Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Dear father in heaven, we are grateful to come together today to u spend time working on the public's business and we ask for guidance and wisdom as we do so. We say this in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. Amen. I pledge 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. All right, we have one business item today. The final site plan PDO for Porter Lane Estates. Mr. Egot,

Mr. M on this one away. Um, so just a quick synopsis, the applicants, Greg and Troy, are requesting a final site plan approval for the proposed residential subdivision under the plan development overlay. The subject property is located at 522 West, 400 South, Porter Lane, also identified as parcel 03001 0209. for the code requirements and analysis. Number one, the final site plan compliance requirements. Um, they have applied, we have deemed them compliant, and they have paid their fees. Subsection E, subsection 2, final site plan application shall include at least the following information in subsections CZC2.2100A through I. Um so including in these packets the associated subdivision plat which um was shown um one additional parcel. Um so the best way to think about this and like simplest terms is the actual layout and the use itself did not change. It was just a a more of a security measure and a safeguard for the residents who are going to be part of that subdivision in the future. So, originally we did not have parcel A and I might be able to pull it up. Here we go. Let me try to zoom in a little bit.

Sport court, right? So parcel A is the sports court and we originally did not have that parcelized out and it was originally part of lot three and lot four and um in previous applications um there was there could have been disputes for lot three and lot four maybe not in Centerville but Mike brought up that in other cities he's seen this so to alleviate that for the future residents What we decided on doing is parcelizing out the sports court um and making it its own parcel. So then at no point can lot three or lot four and crouch on that in the future. That really is the only deviation from the original approved site plan. um the applicants addressed all of the requirements that the planning commission recommended um in the or yeah that the planning commission had terms for in the conceptual site plan. So um with that being said, we looked then at um the next approval process and those are the actual standards for approval for the final site plan. Um in the final site plan once again the layout outside of the staff's direction as noted above it did not change um the ad and they and we add addressed all of the conditions for the approval um by the previous city council meeting on August 5th 2025. Um after this review of both the proposed conceptual site plan um with the flexibility of the PDO and the final site plan staff is in support of the Port Atlanta State's final site plan submitt so long as the outstanding DRC

comments are addressed and last meeting was just this Monday and on the screen you'll see that the comments for specifically the site plan is lot frontages are incorrect. So lot three and lot four will need to be changed to correct the lot frontages on the plan set but that was just due to um parcel A being changed and just an engineering um slip and then for the final subdivision these were the comments that they gave for the final subdivision in the highlighted um I provided those to the applicant as well as the surveyor and the engineering team and they've already addressed most of these items. They're they're getting this resolved and our plan is to get it deemed complete and ideally do our first round of compliance for the subdivision in on October 6 and hopefully get it deemed actually in compliance and and be able to start working on myar for them. So that is um where we are at and that wraps up my report.

Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, so I have some questions for you that I'd like to understand. So parcel the parcel a um being created as a new parcel is different from the August 5th version. Correct. Yes. So um my question is more along the lines of of uh who owns that, who maintains it, who's going to be in charge of it, and that's going to be the HOA, correct? And do we need to impose a requirement for that? it it was updated in their CCNRs. Okay. Yeah, it was added as a parcel. That is part of their maintenance obligation. Maybe I missed that in the packet. Sorry.

The the CCNRs are pretty slim. I've noticed that. But that's something that the the HOA and and I like slim fast, trust me. But, you know, um I did notice that just just as commentary. Yeah. Yeah, I feel there may be things that you know you want to address further or get legal advice about or you know just so that some of the vague things are cleared up in there. Okay.

And then on those two it says in article one that there are seven lots which is evidencing course again but she has it highlighted the obligation right there. Do we as a city have um any authority to enforce that the common space in this subdivision be maintained appropriately? No, that that wouldn't be our responsibility. Okay. No. And even my experience in other cities where we have HOAs has been that it really to what to what Commissioner Moss is saying, it really is between the residents and the HOAs operation.

Right. I have seen it where the city can step in to say, "Hey, if you're not doing it, then we can charge the HOA for doing it." I mean, right, it's any situation, but we are the city. We ultimately look out for the welfare of the residents. I'm sure if somebody came to city council, city council saw some interest, we could explore what our options were through legal direction, but yeah, typically we don't get relationships. Yeah. Okay. Further questions for staff? Um, I was wondering are there like does the city do any kind of requirements for light like street lighting in this kind of a parcel? There are street lights in I only saw one

for the lot A that was it. So I the street I will

back on the back. The city does require that adequate street lighting is is a requirement. Um, in terms of who reviews that, we do it at the discretion of the street supervisor and then the public works director does oversee it. So in terms of what planning requires, planning doesn't call out for any type of street lighting, but it does get captured underneath of the set review. Um, and then following that in terms of like shielding, the city is very very slim on what type of lightings we we allow, which is something that I actually have in um the updated list of stuff that I want to address. So you you hit a good point.

Okay. Yeah, it's a it's a pretty slim code for the city. Okay. On on that point, um is that something that you can provide any further advice as to on this particular street whether we're you know whether it would be recommended for further lighting or you think what's in the packet is sufficient? Our our road supervisor and public works director have said that this is sufficient. Okay. Yeah. For our standard. All right. Further questions for staff?

I just saw a few of those highlights and maybe Sydney, you already addressed it, but it looked like there was that fire inspection requested on June in June of 2025. Has that um gone forward or I guess any fire concerns? Those have already been addressed as well. Yeah, because it's just a pull in pull out thing, right? Which one are you looking at? I'm This is exhibit G. exhibit. Okay. Yes. So that was the unupdated ones from correct. Yes. So this is the one that you have in the exhibit are the old checklist and then based on our review from this Monday it has been addressed. Okay.

Yep. Thanks. Yeah. Good clarification. That is good to point out that we did so yeah was the old one but we did meet with them just as recently as Monday. So there's a update to correct it that she's going off. Yeah. My only other question was on like the irrigation or watering plan wants to defer this to individual property owners once bought. Um I guess that just means hey you know irrigation sprinklers that sort of stuff the individual homeowners are going to be required and typically we as a city don't get down in the weeds on residential lots anyway so that is conform. Yeah.

All right. Um, let's proceed to the uh applicant if the applicant would like to come to the microphone and respond to any questions or present any additional information for us. Say that again. Uh, state your name, your position, and and add any information you'd like to.

Greg M. Larson and Troy Holler, the other two developers. I don't have any really comments. I have I can answer any questions. I think that uh Sydney's done a great job uh explaining everything and and where we're at. There's been some things that have taken place since the last meeting where we went through some things on the storm water and that's all resolved. So, I I feel like they've been very very thorough. A little too thorough, of course, but we're we're glad to be where we're at. Yeah. Okay. Uh questions for the applicant.

Thank you. I'm good. I'm good. All right. We are now going to proceed to the public hearing phase. I'll open up uh the I don't think this one's a public hearing. Yeah, because we're just doing an administrative. All right. We are in a public meeting. Yeah. And I will proceed forward to any further questions from the commissioners to anybody at this point that is relevant to the question in front of us. This is remaining a sports court about the purpose of life. Even though like within the exhibit I'm looking at it, it appears that it's the exact same sort of sideways lines as the road.

It is the oppos Oh. Parcel Above there. It looks like it's still a road. Yeah, that is a am I So that middle spot is going to be the It's not a road though. It's It's a sport cord. It'll be poured as is concrete for or whatever the appropriate surface is for pickle ball use. Yes. Okay. It just It just looked like now it was a T. No, that's a lowercase T going up as a road. And I wondered about like if if we're remaining a road or we have But we're not.

No. So, I understand why it was cross-hatched up that way, and it's because um the road is actually part of a PUE and um SAE easement, and then that is included in the easement. But if you SAE, sorry, and safety access. Yeah. Okay. But if it's a sport court and there are fences and poles in the way, how does that function as an SAPE? Guys got me on that one. As long as here's here's the here's the here's the thing from my perspective. As long as fire is okay with it, right? I'm not going to because that that was my thing. We were talking about this being a hammerhead whatever and now

the hammerhead is not for fire access again just to make as we found out that it's going forward and back. That is only for driveway access. What you're saying access for lot five three and four. Three and four. Three and four. Yeah. Yeah. So, parcel A should have no Yeah, because they'll back a truck up and then pull it out as we've discussed in in previous meetings. Yeah. For access. Um, and again, the reason for the the sport court being parcel A is otherwise what tends to happen is lot three and four will start seeing opportunity for that to become their property because they're paying taxes on it and then they'll start parking their boats or other things on it and then it'll become their property and there'll be no way to enforce it on it. Yeah.

So that's why you establish it as a parcel to protect it. Yeah. Otherwise, yeah, I'd be moving into lot four and putting my vote in if I ever. All right. Anybody have further questions? Seeing none, I'll proceed to the motion phase. I'll accept a motion. Uh, I'll make a motion for the planning commission to approve the proposed final site plan for the property located at 522 West Porter Lane, uh, 400 South contingent on the following conditions for approval 1 through three. Um, the following

and then due to the following findings for actions one through five. I have a motion. I second. Second. I have a second from Commissioner Jorgensson. Uh any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, we'll start down here. I I I I I I That passes unanimously. One quick uh thing I'd say just after just so you again, you know, um we are still working obviously on the final subdivision plat. That is an internal administrative review with the DRC and ultimately the zoning administrator, which is me, will get the final if and when it meets the requirements of code to do so. Very good.

At which point then we'll do myarin bonding and all that. So there is still a little more processing to go on it. But they're 80 to 85% of the way there. They are like 98%. They're 98%. They're fine. Not that close. So just scrap it. Don't scrap it. Yeah. Killing us. I know. All right. Moving on to the Thank you. the community development director's report.

Thank you. Um, two items. The first one's a pretty quick item. I was discussing it off the record earlier with some of the planning commissioners, but we are moving forward with a new software within the community development department. It will be hopefully more convenient, more userfriendly, and more progressive for everybody's benefit. Um, that our current software we've basically turned off and are no longer accepting applications. We will start out accept new applications starting on October 1st. The long-term benefit of it is that we will also move building permitting into the software which before building permitting was just done in or documents and order reporting in old old systems. So we actually will now have tracking software that is userfriendly for building permitting in addition to other other or other permitting for business licensing and planning and zoning. So pretty excited about that. It could even do code enforcement reporting and and form building at some point. So, we're pretty excited. Uh it'll come with a little bit of of a little bit of a a learning curve and challenge for the community and even ourselves, but we're working on it. Sydney has done 90 95% of the effort to get there, but uh

it is a group effort. It is a group effort. She's done a ton of work to get us to a good spot. So, we're pretty excited. Um, the other thing I want to note, I did I did tell you I would give you an update on the water conference that I went to a week ago. So, I'll try to or actually a week and a half ago. So, I'll try to give you I'm have notes on a a notepad at the office and I forgot to bring them with me. So, I'm going have to go off my memory after having presented. Always a dangerous proposition.

Yeah. So, if you want to hear the full report when I was more remembering my information, watch the city council meeting when I came up and reported. So if I miss something, you'll hear it there. But um it was really interesting. We are in a a challenging drought cycle for the state of Utah. Um one thing that I thought was really interesting, key learning fact is there actually are two periods of water collection in the state of Utah. A lot of people don't think about that. They think just winter is your only water collection. But monsoon season is a secondary water collection phase, believe it or not. And monsoon season accounts for your your intermediary water to keep the soils from being too dry and the plants from being too dry so they go dormant sooner. And so the state of Utah has I think they four or five water basins, but the one that that tracked monsoon season because there's such a large portion of it, they they control access to the Colorado River basin, and that's the central central Utah water district. uh they were trying to they did some programming and estimates on monsoon season totals and their original modeling was showing 22% monsoon season 22% of normal monsoon uh season water coming into the Colorado River basin. It came in at 2%.

So that was pretty tough to hear. What that means is now all the plants, all the natural needs are going to take the water even more willingly and readily and basically take it before water can get into the Colorado River basin. Um, so what that could mean is even if we got an earlier amount of moisture in the winter, which we hope for, the plants will absorb what they need to before it starts to go into waterheds. And so not good, right? The other reason that you want a lot of water in the winter is so that when the plants come out of dormcancy, they don't they don't need to take as much because the soil can be saturated in the water and then it'll it'll go into our waterershed. Now, this is interesting. Uh we in the state of Utah and I guess humans generally use only 5.4% of the water intake that comes every year because of all the natural taking of the water before it can get to the watered

5.4% 4% of the water that's accumulated is all we get in our waterersheds every year. And we're trying to do more. Yeah. Trying everything

and and we have a taker now because originally about two or three years ago there was a lot of discussion about water reuse projects throughout the state of Utah. But then we had another challenge come up which is the Great Salt Lake right so because of the Great Salt Lake ZAR and the Great Salt Lake Authority and those moves that have been made over the last three years water use projects can no longer be developed in the state of Utah. So we have even a tighter constraint of how we get and use our water than the state of Utah, right? So you can see how a lot of these water districts start to to consider what are our options. We can't go and use gray water reuse. We we have to let so much water go out to the Great Salt Lake for the water rights that the Great Salt Lake is entitled to and just for the natural welfare of the community. And then we have all the plants taking our water resource, especially in very lean drought heavy years. So are you saying like gray water like when the the South D called consumptive water

they they get the water refine it they have to put it into the Great Salt Lake. Well yeah so now like your consumptive water the idea was let's say you literally take a drink of water you pour some out and it goes down your drain that's consumptive water. Well, that water, there had been some ideas again before the Great Salt Lake push to create facilities that would take that consumptive water that's fairly clean, right? Yeah. Refine the impurities and then reuse it at least for irrigation if not other things, right? You would consume it again. But then it would create a secondary option where you're not taking from the good the water that you need for other things, right?

Um but that no longer is an option because the Great Salt Lake is so low. Um, another thing that was interesting is there the Colorado River Basin is in a sevenst state compact that dates back to I think it's 1935 if I remember my history right and California has an eminent right in the lower basin to get what was it? I want to say it's like 1.4 I can't remember what it is. It's some really high number, but they're entitled to the first dibs on it guaranteed before other states can take the water from that lower basin. Now, that doesn't affect Utah as much, but it kind of does because we can only take 27% of the Colorado River basin water that we receive through our state and then we have to let the rest go downstream because of how all the water comes into that basin. The reason I tell you about that is you think about that now on a community basis within the basins themselves, right? we're talking the state, but it's kind of a similar thing where the water districts have to figure out how to divvy up the water that is available. So, our obviously water basin is Weaver Basin water. Um, so what what we learn then is if mother nature won't provide water like we need we need her to, then what do we do, right? And so there's been a lot of discussion about how can communities participate in water conservation efforts and such. So, I already alluded to this before I even went to the conference that I'm I'm being asked to look at doing a water conservation uh ordinance update. I've drafted with the assistance of of some guidance from Weaver Basin. It's actually we have to do either way because the state of Utah did a new bill just this year that talks about adding water conservation policies within your landscaping ordinances. There's four required standards that the state of Utah has put in place. Weaver Basins is just a little more intense and so I put together a draft that currently is being

reviewed by Weaver Basin and then our city administrator is looking at it. Reason I tell you that obviously is that will be forthcoming as a discussion item and then probably a public hearing consideration and hopefully work its way to the um city council for consideration. But I wanted to make sure you understood the gravity at least of what I heard as best I can communicate it to you that uh we even even with a really bad monsoon season it only exacerbates our drought conditions and they're hopeful. They're hopeful. I mean the wersheds will will carry out this year but they're getting a little scared about what next spring would look like if we don't get at least a decent normal type of a a winter season. So, whatever whatever your uh I guess belief proclivities are, whether it's it's just hoping for good karma or you you pray or whatever your thoughts are, definitely make sure you're putting goodwill towards trying to get some good water for the winter because we'll need it. So, that I guess that'd be my report. That's what I want to share.

Was there any conversation in regards to uh like you were saying water conservation within the cities? Um it's somewhat weird that we have so much water usage on our lawns and we're in a deserty climate. Yeah. Whereas you go back east where they got a lot of water. No one's watering their yards. I mean they don't need to and they have sufficient water. So is there going to be like here in 50 years they're like no not only is no one going to have grass but you can't like I I don't know. I mean I'm just going down the

Yeah, that is something I actually meant to talk about too. So, the reason that these water basins are trying to push sod removal or other planting um ideas isn't necessarily because of the sod. It's because people don't know how to responsibly water their yards with the sod.

And so, unfortunately, you have to create programs and incentives to remove the sod. Now, they did say there's a new Bermuda grass that is actually it doesn't need a lot of water to grow well. and they're doing a lot of um they have a program it's through Utah waterways is I think the group they are doing programs where they'll go through you can apply I think they do he said they do six a year and they'll look at your yard and they'll actually flip it and do your landscaping for you and then what you give them is the opportunity for them to highlight spotlight your yard showing you before and after to promote the program and what a converted yard could look like. Um, but they said that they are planting that Bermuda grass, that that low water made Bermuda grass.

Have they ever sat on that Bermuda grass? They sat on It's a new It's a new hybrid. So, I don't know. Maybe the blade blade isn't as sharp. I have Kentucky blueg grass in my front yard and I we mowed the lawn today and laid in it. I was like, "Oh, this is I get this is so maybe the hybrid's a little softer." I had the same thought. I don't know. I I want to test it. I don't know. You want to test it? But uh but yeah, and and obviously were were we as a city to accept and adopt that code that lines up with Weaver Basin Water, then uh residents could qualify for the programs through Wever Basin if they wanted to receive incentive funding to flip their yard, convert their yard. So that is when I think our green spaces, we have a lot of grass.

You go down to parks like in Utah County, it's not that way. They've got nice shade structures and splash pads and things of that nature. I mean, our community park, no disrespect, but there's so much grass. There's so many mosquitoes. Have you just been there, though? I will say like every night on You see me? I'm in sweats. I have to wear sweats and it's 90° outside cuz I'm getting eaten alive by mosquitoes. Well, and it's being used. If the if it's being watered responsibly by the city, if we just got to rid of the little bit of grass and I get a little bit more cement. I'm a big fan of cement. Be a good feeling. So hot, right? You're lucky is not here right now. Yeah, she loves cement. Oh,

urban urban heating. Urban go there. All right. Calling the meeting back to order. Just a question on that, Mike. Um, so like if that ordinance or code does get passed, are we going to have to like analyze water usage with these applications that come through or is that something

that's the beauty of Weaver Basin said that we don't have to go out I'm not going to go out and look at a residential homeowner's yard and say, "Oh, that's 35% but that's not right. We're not going to the city won't play a role of as an enforcer or a ZAR." But with the ordinance being in place and explaining what the expectation is, hopefully homeowners will either see the opportunity to transition to meet it or new new homeowners, new builders, whatever, will try to meet that code when they do their landscaping the first time. And frankly, there's a more aggressive component that's towards the the commercial, industrial, um, multifamily type developments that may still come forward, right? Especially as we look at the westside development north of of public works up to Farmington. If we got a code in place, all that property, which right now is frankly borderline wetland, some of it is wetlands, could maybe continue with a similar landscape, but but a curated landscape design that meets that rather than a bunch of businesses come and say, "Oh, I'm just going to put sod everywhere because it's cheap and I can't, right?" And the irony is sod compared to other landscaping methods really it's about the same amount of money if you really look at it. I just again people don't know any different a lot of the time

the peak crowd is not long so so anyway yeah but currently you have to have 60% green don't we in centerville it's well we have 60% in previous service I'm trying to think what the the ordinance is I just looked at it the other day I can't remember commissioner Jorgensson what the exact number is but it is interesting how it talks about living versus non-living um landscaping yeah I tried to cement my whole backyard and I was not allowed yeah no you have to have some Well, but but see I think it's 50%. I think it's 50%. And what it says is 50% of your yard house be what you probably did is see you should have put like drought tolerant plants all around your concrete pad and some gravels and then you probably would have been okay.

Yeah, but then you got to weed it. My All right, with that, let's move forward to the minutes. I didn't see any issues. How like detailed are we supposed to be about looking at these minutes? Supposed to read them and if they're accurate then fine. If like if it reads weird. Is that something I should be mentioning? Yeah, go ahead. You can. Just because under I think it's the third page conditions. Maybe I just don't know how to read or don't understand what it's saying. It says the applicant will need to receive will serve approval by the Davis County Health. I just didn't is will serve. It is a will. It's a will serve. So, I'm just Got it.

No, no, you're fine. It's a It's a term of art and and if you don't understand what a will serve is, that reads weird. It does read weird. It does. Yeah. Okay. Got it. Yeah. I mean, honestly, we could probably improve that for the uninitiated that read this. We could potentially say a will serve use like more layman's terms just so it's not so well and it should be capitalized because it is a it's a proper noun. It's capital W capital S to indicate that it is a an actual document. Yeah, it's meant to be capitalized. Okay.

Good. Good. Thanks. And that extra space in between will and serve. That's just I tell you what. Oh, now I see actually why it's doing that. It's just probably justifying. It's justful. Yeah. Yes. I'm I'm fine with it as written. Does anybody have any uh strong feelings about modifying it? No. Okay. Good discussion. Anybody else on the minutes? I'll make a motion to approve if you for one. Okay. Nice work, guys. I have a motion and a second.

And normally you say tightly on its heels. Second. All those in favor say I. I. And now I'll take a motion to close. I'll make a motion to close. Okay. I have a motion and a second. All in favor? Hi, we are