Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We got a team together. It's a little after 5:15. Thanks you guys. Um, so let's go ahead and get going. Let's begin with the pledge of Well, first of all, welcome to 2026. I guess we were a little over a month ago when we last met. So, uh, few items to discuss tonight. I hope everybody had great holidays and a happy new year. We plow into it now, huh? See what it has in store for us. Yes.

Uh, let's start with the pledge of allegiance. Uh, would you mind leading us? Pledge algiance algiance 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. Thank you, [clears throat] Jennifer. Okay. Uh, we can start with the approval of the minutes dated September or December 2nd, 2025. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes dated December 2nd, 2025.

I will second that motion. Excellent. All in favor? I I motion carries. Uh, items two and three are public hearing items. However, um, they're going to have to be postponed. Is that right, Faith? to uh a little bit future. But is there anybody here from the public that came specifically to address items two and three, which is a general plan amendment and zone change? If not, we do we need to have a public hearing or if if nobody's here, do we need to open it? No, we just want to make sure everybody's they have a chance to talk.

All right. So, we won't open or close it. Um, and we'll move on to item four, uh, public hearing. It's a zone change from, uh, GC to R3M. Go civil.

Good evening, Dallas Buckner. Go Civil. Um, this is, uh, we recently did another zone change right across the street, and I think I had mentioned that in this meeting. Um, but ironically when we sent out the notice, someone from across the street said, "Hey, I want to do the same thing." So, um, here we are. This is an existing parcel that's zoned general commercial. Um, and we're requesting a zone change to R3. Um the really the the reason for this is just from a lending standpoint on an existing house and trying to get a residential loan on something that's zoned commercial. So

any questions? Seems pretty straightforward. Yep. Yeah. City have any problems with it or No. No. No issues. It is a public hearing. So, let's go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anybody would like to speak to this? Which piece of property is again? Was it the one that was highlighted? If not, we'll turn the sign around and close the public hearing and entertain a motion if anybody would like to. Oh, okay. Anybody? Okay. I'll make a motion um to for the zone change from general commercial to R3M at the property at 491 North 400 West.

I'll second that. Oh, sorry, Jennifer. You didn't say whether it was a positive or negative. Oh, a positive recommendation. Sorry about that. Who seconded? Who seconded that? Steve did. All right. Thank you. Um, all in favor? I. Any opposed? All right. Thank you. Um, public hearing is the next number five, development deferral agreement. Jesse, welcome.

Jesse Carter. I'm the owner of this land here. Um, so essentially what we are looking to do is build small single family homes on this portion with a twin home right here. Um, so with the from what I understand the new city ordinance, I can't remember how many feet within a development you have to finish the dedicated road. Um, and so the in talking with Kent, um, the city would want us to either now or in the future finish this portion of Center Street. Um, so what we are wanting to do, all of these homes front 25 North. Um, so there's really not a huge need for finishing this, finishing this road currently. Um, from what I understand, this road will eventually go all the way to West View. So, eventually this will be a pretty heavily traveled road. And we're not saying that we don't want to finish it eventually, but I don't know how many people have driven it, but there's really no one hardly ever driving it. So right now um in this phase just this little 1 acre portion here we're just wanting to defer that to a later phase.

Help me understand where that is kind of in reference to other places. Is it out by Iron West? So Iron Springs Elementary is here and then this is Mountain Shadows and Iron West is right here. So these are those new Iron Hawk town homes here. So,

yeah. And this is the new where we're putting in the new soccer fields right down in here. Just one point of clarification if I could, Jesse. What I saw on really we didn't give much of a submittal on this, but what we did get just said to defer improvements west of 4200 West. our understanding of what you were um let me get make sure you get the right map here. What you were wanting to defer because what we were saying is this is all one parcel. You're developing a portion of that parcel. Um you own both sides of the road. Um our interpretation of our ordinance is that you need to fully improve Center Street for that entire length um from Mountain Shadows over to Iron Hawk. And we had understood that it was just this portion west of 4200 West that you were um saying that you wanted to defer um based on what you submitted and and kind of based on our conversations earlier. So are you it sounded like you were saying something different in your presentation though.

Um no I think that's that's actually what we're trying to do from what I understand. You're also needing us to finish this water line right here. Correct. And so, yeah, from the conversations that

I am aware of, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to not knowing that we need to do that waterline, we may as well finish this portion of Center Street and then um you don't happen to have in red or where exactly how much of this we are trying to defer, right? So my my understanding of this was that um basically over through the intersection you would be building the the full width improvement and then you just taper down to the existing and this portion here is what you wanted to defer until you develop the south side. That was what I had understood

which some of that is we don't know exactly where these well likely the road would come in and meet with this intersection and probably this intersection but we don't know exactly how this is all going to play out here and so we don't want to build a road that we are then going to have to tear up. Yeah, understood. Yeah, especially knowing that this is not really a heavily traveled road quite yet till it Yeah, it's getting more and more so with the with the school and church over there and lots of people now in Iron West. It's getting more and more all the time. But but yeah,

is the right side of this road developed there where the the existing homes are? Is that developed? Yeah. So the the north side of the road is developed to here and of course down all all this along here is fully developed. Um so it's the and it's fully developed on the south side here. So it's it they would be already required to do you know of course their frontage and they'll dedicate the the ride of way. Um, but our ordinance allow requires them to do the other side as well since they own it and so it would really require the whole thing. They're asking to defer that western portion right until

so I'm not quite understanding they're they have to do the whole thing but they're asking for a referral a deferral. That doesn't make sense to me. So the requirement there would be nothing to defer if it were not a requirement. Right. So, our interpretation of the ordinance is that their requirement is to build the of course they'll be building the full roadway um where it's not developed on either side, but then they they do have to improve that southside as well. That's also their frontage, right?

That's part of this parcel that they're developing. and um the uh um but yeah, so they're they're they're not um arguing whether they're responsible for that. They're saying that they think this western portion would uh be better done at a later time when they develop that south side of the road. I see. So the north side they're going to when they subdivide for how many lots you're going to have, you're going to develop the north side of of Center Street. So the north side is already finished. It's just this south portion. Well, little portion that one acre, two acre, whatever it is. Oh, right.

Right there. You're going to finish one side of that, right? Yep. We will. So, this is a It'll be a PUD. And so, we're actually required to have a fence, I believe, 10 feet off of Yeah. um off of the sidewalk,

which we did want to present. We're not sure if if this is the correct meeting to do so or not, but we wanted to see if we could instead of the full 10 feet um do like a six foot wall off of that [clears throat] um sidewalk so that these backyards could be a little bit deeper. Um, it's going to be a pretty drastic amount because these homes here, their back wall goes all the way to the sidewalk. So, then it's going to jump up 10 ft. And so, we wanted to tailor that down to six um for the drainage swell that we're going to be doing here in the back. And then also some landscaping. What is the structure on the walls and stuff

on the as I like your your left side those homes right there? What is the is the wall against the center? These actually front center street. I'm not really sure. Okay. How that happened? Because you're not supposed to front a major collector road like this. But these ones back up to it. So they're double frontage with the front being here, but their back wall is tight with So yours are going to back up to it also. They'll back up. So they'll come off of 25 north and then we'll just have our fence here. So if I could just point out some differences, right? Because we've had this come to the board of adjustments before as well.

Um PUDS have a slightly different requirement for where fencing has to go. So we push them 10 ft off. Um those other ones right there are not PUDS. They're standard subdivision if I understand it correctly. So that's why there's a difference. Um there are advantages to going with the PUB usually density advantages and so in many cases it's a trade-off. You get some advantages by having PUB density and other things maybe you don't have to put in that you would for normal ones. Um but this is one of the downsides. So typically at least board of adjustments we've tried to keep those together. If you're going to get the advantages of the PUD you're probably going to have to deal with the detriments too.

Um you don't get the best of both worlds is kind of how we've taken it. The other real legal side of this that I struggle with is this isn't in the application. Um, we were aware of it because Mike told me that, but it's in the application. You guys saw it. It's one sentence. I don't think we can address it. To [clears throat] Randle's point, we would have to notice it correctly and write a summary to to address the fence tonight. Okay.

So, I'm wondering if that is something maybe we can encourage from your end if you want both of these because this is I would prefer both these issues be in the same agreement if you're going to do it because annoying when we have to do two for the same property. Um, it might be worth tableabling it and have you guys propose some better language and even maybe sit down with Don or me to actually put it into an agreement. Um, our temp fence goes or the well,

all of it to make sure we're clear because you even talked about waterline and you tried to point out different areas. It might be best to have that flushed out a little better. Um, so that we're all on the same page cuz you came in on a different page than Mike was and Mike came in on a different page than what we all expected initially. So, I mean, it's I have a question for Kent. Center Street, will that be a major feeder road? Yes. Going east and west. How far west is that road going to eventually? Will it go? It'll go It'll go all the way to 5700. As far as our property goes through, it'll go clear down to who knows where. Yeah, it's going to be major and it's going to be one of the main paths to get up to the school. Key drive is going to go right into Quap, right? Oh, that'll be [laughter] good.

So, so I'll I'll build a car wash out there. So, here's where we're talking about right now is this area here. But yes, Center Street would continue all the way to 5700 West that goes down to the interchange at at uh all of a sudden I forgot the name. So, I have a question. When you get a deferral, what's the trigger? What's the trigger for your obligation to actually fulfill those things? Is it when the homes are built? Is it after they're built? Is it when they're built? What's the trigger? I think that's what uh why it would behoove us to bring back some details for you. I think it that's a perfect question. Yeah. So, without the

I'm sure Jesse has something in mind. without a a development agreement to defer some of those improvements, it would be that they have to have they have to at least be bonded for all of it before we would even record the plat. Um, and then those improvements would all have to be completed before they could get certificate of occupancy on any of those units. So they're wanting to defer to where the part to the west of 4200 West would have a different trigger that would come when they develop the south side of the property. At least that's the way we understand it and that's what as Randall was talking really needs to be spelled out in the agreement.

Yeah. So I I mean I'm happy to sit down you and Mike and whoever else from Plat and Plat who wants to come in to work through those because those are that that trigger question is an absolute must because the documents are drafted that way to say what's the trigger to kick ahead deferred a deferred improvement in. Um the fencing one he told me that you guys wanted to set it back a little but not the full 10. I don't know what a little means. So that would be good to have spelled out as well. Okay. Um because at this point I don't know what they would be giving a thumbs up to. It picks [snorts] it up. Not everything you want that at least I know. Yeah. I wasn't aware that we weren't talking about the fence today. So

yeah, I was surprised too when we sat down for the meeting we had as staff. I was like where is the fence? [laughter] Yep. It's not there. That's the entirety of what we've submitted. So, and that's the unfortunate sometimes we when we do full subdivisions, we make them submit tons of stuff. And this one we don't really have flushed out exactly what's required for submitt. So, sometimes we get a napkin and that's kind of what this was. It's a napkin. Not even a napkin drawing, just a napkin. Um, so that would be my suggestion is you table it, allow us to get a more full submitt so that you can come here with everything you want, not have to come back three months from now because you didn't get something you wanted. Yeah. I mean, I don't make any guarantees they give a faucet or the council approves it, but it's going to be a waste of your time if you

Right. And as far as the water line, that was just something in the construction drawings that we're working through. It wasn't any type of a deferral or Right. No. And that's really didn't even need to be mentioned here other than the fact that that's why we're only asking for a deferral on half of it because it just makes sense. No, it makes sense. But [clears throat] it just be helpful to have all that in place. Okay. I'm already deaf. Yes. If if the if the planning commission wishes because this was published correctly, right? But not the fence. But not Oh, yeah. The fence is not. So, the fence would require us to republish it. For how long? Um, 10 days. 10 days.

Please state your name into the microphone. Sorry about that. [laughter] Okay. So, yeah, it it is possible. Can we do it that quickly for the next meeting? So, we would have to have We'd have to have the notices and this discussion and the summaries ready by Friday to get it out the door. I think that gives us 10 days, right? So, I'm hearing just somebody from your guys' office bring in Jesse, too, to make sure we're getting everything you're expecting and sit down in time to be able to get that to them because, yeah, state law now requires when we do public notices to give a summary of what we're doing. And so, we can't just do only a oneliner vague sentence. We have to have the details to summarize it. Um, but yeah, I'm here this the rest this week. So, perfect.

Thank you. All right. Well, okay. I'll make a motion that we table this until the January 20th meeting. There is a public hearing part of it, so we may need to Yes. I was going to ask, do we need to do that? Is anybody here to speak to this? We'll open the public hearing. Oh, just kidding. Close it. Now, we can go back on your mark. Hey, I'm just trying to move things along with people. Doing well. So, I'm doing my very best here on the limited brain cells that I have left. [laughter]

Ah, and sleep. Limited sleep. Um, so I'll make a positive re or a recommendation that we table this item until um our next commission meeting, January 20th, 2026. I will second that. A motion and a second. All in favor? I I'll warn you, we if they don't get it to us soon enough, we may push it for another meeting. Yeah, if as long as you're okay with that, that's on them. We are totally fine. Correct. Thank you, Jennifer and others. Um, okay. Uh, item number six, transportation master plan amendment, velocity builders. I don't think so. [clears throat]

You're going to do that? I'm I'm going to go ahead and speak to this and let me jump over to that on our uh master plan. What we're looking at on this we have in our street master plan uh you know this is where the terribles is now second east right loves out by the north interchange. We have on our master plan this minor collector roadway running between Canyon Ranch Drive and uh Wedgewood Lane here. Um as this issue has been pursued with UD do get their approval to be able to connect the road to Main Street to State Highway 130 right there. um they have uh considered it and and denied the request to have that new connection to to State Route 130. And so with that being being the case, it doesn't make any sense for us to have that on our master plan. um the master planned road there. Having that on our plan kind of creates an encumbrance there that really can't be fulfilled because they uh they can't build the intersection onto SR130. So what Velocity had requested um and what's your item six on your agenda is vacating this portion here. Um, and they only requested that because that's the side of the road that they that they uh where they own property and would be the ones affected. We looked at that and said while we're doing that, let's go ahead and address both sides. Um, and so that's item seven is for this other side, but it's really all the same thing for both of those um uh those two items. So, and uh um Tyler Meling with Velocity would have been here tonight. Uh he had

a conflict. He called talked to me. I told him, "Don't worry about it. I'll I'll cover both sides of Main Street in in in my discussion." So, that's why he's not here if you're wondering on that. [clears throat] Any questions for me? It's pretty straightforward. So, basically what you're saying is that cannot happen. It can't happen. Yeah. So, let's get it off the map. get rid of that encumbrance. I think that's do. Thank you. [clears throat] Any questions? Is it just too close to that other um

Yeah, but between this intersection and that intersection, there's not enough space to to meet their access spacing requirement. The other concern they had in in considering whether they could, you know, make an exception on the distance is especially being on the inside of that curve, they're really worried about the sight distance there. And so that was uh but we we had a lot of discussion with them. At one point it looked like we might get there and then uh as they kind of ran it up through their leadership. Uh it was they came back and said we we can't do it. We're not going to approve that.

You have a stop light at Canyon Center Drive and a stop light at the Canyon Ranch Drive. So there's there's a there is a traffic signal here. There's not one here yet. There is at Nichols Canyon right down here. Um this is plans for a stoplight there.

Um there's there is will potentially be a stoplight there. Yes. In our um agreement with UD do where it's laid out what intersections would be candidates for a stop uh for a s traffic signal if it's justified by the traffic volumes. this is one that's on the list that it that they have already agreed could be allowed um you know with the windco that's proposed here and and other development in the area with there's a traffic study that's about to happen that will look at that and I I I think we're pretty sure that that traffic study is going to project enough traffic utilizing this for all of this development that it will end up justifying it. So, we're anticipating that there will be one there. [clears throat]

Thank you, Ken. Yes. I'll open the public hearing for six and seven. I think we can do those together given that. Yeah, these are together. Say your name. N name.

Dan Roberts and thanks Dan. JMT owns the property on the east side of Main Street. We asked DOT to let us have a right turn in and a right turn out. and we were just flat told no, okay, by DOT. So, we were trying to eliminate all the congestion that is going to take place up there on the Terribles intersection, but uh DOT can they control all that, you know, back to that intersection. So, anyway, so we're okay vacating it. Uh and that's item number seven. Thanks. Wow, easy.

Thank you. all the extra land. Any other comments? If not, we'll close the public hearing and be willing to entertain a recommendation. You go. You go. I can. Okay. I'll make a positive recommendation on 2500 North Main Street that the transportation master plan be amended to eliminate the previously proposed road. Thank you. I'll second motion in a second. All in favor? I

Thank you. All right. Ordinance text amendment. Amber Ray.

All right. Amber Ray planning. Um so many moons ago there was the general commercial zone and that was rescended. Um however, so it was rescended in our ordinance. However, there are still areas of the city that are zoned general commercial. Um, so if someone is in the general commercial and they want to develop, they have to ask us where this general commercial zone is and we have to go and dig out this dusty copy and give it to them. So um, the general commercial zone is very similar to the central commercial zone. So, in an effort to make the zoning specifications easily accessible to the public, we are proposing a text amendment. Um, this is what it currently says in the ordinance under the general commercial zone. And we would, um, suggest removing what is red and crossed out and adding in what is green.

[laughter] Will that make your life easier? This would actually make my life easier and I think it would actually be very clear and easy for the public instead of this. What will you do with that free time? Well, [laughter] I don't know yet. We have plenty of work for it. Don't worry about that.

We got more band-aids Netflix. I don't know. Just just so you know from the legal side, the reason why I'm in favor of this um is we have no ability to change the general commercials requirements right now because it's it's basically deleted ordinance. So it is fixed and for over 10 years now we have not been able to change what's allowed or not allowed in the general commercial zone. But we've been changing something about every other zone during that time frame. This allows the council with your recommendation of course to make changes if we don't like something whether prohibitive or allowing in a general commercial zone without having to dust off the old one and bring it back and figure out what 12 changes we've made in between that we should make. This is just a simpler way to handle the same situation.

Right. Any [clears throat] other questions? If not, it's a public hearing. So, we'll open the public hearing. Carter Wilkey, I just have a quick question. Um, so I guess in this situation then with this now people there would be no need to change the zone then because a lot of times people come in and reszone from general commercial to central commercial. They could just leave it as general commercial and under they could do that now, right? But there's only just a what we what you guys find like a dozen if even that differences. There were like five uses.

Gotcha. that were different between the two zones. Um, so most of the time they weren't changing the zone. They just stuck with general commercial. It just took us a while to dust off the old version. Right. Thank you, Carter. Any others like to speak to this? If not, we'll close the public hearing and be willing to entertain a motion. I'll get my glasses this time. Okay. I'll make a positive recommendation for the ordinance text amendment pertaining to the repealed general commercial zone. Seconded. We have a recommendation positive recommendation and a second. All in favor?

I. Any opposed? No. [clears throat] Looks like that concludes our start in the for 2026