Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. Welcome to our Draper City Planning Commission meeting. Today's date is May 28th, 2026. I'm Andrew Adams. Thanks for all the commissioners up here volunteering their time that you're joining me. We also want to thank the staff for getting everything ready throughout the week, putting up postings, noticing. And then we have an agenda in the back, and I think the plan tonight is the agenda will go as proposed, correct? So online and the agenda here that's available on site. Welcome all the applicants and our fellow neighbors and citizens. Thanks for joining us tonight. So let's go ahead and get things started. We'll go ahead and start with. Our first public hearing tonight, this is the Evans Fence Conditional Use Permit request. It's on the request of Mark and Alexandra Evans. A conditional use permit for approximately 0.92 acres located at approximately 1194 East Lone Peak Lane. This is known as application 2026-0079-USE. And Nick Whitaker is our staff contact. So go ahead, Nick.

thank you so yes this is the evans fence conditional use permit here's a vicinity map of the property um here's an aerial map as you can see there's a pedestrian trail to the south of the property which is where the proposed fence will be going to provide privacy There's a land use map. The land use designation for this property is residential low medium density. And the zone is RA1. So the request is the installation of an eight-foot-tall fence in the rear yard area. Materials are dark gray composite slats and black aluminum posts. Per Draper City Code, in the rear yard, anything over six feet requires a conditional use permit. That is why they are here. Here is a site plan of the proposed fence. As you can see on the map there, the blue line is the area where the fence will be installed. It will be eight feet in height. Again, just directly south of that, you'll notice the pedestrian trail, which again is why they are putting up an eight-foot fence to provide some privacy. As I mentioned earlier, the materials being used are the composite slats and aluminum poles. However, the color will be dark gray. so impact analysis and mitigation the potential impacts would be impacts to pedestrians safety i mean it would be to the pedestrians using the the um pedestrian trail and would be quite minimal the proposed mitigation for that is that all requirements of the Draper City Engineering, Building, and Planning divisions are satisfied throughout the construction of the fence, including permitting, and that the fencing shall not exceed eight feet in height and shall be constructed only in the locations indicated on the approved site plan. Here is a picture of the property. Again, the fencing that will be eight feet in height will be in the rear yard, so you can't really see it from the street. And that is my presentation. Any questions?

I don't think we have any. Thanks, Nick. We'll go ahead and invite the applicant up. Are they here? If you want to come on down, you can add anything to that presentation that you'd like. And please just state your name when you speak.

Sure. So my name is Mark Evans. This is my wife, Allie. We're the homeowners. Hi. So yeah, the only thing to add is if you look at the public trail, the pedestrian trail, it's called the Draper Irrigation Trail. There's a slope from the trail to where our property line is. And the difference in elevation is about two feet. And so if we were to put up a six-foot fence, if I was walking along the trail, it would be about this high. So it doesn't really provide any privacy. So that's really the main reason is the elevation difference there. And then also just, I think, for safety. Six-foot fence, you could attempt to jump over it. because off the canal trail, again, it's a pretty steep little slope right there. So that was the main reason, privacy and safety. Great. Want to add anything?

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, because I just don't want kids jumping over it, because we'll be putting a pool in.

Can you move closer to the mic?

Oh, yeah. So for safety reasons, I think for kids on the other side, I don't want them being able to jump over it, because we'll have a pool. And so we just don't want any, for safety reasons, anything to happen with neighborhood kids.

Perfect. All right. Questions for the applicant? Okay. All right. We'll invite you back up if we need to after the highly contested public hearing portion. Just kidding. I'm not scaring you. But we'll invite you back up if we need to, okay? So thank you for that. Thanks for coming in. All right. All right. So public hearing, I'll explain that. There's a three-minute timer over there. You can come up. Anybody can address any agenda item. So you can come up and give your thoughts on the current agenda item for up to three minutes. You don't have to fill the full time. We just ask that you don't go over. So with those guidelines, who would like to address this agenda item? Okay, we don't see anyone, so we'll go ahead and close this public hearing on this agenda item. All right, commissioners, pretty straightforward. What are your thoughts on this? We've seen this before. We'll probably see it again.

We've seen it several times, and because of that slope, we've almost always approved them. So any commissioners, do you want to talk about it at all? No. Okay. Then I'll make a motion. Go ahead, Lisa. I move that we approve the conditional use permit as requested by Mark and Alexandra Evans, application 2026-0079-USE, based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated May 15, 2026. We find that it complies with the standards for approval in the Draper City Code.

Great. Thanks for that motion, Lisa. Who will second it? I'll second it. Okay, we'll give that one to Gary. Gary will second that. So with that being said, this is a vote to approve. Let's start with you, Lisa. How do you vote?

Yes.

Gary? Yes. Kendra?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And Mary?

Yes.

All right, so congrats on that. See, scared you for no reason. So thanks for coming in again. Good luck with your fence. We appreciate you. All right, let's go ahead and move on to our next agenda item. This is also a public hearing. It's the Bonham Fence Condition Use Permit Request. It's on the request of the Fox Group, representing the Bonham Family Trust, a conditional use permit for approximately 0.82 acres. It's located at approximately 12540 South, 1700 East. It's known as Application 2026-0049-USE. Our staff contact again is Nick Whitaker. So go ahead, Nick.

Thank you. So, yes, this is the Bonham Fence conditional use permit request. Here's a vicinity map of the property. It's just facing 1700 East, just a little bit off of Pioneer Road, just south of it. The primary structure is still being constructed at this time. And the location of the fence, well, there's a few locations, and I'll go into detail in just a moment here. Here's a land use map. The land use designation for the property is residential low-medium density. And the zoning designation is RA2. So here's an overview of the request. It's the installation of a six foot tall fence that extends into the front yard area and includes an automatic gate. Materials are wrought iron, wood, stone, and trex composite. It also includes the installation, or this permit also includes, or I'm sorry, this conditional use request also includes the installation of a 10-foot fence to enclose a sports court in the rear yard area. Materials are black vinyl coated chain link. So here is a site plan of the property. The fence, the front yard fencing that is six feet in height goes across here. They've also included a gate, an automatic gate, and we'll have more of a discussion on that in a moment. In addition, the fencing on the side of the property, on both sides of the property, is six feet, and that is in the front yard plane. Typically what is allowed is up to four feet. That's what's permitted. Anything above that requires a conditional use permit. So everything here in the front yard, the front gate, side gates, I'm sorry, the front fence and the side fencing is all no taller than six feet. In the rear, Is the sports court right there, which will have the 10 foot chain link fence to enclose it. Here's materials and concept art. So it will be a the front yard fence or the fence at the front of the property. Will be made of wrought iron. A semi-transparent fencing, as you can see right there, on top of a two-foot stone wall. These pillars actually exceed six feet and will need to be brought down to a maximum of six feet. But in between, I believe it's every five feet, there is a pillar. And now the automatic gate, it's located at the front of the property. It's approximately 23 feet of public right-of-way between the proposed gate and 1700 East. So this section here from the red line to this line That's not the applicant's property. That's public right of way. At this time, there's no sidewalk there. Right here is 1700 East. They're proposing to have the fence or the gate that would open right here at the property line. I have talked to the applicant about the gates not swinging out into the public right-of-way, swinging inward. There are some concerns regarding the future sidewalk that will be developed along this public right-of-way and the placement of the automatic gate. As it sits, it would not allow for a vehicle to pull off of the street and wait for the gate to open without utilizing the public way, which could prevent pedestrian and vehicular traffic from safely using the sidewalk or the shoulder. So I took some photos at the site. Here is the gate. They started construction on it, but stopped when they realized that they needed to get a conditional use permit. So as you can see here, this location, the distance between this pillar here and the road is about 23 feet. And again, this is not the applicant's property. That's looking southward. This is looking northward. And that's straight on. So the impact analysis and mitigation identified potential impacts or safety hazards related to visibility of pedestrians and vehicles. Vehicles waiting for the gates to open and public right of way gates opening into the public right of way. Impacts related to the location of the gate relative to the location of the sidewalk that is yet to be constructed. And emergency services and emergency vehicle access. So proposed mitigation. is that all requirements of the Draper City Engineering Building and Planning Divisions are satisfied throughout the construction of the fence, including permitting that the fencing located in the front yard area shall not exceed six feet in height and shall be constructed as indicated in the approved site plan and as depicted and described in the application documents or documentation. that an electrical permit for the automatic gate shall be obtained through the Draper City Building Department prior to its installation, that the gate shall be reviewed for access and safety by the Draper City Fire Marshal prior to its installation, that the gate to be installed on the subject property 20 feet from the front property line with the automatic gates opening toward the interior of the property and that the fencing surrounding the sport court in the rear yard area shall not exceed 10 feet in height and shall be constructed in the location indicated on the site plan. There is an exterior photo of the property. Again, it's still under construction at this time. And that's my presentation. Any questions?

Nick, is there indication on the site plan what the side front fencing will be?

So the site in this location, that will be trex, like a composite material.

Okay.

And six feet in height.

Right. Then it'll join the wrought iron and brick. Okay.

That's correct. And I'm not too concerned about the wrought iron because it's semi-transparent. So that is a benefit.

However, the side fence will not be transparent, right? No. Okay. The front side. The front, yeah. Okay. Okay.

And when you're asking for the gate to open inward, where would a car be even if it opens inward? Would they be pulling in or would they be still in the road because of the distance?

The design of it would be up to the applicant. However, we'd like it to be designed in a way that the vehicle is fully on the property. while the gate is opening, so they're not having, they're not required to use the public right of way for their automatic gate. The number used is, the 20 feet is based on a couple of things in discussions with engineering, they requested that it be 20 feet. And then also considering our parking stall standards, which is 18 feet, 18 by 9 feet, enough to fully pull a large vehicle into the stall without it encroaching into the public right-of-way.

So in other words, out of traffic while the gate opens.

Exactly, yes.

Okay.

So the gate will be 20 feet set back from the property line?

That's correct.

No, from the property line or from the road?

From the property line.

Okay, that's, okay. Yeah. So there's even more distance there.

I think they're proposing 23 feet setback from the property line right away.

I'm sorry.

I think it's, are they proposing 23 feet setback?

Can you go back to that?

I think 20 is the minimum.

So the 23 feet that is mentioned in their submittals, the 23 feet here is not their property. That's public right-of-way. According to the submittals, it is 23 feet from the road, which is what they're stating in the submittals, but it's not 23 feet from the property line.

Oh, okay. That's what I was asking.

Okay. Another issue, too, is that this area here is where a sidewalk will be.

So, Nick, just to clarify, what's already been constructed would need to be moved? No matter how they, so as a condition of use, if this gets approved, then you guys are in charge of making sure that it meets those parameters that we don't need to see the layout or how that is. That's all going to be approved just through the planner.

That's correct. So it will need to be reviewed by a fire marshal and building for the electrical permit in engineering.

Yeah, but it really is, when you think about these manners, et cetera, right, where you're never parked. over the side, never in the road, but you're, you know, rarely if never on the sidewalk, you're in on the property. So if it has to kind of, you know, U-shape in or kind of square in, but that's up to you then based on your conditions of

Well, fortunately, they do have plenty of space that they could move it back to meet the metal.

No matter how they do it. But it doesn't need to be that the entire fence line needs to be moved back. It's the gate, right? So if they want to U-shape that in or square that in and the 20, 23 feet, that needs to start from their property line and push back to the nose of the gate.

That's correct. And just be the fencing call or the.

And then at that point, the gate can swing any way you like, right?

At that point, even though that was one of your... Ideally, it would be toward the property so that the vehicle that is in that waiting area doesn't have to back out onto the public right-of-way. I think the point is to make sure that they're not utilizing the public right-of-way for their amenity. Okay.

Have you discussed that issue with moving that gate or whatever so that they meet the code?

I contacted the applicant, but they did not answer, so I sent an email with the report and called out in the email that they need to review the conditions.

Okay. And the conditions are as proposed that we've got listed there. So, okay.

Can you bring up the proposed mitigations again? Of course. Put that back up. Let's see. Thanks.

Okay. Yep, we're just looking at these real quick. Perfect. All right, thank you, Nick. Any other questions for staff? Great. All right, is the applicant here? All right, come on down. And same drill as before, just state your name and then add anything you like. We'll probably have a few questions.

My name is Peter Wankier. I'm actually the builder, so I'm not the bottoms. But yes, thank you to Nick. We've worked closely on this project, and everything is very accurate, what he said. I've had several neighbors reach out to us just to clarify. I think they're under the impression that the trex fencing going around the perimeter of the property, we're going to extend up to 10 feet, and that is not true. It's just the fencing going around the tennis court is 10 feet in height on three sides, and that's to prevent balls from going into the neighbor's property. And it's completely transparent. You can see all the way through. There's nothing going through that fence. um and we did send in an amended plan showing those gates swinging in i don't know if you saw that but it did not show that fence being moved an additional 20 feet inside of the property line currently as you guys all observed that fence is you know just inside of the property line with the gates swinging into the property not out towards the right of way when we when we started this project there was a previous vinyl fence six feet in height on both sides of the property going all the way out to the edge of the road and a wall going across. And so we were hoping that by bringing it back, we would be doing something better than what was there before. So yeah, I think that's all the comments that I've got. So thank you.

Just a quick question for you before you go. So just to clarify, so the material in the front is as proposed, like on that diagram, right? So the front is going to be the two-foot footing, masonry footing, and then the rod iron on top of that.

Two-foot stem wall. Yep. And then there's a total of four columns, two on the very far ends of the property and two flanking the gate openings.

Got it. And then at the very corner property, that's where then the vinyl fencing will meet up to this?

Well, the trex fencing will meet up to it. And it will not exceed six feet in height, the trex fencing nor the column pillars. Got it.

Okay. I think that's all I have. And then again, just so it's clear that that needs to be, whether it's just the gate that's pushed back or the fence. being pushed to that front fence, whatever you guys decide, but they'll work on that with you. That doesn't have to come back here. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant?

Okay.

Thanks again for coming in. Thank you. We'll invite you back up just like I promised everybody if we need to. So we've got a public hearing on this, so we'll give you the same three minutes. Who would like to address this agenda item? All right. I don't see any, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Commissioners, there are the proposed mitigation conditions.

I think Nick's done a good job identifying the purpose and the mitigations.

Great.

Do you guys think so?

Yeah, I have no concerns about this. Anybody want to make a motion?

I can make a motion.

Go ahead, Kendra.

I move that we approve the conditional use permit as requested by the Fox Group representing the Bonham Family Trust application 2026-0049-USE based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated May 15th, 2026. And the findings are that the proposal complies with the standards found in the Draper City Code.

Thank you, Kendra. Who will second that motion?

I'll second.

Thanks, Susan. Okay, let's put this then to a vote. This is for approval. Kendra, how do you vote?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Mary?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

And Gary?

Yes.

All right, congrats on that. Happy building. Appreciate you coming in. All right, we're going to take a quick break. No, that was it. That was our break. And we are back in session, so thank you. See, didn't even know it was so quick. All right, let's go ahead and move on to our next agenda item. This is also a public hearing as before. Hunsaker Fence Conditional Use Permit Request. It's on the request of Elite Fence Repair, representing Carolyn Hunsaker, a conditional use permit for approximately .83 acres located at approximately 12152 South, 2000 East. It's known as Application 2025-0228-USE. Nick Whitaker is our staff contact again, our fencing specialist. So go ahead, Nick.

Thank you. I think this will be the final fence for the evening.

I can see that because Todd's on the next agenda item. Is this typecasting?

You still have me for one other.

There you go. Thanks, Nick. Go ahead.

So this is the Hunsaker Fence Conditional Use Permit Request. Here's a vicinity map of the property. It is located right off of Highland Drive. It's next to the golf club. Here's an aerial map of the property. Land use map, the land use designation is residential low-medium density. Here's a zoning map, and the zoning designation is RA1. So the overview of the request is the installation of a six foot tall fence that extends into the front yard area and it includes an automatic gate. Materials being used are stone fence, wrought iron, or tube metal semi-transparent gate. And since it is in the front yard and it does exceed four feet in height, it does require a conditional use permit. Here is the site plan that was provided by the applicant. The proposed fence, six feet in height, will run along the front of the property. They also note gates here. I'll touch more on that in a moment. The materials that will be used for the six-foot fence is this cement wall, the precast cement wall, which actually matches the same type of fencing that you see along the subdivision walls in that, just along Highland Drive. And we have the automatic gate. Some of the issues that we run into with this are similar to the previous item. So regarding the gate, the details from the applicant are lacking. Staff spoke to the property owner to obtain a description. I did reach out to the applicant or the fence company and did not hear back. I didn't finish this next bullet point, so I'll finish it right now. So in speaking with the property owner, she described what was going to be put there. And it will be constructed of semi-transparent wrought iron or tube metal. It'll be located at or near the property line, as you can see in the kind of a close-up here of the site plan. The gates, as you can kind of see, they angle it a little bit so it goes in a little bit closer to the property. And just for reference to the distance from where the proposed fence will be located to the back of the sidewalk is nine feet. So, going back to the gate, it's approximately nine feet of public right-of-way between the proposed gate and the back of the sidewalk. The site plan includes the gate opening inward towards the property, but no gate plans were submitted to confirm this. Here are some site visit photos. So here's straight on. And I kind of zoomed in on this photo here so you can get an idea as to the gate. And then of course the fence that would go along here. So impact analysis and mitigation. Identified potential impacts or safety hazards related to visibility of pedestrians and vehicles. Vehicles waiting for the gates to open in the public right-of-way, blocking pedestrian access of the sidewalk and cyclists using the shoulder of Highland Drive. Gates opening into the public right-of-way. Impacts related to emergency vehicle access. Proposed mitigation is that all requirements of the Draper City engineering building and planning divisions are satisfied throughout the construction of the fence, including permitting that the fence shall not exceed six feet in height and shall be constructed only in the locations indicated on the approved site plan. and that the fencing should be constructed of precast concrete as described in this report, that the plans regarding the automatic gate feature shall be provided to staff prior to its installation, that the automatic gate shall not exceed six feet in height, that the automatic gate shall be semi-transparent and constructed to be or resemble wrought iron, that the automatic gate shall not open towards the public right-of-way, that the automatic gate shall not exceed six feet in height and shall be constructed 20 feet from the property line, that an electrical permit from the Draper City Building Department shall be obtained prior to the installation of the automatic gate, and that the Draper City Fire Marshal shall review the automatic gate plans prior to their installation. Now I need to talk about this. There is a report correction that I need to make that Commissioner Nixon was kind enough to point out to me. Condition number eight. In the report, I accidentally left 18 feet, or it should say 20 feet, as it says here, and it mentions throughout the analysis as well, And then the sample motions on two of them include home occupation. That should not be there, so I have crossed that out. The first sample motion does not have home occupation. I don't know how that happened, but I apologize for the mistake.

Here's an exterior photo of the property.

And that's the end of my presentation. Any questions?

Great. Thanks, Nick. Appreciate you. All right. Is the applicant here? Come on down. Just state your name, and then you can add anything you like to your presentation.

Hi. I'm Carolyn Hensaker. This is my home. But I would love for LeVar Christensen to speak on my behalf. This is Kevin. He is the fence contractor, and he'll answer any questions that you have about the fence and the gate.

Okay. Great. Who wants to go first?

I'll go. I'm Kevin.

Will you state your last name too, Kevin?

Kevin Holfeltz. Thanks. So I just had a few things to touch on the automatic gate. We shifted it on that plan. So it's actually going to be 20 feet back from, so it would be 12 feet from the sidewalk. And then it will open inwards towards the home. for the power, would we need to get a permit for the power if it was off solar?

So this won't be question and answer, so just hit us. Oh, sorry. I can wait until he's done and follow the rules. Perfect. No, I mean, yeah, you can ask that stuff here. But, again, if that's something you guys can discuss on there.

So I did talk to the building department, and they said that an electric permit would be required. However, since I didn't have any plans regarding the gate, I didn't know that it was solar-powered. Got it. Even still, we'd need to consult with the building department to determine if that would still require any type of special permitting. Great. I'm just taking notes here, too.

For gates, I'll add the fire department does a review as well. So there'll be a review regardless.

Okay, perfect. Keep going. Anything else? No. Okay, got it. Thanks.

Thank you very much. It's always such a... Touching and inspiring opportunity to be here with all of you. Our family, we've been here for 35 years. And I've developed properties. I'm an attorney, but also I've developed properties all up and down Highland Drive, Steeplechase, Hickory Ridge, Coggy Farm. And we live just two blocks around the corner walking distance from all of this. So I want to thank Todd Draper and his outstanding team. He came and met me on the property in person. We inspected everything. Really gone the extra mile. So I come before you tonight in the spirit of good, better, and best. And I would honor Carolyn for her generosity and her graciousness. She's gone the extra mile. The result will be the best fence and landscaping anywhere on Highland Drive, right there as it comes to the golf course. And our first home backed up to the golf course right by that. But the only confusion along the way and the conditional use permit process and the evolution of the ordinances, and again, I'm very familiar with those, the very first ordinances that were ever adopted back in the beginning, so thank you. But the only confusion is that it's being called the front yard Even though for 30 plus years, the home has always faced south. And so this would have been the side yard and it would have had a much more reduced 12 to 15 foot setback. But instead, the two neighboring homes, the Skeens and the Moors, the Moore home is 21 feet from the front of the house to the street. The skeins are 18 feet from the front of the house to the street. And Carolyn comes before you with this proposal, 53 feet from the front of the house to the street. And with the highest quality fence, landscaping, And now the only remaining issue really is just it'll be fine. We can work it out with the city, no problem. But the final step was to do the security fence right there on the driveway. That's the cherry on top of the cake. What this fence will do, because they have a pool there and with the golf course meals, it'll provide privacy. And that'll be much, much appreciated. But so beautiful. Further down, all of the examples are beautiful. six-foot wood fences that are right up to the sidewalk and only a little three-foot landscape strip and a sidewalk. That's it. But if you look at this, the... Right here.

LeVar, sorry. Can you state your full name for the record?

Thank you. LeVar, L-A, capital V-A-R, Christensen, C-H-R-I-S-T-E-N-S-E-N. Do you need any other information?

No, just the name for the record.

We were going to get that at the end there just for the transcription.

We wear a lot of hats, different hats, but I'm honored and humbled to have served Six terms as your representative in the Utah House of Representatives, chaired the Judiciary Committee. But again, through all of the real estate. And as a boy growing up, my dad was the mayor of a town at an early stage like this. So we've always loved land use planning, municipal law. But here lastly is here, if we have, the only remaining issue is the driveway issue. And we've explained all of that. And so I think you'll find if you have any questions, I'm here to answer it. But if you look at the drawing and everything else, it's just first class, beautiful. And everything around, if you were trying to somehow cut way, way back, then you'd challenge the difference legally, the difference between front yard and side yard setback. But again, good, better, and best setback. She's voluntarily, generously, graciously come to the highest level. And we just thank the city staff for helping us cooperate and respectfully ask for your yes vote that we might be able to go forward. And this will complete what has been a beautiful enhancement of the neighborhood. Ironically, just down the street and around the corner, right behind our house, there's a new home under construction. And it's barely 10 feet from the curb of the street to literally the building itself. And so again, if we were looking for precedent all around, but you have to take it one by one, case by case. And so again, I think Carolyn deserves some real significant praise. And again, Todd and his department, It certainly does. Their team, they've worked together, and we just hope that you can ratify that and let us move forward accordingly. If you have any questions, I'd love to try to answer anything that you might want to know more about.

LeVar, if you can stay right there, can you go over to the condition, list of conditions? Okay, so something was said that you were moving the gate back 11 feet back, 20 feet from the sidewalk, but does this not say that it's 20 feet back from the property line? Is that what you have here, Nick? I think it's the third from the bottom.

I was telling what the other two homes that are characterized as a front yard that are on Highland.

Right, but as you mentioned, LeVar, we don't go off precedent, right? This is just case by case. So what we're looking at here is that the automatic gate shall not exceed six feet in height and shall be constructed 20 feet from the property line. And again, Nick hasn't received any plans showing that, so I just want to make sure there isn't any discrepancy between, I guess, the builder.

Let's ask Todd because when he came to the property and we went through all of this and agreed to this there, we had the property surveyed, we came back, we lined it, everything. And so all the proposal matches that. And then, Todd, you saw the surveyed result.

But we don't have a plan. So what I'm asking is without having a plan, when you do submit it, Again, what we'll do here is just as I said before, if this gets approved like the others have, everything will be up to the planner as per these conditions, not as per something that was perceived or said earlier. So I really want to pin down this 20 feet from the property line.

Does this match? Can I ask Todd? Yeah, sure. Does this match?

I'm the planner that worked on it, actually.

Todd, does this match what you and I? Nick, you need to talk to Nick.

Nick is the one. So to Rick, Nick, why don't you, there we go, right there.

Nick, does this match what we did on site? And then in response to that, we came back and we surveyed it, we chalked it, we lined it, and so right now everything. And then your team came back and saw that again and approved it. And said, so here we are. So now if you need an additional drawing, if you need an additional drawing that we can have our architect match it. But I know what you're saying. You're saying whatever the wording says, that's what it needs to be. And I believe that what we did does match that wording. So I'm trusting them with their wording to do what we agreed and confirmed.

So Nick, do we have a schematic or a plan with the proposed that matches or do we have one at all?

So we have plans for a fence, not the gate. And also, I've never been to the property with LeVar or the applicant. I went independently and took my pictures, so I'm not aware of this conversation. What I am aware of, though, is that they did submit an application and it went through the review process.

So we have the fence. No issue with that. Go ahead, Todd.

Yeah, so I will add to that. I did go to the property, did meet with them, did look at the issues they rose, but we did not agree to fence locations, anything without a plan. They were told to submit the new plan. That's what was submitted to Nick, and that's what he reviewed.

And we all know that there's no way, even had you said, yeah, that's what we're doing, that's not the process, and that wouldn't be valid anyway. Yeah, we don't approve things on site. Yeah, you don't approve things on a conditional agreement.

We were simply looking at the location of the property line with respect to the rest of the front, and that's what Nick has reported is approximately nine feet behind the sidewalk. That's where the front property starts. similar to the last application. The fence will be just on their side of that property line. The gate needs to be set back so that we don't have the issue with the sidewalk.

The difference here is we know where the sidewalk is. So look in this plot map here, this aerial. The yellow line is the property line, correct? Correct. The yellow line is the property line.

That's correct.

Except that's the south. Are you looking?

We're looking where it says gates. The bar right there where it says gates.

Yeah, and the gate we know is a new issue, and it's not controversial. We are going to go implement everything that you're telling us on the gate. But the fence over here on the east by the street, okay If you look at that you can see that for the 30 plus years how the home has faced south and everything else this way So that would be the front but instead we're treating it as if east is this is the front and so they're going the extra mile and And they're going like 53 feet total when everybody else in the area is like maybe 18 or whatever. So we're not objecting. We're just showing you how much goodwill there is. And so now the gate, don't worry about because that's a new issue, additional one. And we're just following your directions and your instructions. Much appreciated. It's going to be attractive. I think they have a picture of what it will look like. But we'll come back to you. with what you need for the gate, but that's honestly the only issue. The fence and the issues pertaining to Highland Drive, all those have been worked out. We've taken care of it professionally, technically.

Do we, sorry to interrupt, but do we have any conditions that are what's being referenced here?

I mean, in terms of the actual fence itself, they're pretty standard conditions. Sure.

And they've been met. And so, I mean, we don't even need goodwill, LeVar. We just need the conditions to be met. That's it. Thank you. We appreciate both.

Thank you very, very much.

So good. So that clarifies that. So the gate's outstanding, 25. property line, not nine feet from whatever was said, that's okay. They'll get that figured out. And we've all discussed, you know, why, right? So that we don't have cars queuing up anywhere near that's not, I mean, they're supposed to, it's your driveway, right? You're creating an interim driveway while that gate's waiting to be open. That's all we're doing. So, yeah, so it doesn't sound like there's any bones to contention or anything.

I hope you know how much we love our city and how grateful we are for all of you. Thank you.

Thanks for the vote of confidence. All right. Anybody else from the applicant side? Well, good, Carolyn. Okay. All right, great. Well, we'll go ahead and open this up for public hearing. Who would like to address this agenda item? All right, we've given it a minute. We don't see anyone, so we will go ahead and close the public hearing portion. All right, commissioners.

I have a question. Yeah, go ahead. So the other applicant that had a gate, we didn't make them go back 20 feet from the property line. Yes, we did. Yes, we did. That was the condition. Yes, we did. Because the sidewalk was the... No, it was 18, and remember how there was...

It had to go back 20 feet.

It might have looked a little bit unclear from the schematic because they also did not have an updated schematic showing the 20 feet back. Again, all of these, I don't care how they do it as long as it complies, but there's two ways to do it. You move the whole fence face so it's all parallel in sequence, in line. You move everything back 20 feet. Or if you want to bring that property, that fence out, you can then jog it back in. and then have that 20-foot driveway jog. You've seen that in these nice manors. I mean, this seems to be a trend here in design and landscape architecture and property management. So you see those nice manors from back east or Beverly Hills, wherever. They're never queuing out on the street. Those fences are up to maybe whatever this legal setback is, and then they jog back in and the fence is there. Cars can move in as if it's the driveway. They talk to the security gate, and then they wait for those gates to open inward. So anything I said right there is not out of line with what this would need to look like, correct?

That is correct. And just to be very clear, too, this defense that's being proposed is not nine feet away from the property line. It's nine feet away from the back of the sidewalk. It's sitting on the property line. Right. This gate here, I mean, the fence itself is, I think, is pretty standard. I think there are no issues there so long as those conditions are followed. Really, the issue comes down to the gate feature, and part of the issue is just the lack of information that was provided there. And then the closeness to the, well, the fact that it's right up on the property line, especially here along Highland Drive, if they were to open, or if the cars were waiting, you would be literally over the sidewalk and into the shoulder.

So really it's just this schematic right here is incorrect. You'd have to have a little 20-foot in box rectangle that's being inserted there. Just in this location, yeah. Yeah. Which would be the ideal way to do this you would you would never you know move that back in 20? That whole fence line 20 feet and put it right up against the house, so that's not what we're asking so so Yeah, so that that's we're clear on that right Nick. Yes good. That was your any other questions Lisa.

I'm sure you got some Nick when we look at a plot like this. What do we consider the front? It's not the front of the building itself, it's the front of the lot that we're thinking as the front.

So it would be, yeah, it would be, I mean, according to the code, it would be the side that's facing the street. Yeah.

And so that's where the four-foot fence would only be allowed, but they want a six-foot fence. Do you have any concerns about that six-foot fence being solid concrete?

I do not. My main concern about having fencing along here is is related to safety just because there are many pedestrians and cyclists who use this, who use Highland Drive. So if you're pulling your vehicle out and you have a gate, a solid gate, and you pull out, I mean, you run a very high risk of hitting somebody.

Right.

Now where that gate... um is ending the solid gate um do you mean the fence i i mean they would have i mean as long as they can they have clear view that's that would satisfy safety requirements so as long as the vehicle is able to see outward as long as it's cut back enough so that the vehicle can see outward to make sure that and so that people coming won't can see the vehicle coming out

and again you don't have a schematic of that yet but that's what it would need to back and forth will continue to be with this conditional use permit so that that gate adheres to it's the first line all the engineering and because it's got to go through fire safety you know all that the clear view is typically is 25 feet has the city engineer does have any comments on that as far as clear view

So the clear view in driveways is typically a lot shorter because you don't have any speed. The clear view on streets, and especially intersections, is a minimum of 30 feet. So at driveways, typically, it's a lot shorter of a distance just because the car's exiting and entering the driveway aren't going more than just a couple miles an hour. But we'll make sure that they have adequate distance. That's part of the reason for setting the gate in is because then it gives them a typical driveway setup to be able to pull out towards the street and to see pedestrians and bicyclists and other cars.

And then I had one other comment. Mr. Christensen kept referring to the house being there for 30 years. This house doesn't look 30 years to me. Is this replacing a previous house?

I believe Mr. Christensen was talking about his own property and not the applicant's property.

Well, either way, why is it even relevant where the front of the house is?

In this case, it really isn't when it comes to the gate.

Right, because when he was talking about that, it's like we've seen your little schematic. Remember, I mean, years ago, what's the front? We have a corner lot, right? And the house is, that's where, that's why you brought up a schematic, right? So you're basically saying, hey, look, is it the left side? Is it the left corner or the front corner? How should the house be positioned on a lot? That's not even in effect here because It's not relevant. So just because it was brought up, I don't know if we don't need to get hung up on which one.

I just wanted him to clarify for the public, but also they're putting fencing on there. That's the other issue. It's the gate and the fencing that we're discussing.

Right, and that's part of the conditional use permit. So it's the front of the house, regardless of how it's oriented on the lot, the front is along Highland Drive, period. It doesn't matter how you plop the house down. It doesn't matter if it's been there before. So it's irrelevant because that's what they're asking is they're saying, hey, along the front of my house, even though it's the side, I'm asking to go from four to six.

I agree.

Right?

Yeah, which the code does allow for, I'm sure, this per conditional use permit as it says in this section.

And don't we love precast? I mean, that's a huge expense. For sure. I'm so glad to hear it's not a hedgerow.

And it is consistent with the fencing that does exist along Highland Drive.

Exactly. Yeah. So that's great. All right.

No tree diamonds either.

Yes, hedgerow tree diamonds and excessive height on signage. Red balloons.

Electric signage, yeah.

So thanks for the personal privilege there. All right. Thanks, Nick. Did you have any more questions, Mary?

Actually, they got answered along the course of others questioning, so I'm good.

All right. Anyone else? Okay.

Great.

So we've already lost track. We've already put this up to public comment. So it's all up to us. What say you?

I think this is pretty straightforward, so I'd like to make a motion. Go ahead, Gary. I move that we approve the conditional use permit as requested by Elite Fence Repair representing Carolyn Hunsaker application 2025-0228-USE based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated May 15, 2026. And the findings are approval that the proposal complies with the Draper Municipal Code.

Perfect. Thank you, Gary. Who will second that motion?

I'll second.

All right. Thanks, Mary. Okay. Let's go ahead and put this one to a vote. Let's start with you, Gary. Yes. And then Mary.

Yes.

Lisa. Yes. Susan.

Yes.

And Kendra.

Yes.

All right. Congrats on that. Good luck with your gate and your plans and schematics. So we appreciate you coming in. I know the planners will take good care of you. All right. Let's go ahead and move on to our next public hearing. This is the Cherry Creek Block Valve Conditioned Use Permit. It's on the request of Matthew Pulsifer representing Enbridge Gas, Utah, a conditional use permit for the installation of a utility substation on approximately 3.39 acres. It's located at approximately 13461 South Highland Drive. It's known as application 2025-0025-USE. So our staff contact on this one is Todd Draper.

All right. Thank you. So you might remember this one having been continued about a year ago. This is the Cherry Canyon Block Valve Conditional Use Permit. I also apologize for somehow getting Cherry Creek in there on the. on the agenda, but everything else does denote that it's Cherry Canyon Block Valve. This is application coming from Enbridge Gas for a utility substation. This is the vicinity map, Long Highland Drive there. Property is owned by the HOA, but they did sell easements to Enbridge for the purpose of installing this facility. This is the aerial. The actual location I'll show you here in a minute. They had a better diagram of where it goes. But it's just across from the rodeo grounds there. The land use here, of course, is that low, medium, dense. Oh, sorry. Low, medium, dense is the other side, is the open space. And then it is the RE2 zone. So this is the site plan. It will come off of Highland, as you see there. There will be two driveways. It will kind of have a semicircle here. The main drive will come into the property this way. It will have a fence enclosure around the valve, which is a smaller area here. They can actually pull the vehicle into the compound, if you will. And then the reason for the two driveways is so that for safety purposes they actually don't have to back out at all. They can turn around on the property there and go back out. Here's their better location, if that helps a little bit. So it will be just a little up from the entrance, just a little kind of to the east. These are just a couple of drawings to help kind of explain what that is. It is very simple. It's a valve. They have the existing line in that you can kind of see here. They already have the existing line. All they're going to be doing, and they can probably explain better, but they'll bring it up above ground, put the valves in, goes back down. So we're really just looking at this section right there. Here's kind of a side elevation, if you will. And it does comply with our size requirements for conditional use. And then this is just the elevations you'll see with the fencing material that they're going to be putting up as it kind of steps up the hill on all the sides. A couple of site photos. One real late at night when I went out a year ago. You'll see the home up the hill, and then another one here more recently. You can kind of see where they've kind of started staking some of that out. There was one public comment that I didn't include in your packet, so hopefully you've had a chance to look over that. And then Susan also pointed out that I got the year wrong on the date of the report in the suggested motions. It's 26, not 25. But given that this is application 2025-0025, that just seemed to be the number that I like to go with there. So I apologize for that as well. But are there any other questions you might have for me on this?

All right. Thanks, Todd. Is the applicant here? All right, come on down and just state your name for the recording.

Yeah, so my name is JD Kessler. I'm an attorney for Enbridge Gas. Matthew Pulsifer is the land agent and his name is on the application. As Todd mentioned, this project has been kind of going on for a year and a half and poor Matthew just took over this a few weeks ago from another employee. So I'm here to explain it to you or answer any questions you may have. This facility, as you may have read in the packets, is an automatic shutoff valve facility. And so it is not a facility that has, there's no motors, there's no equipment on there that has noise to it. It's not a lit facility. It is literally a situation where we have an existing pipeline running through the city, and it's the main line that is providing gas to the city, really, because then there are various reg stations in places that take gas off of that big line at about 300 PSI, and then they put it into a smaller pressure system called an IHP system that runs to your homes at about 50 PSI. And then at your home, you have another regulator in your meter on the side of your house where the gas is reduced from 50 psi down to like ounces, very, really quite low pressure at that point. So those facilities, sometimes we get people asking about those and they ask about noise, etc. Those facilities sometimes have a little bit of noise to them simply because you're taking a high pressure and turning it into a low pressure. So think about when you have your hose running and you may hear the water running through the pipe. It's because there's pressure going through and or... and sort of changing from the pressure in your house into your house. In this instance, the automatic shutoff valve will literally be there doing nothing unless there's an emergency. If there's an emergency, if there was an earthquake that changed pressure in that line, if someone, I know the comment in the, one of the comments in that email in your packet said something about what if somebody shoots it? Well, the truth is, having automatic shutoff valves is what protects the system from an event like that, because the second the pressure changes in the system, that's when the valve closes, and it happens automatically. Now, when that happens, there will likely be some noise. It will be similar, like I analogized to your hose bib when you're turning the hose off, you're going to hear that the pressure is changing, and that's why you hear the kind of whooshing. So when that valve shuts off automatically, though, it's going to be mostly instantaneous. I mean, you know, faster than I can snap. The only other time that valve will be actuated is once a year for maintenance. And so it will be shut on and shut off. It is possible that there will be a little noise like that whooshing noise when that happens. But because in that situation, there isn't a change in pressure occurring, it's virtually, you know, I mean, it's so quiet at that point. I mean, you may hear something if you're standing next to it. But so this facility like is in the packet. It is 12 feet of pipe where it comes out of the ground. runs 12 feet at a height of about three feet high, and then back into the ground. The location that was in the pictures, you know, that night picture, sorry, Todd, isn't awesome, but the location was chosen for a couple of reasons. One, that 20 foot by 40 foot area where that facility will be is in a spot where it does not disturb any existing oak. because it was important both to the HOA when we bought this easement eight years ago. I think when talking with Todd and the city, you know, last, before it came up, you know, a year and a half ago, it was important that no trees would be damaged. So that's, it's sort of located into a little pocket. The other thing that's going to happen is we are cutting the grade there because as you know, if you've driven along that road, the hill goes up and then the oak is up above it um in order to drive in in those driveways you are going we're going to have a cut so that we drive in there will be some retainage a concrete retainage that goes in and that fencing which will be wrought iron will sit on top of that so that valve will actually be down low enough that you won't see it from up above and that was important to the neighbors we spent over the last year and a half we met numerous times with members of the steeplechase board And with one particular neighbor, Jeff Spangler, who lives immediately adjacent to this area. And, you know, discussed that and talked about it. And frankly, we talked about whether or not we should move it a little to the north, a little to the south. something like that, and what the HOA, Mr. Spangler, and we decided is, you know, if we move it anywhere, it's going to, if you move it south, Mr. Spangler's going to see it likely more because there's a kind of path through the trees from his backyard. If we move it to the north, we would have to take out oak, and the HOA didn't want that, and frankly, we didn't either, so... Yeah, the other thing is, there's a note in there about having us paint the gate and fence. It was supposed to be wrought iron. which I didn't think we would typically. I think that's usually just black. It says something about painting it in earth tone. That's fine if that's what's wanted. It was the only thing that was maybe a little bit of a surprise. And otherwise, the concrete that you're going to see there from the outside, because of the way it's going to retain the hill, you're not going to see the concrete at all. Or I shouldn't say at all. Very, very little.

Any questions? I do have a question. Yeah. Are there any other locations in Draper where there's another site like this for Enbridge? I don't... There's the comment. You referred to the comment earlier about the public comment.

Yeah.

You know, and their concerns. And I'm just looking at the one that wasn't addressed. It's just that it's too large for a residential area. It's a fire hazard for a residential area. I don't think the fire hazard is a concern. But is there another location that we would? Use as an example.

You know, in Draper, I'm not sure. So the automatic shutoff valve requirement is a PHMSA. It's Pipeline Hazardous Safety Materials Administration. It's a federal program that governs pipeline safety, and the Utah Public Service Commission has adopted that as their standard requirement. PHMSA has required this over the last, it's really been over the last 10 years that the company has been going around and installing these automatic shutoff valves. This line, this feeder line through Draper is new because it was installed in about 2016. And so I think this might be one of the first in Draper that I can think of. Some of the others I can think of, I mean, we have them all over the state at this point. A lot of them have been in the last eight years. There's one There's one I can think of right next to the seminary building at Jordan High School, right up against there. It used to be the Joanna's Kitchen property there. And they're kind of all over. Sometimes you can co-locate them in other facilities that exist, but then that leads to a bigger footprint. You'd have to put them next to a reg station or something. Okay.

This seems like a logical place because it's across from the equestrian part, too. So it's not necessarily facing or in a residential area. It's on the edge.

Yeah, and that's a good point. One thing that's important about these is, according to PHMSA regulation, we have to put them every so often. And so this was in an area that if you were to draw that black circle where the project location is, The circle where we are required by law to put it isn't much bigger than that circle. So we looked at the idea of trying to put it around the corner and almost in the kind of canyon there, but then it's a problem. It's a little further off the road, but it's in open space. And if you got further north towards that limits, you're even closer to residences and it's harder to have access off the roadway there.

So that answers, I had a question of why now, right? And so it looks like there's a new length of line there. And then I didn't see anything. Maybe I missed it in the report. What does this look like from the road? So, I mean, you've got your east, the profile, is that all we're looking at? I mean, it's that clear cut. That's what it would look like. So you've got scrub oak and then right there.

Yeah, the scrub oak will be around the outside of it because it's existing.

Right, but I'm not missing anything other than that. That's what it would be. And then that's our front elevation. And then that aerial shows that this, This assembly is actually set to the very far back of the... Yeah.

Now, that picture on the right, you can sort of see the stakes towards the front of what that would be. Yeah. And, you know, we will try to limit what we cut. I think there was a requirement, or at least we were planning on, that the driveway was going to be... sort of done in a way, I don't think, it's not just asphalt. It was done in a way that it's supposed to blend in and look like the area adjacent to it.

Yeah, it sounds like that's why they're going with that earth tone fence painting, et cetera. So, okay. I don't have any other questions.

And that's actually something, the fence too is one of those things. We have found in a location like this, we have one, we have a different type of facility, but we have it right up by Kimball Junction in Park City where, And it turned out really awesome because having the kind of open fence there meant that for the most part from the road, you sort of looked right through it at the trees behind it. And so we like that. It looks a lot prettier than some of the stuff they did 50 years ago.

Sure. Because it's only a three-foot rise, but you've got to fence this thing with six feet. So got it. Yeah.

Well, and my question was about the wrought iron fence. If there was a reason that was what was being proposed, if there was a reason that was being proposed. And is that just a visual effect? You don't want it doesn't need to be closed off completely. Okay.

No, the nice thing is not being closed off is a little bit better because you can see from the road if somebody was in there doing something. So we like that. Rot iron is a lot prettier than chain link. And we talked to the neighbors, Mr. Spangler and the HOA, about if we should put something, if they wanted something on the top side that was a visual barrier. And when we stood up there on the property and looked at it and thought about where we were cutting down you know, the visual barrier would actually probably be worse from them. If you were standing in their backyard looking at the fence, which is about as close as you'd have to be to really see this, but if you were standing at their fence looking down, this way you look right through it to the road, and it's kind of like it's not there. Okay, thanks.

Okay, we don't have any other questions for you, so before we invite you up, we need to after a public hearing. Let's go ahead and open this up for public comment. If anyone would like to address this agenda item, go ahead. And again, if you just state your name and we'll go from there.

LeVar Christensen, Draper Land Development Company, the developer of Steeplechase, the owner of Steeplechase Associates. I beg you to, this is a shock to me. I would have never known, but I still own that property. They don't, not the owners association, that the homeowners association. or the interior, but I pay taxes on this still currently every year for the last 20 plus years. It even goes over across into the rodeo area. But the reason I retained ownership all this time was to protect the people because the state has says that someday they will widen the road if they ever solve the Dimpledale Ravine. We have the same issue over on Seventh East where we have an office building, Liberty Square, but we've been able to get state approval to landscape all the way out so you don't just leave it in an ugly state for year after year after year like so many people have. So somehow, somebody mistakenly thought that they would go to the HOA, but this property is not part of it. What I passed on to them all these years, and even if you go a little bit further to the north, what we did too is I didn't want to leave it in weeds like so many other developers have. So if you look at it, went up to Oregon and handpicked all these mature trees. It's beautifully landscaped on it, maintained. But then when it gets down closer to that area where it just stays in scrub oak, as you're saying, All this time I've been waiting to see if I could protect all of this, but to think that they've somehow gone up there. The Spanglers who you mentioned, they're wonderful people, but when some of them wanted to expand, if you saw those photos again, some of them were just pushing their backyards out onto that area without honoring their actual boundaries. And so they would come to me as the owner, and we would discuss whether or not to do it. But this whole thing here, right here, they don't have legal title to it. If they sold an easement, I'd like to know how much they paid. Aesthetically, I'm – but if you had time out and gave me a window of time to catch up – then I could meet with the city attorney and all of you. And I have a great relationship with the ongoing current HOA. I help them all the time with standards. But to go forward on a mistaken assumption that it's been deeded over, it hasn't been. And like I said, I'm still paying taxes on it. But I'm very open. I'm not selfish at all. I did this to protect our city, everyone, aesthetically, so that the state wouldn't come in and somehow... try to transform this. It's happening over on Seventh East. And honestly, on Pioneer Road where we live, we put in curb gutters, sidewalk, and we were promised 30 years ago that the city would come eventually and do it. Little kids can't even get on the school bus in the daytime. The city still hasn't been able to get. Now I'm told 30 years later that Fort Street is the next priority, but maybe the northeast corner of Draper will finally get an extension and the but those aren't criticisms those are just factual summaries of what we're now dealing with but please please please i would have never known if i wasn't here tonight helping this and i get the agenda and i stumble under this discovery and if you just call time out if you just call

Well, we'll call time out. We'll still keep the public hearing going, and I may not close the public hearing, so I'll let you go ahead and be seated, and then let's do that.

Give me a window of time to meet with the city, and I have an ongoing relationship with the HOA.

We'll keep that as public comment.

And keep in mind that I'm not only the owner of Pay the Taxes, but I'm a longtime attorney, and I know the specific of this issue very, very well.

Three minutes. Thank you. All right. Anyone else would like to address this agenda item? Okay. I'm going to leave this open for just a minute, and then we're going to wait. Did Spencer chat with you?

Spencer went back to his office to his desk to look some things up.

What do we do with our public hearing? Leave it open? Because I know once we close those sometimes, when we close public hearing, then it's written in stone. So you tell me.

Could we move on to the next agenda item?

We could. We could do that. We could suspend. So Susan's asking do we just move on to the agenda item while we give them some time. Why don't we do that?

Okay.

With the applicant, I'll go ahead and this is just going to be paused. We're going to move on to the next agenda item. A little unprecedented, but we'll go ahead and do that and then come back to this. Sound fair? Great, okay.

Yeah, I think we need a motion.

Let's do it. I'll make a motion. Go ahead, Lisa.

I'll make a motion that we suspend this item and carry on to the next and then come back to it.

Thank you. I'll second. Great, so let's go ahead and put that to a vote. Lisa? Sorry, yes. Mary?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Kendra?

Yes.

And Gary? Yes. All right, so that's suspended for now, and we'll go ahead and move on to our... It's later tonight, so we're just going to move on to the next agenda item here. So wait until our city council comes back and tells us what to do. All right, so let's move on to our next public hearing, the Mitchell Landscaping Home Occupation Conditional Use Permit. It's on the request of Michelle Mitchell, representing Mitchell Landscaping LLC, a home occupation conditional use permit. for approximately .70 acres located at approximately 1354 East, 12900 South. Known as application 2026-0080-USE. So Nick Whitaker's our staff contact on this one, so go ahead and let's hear what you've got.

Me again. So yes, Mitchell Landscaping LLC, Home Occupation Conditional Use Permit. Here's a vicinity map of the property. Here's an aerial map. And this is just right off 129th and in the area of 13th East and 129th in that area. Here's land use map. The land use designation is residential low medium density. Zoning map is RA2. So here's an overview of the request. It's a home occupation conditional use permit. The applicant is requesting to operate a home office that provides landscaping services. A room in the dwelling is used for business administrative purposes. Appointments are scheduled online and services are provided at the customer's property. No customers come to the home, no employees come to the home other than the employees who run the business who also live at the home. And an enclosed trailer that contains landscaping equipment and includes a business logo wrap is parked at the property. Here's a site plan that the applicant provided. The street just north of the property is 129th South. And here's the floor plan. It's just a five by five office space in the home, just used for administrative purposes. And in the side yard here is where they park their trailer when it's not in use. So impact analysis and mitigation identified potential impacts for customers and employees coming to the home and associated traffic. Vehicles parked on the street, noticeable business-related equipment and vehicles. The proposed mitigation is that all requirements of the Draper City Engineering, Public Works, Building Planning and Fire Divisions are satisfied. that a Draper City business license shall be obtained and maintained by the business owner for as long as the business remains in operation, that only one business-related trailer shall be stored at the subject property in the rear yard in the location illustrated on the approved site plan, and that all equipment be stored inside of the business-related trailer and not in outdoor yard areas. Here is a picture of the subject property. Over in this area is where the trailer is parked. And that's my presentation. Any questions?

I have a question. So in the staff report, it says that staff did a visit to the property to observe that the rear property, the rear yard parking lot is located behind a shed and is set back far enough from the street that it conceals the trailer. But then the site plan doesn't show the shed so clearly. What are we looking at here?

Which is the correct one that we're approving or going to approve or review, I guess.

And then also, well, I have another question for the applicant when they come up.

So thank you for pointing that out about the shed. So the shed was not included in the site plan, but when I did a visit to the property, the shed is actually right here. And the trailer is parked on the other side of it.

Right. So do they need to submit a revised site plan? Because what's in our packet, again, doesn't show the shed. I like the idea of the trailer behind the shed. I think that's a better scenario. So do they need to submit a revised one?

We could request that. I think that is a fair request, just a new site plan that would clarify that it is behind the shed.

Can we just put that in a motion, a modified motion? Yes. As an added condition. Modified condition.

Well, I think that's a good idea. I think it's fair to you, Susan.

Because it actually improves the proposal.

Yeah, yeah, okay. Thank you.

That's good to point out. We got the dates right? Yeah. We're going to have to put Susan on staff.

You may want to read that report if you want to. Who knows what I was thinking that day.

We do appreciate that, Susan. Thanks.

That's what happens when you get inundated with Pennsylvania. It's true.

Thank you. All right. Any other questions then? Okay. Great. All right. Is the applicant here? Come on down. And you know the drill now, right? You've seen it demoed. So just state your name and then add anything you'd like.

I am Josh Mitchell. I am the owner of the company requesting this.

Hi.

And this is my wife, Michelle.

Hi, Michelle. Perfect. Anything else you want to add?

In the photo that you have here, the trailer is actually in front of the shed on the north side. There is room, however, behind the shed if that's where you want it. We can just basically put it where you want it. There is heavily landscaped area in front of the on the north side of the trailer so you really wouldn't see it. Is it almost where that Jeep is?

Is that where the trailer would sit, see where the shed is?

It sits just on the other side of that scout, yeah.

Oh, it does? So there's even more space there, interesting.

Yeah, there's four or five spots right there for it. How big is that trailer? It's a 14-foot trailer, just a standard enclosed trailer. Okay.

The concern is we just don't want the advertising to be showing so that it fills like it's a billboard.

I'm not going to be advertising at all. I'm going slow. I don't want any kind of advertising.

So it sounds like that may just be one of the conditions just to send in a revision, right, that shows the shed. And then where do you decide to put it? I guess we can specify that, too.

He's offered that, so just keep that in mind as part of the motion there.

Okay, perfect. Well, we always appreciate you coming in and doing this, right? So this is something you should do, but most don't, so we appreciate you. So thank you. Thank you. All right, we'll open this up for public comment. Go ahead.

Sorry, thanks. So... So I was out to your property today, and I know you're doing some landscaping. You chopped a big tree down in front. Great. Awesome. Practicing your business. That's awesome. But I did have a question. There was a skid stirrer and I think like another piece of equipment at the back, a red wagon of some sort. Are those there just for what you're doing now, or is that part of your equipment? Okay.

That is my equipment personally that I have, and it's stored in the summer down at my lot, and then it's stored at my cabin property up in Duchesne.

So that will not be on the site all the time? That's not. Okay. That's correct. Because that was not specified in the application.

That's correct.

Thank you.

Perfect. Any other questions? Okay. Again, we'll invite you back up if we need to afterwards. Thank you. Okay, this is a public hearing, so we'll go ahead and open this up for public comment. Who would like to address this agenda item? OK, we don't see anyone, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion. All right, commissioners, pretty straightforward. There's been some talk of adding a condition. So what say you?

Do you want to do it, Susan, and add the condition? I like the idea of it back behind the trailer myself.

You mean behind the shed? Behind the shed.

Excuse me, the trailer behind the shed. Yes. So would we agree on that?

Are we okay with that? Yes.

And that they just submitted an updated site plan to correspond with that? Okay.

They don't need to. Let's just do it.

Oh, okay. Go ahead. Okay, thanks. I will then make a motion. I move that we approve the home occupation conditional use permit as requested by Michelle Mitchell, representing Mitchell Landscaping LLC, application 2026-0080-USC, based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated May 15th, 2026, with the revision that the trailer be located behind the shed.

Currently on site.

On the site, yeah.

Perfect. Great. Is that the end of it?

Yes. All right. I'll second the motion.

Great. All right. Let's go ahead and put that one to a vote with the modification. Susan, how do you vote?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

Gary?

Yes.

Mary?

Yes.

And Kendra?

Yes.

All right. Congrats on that. Good luck. Thank you. Appreciate you. Let's go ahead and we've got now our city initiated as public hearing. You tell me. Are you ready to go back?

I would recommend making a motion to go back to item 1D. Are we ready to go back?

Okay. Great. So let's go back. Who will make a motion for that?

I'll make a motion. Let me go back to the item for the Cherry Canyon block valve.

Numbered 1D as in Delta. 1D. Perfect. All right. That's the motion. Who will second it?

I'll second.

Thanks, Mary. And let's vote on it. Susan?

Yes.

Mary?

Yes.

Gary? Yes. Lisa? Yes. Kendra?

Yes.

All right. We are back. Go ahead. I'm going to give some time to Spencer Duchesne. Go ahead.

Okay. So I went to Salt Lake County Recorder's Office, and I pulled the information on the subject property for which Enbridge is requesting the conditional use permit. All of the information that we have available to us from the Recorder's Office indicates that the property is titled under the HOA's name and that Enbridge has an appropriate easement. Mr. Christensen's challenges to the ownership of the property shouldn't be adjudicated in this form you're not a judicial body you're a a body that's vested with administrative powers from the city and for who to decide the true owner of that property is it's not the planning commission it's not the city of draper If there's a dispute about it, then it's not really even the recorder. That's for a court of law, and if Mr. Christensen feels that he's got some kind of ownership interest in the property, then that needs to be adjudicated in the court of law. that's not something that we're here tonight to decide in terms of your ability to decide as a planning commission as a conditional use permit so we stick to our tenants of whether how we grant a conditional use permit are there conditions that can be mitigated we don't have to eliminate all the conditions we just have to mitigate those conditions to make it so that it wouldn't disturb the residential character of the neighborhood in a way that's overly intrusive. So those are the things that you need to consider. I've printed off both a plat document and a recorded easement document that back the city's position that the HOA is in is the owner of this property and the Enbridge has a legal easement to build this And I will submit them to the record for the Planning Commission tonight

great thank you all right no yeah we've we've already got again we've just heard what was said there and i do still have the public hearing open on this and you've already made some public hearing comments so we allow that one three minutes per com per commenter that's that's what we've got sorry lavar the citizens you're on notice i have a title license if you just hit pause i'll be Again, we just heard this is not the forum for it. It's out of our pay grade. It's out of our jurisdiction, so it's not the forum for it.

Why proceed on a false assumption?

Again, it was just mentioned as to how that can be handled. So what we'll do, since the public hearing is still open, I'm going to close the public hearing unless there's anyone that would like to address this agenda item that has not already done so. Great. Then we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion. And now we will go ahead and discuss and vote. So commissioners, what are your thoughts on this?

I commend Enbridge for working with the HOA on the things that they wanted done to this piece of this easement. Hang on a second.

Just as a matter of procedure, we should be inviting the applicant back up because the applicant's opportunity to speak has been our standard procedures.

So before we deliberate as a planning commission. That'll be great. Noted. All right. If the applicant would like to come back up, we'll go ahead and do that.

As she's coming, a Google search will show you my name, phone number, and address.

LeVar, I've got to ask you that we just can't have you disrupting the meeting. I'm sorry. Hi there.

Hi, I'm happy to answer any questions. I mean, this the comment that came up in the public comment is news to us. It's the reason this was tabled a year and a half ago was because the HOA wanted to talk to us and wanted the city to encourage sort of this process and we were happy to do that um and you know our title search indicated that the hoa is the owner of this parcel on this side of the street i think steeplechase associates owns the other side of the street um but we didn't do a full title search on that but happy to answer any questions if anybody has any

I have a question. Has the easement been recorded? It's all fully taken care of on the recording side?

Yes, it was recorded. It looks like we bought it. I think I misspoke earlier and said I thought it was six years ago or something. It looks like it was four years ago. We bought it in 2022 and recorded it in 2022.

And it looks like it's recorded as Dominion, which is now Enbridge.

Yes. Well, that's another interesting thing because it's recorded as Questar Gas Company doing business as Dominion. Questar Gas Company is now doing business as Enbridge because they were purchased.

So again, same. Same entity. And there it is. And as Spencer mentioned, we've just... submitting this into the the entire application and agenda item okay okay sound fair yeah and it so it's not even a new um easement it's been in place for four years yeah we picked it up a while ago to plan this okay yeah at least this one here dated this one says survey date uh 2022 yeah november 10 2022 is what we're putting out stamped here uh professional land survey or state of utah so Benjamin D. Handel. So we'll go ahead and just submit all that when it's needed.

Do we... I think we need to pass it.

Yep, we're passing it down.

Yeah, it'll go to Lori.

Passing it down. Great.

Good to see that, though.

Yeah. No, thanks for getting that. So that was timely. Anything else you'd like to add? Nope, not at this time, unless there's any questions. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Will you go back to the conditions that we've got on there, just the conditions... Yeah, sorry, the mitigation.

I did not get them on a slide. Oh, it's okay. I can read them to you if you'd like. It's okay, then. Yeah, he said he could read them. Okay. The conditions are basically all requirements of the Draper City Engineering, Public Works, Building, Planning, and Fire Divisions are satisfied through development of the site and construction of all buildings on the site, including permitting. All requirements of the geotechnical report are satisfied through development of the site and the construction of all structures on the site. The construction of the utility substation be in conformance with the approved plans. The disturbed areas site outside of the fenced area and access drive would be revegetated with native plant material and seed that tie in the surrounding natural vegetation, which will not need, and that will not need supplemental water after the vegetation has been established. And that the vegetation installed as part of the required revegetation disturbed areas is provided with supplemental water as needed for initial establishment. and that the utility substation entry gates be painted an earthy tone color. That color be submitted to staff for approval at the time of the building permit submittal. the fencing be installed as per the approved site plan and elevation drawings. So basically follow what the plan is and get us a color for the fencing.

And the location cannot change, correct? Where is that noted that the location up and down this property would not change?

Yeah, the location is actually specified. Got it. I think not one of the drawings I've got up here. It's just not. as easy to see off of this.

Just so that there's nothing outstanding on an approval. Yeah. Okay. All right, commissioners, deliberation on that. I do like, that's why I wanted to point that out. I do like the coloring of the fencing to kind of match. It's very common, like in Zeroscape, Arizona and everything, there's a lot of these just up and down those bland highways, and it is nice to be able to see through them instead of just having an opaque box.

I think this is important because it's a safety feature for all of the community. So I commend them for doing that. I also think they did a good job working with the HOA and their desires for this because they'll be looking down upon it from where they live.

Yeah, I agree. I feel like we don't need to add any additional... It's already worked into the application and the recommendations from staff. So I'd be happy to make a motion if we're ready for that.

Yeah, go ahead, Mary.

I move that we approve the Conditional Use Permit as requested by Matthew Pulsifer, representing Enbridge Gas Utah for the Cherry Canyon Block Valve, Application 2026-0025-USE. That's the 6th, right? Mm-hmm. Okay.

But the report date is also the 26th.

Gotcha. Okay. I knew there was something else. Based on the findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated May 20th, 2026. Okay.

Thank you, Mary, for that motion. Who will second it?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Kendra. Okay, let's put this into a vote for approval. So, Mary, how do you vote?

Yes.

Kendra?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

And Gary?

Yes.

Okay. All right. We'll go ahead and move that forward then with approval. Good luck. Thank you. All right. Next, we've got our city-initiated short-term rentals text amendment. I thought we were going to get away with all administrative items on one night, but no. So here we are. Let's go ahead on the request of Draper City, approval of text amendments to portions of the Title VI and IX of the Draper City Municipal Code, DCMC, in order to require short-term rentals be licensed and permitted and to add associated standards, known as Application 2026-0090-TA. And our staff contact is Todd Taylor. So go ahead, Todd.

Thank you. So the reason we're having these proposed tax amendments is in response to a request from City Council to come up with regulations for short-term rentals. So that's like Airbnbs and verbos and the like. Currently the only standard that we have in our code is that internal accessory dwelling units cannot be rented for less than 30 days. That's our only current sort of short-term rental standard in our code. Since the City Council had requested that we prepare these standards, we've held several work sessions with the City Council to gauge sort of the level of regulation that they were desiring. And out of those meetings, sort of some goals that we had sort of come up with for the regulations was to improve public safety, to protect neighborhood character, to provide clear operating rules, to ensure tax collection and to enable tracking and enforcement of short-term rentals. So I'm going to go through sort of the high-level regulations here. I do have the full text if we want to reference it.

Sorry, we disrupted you, but we're listening.

Okay.

I just didn't know if we wanted to pause until things were cleared up. So basically, we're proposing that the short-term rentals come in for a permit. So we're establishing a new permitting process and that they also get a business license. And the business license is to ensure that we collect the municipal transient occupancy tax from the state. So we've added procedures for the application. Either the owner or an owner's authorized agent as the host would be able to apply for a short-term rental permit. As part of that application, they will need to provide a floor plan of pretty much the whole home, show which areas of the home are being proposed for the short-term rental. So it could be a portion or the whole home. sort of the sleeping areas, the fire extinguishers, the smoke alarms. Also provide a site plan, and that will be important for showing the necessary parking. And then providing a table indicating what the maximum occupancy for that short-term rental will be. Another part of the application will be an affidavit that there's no existing restrictions on the home. So that'd be such as HOA or CC&Rs. these would be approved by the zoning administrator and they need to be renewed annually we've added a section in the code for revocations so these are some if these situations arise the zoning administrator can revoke the short-term rental permit so if they've provided false information on their application If they're not operating as described on the permit, if they're out of compliance with conditions, if they refuse an inspection, if they're 90 days or more delinquent on their taxes, if they've had two citations or charges in the past 12 months, or if they're found to be a nuisance by a court. So then moving into the standards for the short-term rentals, we propose to allow them in all residential districts. They can be located in all or a portion of a residential unit. They can be located in a detached accessory dwelling unit if it has a valid ADU permit. They cannot be on a property with an IADU, an internal accessory dwelling unit. They cannot be located in a tent, trailer, camper, RV, or other uninhabitable structure. They can not be in a unit with a long-term rental, so if there's already sort of a long-term lease on that property, we don't want that owner to then try to break up and rent more of that unit to multiple individuals. and then they cannot be used for commercial purposes or events. For the occupancy, we are allowing one short-term rental per residential unit. There can only be one renter at a time. That renter can have guests, multiple guests, but it's limited to one renter at a time and not be divided into multiple rentals, so you can't have different rooms being rented out to different people of different parties. The stay has a minimum of three consecutive nights, and this was something that was requested by police and city council in order to reduce sort of the party rentals. And then just to be consistent with state code, it's a maximum of less than 30 consecutive days. And then the maximum occupancy is based on the number of bedrooms and parking, which I'll get to on the next slide. And then RV parks, manufactured and mobile home parks, bed and breakfast, hotels, motels, and motor lodges are exempt from this because they already sort of operate as lodging facilities. For the occupancy, we will look at the number of bedrooms or sleeping areas. So for the occupancy, we would assume two persons per bedroom, and that area has to have a minimum of 70 square feet. If the applicant wants to have additional people for that sleeping area or bedroom, it has to have an additional 50 square feet for every additional person. So this will come into account when they're trying to set the maximum occupancy of the unit and just to make sure that there's sufficient space for the number of people that they're proposing. And then tying in with the occupancy or the number of bedrooms is the parking. So again, they'll have to show that they have enough parking off street to fit the number of bedrooms that they're proposing to rent out. And so we're requiring two off street spaces per rental and then one half space for every bedroom or sleeping area exceeding two. So here's a sort of sample of how that would go as we increase the number of bedrooms or sleeping areas, and we round up to the next whole number. So an important part for police and fire response is to have this urgent response hotline or contact info. And this will be required at applications. So the host has to be available by telephone 24-7 during a rental. The host or a decision-making individual must be able to be at the property within 30 minutes of a complaint or a need to be at the property. When approved by the zoning administrator, a notice with this urgent response number will be sent to abutting property owners so that they have somebody to contact. in case there's an issue, and it will also be provided to Draper Fire and Draper Police so that they have it in their records and that they have somebody that they can contact when an issue arises and they know who to contact. You know, I think there's been instances where they have shown up and they don't know who to contact or how to contact somebody that can make some decisions on who's staying at that property. For noise, we're requiring that the host ensure that the renters are aware of and adhere to our noise control ordinance. Within the short-term rental, we are requiring that the short-term rental have the permit and the business license posted, that they post the urgent response number. that they post all applicable rules, and that they post a good neighbor guidelines document that I will show what we have drafted. So it's a document to the guest, really just sort of outlining how they can be a good neighbor, letting them know our non-urgent police number, that they should call 911 if there's an emergency, that there should be a fire extinguisher located in the home, that they should, you know, locate it, not tamper or disable the devices, that there should not be commercial events happening during their stay in the home, that they be a good neighbor, not disturb the neighbors, especially between 10 and 7 per the noise control ordinance, and being mindful when they're arriving and leaving. that they park on the property but not block driveways, mailboxes, sidewalks, or park on the lawn, that they not exceed the number of guests that they have on their reservation, that they pick up after themselves, and if they have pets, that they keep them under control, clean up after them, and walk them on a leash. So it's just a document that we saw in other jurisdictions that tries to remind the guests of where they are and encourage them to be on their best behavior. Finally, we do have some standards that they have a fire extinguisher in the short-term rental and smoke and carbon monoxide alarms per the fire code. Also, if the home is equipped with fire sprinklers, that it have its annual inspection, that electrical panels be clear. that house numbers are visible for maintenance that they comply with all city ordinances for the online listing we're requiring that they include the short-term rental permit and business license numbers in the online listings and then finally we've just included that as part of the short-term rental permit we can conduct inspections as needed to ensure compliance That concludes my presentation, and I'm available if you have any questions.

Todd, one quick question. When you go back to that slide that says a permit will not be issued if it's already a full-time rental, does that, so reading through that, give me a scenario where that would be the case. So, for example, if someone has a home that's currently rented full-time and they came in to apply for one of these permits, that would be denied because it's already a full-time rental. Because you couldn't have both. You can't kick the full-time renter out to say, hey, you're out for three nights, four nights, five nights, whatever, because I'm going to short-term this out. What caused that? Am I missing a scenario? Is that the case?

The Olympics. The Olympics.

I think we have been aware of other situations in the city where there are property owners who are trying to rent every piece of their home and make as much money off of that home as they can.

But they can do a detached ADU, but it's never an ADU if they're not living there. That's correct. So... Again, I'm just looking for a scenario where it would be a full-time rental and they'd be applying for a permit.

If they just rent it out, let's just say they have an upstairs and a downstairs, but the downstairs isn't technically a full internal ADU and they somehow lock the upstairs renters out of the basement. but they want to rent out a part of that basement or the full basement as a short-term rental, then they could have two rental situations happening.

So basically the application will say, is this unit being rented out as a full-time rental? And if it says yes, then it's disqualification. Yes. Period. Got it. That's all.

Okay, I have a couple questions. And kind of the flip side, the first one is the maximum of 30 days. So there are plenty of times when people want to stay in an Airbnb or something like that, a short-term rental, for longer than 30 days. So how... Do they just have to technically be separate rental periods? Or how is that structured? Or is there any reason we've cut it off at 30 days? And I understand there's, you know, we've got people who long-term rent. Those are more than 30 days. But there are also short-term rentals that end up being longer stays.

So it's. I'd say the state code says that they are less that short term rentals are less than 30 days, so we're being consistent with that. We have different standards for the long term rentals with our business licensing. So we're sort of just trying to break that sort of at that line.

So I guess technically people would just have separate rental periods. I'm assuming if people are staying more than 30 days because that happens pretty regularly, I just.

Yeah, so I can answer a little bit of that, having had to deal with something similar to that in the past. Yeah, once they hit that 30th day, technically, the landlord, if you will, does not have to pay that transient room tax because they've been there longer than 30 days. And they're supposed to refund it back to... the renter, so that's now a long-term rental.

Okay, that makes sense, yes.

And so we're just trying to keep those separate.

Okay. Isn't this kind of initiated because of the transient tax collection that's kind of forced upon us, the city, whatever?

Well, even though we didn't have... Can I finish my... Oh, sorry. I just don't want to forget. Ah, go ahead. The other question I have is about the manager or, you know, I know it wasn't referred to as a manager. It's not uncommon in states, and I know this because I own a vacation rental property in a state that requires a local... And I think that's a really good rule because then you don't have people moving out of state and Airbnb-ing their home. I probably shouldn't say that, right? Short-term renting their home. And nobody's really around. You may have somebody available via phone, but not to actually come and deal with problems. And so I would prefer to see that kind of requirement if it's not prohibited by the state legislature, which it could be.

Is that something that was discussed? Was it addressed a little bit in that area where it's like they have to be within 30 minutes? I think police and fire wanted that. Yeah. See that right there. So the host available by telephone during rental. Oh, my gosh. Well, how embarrassing. No, no, it's not. I just want to point it out because is that the same thing that you were referring to?

Yes.

Because host or decision-making individual would include the manager, right?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

But not just a phone call. I do like the 30 minutes. That actually is key. emergency and everybody's just looking at each other going i don't know i mean this is all it sounds like the police department had a lot of input on this on the problems the minimum three days or maximum well no minimum three days right so that people aren't just renting it out for party one night party house if they do they've got to pay the cost for two free nights right so which prohibits that it kind of inhibits that So, no, yeah, I just want to point that out.

Sorry, I just went on that whole tirade.

Okay, great. Validated.

Now validated.

Withdrawn.

Mary, to your point about using the term Airbnb as short code for short-term rental, I wholly appreciate your willingness to use the term that we're using, but also Airbnb is not around to try and protect their trademarks in this meeting from being generic.

Well, and it applies to multiple platforms.

Say what you want. Say what you want. That's fine. Would you like me to give you a Kleenex or a tissue?

That's right. It'll be $500. There you go.

Great. All right. So now, Susan, did you have some questions?

Well, I just want to comment about the transient. I think a lot of this was initiated because of the transient tax that they're paying, whether the city had STRs or not. Just kind of a comment.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

So I think this is great that the city's adopting or possibly adopting a code to address these and hopefully get a handle on some of the issues.

I was kind of smiling when I was looking at the parking to bedroom count. And I'm like, I'm actually really wondering if there's homes big enough to accommodate that. Because there's so many, there's so many homes. Five bedroom home. And I don't know if they have that much parking, right? Like a five-bedroom home with just a owner-occupant may not even have that much parking. So that's great because that actually, you know, remember when we do conditional uses and home occupations, that's always the plague on the neighborhood is that just the surge of cars. So I do like how, I mean, it's pretty aggressive. So I think this accomplishes whatever they were trying to accomplish and not. put a really bad burden. I've liked everything I've seen. It's open enough, yet strict enough to keep the nuisance down.

I am curious, though. This change or this proposed code is for all residential areas. And then you specifically call out certain special districts that are actually residential.

Is that a question?

Well, so I'm wondering, is there a reason that you would have to call out specific special districts? Did they prohibit these or something? I mean, I'm just curious why you've included all residential districts and then you've got... Well, like Bellevue, residential, special district.

Yeah, so I just went through the code, and any district that allowed residential, I had to go through and add it in as a permitted use. So...

Oh, okay.

It's not calling, it's not excluding any of those areas. It's, I just, when we went, when I went through, I made sure that each district, a lot of residential units.

Okay, so it's not like they prohibited or spelled out in them. Okay, I was just curious.

So it truly is all residential areas. All residential.

Thank you.

Those are good questions. Anything else?

I just want to thank Todd for doing this because this is a big project. Yeah. It's huge. I think you did a great job, so thank you. Thank you. It's been needed.

Yeah, great job.

So I have another question that just kind of came to mind. So in an apartment complex, then, the owners cannot have part of the complex be long-term and part of it short-term, correct? Or certain units short-term? It applies to the whole property, a permit.

They could designate a unit or several units as...

They could?

Yes.

Okay.

It's per residential unit. Yeah, so that's a great point, too, because now you could have these apartments out here, right, that are saying, hey, the question again, you know, is this unit being rented out full time? These 30 are. These 10 are not. So we're applying for these 10. Weird, huh? I doubt that. I don't even know. I doubt that they even do it, but you could.

Well, I can see if you have high vacancies and maybe trying out short-term. I don't know. Anyway.

Well, with the water, with the surf park there, you could get the three-day surf tour coming through.

Short-term rentals. We do have some projects, some apartment complexes that do have some short-term rentals in them. Interesting. Canyon Vista there on 123rd and right next to the freeway. A couple of those buildings have a whole floor that's designated just for.

So this would apply now to them. They would now need to permit. They already have a business license that they now need to would they would permit or is that grandfathered in since they've been doing it?

Just a question. They would need a permit for apartment complex. We'd probably just do one permit for all the units, but they would need to designate like how many units they're going to have a short term.

So there'd be one permit for say they're doing 10 units and then a separate. Well, they don't need a permit to do long term rentals, I guess, do they? They need a business license for the long term. But that would apply to both business, you know, they're not separate ownership.

Yeah. So they're going to have a business license to have rentals, period.

Which is one of the requirements to have a business license.

Yes.

So, yeah. So, yeah. Like you or I, single family, you know, family property owner, we then need to go get a business license and then this permit. Yeah.

Right, you need both.

Yeah, it's pretty cool. I like it. It's enough to make it doable and not, I mean, I don't want to say not hard, but, you know, enough of a hoop to jump through.

What, can we go back to the, there was something about notification to adjacent owners, but.

He was giving phone numbers.

That was just contact, right? Yeah.

That's we haven't finalized what the notice will look like but it will include the contact information for the host or the owner And that number that they can call if there are issues they can contact those abutting neighbors can't contact That urgent response host person if there are issues first and try to resolve them Someone across the street hopefully would get a notice I

Yeah. Or would they?

Well, a budding would be left or right.

Well, that's why, I mean, yeah. What's a budding?

Well, I think legally it's probably directly touching.

Well, yeah, but if I was across the street looking at it, I would want to be notified.

So that's my question. Then you call the people who live next door and get the number.

You know, I think it is the ones that are immediately touching the property.

So did you say state law is requiring us to put something in place or just has a framework of standards that we're modeling off of? No, no, go ahead, because I already have a follow-up.

So there's a section in the state law, and it does have some definitions, and it discusses how enforcement can occur, but it doesn't lay out all these standards.

So under, I guess, is there anything prohibiting us from making this available to every part of this city? Or are we just doing that as a blanket rule? And couldn't HOAs, will they be able to basically ban short-term rentals contract basically out of this law amongst themselves?

So I would say

Maybe that's a Spencer question. I don't know. I don't know. I would hate for my neighbor, once this gets passed, to decide to short-term rent their house in my residential neighborhood. And I know we've been able to up to this point. But with the blessing of the city, that kind of bugs me. And I wouldn't like that. And I know in St. George, years ago when we looked at... having a rental property there we looked at short-term rental rules just curious what they were but um and you had to get like pretty much it was banned in the city unless you had sign off from a certain number of neighbors so if they agreed then um it was fine but but here we're just making it permissible it sounds like anywhere in the city which i don't love because i live here

Okay, so I've got an answer to that question. Okay. And let's see, it's 10.885.4, subsection 2. And it lists some exceptions, and I haven't looked at the exceptions. I've got them open, and I can look at them and give you some more information if you'd like. But it says, notwithstanding section 102501 or 102503, legislative body may not enact or enforce an ordinance that prohibits an individual from listing or offering short-term rental on a short-term rental website, or use an ordinance that prohibits the act of renting a short-term rental to fine, charge, prosecute, or otherwise punish an individual solely for the act of listing or offering short-term rental on the short-term rental website. So we can't prohibit it. anywhere in the city, is the way that I read that. Okay, yeah, that's what it sounds like. So what we've done, what the direction that council's given us is that, hey, if we can't prohibit it, let's regulate it in a way that we can, that's permissible by the statute. So that's the effect of this. I am not 100% sure because I don't really care all that much about what HOAs can or can't do. But I do the legislative tracking for the city. And every bill that comes around in the 45-day legislative session that affects the city, I look at, I read, I track. My recollection for this one when it came around was that A similar provision in the bill prohibited HOAs from doing the same thing.

But right now it's just municipalities that are restricting?

No, my recollection in the bill, and this could be wrong, was that the HOAs also couldn't enact an HOA regulation or enforce an HOA regulation that prohibited short-term rentals within the HOA.

But what you just read was, was that just municipalities?

Yeah, what I just read is just for municipalities. Now, I can go back to the bill and look at it if you'd like. I'm curious because... Or I could email you what the bill number is and you can go through it yourself.

Well, and here's an interesting twist. I own a home in St. George in an HOA, and I am prohibited from long-term renting that home. It has to be owner-occupied. So I would be very interested to know that you can't prohibit short-term rentals and would like a similar bill to come forward on long-term rentals.

Just to add to that, Mary, one of the things that HOAs watch out for is their FHA certification. and you lose that when you have over 20% non-owner occupied. So what's interesting there is that affects property values, I think, in a negative way because then FHA buys a property using that type of loan. So I don't think the short-term rental... checks that box. So for example, and it may check the box. Does that make sense? So it's got to do with the HOA can enforce that because that truly does look out for the property value. So that's why they even get in and regulate and say, hey, Do you have renters in there or are you owner-occupied? And they can ask that because the noble request is that, hey, we're just trying to keep our FHA certification. Others are just overreaching. But I would assume that now that I'm talking through this that a short-term rental is a rental is a rental. So it's still not owner-occupied. So it's interesting to me that they'll regulate one there and not the other. That's actually really weird.

Well, and totally extraneous information, but I did approach our local representative and ask for a bill. prohibiting HOAs from disallowing long-term rentals in the perspective of a housing shortage. Because I have a house that sits there empty most of the time. And he told me home ownership was the focus of our legislature. So he didn't think that would be something that would move along. And interestingly, now we have this short-term rental issue. requirement it sounds like we have to allow them um which most certainly is not is not not home ownership so i know i'm now dragging this meeting out and i'm no but i just it bothers me so but it sounds like the answer to your question was i don't like it well nobody does right because we live here right but it's allowed so let's regulate it and control yes that is the answer yep yeah very good

All right. Well, should we pass this on to?

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, well, it's public hearing. So we've got to open this up for highly contested public hearing. Yes, there's a cricket in the back, I think. So let's go ahead and open this up for public comment. Who would like to address this agenda item? Is that a yes? No, maybe so. All right. So I don't see anyone, so we will go ahead and close the public hearing portion. Commissioners, what would you like to do? Positive or negative recommendation? Send over to the city council.

I can make the motion. Can I just make one comment? Oh, sorry. I think that this might be kind of sticky, but ticky tacky. I don't know. Property owners across the street ought to be notified. They're the ones that have to look at it. They're the ones that see the coming and going. To me, they're the ones that are going to complain or want to know what's going on. Is there any way to include that? I mean, I know a budding is a budding, but... Can we add that?

I don't know how you expand that. Can you change proposed code with a motion?

I don't know.

What do you think I mean? Correct.

It is a recommendation.

Yeah, you can include in your recommendation. So if you want to forward a positive recommendation, include that you recommend the city council look at this modification.

I think it's fair. They may change it from, you know, a budding adjacent, you know.

Well, if it were like a radius, that would accomplish, I think, what you want.

I don't know what the radius should be. Yeah, I don't either. I mean, typically it's 300 feet.

Because, Susan, you're saying if the short-term rental is, in theory, on fire and you were across the street, you wouldn't have the urgent response number to call, yet you'd have to go to the abutting neighbor to say the house is on fire.

You just call 911. You just call 911.

Well, in that case, right, but if it's like... If it's a noise issue or they're parking all over and in front of my street, then you call the police.

I'd still call 911.

You'd still call the police.

So what is the purpose of the abutting property owners getting a number? What was the purpose of that? You've written some good code here, so what was the purpose of that one?

So I think we wanted to make sure that the immediately affected neighbors got the notice. I think there was thought that it would probably spread amongst those neighbors to be on that. The fire or the number? The number. The notice, the number, yeah. But we didn't want to get into too big of a radius that we're having to mail out.

What do you think of Lisa's proposal of just calling 911?

Well, they're kind of called the non-emergency numbers, really what you should do, you know.

So I don't know. Well, but I don't think the non-emergency number is appropriate for an excess number of cars. As long as they're all legally parked. That's just a complaint you would want to pass on to the property owner, to your point. And I think that is the kind of thing.

And so it could happen across the street.

The same reason that the abutting neighbors.

Well, why don't we put it in as a record? that someone sorts out the proper word to use that would describe, that would get the end result that you're looking for.

Or am I the only one that's thinking that? Does that sound fair? Sure.

I think it's a fair recommendation.

So what's the language that we're?

Just putting a recommendation in that the term abutting And we would like the across the street. And to the rear. Added. And to the rear, yep.

So the immediately surrounding property owners.

There you go. Great job. Okay. Any other.

There you go. Immediate.

Sounds like there's a motion.

Any other changes before we start?

I'd like to recommend that HOAs are also banned from the city. If we can just slip that pork belly fat in there, but I don't know if it'll fly. Just kidding.

Okay, so are you ready to make the motion? Yes. Okay, I move we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the city-initiated short-term rentals text amendment as requested by Draper City, application number 20260090-TA. based on the following findings and the criteria for approval is listed in the staff report dated May 18th, 2026. So it would include the five findings for approval listed there. In addition, with a modification on the urgent response requirement for abutting property owners, that that would, we recommend that that be changed to immediate surrounding property owners so that it would include both the property owner in front of the short-term rental property as well as the property behind. Did that cover it?

Well done. Who will second that?

I'll second.

Thank you. Susan will second it.

See?

Mission accomplished. Perfect with that. All right. Well, let's put it to a vote then. So, Kendra, how do you vote?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Mary?

Yes.

Lisa? Yes. Gary? Yes. All right. Good luck to the City Council. Again, great job, Todd, on all that. I think that's, if you could box that up and cookie cutter that out, I think you could market it to other cities. So yeah, I think you did a great job. Let's see here. Now we've got, I think, just one other item, right? Public hearing city initiated Draper Highland boundary adjustment, number two, land use map and zoning map amendment request. It's on the behalf of Draper City and land use map amendment and zoning map amendments for approximately 0.31 acres. of property located at approximately 16377 South Suncrest Drive. It's known as application 2026-0112-MA and 2026-0117-MA. Todd Draper, take it away.

All right, thank you. This will look very similar to one we did a few months back. This is the vicinity map. This is just kind of the second half of what we probably should have done altogether as one, but where we took the other portion out of the city maps. This will be adding to the city maps the portion that came into Draper City. So this one is owned by the same property owner that owns all of this. And this is just the aerial map kind of showing that again. And then we will be looking to put it into that hillside low density land use, which is the same residential hillside low density land use that's already there. And then, again, A5 zoning and that hillside sensitive overlay for the zoning. There's our wonderful site photo, giving you the same location with the arrow moved a little slightly. And we're looking for recommendation on the land use map and the zoning map changes to the city council. Great. Are there any questions?

Thank you, Todd. No questions. All right. Is the applicant sitting right there? Thank you. So we'll go ahead and open it up for public comment. Who would like to address this agenda item? No one? Hereby close the public hearing portion. So let's go ahead and deliberate here. We've got two items on here. What would we like to suggest to the City Council?

Let's move it on.

Yeah. Perfect. I'm happy to make a motion. We have two items.

We do.

I did combine them into one motion for you. Thank you.

Great job. That was great.

I thought I was missing something again.

As if he knew it would be a quarter to ten. Or a quarter to nine. Sorry. Great job.

I move that we forward positive recommendations to the City Council for the proposed land use map and zoning map amendments as requested by Draper City Applications 2026-0117-MA and 2026-0112-MA based on the findings and criteria for approval as listed in the staff report dated May 15, 2026.

Thank you, Mary. Who will second that?

I'll second that.

Thanks, Gary. All right, let's go ahead and put this then to a vote. This is pushing on with a positive recommendation of city council on both items. Mary, how do you vote?

Yes.

Gary?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And Kendra?

Yes.

Awesome. Thank you, everyone. Jennifer? Any outstanding items?

I have nothing on.

Great. Seeing no outstanding business.

I move we adjourn.

Adjourned.

Yeah. It was the shiz that comes out of his mouth. You're the greatest. You're so wonderful. I just love you. And then he goes into his self. And then he's like, oh, yeah, I represented this community. Oh, it was so bad. I'm touched to be here. All right.

And when Spencer came in with those docs, I was just like, yes.

Down here, I could do it down here. I couldn't do it up there.

No, I own this property. I pay taxes.