Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey, and this ain't no threat or nothing, okay? Justice Department has asked for these video recordings that I have concerning these matters, okay? That I have in my possession. I'm not trying to have you all justified to the Justice Department as to why you guys are violating these issues or ignoring what has been brought up for the last three and a half to four years. Okay? Um, these issues get brought up two to three times a year. So you cannot say like the last meeting I was to well you ought to be aware of the situation that's going on hey three and a half four years you ought to be aware of what's going on just like I told you the three to five months ago. Okay. Same thing. Okay. Yeah.

This is I'm sorry. This is the public comment for a public hearing. Let me finish. A. Yes. If it is has nothing to do with a Yes, it does on the agenda and then then there's no further hearing.

Before I get interrupted here, okay, like I said on this planning that you guys are considering doing, okay, number one is have you guys ever thought about the same thing what is happening up there in TWIL? Okay. With the wine co you got to have the water rights. Okay. You are going from a single family to or uh uh what do you call family single family to a mixed use density. So that means if you change the uh water rights here you were setting the presidents for the other people or other businesses that come in here. Okay. And I don't even know what our water issues are here in the city. Since I've been here, all I've seen is people move in and uh yeah, I haven't seen any water issues or nothing and I know that water is an issue. So, yeah. Um, second thing is is I would think that you guys pay attention to what's going on in the world or the economy, okay, down in Denver, okay, you guys,

I'd like you to stay on task here, please. I have a limited amount of time. I can't help that, lady. Okay. Okay. Now, like I was saying, I'll give you two more minutes.

Please don't interrupt me. Let me finish. Okay. And like I said, you guys are doing exactly what Denver is doing. You are coming in here and you are putting uh multifamily homes. Okay. Mixed in with the other houses. Okay. Now, I don't care what my house is worth. Okay? Now, not to but I go with these other folks. Okay? I'm an investor. So, if my house is only worth $100,000, I don't care. Okay? However, when you stick all of these with the town homes you have, Denver is losing 4% this year and they lost 4% last year on their sales tax because of the property uh the property values went down because they have stuck all these multifamily homes with these other existing homes that are there. That's what you guys are doing here. You were making it to where your house isn't going to be worth anything because you have these multif family homes that are around. So, we're going to be like Denver here in the future. We're going to lose 4% this year. We're going to lose 4% this year. Who knows what we're going to lose next year. So, I mean, have you guys ever thought, you know, I mean, we have no businesses here for the for our sales tax. So, for you to go in here and put mixed density in something, like I said, you could drive the values down, but you're going to lose revenue. So, I have to agree with like the gentleman before me is you guys haven't thought this through yet because you're mixing too much together. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Mark. Is there anybody else who would like to speak on item A? Would you please come up to the podium and state your name? Thank you.

Um I'm Mandy Smith and I just live right next to this um area. I don't I agree with everybody else's spoken. I don't like the idea of mixed use density. I um would like to see that go to good use, but I don't want my property to be devalued any more than it already is with the town homes around. People here in Grantsville are here because we have space and we like the small town feel and the community and I understand that we can't. We'll expand, but it doesn't need to be the Salt Lake Valley people are here because they don't want to be in the Salt Lake Valley. And to be honest, I don't really like what mixed density brings near my home. I want to keep my family safe and not everybody has that same agenda. So,

thank you, Daddy. Is there anybody else? Would you mind coming to the podium? And I will you just reannounce um if they're online to raise their hand? as well. Just that way we can kind of get a list of people. Hi. Hi. So, I'm Kyle Allred and I live directly across the street from this place.

So, my big question is what's the actual plan if they do reszone? Are we talking 70 80 apartments shoved over there? Are we talking couple dozen town homes? That's going to be a big difference. I mean, it's great they're finally doing something with the property. They have to call the police a lot less. you know, people not over there doing drugs or breaking into it, vandalizing. But like I said, if it's couple of them town homes, yeah, is it the greatest? No. But if it's, you know, 60 70 apartments, then yeah, I got a problem with it. So, thank you, Kyle. Thank you. Please.

No pressure. I'm Christine already his wife.

Um I have questions of I know we that area is an aluvial fan and also in the flood plane. So what are the plans for flood mitigation if they have any? So if they're going to come in and do anything or build up um change the ground, what are their plans for flood mitigation for all of us that have just built in that area? So I would like to see what that plan is before they start reszoning and building in that area. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else that would like to make a public comment for item A on the agenda? It is a consideration to change the land use designation. Is there anybody online that would like to speak? Please raise your hand. I don't think we have anybody else who is wanting to make public comment on that item. Correct. Okay. We will close that item. We'll move on to item B. the consideration of a proposed resone of parcel 01- 0006-00006 and parcel 23-001- 0-00A and parcel 01-112- 0-000012 and parcel 01- 1112-0011 from the A-10 and R-1-12 to the RM-15, which is multiple residential district for the Apple Street town home subdivision located approximately Cherry Blossom Lane and

Apple Street excluding 0.95 acres proposed for commercial use. Is there anybody that would like to make comment on that? believe those are essentially the same parcels. State your name, please.

Yeah, name's Mark Nielson. Yeah. On this, I don't know if you guys have consider you got houses that are there. Uh you're going to have uh gez what I don't know 40 50 people that are going to be looking into people's backyards. I mean, it a little absurd there, you I mean, there's no privacy or anything there. I mean, that's why I said you need to be building your your places away from the uh homes and that. So, cuz where my house sits there uh and you guys are talking about all of this stuff there is, yeah, I'm going to have Oh, man. almost half well over a quarter that's going to be able to look right into our yard. So, the disabled wife will have no privacy. Um to me I see that being issues because I have to leave the windows open at time and that and I mean someone peeping in. I mean we've already had an issue already about that just because we're so close in the neighborhood that's right there. So yeah, I'm not sure that you guys have really thought about all that and then this is still a flood zone area. Correct.

I'm sorry. We really can't respond. This is for public comment for the record. That's the way it goes. That's another thing I don't understand is if this is the area since I guess it's top secret. You can't tell me, you know, since this is a public meeting that um I don't understand why we're building in flood zone areas when we don't need to. I don't understand that. I understand that we need to give those people,

you know, good thing for their money. Last time when I was here that Yeah, that was a shambles, you know, but but yeah, I I can't see that there. That's a little unusual there. But yeah, I don't know if you've thought about the privacy there and what it looks into and and that cuz like I said, they're yeah, the back of their houses I would assume will be up against gez there's three houses there that a quarter of the lot will be able to see into their houses or into their backyards and mine they'll be able to see into my house when the windows open. So that's why I say that kind of does create an issue. So So yeah, thank you Mark. Please.

Hi.

Hi. My name is uh Truman Lancaster and me and my wife just moved in. We're right next to the All Reds and that property is exactly across the street from my front yard. So the it's there. It's there. It's you're not going to tear it down and build houses. So it's there. So, the only thing that I'm concerned about is what are they going to do? Is it going to be apartments? Like Mr. Alred said, that's a problem. If it's going to be town homes where there's owners, they own the town homes. That's another thing. Ownership brings responsibility. So, that's the question I want is what are they going to build there? Cuz we talk about it. What is going to go there? So that's my comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to make public comment on item B? Is there anybody online? Please raise your hand. Oh, sorry. Tyler, there is one guest online. So after Tyler,

Tyler Dimmick, again, um just another point that I wanted to bring up is just traffic. Um, like I said, I've only lived here four years, but traffic has gotten exponentially worse since then, where the more we put high density housing on the west side of town, the more congested main street kits. We don't have the infrastructure for that right now. Um, which means that costs more money to put infrastructure in, more stop lights, more turn lanes, all that type of stuff to be able to manage all the all the extra cars that are going to the west side of the town of the city. Um, well, that's just another thing I wanted to wanted to be considered in this that, you know, I see a lot of, you know, the the townhouse that went in just to the north of me. And then there's that spot on Cherry Blossom and Cherry Street that is already approved from what I understand for high density mixed use. Um, where that's already going to be way more people than we currently have, which is more than what I feel like our infrastructure is built for. And again, just to reiterate, no one over there wants more high density housing. We move there because we want space, not because we want five million more people all over the place. Dogs pooping all over our lawns. That's one of my biggest complaints about the town houses near me. Everyone walks their dogs up by my house. They poop all over my lawn. They poop all over my park strip. And I get to clean up all their messes. Rather than having a neighborhood that they can walk in their own, they venture to the neighborhoods around them to use their dogs toilets. That's all. Thanks. Thank you.

Take that on my call. I did have one thing I think I didn't mention. The person online who'd like to make a comment. Could you please speak? His name is Pete. Pete. Yeah. Hi. Pete Saris here. I just wanted to make a quick comment that I want to say it was in November of 2023 that the developers brought a concept plan to city council for 150 apartments. Um, I just I want to know if that has changed now to town homes and what that looks like going forward. Thank you, Pete.

Yeah, not again. And hey, I have to agree with what the neighbor here is saying about the dog feces. That is very uh contagious sick. People do get sick from it. So, something you guys need to be aware of. And the second thing is is you guys are aware that they are going to be putting two stop lightss here. Sorry, we can't move. Oh, well then I guess I won't tell you where they're going to be because this here would create an issue with the one that they proposed to put in. So, okay. Don't worry. Top secret. I understand.

Is there anybody else who would like to make a comment on the proposed resoning? Oh, I mean honesty. Okay. Anybody else online, please raise your hand? Close it out. I'm seeing nobody online. Nobody else. Okay, we'll close that item and we will move on to agenda number one. Consideration of a proposed general plan amendment for the parcels we've previously listed. Do I have to list them out again? No.

Okay. to change the land use designation from single family density to mixeduse density for the Apple Street town home subdivision located at approximately Cherry Blossom Lane and Apple Street.

Yes. So, um a very very long time ago um this property was vested as apartments. Um you can see that um there was structures built uh and then that property failed due to funding. Um the applicant is proposing a general plan amendment to uh leave the commercial as is in the CS and amend the general plan uh for mixeduse density um to bring in town homes um and and change that property and and bring it to life. Um so it's approximately at 500 West Apple Street. There are four parcels um that are broke up. Um and then they're wanting to change it to mixeduse density from high single family density which uh best six dwelling units per acre. Um they're just slightly over that at seven. Um this used to be called Applegate Apartments and um it received approval from planning commission on January 13th, 2005. The project began in 2006 and the development eventually halted and was never completed. Um the proposed reszone is consistent with the general plan and the future land use map. The RM15 zoning district um does meet the size of the property. The request um reinvests and redevelops the long long vacant and partially improved site and the reszone creates a logical transition between commercial uses along SR 138 and the residential development to the south. So you can see here um this is the CS zoning for commercial and then we have a portion of A10 and RM15 and R112 and then here is our general planner future land use map. You can see that this mixuse stops right here at West Street. Um, and then they're asking to

pick it up and extend it to the south further. So, the mix use does allow up to 10 units per acre where the surrounding uses are compatible heights of a maximum of 35 ft. Um, and 15 units per acre may be approved with special consideration. You can see this property is here um outlined in the orange. And then I provided just um the information and uh public meeting minutes from when this was originally approved. Did you have any questions? Thank you. I appreciated all that information. Jason,

what based on what was what's existing now right now, what are your plans to how are you going to work around what's already built versus what you're planning to do?

We're going to tear the garages down. And uh we're going to the plan right now is what we're going to ask is we're going to take the existing structure that was there and uh finish it off and put a a pool and uh a gym and stuff in it. And we'd probably open that up to uh the community and family parties, stuff like that. Uh it'll be gated. There'll be town homes. Uh you know, initially there was going to be on 9 acres, there's going to be 150 uh apartments. We've changed it to town homes, which they're all individual lots. And we've we've specifically targeted a bunch of the town homes to have main floor masters and stuff, so it could be uh different than any of the other town homes that are built around here. We've got as many as we could fit in there. Uh that would be a different different meeting as of right now. You're just changing the zoning and whatever that zoning is it is what it is. You know that that would be a different meeting that uh when we would come and show the plans and get those approved.

That's correct.

As it is now, you know, the it was a an eyesore there. We've we've cleaned it up. We've uh secured the building. We've uh got rid of all the weeds where uh in my mind were it was with the garages and stuff there was supposed to be 150 apartments I but thinkund some town homes is a a much better deal and as far as being anybody's dog or whatever we it's a gated community you know a dog would have to get out of the gates and go around and as far as I No. Uh there's maybe two houses that our property borders at all on. Other than that, it's a junkyard, an auto shop, and a street and a a storm drainage area on the one side, and then, you know, there's a guy with a really really nice house on the east side of it. But, uh, you know, I don't I don't see how we could impact anybody else's property from where we're at. And it would be a cadated community and it'd be an upper end. It's It's not a cheap uh uh place. It's It's a lot nicer than the other town homes that would be there that are over there. and it'll be gated and it'll have amenities and we'll open up amenities for the other homes around it if they approve what we want to do with that. Everybody else would be able to use have access to the pool and uh the

clubhouse that would be there. Oh, I'm sorry. I don't know if you stated your name when you came up. Randy CR. Randy CR. Okay. I represent Gransville Mark K LLC. Thank you. Did you have other questions? Uh, no other questions right now. Chris, Commissioner Horox, do you have any questions? Uh, no. The only question I was going to ask is kind of the what their overall plan was for it. Um, but it kind of answered all those questions for me as far as that's concerned.

Okay. I do understand that this is this these conversations are just for the zoning and the land use designation and it's really hard to make plans further out not knowing the outcomes of this meeting and that having a plan presented to the planning commission staff to review and possibly come before this body again for any variations is a ways out and we understand that. Yeah.

Um on the flip side, I just want to state that um everybody has a right to develop their property as long as it aligns with the laws of our city and the regulations that we have in place. And so

we've we've heard lots of comments, but um I have been on that property. We did a homelessness pit count and I walked around that property for probably an hour looking for people taking shelter in mid January, middle of the night because that's when we do pits. And I I had always just felt so bad that that that property there had had just fallen into disarray when whoever had it before had such uh grand plans for it. and I had been hoping that somebody would come in and and provide an opportunity to improve that land that would complement our city.

Um, so um do you do you is there any indicator that you might be open to providing affordable housing in your development in the future? Not that you have to answer now, but that's something that the city's made a commitment to. Um, well, and would like to see a focus on that. Well, you know, when when people say affordable housing, I don't understand a lot of what that is. Affordable housing is usually subsidized by HUD or somebody else. And um affordable housing is simply structures that are

we're going to be building we'll be in the lower end price range for what's there is what about as cheap as you can get for it. Yeah. And that's that's all it is is Yeah. um you know building some structures where folks if you are actually selling these improved lots with possibly buildings on them that maybe you'd consider some of those to be say below a 300 or around a $320,000 threshold. So folks who are earning less than 80% of the area median income could possibly qualify for them.

Yeah. The problem with that is is the the building cost being where they are at and the development cost being what they are. If you know we if if you could build that and build stuff for 300 there a lot of people would have been doing it. The other uh town homes that were built there they ended up you know I'm a real estate broker. They I look at the sales of those two three years ago they were 378. Building costs have gone up substantially. Those have 2,000 square feet, 1,500 square feet above ground and about 500 feet in the basement and a twocar garage and and we're going to be doing nicer stuff than that. And that was cost 2, three years ago. And so we will definitely be on the as affordable as they can be. It only makes sense for us to have them as affordable as they can be. But if we, you know, nobody's been able to put anything with like main floor masters and stuff. And if you put a main floor master there, then your ba basement's bigger and you still have to have the other stuff. So it's they're a little bit more to have something like that, too. And it takes up more of the lot. So, uh, for for what's there, they'll be as cheap as they can be.

Yeah. And I appreciate that. I didn't mean to put you on the spot. I just wanted to um No, I that's that's what every city needed. That's what every city wants. They want affordable housing and uh uh and and they everybody needs more of it right now. Well, I appreciate your thoughts. We'll we'll see you when you come back, I guess. Yeah.

Um I don't have any other questions. just know that um you know the city does have uh future land map use uh plans in place and those are public records. Um any records of being in a flood plane that's public records. Um there are some expectations that flood planes would be well storm storm drainage is some of that's already been put in. See a lot of the improvements are already in there. Yeah,

storm drain is one of them that's there. And we've we've we've allowed for the storm drainage and for the flood control there, but you know, you you will never get anything passed unless you address those issues. If you know, it's this is the zoning at the the other meeting, then they'll okay, we're this is what we require for flood control. Have you met what we need for the and and we certainly intend to meet whatever codes and everything you have. Yeah, I realize that. Thank you. I didn't mean to go off on a tangent again. Jason, you have anything else? Um I Well, I do have something to say, but are you done with your questions? Yes. So, I'm going to I'm ready to entertain a motion, but I want to clarify a couple things. And I

I really did listen to what everybody had to say here today. I know there's public comment coming here, and I know you're looking at at trying to to do something. You're not a charity. You're a good business. I get that. I think our job for the planning and zoning commission is to to look at what is allowed within the the rights within the city to develop for people to use their property. Those individuals that want to help change how Grantsville City is built out and what that looks like in the future, the the the general plan is gets updated regularly. And that's where an opportunity for comment fits in here. I think what we're what we're doing here and I'm going to entertain a motion to accept it is that this matches what we're looking at in the general plan and it doesn't take away from people's concerns. I get that people want to make sure their their their lifestyle is is protected. At the same time, we have to look at from the planning zoning commission perspective of how we are trying to to help the city continue to stay on a plan and not deviate because the more we deviate, the less cohesive we become as a city and continuing to grow, which we will we have to to address. So, with that being said, I will entertain a motion. There is one thing then, you know, when we when we do do it,

if we do make uh that clubhouse some sort of uh uh thing where the public has access to it. I'm I'm sure that's going to require a zone that's different than what this is. Well, you're not obligated to do that by any means, but No, but I'm just saying it probably doesn't meet a I mean, it's a the guy built

a pretty big building there. It's bigger than what anybody would need for a clubhouse for for those units. It's 80 something square feet. And it just seems like it would be better if we could open it up to, you know, if we're going to put a pool and some of the other stuff, maybe make it bigger and then open it up to some of the other residents here. Go ahead. So, do we I'm based on what you're saying right now that I'm ask I'm going to ask you if we're going through this effort to to to reszone this currently. Well, we may we may end up being here again with No. So, it would be a use on the use table. So like a community recreation center, something like that.

So we don't I don't know what zoning that would even require. Okay. She you you know I don't Yeah. We wouldn't have to go through. Yeah. Okay. You'd have plenty of time to work. Yeah. I was just I was just saying it's uh it's I appreciate that's not town homes and that's something that uh we would hope would be a benefit to everybody. Well, I think just improving that area. Well, it's better than it was when probably you went out there and tore it. It was beautiful building. I could see the the vision there when when I was there, but I I was very heartbroken to see that it had not been taken care of or had any further improvements done. So, thank you. Yeah.

Go ahead, Chase. I'm going to submit a proposal then that we approve the general plan amendment for partial 01-066-006 23-001-0000 A 01-112- 0-000012 and 01-112- 0- 011 to change the land use designation from single family density to multi-use density for the Apple Street town home subdivision located approxim Ely Cherry Blossom Lane and Apple Street. Oh, you got it, Chris. I was waiting.

Okay, Chris second it. Okay, any other discussions? Okay, all in favor? I Thank you, Chris. Okay, well, we'll move on to item number two. I don't know, you're welcome to stay up here, but this is uh we'll close item one. Item two is the consideration of a proposed reszone of the parcels previously stated from the A-10 and R-1-12 to the RM-15 multiple residential district for the Apple Street town home subdivision locating located approximately Cherry Blossom Lane and Apple Street and excluding N5 acres proposed for commercial use.

Yes. So the RM15 um allows town homes and apartments is a conditional use. Um when this is reszone RM15, it's still uh keeping that commercial component along SR 138 um which has been asked of the applicant. So I mean do you guys have any other any further questions from the general plan? Jason, not for me. Chris, no.

Okay. I have no concerns with this and I appreciate the consideration of the developer to maintain that commercial use along the 138 route. So, I'll entertain a motion on this item.

I'll make a motion. All the looks are me. I'll propose that we that we accept the reszone of parcel 01-066-006 23-001-0000 A 01-112- 0-000012 and 01- Z sorry 01-112- 0-0011 from A10 to R112 and R112 to the RM15 15 multi- multi-residential district for the Apple Street town home subdivision located at approximately Cherry Blossom Lane and Apple Street. And that's to exclude the 0.95 acres proposed for commercial use along the highway.

Thank you, Commissioner Horox. Yes, just make Okay, I will second the motion. Uh any further discussion? Thank you. I will say if if anybody has any like comments in the public that they want to there's the other part of this where it goes to the city council where there is other you can look at this as far as carrying what your other pieces are but we approve this based on what the zoning laws allow. Anyway, thank you Jason and the approval of these changes will allow the developer to solidify what plans he might have in the future for this development. So all in favor I

I I thank you.

Okay, we'll close that item. Move on to item number three. The discussion of a proposed new use for micro entrepreneurship within the RM-7 zoning designation. So this new use being proposed um well no you're fine. So, this new use um comes from a conditional use permit that we seen that was just off of Clark Street. And we thought long and hard of, you know, what can we come up with instead of um compiling the name and um how can we make sure it's not overly restrictive and burdened, but restrictive enough that we're not seeing all these pop up in town. Um so with the help of um staff we came up with a new use called a micro entrepreneurship within the RM7 zoning designation. Uh this is a discussion only and um we wanted planning commission's feedback to see if this is something they would like to allow uh in this zone. Um, so as we continue to experience increased interest in small-scale, locallyowned businesses that operate at neighborhood compatible intensity, many residents are seeking flexible opportunities for self-employment, cottage industries, and professional services that do not align neatly with the traditional residential or commercial zoning categories. The proposed mixeduse entrepreneurship is intended to bridge that gap by allowing limited low impact business activity with residential districts, specifically RM7, while preserving neighborhood characters and minimizing land use conflict. So, the purpose and intent is to support local economic um innovations, encourage small independent businesses and self-employment, provide flexibility within residential zonings without creating commercial corridors, and

maintaining Grantsville City's rural residential character. The micro entrepreneurship is defined as a single low inensity micro business operating within one building or site with the following characteristics. No more than two employees. Customers traffic is limited to approximately 1 to two employees per hour. Activities conducted primarily indoors. Minimal environmental traffic and visual impacts. and the uses not intended to accommodate industrial operations, largecale retail or hightra commercial uses.

The permitted activities subject to approval um are artisian or craft production, woodworking, art, textiles, small batch goods, cottage scale or micro You can't shut the door. Sorry. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. I was just having a hard time hearing.

Um, cottage cells are micro enterprise food production um, consistent with state and county health regulations, professional and creative offices, design consulting, technology, uh, personal services by appointment, tutoring, small repairs, on-site and online sales, incidental to production or services. And you may be asking, well, this does kind of sound like a home occupation, but we've also um reddrafted our home occupation in the fourth um agenda item. So, we've tried separating these out and and making them different. Um so, operation limitations, one operator or tenant unless otherwise approved, retail sales and productions, no wholesale distribution, no outdoor production unless specifically approved. Events or classes limited in size and frequency. We have compatible standards. Noise, odor, vibration emissions limited to residential level impacts. Noise not to exceed 85 dB measured 20 ft from the property line. Hours of operation is 7 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. No outdoor storage unless screened and approved. Downward directed lighting with no light trespassing. So that means the lights can't be shining out towards your neighbors and on there. Um, signage needs to be compliant with chapter 20 traffic generation comparable to a home occupation. Um, they need to meet parking setbacks, landscaping buffering, existing structures may be reused where code compliant and minimum lot frontage so that they need to have 200 ft. So someone with a 50 foot wide yard wouldn't fit in this, but they may fit in something else or they need to propose a new use.

Okay. So that's where we've really restricted and narrowed down who falls under this category and who doesn't. And then the approval type is conditional use approved by the planning commission allowing a case-by case evaluation and tailored conditions. Any questions, additional information you would like added to that because all of that would go into the code. I have a couple questions. So you're you're basically saying that no one that no one that lived in a house didn't have a frontage of 200 feet could have a micro business. Correct.

So if and I'm just trying to wrap my brain around this. If someone someone individual says, "Hey, I want to start making something in my basement and sell it on Etsy or one of the sites like that." We're basically saying no to that if they want to apply for a business license. say I'm going to be doing this in my basement and I will be shipping it out because I I'm trying to look at the different things of why how how we make this work for the public but not in a way that becomes a burden and I think you've done a really good job of kind of lining out what that could be but I just see that there's some potential issues or I'm going back to some past experience I've had here in Gransville where someone was running like a silk screen shop in their basement they were producing t-shirts that didn't really impact the neighbors and really they could fit with everything else in here besides small things like that so I'm curious

so Some things like what you had mentioned would fall under a home occupation to where inside only. You're not seeing any sales on the outside or anything like that would fall under the home occupation versus this is someone who wants their little outuildings and but they have to have 200 feet of frontage. Okay. So you're saying they want to have a separate building they would use for a business. Gotcha. Bill,

I'm sorry to interject. You're doing a great job. Um this is really just an expansion of the home occupation permits. It it loosens some restrictions that we would have on home occupations, but we didn't want to allow them just anywhere. Like a home occupation could be allowed in any single family residence or you know that kind of place. Whereas this is more of a unique setting and um we want to encourage people to be entrepreneurs and and find ways to support themselves without having to incur incur a bunch of extra expense. Um, so this kind of uh situation we we want to make it kind of tough to get because uh home occupations do have the potential to change or impact the the character of the neighborhood and we want to limit that as well. But this kind of thing is is kind of a niche thing and and uh we didn't want to allow it just anywhere and everywhere. So, that's an easy way for us to say if you've got a large lot and can feasibly host or allow people onto the property to buy things or to come visit a little shed or or whatever, we could consider that.

What the only the only other question I had or concern is on the piece where you talk about no wholesale sales. If someone's going back and trying to sell something different like that, I know there's you're looking at the volume, correct? That's what you're trying to reduce is the volume amount. I I just see that being a little bit of a hangup of someone's saying, "Hey, look, now I can go and sell this and I have one delivery a day versus multiple type things where if we're looking at impacts to traffic, but I how we ring fence that maybe that' be the easiest way. But I'm just trying to think how someone would try to use this and build it. But eventually if someone's saying I'm going to sell to a business and I'm going to sell hundred of these versus one at a time." Yeah. There's obviously value in them to be more of a micro business which brings more tax revenue and things to the city but it

yeah comes at a regular or we have to figure out how to regulate that. So those kinds of things would would typically be regulated through the state as far as like the tax collection and and those kinds of things through their business licensing and and uh if they were creating anything that was like a a food or anything like that that would be through the county health department. So they're already kind of stop gaps in I'm just saying but as we look at that as saying if we wanted to encourage that kind of business or do we want to to really control what that looks like and discourage it is what I'm asking. Yeah, that's a good point. So those are my thoughts.

I love that actually. That's a great discussion because I just thought so the ladies that were here before had

so for example they are selling fresh fruit from their garden and um they came because the city wouldn't let them have a a structure that was permanent or something like that. But they had mentioned that somebody else who made jams and jellies was interested in using their area to sell their goods through. Is that going to restrict an opportunity like that with this no wholesale? It would restrict and not allow um multiple I guess clients come sell. It wouldn't be essentially a pawn shop. um you know, you're not going to have people drop off their items so that you can resell them

a consignment shop or and it it's intended to be something that is um just locally made things on site, that kind of thing. So my neighbor So my frontage is 197 ft. So I wouldn't be able to sell anything with that 200 foot minimum frontage. And even if I had another three feet, I couldn't sell my neighbors gems and jellies.

Yeah. And this is just a discussion, right? So this is if if you guys want to reduce that and propose 150 ft to make it so it's not so restrictive, that's something that we can do. That's why we brought this as a discussion and not a consideration. But yes, you wouldn't be able to sell your Yeah. The off-site thing I think is important because uh then you're bringing in chachkis and and junk from China to sell in your front yard. And that's not the purpose of this. Purpose of this is not to create a perpetual yard sale or a neighborhood kind of build-a-bear outdoor in your front yard. Um not Build-A-Bear, Quilted Bear. Quilted Bear. That's the one. Thanks. You've been there too many times.

Yeah, I've been here many times. Um because we're not we don't want people to compete with Quilted Bear. There's that they're doing a good business where they are and it's you know if you have that kind of interest and that inclination, great. There's a venue for you. But if you're creating things on site and maybe you are have honey bees and you want to sell honey, but you also do quilts and you want to sell quilts or you are growing fruits and vegetables on your property and want to have a little kiosk for that. this this kind of thing is our our that's our target is to try to find ways to help people do that kind of thing.

I'll just say I like it. I think it helps kind of facilitate future discussions with people coming and I think the intent of this is to let people be entrepreneurs but without turning it into every every house turn into a commercial opportunity. So I like I like the idea.

Yeah, I like it too. I support that. Thank you for all the research and the background work and trying to uh open up other opportunities for people in our community while not creating the perpetual yard sale. I appreciate that. As much as I love yard sales, I would I would like if if this comes for consideration or if it goes to city council, uh consideration of maybe reducing that that limit of 200 foot uh frontage maybe to something like 150 or get what the average is in Grantsville is a lot of the houses have been built over the last seven, eight years. They're on smaller lots and and but still stay at home parenting and opportunities for those kids to to help their mom run a business in this manner of selling their fruits and their eggs I think would be great. Not that smaller lot would have lots of chickens, but chickens seem to create eggs out of thin air sometimes. So,

um I I like it. Thank you for all that work and it's very intuitive. Is this something that you guys are wanting to keep with just the RM7 zoning or are you wanting to expand this to other zoning designations? I haven't thought about that piece yet. Um I do like the idea of kind of codifying this were some expectations, but I'd have to think more about that as far as other additional zone. Yeah. Oh, Commissioner Harox, sorry. Did you have any comments or thoughts on a new m micro entrepreneurship within the RM7 zone?

Yeah, I'm I'm I'm not definitely not against I think it's probably a good way to go, but I think yeah, like we talked, I think there's some little fine-tuning things that may need to happen. As far as like uh they said about the the zoning, I was really thought about the other zoning. Nobody's focused on the RM7 at this point, but um and I think the 200 feet might be like uh like you say by maybe average kind of get an idea of an average in the in the city. I mean, I know that's probably going to be difficult to do, but then we can kind of redis maybe adjusting that. Yeah, I love everything else about it. Okay.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chris. Thank you, Jason. Okay, we'll close that item then if that's okay, Shelby. And we will move on to item four, the discussion of the proposed amendments to chapters 2, 7, 8, 9, just say Grantsville Lang because there's a lot more in there than that. Okay. Has started out as three codes and then it went through the whole thing. Oh, I apologize. So, the proposed amendments to the Grantsville um conditional uses code Sorry, something must be cut off there.

Yeah, it pulled up weird right there.

Oh, and okay. Um so initially uh we were just amending the conditional use permits and sportsman's permits and then it went into a a whole rabbit hole that I went down and um definitions ended up needing changing. Um the use tables needed amending and so yeah it just went from there. But I will try and be fast when I go through these changes with you guys. So please bear with me. Um, chapter 2 definitions I went through um and have defined these a little bit better. So you know a block is just talking about the rightway blocks and so we just reference C city standards and master transportation plan cuz that's where that language is going to be. Um the clear view zone we actually call site triangle. So we just added the sight triangle. It initially said 40 ft. We've changed that to 30 ft and clarified it's from the back of the sidewalk. We defined community gardens concept plans. Um we defined conditional use permits. So a conditional use permit means a land that because of its unique characteristics or potential impacts on Grantsville City or surrounding properties may be incompatible in some locations unless specific conditions are imposed to mitigate or eliminate detrimental effects. A conditional use requires review and approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to this code. It may be allowed only when the approving authority determines that all required conditions can be met. Um conditional use permit means issued that may be repetitive. See the things I got to fix. Um on a specific property subject to conditions imposed by the approving authority to mitigate or eliminate detrimental impacts. The conditional use permit may be granted only when the approving authority determines based on this substantial evidence that all required conditions

can be met and that the proposed proposed use will be compatible with the surrounding properties. Then I defined detrimental impacts and mitigation uh condition that I won't read your ear off. Um we defined dwelling forplex um quadplex triplex um and two family duplex. These didn't have a definition and they just said four family. Um so a four family plex or quadplex means a single building containing four distinct self-contained housing units. Each unit with its own entrance, kitchen and bathroom designed to house separate families or renters under one roof as off roof often as an investment property or for multi-generational living with layouts that can be side by side, stacked or mixed. Um then we define a dwelling group. We define a triplex and we define what a duplex is. Um specifying on a duplex that it can be side by side and not stacked.

Great. We also defined um that they can um have no more than uh one kitchen in those. And then we do have our ADU language that defines that as well. We defined um final plat and final plan. Um we didn't have a definition for a final plan, but a final plat is the official legal recorded map. We reference um state codes as well as um Gratzfield land use code.

Shelby, can I back up just one thing? When you said back on the ADU piece, you're saying that they can only an ADU a permitted ADU can only have one kitchen. Is that right? So, and yeah. So, a we call it a dad, but a detached ADU can have one kitchen and a single family can have one kitchen. if you have an internal ADU that can have one kitchen, but you wouldn't want your single family to have five kitchens in it where you can rent five different spots.

So, if I'm just trying to think how this could work out if someone built a big ADU and say they had say we going to have our family area and then we're going to have an apartment above it. The family area has a kitchen area, but the apartment does as well. Is that so that would not be allowed then is what you're saying? I'm just trying to think through this. um and definition 90 that could potentially affect that. Yes. So, thank you for pointing that out. Great.

Um I've highlighted the flood plane um definitions as we are going through um chapter 5-3 of our MUN code and our flood hazard regulations. We are amending these. Um I am just waiting on definitions from the state and from FEMA to implement into our code. Um here handicap residential facilities it said part six but we've amended our code since then. So now it's part um eight. Um I have completely redefined um home occupation. Um so a home occupation is a profession or other economic activity conducted within a dwelling or its accessory structure by persons residing in on the premise. The use must remain subordinate to the primary residential use of the property and shall not alter the residential character of the dwelling or neighborhood. permitting intent. Any condition use permitted any conditional use permitted issued for a home occupation shall ensure that the residential character of the premise and neighborhood is preserved in case of uncertainty. The protection of the neighborhood residential value shall be paramount. And then I define frontage as 100 linear feet of continuous frontage along a public or a private road. So again, we are removing, you know, these smaller maybe town homes that may not fit into an occup a home occupation that's only 25 ft wide. Um, and so we have defined that at 100 ft. If you have any recommendations or specific conditions, please um is that um informed by any fire code or anything? That's a question I was gonna ask about the 200 feet.

No. No. Okay. Nope. It's just a um condition that has to be met. So, if I go apply for a conditional use permit for a home occupation and my lot's only 70 ft wide, I unfortunately would not meet that condition.

And I'm fine with the 100 foot and and just thinking about, you know, some of our town homes that will be the 20 foot frontage and firefighters arriving and not knowing what. Well, I mean, maybe the firefighters would, but emergency personnel or somebody being confused because they're so close together. It would be it would be hard to determine um without somebody directing you which unit they're supposed to be going to in emergency. That could be bad. But sorry. No, absolutely. And we have area restriction, client traffic, deliveries, employees, um noise and nuisance and exceptions. And so we do define that all under the home occupation. Um household pets um we did kind of change and define um

and I kept the lions and tigers. Oh my. And a household pet is a domesticated animal like a dog, cat or bird kept in a home for companionship and enjoyment not for profit or farm use except for normally dangerous animals such as lions or tigers. Um, I did speak with Tyson and it frustrates me that when I change this to a PDF, it's not showing all the comments, but I did have Tyson read this MDA um, definition. Our definition was not um, I mean, you can see it up here was not my favorite and I felt like it needed to be updated. Um, so Tyson, I don't know if you want to provide your opinion on um the new proposed definition or not.

So what do we call it before? We had a it was called a uh improvements agreement.

Agreement. That's right. Um Yeah, it's pretty self-explanatory. There's I mean, we we've got something called the an improvement agreement that we referenced before. That's kind of an archaic version of what we term now a a development agreement. We could really just superimpose those and say development agreement parenthetically improvement agreement. But the the uh the intent of the MDA is more clarified in the new definition. Um

what' you mention phases in there like multi-phase? So you have multing that's listed in there. Um I didn't want to be super specific of what it covers. We're just giving an example of what it covers. Yeah. like it and the intent would be that any developer that came in with a project would have a development. We cannot require um every project to have a development agreement. If they are meeting the city code, we can't require it. But if they're asking for PUD or an MDA or you know any sort of deviation okay to an extent we can require that.

Fair enough. Shelby, I do think some of the feedback I had was that so often between developer and a landownerclient that doesn't ne that doesn't really describe what it will often be in our for our purposes. It will often be between developer and the city. Just hit delete on this on my computer. Thank you.

Can we jump back up to the lions and tigers? Sorry. Um, maybe instead of except we could put excluding. Excluding normally dangerous animals such as lions and tigers. Is that No, I Yeah, I mean I as long as that's legally acceptable because we don't consider those or excluding those from the definition of household pets, right? Yeah. We could even just say household pet does not include normally dangerous animals. It's uh that I don't think that

in any context you can domesticate would be considered a domesticated animal like a lion or a tiger but don't give me an opportunity to own a lion or a tiger Tyson or or roosters. Well, even around here you'd find someone like a coyote or somebody be like, "Oh yeah, look, I've got my pet wild dog." It just wouldn't work. So wolf breeds. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Change that. Thank you.

Um, we did not have a definition for kennel permit class A. Uh, this is in our use table and so I defined it. This language is pulled directly out of our um animal control section of the code. Thank you.

Um, I defined a master plan. So we don't have a definition for a master plan similar to a you know site plan concept. So just define that um saying that it needs to meet city standards and chapter 11 site plan um requirements. I've highlighted open space improvements usable. Um I was not sure if we wanted to define those um better or if we like the definition that we have for those. I know those come up a lot. Yes. So, we'll have to This is just a discussion, right? Yep. Okay. Um, so if there's about that

any definitions that we need to add, uh, please let me know or if there's any language that you'd like to propose. Um, I defined an overlay district. Didn't have a definition for that. Um, just explaining that it's a zoning district applied to the property in addition to the underlying based zone. um defined a parcel of land, we would we referenced some other definition in our code. And so instead of referencing other definitions, let's just have a definition for it. Um define permitted use means a use of land that is expressly allowed within a zoning district. Um referenced. So the land use code changed from 10 9a um to 1020 and so I referenced state and so all these state codes define preliminary plat and what that means in accordance with the Utah code. Um defined preliminary plan in accordance with Utah code defined record of survey and really just referenced the Utah state code. uh both county requirements and municipal requirements. State code reference chapter 11 and city standards define sportsman's permit. Again, this language is pulled directly out of our animal control um requirements. Could that also go back to people and maybe this is different but you look at sporting dogs but also ones that are if someone's rate for hunting related purposes someone's breeding dogs for make to make for hunting dogs is that fall within this or is it separate from what you had before

it is separate but I did define sporting training or field trial says hunting related purposes could you I mean I'm just going legal ease but if someone says hey this is hunting related I'm breeding dogs I'm breeding bird dogs I don't does that fit within there or Yeah, if they're breeding bird dogs, they'd fall under. So, they're only allowed to have up to six. So, we don't count the puppies. Okay. All right.

Um, alley is not new. These definitions down here are not new. I did change them their location. So, we have streets and street road systems. It made sense to have all of our road requirements um changed and moved under the road requirements. So, alleyway was already here. Um, one thing that it's not under alley. Um, we have our arterial. I did add some language to it. A lot of this language will actually be removed um as we're not going to define how many trips here. It would be defined in our master transportation plan that we are um changing. I proposed a new definition for holdac. Um, we moved major street plan to here. Private lane, um, is the same. I just moved it down here. Private street, um, during the proposal of this definition, we were going back and forth of what the rightway width is. And in the code, we say you can have 32 feet of pavement, but then it needs to meet the city standard right away. And that's actually um would bring it up to 60 feet. And so in order to meet the park strip and the um sidewalk and curb gutter layout. So that's the only change I'm proposing on that is to change it from 54 to 60. I added this guy in here because it's supposed to be in here. Um accessory use and temporary use is defined under use. is what accessory use is. We reference um storm water facilities um specifying that open space cannot be used in a storm water facility. Well, what is a storm water facility if we

don't have a definition for it? And so here's the definition. Thank you.

So go back. What was your intent then with this as far as our definition? So, we're referencing in chapter 21 that you can't have open space in a storm water facility. But what is a storm water facility? And so, if we don't have a definition for it, how can we enforce that? And so, I added a definition for a storm water facility saying that it's a system of engineered structures like pipes, ponds, swells, filters designated to collect, control, treat, or convey rainwater runoff from development areas. If this is something that we don't want to enforce and we want to allow open space to be, you know, taught lots and things like that, put in a maybe a large retention basin, then we need to amend chapter 21 open space requirements and remove that language from there.

My recommendation would be to consider something like that as an option because I mean some of these where they're just become a noise and we no management. If there was other design for it to where it was actually used, we'd actually see better use out of that versus the weed patch. So that'd be my concern on this one. Not not the way you had defined here, but an overall use of saying that they're excluded from anything. We basically get it. Yes. So in chapter 21, and I can bring that back and propose that chapter 21 is what specifies that we can't use a storm water facility for open space. There have to be, I think, conditions on how like the size and everything. Obviously, you don't want a small one that has high inundation and or we'd have to work through that. But anyway,

yeah. Yeah. And that's the biggest thing is the city doesn't take anything less than 10 acres. And so how do we take a retention basin that's half an acre, right? And if our master development plans require some portion to be open space, but it's just going to be swells, then what's the point of right having the open space if there's not a use for it? I like it. Absolutely. Jason,

um, so I just added the conditional use permit definition here. I did relocate some things um and combine them. I added an approval criteria. Um, conditional use permit shall be approved if reasonable conditions can be imposed to mitigate and eliminate a reasonable anticipated detrimental impact if the planning commission upon operation authorization authorizing the community and development director, zoning administrator or their designate determines that the detrimental impact of the proposed use cannot be substantially mitigated through reasonable conditions. um just added community and development director their design. Um we did ask that a decision of the planning commission shall be included include findings of facts at the time of its ruling. So if you make a motion or recommendation to deny it or you vote against the conditional use permit, we're asking you to give us your reason um why you're voting against that. It is a requirement that's outlined in um section three and four of our code. And so we're just reiterating that we as staff need that.

I don't know why has to be dependable, right? Not based off of opinion. Yep. Yep. Got it. Um you'll see down below further I crossed out public hearing and I actually implemented it here. We notification requirement we were going into it and so it just made sense to combine those two. Great. um per SB 178 I believe is what it is. Um or House Bill 178 requires that we have a process for uses not listed on the table. So this is just complying. Okay. See the rabbit hole I went down.

Oh, and then home occupational uses. We just took the definition and we put it throughout home occupational use. Um so no more than 25% of the gross uh floor area. Um and no or 500 ft whichever is less. No outdoor display displays, storage or activity related to the occupation shall be visible from the joining properties. No more than two clients or customers per day may visit the premise. No on-site advertising or signage is permitted unless specifically allowed by the ordinance. Um, but sorry. Oh, go ahead, Jason.

One question we need to define and I'm just trying to think of possibilities here. If we define like customers or clients if you're having deliveries like UPS to go pick stuff up, is that considered a client or a customer? No, it would be if you have a hair salon at your house and you got eight. I'm just thinking of someone having deliveries if someone's going to say that doesn't count, but they're delivering everywhere anyway. I'm just trying to make sure we're I like what you have here and I like that we're defining this. That's all. I'm just trying to think through something else could come back on it. That's all.

I like it too. I was going to say on our other one for the micro entrepreneurship, um you you had a similar no no more than two clients or customers per day, but um I wonder if we could enhance that to say um on a regular day because for the micro entrepreneurship there probably would um garner more clients. on like the 4th of July weekend and the 24th of July and when we do our our community events like near the fire station, people are walking around neighborhoods, you might have more than two or three clients per or per hour, I think is what it said. Um so

um so I did is there a way like regular regularly or standard? Well, what is regularly? Well, and and that's why we're trying to define these and have these conditions. Um, what I did add is that it can be um additional clients can be approved by planning commission. So, if someone comes and says, "Hey, I'm going to actually have I anticipate 10 an hour." That's something you can determine if you want to approve unless you have a hard number.

Um, I mean, I can propose something, but it's just like throwing a dart at a dart board. I don't know what you guys want. Okay. So, if you have a number in mind later on in the week, just let me know. If not, I'll just throw the dart.

No, you've done a great job and all of these uh updates and enhancements are amazing. I I love them. But on the on the micro entpreneurship, if um if there's a way that we could um make it a little more friendly to big city events that you know we'll bring out more people. Um we don't want or or maybe just say in you know um I'll I'll look at a way of changing the language or proposing something. for you. You can do it. I have faith.

Um, so the PDF changed it a little bit. So, a lot of this isn't just changed and added. Yeah. Um, so a home occupation that requires a client to that come from the home for the service may be permitted, and this is already in our code, provided no more than two clients or customers per day. Physicians, therapists, or healthc care providers must obtain approval of the home occupation permit from planning commission. Um and then you have like the following activities shall be permitted. Um then artists, illustrators, writers, photographers, editors, publishers. And so this will all be combined.

So if someone has like a we say two two customers per you mentioned hair salon or someone has a massaging or whatever, they're only going to be able to have two customers a day and that's it for a home occupation. I can see trying to mitigate slow traffic and unknown cars driving through my neighborhood. I'm one that calls public safety personnel when there's unknown cars sneaking around my neighborhood looking for addresses. But um yeah, that

is there a recommended number that you guys would like to see or would you just like that completely removed? I think keeping in control, but I would say go back to what we said before, like we said, two per hour, not per day. Okay.

Um landscape plan and buffers. We really didn't have a landscape plan and we are trying to beautify our city, right? And so um yeah, I did a lot of changing on this. One thing I did change and it's not showing on here is that we don't require landscape plan for single family homes. Um, and while I understand that not all single family homes are HOAs, we are seeing a lot of them HOAs and we're seeing a lot of these retention basins that are now just a dirt with a hole in the ground and we could actually make those planted and have gravel or or grass that's maintained by the HOA if we're not just restricting it to multif family homes. So, I did propose that we do require a landscape plan with single family developments. If there's an HOA, like my HOA requires the front yard to be landscape, but they also require the swell to be dirt or rocks and void of vegetation because for whatever reason. But, um, I'm on board with this, but I I don't know if we want to put the owners on the city or just ensure that if there's a master development plan that is going to be an HOA, that the HOA bylaws reflects some sort of expectation where we're not just blowing dirt around and causing asthma. And is that the point or

Well, the Yeah, the point is to obviously beautify our city. If you drive down Dery Street, there's a big dirt hole in the ground that has 8ft weeds where you could lose, you know, my husband in it that's only like 5 foot, too. So, we're trying to reduce that. And that could be, you know, lawn and it's maintained by an HOA or, you know, and have some trees around it with maybe a park bench. But right now, that can't be required of the developer because of our code. I 100% support this. So I think especially on the smaller ones that aren't going to be maintained by an HOA, the only way we're going to have some way to try to get this built to a way that we can keep the city is to actually have it sort of control within a city ordinance that allows us to have a stick.

Yeah. Now, I'm not saying that we're controlling the front yards or the rear yards or anything like that. We're just saying, you know, park strips and a retention basin that is separate from the homeowner. And there's there's lots of street facing park strips and and things like that that that have weeds that are as tall as me. And and I don't we moved here 20 years ago and my son had the worst hay fever where he you know just because he was exposed to all those different pollins of all the weeds. Well, we moved into a an improved area that had weeds, but um center city. It's it is frustrating to um to see that people aren't caring for their lawns. Is that something that like the code enforcement people can do? And

yeah, if there's weeds and stuff, code enforcement can enforce that. Right now, we have um one we have one part-time animal control officer and one part-time code enforcement officer that we just hired. Um he does have um a law background or not but he used to be a police officer for Tw County law enforcement. Law enforcement. Thank you. Get late. So would this be would this also be applied? You talked about even small developers or anybody coming in. Anybody even applying for a single building permit would stop to meet this or no?

No. So this is for So like a single family lot, right? Or a single lot development isn't going to have a HOA maintained retention basin, right? that they would this is allowing us to to even have a small development that is isn't HO is only HOA or is it with any so if like a two to four lot subdivision came in they would have to put in um trees which is already required in our code without without chapter 9 in the swells or just as a land

in the park they're required to put trees in the park strip already um and so like if a two to four lot came in we would require trees but If they have just private rear swells, this wouldn't apply. We require them to plant trees in the park strip. Yes. Is that only if there's sidewalk or just our code says trees in the park strip but not in the swells?

Well, it depends on where the swell is. Is the swell in the park strip? Huh. Um, but with a landscape plan now, depending on where that swell is, could be required. And so that's why I'm proposing this only with a developer would be required to submit a plan of what they're going to do for landscaping. So a single single person going in purchasing a home would not be required to to meet any of these any of these statutes. No, because they're I mean maybe put a tree in in their park strip. But

I'm saying even like that like we say you're talking about things like using decorative rock and things on against that the front. This is what we're saying we'll allow in the park strip. Oh, okay. So, if a development comes in, they have to submit a landscape plan that's approved by you guys. So, we include that last not individual. That's what I'm asking. Yes. Correct. So, if I apply for a single lot development, I can make myself put in a tree, you know, but that's about it. I mean, Bill can make me put in a tree.

Thank you. Yes. Oh, sorry. I don't I do worry about the time that it takes to enforce that enforce. So if we require developers to submit a landscaping plan for their swells and their park strips and then then is you know are code enforcer or public safety going to be going around and writing tickets all day or

well I mean even if they don't have a landscape plan they they already are. But a landscape plan um is approved by you and I and then inspectors the building department inspectors ensure that it's put in at the time of CFO. Okay. So um we've allowed prohibited and permitted materials in the park strip. were allowing permitted hardscape and mulch materials, decorative rock, pavers, flag stone, concrete, um strips, prohibited material, and this prohibited material was already in the code. Um so asphalt was prohibited, material smaller than 1 in pearavevel, bark or wood chips, thornbearing plants, and visual obstructions were already in the code. Um again, we require street trees in chapters 14 and 15. And so here we're just defining it um utility clearance for water meters. Um we're just defining that it shall be no more than that. We need a two-ft circle around that meter. And then we have a purpose types of shade trees that are water efficient um shade trees that we like to see. A lot of these were actually in the code. It was It was weird, but it was stuck in chapter 4. Sorry, I was trying to find it. And it was just Anyways, it was stuck in chapter 4 and it didn't make sense. So, we moved it over here. Um, we allow shrubs, ornamental grasses, perennials. Could you go back up to that right there? So

these were already in the code. Yes, they're in chapter four. I can't remember what section is, but it was for sight triangle. And then next to site triangle is approved street tree list. So I'm just moving it here. I'm just uh can we consider adding what this olive tree a Russian olive? Yeah, you want to include that in the in the following species maybe consider a case by case cuz those things spread like wildfire. Yeah, we don't want to allow those.

They are invasive species. I would not recommend putting those under recommended trees. I mean, no, not under recommended trees, but the the ones that are considered on a prohibited. Oh, maybe under prohibited. Well, thorny bearing plants prohibited. There you go. Okay.

And then I changed the uses. There's a lot of uh commercial uses that are within the conditional use table that I pulled out of the residential zones. Um, and I place them in our commercial zones like a school of higher education, community colleges, off-campus facilities, schools, and professional vocational. I removed it out of the residential area and put it into a commercial zone. So, I'm not saying that we don't want the schools, right? We want them. We're just saying, hey, Yep. Gotcha.

Sorry, guys. I can promise I'm trying to be fast, but Oh, we keep interrupting you, too. This is a lot of work.

Um, and then I took all the definitions out of chapter 2 and put them that refer to a sign and put them in chapter 20, sign definitions. Again, why are we having definitions in multiple locations that are conflicting with each other? So, I just made it easier for staff and to be able to review that. And then we changed the language for improvement installation guarantee. Um, we're wanting city council to approve the bonds and approve when developments go into warranty and come out of warranty. Um, and so that's essentially what we defined and that's it.

Wow. Well, no more vacation for you. This is what you're going to do on vacation. Thank you, Shelby. Thank you. That's amazing work. Help from all of staff. Yes. Thank you. All of your staff. I can't even imagine the patience perseverance that and the tears and the sweat and the blood that went into that. But much cleaner. Thank you. Do we will that come to us for approval or does it just go to city council?

No, it would it it'll have to come from you guys for uh recommendation to city council. Okay. Okay, but my question to you guys is that something that you still want me to pursue is all these changes? Absolutely. No, that's fantastic. Let's shore up those just those couple items and thank you. I don't know anybody who could have tackled that. Okay, we'll close number four and move on to item five, approval of minutes from the January 6, 2026 planning commission regular meeting. Sorry, Commissioner Horox, did you have any questions on the last item on the

No, you guys, you guys are doing fine. I I I I agree there a few little changes that we need to make, but uh that was it was uh well prepared. Okay, thank you. Make make sure that if you have any comments on that to send them to Shelby as she's finishing this those up and that'd be great. Okay. Um, approval of minutes. Do you have any comments on those? Do we need to state in the comment? I know Commissioner D was the one that brought this up, but we had some we had some typos in one of in the the zoning on the one um

approval we made that we needed to just make sure those were captured and adjusted. So, the NDA is that what you're talking about? Yeah. There was we we just need to clean it up. I think we brought up and said we need to fix it. It was there, but that was one thing we approved, but we needed to be make sure it was clarified that they were amended to coincide with what we approved. Yeah, it was amended in the city council. And

I'm just from our minutes that we said we approved it, but that what we approved was there was a typo. As long as that typo is fixed, I'm fine with that. Other than that, I have no no other issues with it. I don't think it was in the motion when you guys approved the MDA template is what I think you're talking about. And uh he brought something up, but um it didn't say to amend it in your motion. Sarah mentioned to bring it up at city council is how I remember it. Yeah. For cloud court. The amendment was made before it went to city council. Okay. Yeah. those kind of dimminimous changes like typos and it was and stuff like that did that.

Okay. Thank you. You have a great memory. I'll make a motion to approve the the minutes from the January 6, 2026 planning commission meeting. Second. Thank you, Commissioner Hox. All in favor? I I Okay. Uh we'll close item five and move on to item six, a report from city city staff.

Um they extended the time to apply for the UAPA awards for the asphalt preservation. I did apply for two of them, the city's um asphalt preservation, the largest one, and then asphalt. So fingers crossed that we went. They extended it till when? I think the 26th of January. Oh wow. Thank you for your perspence on that one.

Just really quick, we've been working on an annexation policy plan update and hope to get that in front of you for discussion only. um next planning commission meeting and then similar to this where we'll introduce it and discuss it. If you have any changes or thoughts or concerns, we'll iron those out before the public hearing and then we'll help that hold that public hearing and get that going. Great. Thank you.

Okay. Sorry, I'm writing as fast as I can. Is there anything else, Shelby or Nicole? Nope. Thank you guys. Thank you. Thank you, Bill. Uh, open form for planning commission. You have anything? Commissioner, I'm good tonight.

Okay. Yeah. I I just want to say I I feel kind of bad when people come up and pro propose public comments and they feel like they aren't being heard because we aren't allowed to uh respond back, but I feel like the Grantsville City website is got all the information that they could ever want. And um I was going to offer your door is always open, but please do. We really honestly if you guys have questions, reach out to Nicole or I and we can either point you in the right direction or send you that information and I'm happy to sit down and meet with you all. So

yeah, those those were good comments, but it just takes a little bit of research on those folks parts when they have concerns. I feel like the the website and the resources are all there at their fingertips and and uh um

the process is well documented and we're follow state code and so sometimes I'm just flabbergasted that people can accuse us of not caring and we do care and we sit here but we can't respond. That's unfortunate. Okay, anything else? Okay, we'll close that item. We'll move on to the report from city council agenda item eight.

Okay, I've got a couple things for you um for this commission. Uh first thing is we will be discussing and potentially recommending John Montgomery to serve on the planning and zoning. That is Mayor Hammond's recommendation and we'll um we'll vet that in our upcoming city council meeting on Thursday this week, not tomorrow, but Thursday. Um in regards to uh what happened in our last meeting, we had three items that were before us

to um approve three different ordinances that had come before this body. Um the first one being was the the MDA and the easement access rights for the plow court minor subdivision. That was approved by city council. Um the next one would be the changing of the RM15 zoning designation to CN for the um for the locations there on North Center Street across the street from the fire station. That was approved as well.

Um thank you. And then the last one um was really the corner of Maine and Booth um to change that from commercial um development district to RM15 and that was not approved. So the council split on that and Mayor Hammond um voted um in opposition to approve that ordinance. So keep keep Main Street commercial as much as we possibly can was was I think the kind of the thoughts. Um the other thing that I wanted to talk about is something to just mention. So with public comment there was a new approach that uh Mayor Hammond um kind of went about in our last meeting allowing public hearing. uh we have public comment that can happen but if we're going to have a public hearing have the public hearing prior to the discussion of the particular item which like today it it really happened a happened and then B happened and they were just happened to be similar in nature right and then one happened and then two happened um and I'm not necessarily going to tell you guys necessarily what to do but if if an item is down the line maybe our approach to having the public come up and to be able to express their opinion on a particular item and then the commission um just like the council is going to start doing the the commission starts to discuss that item immediately after that portion of the public hearing. So, it's it's an interesting approach. Um I'll I'll just bring it before you think about it. Um, you can talk with staff and see if they're okay with with changing that.

But that does that does allow you to take notes, which we do anyways. Right. Right. and to potentially not really answer questions, but maybe hit some of those bigger issues. And um especially if they're they're they're a um hot button topic. And it it maybe makes the the citizens feel um I would say a little bit more heard um in those regards because it the discussion would ensue right after the public comment would be closed. So, kind of like that idea. Little bit different approach. Um, it was Mayor Hammond's idea for city council meetings. We thought it makes a little more sense to still have I mean, we allow public comment. um and people can come up and and that's that's standard for all of our meetings at the beginning. But if we're going to have a specific public hearing on something um to have that public hearing just before we we start to discuss it and then you know either table the issue or make a decision at that time. So there you have it.

Thank you. I think we'll consider that. Chris, did you have a comment about that? No, it was the same thing. I think I I think it's not a bad idea. definitely a consideration. Um, if there's one thing I could just um encourage the commission um to do is when we do have public comment, please um set some ground rules um prior and um help the public understand what the purpose is of the hearing and uh and to try to set a time frame um to a lot so that you know all people involved may have an opportunity to to be heard. elves. Yep. I appreciate that.

If you'd like me to be the the timekeeper, I'm more than welcome to. So, I thought about asking you prior to the meeting and I just should have listened to my better self and say, "Hey, I'll volunteer for that." That that might have um changed uh a little bit what what happened a little bit earlier. Help people focus a little bit.

Yeah, absolutely. One thing I thought of too was if someone wants to come up, they have their minute to speak and then they can't come back up again and keep coming unless there's some real issue unless we have an adversion to that. But I mean he we had one individual who said what he wanted to say, but then he just kept which is why you need to set ground rules. Right. Um prior there are individuals in in um citizens can can actually lend their time. I mean that's I don't know if that's a Robert rules of order thing or not, but um I've seen that in the past. So, but but you're in charge of the meeting. You're the chair and so you can set those ground rules as long as they're within um within reason. Right.

Absolutely. And I would expect people to be reasonable. And I think um having people have their let let people have their say the one time uh today was we had two different items on the same kind of the same subject or the same properties at least. And it it's hard to limit people when they feel like they're not being heard to try to limit them even more. But um thank you for that guidance and we'll try to incorporate some of those in the future especially when I see when I when we come in and the room is packed. But honestly being up at that podium and trying to speak your piece makes me nervous enough that I could just throw up. I I've been there and um I don't know why anybody would want to draw out that time any longer than what is absolutely necessary for them to say their peace. But we'll set some ground rules and tell them that they need to maintain focus and be reasonable and be civil.

Thank you. Time frame. Um I can't remember is it two minutes or three minutes there? Three minutes. Typically it's three minutes that we allow. Okay. I think that's pretty standard. So when we have people that more than 10 people that might want to say something or more than five people because Gary can get up there. Sorry. Um Jerry could get up there and talk for several minutes on an item. Absolutely. So um yeah, I just encourage that. And I think you'll find if we do change our approach with those publicity portions of the meeting and have the discussion right after, I think individuals will feel like they're they're more heard. So,

okay. Anyways, I would I would actually strongly encourage that. I like that. Anything else? Okay. Thank you, R. We'll close that item. We'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. I'll make a motion to adjurnn. I'll second. Second. Oh, I beat you that time, Chris. All in favor? I I I Thank you.