Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Going down and out. That's what I was gonna say. Down and out.

Steve Johnson. Well, I wasn't in his group, but he was out golfing. I'm sorry.

No, we need it. Yeah. I totally did not mean to do that. Oh, you did. It's okay. It's totally you to do that. What one? Last week. Oh, I don't remember.

I'll remember that next time. So cute. Yeah. Yeah. No, I agree.

My purse. We used to do prayers. I know. I miss those days. Well, I think we should gives you the option here.

Yeah. They used to have All right, we'll go ahead and get started. Um Keith Casey is going to lead us in the pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Okay, it looks like we have a full quorum. Are there any conflicts of interest? All right. Um, approval of minutes for March 18th planning commission meeting. I'll make a motion to approve the minutes for March 18th. I can second that. So, motion by Heather, second by Adam. All in favor? I I I.

All right. Uh, 4.1, review and consider approval of a conditional use permit for Simple Manufacturing LLC. Good evening. So the presentation this evening does combine uh items 4.1 and 4.2. Um and before we get into this today, I would like to just mention that we do have representatives here from Axia and Simply uh manufacturing and dime as well in case you all have questions. Okay, so this is uh the kind of large building down we first come into Haramman down off of Redwood Road. It is located in the M1 zone. So the building itself was approved back in December of 2022. Um as you can see here in the green is where Simple Manufacturing would be located and then in orange is Dime. Um the original entitled uses for the space are office use and warehousing. Parking would not be an issue for the site. The original uh site was approved with 244 spaces. Uh the current tenant when it was originally reviewed had 80 stalls. And then we have 24 proposed in general use for simple and 55 employees total for dime 75 stalls still available for use on the site. uh Dime or Simple Manufacturing is going to propose to occupy 72,654 square feet and dime proposing to occupy 29,252 ft. Okay, so this is kind of simple's preliminary facility layout which includes approximately 4,500 ft or so of

office space and approximately 68,154 ft of manufacturing and warehouse space. The proposed use is warehousing and light manufacturing including cosmetics. So per the FDA, the term cosmetics includes products for the eyes, face, nails, hair, skin, and mouth. Uh they can be in the forms of products such as makeup, sunscreen, fragrances, etc. Uh cosmetics are also referred to as personal care products by the FDA uh because of the wide range of products now regulated as cosmetics that are not strictly for your face. uh these products still fall under the cosmetics definition with the FDA and the associated regulations. So, Simple also holds an SGS certification demonstrating that production, storage, and shipment of their products complies with good manufacturing practices. So, essentially the standards for safety, quality, and cleanliness meet the standards adopted by the International Organization for Standardization known as ISO and the FDA. So all this manufacturing and processes takes place under FDA's regulation in addition to SGS who does specialize in those certifications and they do provide on-site inspections and testing assistance with their applicants. Okay. So Dime is shown in the pink area outlined in yellow and that would occupy that 29,252 square ft. Uh the proposed use for this occupant is going to be limited wholesale and warehousing. The proposed tenant plans to warehouse and distribute their products directly to consumer shipping. Um as well as retail partnerships that they ship to and that fulfillment. So in addition to the marketing and customer service space that would also occupy that space. Okay. So the review found that the application did meet the standards for the M1 zone and conditional use

standards and engineering did not have any concerns for this application. So staff does recommend approval with the following conditions for item 4.1. uh we do recommend the conditions to follow with limiting the formulation to cosmetics as defined by the well defined in the FDNC act which is adopted by the FDA uh to continue to comply with the ISO's good manufacturing practice requirements and finally to comply with any state or city requirements as far as the formulation uh using alcohol for colog and perfumes. Um the item 4.2 approval would come with the other following condition to receive and agree all recommendations from other agencies. Also the first item for uh an approval condition both kind of targeting that if there's any additional requirements from the licensing or building department when they go to complete the tenant finish that those will still apply. Do we have any questions for staff?

Okay, thank you. Does the applicant have anything they want to add?

Yeah. Okay. Okay. Do we have any questions for the applicant? I have a question real quick. Will there be a retail aspect of this within your space where you actually sell some of the products or is this completely manufacturing and then distribute distribution? Yeah. And state your name. Thank you.

Hey, my name is Sam. Uh technically I'm here to represent Dime, but we could do both questions if you have them. Uh so we currently have a space in Draper right now and we do have a little storefront that we sell goods out of doesn't do a ton of volume but you know it's nice for our customers to be able to come in return products or you know test the products in person if they want. So, usually we would just operate it out of our like front little, you know, kind of reception area and no concerns from staff. That meets the zoning requirements as well to have that part of it. I'm okay with it. I just want to make sure it's it's not an issue with the M1 zone.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that was my only question because it doesn't it doesn't fall within your description of for this conditional use and so yeah to be specific that it allows that which we've done in past right for other other businesses in that same area. Yeah. Yeah. It's like less than 1% of our revenue comes through that storefront. So Right. Right. But just having a storefront and manufacturing zone is that's that's where the

needs to be specified. The other thing I would just clarify too is on the on the simple side, we don't actually store the the alcohol itself. We store the fragrance. So it's the alcohol mixed with the fragrance. And so that's just come so we can put that into our bottling. It's not like any just specific alcohol, you know, raw alcohol. There's no batching on on the facility. It's primarily just putting goods together. So, uh, alcohol is probably your your big, uh, potentially environmental impact. Um, yeah. Yeah, I would say there is one. Yeah.

You don't store any other hazardous materials? No. No. Yeah. No disposal or anything? Yeah, we just fill it. So, I had one question while staff is working on that. Um, do you do testing on site? Like do you don't do animal testing right on No. Okay. No. Thank you. No.

No. We have different thirdparty providers that do any testing that we we'll do like you know standard manufacturing testing but most of our like you know FDA or other organizational type testing is done through third party organizations. Cool. Cool. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. I'm personally good the way it is. Okay. Need to She's just checking. Yeah. Weren't we just allowed as a maybe condition to allow it just so that there's no Well, most of them have a storefront

M1. I said most of them have a storefront element to an office space. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know how you'd measure that quantity of storefront what that means. So I think yeah I don't want to prohibit it. We just we yeah sorry I heard this earlier but I forgot how how many employees are you bringing into airman or will be here?

Um we have about it varies but we have employees we have at our at simple we have 25 plus we fluctuate between 20 to 30 temps depending on the season and seasonality of it when we're packing out orders and stuff. We might need to bring some people in, but our employment's about 25 and then I think it's about 55 for dime as well, right? But a lot of them are out of state. 55 for dime, but 30 are actually kind of in Utah, 25 are remote. And then of that 30 that are in Utah, we do a hybrid structure. So in the office on any given day, you'll have five to 20 probably.

Cool. Also just wanted to mention too on just the on simple what we actually manufacture. We don't actually bulk stuff there. We just bring it in from a third party uh bulk and all we do is fill. But we also do like essential oils as well. And so from a cosmetic standpoint, we do, you know, a range of shampoo, conditioners, toners, um skin care products, but we also do other liquid stuff similar to essential oils like a doer type or Young Living type thing filling. Can you state your name? Sorry. Oh, sorry. Keith Casey. Okay. Thanks. Sorry. There's no restrictions or issues with that. Thank you. Okay. Do we have a I'm ready to make a motion. Go forward.

Thank you. I move to approve item 4.1 with staff's four recommendations. Second. Okay. So, motion by Adam, a second by Jackson. Brody, yes. Jackson, yes. Heather, yes. Adam, yes. Daryl, yes. And Andy, yes. Okay. So, that's approved. Um, do you have more for 4.2 or should they just do the motion for that one? Okay. So, motion unless there's anything else someone has a question on on 4.2. I move to approve item 4.2 with staff's one recommendation. Second. Okay. So, motion by Adam, a second by Jackson. Um, Brody, yes. Jackson, yes. Heather, yes. Adam, yes. Daryl, yes. And Andy, yes.

Okay. Thank you. Excited to have you come. Thank you. We're excited. All right. Um, so this next item has a public hearing. So, I'll just read that comment policy. The purpose of the public comment policy is to allow citizens to address items on the agenda. Citizens requesting to address the commission will be asked to complete a written comment form and present it to the deputy city recorder. In general, the chair will allow an individual three minutes and a spokesperson representing a group will be allowed five minutes. This policy applies to all public hearings. So, item 5.1, review and consider a request to recommend a master development agreement for Awaken City Church.

Good evening and thank you. Um, apologize, my computer just had a reboot. I'm gonna save this presentation over here so Garrett can open it up here. Just one moment.

Okay, that should be there now. Um, as we discussed in our work meeting this evening, introducing this item to our planning commission, um, this is an unusual variation on something that this city has done many times before in that we are very comfortable, very familiar with entering into agreements with uh, potential development partners. Now those development partners are are usually uh constructing uh large subdivisions uh commercial projects. Um I I I haven't counted exactly but I know that we maintain a list of all development agreements that the city has approved in the past. Obviously, not all of them are still active, but I I I'm pretty sure we've entered into about 30 of these at least, and of course amended a number of those multiple times. This one is really a request from an in a church from uh and to locate within an existing space. And so they're not physically developing uh the site or the building. It really is an issue of occupying this space. Uh this is the area that we are discussing here in the south end of the valley. This is within um a pretty successful um M1 zoning district uh development that has what we often would see is a concrete tiltup building. uh these larger buildings have uh flexible um demising walls that can be removed, taken down, relocated, you know, for

multi-tenants. This particular building um was the former location of DBAT, which was a baseball training facility and had been very popular, very successful for many years. DBAT occupied um 36,000 ft which was roughly half of this one particular building and again I emphasize that the request is um parcel specific and to this building as you can see there are other buildings within this uh center the Porter Rockwell Center um but but we're only talking about a potential development agreement for this one building. So, here is the crux of the matter. The M1 zone currently does not allow um churches as a as a land use. Um to uh to address that, uh we we have discussion with the applicant and with the city attorney about um a development agreement that legally under Utah code and within the Utah co court system says that cities can do this. we can introduce a land use by development agreement. Now, more specifically, what the applicant is wanting is to uh occupy uh a 9,000 square ft lease with the potential of expanding to an additional 9,000 square ft within this facility. And again, this claim um is or the the the basis of this claim is there is a federal regulation that protects um religious land use. And it essentially says that churches need to be treated equally with other land uses that have a similar impact or have similar activities.

Um and and we can't just simply discriminate or exclude a church in our zoning law if there are other uses that have similar impacts. And so that was the basis of their rationale at approaching the cities. They they were fully aware that a church was not allowed in the M1 zone. But under this claim um we began to study this claim. Uh we reviewed it with the city attorney's office and it was his advice and recommendation while who knows what the outcome of litigation might be. Might the city be able to um defend its position in saying no churches are allowed in the M1 zone? But the result was we discussed with the applicant um some options to resolve the claim. One was a text amendment. Another was a potential just reszone the property to another zone that would allow a church. And then this third one was the ide to to permit the church in within the boundary of a development agreement. Again, legal under Utah code. And the attraction to that for the city was that it was very narrow. We're only talking about introducing this land use in an area where we might where we're currently saying we don't want a church within the M1 zone. That's our that's our current law. But we can permit that. We can resolve this this claim. We can prevent potential litigation if this were approved uh by the city council. Of course, you as a reviewing and an advising body would forward a recommendation to the city council. Um, this did not fully save. Um, we talked about, let me let me fix this

while I'm talking, but we discussed in the uh work meeting that there are some additional uh modifications that we had recommended after we had published the staff report. Uh I have reviewed those modifications with the uh applicant and also with the city attorney today and uh both are willing to uh support those amendments. And I'll just I'll I'll update this information so that you can refer to it uh following the public hearing. But essentially uh we want to specify a limit of how much of that building the applicant can uh occupy as as indicated the initial leases for 9,000 square ft. They're interested in potentially expanding into as large as 18,000 square ft. We'd like to specify that that would be the maximum occupancy for this one use within that one building. Um, another one is the current development agreement does not have uh uh any type of an expiration clause. Our development agreements have always had that. We've always have stipulated when these agreements would would terminate. Um, so we're proposing that it would be a 10-year termination with the potential of a five-year extension uh with with city approval. And this is this timeline is intended to uh meet the applicant's um vision or or goals as a as a congregation to grow the congregation sufficiently large enough to thereby have the means to acquire another site for development of a church. and they're not their their goal

is not to remain in this location but to use this location to grow to the next step and it takes time. It takes time but at the same time we also would like to put a limit a sunset and again that's really standard for all of our development agreements. Um it was also mentioned in the um uh work meeting uh that perhaps we should strengthen the um preamble clauses to the agreement. that the reason why the rationale for doing this is largely based on uh protecting the the the applicants rights under the federal religious land use and institutionized persons act which we often uh just refer to by this acronym. Um so again we have uh these modifications for your consideration. We've again discussed them with the applicant and they seemed comfortable. Um the applicant is here and I'm sure that they would like to maybe provide more information to you as far as their their goals, what they're trying to achieve. There was a question in the work meeting about um a reference that I made in the staff report of how they intend to use the property. They will occupy it and have activities there uh throughout the week. Obviously, the peak operation will be associated with religious services on Sunday, but there will be other activities and potentially also uh maybe uh some subleasases or um services offered by uh third parties. Uh that would I believe would be potentially like counseling, but they can address more of that. Um obviously that would all have to comply also with the with the zoning codes of the city. So, any

questions for me at this time other than get that updated list for your review and the motion I did have a question if you wouldn't mind going back to the map of the Y. There you go. So on this those properties that don't have anything on them, I'm assuming they're M1 zoned as well. The Yeah, this neighborhood is is uh is the Yeah, this whole project is is M1 right here.

Okay. So with that religious land use act, is there something that prevents those properties from being purchased by other churches? And well, again, this is going to only apply to this one parcel, right? Could someone else come in and file the same claim? Yes.

Yes. I mentioned in the work meeting, I think this will create um conversation with the council to make a a recommendation to uh the planning staff to either remove those uses within the M1 zone that gave rise to uh this religious protection claim or possibly to allow churches within the M1 zone with perhaps certain restrictions or or standards. I I don't know. I don't know what will happen, but yeah. So, does that also mean that we can't restrict churches in any other zone?

Um, they have to make a claim that there are other uses in that zoning that are similar to the impacts of a church. And as we discussed earlier, the the the the zones that we are not allowing them in, the technology and manufacturing zone, the M1 zone, the M1, the M2 zone, and the mixeduse one zone. I don't remember about our recently created CF zone. Probably don't allow it there either. So, it's it's these commercial zoning districts, right? and and the fact and the reason for that and and we could we could go dig up the past but I believe at one point in time we did used to allow churches in the C2 zone. Uh we were doing development agreements with our partners who wanted to do some a bunch of residential and some commercial and we were expecting a tax base to come out of that commercial space only to find that a church would be in that C2 zone instead. And so this city said, "No, we've got to protect these commercial zones for commercial land uses so we can have jobs in the tax base that the city needs in order to support, you know, our our services." So,

do you feel like the city council will lean towards that in this area and deny? It's hard to say. I have no idea. And of course, as you know, any potential change in the zoning code would require a public hearing with you first, right? We would have to come back and address that separately. What are the other uses in this building? I think isn't isn't this the building that has the dance studio? Um, so yeah, there there are dance studios. Uh there's uh gymnastics. Yeah. In the same building or the

I think this one does have the dance studio on the on the north end. Yeah. And we changed the zone specifically for that. Yeah. Which is a gathering of some type of sort of group, right? No. No. Makes sense. Well, that was kind of under that discussion the catalyst that allowed them to and and as we mentioned, we do allow charter schools and we also allow um like a reception center, comfort center or something. And so there are some other similar uses that aren't really manufacturing, light manufacturing, right?

Not a big stretch from a reception center to a church gathering. Yeah. Yeah. which is the conjecture of that, right?

And I think this is a really healthy conversation as we talked about. I mean, these um flex spaces, these warehouse spaces, we've been seeing them develop, you know, especially over the last 10, 15 years, right? They've been successful in the marketplace, more so over the last five or 10 years. And some of these centers really do have a wide variety of uses. You'll see dance studios. You I mean because they're they're a little more affordable construction and some larger spaces and you you know maybe the market does this right. They just have a lot of different land uses allowed within these areas. But does that really lend itself to a manufacturing you know zone? Maybe maybe we have a mismatch or yet the the opposite is we tighten up the zone and really encourage uses that really fit this light manufacturing moniker.

Right. So this is a I mean obviously a city concern, but the owner of the building likely doesn't have doesn't share the same concern as as we do.

They're they were willing that we've been talking with the property owner many many times. They have been very very cooperative and very they're they're supportive of this. This is not you know you saw in the agreement that the agreement requires the property owner to sign the agreement. So this is not something that is being done adversarily with the property owner. So I think what we had discussed in the work session is that we do want to try and allow other um similar you know different making it easier for other churches to come in. Um I think my only concern is that how do we protect commercial like true commercial from something like this happening? So what I would recommend is you know you have a specific request that is before you tonight. Make your recommendation based on that one specific request. If a commissioner desires following your motion to express a position, an opinion, a recommendation, a comment, you're welcome to do that. That would be shared with the council. Um I I agree. I I think that whether this project is approved or or not, it it obviously uh warrants attention, a review of these land use, our land uses that are allowed in the M1 zone. We we should do that.

Mike, is this our most industrial zone we have? Well, we do have a MU2 or excuse me, the M2 zone on in the land use table, but we have not mapped that zone anywhere in the city yet. So, it's is there a reason why it's more it's more intense in theory, but again, we haven't applied it anywhere. Yeah, the TM zone um it is similar um probably I don't know, it's kind of a hybrid between the two. The the reason I ask is some zones may or may not fit with our type of our community just because of our geography, right? Like Right.

Like we're never going to be downtown Salt Lake with heavy industrial processing plants and stuff like that. So I guess I was just curious. We don't have that slated to even go that M2 that you just said anywhere. Correct. Not yet. It has been something that we have talked about and again that might be another conversation that comes out of reviewing the M1 zone is where should we apply the M2 zone because there are some specific land uses that we need to accommodate by law. We need to figure out where where that M2 zone really should just for comparison. What what zone is Bullfrog in?

That's the TM zone. The technology manufacturing zone. That's the only one we really have. Yeah. Yeah. And there are some other parcels around that um that were included in that project that just haven't built out yet. I think I'm good. My question is for Mike right now. Okay. So, I think we should hear from the applicant and then have our public hearing.

That sounds good. So, if the applicant has anything they want to add, if you'd come forward and state your name. Uh my name is Derek Duval. I'm the pastor of Awaken City Church. Uh and I I don't want to supply any information that you're not interested in knowing. So, uh I will await your questions and and uh look forward to answering those, but I do want to thank you for your consideration and um and and just really this is a reminder of just how much planning goes into all that you do. And I'm not saying this to try to butter you up. I'm just saying from my heart. I was like, "Wow, there's a lot of thought that has to go into everything that happens here." So that off the record, whatever. Thanks for that. I I do have one question for you. Yeah.

Are you going to have like I know some some denominations have like daycare in the daytime. Just just curious if you could um there's no plans for daycare or anything like that. Um there are plans for the opportunity to allow for uh because there will be some office space or some rooms where there can be some counseling. We've already had conversations with the uh it used to be called the pregnancy resource center. It's now called the CARIS resource center for uh moms in crisis pregnancy situations where they would be able to uh meet there. It wouldn't be full-blown medical anything. It's just an opportunity for another counseling opportunity uh there. Also, uh something that we as my own family saw this past year is our our one of our sons had a football banquet and we had the football banquet in a room um about as big as this space right here and there's 20 something kids and then they each had two parents and like there's just nowhere to go to rent a space. And we thought, man, this would be an opportunity for us to also uh rent a space out and provide something for our community in which uh they could also rent out and use uh when they want to have a football banquet or whatever it might be. Um but there would be no ongoing continual daycare, any kind of meetings like that. Yeah.

Okay, cool. I just I have one quick question, too. So, Michael had mentioned that there's uh we have an added you're looking at 9,000 square feet, potentially up to 18,000 square feet, and then also he talked about a termination clause. I just want to get your take on that. Is there any concerns with the limiting of the size and the and the time frame from your perspective? Yeah. Any concern there?

Yeah, the the concerns that we have is really um and I I've always voiced these to Michael is uh obviously we have the 9,000 um and then the another kind of plot if you will or unit would be another 9,000. Um but then the concern of what if uh the next unit that comes available is 10,000 square feet. Well, then we just went over and we have to do this whole process again. Well, then you go, well, let's just do 19. Well, what if the next one's 11? You know, and he's like, I'm not going to split it up and give you three. And so, there's always the concern of what if the next place that comes available doesn't meet the restrictions. Um, but we want to work with the city in in whatever we need to do. And so, we don't want to create any kind of burden or situation where it's like, okay, this feels like you we let you in and now you're taking over the whole complex. Well, we want we don't want to limit you as well, right? We want to personally allow you to have a little bit of growth, but not limit it as well.

Yeah. Too too much for you. So, just want to make sure that I would say I value as much uh uh openness I have to it. Yeah. In in a way that you guys would feel comfortable. I don't want to to to ask for too much and then go, we're not we're not comfortable with that. So, but it also just because on if you said the whole building 36,000, we would never plan to take 36,000. So, uh you know, but it would give us the freedom if something crazy happened. Okay. But but still, Derek, maybe you can just clearly help us understand. Sure. Your goal is not to be a rentor. You you eventually want what?

Yeah. We we would like to purchase a property, but we also recognize we have to have a space in which we can grow in uh and have enough people that we can afford to have enough congregants in which we can afford to purchase a piece of land or a building. And so that that there's a need for additional space beyond the 9,000 for us to grow in. Um the other thing I think um was mentioned, was there a timeline mentioned on the 10year thing? Was that 10 year plus?

10 years plus. Okay, there was. Okay. So we uh the the reason we we came about that is it it again we don't know um what God might do but it feels as if five years it would take at least five years for us to get to a number of people where we could go okay we can and start to save up money where we could say okay we can now start looking at a property but we don't want to shorten it where now we're stuck and we got to get out and we're not quite ready. So we felt like 10 plus 5 would allow for us to do that. Okay so you're comfortable with 10 plus 5. I want to just make sure on that. And then then the 18,000. Are are you comfortable with that? I'm comfortable with 18 because I I I um

I I don't want to present a burden to the city to go. He's trying to take over this whole place. You know what I'm saying? So if you said if you said you can have the entire complex, I'm never going to I mean all four buildings there. I'm never taking all four buildings. So, it's not like uh but but so if there was no limitation put on it, that would be preferable. I don't know if that's a possibility just because I'm not going to abuse it, but it frees me up to not fear. What do we do next? Okay. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. A couple questions similar to what uh uh was asked earlier about the uh daycare and I'll so I'll broaden it a little bit to ancillary uses.

Yeah. Uh some of those could be business like a cafe or coffee shop that you might have, you know, uh or one other one I was thinking of was a homeless shelter. Yeah. If you might provide homeless services, overflow homeless for other parts of the valley or something. Yeah. And so I'm wondering if you're have any of those.

No, we don't we don't have any plans for any kind of uh offerings of a coffee shop or a homeless shelter. Um the uh I think the main the main potential uses are those people who are want to rent out a uh not long term but like for the day uh a space or uh for people to potentially on Mondays, hey from 9 to noon I've got this room and we're doing I'm doing some counseling kind of stuff like that. But but no um uh direct to people um kind of service. Yeah. I was kind of hoping you would had some homeless.

If if I had more um money for more property, I mean, more space, I could do that. I I would I really wanted to be able to be honest. I wanted to be able to do a food pantry to offer because there actually is a food pantry in Herman that we work with. Uh but they're kind of jumping place to place and it'd be nice to give them a landing spot, but we just don't have the money to to rent that out just so they can use it. So, yeah. But that that we we really want to and our heart is from the beginning when we got here eight years ago is we want to be a blessing to this community and we want to be able to serve it in any capacity we can. Uh and I've gone multiple times to uh the city and to the mayor and said hey just blank what can we do to serve this city? You know the needs we don't know. We we're small so we can't obviously do uh everything you might ask but we've even uh brought in uh friends of of churches who've come and they've brought a large group to help us just do something for the city just so we can serve it because that really is our heart. We want to be a blessing in the city where uh if we did leave Herman it would that we would feel missed not because we're important but because we believe that uh Christ works through us and serving this community. That's why and and part of the reason I ask it in in that way almost along the lines of what Andy was saying earlier is the is it restricted or is there a way we can make sure it's not restricted so that you can do that.

Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know if I asked that the right way, Mike, but and and so maybe we'll have to have this Yeah. in further discussion here. So, okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Uh we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Okay. And seeing none, do we have a motion to close? I'll make a motion to close. Second. So, a motion by Heather, a second by Andy. Thank you. All in favor? I Okay. Do we have any other questions or a motion?

Well, I would like to ask my my question I had just a second ago. is some of these other things like a food pantry and a homeless is that prevented or is that something we can um that they can do? The like the coffee shop, those type of things uh and the and the counseling services I believe we're okay on. But the homeless shelter would that would be another land use conversation. And again, I think this is going to spur further conversations with the council and I assume potential amendments to the M1 zone. So I again I would encourage any members of the commission if you want to offer a comment on your motion tonight. So if we were to add something in I would share that with the council.

So if we were to add that in make that something they could if it's an So one of the issues that we have is we legally cannot go beyond the boundary of what we had advertised for amending the land uses in this agreement. Right now, we've only advertised church or place of worship. Anything that falls outside of that, we would have to back up a step and revertise a hearing for this. And it doesn't sound like that's in the interest of the applicant at this point in time. Do those fall outside that? Yeah, they do. But what we could do is remove the maximum square footage entirely. That's something we could do

because I going with what I believe we should do is completely remove this restriction from those zones and allow it to be anywhere. But that's a different discussion and doesn't get that point where where he wants to get to today. But if we remove that, that to me is kind of highlighting you should be able to do whatever you want to do related to this type of use. I think I agree, Adam. Um, I still see uh the building's owner as being a part of this.

I mean, we're still in the United States, still in America, and there is some rights to being an owner. So, he could control um restrict or open up the use of his building for what he wants. Yeah. I I don't see the need of restricting the square footage because like you're saying if they come in they're like hey we want the whole building for our congregation and and it would be just the developers like oh I'm sorry I can't do that I'm restricted because the city put a limit on square footage for

maybe you just make the the right now the one building is 36,000 ft total right let's not limit it's just that building I mean we don't necessarily want to open it up to the entire thing we're only talking to the property right now so to me I just you delete the bullet at the bottom. It's that one building. Yeah, we don't care what the limit what size you use cuz we're only talking about that property. 36,000 anyway. So, I don't have it on there. I have one more stupid question for Mike and I sure I'm assuming this is an easy one um to confirm. I assume that as a church it's allowed to have weddings, baptisms, whatever during the week. They could have larger groups coming with us typical services.

Yeah. And obviously there's social activities that come along with the congregation and yeah all of that's allowed and okay Michael what was the reasoning behind limiting the square footage? Again this is a reflection of what has been communicated by our general plan our zoning map that we really are trying to preserve the M1 zone for other types of uses

employment. This was just a very narrow modification to resolve the disparity between a potential uh religious protection claim that may result in litigation with the city. So, we're trying to resolve that claim to a mutual satisfaction in the most narrow possible way. Can they take that we're limiting the size and if that's your recommendation again that's that's appropriate because we didn't have that size limitation in the notice that was published.

So this was a more restrictive modification. So if you are wanting to recommend to the city council that just leave it as is like no no no size restriction within the existing building you you can do that. Well, what I'm asking is does that go back to that religious protection act? And

well, I I I guess you could or you know, you might say, well, you don't limit you don't limit a reception center to 18,000 ft. You haven't said that. That's not been their claim. Again, as you heard from from Derek, they they've been in the community. They they know us. They want to work with us. They're they're not trying to do ask for that religious protection any further than what they believe meets their mission. So sure, you've heard from him that he would be glad to accept no square footage restriction. So

and as we discussed in the work meeting, um it's kind of a two-edged sword here. I I I firmly believe that the diversification in uh in churches anywhere, but it's here in Heramman is a good thing is a really good thing. Um uh but I also know that uh in in in not trying to offend or defend anyone um the non-denominational churches your congregation probably there's probably some of them here in in Herman but chances are you're all over the valley with your congregation. So that makes you different from the predominant religion who the neighborhoods make up the the church. Um so I I see this as a good thing in Herman's evolution in our growth. But then the flip side to that is if we allow you this space, we're sacrificing potential income generating uh uh companies from from occupying that. So

do we get money from a manufacturing zone? I mean it depends. I mean if there's if it's purely wholesale then there's not really a a a tax that is being collected on a retail transaction, right? But but there are other derivative activities that may generate. So somebody comes to that work site and then they go buy lunch. Yeah. Or you know so you have those secondary impacts of creating that this could be attracting people from around the valley would be doing. Correct. That's true. The reason why I'm saying is we don't make money off of the dance studio. If this became a dance studio, there's no money ingesting to the city between it and a church. they're selling outfits or

I don't. So, I I personally like the idea of having that 18,000 square feet in there to do our best to kind of protect the zone to bring things in. So, for me personally, I would like to keep that as a recommendation. I I agree with what Daryl said and Heather and I think my biggest concern. I'm not, you know, I'm not against seeing other religions here. I think that's great, but I I worry about the president that sets for the zone. Well, and again, I that is an issue that the council will need to address outside of this one development agreement proposal.

Yeah, I think we ought to have a conversation after this motion. We I've got I got some thoughts on that, too. Okay. So, okay. Thank you. Okay. Any um other comments or a motion? I'll make a motion for item 5.1 to approve recommend or sorry to to recommend approval to the city council um with staff's recommendations. I'll second it. Okay. So, we have a motion by Heather, a second by Daryl. Um, Andy, I'm going to say yes, but I wish we would keep uh increase the 18,000, but I will approve this so we can get this moving forward. Yes.

Thank you. I know it's a yes, but I'm just saying just so the Yeah, it's a yes. Okay. Uh, Darl. Yes. I I'm only saying no because I want to remove that 18,000 square feet. So, I would that that's the only reason I'm saying no. Which gets your message heard by the count the city council. Correct. I I believe we should unrestrict the whole zone. Okay. Um Heather, yes, Jackson.

Um I'm also going to add a qualifier. I think there's I think there needs should be something to help a it's coming. We're going to have a a church here. And so I think we need to be able to work in some other things like can they do a food pantry? Can they do a homeless shelter? And so I I want to be able to say to say that's an approved use. So, I'm going to make that as a recommendation separate from this after the meeting is done in in in our comments. So, but I'll say yes to this motion. Okay. Thank you. And

kind of stuck in the middle, too. Uh I don't really feel putting a restriction on the square footage, but I do feel like we it is manufacturing zone, but I say yes. This is the first time we've had conversation with our motion. That's great. We appreciate what you guys have done. So, thank you. Yeah. So, Michael, how do we add those? Do those comments just get added to or do you want them We'll just We'll have No, they don't. They don't. But my no will and they'll know why I said no. The no will get the attent that that's it's a yes or no, but we're going to item six. So, we're going to make some more comments right now. Yep. I'm going to make comments. All right. We would like to welcome you to here. Yes. All right. So, item six,

the vote was six to one. No. Oh, five to one. I have one. Okay. Okay. So, not that the one didn't. Yeah. Oh, sorry. You're fine. Keep going. Chair and commission comments. I have one. Okay. You get the first. You don't. You already made yours. So, this is for Michael and and planning staff as I think we should we should allow churches in every zone but the M you called it the M2 zone. M2. The M2 zone which is our heavy industry. TM I think could it should be everywhere. Even TM. No, the uh the uh frog was it M2?

In my opinion, it should be in every zone. The option to be in every zone except for heavy industrial which is M2. So I I have a comment as well. So and this is separate from your application. Um I think that it's great that you guys are moving in there. Um the way that we're going about this just opens the door to problems and we shouldn't be forced into a corner and say, "Hey, let's make this special zoning,

you know, application just to cover our butts because we think that we could get sued for this or for that." And I agree. I think that we need to change the zoning to I think to allow churches as well so that we eliminate that issue because I I prefer having the ability to do churches pretty much wherever because I think they're beneficial and that that would reduce the amount of places they'd be in our C C1 and C2 zones. And the only reason I excluded the M2 so everybody is clear on that is the M2 if I look at historic code industrial to me may not even fit in our city

right because I'm thinking heavy industrial like like what you'd see at the point of the mountain up by uh as you north Salt Lake steel manufacturing like more from that style which is why I'm saying specifically M2 which it wouldn't have any other compatible use in M2 anyway. Yeah. Basically opened up exactly the same thing for the LDS church to do

to come and say you can't prevent us from building in the M1 M2 zones. You can't prevent us from building in all these other zones using the exact same path that they did. I think Mike's uh excuse me, you know, there's other churches that could do the same thing, but LDS church is the most likely. I think Mike's advertisement though pretty much restricted it to this one unique case. So, it doesn't allow it to spill over. It doesn't matter. He he opened the floodgate. Well, so now now they can the LDS church can come and say, "Hey, you can't prevent us from going into the M1 zone." Well, they always could. Yeah, they have the same opportunity. Which is why,

going back to your point, which I think you're agreeing with my point, is put it in all of the zones. We need to fix it and fix it once and for all. Yes. But Adam, I believe you were on the commission, and this predates me of when we decided as a city to take churches out of the C2 zone from what I mentioned earlier. Are you now at a point where you feel like we don't need we don't need that protection? The intent was to try and drive commercial which it never did anything. Okay. That that that was the intent. But in reality, rather have commercial than a church that's not non

but in re in my opinion in reality you maybe you could want an airport in Haramman. That doesn't mean we're going to get auto. I'm just saying like there's there's these cool ideas that everybody wants the tax base, but we don't live in that type of community. So, I'm more of a be with it. Just food for thought. Another reason, and I mentioned it briefly in the staff report, one of the reasons why cities may have some concern with allowing a church in every zone, especially commercial zones, is we do have these separation distance for restaurants who want to have a an alcohol license.

I mentioned that in the staff report. Now, in this location where where the built form is is large, right, that's probably not really an issue. But if you introduce a church in a strip center, right, and you we see that you see in these older strip centers, the zoning code allows a church to go in there. Well, now you prevented a restaurant from coming in within so many feet and having an alcohol license because there's a separation requirement between that church and a restaurant and restaurants without an alcohol license struggle. Yeah. You know, a full service restaurant, it's just the reality.

That makes sense. So, but they can be one right now and solve that same problem. So

I guess I guess I have more of a a question on the other side and maybe maybe this is more for attorney or or legal side of a question. I I almost am agreeing with Adam and and Forest, but in from the sense of from a legal standpoint, I mean, we could try to restrict it all day long, but similar to the conversation of well, should we put in there a restriction of no like homeless services? And I laughed because I was like, "Yeah, good luck defending that from a legal standpoint." I mean, freedom of religion is going to squash that real quick if we try to say, "Oh, we're going to allow a church but not allow you to practice your religion in your church." Like, so my question is, is there any case precedence for restricting zoning and churches that actually it was defended?

That is a defined land use. We do not define it. And therefore by it not being defined, it's not permitted. We do have a process where somebody can come in and say this land use is similar enough to something else in the city, right, that if the city were to agree to that interpretation, then we could allow it. I think that would be a difficult challenge. Now, if we were to to deny that administrative interpretation, then the applicant of that request can appeal that, right? Uh and so there's a process for reviewing whether or not the city made the right decision in that case.

So, I guess my question is basically like does the city ever win those arguments in in case in case history? Like would I That's my That would be my question. I depends on how good our attorneys are. Well, let me I'm willing to pay place a bet. So, I can just tell you in my career, I have not lost on an appeal, but thankfully I have only had a few, but I but you know it things happen. So, so where does it go from here, Mike? There it is.

So, Mike, where do we where does it go from here? I mean, the council is going to hear our decisions and our conversations. Um, and they could say, "Man, these guys are talking about things we never thought about and act on it." Or they could say, "Ah, we're just the status quo." They they could It'll be my recommendation that we we do need to make a decision on what the M1 zone I was going to say has to be.

Is there any conflicts in any of the other zoning? the the condition that came in here or the the discussion here tonight was in an M1 zone we allow certain things that are comparable to a church. Are there other zones that have that same that we're restricting churches in? Yes. So if if so, we need to clean that up. And and my thought is if we're allowing a reception center or something like that in a zone, we need to allow a church in that zone. If there's a specific zone that is not in conflict with the church use, then maybe we keep it and leave it alone. But if there is, that's my opinion. But what Michael was saying is then that that they can't have a liquor license, right? Or an alcoholic.

Well, then then we got to clean it up so that you I mean that's a maybe of a maybe of a maybe. Yeah. See, I I think there's there's so many variables with that. And so I do like this coming in to us because it's brought it to our attention, right? There is a there is, you know, this act, the religious act that was was mentioned, right? That is legit and we need to make sure we need to honor that. And so if we have zoning conditions in our city that that are contrary and are setting us up for legal issues, we need to clean that up. But Mike, and maybe this is something going to the the business side. So let's imagine there's a a business that has alcohol permitted

like squatters or brewery or something. It's there and then a church comes in, right? It's there first and its uses are there first. So what what I'm trying to say is it it's not like it it's not going to put businesses out of business. That's more in a commercial than a manufacturing. No. Correct. Correct. What am I saying? another one couldn't come in to it if it's already there. But also, there's so many variations of church. Like, would I want like a church where they're able to like smoke weed or do mushrooms next to my daycare? So, we do have to consider there are a lot of alternative type of churches.

Agreed with you. But technically, we don't get to determine those. That's that's what I said. Good luck. Good luck controlling what they do in their church. That's why you need to That's why you tighten up your zoning. That's why you got to tighten up your conditions on your zoning. Yeah. I don't know. Um I did also want to just bring up that it's 600 feet, which our like standard roadway is about 60 just for context. And uh there are variances allowed. So uh contact your legislator. We don't determine liquor laws. What we can determine is the zoning. Yeah. That these can go in. So, while I understand that's a point, um,

yeah, restaurants can succeed also. Well, I I know that we all know that there's a bigger issue here and hopefully the council will take some action, but for the here and now with these guys, welcome to Heramman. I think the diversification and and having a a non-denominational that reaches out to the whole valley to bring to potentially bring people into airmen is a great thing. And even though I voted no, I completely agree. And I'd like wasn't no on you. It was no situation. Make a comment as a pastor toward the alcohol thing or is it not a permissible?

Yeah, we're not taking after the meeting is closed. You're welcome. Okay. Jackson, did you have something you wanted to add? Yes. I'd like to add my final comment. So, as this goes into city council, I would like city council to uh talk about or at least discuss the ability to allow them it, you know, the possibility of homeless or food pantry uh services that they could provide. So, I want to find a way to make that possible if I have some concerns about that. So, with the homeless part, I feel like we don't have services out here with transportation or we probably don't have

it. It probably is an overflow. They'd have to probably bust them in from one of the more central locations. But, are you meaning more like when it's like code blue, like it's cold or like a homeless shelter? Not like a full-time shelter, but just more as an emergency. I think both, but I don't see the one ever being used clear out here in this edge of the valley. But as a code blue, I you know, I disagree with that. It is hard when there's a lack of service conversation like you're Don't we already have a like a like a boy club on West 134? We have We have many of those style of homes. Yeah. Residential facilities. Yeah. We have residential counseling and

and I've been named in lawsuits on several of them. So, yeah, we have Okay, that was my comment. Thank you. All right, anything else? Great discussion. Okay, our next planning commission meeting will be May 6th and the next city council meeting will be May 13th. Motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Second. Adam and Heather. All in favor? I. Thank you.