Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, good evening. Welcome to our Draper City Planning Commission meeting. Today's date is Thursday, August 13th, 2026. I'm Andrew Adams. We've got all our commissioners up here. Thank you so much for volunteering your time. And then also, as usual, we thank the staff for getting the reports ready, working with the applicants, and staying late. So let's go ahead and welcome everyone tonight. We appreciate you attending. We're going to start. Our agenda is as posted and proposed without any changes. So we'll go ahead. We only have three agenda items on here tonight. So let's go ahead and kick the first one off. It's an action item simply to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes for July 9, 2026. Are there any edits or changes we need to make staff aware of, or can we approve those?

I move that we approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes for July 9th, 2026.

Thank you. Lisa, who will second that motion? I'll second. Thanks, Mary. Her microphones. I heard it, though. I'll vouch for you. I heard it. So Mary will second that. All right, let's go ahead and put that to a vote then. Lisa, how do you vote?

Yes.

Mm-hmm. Okay, we'll go ahead to Gary.

Yes.

Laura.

Yes.

Joshua.

Yes.

And Mary.

Yes.

All right. Let's move on to our first public hearing. It's the Lamb Hair Salon Home Occupation Conditional Use Permit Request. It's on the request of Greg and Sabrina Lamb, representing Lamb Hair Salon, a Home Occupation Conditional Use Permit Request on approximately... 0.5 acres located at 249 East and 13560 South. This is known as application 2026-0154-USE and our staff contact is Nick Whitaker. So Nick, go ahead. Thank you very much.

So yes, this is the Lamb Hair Salon home occupation conditional use permit request. Here's a vicinity map of the property. The property there is in the center in blue. Here's an aerial map. Land use map. The land use designation is residential medium density. And here's a zoning map. The zoning designation is RA2. So here's an overview of requests and business operations. It's a home occupation conditional use permit. The proposed business provides haircuts and coloring. Services are provided in a detached structure located in the rear yard. Customers come to the home by appointment only. Up to and no more than two customers are scheduled at one time. Two off-street parking stalls are provided for customer appointments. When needed, a non-resident employee comes to the home to assist. an off-street parking stall is provided for the employee and the employee parking stall is provided in addition to the two stalls for customers so there's three stalls available Hours of operation, Monday through Saturday from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m. Appointments are made in advance and range from 30 minutes to three hours, depending on the services requested. And then a typical day has three to six appointments. On occasion, there are as many as 12 appointments, and on the days where there are more appointments, that's when they have the additional employee. Here is a site plan and parking plan. As you can see, the blue or purple, it's hard to tell from here, that is where the employee is able to park their vehicle. And then the two customer parking stalls are located here. This allows for the resident to access their required parking and come and go. Here's a floor plan. So the residential structure does have an office where administrative duties are performed. And then out in the rear yard there is the accessory structure where there's two salon chairs. And that's where services are provided. So the impact analysis and mitigation comes down to, well, the potential impacts comes down to customers and employees coming to the home and the associated traffic as well as customer and employee vehicles parked on the street. And 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. That the hours of operation be limited to Monday through Saturday between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. That there shall only be one non-resident employee working at the home. That customer appointments shall be scheduled so that no more than two customers shall be at the subject property at one time. And that two off-street parking stalls shall be provided to the customers at the time of their scheduled appointment. And that one off-street parking stall shall be provided to the non-resident employee. Staff recommendation... IS APPROVAL. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL DOES NOT NEGATIVELY IMPACT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE CITY. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL WILL CONTRIBUTE TAX REVENUE TO THE CITY, AND THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL SUPPORTS THE ECONOMIC VITALITY GOALS FOUND IN THE CITY GOALS AND POLICIES CHAPTER OF THE DRAPER CITY GENERAL PLAN. HERE'S A SITE PHOTO. AND THAT IS MY PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS?

Thanks, Nick. Will you just pull up the parking layout just as we're discussing? There. That'll be great. Thanks. All right. So no questions for staff? Thank you, Nick. Is the applicant here? All right. You want to come on down? You guys can add anything you'd like to that presentation. And with everyone tonight, we'll just have you state your name.

Hello. My name is Greg Lamb. What did you want to know? Anything you want to add? Yeah, no, just, yeah, I object. I'm just kidding. No, it's been a good learning experience. Nick's been great to work with. I know a lot more than I did when I started this process, but excited to hopefully be done with it.

Good. Perfect. All right, well, we'll go ahead and put this up for public hearing, and then if there's any comments or anything that we need to invite you back up for, we will. Cool. Awesome. Thanks. All right, this is a public hearing, so the way this works is we open it up for public comment. Anyone that would like to address this agenda item gets up to three minutes. We have a nice little red timer over there. We just ask that you don't go over three, and you do not fill the whole time. So is there anyone that would like to, based on that, come up and give their public comment on this agenda item? Okay, we don't see anyone, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. All right, commissioners, this is pretty straightforward. I just pulled up the parking. Plenty of parking here, correct? That's probably the number one question with the extra employee and then two people at a time to minimize the impact on any neighborhood. So with that, what do you guys say? Any deliberations, or do we want to make a motion?

I think it's fine. Mary, do you want to make a motion?

Sure. Yeah. I'd be happy to do that.

Go ahead, Mary.

I move that we approve the home occupation conditional use permit as requested by Greg and Sabrina Lamb, representing Lamb Hair Salon, application 2026-0154-USE, based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated July 31st, 2026. Okay. And the finding for approval being the proposal complies with the standards for approval found in Draper City Municipal Code Section 9-5-080E. And potential negative impacts are mitigated through the imposition of reasonable conditions. I'll second that.

Thanks, Mary, and thanks for the second, Laura. All right, so this is for an approval on this. Let's go ahead and put that to a vote. So, Mary, how do you vote?

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Joshua?

Yes.

Lisa? Yes. And Gary?

Yes.

All right, congrats on that, guys. Good luck with the hair, and good luck with your business. Thanks for coming in. It's good to see you. Now the kids got a little bit of civic education back there, too, so write this down so they remember, okay? Thanks. All right. Let's go ahead and move on to our last agenda item. It's also a public hearing tonight. It's the Kimball Station site plan and preliminary subdivision plat request on the request of Spencer Llewellyn representing Edge Homes, a site plan amendment and a preliminary subdivision plat for 7.126 acres of property located approximately 600 East Kimball's Lane. The property is zoned RM2, multifamily residential, and it's known as application 2025-0263-SP and 2025-0262-SUB. So Jennifer Jastrzemski is our staff contact. Go ahead, Jennifer, the time's yours.

Great, thank you. And bear with me because my laptop has stopped working. So I have the staff report on my phone.

Perfect.

But I have no access to any of my notes or anything I had for this presentation. So you guys are familiar with this property. It's just across the street from the Kimball's Track Station on 7th East and Kimball's Lane. There's an aerial of it. Now when they originally came in for vesting, it also included this piece back here tonight for the site plan and plot. They're looking at their phase one, which is here, and then they'll come in in the future for their phase two. So properties in the high density residential land use designation and our RM2 multifamily residential zoning designation. A little history on the property. June 25, the council approved a development agreement for this property allowing multifamily housing with 25 to 27 dwelling units per acre. They also approved a zone change and land use map amendment to the current designations. In September 25, the City Council adopted the stationary plan for the Kimball's Lane track station, and that stationary plan did call for multifamily housing on this property. And then in March of this year, City Council approved an amendment to the development agreement from June 2025 that set specific standards, deviations to the code, as well as approved a concept plan. So that development agreement done earlier this year set parking, building heights, architecture standards, landscaping percentage requirements. And this is the concept site plan that was approved with that development agreement. So when these applications came in to the city for review, we're reviewing it against the city zoning ordinance and subdivision code, but also the development agreement amendment to make sure it complies. So the site plan before you today, like I said, it's phase one, so it's the eastern portion of the project. It has one access point to Kimball's with a stub to phase two that will eventually, there'll be a bridge crossing the creek here. There's a mix of three-story, four-story, and three-story townhomes, so condos and townhomes on this development with a center open space area. This just gets a little bit more detailed with dimensions, so you can kind of see the parking a little bit better, the road design a little bit better. Parking, they've got 407 spaces. There are 166 dwelling units in this development. Spaces range between covered and uncovered parking spaces as well as garage spaces. And then each garage space does have a driveway space attached to it as well. So a couple temporary improvements that will happen with this project So we're looking here where this stuff road is going there'll be a hammerhead here Until this crossing happens with the canal and then there will be a temporary road Put in right here on Kimball's that will operate as their secondary access and so that this phase one has two access points into the development. When phase two goes in and this stub road connects across the canal, this access will go away and this future building will be built. So this is just showing that design of that road and that turnaround. Amenity plan, the majority of the amenities are in the center of the development with the clubhouse, the swimming pool, playground, seating areas. And then there is some additional amenities to the south, including playground here. And then there'll be additional amenities in phase two. So landscaping, most of the landscaping is, you know, there's landscaping around each of the buildings, a little bit in the driveways to break that up, and then a substantial amount next to the clubhouse. I think it's 2 acres, 2.3 acres. One point two acres. Sorry one point two acres of common space within phase one itself And just some close-ups here And they do have Eight foot wall running along this property line as well as this property line adjacent to existing single-family Developments. So the elevations, the elevations do match what was in the development agreement. So this is the three-story townhomes. And some rendering so you can see what those will look like. We don't approve renderings specifically, but this does show the materials and color options that they plan to have. Three-story condos. Again, these do match the different elevations that were in the development agreement. And then your four-story condos actually have two separate designs there with differing roof lines on that. So they've got this one and they've got this one. It's a little bit different roof line on those. And then the clubhouse building as well. So the subdivision plat, it's a little bit unique how they're going to do this one just because they've got the different types of units. So the preliminary plat shows typicals for, has the main layout and then shows typicals for the condos and the townhomes when they come in for their final for phase one. It will create single lots where each condo building will go, and then we'll create the individual properties for the townhome units. They will then come in and do a plat amendment for each condo building to do that condominium plat for each of those. So typicals for the townhomes, this is designated, you know, your private space, your limited common, third driveway, and then your common space would be the landscaping, parking around the building. Ground floor on the condos, these are your garage spaces, and then condo unit itself, center hallway space. for the building um subsequent floors look like this so there's four units on each floor and then that's the side condo view for the three-story and the four-story so the condo plots will create that airspace unit and i'm happy to answer any questions that you have

I have a question, Jen. Do you recall what the amendments were that were made in, was it May or March? I can't remember what month.

Yeah, in the amended development agreement. So they did quite a few changes. Landscaping went down to 25% from 30% of the site. Driveway depths went from 20 feet deep to 18 feet deep. that building heights were amended to allow that three and four story buildings that they have. It did set the parking plan, the building elevations, which did reduce the amount of brick our code would require. There were a few other little tweaks here and there. So it did approve quite a few different things with that original development agreement.

Thanks for reviewing that, especially for the public. We had some comments that we reviewed that came in. Lori forwarded those to us, so I appreciate that. And the public made a lot of comments that I think were already decided or criticisms of things that have already been decided and contracted through the development agreement. And so in some ways, I think our hands are tied because those decisions have already been made and approved.

Correct, yeah.

And then as far as state law goes, we have to comply. There's no option for the city, right? We have to comply with the state law for train, what do you call them? Station area plans.

Yeah, so state requires stationary plans. Stationary plan did look at multifamily illness development. As we were going through that process, the council did approve that development agreement

setting a density amount And so that that has been approved But our hands are tied in that sense correct those decisions have been made plus the state has the requirements so correct I appreciate the public making comments, but I'm I Don't think in some ways. There's anything we could I can do to you know support the public Or that I mean the condition itself Okay, thanks

Thanks for pointing that out, Lisa. Yeah, what's on the docket here is this plan, the actual plan where things are laid out here as proposed. All right. Any other questions for staff? Great. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Come on down. Just state your name and then add anything you like.

Great. Thank you so much. Paxton Guymon with Edge Homes. Our office is here in Draper. Your question is spot on. The issues regarding the uses, the densities, the zoning, those have all been decided. So really, the only purpose of this stage is to ensure code compliance, compliance with the code as well as compliance with the amendments to the code that were approved through the development agreement process. I have to just applaud staff. They have done a fantastic and a very detailed job. It's taken about four and a half months to get through all of the engineering details. If you reviewed the staff report, you probably saw a laundry list of some final things that we need to change to bring this into full compliance. And we have carefully reviewed all of those and are prepared to comply with each one of them. I had one last question for Jen right before the meeting started, and she said, yes, in fact, you do have to comply with that awning issue. Long story short, we're there. We're finally there. It's taken a long time to get to this point. We are very excited to start the site work. We've had so many people calling with the signs that have been placed up, so many people calling wondering when are these going to come to market. We want to look at it. We want to live here. We're finally going to be able to deliver. So really nothing to add to that. Thank you for all the work that the staff has done to get us to this point. We're anxious to submit for a land disturbance permit next week, and you'll see a lot of activity beginning very, very soon. Answer any questions you may have.

These are all for purchase, correct?

Yes, these are all for sale. You might recall in our development agreement, we agreed not to sell to any institutional investors. We have an owner occupancy requirement. We actually have workforce housing set aside with some subsidies we're giving to help people afford home ownership who simply wouldn't otherwise qualify. It's a great program. You may not know this, but this particular project has been highlighted by Stuart Waldrop, who's the Governor's Senior Housing Advisor. on how cities and developers can work together to maybe modify some requirements to provide increased housing supply and to encourage home ownership. You might recall this was probably slated to be a 40 to 50 unit per acre apartment project. And because of the city's willingness to negotiate with us, we're going to deliver a homeowner occupied project. So thank you.

Can you tell us which of the buildings is the one that is too close?

Yes.

Which site?

Let's see. Do you want to go to the site plan that's really focused on Kimball Station? Okay.

You do have the mouse right there.

Oh, thank you. Perfect. Okay. Let's see. Right here, 102 and 101, that space is too tight. By about two and a half feet, we've already analyzed this. And right here on the north side of that building, there's plenty of room to shift that to the north three feet to make sure we cover that distance. Our engineering team is already looking. In fact, they're already making that change for our final construction plans. The other issue is that on this building right here, there's a metal awning that hangs out over the front entryway to the breezeway. It's about two and a half feet, provides a little bit of shelter from the weather, sun, rain, snow. It's kind of a nice architectural feature, but this is what I confirmed with Jen right before our meeting. I said, do we really have to remove that awning? Because it's such a nice architectural feature, but sure enough, It does count towards the 10-foot setback. So we're going to have to just remove that. That's one of those issues where maybe code compliance is sort of trumping common sense because the building will still be there in the exact same footprint, but that architectural feature will have to be removed so we don't encroach on the setback. But that's fine. We understand.

Appreciate you paying attention to those. Thanks.

Sure.

I have a question about, I know that all the neighbors' concerns with a lot of this was traffic and, you know, as always, right? When you come out of, onto Kimball, you can turn right or left?

Yes.

Onto that? Okay.

Yes. We did do a full traffic impact study. We actually did an update to it. Staff has reviewed that. We're good to go.

Great, thanks.

I mean, we all recognize that Development brings new traffic, and that's the reality. I guess my only comeback to that would be that this is still going to provide less of a traffic impact than a 50-unit per acre apartment project would. And in the station area plan, that was inevitable.

Thank you.

We're excited about this. We genuinely are. We've come up with some new products, some new designs that we think will be very well received by the market. I'll just point out, every one of those condominium units has at least three bedrooms and two bathrooms. They're designed for families to grow in and to stay and to have the stability that provides for a successful long-term community.

Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We'll invite you back up after public comment if we need to. Thank you. All right. So this is a public hearing. Same rules apply as before. Anyone that would like to address this agenda item as we've got it on the docket tonight, remembering that the focus is the site plan, bringing it into code and compliance rather than anything that's already been passed or approved. So with that, we'll go ahead and open this up for public comment. Who would like to address this agenda item? Come on up and. As always, we just ask that you state your name for the recording. Thanks. The time limit will be in force as well.

My name is Denise Smith. I live across the street from this. I have a Draper City newspaper article in which the Draper City Council noted the concerns about the numerous... the number of deviations proposed for this new high density development, including shorter driveways, smaller parking spaces, narrower alleyways. These deviations ultimately approved, even though on the same night, another development was denied for one of these same issues. I was present at that meeting and remember the discussion clearly. The article states that these deviations were needed to comply with the newly approved R2 status, which allows the 25 to 27 units per acre. However, 25 units per acre across 21 acres is 525 units. while the proposed plan includes 560 units. If the goal is to comply with current code while creating a livable development, the City should consider whether reducing the number of units or removing one or two buildings would be better to meet the standard. Once these units are built and sold, the long-term impact will no longer rest with the builder. It will fall on the homeowners who may not realize that these approved deviations could create daily frustrations as well as existing residents who live nearby. Most buyers would reasonably assume that the city had protected them by ensuring that the development complied with the city code and basic livable standards. I also remain concerned about the traffic study, when will it be completed and reported. I strongly urge the council to require the traffic study to be completed before these are approved. At a minimum, the study should be conducted while school is in session and during normal school hours so that it can accurately reflect the traffic conditions residents will experience. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the council to reconsider the approved deviations, evaluate whether the proposed density is appropriate, and ensure that the traffic study is completed and reviewed prior to any final approval that is granted.

Thank you. All right, who's next? Okay, we'll go final call on that. And we don't see anyone else. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing for this evening. All right. As you know, this isn't question and answer, but I took some notes there, so let's address some of those just really quickly. So, Brian, can you just address the traffic studies and which comes first, the traffic or the study?

Yes, so they have completed a study, and they did update it. They did do some traffic counts during school hours on school days. They did those in May to make sure they had a representation. They did find that the peak impact was in the a.m. peak time when people were going to work and the students were being dropped off. So that's where they really focused their attention. We had a separate independent consulting firm review their traffic study and provide comments. And so, like was stated, we have reviewed that. The development is not required to address any city deficiencies. So all of the long stacking queues that exist now, the impacts from the school, this development will not address those. But they do address their impacts on the streets that are surrounding. And the traffic analysis did not identify any upgrades that are needed surrounding this development from specifically this development.

Is that traffic study available to the public?

Yes, they can request that through the city recorder's office, the grammar process, and we can provide that. Thanks.

When you say they mitigate their traffic intact, can you explain that? What does that mean?

Yes, the development generates peak traffic. People going to work, since these are owner-occupied, these people presumably all go to work at approximately the same time. So the amount of... you know, traffic hitting the roads in the morning, if it needed an additional lane, a turning lane, some sort of an additional signal or something like that in some of the surrounding intersections that was triggered by this amount of traffic coming from the development, that would be the development's responsibilities. So the existing stacking that we have, especially along 7th East and 118th South and the tracks crossing, They are adding traffic volume to that, but their addition to that doesn't warrant any improvements to that infrastructure. Got it.

So does the city have any plans to address those issues that have already been identified as city responsibility?

So UDOT does have a plan to widen 7th East. I do not have a timing on that yet. It's been on the long-term plan for quite a while now. It has been widened in Sandy City, north of 114th South. So that is the roadway section that's supposed to be extended to 12300 South. It's still a little bit of time away. I don't know if that's five years, seven years, ten years. Right now they're getting ready to resurface 7th East. So that's what the cones are that are out there presently.

Does the city have any way to help motivate UDOT to take care of that? I mean, obviously, if that's UDOT Road, they're responsible. But what, I mean, if it's bad now and only minimal, if any, mitigation will happen, it sounds like nothing on Seventh East, right?

Correct.

To address.

From this project, correct.

From this project. So, I mean. Obviously, nobody likes the sound of that, especially if people have to drive through it all the time. So are we doing anything to help speed that up?

We do work with UDOT, and a lot of it is just the funding that they have available. The priority, UDOT's priority doesn't have this as a top priority. So the funding gets applied to the top priorities first. But I don't have any. We don't have, as a city, don't have any mechanism to... enforce our desires on them, but we do try and work with them. We do have a good relationship with them.

What creates priority then? So, I mean, are we creating a situation that might move that area up in priority?

It could. They're aware of this project and they're aware of the impacts that a lot of the station area plans have. I don't know specifically what would trigger that. I know that oftentimes they're looking at regional issues, you know, community to community, you know, travel and impact. So I imagine that that's probably part of what prioritizes their projects. But I don't know specifically on how we could increase the prioritization of this project specifically.

Yeah, I was just going to say, this sounds like a question for the legislature, why that wasn't just bundled in, right? Because this is totally, hey, we're supposed to comply with state law. Thank you very much. We've got to go high density. Thank you very much. And by the way, we're not expedited or pushed to the front of the line around these stations, station area plans.

It's already a choke point.

Well, it's been a choke point for, I mean, the entire, how long have I lived here? 30 years now, 20 years, 30 years. And it's that choke point down on 7th is just like, you're like, honestly, when is this really going to get addressed? So, but there is nothing built in, right? There's just not, we're now hearing there's nothing built in with the legislature that's actually bundled in to say, hey, UDOT, if we're going to comply with state law, maybe you can.

It's on the future plans. There's just not a definitive plan.

Yeah. Well, not encouraging, but yeah, it is what it is.

Jen, could you address the public comment about reconsidering the deviations? We're not the council. We're the planning commission, and we only make recommendations to the city council. So would you address that?

Is it okay if she pulls up the deviations? Sorry, you're on your phone. Who's got the mouse? Yeah, but there's a little table there, is there not, that's got our...

I mean, we can't change the deviations at this point, right? Because they're contractual.

Sorry, let me turn my mic on. I'm going to open up the staff report from when the development agreement went to the city council. I think that will be helpful.

The rain is distracting.

It's exciting.

Let's put out some fires.

And as you're pulling that up, just to kind of go over those. as proposed, at least some of the highlighted. So we're looking at driveways that are now two feet shorter and parking spaces as well are also shortened in length?

Yes. Sorry, my... Yeah, so there's quite a few things that were amended with the development agreement. As far as going back and changing standards, this is an approved agreement. It's a legal agreement that the city has entered into. So Without both parties being open to a change, there's not really an ability for the city to go back and just say, we're not going to honor our agreement.

Everything as proposed tonight has already been agreed upon. They can't just, they're not just now asking to go to, I'm just pointing this out, so I know the answer to this, but they're not just coming in here asking, hey, by the way, is it cool if we go to 18-foot driveways? That's built in and baked into the development agreement, correct?

Correct.

Or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Correct.

Got it. So now on that note, maybe Paxton, if you can come back up. Is it okay if I just bring him up? Sorry, we might have to put you up and down. So you're familiar with the other developments that you have out in Harriman, Vineyard, all the areas. Are those 18-foot lengths similar, the same, shorter, longer than what you have in other developments? Yes.

So that's a good question. We have some developments that have what we refer to as aprons. Aprons are like a four or five foot driveway that essentially don't function for any parking whatsoever. They just allow you to turn into your garage. We don't prefer that. Sad experience has proven that you need to provide more parking. We have other projects that do have 18 foot driveways. And do you have any that are 20? We have plenty that are 20. You do have some that are 20? We have some that are 22. Okay. It all depends on the density that's approved. We recognize that not every vehicle is going to fit well on an 18-foot sidewalk. You're not going to see an F-350 longbed truck that fits there, and that's fine. That's not our buyer for this project, right? So we recognize that there are some deviations. But you might remember when we came back to the Planning Commission and then the City Council for these deviations from the code, there was sort of a trade-off we were trying to hit. And the trade-off is we still want to have pedestrian trails, some open spaces, a clubhouse, and green spaces. And the way to maintain those areas, those green spaces, is to tighten some of these other standards. Otherwise, we would just have all four-story condominium buildings instead of the variety of housing products that we now have. So it all goes into a fairly complex analysis of what makes the most sense for the site. And when we came into this project with guaranteed density of between 27 and 25 units per acre, Those are the guardrails we are working within. And we found through our experience that this does have adequate parking. 18-foot driveways do work. Maybe not for everybody, but that's OK. The buyers who want to live here will see that. I did want to say one thing, Commissioner Squire, on the UDOT 700 East issue. We have been asking for this to be moved up in priority, and the response that we have gotten is after phase one is built, we believe this will be jumped up in priority, the 700 East expansion. None of us know for sure.

Just get that in writing.

Right, exactly.

I don't need to tell you that.

No, you're spot on. It does help, though, to have lobbyists encouraging you not to appropriate the funding and move you up the priority list. I think the city has some good lobbyists that maybe could focus on that. Other questions?

I have another question. There's a question about how many units there are. So total, how many units in this entire project?

Okay, I'm going to have to defer to Phase 1, Phase 2. Well, we have 166 in Phase 1. I know that for sure.

166. And then how much in the other one?

So let me get to their concept that was approved with the development agreement because it does list that. So it was phase one and then three, 94, 54.

And that's it, just those two phases, correct? Just two phases. We're still analyzing whether phase two may be divided up into two phases of its own. That's a big project to develop 394 units at once.

But isn't it common practice that Edge is always just coming in and doing one building at a time? Yeah, for condominiums for sure.

We found that to be the most functional way. You plat them one building at a time, 10 to 14 units. Get your CFO for that building and then you're done. It's much better, more amenable to get your FHA and Fannie Mae financing approvals so that buyers can get the federal financing they want.

So that total comes to 560. 560 total. And then I think there was the point that was made that that's over the density. It's not, though.

It's under the 27 per unit max. It's above the 25 per unit floor. We're in the guardrails.

So I think maybe potentially the discrepancy is when the initial development agreement came in, they had a certain amount of acreage. They then were able to purchase a couple of the nearby homes or adjacent homes. That bumped up their acreage a little bit.

Thanks for reminding us of that, that extra added on acreage. I think that was it. So we had the traffic, driveway lengths, parking lengths. To me, I'm always interested in when it's a developer or a builder that's actually done other units, how does this differ? How off are we? How many deviations are we giving compared to what they normally would do? So I've been to some, I mean, I've settled all my kids with mortgages, and some of them are actually this project, right? So they get out of my basement, not this project, but, you know, these edge condos. And so, yeah, some of those parking units are problematic. Other builders do the aprons, right, where you just have the air conditioner unit and the concrete pole so you don't run into your air conditioner unit as you're pulling into your little two-foot driveway and then into the garage. So driveways do, I mean, they really are sincerely used as a parking stall for, And that's, I'm always on 18. I don't measure these things, so I'm having a hard time just, you know, visualizing what an 18 versus a 22 would even feel like. So anyway, but I think those were the questions that we had. And then the traffic, that's just. I don't know if we've ever had a traffic study that was rejected. Have you guys ever heard of a failed traffic study? It seems like the streets always have enough, they can always hold enough weight. I don't know about capacity.

There have been some where they've had to do some improvements.

Got it.

But Brian's team looks at them first before they come to you. Perfect. So we have seen changes to them.

If it's going to fail, we don't even see it. So thanks for hiding that from us. We just live in bliss over here that all traffic is good traffic. All right. Thank you. I think any other questions for the applicant? Okay. All right. Thanks, Paxton. Okay. Let's go ahead and anything we need to deliberate on this? Because, again, it's baked in, so there's not really any.

Well, and I think when we review site plans, we're reviewing for compliance with whatever the regulations or agreements are that they have to comply with. And our staff is telling us that they are compliant with everything that they have. And this isn't one that goes to the city council. This is one where we just make the determination. In a public meeting, whether or not they're compliant, and it looks like they are, so I'm not really sure what we can do. Yeah, there's not much to deliberate. Other than, yeah.

Yeah. Well, commissioners, let's put a motion together and put a vote up.

Sorry, I'll make a motion for the site plan. I think there's a second one we need. But I move that we approve the site plan as requested by Spencer Llewellyn representing Edge Homes for the Kimball Station site plan application 2025-0263-SP based on the findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated August 3rd, 2026 because the site plan is in compliance with the development agreement.

Perfect. Thanks, Lisa, for that motion. That's for the site plan approval. Who will second that?

I'll second that.

Thanks, Gary. Let's put that one to a vote. Lisa, how do you vote? Yes. Gary? Yes. Mary? Yes. Laura? Yes. And Joshua? Yes. All right. So let's go ahead to the next item we've got on there. Is it the preliminary subdivision plot?

I'll make that motion.

Go ahead.

I move that we approve the preliminary subdivision plat as requested by Spencer Llewellyn representing Edge Homes for the Kimball Station preliminary subdivision plat application 2025-0262-SUB based on the findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated August 3rd, 2026. The finding for approval being the preliminary subdivision plot complies with DCMC section 17-3-040A in chapter 17-5 as amended by the development agreement.

Thanks, Mary. Who will second that?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura. All right, let's go ahead and put that one to a vote. This is for preliminary subdivision plat approval. Mary, how do you vote?

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Joshua? Yes. Gary?

Yes.

And Lisa?

Yes.

Okay. All right, congrats on that. I know you've been working hard on that, and let's write some letters to you, Dot, or bring them some cookies, either one, whatever will work. I think that's it. Do we have anything else tonight, Jennifer?

I was just going to – we've got a couple things. I was going to give you an update on what happened at council last week. So we had two items. So short-term rentals was approved, so we now have short-term rental regulations. I don't know if we've actually received any applications yet, but we are open for applications as well.

What changes did they make, or did they? I know it was continued.

Yeah, there was a couple changes. They reduced the minimum stay amount to two nights minimum. The previous version they looked at had three-night minimum stay. And then there were some changes to clarify the penalties.

Okay.

So beyond that, it's pretty similar to what you guys saw.

All right. Thanks.

And then there was a rezone on 7th East for Ivory, just like 124th South. I don't have the address because my computer died. So that, they actually continued that one. They had some questions for Ivory. They kind of wanted to have Ivory work on a concept for it. So that'll eventually go back to them for free review.

Was that the one with the historic home? The old home. The old homes, yeah. Okay, it was that one.

Yeah, so that was the one that had the three older homes on it, yes. All right.

And then the only other thing is we do have the local American Planning Association chapter here in Utah has their fall conference. It's a little bit earlier this year, September 16th and 17th. Or 9th and 10th? September 9th and 10th. But it's a little bit earlier. But if any of you want to attend, just let Jen, I, or Lori know, and we can get you registered. Where is it this year? Layton. Layton. Davis Conference Center.

I was hoping you'd say Hawaii.

The local one's never going to be in Hawaii. San Diego. Layton. Jacksonville. Sunbelt.

It is Utah.

The Utah Bar has a summer thing every year in Sun Valley, Idaho. Oh, that's true. That's true.

All right.

All right. That's all I've got. Yeah, that's it. Thank you.

Okay.

Any other items? I don't see anything else on our agenda. So, commissioners?

I move we adjourn.

Adjourned.