identify and then they maybe have
something from health and welfare.
Yeah.
But um yeah, no, we don't. That's why I
say we don't have a code that really
deals with them. And what we're seeing
now is these temporary uses like by us
that I showed you in this in these
pictures.
They're basically permanent now.
I mean, they're acting as a defect or
permanent use.
Yeah.
Of the ground.
Commissioner Strong, you got a comment?
Yeah. I Well, a couple of questions.
First of all, I assume this is all on
private land, not city land,
right? And
I guess this would cover and I' seen a
few places here where you see the
umbrella up and somebody with an ice
chest selling tamali.
I assume that it would cover those too
or
Yes.
Yeah.
And because obviously I'll bet I could
be wrong, but I'm sure they don't have a
business license.
Yeah. They're not a food handler from
a street vendor. Yes. I'm sorry. And a
street vendor, the the person you see
walking up and down with flowers in
their hands, uh, this doesn't touch
that, you know, it doesn't deal with
that.
Okay. Yeah. And it's I'm sorry.
It would be in my mind kind of it could
be done I'm sure in some way but I
didn't want to tackle yet the idea of
trying to micromanage it to the point
where
we have some kind of identifier for
every scale and scope of temper use out
there. So for example the umbrella with
a table
and a chair versus you know something
like you see in these pictures it's more
has more magnitude to it. So it's been
relegated by use but not necessarily by
the scope or scale of the of the type of
use there other than say well you only
have one there at a time and some places
will say well you can have this kind of
sale like they do garage sales even
force really but it's so many times per
year like you can have your seasonal
holiday uses say there's four just for
example and then oh we're going to let
you have one a month or whatever number
that the the community constructs for
their code of this other kind of
temporary use there. So, we don't mind
them so much. We just don't want to end
up with, to borrow a parallel example, a
sea of signage or in this case a sea of
tipper uses all over the place there
over time. And another important thing
to remember too that just came back to
mind was that is that um it's also an
issue of fairness too. So you have a
business and granted business A might be
leasing
uh space like the Chevron to allow for
that fruit stand, but then mom and pop
who have a grocery store three blocks
down and this happens. Not often, but it
happens has happened in my experience.
They come knocking on the door. Hey
city, why are you if you are allowing
them to do that? I'm here with bricks
and mortar. I'm paying taxes. I have to
advertise. I have to improvements,
parking lot, store, everything I'm
paying for and these guys are taking
away my business.
And so that's a real question business
world of course.
And by temporary
I I you're saying there's a limit of
time on this. They can allow it. It
could be a week. I guess it's a month.
Some of them like this. Yeah.
Might be longer than that.
Yeah. And it just depends on the numbers
that we as a city set. I've given you
suggestions that are used elsewhere. I
tweaked a little bit on the time, but
yeah, it's at the end of the day, this
is draft code and whatever way it spins,
as you know, going through the hearing
process is
what will happen to it. Commissioner
Jensen, you wanted to make a comment.
I have a question. Is there an
additional fee involved in this
application?
There's no fee proposed right now, and
my preference would be to keep it as
minimal as possible. For example, when
we got the fence permit set in place to
cure a problem we were having with
people not realizing supposedly or their
contractors what standards we had as a
city for fencing and we were getting
issues with wrong kinds of fencing being
put up and having to be dealt with by
neighbor improvement. That fee was set
at zero.
I don't know if it's an introductory
price. I mean it's something that's very
simple and I look at it as more as a
customer service to the community.
Granted, we're spending a little time on
these, but maybe this would be 25 bucks
or something, but some dimminimous, you
know, amount to maybe cover costs if we
decide to do that, but uh again, it
shouldn't be like a astronomical fee. If
we had to, we just introduce a new fee
into the fee schedule for these things
rather than charge a site plan fee of
substantially more money.
Commissioner,
yeah, I was just thinking here about the
food trucks. you know, maybe we need to
add in
some sort of I don't call a zone or
whatever, but where we've granted the
right to that home, that land owner to
say this is going to be for food trucks
and then we can have like a permanent
area because I know over ranches and
pony they've like put in some
improvements there. It looks like
they've done a little bit here, but if
we allowed a place for more permanent
food trucks, that could be something we
could look at down the road because the
180day thing, like you said, these guys
are like pseudo permanent now. So, I'm
sure they would not be very excited
about the 180day thing. But if we
allowed certain land owners again to say
this is going to be permanent food
trucks, you can swap out the food trucks
if you want, but we know this is going
to be for food trucks. They're always
going to be here, then they won't have
to worry about that 180day thing. So,
that was one thought. And then, uh, you
mentioned on the number allowed again,
the Chevron had two there and they seem
to work fine for me. So, I'm glad
there's some flexibility to allow the
planning director or designate to decide
if additional ones are allowed. And I
would just like to see if it stays the
way it's written here as this develops,
if the planning director, whoever is
granting these exceptions, if we're
starting to see patterns there, then we
could codify those as well, right? Like,
hey, if the parking lots five acres
large, then we could allow a fruit stand
and the fire. So, that's just a
recommendation. as we move forward, as
we're seeing patterns, we can codify
more of those.
And that's sometimes, as you may know,
thank you, Commissioner Allen, one of
the things that staffs do. We have, in
our case now, created a folder and we
put it in our SharePoint system that
houses,
policies, procedures,
legal decisions that come from or
opinions that come say from Marcus or
that come from maybe the Utah Supreme
Court, whatever. So we have that package
together and from those we often will
draw when we're not dealing with some
kind of state code change we have to
then mimic in a sense we will draw from
that pool to
start crafting a code that deals with
some topic if it's given to us to do or
if we want to suggest it and see if
council will go with it.
Okay,
great. I think um obviously the city's
thinking about some need to identify
this maybe in a different manner than
has been done or not been done and I
think that's always a good thing and I
think we'll be willing to provide
additional comments and support the
process and hopefully
get something that would be applicable
to have some city controller oversight
to an extent but yet allow
these things to do go about.
Thank you, Rob, for um that agenda item.
Um
okay, that uh it is uh 6:28. We'll go
ahead and uh we will skip our last
agenda item for the working session,
which is just a review of the policy
agenda. I'll go ahead and end right now.
We'll uh start our policy session here
in just a few minutes. So, thank you.
Okay. Um
uh we will uh welcome to
uh tonight's uh planning commission
meeting. It is 6 uh 333. Thank you for
joining us this evening. Uh we'll go
ahead and get started. Um please stand
and join me to repeat the pledge of
allegiance.
I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic
for which it stands. One nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
Okay, we will uh move to our declaration
of conflicts. We'll start with
Commissioner Strong.
None.
Commissioner Allen,
none. Commissioner Jensen,
none.
Uh, Commissioner Hes has none as well.
Um, next on our agenda item is our
planning commission med minutes review
for July 14th. Um, commission, are there
any comments
for this review of the meeting minutes?
I do have one on I was not in attendance
for the June 23rd
um a vote and so I I think I should be
uh I I I think I have abstained
so this will be confusing on July 24th I
abstained from the June 23rd meeting
minutes because I was not in attendance
on June 23rd but it showed that I had
voted that was my only comment Anything
else from the the commission? Did you
have a question on that?
Yeah, just on the minutes you
Yeah, so on on the minutes for July
13th, I I abstained for the previous
meeting minutes,
the June 23rd. That was a little
confusing. Sorry about that.
Okay, perfect.
Any other comments from the commission
on the meeting minutes? I'll entertain a
motion on that item.
Chair, I move that we approve the July
14th, 2026 planning commission minutes
with the one change noted.
I'll second.
We have a motion presented by
Commissioner Allen followed by a second
um by Commissioner Strong. Um and we
will proceed with the vote. We'll start
with Commissioner Allen.
Yes.
Commissioner Jensen.
Yes.
Commissioner Hess is yes and
Commissioner Strong.
Yes.
Okay. Thank you. Um I will note um sorry
I should have noted this earlier. We
needed to excuse Commissioner Dorsy. He
is out of town um unavailable as well as
Commissioner uh Free. Um that leaves the
four of us also as we u
as we progress in our agenda.
Commissioner um Allen will may need to
step out and so we will um make a note
of that in the agenda. But before we
proceed with our action advisory item
agenda, we'll turn to our um staff for a
status update. Um anything that you
would like to share with the commission?
Uh Brandon?
Yes. Um last council meeting,
the council did approve um the off
streetet trails
off streetet trails master plan that
came to you a number of months ago and
that finally was adopted by the council.
Um
also
there was a code amendment adopted. Uh
you saw this I [snorts] think in the
last meeting. Uh it it was just adding
basically a co a requirement for a cost
estimate for plats that that got
approved as well as a code amendment to
it was basically
reacting to a state code amendment
related to golf courses. Um, we
basically made it so if I remember
correctly correctly, Mickey, correct me
if I'm wrong, but I believe it open the
the window from 5:30 a.m. till 10 p.m.
for maintenance on golf courses. And
then um the the second amendment of the
Triumph Master Development Agreement was
approved by the council. They had a
number of things they wanted that that
were adjusted by the council that
meeting, but it ultimately was approved.
So, those are the the major things that
occurred at the last council meeting.
Great. Thank you, Brandon, for that
update.
Okay, we'll move to our agenda item
number seven, our action advisory items.
We'll start with 7A, which is a a public
hearing for an ordinance um amending the
master plan known as a transportation
master plan presented by staff. This is
presented by David Salazar, our
assistant city engineer. Is that
correct? Okay. Thank you, David.
Commissioners, chair, it's good to be
here this evening. Look at that. And
have to drag it. Wow, that's cool.
Excuse [clears throat]
me. So, tonight we're here to present
back the transportation master plan and
IFP updates from last year. Um, the
updates are not largely huge in nature,
mainly minor things here or there. We're
going to talk through kind of each
update. Um, the goal here is to kind of
go through and keep this process
updated. Uh, I know going forward we're
looking to make these overall updates
every one to two years. This was a more
minor update just there's been a lot of
changes in the last year and so we
wanted to capture that as we kind of get
to the IFA process. Um we provide some
road sections level of service mapping
we remap some things with some major
roadways included updated project costs
and some of the contribution assumptions
and we want to have just kind of
consistent message from the TMP to the
IFP.
So, I provided a list of updates and
we're going to go through each one of
them kind of line by line.
[clears throat] So, the first one we
updated was the project priority list.
Um, some of the projects there were no
longer kind of priority throughout the
process from comments from council,
other developments in the area. One to
note in particular is uh number four.
[snorts]
This is the connection to uh Saratoga
Springs via Silver Lake Parkway. And
that was from the recommendations from
the study that I emailed you all on
Monday um from the consultant we hired
to provide those uh analysis and their
their results did show um that it was a
warranted connection um with
improvements needed at Silver Lake
Parkway and Golden Eagle as well as with
some um improvements at Woodhaven and
Silver Lake as well. Um, basically we're
looking at doing is adding a traffic
signal, replacing the roundabout at
Silver Lake and Golden Eagle, and that
those movements did warrant a signal.
Now, further up north, um, at Wood Haven
at Silver Lake, um, also removing that
roundabout, it was kind of on the fence
for being truly warranted, but we had
concerns with the pedestrian crossing
there as part of the safe walking
routes. I know just last year there was
somebody hit there, so we're looking to
also put a signal there as well. and
kind of make it more of a a T connection
by limiting access from Campbell. It
would have a fire uh gate there for
emergency eress, but function that would
serve more to kind of facilitate the
north south traffic that goes through
that area. So that was one we added to
our list. Um some of the other ones,
Pony Express widening Ranch's Parkway,
which we'll talk about a little bit
later.
Then I can also answer more questions
later on or throughout either way.
Lake Mountain Corridor, formerly known
as Mid Valley Road. This was a big win
for the city, UDOT. This I think this is
the fourth time in the state's history
where Ud has taken over a facility. It
was pitched to them. So Mid Valley Road
is now a UD do facility. Um because
there's another Mid Valley Road in UD do
in Tilla County. We needed to rename our
road. Originally, they had called it
Crown Ridge Crest, I think, and council
was not a fan of that, and neither was
staff. So we proposed Lake Mountain
Corridor and UD do was good with that
name as well as with NAG. And so on our
TMP we're showing kind of the blue line,
the horizontal line. Now they've kind of
just kind of proportioned the the f
first part to the east kind of from Pony
Express to Mountain View corridor, but
the intent is this road eventually would
serve multiple municipalities and head
further west as well.
So, and this is uh currently with the
study we did last year. It was a minor
arterial five laner, but we'll see what
happens now that UD do's kind of taking
over what their plans are going to be
for that.
Um, we [clears throat] also found some
typos and inconsistencies on some of
those uh roadway naming consistencies.
So, we just made some updates
throughout, minor things here or there
we tweaked throughout the document.
Nothing worth noting in particular.
We did up way update the freeway and
expressway criteria now that we have a
UD do facility the column for freeway
and expressway. We did add some criteria
uh specifically for the spacing of
intersections because we know um Lake
Mountain is going to go through some
development. So the four mile space for
intersections was pretty far. So we know
we're going to need some intersections a
little bit closer. I kind of think of it
as like a banger to highway where we're
going to have, you know, long stretches,
you know, hopefully with, you know, just
good smooth travel and then we have, you
know, some intersections, you know, kind
of intermittently. So, we updated that
as well as the speed limits. We kind of
added a 35 to 45 zone in the, you know,
fully developed area where where the
goal is to get more of a high-speed
expressway once we kind of get out and
we can kind of move that traffic east
west.
Another [clears throat] big section was
we updated the road classifications. Um
we removed the raised landscape medians
from major collector, minor arterial and
major arterial. This will provide better
U-turn flexibility for emergency
vehicles responding to calls. It removes
hazards from the landscape median
maintenance vehicles and pedestrians. Um
it also eliminates blind spots and
provides flexibility for additional turn
lanes, travel lanes. Um, and with this,
I've been talking with our arborist.
We're also going to when we do these
updates, we're looking to spruce up the
park strips. So, we don't want to have a
big concrete, you know, playground out
here. We want to keep Eagle Mountain,
Eagle Mountain. And so, we're looking at
adding more trees and shrubs in the park
strips, you know, not immediately to the
intersections, but kind of throughout.
So, we we lose some green here, but we
want to add some more here.
So, here are those crosssections. The
median taken out and turn lanes shown on
those crosssections going forward.
And then we added a new crosssection.
This is the [clears throat] principal
arterial was formally the parkway and
that was in two areas that was Pony
Express and ranches and as you know it
was you know two lanes. Um there was a
medium in the middle and what we're
looking to do is widen this and I'll
talk to ranches here in a minute, but
we're looking to have our principal
arterials be seven lanes with the turn
lane in the middle.
And this helps better distinguish the
major uh and the minor arterials versus
the principal. So we're trying to have,
you know, when you look at the map,
which I'll show here in a little bit,
it's easy to see what's what when we
distinguish things.
So Ranchers Parkway was a a road of some
concern. Some of the residents had
concerns about losing the medians and
[clears throat and snorts] you know
we're very aware of their concerns. We
want to be, you know, concerned about
that. And so I wanted to talk a little
bit about Ranchers Parkway in
particular.
This is one of the busiest roads in the
city. The medians are they're beautiful,
but they're quite big. I mean, they're
approximately 37 feet wide. They're very
tall and they have large blind spots. Um
turning movements are quite typical
throughout this corridor.
And throughout the parkway, there are no
protected pedestrian crossings unless
you're at Stonebridge, which is the road
just before the Maverick, and then down
to Pony Express. And then there's also
limited um emergency vehicle access. So,
we know there's a lot of speed in here
because people know they can get away
with it because it's hard to catch
somebody going the other direction.
[snorts and clears throat] What we're
proposing for this parkway is in a
two-phased approach. So phase one is to
remove the medians, add two travel
lanes, one in either direction, and a
centered turn lane. We would then
propose two traffic signals throughout
the corridor um at approximately third
points, one at half mile, the other one
at Braxton. And these would serve the
neighborhoods very well in the area. So
they have access um the highlands,
ranches, um Cedar Pass. So they have
good connection to a protected left turn
whether they're heading north or or
going south to provide them that access
along with pedestrian crossing.
With that removal, I talked about adding
additional trees and shrubs in the park
strip, which we still have quite it's
one of the biggest park strips in the
city. So we have a lot of area to work
to spruce up the green in that area.
[clears throat]
And then we would also improve the
intersection at Pony Express and
Ranches. [snorts] As we know right now,
it's probably the worst intersection in
the city. Um, we [clears throat] would
move to dual left lanes. So, it'll be
the the westbound left. So, as you're
kind of leaving the city, that turn
pocket would have two lefts, pull back
about 700 feet. We would widen um the
road on all legs at turn lanes so we
would have movements so we're not
slowing down in travel lanes. So that
would kind of open up that whole
intersection. [snorts] And this summer
we're going to improve the intersection
at 73 in ranches. We just got bids uh
this week. Actually, we're looking to
assign that to a contractor and to award
it and start in the next few weeks. Um
and I can pull that [clears throat] up
later when we're done. I can show you
guys if you want to see what that looks
like. But basically what we're going to
do is we're going to add northbound two
lefts, two throughs, and two rights.
that gets all the movements separated
because we saw a lot of conflict with
the thus and the rights. Now we have the
Walmart and so that's that's inhibiting
you know commuters coming to and from
work and the Walmart traffic as well. So
everything's going to be separated and
we also with that improvement we're
adding a high signal at campus drive for
our folks at planning as well as that
traffic um heading southbound. They'll
now have a protected uh egress out of
that campus drive. Um, we are limiting
the connection. So, you won't be able to
go through anymore to the Maverick. You
have to go down south to Stonebridgeidge
to get that. That's already a it's a
pretty perilous drive trying to make
trying to shoot that gap. So,
[clears throat] will those be all that
improvement be by removing the raised
medians, [snorts]
whether that be at the intersection of
Ranches and Parkway to your seven your
full seven lanes.
So, the seven Yeah. So, the seven lanes.
Yes. We we can get that in phase one. No
problem. Plenty of it.
For phase two,
um this [clears throat] is in the
parkway itself.
I'll talk to the intersection in a
minute, but in phase two, we're looking
to add 10ft shoulders on either side
because there's a large sewer trunk line
needed on the east side. As you can see,
there's a little circle down there.
That'll be like phase two. That that's
probably a five tenure window when that
sewer is needed. That's what we'll do
there. But we'll still maintain the park
strips. We will um the trail is pretty
windy there. We'll just readjust the
trail a little bit so it's not so close
to that shoulder because right now
there's no shoulder in there at all. So
for emergency vehicles, vehicles being
pulled over and so for phase two, the
the biggest concern right now is get the
capacity. So that's what we're trying to
do first. Phase two will be to improve
the thoroughfare, the access for the
additional utilities. That's kind of the
phase two. For the intersection itself,
we would widen it, but the nice thing is
we have all that right away. both the
majority of ranches and Pony Express are
that 206 foot rightway. So that's all
well preserved. We're very grateful to
have that to work in parts of the trail
that get close to the road. We're just
going to readjust a little bit so it's
not so close to the road, but and then
again adding some additional trees and
shrubbery throughout.
Sorry, can I ask a question on that too?
So now we're going to have the the three
lanes. Are we going to add like right
turn lanes into those neighborhoods or
is it just assume that far right lane's
going to be the
Yep, we are. And we'll do that at the
intersection. Um, it'll get and we're
we're kind of working through that
design. Our I'll I'll show that here in
a minute. So, I took this to MAG this
year for the 2026 TIP selection
and we have been tenatively awarded uh
11.8 million for that project. It's
actually the biggest one city has gotten
so far. Final Thank you. The final
selection will be uh Mo board meeting in
two weeks. They will it will finalize
this potential funding scenario and then
as you know [clears throat] the city
likes to cash flow out of these
projects. So we're we're hoping to look
at uh solutions to see how we can cash
flow this project to get done sooner
than later instead of waiting for the
2930 uh funding cycle. We've done that
with a lot of p previous mags like
airport road boulevard and pone express.
So I know we're going to try and see how
we can do that as well.
Commissioner,
who controls the lights? Is it UD do or
is it the city? [snorts]
It depends [clears throat] where you're
asking
because the current intersection at the
Holiday and uh what's the elementary
school [snorts] 173?
Yes.
Blackidge Blackidge Elementary and the
Holiday
turning left. So turning [snorts] if
you're westbound, turning left to go
into that subdivision which is Lake View
estate.
I'm not I'm not familiar with Black
Ridge. Can you give me a street
on 73? You're going westbound. Then the
north south cross is at the Holiday and
Blackidge Elementary School.
[clears throat]
I don't know all the elementary school
locations. You have to help me out here.
73.
It's on 73. Okay. Is it right here?
I said that.
Okay. Yeah.
Yeah. So that one So that is a UD doc
controlled intersection.
The left hand turn there is a nightmare.
It should be a blinking yellow light,
not a solid red light, which I'm sure
everybody's agree with. And I know that
we can't change that. But if we're
adding intersection, when we're adding
these turn lanes, that has got to be
part of the decision is how are they
going to signal those? Because at 10
o'clock at night when there's nobody
there,
you don't want to sit there for five
minutes waiting to turn or I get a whole
lot of heartburn because that's the
neighborhood I live in. When I'm waiting
to turn left and I have these huge
diesels that are coming and barely
missing me, I think it's a safety issue.
So, a couple things. So, one, this
intersection, you know, with the future
freeway improvements, eventually this is
going to be a 10-lane highway. There'll
be frontage roads on either side, six in
the middle. So you're not going to have
those problems. It's going to be kind of
over and undercut kind of layout. So
that's kind of big picture where that
will be going in the short term. U
controls that. It's we we have heard the
complaints. We don't like it either, but
that's their code. If it's 50 miles or
above speed limit, it's a protected left
only.
That's just that's their code. We
Yep.
You don't have a
It's not permissive. That's 100%. Yeah.
So and and we know and and we we have
pushed them to optimize these as best
they can to allow that. So we're we're
well over aware of it. Our signals we
optimize. We can do them smartly. It's
different. So ours we try and do
optimize in the future when this goes to
dual lifts. You know it will be
protected because dual lefts are
protected. They're not permissive. But
again it will have a much longer turn
pocket and they will move that volume
better than just the one or two cars
trying to shoot the gap. So but
appreciate the question.
Mr. Strong question.
Yes sir.
Yeah. Back to that same intersection.
Oh yeah. Uh, I know that long term
there's going to be a freeway there, but
is there any plan shortterm where that
73 necks down to one lane for a short
period of time to expand that to two
lanes?
We are actively pursuing that. We are
aggressively pursuing. I'm going to
rephrase that because commissioner,
you're 100% right. So the way UD do has
it right now, this part right here from
Mountain View to Ranches is funded. It's
phase one. They're going, they already
have a program manager on board. It's
construction will start over here in 29
and go down to 30 301ish for this.
Problem is this part right here is not
funded. It's I think it's slated for 32
as far as programming. It's probably
wouldn't break ground till like 36. And
so we see that as a huge bottleneck. You
can't go 10 lanes to two. And so we have
been pushing that. Mayor has been
pushing that. We're talking with MAG UD
do and they they're they know our names
very well. They know our cell phone
number. So we are aggressively trying to
come up with options. We just had a
meeting yesterday actually with the
program manager who's doing the work.
They're the consultant kind of working
this project. Uh it's Horox and HDR and
we're working with them and they're also
aware of our concerns. the the best
solution that's been proposed is to
maintain the two lanes now and then put
two more lanes to the north that would
serve as the future frontage roads. So,
we go to four. The only challenge with
that is there's still a lot of property
here that hasn't been acquired yet.
That's the one of the challenges. You
know, in this quarter here, you can kind
of see the rideway. There's additional
300 feet. It's a 425 foot rideway for
this freeway. And so, you got, you know,
this part here and this is all future UD
dot. and try to imagine that line
heading west. There's a lot of property
here still. So, that is one of the
challenges like it it necks down kind of
down here past the elementary school.
You can kind of see here. So, they're
looking at that because what they don't
want to do is put in a road and rip it
out a few years later. It just doesn't
make sense from a cost. But trying to
find the best option
and I know it doesn't make sense, but I
thought a lot of that property has
already been acquired.
I know there are a lot of those houses
looking at the UD do county paral map
maybe about half of it has so some of it
could still be negotiation I mean all I
can see what's been recorded and it's
kind of split right now so there's still
some that are private property what I
was looking at the other week
correct
yep did I say south
nope it's north yep so it's like this
yep it's like right here
yeah and with this David does you not
factor in like emergency situ situations
as well. Like say there's a wildfire,
everybody's got to get out. Are they
planning? Because some of these sound
like you're saying 2032 and later, like
that's,
you know, it's like way too far out and
our population is going to keep
screaming up. So, are they looking at
that? Because I think we need it now.
They are. We are. We We are screaming to
anyone who will listen to us and we are
trying to push this. I know we have our
lobbyists working at at the state level.
We met with [clears throat] the Senate
and leadership just a month ago with
mayor. So, we are doing everything we
can to absolutely do that.
And follow up on that if you don't mind.
Is there anything the citizens can do to
help harf on them as well? So, if they
don't just have your cell phone numbers
because you're calling so much, maybe
the rest of us too.
Um, probably just reaching out to, you
know, state senators and, you know, um,
Congress members as well, just the need
for this and find out who's and we can
try and put a list together. Maybe our
lobbyists can help us with a short list
of who to contact. I don't know all the
people off the top of my head, but we
could reach out and try and put
something together.
Yeah, they have monthly transportation
commission meetings that correct that
um determine some of that funding. And
so there's ultimately some uh influence
politically that that certain areas, you
know, that someone has to make a
decision on funding and that
[clears throat] that's where some of
those places take place. But you could
you could talk to the local U dot region
folks, but some of that is determined by
people way above us.
Yeah. But I think I think it's a good
comment for our our citizens residents.
I think they could reach out to some of
those folks. We can try and get a list
together. I know we are going through
the RTP process right now for the 255
and again we are
pushing pressure on that very much about
the prioritization that's coming up here
soon as well and what's a priority. We
know this is a priority lake mountain
corridor as well because if this there's
an accident in here it's like all we
have is Pony Express and that's it. So
great questions though.
[clears throat]
So going back to Ranchers Parkway. So
yeah, we have tentatively funding to to
fund that project, removing the
meetings, added the travel lanes, and
this is just funding for the phase one
component um which was this work here as
well as the traffic signals and the
intersection improvements at Pony
Express.
So, and that would help our capacity
significantly. We're currently just
under 30,000 vehicles a day and we're
just approaching failure for four lane
is 312.
Um the [clears throat] projections put
it well over 40. And so by going to
seven lanes, our our capacity gets to
like I think it's 50 55 50.5 I think. So
it'll definitely get us a good 10 15
years.
So one of the comments from the folks
[clears throat] at uh the Highlands,
they asked is, "Hey, if we don't expand
ranches, could we expand airport road?
What does that do? Can that help delay
some misimprovements?" And so we said,
"Yeah, we'll model it and we'll see is
that a potential option." So we reran
our model showing Airport Road in there
now. And it did pull some traffic off of
Ranch's Parkway. Before this was at like
33,000. Now it's like 29 something. I
can't read that, but Oh, here we go.
291. [clears throat] And so we reran it.
This is asis in 2035. No build. Ranches
completely fails. Had almost just shy of
40,000 vehicles. So pretty bad failure.
We reran it in this scenario. If we
build airport first, we put five lanes
on airport, we leave ranches as is, what
does that do? And we just improve the
intersection at Pony Ranches, it
actually gets worse. It pushes more
traffic because right now that
intersection at Pony Ranches is like a
natural bottleneck. It limits the
traffic that flows through. If we fix
that, it actually puts more traffic
through there. And even adding airport
road doesn't draw that much off because
people are wanting to head east and most
people don't want to go west to go east.
That's just natural human behavior. So
[clears throat] but it is an important
road. We do an airport road for this
development future. It's good having the
redundancy. It's a big very good road.
But in my opinion the priority is
ranches and that's what this looks like
in 2035.
Airport as is. We're start looking at
design at that point, right acquisition,
but focusing on here we go. Sorry, I
went backwards. There we go. There's the
future build out with airport starting
to expand to five lanes and then with
ranches at seven lanes gets us under
capacity. So that's what we're promoting
is to kind of fix ranches first and then
start to look at airport.
But we did hear their concerns. We
wanted to see if that was an option. It
was a fair question to ask, but the
immediate concern is ranches right now.
Uh update number eight was updating the
spring run area. There's a lot of
development that's kind of uh on the
foreground in this area. And so this is
kind of the proposed layout that we are
trying to pursue for the city. What it
does is it takes Wagstaff Way, which is
that yellow minor arterial east west as
kind of the main thoroughfare for that
region um to kind of move traffic in
this area versus having a bottleneck
right there at Spring Run by the
Walmart. So, we looked at that
intersection quite a bit with the
development that's going on at that
corner. Uh, we're adding a free right to
keep traffic moving from the highway so
it doesn't back up onto the highway
because we don't need another um
Pleasant Grove interchange. So, we we
looked at that very thoroughly.
Um, we also ran the models for the
future level of service in 35 and then
at 50. So, trying to stay ahead of
things. Ponies still even with pony
widening, it'll still be a challenge,
but We're hoping that we can get that
Lake Mountain corridor sooner than
later. We know that's going to help a
lot.
And then we update the project lists
based on those modeling just rep
prioritizing what projects need to kind
of come first. And that's back to the
prioritization list that I showed you
before.
And then we updated the future
functional classification map. We tried
uh re reorganizing the legend. There is
one typo that I caught and I fixed it
already. It's in the packet for council.
Uh the seven lanes still says major
arterial, but I got that fixed. So now
it says principal arterial. So if you
want to recommend that with that change,
that's great. But this kind of helps
show the classifications. And then as
we're talking with developers and
prospective folks out here, you know,
we're showing we have two large, you
know, Utah facilities in our area along
with a lot of uh additional capacity in
the future.
With that, we went through and updated
the 20 35 and 50 costs. Some of the old
tables had a lot of assumptions that
some of these roads were done by MAG.
And while we're always trying to submit
for MAG, we're not going to get it.
First of all, it's a two-year cycle, so
we're not going to get it every year.
And even then, it's, you know, we may or
may not get all of them, we might get
one, maybe two. So, we updated that so
it more accurately reflects more of the
burden on the city to account for those
costs
again. So that's kind of the the
majority of the updates. Just trying to
be more consistent throughout the
project, clarify, you know, some of the
hierarchy and just kind of update
information as we have and better help
facilitate development review and future
impact fee calculations.
So our recommendation is that planning
commission uh propose a favorable
recommendation as we move forward to
city council u next week.
the questions on this list or anything
else in the city I can answer off the
top of my head.
Yeah, let me let me just make sure
my agenda. Okay, so as public hearing um
I think any other uh some questions for
staff or David at this time before we go
to the public hearing.
Um I guess I do have one. Um, does the
long-term plan, and you had mentioned
this related to Silver Lake Parkway, do
does the plan show expected
agreement agreed roads between Saratoga
Springs and Eagle Mountain that don't
include
that we would both cities would consider
local that connection rather than just
Midland Valley Road, which is now Lake
Mountain. besides express besides SR73
are those shown I know and it sounds
like this those two cities are working
together having additional local roads
that connect across the municipal
boundaries I know are a challenge but I
think it very beneficial but do you have
any information on that?
Yep. So there are additional connections
as well. Let me go back to the document
itself. It's easier to talk through. So
if we look at the project list, so this
is one we've shown as a local road
making that connection. Um we're also
showing a connection here
and I cannot remember the street name
off the top of my head.
The other one we're showing is up here
Scenic Mountain and the
Talis Talis
Talis Ridge. Thank you. Y
[clears throat]
and we're actually that study so we
actually reviewed that study that was
done by Edge Homes and it was it was a
pretty reasonable study. They projected
like 2,000
vehicles a day which is That's local
road traffic. So that's ideal. We are
doing our own study as we do a the speed
study throughout the city. That's a
component of it is to review that
because we're collecting data in that
area. But that would be one as well.
Um the other one is Wild Blossom. That's
this connection up here 48. So we're
also looking at that as well. That would
be a major collector though, but still
an important connection to make.
And off the top of my head, those are
the main ones that we're showing right
now. Eventually Porter's Crossing, but
this is a future one. It's not a 2035. I
think it's a 2050.
Thank you.
Any other questions?
Okay. Thank you, David.
We'll go ahead and um we'll proceed with
our uh public hearing for this agenda
item. Just a note. Um if there are any
um residents that are wanting to make a
public opinion or a public uh comment,
um make sure I get this right. You're
limited to three minutes. You'll need to
enter or provide your comment and your
information. You can do it online ahead
of the meeting or you can do it um
papers are in the back on the right side
of your the meeting room. Uh you can put
your information down and submit that.
But um it is now 7:06 we'll go ahead and
open our public hearing. Um uh as staff
received any online communication that
needs to be presented.
Any anybody in attendance from the
public that is wishing to make a a
public comment on this agenda item?
Hi there. I've not met you before. I've
been to several city council meetings,
but the first time I've been to the
planet commissioning, so I'm trying to
get ahead of this. Um, my name is Eileen
Miller. I'm with the Utah Valley
Homebuilders Association. And of course,
we're very interested. We are always
happy when you folks are able to land
grants or get extra money to put in
infrastructure and roads and things like
that. So, we'll be sure to try to help
you guys out with some money and we'll
try to lobby those legislators for you.
I spent 20 years as the state senate
recorder, so I have I know who they are.
[laughter]
So, anyway, so very happy to see you
guys securing funding because that is
just enormous. Uh the next thing we're
most interested in is infrastructure. Of
course, your big trunk lines and the
skeleton of what happens every time you
tear up a road. You know, you're
breaking into infrastructure. And of
course, those costs are offset to
developers or in our situation, the
builders, and we don't represent as many
developers as we do builders. But
anyway, we also do the parade of homes,
which was a tremendous success this
year. Just had to throw that in. So, um,
anyway,
um, since the days of Chris Trusty, I I
showed up here today on purpose to meet
Mr. Salador
and, um, I'm hoping that he will share
this PowerPoint with me. I'll I'll email
you and if would you share this with me?
[snorts] Okay. The other thing, the
reason being is because a lot of our
builders look to see where the future
growth is going to be and where there's
going to be infrastructure put in that
they don't have to cover costs on. And
so that's that's a big deal. So, um, the
other thing too, could I get the name of
the consulting third party engineering
firm that you used for the FFB?
Horox. Okay, very good. Very familiar
with them. I'm from American Fork.
So anyway, this is a big big deal for
you folks and um it's a big overhaul and
a lot of these major roadways, you know,
like I said, it's the maintaining level
of service, but then you've got so much
going on out here. This is where the
growth is going here and down through
Santa CLA.
So, we're really interested to see how
the development's going and um trying to
stay ahead of it so that we can help the
builders make good decisions. So, when
they go to secure loans and things, um
the amount of infrastructure and stuff
that's going to be disrupted and how
much is going to be offset remaining
offset to the impact fees and building
fees is of great concern to us. So,
thank you so much.
Thank you. Appreciate it.
Anybody else wishing to make a public
comment?
Okay, seeing no additional comments, um
we will um end our public hearing at
7:09. And do we end the public hearing
before we if David needs to respond to
any comment? Okay, we'll go ahead and
end the public hearing at 709. And
David, is there anything that you would
need to follow up as the presenter of
the item? Nope. Just on city council,
these slides will be in the packet and
happy to share them as well. So, just
didn't get time for you guys. So,
okay. Thank you. Um, okay. Discussion
on the commission about this item.
Commissioner Allen.
Yeah, I've just got a few little
corrections I can email you about,
David. Just minor things like where it
says in one paragraph, we don't have
deficiencies, but then later on it says
we do and things. I can send this to
you. I've got it noted in here. Okay.
Update it for the uh
for the city council. Um I I just want
to say too to the public, I know
infrastructure is our number one
priority and concern across the city.
But I I hope that they will watch this
or go back and see like you guys are on
this. You're working at it. We've got
professionals. You're lobbying. You're
talking like you're doing all you can to
to help this city out. So I hope they
appreciate that and the things you're
doing and the analysis and all the
effort you're doing. So, I think the
planning commission, we definitely
appreciate it and anything we can do to
help is a good thing and I think these
changes we've seen tonight are exciting.
I mean, I think that's exactly where
people would say we need help right here
on the on these roads. So, you guys are
on it and uh we just appreciate it.
Thank you, David.
Thank you.
Okay. Um with that said, I'll entertain
a motion.
I will um I will make a motion to
forward a positive recommendation to
city council on this agenda item with
the noted changes mentioned by David
Salazar previously as well as um
suggestions coming from Commissioner
Allen. Do are those are those are just
edits?
Yeah, I can email those over later so I
don't have to include them in the
motion.
Okay, we'll exclude that from the
motion. So, um, again, make a motion to
for a positive recommendation to city
council with the changes made by David
Salisar.
I'll second it.
Okay. Uh, commissioner hasn't made a
motion. Um, followed by a second by
Commissioner Strong. We'll proce any
questions. Any need to clarify that
motion?
Okay. Start with our voting.
Commissioner Jensen,
yes.
Commissioner Hess is yes. Commissioner
Strong,
yes. Commissioner.
Yes.
Okay, that vote passes with four votes
from the commission. Thank you for the
time and presentation. Thank you.
Uh, next on our agenda is item 7B. Um,
this is a um
this is a public hearing or the agenda
item is Angel.
landing lot split and this is going to
be presented uh by is Mickey. Oh, hi.
Sorry about that.
Okay,
surprised you.
Thank you.
Um yes, so this is a lot spplit. Um this
is the kind of general location of it
here. So it's just off of Pole Canyon
Boulevard. Um there's an existing home
on the property. Its access is actually
to the west um over in this vicinity
here. and they are proposing to split it
into two lots of just about 10 acres. Um
it does predate the 1996 founding of the
city for the requirements. Um they're
over five acres. Um and then that road
access to the to the west there and then
parcel B would be onto P Canyon
Boulevard to the north. Um reviewing the
requirements for a lot. They are all
met. Um they do have access to the
street. They're not less than five
acres. Um and that was created prior to
uh the founding of the city,
incorporation of the city. And then this
is just a zoomed in version of what's
existing right now. So their proposal
will split it right down the middle in
half here. Um there is a concept plan
right now that's been submitted to the
city. It's only in the intake review
process. Um but it's for a storage unit
for the second lot for that eastern lot
there.
Okay.
Any questions for staff?
Commissioner Strong.
Yeah. The the split to the second lot, I
assume that's going to be
AR1 type lot, one one house on an
agricultural.
So, the existing lot would remain
agriculture with an existing house. Um,
and then the second lot is it's
agriculture as well right now. Um the
storage company hasn't gotten into the
process of reszoning it yet, but it
would need to be resoneed.
Storage company.
Um the storage company is who submitted
a concept plan for this eastern lot for
they're looking at doing a a business
there.
So we're just entertaining this lot
split.
Just the lot split. Yeah.
Future.
And there's interest in developing the
second lot if the split is approved.
Right. You have to keep your review to
just the lot split, not any potential
future uses.
Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner J. You had
a question.
I did. Where's the road access on that
back half
on this one here?
Yeah,
it's going to be on Pole Canyon
Boulevard here.
Okay. Any other questions for staff?
Okay. Thank you. Um, this is a public
hearing. We'll go ahead and, um, open
our public hearing for agenda item 7B.
It is 7:15. Any online information or
comments made that need to be presented?
Okay. Anybody in attendance in the
audience that is wishing to make a
comment on this agenda item?
Seeing none, we'll go ahead and end that
public hearing at 7:15. And um any
discussion from the commission,
I will entertain a motion on agenda item
7B.
And then Marcus, to be clear, this is an
approval, correct?
Yeah, I was just double checking. I
believe you had line authority.
Okay, that's how it's listed in the
package. Just want to make sure. Um, if
that's the case, commission, I move that
we approve item 7B as presented.
I'll second it.
Okay, we have a motion uh from
Commissioner Allen to approve uh the
item followed by a second by
Commissioner [clears throat] Jensen. Any
questions? Final
discussion?
We'll go ahead with our vote. Um,
Commissioner, I will start the vote.
Commissioner Hess says yes. Commissioner
Strong,
yes.
Commissioner Allen,
yes.
And Commissioner Jess,
yes.
Thank you. Okay, that vote passes with
four uh votes from the commission. Uh
thank you for the presentation.
Okay,
next on our agenda, um we'll be
reviewing item 7 C um an ordinance um
regarding preliminary plats and that
will be presented by David Straoud.
Okay, get switched over here.
[clears throat]
All right.
So, these next two items we're are
dealing with uh one's a proposed
amendment to the preliminary plot, one's
a proposed amendment to the final plat
language. They they run together. They
they're associated with each other
obviously. Uh they are separate public
hearings. So we what we can do if if
you're acceptable or you'll uh do that
is just we'll do the first one public
hearing address it action then we can
move on to the next one but again
they're both both related to each other.
So the first one involving preliminary
plat um you know sometime at times when
when I see a code amendment command I'm
working on something I'll usually scan
other parts of that section say if we're
already going to be in that section
anything else we need to change. So, so
that's here with the first one. So, it's
a very minor on that first box. Uh,
county does use book and page, but it's
always the entry number. And so, um,
we'll just, you know, propose change
language say what's the entry number for
that whatever that recorded document is.
It's usually a number and then the year
that it was recorded. Uh, the second
one, uh, deals with street naming and
whatnot. Uh, a part of this box is
already contained in the in the final
plot language. It was put in there a
couple years ago. it's probably best
served in the preliminary section. Uh
I've also expanded a little bit on this
one as well uh by by talking about
street names that they will continue
when they cross another street. So, and
I'll give you an example here on the
next slide. I had and this this was
instigated by a plat I was reviewing for
a developer where they had their local
streets, local street intersection. Once
it crossed one local street, the name
changed. like doesn't make sense to me.
Now, you could make the argument, well,
if it was a numbered street,
you know, it wouldn't change you
wouldn't change those if it was a
numbered street, but I mean, just for
clarity and for wayfinding and what to
me anyway, it makes sense that that that
street name remains.
Uh, dealing with the north, south, east,
west, that's already the language in the
in the final plot. So, that doesn't
change there. It just changes location.
Uh we also had a a review come in that
Mickey was reviewing uh which the the
street was Aster and well if it's East
Aster you know it could be written
addressed a few different ways. It could
be E Aster someone could look at that
and go well is that supposed to be
Easter. So again to to kind of you know
delay any kind of confusion or put a
roadblock up on confusion down the road
of street names um we would look at
those at staff. would be up to staff
obviously to say well could this be
construed to be something else uh and
also saying well and the example I also
Jeffrey way Jeffrey way could be spelled
two different ways
we don't want to have you know the same
street name is spelled differently um
and so if you can recall the Nate Barati
SNL skitd on Jeffrey anyway um I thought
of that when I came up with this but
just to clarify and and make things a
little smoother in the review process
and you know, street finding,
wayfinding, uh, and whatnot. And I even
asked fire, uh, Dan with the fire
department, and they, they do not like
to see street names change either at
intersections. Uh, they prefer to see
them continue on as, uh, as named. And
so, this was the plat that actually, you
know, instigated this, like I said, uh,
where they had white baldy way, but once
you got into Tulle Mountain, it changed
the line head path. That does doesn't
make sense to me. So that's what caused
that. So that would be the first first
uh item there. If uh you know at your
discretion if you want to act on that
now and see if there's a public any
public comment and then uh move forward
with that.
All right. That includes any any
questions for David on the presentation
for 7C.
Okay. See no comments or questions from
commission. We'll go ahead and um begin
our public hearing. Uh is uh 7:21. We'll
open our public hearing for agenda item
7 C. Um any information submitted online
for that needs to be presented? Anyone
in attendance from the public wishing to
make a public comment on this agenda
item? Okay. All right. Seeing no
comments, we'll go ahead and end the
public hearing uh at 7:21 p.m. And any
discussion
um from the commission on this item.
Okay, see no discussion, I will
entertain a motion for agenda item 7 C.
Uh I would move to forward a positive
recommendation to council for item 7C.
I'll second.
I'll
second. Okay.
We have a motion by Commissioner Strong
uh for for a positive recommendation as
well as a second by Commissioner um
Allen. And uh we will
go ahead with our vote. Commissioner
Strong,
yes.
Commissioner Allen,
yes.
Commissioner Jensen,
yes.
And Commissioner Hes votes yes. And that
vote passes with four votes uh on that
agenda item. And David, as you had
mentioned, you're right back up with 7D.
Is that correct?
Yes.
Okay.
Yes, that is correct.
Thank you.
Uh so so 162540 on the final plat
section [clears throat] again. What's
the first box there?
Strike that. That's been put then into
the preliminary plat section as well.
And then also adding, you know, when
plats come through, uh, sometimes
there's question of, well, is this a HOA
property? Is this a city property?
There's instances where the city is
maintaining park strips. I think that
should be identified. It certainly is
helpful on a on a final plat of what the
city is responsible for. And so this
would then become a requirement here.
Plaque comes through. Again, sometimes
those are identified, sometimes they're
not. Uh, but this will just be uh
hopefully one more uh thing that we can
look at and make sure is identified
properly on the plat.
Great. Any questions, technical
questions for staff or David?
All right. Um, seeing no questions,
we'll go ahead and um start our public
hearing uh for this agenda item 7D. It
is 7:23 and we're looking for comments
from anybody online. No information uh
anybody uh prepared to make a public
comment on this. Okay.
Seeing no public comments for this item
or the public hearing, we'll go ahead
and close the hearing at 7:23 p.m. Um,
and any discussion
from the commission on this item.
Okay, seeing hearing no discussion, I'll
entertain a motion.
Chair, I move that we forward a positive
recommendation to city council for item
7D as presented.
I'll second that. Okay. Thank you. We
have a recommendation or a motion by
Commissioner Allen for a positive
recommendation and a second by
Commissioner Strong. Any questions?
Okay, we'll go ahead with the proceed
with our vote. We'll start with
Commissioner Jensen.
Yes.
Commissioner S votes yes. Commissioner
Strong,
yes.
Commissioner Allen,
yes. Okay. Uh, that vote or that agenda
item passes with a for with a positive
recommendation with four votes.
Chair, this might be a good time for me
to step out.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, excuse
Commissioner Allen. Thank you,
Commissioner Allen for being here. Uh,
just a note for the agenda that will
take us to three commissioners. Um we
still obviously have sufficient for a
quorum but just a technical note we that
will still require three votes for the
remaining agenda items to pass per the
process. Okay.
Next on the agenda is item 7E um an
proposal to uh for Eagle Mountain Cha
Chapel and Recreation Building
Development Agreement. And this will be
presented by Stephen.
All right. Sorry. Thank [clears throat]
you. And if it's okay with you, I'm
gonna it's gonna 7F's going to be talked
about as well because they're linked
together.
Oh, yeah. Um I guess the only if if you
[clears throat] present um
uh what's the recommendation for when we
have backtoback for for we just
You can present them together, but they
got to be considered separately.
So we'll Okay, that's fine. Thank you.
We'll do we'll do that
and I'll try to explain what's different
between the two of them. Okay.
Okay.
So, both the development agreement and
the site plan um have to pertain to
this. It's these two properties, right?
Well, I guess it's three. These three
properties right here. So, zoomed in,
it's it's this property here, this one,
and then uh the applicant recently
purchased this strip of land from the
city, and there has been an approved
plat amendment. Now, and it's not
recorded yet, and these reflected on
here. Uh this is all will now all be one
lot.
Um the purpose of this is to facilitate
this site development. So this existing
structure back here will be expanded
uh remodeled to uh turn it to a
religious or cultural hall by adding all
of this up here. Um these two houses
that were here will now be removed and
then all this parking constructed.
And then I don't know if it's necessary
considered phase two or second half of
this project will be this recreational
building down here um which is an
accessory use to
the religious building up here. If you
recall we we had a code amendment last
month that dealt with this to allow such
a use um the height standards change to
allow something like this to happen. So
that was approved. Hence why this is
coming. Uh the purpose of the
development agreement is [snorts] there
were two aspects of the site plan that
weren't compliant with our code. One was
when you have a parking lot over a
certain size that requires a 10-ft
raised delineated pedestrian access to
the building. Um staff felt that it was
easier uh given the slope constraints of
the site and this layout to have two
separate six-foot delineated pedestrian
accesses. So there's actually additional
pedestrian walkway. So there'd be one
here to this building and then one that
comes up here and then crosses to
recreation building and then one across
the parking lot. So that was better
pedestrian circulation and then it just
helped the site work better than having
to set up such a big wide area.
Uh the second one comes as you're
looking at these elevations. This is the
addition to the what's the current
structure. This would be the religious
building. As we flip through these,
you see what's existing is kind of faded
out. And then what is going to be added
or changed is brighter there. And this
building was fine. Met all the code
requirements. Height's good. Um,
articulation was great.
And this is the proposed recreation
building
and it was on this east elevation. Um,
wasn't very articulated. However, this
does um is it is adjacent to the rear of
Walmart. And so based on feedback from
city council, the second ask of
development agreement is to allow this
wall to be as is as proposed. So not
required to meet code on that one.
Um
we'll get to this one. And then the
third part of the development agreement
is to facilitate the site because it is
currently on septic that probably
wouldn't work or the applicants agreed
to construct this sewer line that's
going to leave down here come down
autumn lane to harvest lane and then
down all the way here and then there is
a sewer line down here right parallel to
SR73.
Um they will construct that at their own
cost. So city won't be held to that
cost. So that's just putting that in the
agreement.
So for the development agreement, our
recommendation is to forward a positive
recommendation to city council.
And for the site plan, the only thing to
add to that it was we did find that this
uh the lighting plan did exceed the
number of lumens.
We felt like it wasn't worth taking them
back to make a change.
planning commission's okay with that and
city council is that they'll just work
with staff to bring those lumens down so
they'll meet the
less than 100,000 lumens per acre. So I
just have to drop it down a little bit.
So it's the development agreement
recommendation and the site plan one is
that's contingent on the development
agreement and then that stipulation
about the lighting plan.
Okay.
All right. Uh commissioners any
questions for staff on these two
separate agenda items that presented
simultaneously.
Okay. Is the applicant here applicant
like to make a um a comment or anything?
Not only only if you wish to would be
fine.
The only comment that I would make is um
just that you know live here.
Yeah. Say your name.
Oh, my name is Jacob Baker.
Okay. Thank you. Um, and yeah, I've
lived here in this city for almost 20
years now and really looking forward to
the opportunity um to no longer travel
far away uh but to be able to live here
um gather,
worship and and here in in our city and
our community and really have
appreciated all the work that Stephen's
done in helping get this uh to at this
point and yeah, looking forward to being
able to to do this project. If you have
any questions for me,
any questions for the
Thank you. Appreciate it.
Thank you.
Okay. Um we will do uh first hold the
public hearing for um item 7E which is
the public hearing for the de changes to
the development agreement.
Um any comments from online or staff
that needs to presented? Okay. Any any
comments from individuals in the meeting
today?
Okay. Hearing no com Sorry, I forgot to
mention that we started our public
hearing at 7:32.
Seeing no desired public comment, we'll
go ahead and end at 7:32. Pretty
effective. Um,
and any discussion on agenda item 7E
regarding the development agreement?
All right. Um, it was hearing no
conversation or discussion with the
commission. I'll entertain a motion. Um,
I will actually go I'll go ahead and
make a motion to for a positive
recommendation to city council on agenda
item 7z 7e as presented.
I'll second it.
Okay. Uh, Commissioner has made a motion
to for a positive recommendation.
Seconded by Commissioner Strong. Any
questions? Okay. We'll proceed with the
vote. Uh, Commissioner Strong.
Yes.
Commissioner Jensen.
Yes.
Commissioner Hess votes yes on that
item. So, that agenda item 7E passes
with three votes. Um now with that
completed we will proceed with the
public hearing for the agenda item 7E
um which is the site plan.
Um any
sorry 7F
I'm sorry that no do not need to
apologize. Keep me corrected. Okay 7F um
it's 7:33 p.m. We'll go ahead and open
that public hearing. Any comments
online? Anybody in the audience wishing
to make a comment
hearing hearing? And seeing none, we
will go ahead and end the public hearing
at 7:33 p.m. And any discussion um from
this commission on this item.
Okay. Um hearing no discussion, I'll
entertain a motion for this item.
Okay. Well,
so on. So he has
Thank you, Stephen, for printing the
cheat sheet. So, he has language that
you can use and you can just make a
motion for and you could basically
repeat forward a positive recommendation
to the city including those two
conditions.
Okay. I would like to make a motion to
forward the positive recommendation to
city council with the following
conditions stated as stated. Right. Do I
have to state those?
I I would. Yeah. just
that the site plan is contingent on the
development agreement for the project
being approved and the applicant works
with staff to bring the lighting plan
into compliance.
Okay, I'll second that motion. Um so we
have a motion made by Commissioner uh
Jensen to forward a positive
recommendation seconded by Commissioner
Hess. Any questions? Okay. Um we will go
ahead and uh have our votes. Uh
Commissioner Strong,
yes.
Commissioner Jensen,
yes. and Commissioner Hes votes yes as
well. Okay, that vote passes with three
votes. Um, thank you for that
presentation on those two items. Um, now
we'll move on to our next agenda
uh item which is 7G. This is a um a
amendment to an existing code for
barbwire fencing and this will be
presented by Robert
No, no, it's it's a different group.
At least I suspect
chair and commissioners, thank you for
your patience. I just wanted to create
one new quick exhibit for another item
here. I had a minute. Water wire fencing
code amendment. This is a simple item.
It was generated as an idea for staff to
um engender into a type of code
amendment
due to a use that came through uh the
city not too long ago. I think it might
have been Williams went before the city
council ultimately and then they were in
the process of doing that asking at the
same time for a stretch of bar wire
fencing at top some of their other
fencing and couldn't do so without a
development agreement. This is aimed at
trying to cure that issue in the future.
And it's a simple correction or
allowance if you will that permits in
the RT RTI zone overlay bar fencing to
be used. It also uh does a little bit of
cleanup with the code as you see in item
5C5.
That's all it is.
Thank you. Any questions for Robert on
this item?
Yeah, clarify
why we're making this change.
It seemed that it was of interest to the
council to allow for the barbwire
fencing in that scenario and in that
kind of location, but they couldn't do
without a full on development agreement,
which engenders quite a process.
And what was the zoning in the area? I
think it was RTI. The base I assume was
industrial.
But I don't remember for sure. It wasn't
my item, but
Okay.
They wanted extra security measure on
top.
But this wouldn't open it up to
residential or
No, specified for the RTI
industrial.
Okay.
So it's it's changing the code so that
they cannot put the barb wire on top of
their fence.
Chair and commissioner the reverse. So
it's allowable.
So it is
in a specified situation. Yeah. Or place
the condition
where where chain says that that D that
right. Am I reading that correctly?
Under
we have two.
Yeah, it should be a six there instead
of two fives. Sorry.
That's okay. So, so where there's
chaining fence,
yeah,
bar wire is not
shall not have the bar wire be set on
top of the chain, but it's just allowing
that where within the RT overlay zone if
approved, bar wire fence could be used
in some form. Mhm.
So in that specified instance in that
area it allows for extra security for
industrial user that wants it
otherwise they wouldn't get it.
But it is there a height restriction or
anything?
Not specified. I didn't put that in
there. They're typically Constantine
wire and they're usually in rule sets
that I I haven't measured, but I'm going
to guess they're probably two three feet
tall.
Okay.
Just whatever's common industry
practice. And and I guess I'm I'm
thinking of the three strand bar
or straight across.
Yeah.
Yeah. There's no there it sounds like
there's no definitive exact layout of
barb wire, right?
Because um there's lots of different
reasons whether it's separate strands or
mesh plus barb wire. This is just simply
saying it's feasible.
But there's no mention of height or
anything particularly here
and chair that's correct and
and that's one of those topics that if
the commission and obviously council
down the road want to specify in this
case recommend
that it's good time to do so
okay
if you want limits etc
okay
thank you um any other
questions
okay this is a public hearing we'll go
ahead and um uh start our public hearing
for agenda item um
7G. Uh it is 7:40 p.m. Just want to
check in with staff to see if any
comment was made online for this agenda
item.
Nothing online. No, you're okay.
Multitasking is always um a challenge,
but any comments from those in the
audience that would make a comment on
this?
Okay, seeing no public comments, we'll
go ahead and end our public hearing at
7:41.
Any discussion from the commission on
this agenda item?
Okay. With no no discussion or
conversation, I'll entertain a motion
proposed by the commission.
I will um I will make a motion to
forward a positive recommendation to
city council um on this code change for
item 7G as presented.
Oh, sorry. No, I did not.
Brandon,
just had one question. Maybe I'm just
missing it. Are we on Don't we have to
two Roman numeral fives under the
exception we got one?
We can just fix it. Yeah, we noted that.
I'll fix it.
He Rob did mention that. Um, you did
mention there was an error there, right?
Did we mention
it? Seems like we're deleting too much
of the first Roman numeral 5 that it's
industrially industrially zoned. It
trails off.
Yeah, I probably should say property or
something like that.
Yeah. I'll fix those scriveners errors.
Pardon? Let's see. Let's go back to
that. Um that is
these are the attachment for this is the
code the code amendment document right
that you were looking at. So
correct
we let me get out of
the power the code. Oh wait. [snorts]
Okay. So, we noted that Rob there was an
error with two Roman numeral fives or is
Okay. Is that under C?
Yes. Yes.
You're you're eliminating a complete the
original Roman numeral 5 which is a
comment and it sounds like there would
be a revision to not eliminating all of
that. Is that correct?
Yeah. C5 will stay C5 and the word
properties was accidentally struck
through will be back.
And then the next one down will be
number six instead of Roman numeral
number five.
Okay. And so five five that's shown
removed now will read please let me
somebody read that to me so I can
understand
what it's going to say. Is it going to
say chainling fence is specified in this
title around
industrial zone properties.
Oh okay. All right. Okay. Okay. So, I
will amend and those are the only two
editorial changes from what's presented
here.
Okay. So, keep me on track. I'm going to
mention those in my I'm going to amend
my motion uh to include those two. Um I
make a motion um to forward a positive
recommendation for agenda item um 7G
with the two noted changes. The original
um C Roman numeral 5 will read chain
link fencing as specified in this title
around industrial zoned properties.
Is that correct? Period. That's the one
change. The second change is the
proposed Roman numeral 5 under C will be
revised to Roman numeral 6.
Does that work from a revised?
Okay.
I'll second it. Okay.
All right. We have a amended or a motion
um by Commissioner Hord recommendation
with a second uh seconded by
Commissioner Strong. Any questions or
need to clarify that from the commission
or staff?
Okay. Uh we will go we'll vote. Um
Commissioner Hes votes yes. Commissioner
Strong
yes. Commissioner Jensen.
Yes.
All right. Thank you. That item agenda
uh passes with three votes. Uh thank you
for that presentation. Um next is agenda
item 7F.
Seven. Sorry.
The next agenda item.
Sorry.
In trying to be precise, I am imprecise.
So anyway, shouldn't be a shocker to to
folks, but um 7H and this will also be
presented by by Rob.
Thank you, chair, chair, and
commissioners.
You will recall that recently the
commission acted upon the request by
city initiated at the behest of council
to reszone properties in this instance
in the scenic mountain area at the
northeast area of the city. This was the
third such effort and an ongoing effort
to, if you will, do housekeeping or
clean up the books wherein we have
properties that were zoned once upon a
time either by development agreement or
otherwise and given a signed districts
or zones that are now no longer on our
books.
And therefore, we are converting, if you
will, transferring those properties from
whatever they used to have to uh having
zones placed upon them that are codified
and this is one such instance.
Now in the case of Scenic Mountain the
smaller properties that have detached
single family homes upon them didn't
even meet the size minimum size
requirement that uh has been placed upon
them of the RC zone residential cottage
zone.
And so then one of the things that we
were trying are trying to avoid with any
of these reszones is creating what are
termed nonconformities.
So in instances where for example we
have someone from the private sector who
maybe they're an attorney or most often
a loan officer, an appraiser, realtor,
whatever. when they are asking about a
property that they are involved with
somehow financially in a transaction,
maybe it's a loan like a heliloc or
they're selling someone's selling a
house, they want to buy it, someone
wants to buy it, excuse me,
[clears throat]
the interested party
uh wants to make sure that their
financial investment is secure so that
if we have a nonconformity in some
fashion, like say they're looking at a
property that has like in this instance
a house upon it, but the lot is too
small to meet current city code. Well,
that's non-conforming.
Yes, it was planted that way. Yes, the
house is built. But a lot of times
they'll still want to cover their basis
in dealing with that question mark or
particular. The threat being that if
something happens in their minds anyway,
often times to that house, using our
example, like for example, it burns to
the ground. Their concern is, well, will
the city come back and say, well, that
property is too small to be built upon
again. It has to just remain open space.
Sorry. Now that's an exaggerated example
and probably not super derain to this
necessarily but those kinds of things do
happen in other instances. So to
eliminate any question of that going
forward the thought is to introduce a
simple amendment
uh that will be sort of a catch or
safety net and frankly help prevent both
interested parties and staff down the
road in future from having to deal with
this topic whatsoever. Other words, we
won't have to worry as much hopefully
about people emailing in, calling in,
asking about the zoning conformance of a
given property because there's already
this out in the code for this kind of
instance. What we're dealing with are
again the lots under 4,500 ft. Which is
our smallest lot size allowance in the
city in the RC zone for detached
housing. So what it basically does is
say, okay, if you have a lot that is
smaller than 4500, it's going to be
considered a legal conforming lot, we're
accepting it in that zone, even though
the normal standard is 4500. And the
same with setbacks. If they're
pre-established setbacks on a structure
and they happen to be, for example, say
five and five versus say 10 or what,
then we're going to accept that. And
that's our way of in a sense
grandfathering them without clouding
title by saying it's grandfathered.
Marcus has looked at this. U one
counselor was agreeable with it as well.
So staff recommends it for approval as
drafted.
Okay. Um
do do we anticipate so so this condition
is really tied to two factors. one
trying to
allow or or acknowledge what was a
previous zone that is not currently on
the code to be recognized so that they
can continue with those similar rights
and in doing so there's a case where
maybe you know in this example that the
lot size in that process of transferring
hey this was a different zone it's we
don't have that zone it's a historic
zone we're going to move it to RC and it
just happens to be that a lot is too
small and so this is going to address
that. That's the intent,
right?
Sure. That's correct.
Is
does staff feel comfortable being able
to document
that on a lot bylot basis if it were to
occur
down the road? And so let's say we're
we've been making these decisions.
Obviously, I don't know if every single
lot is being noted. Hey, this one on
Scenic Mountain, there's one lot that's
4200 square feet. Like, is that being
documented so that there's not a
roundabout?
Well, chair chair, no. But the why for
of that is that we feel it's covered
because you've got, for example, a this
exhibit that's on the slide now.
Yes.
That has a zoning map display.
So, the property zoned a given zone. in
this case RC. So the in that kind of
yellow color, right? The darker yellow.
Okay, you have that now as your base,
right? And now this at the bottom of
table 172540 specifies, okay,
some of the lots that are in the RC zone
might end up being smaller than 4500.
They're fine.
Okay.
So generically because it would be
it's a parachute for all.
Yeah. Yeah. Because the zoning map is
going to reflect that it's an RC zone,
right?
Okay.
Um, that was a question that I had. Any
questions for staff on this agenda?
Yeah, just a quick question. So, this is
if you want to say it correcting past
sins, but going forward, anything new
approved would have to meet the zoning
requirements.
Yes. And if we look at the correct
commissioner u chair commissioner if we
look at the last sentence
uh of that little snippet paragraph if
you will that's on display it says as
you asked about that quote primary
structure setbacks
um oh sorry before that because I added
setbacks after my apologies. So nothing
in this provision authorizes the
creation of new lots smaller than 4500
feet within the RS RC zone and the
effective date would be of course when
new ordinance passes. So that's taken
care of.
Any other questions?
So I think the last two words on under
footnote 12 should say legally
conforming, not legally non-conforming.
Is that
That's correct. That's I didn't get that
on the slide. Sorry. But it does in the
the verbiage that went to you guys. It
should say legally conforming.
Uh the agenda item I'm looking at for
this for the the code amendment, the
historic lot. It says primary structure
setback less than allow less than
allowed by the RC zone for existing
structures are also deemed legally
nonconforming.
Okay. So that none in there goes away.
Okay. So so this will be so we would be
I corrected it. Maybe I didn't get it in
the packet that sounds like. So sorry.
That's okay. We'll we'll make sure we
capture that moving forward. Okay. Any
other questions? Thank you for that
caption.
Okay. Um this is also a public hearing.
Um and so we will um go ahead and open
our public hearing for agenda item um
7H.
Uh it is 7:4 p.m. Any comments submitted
online by public for comments? Anybody
in attendance wishing to make a comment?
Seeing no public comments, we'll go
ahead and end our our public hearing at
7:54. Uh and commission. Any discussion?
[clears throat]
Hearing no discussion, I'll entertain a
motion for this item. Uh I would like to
make a motion to recommend a positive
approval for item 7H
with the one change of removing non
as noted by staff.
So, okay,
I'll second them.
Okay, we have a a motion by Commissioner
Strong followed by a second by
Commissioner Jensen to for a positive
recommendation on this agenda item to
city council. Any need to clarify
the condition?
All right, we'll go ahead and do our
votes. Commissioner Jensen,
yes.
Commissioner Hess votes yes and
Commissioner Strong,
yes.
Yes. Okay. Uh that item receives three
votes and passes. Thank you for the
presentation and discussion. Next on the
agenda item is 7 I
which looks like oh Robert Rob got has
another item he'll be presenting. This
is um the item is a
code amending
section of the code we're getting master
site plans. Rob take it away.
Thanks chair. Hopefully I save the right
one in the right spot this time around.
Anyway, so in this effort
we are proposing that the code be
altered as you see in your exhibit to
reflect a need to make a technical
correction in our view.
The master site plan and what I will
call standard site plan process is much
like the city's designer view process
that other places have in some ways
including sites. So looking at
architecture, site layouts etc.
When the code was crafted at some
juncture anyway it was decided that for
larger projects we should have a master
site plan. I'll use the example of a big
box grocery store and associated pad
sites as one sample of that
consideration. And then in that kind of
a case, the pad sites and the store
proper later on expectedly in our case
the city would come forward with uh
specific or more specific site plans,
the standard site plans.
But what do you do when you have, as an
example, a charter school on southwest
souththeast part of the community that
sits on over five acres a qualifier to
have to have a master site plan
approval, but yet it's the only building
on the site. So then do you say, well,
you need a master site plan and as if
you didn't dial in enough already, you
need a standard site plan as well to add
to your process silliness. So this
breaks that apart and better I think
clarifies when one is required versus
the other
and kind of reformats things a bit too.
Now another um
consideration in all this is really
towards the end I'm just leaving here to
I'm hovering for a bit if you want to
read it again
is down on this page now
we allow concurrent submitts in a sense
we allow for a master site plan to
absorb if you will or have associated
with it period. Great.
And the problem with that though,
especially with our new open gov
tracking system, is that it muddies the
waters for us.
And sometimes an applicant will say,
well, can I get the plat in ahead of the
site plan? And have I got everything in
I need to to satisfy your plat
requirements? And now kind of picking
through all that. Much cleaner if we
still allow those kinds of items to run
concurrently as you expect we would, of
course. piggybacked if they want to
meaning site plan and plat but now we're
saying okay still give us the master
site application but also give us a
regular application for the plat now
maybe at some point we could say
something about a co-join fee where we
take the higher two fee values and maybe
that could be a correction schedule but
this is just simply keeping things
tidier and cleaner for us and um
It's also making a kind of a a
regulation change sense the spirit of
things I think
to specify that if you have like it says
an e
a plaid and a master site plan and they
want to come in together we want the
site plan first
but that may not be agreeable to
yourselves and city council
u there are instances especially with
commercial users I run into anyway that
say we don't know who's going to buy
propert
Therefore, can we just divide this on
speculative basis and then we will sell
the property here to whomever box maybe
or whatever. Then they may come back and
want to change or mend the plaid to fit
their footprint and then we'll go
through the site plan or design view
whatever you want to term it site plan
process but we'll look at their layout
their building etc.
I don't mind it saying what it says now
from a staff perspective because at
least it it triggers the conversation
and if that's not a a policy excuse me
that we want to stick with great
but somebody can decide that more
definitively
because it's a question that comes up
periodically anyway that's kind of a
quick summary.
Thank you Rob. Any questions?
Okay,
this is
also a public hearing and so we will um
open our public hearing at 8:00 pm and
find out if any comments were submitted
any comments being wish to made during
meeting by the public.
Seeing no public comments, we'll go
ahead and end the public hearing at 8:00
p.m. discussion from the commission on
this. Any discussion it
hearing? No discussion. I'll entertain a
motion
agenda item.
So you can So usually staff will make a
recommendation. So you can that's just a
helpful you can look at and that's
that's you know hey I make a motion to
forward recommendation.
Okay I will make a motion to forward a
positive recommendation
respecting the draft code amendment to
the city council.
I'll second that. No you're fine. I was
I was getting confused with our edit we
made previous one. So I'll second that
motion.
Any questions? Okay. Sorry. We have a
motion by Commissioner Jensen for a
positive recommendation. A second by
Commissioner. Any questions?
We'll vote.
Yes. Commissioner.
Yes.
Thank you, chair, chair and
commissioners. The quote simple vicinity
map you have on your screen shows the
property that we are about to consider.
I will quickly note that there is a
third piece. So this this property that
you see highlighted has three parcels
and a powdered to create that uh set of
actually not three lots and the
westernmost one in this area. If I get
my mouse to where I want it to
here
was inadvertently left out of legal. So
it's going to catch up to the other two.
You'll see it coming forward and it'll
be advertised for the same council
meeting in September.
But suffice to say, the goal is to
reszone in the end all three of those
properties out of a commercial setting
into agriculture.
Applicants representatives are likely
here and can explain if they wish the W4
of that, but suffice to say that in
conjunction with this effort, there's a
need to amend the original
master development plan and agreement.
Turns out that showed as you see on the
bottom portion of your image uh those
properties from CN as identified in that
legal documents to what we want to go to
now which is egg and then of course a
corresponding future language map
setting as I call them or um
or district or whatever you wish to call
it uh would be applied to harmonize with
or match
uh that zone change
16 acres in total Basically, Pinnacle's
project was recorded in 2022 or so, and
you see in your staff report the call
outs for the future land use map
category that you have there. That
obviously needs to be fixed
and should have been fixed uh on the map
at the time that this was originally
worked out in four years ago. Any event,
we'll clean that up, too.
You have any questions on this matter
for now?
You had mentioned the three. Does the
agenda include this three separate
parcels [snorts]
being recommended or just the two?
Just the two. So you mentioned that
starts as the one down here which is
under same ownership.
Okay.
Right there. That little rectangle
that's not
was just Yeah. With the partial number
out. So it's going to play catchup
uh rather than hold anything up. It just
we'll just have it trail on and it'll
catch up at council level.
So again, the whole thing is to be uh
changed over to agriculture is the idea.
Any other questions for for staff on
this
is the applicant would like to um
presenting.
Okay.
Hi, my name is Andy Flam. I appreciate
the opportunity. Uh, context matters.
This is kind of a strange request. I I
realize it. So, um, if Robert, would you
mind backing up just to see the, uh,
overall map of the community, the one
that shows all the different zones?
Um, one more. I think it was
that one. Thank you. So, this was
approved and recorded back in, I
believe, 21, uh, in November of 21. So,
uh, I worked on this project for a
couple years with both, uh, planning
commission and city council to try to
get something that the city wanted. And,
um, the planning commission at the time
recommended this CN zone along Aviator,
which I actually liked the idea because
I don't want to call out certain cities,
but, uh, if you drive down a city that
has become a busy road over time, you
have single family lots uh, on a busy
road. And so the idea here was to buffer
that and and so rather than have more
commercial up north, we shifted some of
that commercial from the northern
portion of this property. It was 160
acres rough um approximately square
property. We shifted that down along
Aviator. Um with the future freeway
coming in, it was anticipated that there
would be some traffic one day. Um we're
not quite there yet.
As you know, this is pretty much a
deadend road, the edge of the city. Um,
so when um and just to uh kind of defend
why one parcel was left off, this was
one parcel until just a few weeks ago.
Um, these roads that were put in by the
home builder, which is Century
Communities on the residential portion,
that's split the parcel into three, but
not on paper, it was still one parcel
with easements for those roads. So, um,
when Utah County found out about that,
uh, they pulled us from Green Belt. So,
we're getting killed on taxes on parcels
that aren't ready to be built on. It's a
dead-end road. We've, we've tried
marketing it for the last year. There's
just not a lot of interest in commercial
at this time. So, I'm not trying to
reszone to residential or anything.
Like, I I understand the the point of
keeping this commercial, but until
there's a use for it, we're just getting
hammered on taxes. And that's the
request. It's uh I mean it's really a
band-aid. We're try to get back into
green belt, but we're not quite there
yet. So, uh anyway, that's the reason
for the reszone request. Uh any
questions? I'd be happy to answer them.
Yeah. So, this is going to be if you're
moving them back to agricultural,
you can't unless you're you're providing
income off of that property somehow
agriculturally. You can't go back to
agricultural if I understand the
uh county code.
Are you talking about green belt?
Yeah, green belt. I'm sorry. Green belt.
You can be you can have agricultural
property, but you have to show some kind
of an income.
Correct. And so I guess I'm just curious
how your what your income's your
agricultural income is going to be off
of that property. You gonna
Good question.
You going to
plant wheat or
what do you
So we're dry farming the northern
portion of the property. Um and we've
got a lease on that and he was coming
down here as well, but the county didn't
like that there was detention basins
that this city required, which I
understand all of that. I'm I'm just
saying those things triggered this
getting pulled from green belt unjustly
in my opinion but it is what it is. So
in the interim until we can get it back
in green belt because there is a waiting
period. We the the way that the tax
assessor looks at the ground is based on
the zoning. That's how they value it and
that's how they tax you. So this isn't a
way to alleviate that uh in the short
term. Most of as you know the taxes uh
go to the school district and other
things. um and a very small portion
comes to the city. So overall, I don't
think this is going to be a big impact.
I think probably the the fee to reszone
this probably is going to recoup the
taxes that you would have had anyway. So
that's that's good question and that's
the reasoning behind it.
Okay. So is it twofold to go from back
to agriculture, one for taxes or is that
only contingent on the green belt
designation? Are those separate things?
The Yeah, the zoning doesn't matter for
green belt. It's a five acres
contiguous. So this even though roads
through it. Yeah. It's it's just for a
short term. Yeah. Um we know that uh one
day that this aviator is going to have
traffic and then I'll be back here. Um
hopefully you're all here again. But uh
five years and it's it's crazy that uh
there's not the same face here from
before. So it happens.
Any questions for the commission? So the
intent is to go [clears throat] back to
commercial down the road
one day. Yes.
Great. Thank you for coming, presenting
and and waiting to the end of our longer
agenda today.
That's totally fine. Thank you.
Thank you. Um okay. After hearing from
the applicant. This is a um
a public hearing. So we'll go ahead and
open our public hearing for this agenda
item. It is 81
p.m. I wanted to know if the staff had
received any comments online.
Uh, anybody in the uh publicly like make
comment?
Yeah. Yeah. If you'll you'll you'll
provide it to Megan and then you can
turn the mic on and and state your name.
You'll have three minutes.
Oh, one more button.
There we go. Good evening. My name is
Austin Thornhill. Um, and I live in one
of the properties adjacent uh in the
Pinnacles development that is adjacent
to this commercial property. And so I
had a few questions. Uh, most of them
have been answered by the applicant. So
that's very very helpful. Uh, really the
only question I have left is uh, this is
as described potentially temporary and
that's what it sounds like that the
intent is behind this. If it reverts to
commercial later, will adjacent
homeowners, again, just like this, have
the opportunity for public opinion when
reszoned or under the master development
agreement, will it be able to be taken
back to commercial again without a, you
know, uh without time for public
opinion, public comment. Um just want to
make sure that if if and when it does
get reszoned back to commercial that we
would have that opportunity. Um yeah,
and that was like I said, the other
questions were answered by the
applicant. Thank you.
Thank you for coming and making your
comment. Um Rob, could you clarify that
question?
Barring an unusual circumstance, then
the typical process would be that they
would come back through the public
hearing cycle just like this is doing to
yet remend, if you will, the agreement
map to get back to where it was or not.
It depends what the council decides at
the time. It's a contract between two
parties and they could decide otherwise.
But I would expect there'd be great
weight assigned to what had been
previously arranged. And it's not a
guarantee. It probably speaks to what's
expected in the future. And that's on
the books now. So partisans or parties
that bought property in that area should
be expecting that that's what the
potential development is going to be
because that was what was approved some
years ago.
Thank you. Okay. Um any other comments?
Just one question more for staff.
Everything's already built out around
this piece of property. So there's this
piece of property just there by itself
or
there houses all the way around.
There's
Yeah. So you got build out there and
then you've got these basically vacant
properties. Yeah.
So you got a chunk of a agriculture in
the residential area.
Yeah. You've got Well, at least it's
along the roadway. So, you have that as
a buffer and that's been the placeholder
the council has been agreeable with uh
in question mark situations.
And you know, maybe someday, maybe it
won't be retail that goes there. Maybe
if it does commercial, it might be
offices, dental, medical, small ones.
You know, that's a pretty common
subdivision entry methodology and and
circumstance as a buffer. I don't know.
You that's I don't have my [snorts]
crystal ball out.
Yeah. questions.
No.
All right. Um Okay, that will uh we will
go ahead and end our public hearing at
8:14 uh p.m. Um any followup discussion
based on your comment, Commissioner
Strong?
No, I just I I know the green bell,
you're really not
eliminating your taxes. You're just
postponing them by five years. You have
to pay back taxes for five years. So in
five years from now, either you or
whoever you sell it to will have to pay
those back taxes or you'll have to move
it into green belt again. And I I'm sure
you're aware of that.
Okay.
comments, questions or discussion.
Hearing no further discussion, I'll
entertain a motion.
Um, I will make a
motion to for a positive recommendation
to city council on this agenda item as
presented.
I'll second that.
Okay, [clears throat] we have a motion
by Commissioner Hess for with a positive
recommendation followed by a second by
Commissioner Jensen. Any questions or
clarifications?
Okay, we'll start with a vote.
Commissioner Jensen,
yes.
Commissioner Hess is yes and
Commissioner Strong,
yes.
Okay, that agenda passes with three
votes. Um, thank you for coming and
presenting and presenting as well,
Robert. Okay.
Um that is the end of our action agenda
item. Any um any discussion items that
we need to mention
hearing? No, nothing else. Anything
staff sorting? I just want to give you a
quick update. The Cedar Pass Ranch folks
have furnished to us their uh parent end
revision to our initial drafts for their
zone to give them to sign to that whole
property out there versus guessing or
assuming it's still county zoned. And so
that'll be coming forward to you here in
the future, but I'm probably going to
have it in front of you first as a work
session item at council as well just so
you can kind of fill things out and we
can have a presenter from their group to
discuss the details since they did most
of the drafting in the end.
Thank you. Um, next agenda or our next
meeting is August 11th.
Do we know anybody will be out of town?
I'll follow the other commissioners.
Okay. All right. Okay. Um I make a
motion that we adjourn the meeting at
8:17.
I'll second your motion. Okay. All in
favor?
I
Okay. Thank you.