Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Are you ready? Okay, we'll go ahead and get started. Um, our first item is the pledge and Sheldon's going to lead us in that. All right, if you can please join me for the pledge of allegiance. 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.

Okay. Are there any conflicts of interest today? Um, on item item 5.2, I'll recuse myself. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. And then um approval of the minutes for July 16th and August 6th. And I had one um amendment on the August 6th uh minutes on item 5.5 and 5.6. Um my name needs to be replaced with Andy Pal's name on the vote. Do we have a motion? I'll make a motion to approve item 3.4 with the changes that Andrea mentioned. Second. All in favor?

I I All right. And then next item, um 4.1, presentation and review of the Herman City 2025 moderate income housing plan. And is um Susan Pram here. Madame Chair, I just received word that she is arriving late due to a previous um meeting conflict. So, if we could just move that item to the end of the agenda. Perfect. Okay. Thank you. So, we'll move on to 4.2. Review and consider a conditional. Oh, I'll make a motion to move that to the end of the agenda. Second. All in favor? I.

Thank you. Okay. 4.2 review and consider a conditional use permit for a new 80 foot tall wireless cell tower. And it sounds like the applicant is online. Thank you. Yes. Thank you very much, Mark Williams. Thank you for letting me remotely. I really appreciate that. I did have the person. Thank you. Thank you. And then um looks like Michael's going to present.

I do know that my colleagues and Cooker in the room as well and they may talk at some point. Just want to introduce them. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay. This is an oh this is an item that the commission is familiar with in that we recently reviewed uh a proposed amendment to the city code to regulate these wireless communication facilities and we looked at this property as kind of like an example or um a concurrent application that was tabled. So the commission has seen this item once before. This is the appro approximate area of the of the property in the city. um a closer uh view of that property. You can see that there is a commercial uh area that is yet to be developed uh to the east of the site and then an existing residential neighborhood further to the east. Um we've also have been looking at other commercial development uh further west and to that southwest corner of the property. Um, as the commission is well aware, historically the city has encouraged our um, cellular companies at identifying locations that could be a stealth solution where the where the w the uh, arrays are essentially screened such as this um, kind of pseudo um, clock tower at Haramman High. We've also have done them um on taller poles like at a football uh high school stadium and and other places. But these facilities really do require uh essentially a line of sight uh as far as making them effective. And we've also have previously required that they be located on either um quasi or public quas public or quasi public properties which have been um growing uh far less available as our residential and commercial properties have been developed within the city. We're just not having enough of these uh public

sites that are eligible for um citing these um wireless facilities. So with that, the city did approve a recent amendment to now allow um these private nonresidential sites to be a potential location for a wireless communication facility. So this site is a C2 zone. It is a conditional use. Um it can be up to 80 feet tall. We are requiring collocations and there are some stealth tools that may be required if it's justified in the code. All of those standards have been attached in your packet of materials. And again, as we've talked about, any condition of approval um or requirement or even if you find a motion for denial must be based on on those standards that are attached in your packet. Um the the applicant submitted evidence previously is showing that the site is underserved. That was one of the requirements demonstrating that there is an unmet need. Um again this is a detailed u proposal that's in your packet showing the actual location. Something that um I did not address in your staff report is this proposal is at an existing commercial site and there will be a displaced parking stall. When we looked at the planning commission approval for this site, it required I believe it was 50 or 51 parking stalls. the current quantity of stalls that are um present still meet that requirement. However, um Blake Thomas, the community development director, had reviewed the building permit require that was issued for this site and it identified I think it was 53

stalls that were being provided. Anyway, there's some concern that maybe that in approving this site, there might be um a displacement that has to be cured. Um but that still is subject to review and so staff is recommending that that will be a condition of approval. So again, these are the elevations for the um proposed um wireless installation. As mentioned, this is a definitely a a balancing act trying to balance what are the community's interests for service versus also that um impact potential impact on on uh visual uh the visual impacts on the prop uh on properties. Is there a potential claim for having a negative uh monetary impact potentially? I mentioned in my staff report that I I studied that issue out and you can you can find studies on both sides of that issue. And then there's a statement in the um federal telecommunication um code that talks about that if we were to rely on that type of a study, we would likely need to commission a study specific to this site to justify uh denial essentially of services at this location. we can't essentially use some other third-party study on that issue to justify that impact on this particular location. So, I just am encouraging you to be cognizant of that fact if there is some concern among the planning commission at at citing uh a cellular uh lo service at this location. So again the recommendation is that uh for approval making sure that we do comply with all applicable standards and then identifying that second one again not addressed in your packet as far as if there is a uh we're going to require or recommending that the PL that the

applicant provide an updated off- streetet parking calculation and if it is determined that that displaced parking stall uh would put the property into non-compliance And then as part of this application, they would have to provide an additional parking stall to maintain that compliance. Um, any questions for me at this time? Obviously, the applicant is is prepared to address um or I think he's planning on making a presentation to you as well or at least going through some points of of interest or concern for you. Any questions for me at this time? Okay, I'll just leave this exhibit up for for reference. Okay,

Mark, did you want to go ahead and present?

Yes, thank you very much. I really appreciate it. Um, again, I appreciate you having remotely. Thank you for having me when I was there last time. What I'd like to do is talk about why you should approve this facility and this application. and concluding with that balance and Mr. Because upon reflecting on that balance, I think you'll conclude that this should be approved acceptation from staff. As I think we all know these facil these devices that we have are essentials in our everyday life. Inheriting residents rely on wireless services as their primary means of communication with each other, with businesses they communicate with and between businesses who do commerce in the city, with healthcare providers, importantly with emergency providers, uh and parents with schools and vice versa and other uses. In other words, the essential elements of communications in life are used wirelessly these days. Rarely do we have a land and residents also want the latest in uh technology for video AI health care apps when you have remote health issues or remote appointments and more. And as Mr. Malloy one screen. We'll show you a couple of one other there is unequivocally and indisputably a significant gap and coverage in that area that materially inhibits the

provision of services and deployment of newer technology going forward in the future that the that the residents and businesses need. And from our perspective, both Utah federal law require approval of these of this site. I'll talk about that in a while. Mr. Mo just discussed the issue of a possible um decrease in property values for consideration. As he also pointed out, there is zero evidence of that in this proceeding. You have to look at this proceeding itself. In fact, our packet that we've provided and you've seen this in for the statistics are that of 90% of single family home buyers consider an area sell services somewhat or very important when buying a home. 87% of prospective home buyers identify faster mobile home internet connections as somewhat or very important when looking at 5G or I will tell you that I know that many young folks looking for a home or an apartment, many folks my age also when they go into a new home or some place, one of the first thing they check is the number of that's an important requirement for writing homes. So from that perspective, the evidence is that it's needed in this area. I'm going to talk about why this location is best to to fill the gap, but it's also best because it's adjacent to right now a development which will be developed which will further buffer um

any of the residences to the east from the facility. It's adjacent to a gas station, restaurants, and other business services uh and establishments. And it will also hold three carriers. Uh there's three major carriers now. T-Mobile is applying for this. Verizon and AT&T. Those are important. That's an important factor that you talked about a couple of meetings ago. the affiliated colon to us to be able to deliver that this application for you. What that means also is that there will be less sites um in the area because uh they can any other will be directed to this site and there will be plenty of space in there to be able to put on the ground. Um this facility will also provide service along the highway adjacent that goes uh southeast and northwest roads are which are heavy traffic areas and I think at least in one of the meetings that I had the privilege of hearing before you one or more commissioners indicated that they have experienced a drop call or bad service and there have been fairly resident complaints. Um so uh this application as as the staff board notes meets all the code requirements. Uh it will meet the conditions that we proposed. Um and without this site the service will be further and there is no other location which will provide the service and you may also recall that Mr. Sher Sher indicated in a previous meeting that T-Mo has been working on finding a site for this for this area for a long

time and team already has the contract for this site. It is part of a commercial project on a small piece of land which probably has no other use but will serve a lot of folks in that area. Now, one of the things that's discussed in the report is I'll talk a little bit more about that. Um, but u we propose painting a style or a different whatever color which will be and blend in the area because doing so will make it more ubiquitous going forward as people in our experience will just ignore it after a while. A a stealth facility such as a pine tree would look odd in this place. Um a a large cover these facilities would also look like um candy apple on a stick and not be it would be obtrusive. Um the uh a some sort of steeple or something like that would not work and I'll explain about that a little bit more in a couple minutes. By by by approving this application, you're not creating a precedent, if you will, for future facilities that need to be this way because the way the code is written, by the way, we appreciate the ability to work collaboratively with airmen on upon the code. Each facility needs to to be judged and passed upon its own facts and circumstances, which is what the commission does, what the staff does, what the commission does. And so you can approve and that's why the way it was written is that it can be certain aspects of of of technology

including but not limited to and the reason for that is because a it gives you the ability to to work with those criteria and I'll walk through those in a couple minutes but also we don't know what comes up in the future. It will allow you to have that that flexibility going forward. So then you should approve this facility because it meets the code requirements. It also meets at least six of the eight stealthy requirements that are in the code uh which you have and which again is not is not exclusive and and it's not inclusive in the sense that you have to to comply with each one of these and these are section 10-35-7 subb and I'm not going to read them verbatim but the B C D E F G and H so six of them and they include you know matching the colors of the facilities that you see right there on the facility itself will match the colors that so that they will be as leastrtusive as possible. Um we'll um we'll make sure that the cables are inside the hole where the conduit is minimized and need it so that it's not intrusive. Um it it will uh will paint the color color of the sky as as the code notes. We'll have paint of durable quality so that it doesn't um look uh I'll use the word shabby over a period of time and it will be filled with weather resistant materials. So as planned this particular freestanding facility which is allowed out of the code already comply with a number of these requirements. We're also familiar folks with Utah

section 10-9A-507 which discusses the presence of mating facts support the conclusion um that the commission should approve this facility and those are again it's a small property as Mr. C2 property next to adjacent undeveloped commercial land which at some point will be developed um and there are other business in the area and while there are residential are the units in the area uh it's important for them to get service that's where that balance that you talked about comes in and I'll talk about in a moment um it will will hold up to three carriers which is another mitigating factor another mitigating factor is our original application some time ago wanted a 100 foot facility and in working through the code with the staff and and then you all and the city council we we agree that you should limit it to 80. So we mitigated that the the um height but it didn't allow service to the roads to the RLS Academy University of Utah and SLCC campuses nearby businesses and residents in the area. So it's a needed service in a in a hightra area and resolve the complaints about service. Um these steps all the ones we've discussed mitigate any detrimental max per compliance with both with the code Utah law and federal. Now no additional stealth should be required. I just went through some of the reasons why from the actual but let's pretend that you did a flag didn't You took the array away there.

What that would limit it would limit the size of the canister and it wouldn't provide be able to have future technological attachments on it or behind it like 5G or advanced 5G or 6G going forward because it would be in the pole. Um that would also be somewhat intrusive and noticeable. It would it may not be able to allow other carriers because they may want something a bigger array. that would be helpful. Um, a square would tighten this area. It would um and at most you might be able to uh fit one other carrier in there because of the skeleton that's required. It would be obtrusive and it would just sit out like a sore thumb if you would and wouldn't allow for additional carriers. So that would be way against the policy that this commission want. The cost also of doing in this particular area facility would be um significant and u and therefore technically not able to be uh accomplished um and it just wouldn't make sense to to have the the facility and that would be a further detriment to the service in the area where a significant gap already exists. Um and uh facility really strikes a a a balance and I like that that that little balancing of slight it provides service where it is desperately needed because there's a significant gap in a traffic most of the elements of the stealthing many of them

it allows collocation of carriers and and it reduces the number of facilities that are out there as as the staff report notes if it's not proposed we we you may well see more facilities something to be built in the area and Mr. I'd like to just go through just a few of the slides the PowerPoint. Would you like to share or do you want to run through them? I have a page.

Uh our communications team would probably need to manage that. Uh do you want to coordinate that with him Mitch? Can you see?

Yeah, we can see that now. Well, we can see your desktop. You don't see the power. There you go.

Well, as I indicated, it's walked through this before. One of the priorities of of the Herman city general plan was to bring economic out development opportunities um and be flexible to respond to shifting trends, needs and impacts. Man, what providing this allowing this facility will allow the creation and location of smaller business spaces, people can work from home, opportunities for local businesses, those may develop that undeveloped site and uh it will allow airman to attract and diversify the types of businesses in opportunities in the city and support opportunities for entrepreneur spaces and startups by encouraging work units in mixed use areas which is the area that you have. Uh it notes that there needs more fiber and fiber will go to this facility because it needs to communicate and that's going to be important important help as I indicated um previously um the um there is 98% of adults on a cell phone and app Most American adults and most children are are wireless only and smartones which is advanced technology. The use of of this traffic data on wireless facilities is increasing exponentially. I went through this before about 57% of

prospective home buyers identify fast loan service as important and that's the citation to that that survey Mr. This particular slide here. This is why I said they're not always more appealing. This is a a pine tree. If you can imagine a pine tree area, I think you would agree that it's not suitable for that area. These are the moists that I talked about. I just don't

I've never seen something like this. Although that is a copy of I just haven't seen one and looks like lollipops on top of a stick which is more intrusive because the shroud needs to go way out to be able to do it. And if you can imagine this all the way down in that area, it's going to be a box which can be much more intrusive. This is a this is sky blue to be painted other but this is what it looks like becomes more ubiquous uh from a view and this facility is proposed a facility facility I talked about as you know the the telecommunications act of 1996 uh regulates the the placement, construction and modification of personal riding facilities and and it just it it notes that that a local jurisdiction can in fact regulate but there are certain things that that must be considered and one of them is that there can't be a probate prohibiting the provision of services in this instance the evidence demonstrates that that it's not that that will occur um we have to pack this whole thing. So I'm happy to walk through it, but I want to respect your time and I want to get to the uh talk about that facility right here. That's where the location went through that. It went through these as well. What I want to get to is here is the

existing service right now. The yellow area is where there's significant gap in service and this is a significant amount of you know the science stadium the corridor and of businesses and residences in this area. Yet when we have the facility, it's going to be built and all of those areas of high density like the stadium where people want to have video the campuses um along this way will be able to be served which is important. As I indicated, it does promote the goals of a comprehensive plan and protecting and promoting public health, safety, and welfare and ensuring that residents can always connect with emergency 911 healthcare services, which is the really the way that people do that these days. Allowing the deployment of high speed internet technology to drive economic growth and improving property values by attracting new residents with improved connectivity and new opportunities. Because of that, These are showing the photographs or post site the facility. And you can see if you had a big steeple square be much more intrusive than these facilities here. you're familiar with with with this code section and I went through it and as you know we can't impose a requirement that that complaints with federal law you indicated that that not on the facility

will materially provision services and itself requirements but would also make it technically feasible for us Um, I've already gone through the mitigating backers here. I won't repeat myself. Um, just want to thank you for the ability to to present to you today to run through some of these slides that you've already seen, but just to refresh your reflection on them. And we approve the application to best serve the residents of Harman and to further the Hering general plan and apply Utah federal law. I really just appreciate your time and I'm would be pleased to uh answer any questions or have any further discussion and uh I don't know if Mr. Shuster or Mr. comment but that's up to you Madam Chair because your This is your show.

Thank you. Do we have any questions for the applicant? No, I don't. Okay. Thank you, Mark. Um, any discussion?

I've got a thought and I know we've kind of been over this and I missed the first round of this a couple months ago and was only involved in the second round when this is third. Uh, I think it's third if not more. But it's uh pretty obvious that uh you know we want to just I don't know maybe I'm a little too blunt but just slap some paint on it and call it good. Um which yeah I you know there's maybe some technical issues to doing that but slap some paint on it is what I keep hearing again and again and again. Um, so one thought I had, and this is a thought I just wanted to bounce off council or commission, what if we were to have an artist slap the paint on there, uh, you know, maybe we do a, you know, 10% of the cost of construction could go towards uh, the artist applying some paint so we get something more interesting than just flat blue thrown on thrown on the tower. I like the idea of a tower. We need coverage. I live out in that area. I could use more coverage. Yep. But I'm wondering what, you know, could we maybe ask for, you know, 10% of the cost of construction go to an artist, you know, doing something more interesting than just slapping blue on it?

I could see that. Or I mean, for me, honestly, my only issue is I won't I prefer stealth and I don't consider paint slapping paint as stealth.

Infeasible to me is not cost. We're not supposed to look at cost. That's one of our chargers of our board is that we don't look at cost at all. Um, and I didn't hear that putting on uh uh other types of um stealth options makes it so that the thing doesn't work. So, I'm not So, stealth to me is still an option we should still try and achieve. I kind of like the idea of either your idea, Jackson, or a water tower since that whole area is a water tower. Uh there's a ton of water out there. Um, and so I think it makes total sense to put it here. I think we just need to define what stealth we mean and paint is not enough to me.

Yeah, slapping paint on it is not stealth. That's why I'm wondering if we make it an art feature instead of, you know, if they want to use paint. That's an idea. Maybe we just, you know, I think we'd have to see what that looks like for myself to be honest. I don't know how else

to not to counter. I I agree. I I think I would prefer some sort of a stealth overp paint, but Jackson and while I I I like that idea in a lot of instances, I don't think that that would qualify by definition as stealth either. So, I I don't think that that fits this project. I do like the idea like the utility boxes having that or you know, but I just don't know if this instance that would be appropriate necessarily. But then to like a water tower or, you know, we showed the display of the Herman High School one. I I could see no problem with having something like that right there and it just saying Heramman City on top or I mean, my goodness, it's in a commercial area. Maybe you put signage up on it. I don't know, you know, depending on if it qualifies for the signage rules or I don't know. There's plenty of options I feel like for Stealth other than what was shown. But I do agree, we definitely need this here.

I had a conversation with a police officer uh regarding this area and they were he was very clear that this is an issue troubled area with communication there. Oh, I I get calls dropped all the time and I drive it every day. So I agree. Again, not an issue with location. Location's great. To me, I think still needs to be addressed. It's awesome. We And we need stealth to go with it. Paint is not stealth. Yeah. And so I'm wondering if we make it an art feature. Well, is that um the water tower, the things like that, is that conducive to ultimately having three arrays on it?

Yeah, I guess no was the answer. Okay. This is your mant. We're not bartering, right? We're we're not bartering, right? Like this is us talking as commission. So, um

Well, because I'm like with Jackson, you know, is it stealth or it's like I would prefer making it a an intentional feature than trying to hide it because it's like the thing's 80t tall. Do we just use what it is and not try to make it look like a fake tree? It's like make it a feature instead of something that looks fake. Maybe it's, you know, like I said, 10% of construction cost goes to art, an artist, and the artist does the paint. I I like your idea. Honestly, I just think I would want to see it before I would I I don't I have a a lot of different opinions on art and so since it's so large

and that that to me makes me a tad nervous. I really like personally more of like the the ones we've done around the schools or I know Bluffdale has a killer water feature like it it looks like a water tower and I think it looks really cool and so I like that. Um so that that's kind of where I think we just need to agree. He's he's just been very again and again mentioned the fact that they don't want to do it. So maybe there's an in between where or something where we, you know, get something else out of it.

But I don't feel like he's we're proving that it's infeasible. The the whole point of our code is infeasible. Like it literally can't be done. And I'm hearing it can be done. It doesn't it expensive. That's what I heard. And it's a cost. Yeah. But that's not what we I mean, we put on percentages on requirements on everything and that all has costs. So, so I I don't think we can equate that. Back to my comment, I don't think uh it's conducive to having multiple arrays and that's uh the economic values in having more than one array, but we don't know that there will be more. I mean,

no, we ability to have them. Yeah, they're not constructing the arrays day one. All of them arrayed. Well, not all at once. Yeah. I don't know, guys. I'm not that opposed to paint. I do like the idea of breaking it up. Maybe I'm not saying camo, but uh something um but I don't mind paint.

Well, how far away from residential housing is this? I don't know the exact distance but remember we required uh the height of the pole to be equal to or or less than that distance and this does qualify with that requirement. So it meets that standard. I did want to and it sounds like Commissioner Jacobson is keeping this in mind. The the section of the code that I had cited in my staff report says uh the wireless facility shall be stealth unless the applicant demonstrates that a stealth design would be technically infeasible or would prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services. And then number one, stealth elements and techniques should be used to blend the facility with the surrounding materials and colors of the support structure or make the facility appear to be something other than a wireless facility. Stealth elements include but not limited to the following and then that's that list. So I really think that that is the key is uh is it technically infeasible or would prohibit the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless services

and requiring a stealth solution and that's why I threw out the idea of a water tower is because that area does have a lot of water tower uh water tanks uh because of where it's at. So, I don't think we need to I personally don't want to solve the stealth solution tonight, but I don't feel like we've addressed the feas infeasible. Like, I I could understand if they were saying, you know, we put this, we put the the Heramman watch tower look and it physically doesn't fit the lot and we put the water tower and it physically doesn't fit the lot. Like, I don't feel like we've proven that yet.

Maybe Well, maybe the answer is this that we could approve it if it's anything but just paint. If it's anything but paint, we could approve it. I don't know if that's then then they have to come up with stealth that's not paint or we could approve it with a stealth requirement to have it come back for us to see it. Right. Yeah. Yeah. There you go. Because I think the location everyone feels like the location is the right place. Yeah. Location is the right place. I don't think we're fighting the location at all. It's just the service is a stealth type option. And then that's where to me we could I'm I'm comfortable even I mean I I'm comfortable approving it with a stealth option but it needs to come back for us to review what that is.

That's pretty much in our ordinance already too. Okay. Or we continue it and they do the same thing. Like to me it's like one and the same. I I really have no issue and I want to say this like 400 more times. No issue with location. It is truly and no issue with height for me. But you're wanting an an enhanced stealth. I'm actually I'm actually wanting something that is stealth painted stealth. That that is one of the tools, but they're not you're not limited to requiring just that, right? You can require more,

but stealth, like Mike said originally, and that's what I kept looking to in the in in the packet is it's more than paint. And it's it's actually doing it can be at a minimum, but it could also be galvanized. Like to me, that's the same difference. Galvanized versus blue. Like maybe great. You want to Yeah. Everybody go ahead and will you please state your name? Yes,

for sure. Uh Rock Shuter, uh representing Skyway Towers. Thank you for the discussion. Maybe just a couple quick points. Thank you commissioners um um for your time tonight in this um this matter. Um two things related to what we're talking about right now. One um I think you might recall that when we when we started this process and the last time we were before you, we kind of talked about the genealogy of how we got today, how we got to here today with this proposed location. Um which started in 2018. And to remind you, we spent the first 2 years trying to figure out a collocation option at Providence Hall at the charter school on I believe it's an 80 foot, it might be a 100 foot cell stealth structure there at the charter school that Verizon built. Um, we spent two years trying to figure that out. Um, that sounds like a long time. it didn't it didn't go very smoothly and sometimes we don't exchange information really well between T-Mobile and Verizon but um ultimately so at Providence Hollywood just like you have at Herman High School or excuse me not Herman High School but at uh um what is the other um

Mountain Ridge Mountain Ridge not at Mountain Ridge yeah at Harman

yeah no at Herman High School yeah so you have a which Verizon also built so you have a four-legged tower And I I don't have the dimensions in front of me right now, but I'll bet you that those four legs are 20 ft apart. And then you have that structure that goes up and then you have the mass on top that hides where the antennas are. Um, one of the specific constraints that we have on this location where we've leased space from the property owner is we have a ground space that will not allow that kind of footprint. Um, where we're occupying a parking space um, which Mr. Mole referred to um we we can't physically get a mass type structure with four legs even three legs within that small space. Um so that's a constraint that we have. Um and that parcel is um I mean it's fully developed. Um we we we were trying our best to not take up a parking space but we're also trying to accommodate for future collocation. So just two comments. I mean, there's many parts of your city that need additional facilities. I was talking to a resident um at the start of this meeting about service, and I appreciate the the um acknowledgment that the site is we're not arguing about whether the site's needed or not. Um but just noting that at Haramman High School and that Providence Hall, those two stealth applications that have been approved and built, there's no additional tenants. Um, and I would venture to guess, well, from a T-Mobile standpoint, there's not an additional tenant at Providence Hall because we can't make that structure work for us. Um, the other limiting factors with regards to stealth is so it works for one carrier. I won't argue that at all. It definitely works for one carrier, but that's where your ordinance can be in conflict. When you push so hard for stealth and you're also encouraging collocation,

your ordinance can be in conflict with it with itself because you oftent times can't achieve collocation because of the type of stealth application. So anyway, just just some thoughts related to your discussion. Um, one quick, and this is getting a little bit technical, but um, every carrier has their own network puzzle that they're trying to put together, right? So, every single site has its own puzzle pieces that interact with each other such that we're not dropping calls. We're handing off seamlessly from sight to site. um Verizon's network is going to be different than T-Mobile's and we don't know for sure that other tenants are going to come, but um what we do know is that a stealth application um especially when you're constrained like with a foursided structure, you can only have antennas pointing at a certain direction the the way that you can mount them. And so Verizon's orientation of their antennas might need to be different than T-Mobile's or AT&Ts. And so you get constrained by the by like a a four-sided structure where you can't tilt an antenna um to the direction that you need it. So that's getting a little bit into the weeds. But

no, I love what you're saying, but did you guys evaluate a water tower? Because those ones there aren't for structure. The force structures are down. the towers. You're Yeah, we we we have not uh I would say we have not specifically um looked at a water tower in this location. I would also tell you too though that even at the base of the tower there there could be space for the monopole um structure at the base of a water tower, but when you get up top, you've got a huge mass, right?

Yeah. um which would exceed and I don't know how this works from a land use standpoint if we're exceeding our lease area with the structure that is that is in the air if that makes sense but again water tower um again perfect example I drove um I got off of Bangader tonight um from where I live and right west of right before you get to um so westbound on Bangader There is a great water tower there. It's a Verizon building. You guys might be familiar with it. It's on the north side of um Bangad right there. Um

sadly um Ver Verizon built that. It's a good stealth structure. Sadly, less than a quarter of a mile to the west as you continue going on Bangader, you have a traditional monopole with three carriers on it. And you have that because that water tower cannot accommodate additional carriers. So, um, same side of the same side of Bangador. Um, the the Verizon water tank is just east of Redwood and the Monopole is just west of Redwood. Both of them are right up against the the highway. So, I know what you're talking about.

A practical example of of of what you're talking about. So, I'm I'm not here to argue whether or not stealth there aren't good stealth solutions out there because there are. Um, I would just say that sometimes we push so hard for stealth that we get away from the ability to colllocate and then you end up with more structures in your city. Um, whether or not everyone knows that a fake water tower is a cell tower or not, you know, whatever. But if if you have three of them right next to each other, um, then that could become an issue. Happy to answer any other questions that you might have. And I appreciate the time to comment.

Thank you. I think it's just seeing options of stealth. That that's where I'm at still. And then if the options for stealth still look terrible, then we go with the normal one. Yep. That that's kind of where I'm at. Or maybe there's a way an artist could do something better than just slapping paint on it. So So like I I'm in the I'm approved with stealth options or I almost lean on we almost I lean on more of a continue just so they could come back with because otherwise they're going to have to prove the stealth option. Second that. So I I'll make a motion. Well, before you do.

Okay. Um I'm not I'm not sure, gentlemen. uh because uh we're talking one pole that with the possibility of three carriers. But if it causes us to create or have the need for multiple poles, doesn't that kind of defeat what we're trying to do here? Yeah. By the height. But if those carriers needed to be 10 10 feet higher, they're still going to need another pole. All of what you're describing I agree with, but it's stuff we can't guarantee. They correct. I mean, but it does sound they needed to be at 90 feet. A different carrier carrier. Sprint needed to be at 80 feet right where your prime real estate.

We We can't guarantee that, but it does sound like we can guarantee if we wrap this thing, they're not going to be able to put multiple users on it. Well, I guess I just say it depends on the stealth technology. Yeah, that's what I think. Like is there a stealth for multi- carriers? I'm sure there is.

There's multiple ways to screen things. We I do it all the time.

Yeah. It just takes evaluation and thought. I mean, just so everybody knows, like I remember when we approved the first one that was Providence Hall and it was like, "You can't do this. All we do is trees." like like they came up with the idea. Sounds like they should have made the poll a little bit different so it fit other ideas. And that's what I'm trying to say. If someone comes up with tech stealth technology that can make it so people can expand, it is possible. And that's our role is trying to prove that it's not possible. It it is. You just have to be creative. It it it's not just slap paint on the on a pole. It's thinking outside the box. But even then, I think the the tree in the first picture that he showed actually looked better than the blue one he showed.

I I kind of agree with you, honestly. So, even the tree that he said was ugly, it still looked better than the blue pole. I mean, for me, I I think I'm leaning more towards approve with providing stealth options so they know that they can move forward.

I don't think they would be able to move forward if it's truly not possible. like the concern on maybe it doesn't fit over the property, they still have to come back to us. So that's why I go with more of a continuation in my mind, but so we could sit and barter or we can vote and decide. So I'll make a motion to uh continue item 4.2 with without dates so that applicant can address the stealth options that are available or not. I'll second that. All right, let's do a roll call. Brody, no. Jackson, yes. Heather, yes. Adam, yes. Daryl, no. And Preston,

yes. Okay, so we have a four to two in favor. All right. Um, the next item, um, we'll have public hearings. So, I'll just read that policy really quick. Thank you folks. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you.

Um 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 that's in the uh rear of the building and present it to the deputy city recorder. In general, um, the chair will allow an individual three minutes to address the commission and a spokesperson recognized as representing a group in attendance may be allowed up to five minutes. This policy applies to all public hearings. So, item 5.1, review and consider a proposed amendment to the Crescent Commercial Development. Thanks, Mike. Okay, this is an item that we had briefed the planning commission on previously. Um, this, as you mentioned, this is a public hearing for an MDA amendment. This is the approximate location of this property. It is currently vacant. Uh, it is zone C2 commercial. And of course, you can see the residential development around this property. Um, just to be clear, uh, this does not include the, uh, corner parcel at on Heramman Boulevard and Anthem Park Boulevard. You can see that northeast corner that is not part of this agreement. Um, this is an amendment to an existing MDA that essentially functions as a almost like a zoning uh, overlay. Uh it it modifies the base zone and this amendment um requires a recommendation by the planning commission to the city council for consideration and ultimately they will make the final decision on this matter. There is essentially three key elements. They were wanting to add uh warehouse and wholesale which we

typically allow within a uh light manufacturing zone. Um we we don't allow wholesale activities typically in our commercial zones. We're looking more for retail activities or commercial services. But there's an option, an opportunity um that the developer has partnered with or is engaged uh with a potential partner that would bring in um a number of jobs. Uh would have a retail storefront, but they still do um wholesale products. And so in order to work with that particular um development proposal that that would require this this modification of the MDA, also looking at modifying some of our um design standards relative to how do we treat the the landscape buffer or some type of buffer between the commercial property and the residential property. as the commission is very familiar with, our standard requirement is a masonry wall between residential and commercial. Um but because some of the um grade changes that are pretty significant on this property and just the general complexity that we often have when the residential is pre-existing before the commercial, we already have pre uh folks with um rear yard fences and then trying to coordinate the replacement of all those fences with the new pre-cast. It's been complicated. So this development partner is requesting an alternative uh essentially a landscape design that would meet that uh need for having a a buffer between the two uses and then uh the building design itself uh they would like to use some of those standards we've already established in the auto mallal special district. So um this we received this material after we had published the packet.

Again, this is just a concept. Um, uh, it's not an really, uh, necessarily a specific element of what is being proposed to be amended. Although we have the council has periodically attached these types of illustrations to an MDA just to clarify the the agreement or the intent of of these agreements. Um so this is the uh concept proposal and you can see that this does not um propose to develop the whole site in this initial phase. This is just the furthest east portion. So uh north is to the left of the screen here on this on this exhibit and then the east is to the top. Uh and then here is that cross-section of how they would treat the the landscape buffers between um the uh the the pavement that goes around the building. Uh you can see for um just emergency vehicle access, there is a circular driveway there on the north side of the building between the the proposed development and the existing residential development. Um but you can see these cross-sections and this is an illustration that they are contemplating uh for that mitigation as mentioned in the packet. We didn't have those exhibits when the packet was published. And so we had I had written this condition of just saying we recommend approval of those amendments with the with the following condition that the applicant would prepare an exhibit for city council review that illustrates the design of an alternative buffer landscape detail so forth. So they've provided that now. Uh but that was the exhibit that was in your at in your packet at the time or the recommendation. So again, this is a public hearing. The applicant is here to be able to answer any of your questions as well. Do you have any questions for staff at this time?

Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Does the applicant have anything to present? Hi. Um, good evening. I'm Julie Smith and this is Braden Hansen and we work with the applicant, Larry Miler. Um, this was originally approved clear back in November of 2022. It's a 15 and a half acre site and as you saw, it's it's an awkward site and a hard site to develop. Um we currently have a locallyowned retail business that is looking to relocate their operations to this site. But in order to relocate to this site, um they're also requiring that we add retail warehouse space and light manufacturing and shipping. So they would do retail wholesale and um light manufacturing and then shipping. And so that's why um the request to amend our MDA to allow that. And then we're also looking for you to consider um in in the zone that we're required to have the masonary fence and consider um a burm with increased landscaping on that.

Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any questions for the applicant? Thank you. Oh, okay. Okay. And then um discussion. Oh, is it? Oh, do you want to do should we do the public hearing? Yeah. Okay. Let's um go ahead and open the public hearing. Do you need a motion? Do we need a motion? Okay. So, the public hearing is open. if you want to come forward and state your name.

Uh my name is Sunonny Mortonson. I live on Iron King just uh immediately behind this property. Um and uh just by way of of uh I guess communication uh there are an additional one, two, three, four, five residents that have asked that feel like this is important that couldn't make it tonight. They asked if we would just express our our sincere um concerns of safety of the de of the removal of of the soil. You are so aware of this and and Mr. Miler is aware of this um and and a a a concern of uh mistrust that it may not be done um safely. Um, my background is in, uh, I went to school for geographic information systems and and had to work at the mines and and, uh, MSHAW and whatnot. And I hope that we understand the the uh the risk of of actually moving this soil. Um, as far as the development goes, cool. Who cares what's what's behind there? Nobody's going to be happy with whatever we put back there. Um, I think this looks okay. So, uh, not at all concerned about uh the the land use. Uh however the fact that that uh in the past when we put in utilities right up on 126 there I think it was a couple three four years ago um we put in um fiber optic I think to go to the schools and uh the uh dust uh suppression was not done well. And I just state that because my wife took videos of of the water truck doing a really poor job and the dust all over the place and we are just freaking out. Uh super concerned. Now I'm not in uh in land cons uh land uh development or anything like that. I'm now an insurance guy and all I do is help people to avoid risk. And I think

there is a very very real uh concern that the city would be liable for uh for the the dirt not being removed properly, this this bad soil. Um there's there's case law, there's chat GPT helped me with all sorts of stuff ju just to understand like is this even a real issue? Could this really come back to the city? Um and I I do feel like uh from from your perspective um you're just supposed to say is this good for the city? Hey, who cares about cost? And I appreciate that. But, uh, man, I just really, really, really am concerned. And that's what I hear from my neighbors. We are so scared of, uh, of inhaling lead and arsenic. and you've seen this and uh the the Anyway, um last thing is uh a little bit of a concern with uh the fact that the proposal is that the city council kind of take the next step and uh and approve it. Uh I'm I'm just going back like one slide. I took a little screenshot so I could access it. But I I was surprised that we would bypass the planning and zoning commission and uh and allow the city council to review the illustration and design. Anyway, um I think I'm done. I just uh really kind of beg you to to consider and make sure that in that MDA uh that everything is spelled out so incredibly that that it can't come back on the city uh and that we we would have some concrete guidelines for it uh to be done properly. I think I'm I'm done.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

How's it going? My name's Andrew Lawrence. Um, so yeah, I'm Sunny's neighbor. Um, right next to him on Iron King Drive. Um, and and we kind of talked about he kind of talked about it. Um, but but yeah, so just in case anybody doesn't know, all of this soil is soil that was brought here um by developers because it's contaminated soil. So it's not just just whatever soil. It's got high levels of lead, high level levels of arsenic kind of thing. Um, so, so yeah. So, and just kind of to recap what we had talked about. So, at one point there was, uh, they tried to reszone it to residential and that didn't go through. Um, and and at that point they were going to take all the soil and put it somewhere else or whatever. Um, but then then it was became commercial and then there was talk of like, okay, well, now we can just put it right on top of this capped soil. Um, and it was this this thing. Um, so the representative that they had last time um said that so I think there is their attorney Baird stated the contaminated soil limits were set by experts and the standards were agreed upon by the EPA in the city. There was no requirement to lower land to street level and they may build on its existing conditions. So, it was just kind of this thing of like we're just going to build these huge whatever we want kind of things on top of these 15 foot soil caps. Um, things like that. And so that was so it went from like, okay, we're going to get the soil removed to now we're going to have these giant structures. Um, and then there's a lot of talk and um things and some confusion um as things went on of like who's responsible? Is the EPA responsible? is the state responsible? Um, and ultimately it ended up um that it is the city's responsibility um as it

stands now. Um um and in September uh I'm sorry. Yes. So in October um there was talk of director Thomas explained that staff had filed an environmental covenant on the property specifying the cleanup requirements. planning manager Spencer indicated to you investigate options for self-development options on affected properties. Um and so I was just wondering like has that been done? Have they figured out some plans, things like that? Um and then there was some confusion. I don't know if you guys remember there was um so at one point the so EPA had told us you need to keep the lead levels under 4,000 parts per million. And then at some point, and as far as I know, nobody knows how it got changed, but at some point it got changed in the city to 5,000. Um, and so we had to have like this emergency meeting to bring it back down to 4,000. Um, but of course there are some soils and this things that's in between that range of 4 to 5,000. So it's just so it's this complicated mess kind of thing. Um um so today I called the CE or the CEO called me of Black um Clover whatever they are. Yeah. Um and he was super great and he was super supportive and um one of the things he said is man he agrees with me. He agrees with the citizens. We got to get rid of this soil. We got to get rid of um we're not going to build on top of anything like that. Um and that's a part of their agreement. Um, and so just kind of echo what Sunny said. I really think that we should put this in the MDA. Like I don't see any reason if if the the people that want to build it want to remove it and the citizens want to remove it. We don't need to try and pretend that someone else is going to well maybe the EPA will take care of it or maybe d like let's just make it crystal clear that this is something that we want to have happen.

And and I know my time's up, but I just wanted to thank you guys so much for all you guys do. I know it's a a thankless job. I know last time when we had this meeting in September, you guys did give a recommendation to the council, and that a part of that council was to include um to to remove some of that soil. Um and they didn't choose to accept that. And and that was kind of frustrating. And and I don't know if you guys are frustrated, but I was frustrated for you. But I hope it doesn't deter you guys to do the right thing and make that recommendation again. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks.

All right. If there are no more comments, we'll go ahead and close. Oh, go come in. Okay. So, my name is Brenda Mortensson. Um, man, it's been a little bit since I've been here. I was here last time Larry was proposing something and I do like this a lot better than what he proposed last time. Um the big concern that I have is really just the health and safety of the people. Um you know when we moved in they told us it was a storage area for snow plows and salts and things like that and that that's what was going to be put on this property. Removing this dirt has huge health implications. You know, last week we celebrated or not celebrated, but we remembered 911. There are over 20,000 cases of cancer caused because of that cloud of dust from 9/11. So, you're potentially risking the health of so many people. And nowadays, it is not hard for us to test if this is being done correctly. Like my husband said, I have video. I still have it on my phone. When the city did the um the fiber optics, it was not done correctly. There was dust all over the place. The water truck went right around where they were actually digging and didn't even spray where the digging was happening. Um we can use our air conditioning filters. We can use simple air filtration systems, test the hepailter, test the water. There's plenty of labs in the Salt Lake Valley that we as residents can take those to and they will test it and let us know if it's being done correctly. And like my husband said in in managing risk, if it's not being done correctly, the city is liable to be sued by tons and tons of residents. So I just urge you to really think about that and make sure

that as you go forward on these things that if we are going to do this you have everything explicitly written out in that MDA because if it's not the developer can do whatever they want and I I do have some mistrust issues with the developer because of how some of things were handled a few years ago when he was trying to build three or four story houses on there. Um, so I do have some concerns that if it's not spelled out that there will be things that we as residents in Herman do not want to have happen. So, thank you.

Okay. So, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Do we need a motion? I'll make a motion for that. Second. Second. Thank you. All right. All in favor? All in favor? I All right, we'll go ahead and um have a discussion. I think Blake shared some great information. The soil was of course one of my top questions as well. Can you speak to some of those?

Oh, yeah. Um I was trying to take some mental notes over there. Very good comments. Very um all true. the the site was originally zoned residential several years ago. The city acquire has had the property for a long time. Um we changed the zone to commercial. It was going to be a public works yard. Um I think originally it was going to be a park or some something way back in the day with Tuskanyany. It was their soil repository. They were going to remove the soil and and developers were going to build a park or something. But um so it was a is a public workshard for a long time and then the city was getting um quotes. We were trying to get brownfield funding to clean it up. It didn't qualify for a brownfield because the soil had been moved there um for development. So we uh changed it to zoning or changed the zoning commercial and couldn't move the soil because it was too expensive after we couldn't get the the federal funding. So then it became part of the deal with the auto mall and uh and Herman 73 partners acquired the property and it was a discounted price for the property because of the contaminated soil and we always knew it needed to be cleaned up. There was a study done in the late 90s. It was by the EPA. It was a record of decision that was um drafted and written up and signed off and adopted by the city. The decision identified that area, all of Butterfield Creek as operable unit three. Operable unit three became the jurisdiction of Haramman. Some areas were cleaned up if the property owners allowed EPA in to clean that up. Some areas were not cleaned up. And then at that point there were recommendations for levels of contaminants that could be allowed for different types of uses. And so the city adopted um code at that time. It was um mid mid 2000s, early 2000s. It's before

my time and Adam's time I think. And so uh those those standards were in place and the city was always responsible for cleaning up any soils in the operable unit 3. And the city usually relies on the developer to clean those soils up with city oversight. And then the city has to report every several years to the EPA about what's been done. So, um, this site does have, um, elevated levels. Some of the stuff that I brought up in the meeting was as the the soil was cleaned up, um, from these other areas, as it was picked up, it was picked up with other soil that had lower concentrations. So, as that was carried over to this site, it was mixed and then they spread it and they compacted it and capped it. And so every time it moves and gets mixed with other soils, the contamination um concentration drops. Uh we we have some documents that show elevated levels around on the site, but they don't they don't take the samples very frequently, like every 200 feet or something like that. So we know there's spots in between that could be less, could be more. So our plan is and it's in our ordinance of how to do this in our engineering standards. There needs to be a soil assessment plan done for the development where they will come in with a environmental consultant. They will assess the soil. They they will likely do a grid and it it's typically a 100 ft or 75 feet grid and they'll go they'll they have a gun. It's called an XRF. They shoot it at the soil and it tells them the level, the concentration levels of the contaminant. And they'll shoot the surface. They'll dig down usually six inches, shoot it again, dig down until they get to a point where they don't run into contamination anymore. This site's a little different because

it's been put in from other areas. So, they may have to go really deep. Um the the current levels that are allowable at this site for contamination I think are 4,000 parts per million for the lead. And that's the one that we've seen the most of. The the arsenic hasn't been as prevalent. And so if they run into soil levels that are 3,900, they can cap that. But if they run into anything that's 4,000 or higher, they will have to remove that from the site. And they can't put it anywhere else on the site. It will have to be hauled off to a um a facility that'll accept it. Right now, we're only aware of two facilities that will accept the contaminated soils. While all this work is happening, they will be required. There will be a oversight. Um we have a consultant that will come and have oversight on the on the project and and watch the cleanup. Um, the one thing that was brought up with the uh fiber optics project that was through a land disturbance permit, I think it it snuck through because it wasn't a big development. Um, it wasn't caught. They usually do their work right out in the right on the back of sidewalk and whoever was reviewing that permit didn't see that that was in that contaminated area. So that one um was likely one an outlier I guess larger developments. So when when the Miller Crossing subdivision, which is where most of the the people reside in, when that project brought the soil over and and put it on top of the Tuscanyany repository, um we had the oversight and so our consultant was there. They had air monitoring stations. They had a backpack. Someone was on site the whole time. and they were monitoring the the trucks that left the site had to be washed down to to leave the site and when they came in they they watered everything down, kept the dust down. So

there there will be oversight on this one and um the the ordinance is there. the city is responsible for the cleanup to and so we take responsibility responsibility as being the oversight for for the cleanup and uh at the end of so they do the assessment and then they have a cleanup plan and then they um execute the cleanup plan and then at the very end there's a um summary of what happened. And so all those documents will be on file for anyone to review to look at and uh they'll be reviewed by our staff and and our consultant will also review them. So hopefully that answers your questions. I bounced around a little bit. I should have had a little bit more organized thoughts, but uh that's the cleanup process we're anticipating.

So you're saying that sorry um when this consultant will be on site the entire time that any earth work is being done? They'll either be on site or have an air monitoring station that they'll be monitoring um nearby. And this this has happened multiple times at other locations, not just this repository. That's correct. And this uh Sorry, Heather. I didn't mean to. Oh, no. I just this this program of testing that that all happens um before construction,

the the sampling, the assessment plan, that's all prior to putting a shovel in the ground. Yes. And this one will have to be pretty deep like you said because I mean just so everybody's aware that hill was not that high before where your homes all came. I I I remember those days when when Tuscany put the first dirt there it wasn't as mounded as it is now. So it'll have to be quite a bit of digging just to do that study to do the study and yeah the assessment. I know a lot of it's been done already. Um but yeah, it there'll it'll be built off of that those existing studies and they'll have to get new new uh data for the analysis.

And to to clarify, this is this is all codified requirement whether it's in the MDA or not. Yeah. So I think if it the MDA has a statement in it that they have to fire follow all um city code and and standards unless stated otherwise. And so yeah, this would fall underneath the existing city code. I was wondering because in the MDA it does say that it goes back to um October 12th, 2022 code. This like Blake said, th this code for the soil mitigation has been since before I worked with the city, which was 2002.

Sounds good. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't going to be excluded because it was done a month later when that uh EPA record of decision came out. One of the requirements was that the city had to adopt um standards. And so, yeah, there's a there's a booklet, I think it's on our website in the engineering development information that talks about soil cleanup requirements. And then the ordinance has the cont allowable levels listed. And we have been meeting recently with the EPA. They're looking at changing their standards and so we may have to modify, but they haven't talked about commercial. They've only talked about residential standards with us. How does how does the I guess mitigation company remain kind of third party?

Yeah, I can say their name. We contract with them often. It's Earth Touch Engineering. And uh so yeah, they they are currently overseeing a lot of the work in Olympia and the Sarrento project that's currently being um remediated off of 5600 West. So just question, is the city paying for them or is the developer how does how's that set up? That's usually a cost that's included in the building permit after the work's done um for the developer to pay for. Does the EPA is there approval needed or do the results go to the EPA or is

just in that uh every other year report that we submit to the EPA, they they review it. But no, we we have full jurisdictional control over the soil as a city. Thank you. And and this just so everybody's aware, this goes all the way up through where Butterfield Creek, like Blake said, we've done this a ton. Yeah. So, the Hidden Oaks project um did a massive cleanup. So, that was one of our more recent massive cleanups. They they cleaned the entire creek out from uh jeez, what 60 6600 West all the way out to 7,300 West. So, did you did you have any complaints regarding that cleanup process from residents? No, just the developer. Just the developer.

No, no trust issues during that project, in other words. No. Um, it was it was pretty good. We we worked hand in hand with the sewer district. The sewer district deals with this a lot, too, because they're always putting sewers in along the creeks. And so, we've we've worked closely with them on on this throughout all their processes, too. Does Earth Touch have a contact that the residents could call if they see issues? Um, I think we can we can work on that. We can probably get a a a flyer to hand out to the residents or or web page set up for it and we could we could have a hotline for that. Yep.

Blake, can you also talk about liability? Um if there were concerns, is that something that falls solely on the city or

It is. And so, yeah, it's definitely a concern. That's why we hire a consultant. I don't think anybody on staff has the specialty knowledge for contaminated soils. We we know enough but uh we know enough to hire a professional consultant to come in and help us and and Earth Touch is resume when we when we uh were looking for someone to use they've they've done a lot of work in Park City around the mine areas and things. So they've they've done some pretty heavy duty stuff up there which um also had a record of decision and gave Park City the jurisdictional control over or the institutional controls over the soil. So very similar to to our situation here. You you mentioned that uh every other year the city turns in a report to the EPA. Um is that public knowledge? Is it

I think it's every five years. I might have misspoken. It's been a while since I read that. But but those reports are available if the citizens wanted to grab one. And yes, they are. Have you guys, this a question in this particular situation, have you guys ever had like someone from this subdivision or something as like a representative to collect information or maybe the hotline is sufficient if there's a way for them to bring up problems?

Um, we're we're usually pretty available, so email or phone call away. But I I liked the hotline idea because there are so many residents right adjacent to this. That would be a good thing to do just extra set of eyes to keep to keep the city um you know aware of what's going on in case there's some work going on on a Saturday that we're not aware of that.

Thank you. Thanks Blake. Thanks. Okay. So further discussion. Um, as far as the overall site, I think, do we need to close the Oh, yeah. public. We did close it. I'm just wondering if we want to hear anything more from the developer or closed it. We closed it. The developer could speak. Say, do you have anything that you want to add? There you go.

Um, yeah. So, I'm I'm Braden Hansen. Um, like Julie said, I represent uh Larry Miler, and he couldn't be there be here today. Uh thank you guys for your comments. I do appreciate that. Um like I said in our work session um we are actually going to be using the same consultant that they use um because they've done so much work in Haramman and they have such a you know a good resume like Blake said and we vetted them with did our bids so them and another one and we felt like they had the experience to come and do it and we'd be following all the rules all the regulations to uh remove the soil. Um, but yeah, thank you.

Thank you. Well, I like the development. Um, soils was a concern, but it sound like I mean Blake answered all my questions on that. Um, the reports are available to the public, so you folks can take a look at them. Um, and the monitoring will go on through the duration. So, I I don't know what else what other stumbling blocks there are.

I I think that it sounds like this this development is a compromise that's come from a long ways away, you know, and that there's been quite a few projects proposed previously that were not liked. There wasn't I didn't hear much of any issues with this project other than the soils. I I feel comfortable with the explanation Blake gave and I think frankly having a project done to to fix this issue is better than leaving it undeveloped because I I would say that that's just as much of a liability and risk as as to not. So, so with that, so with that,

I'm ready to make a motion. Okay, go ahead. Thank you. I uh recommend approval uh to the city council for item 5.1, review and consideration of the proposed amendment to Crescent Commercial Development Master Development Agreement. I will second. Okay, so we have a motion and a second. Let's do a roll call. Um, Preston, yes. Daryl, yes. Adam, yes. Heather, yes. Jackson, yes. And Brody, yes. So, that passes unanimously.

All right. Item item 5.2, review and consider a recommendation to the city council regarding amendments to Heramman City commercial zoning code. I'm just going to recuse myself for this one.

Thank you, All right. Thank you, commission. Um, this is an item that we did talk about a couple of weeks ago, few weeks ago maybe. Um, expanding our commercial zone uses. So, um, why do we want to do this code? We we have several properties. They're identified here on this map on the right. Um, that kind of have some challenging topography or for some reason they've remained undeveloped. there's uh visibility, ease of access, lots of things, even unmade unmotivated owners, which I don't think we can do anything about, but some of these other things we can maybe um address. And so, another thing we see is there's there's kind of this gap, and you can see our M1 and M2 uses are generally way down south. We do have some technology manufacturing uses out west by Kennot, but that land's owned by Kenkott and they they're they're kind of an unm motivated owner. They they are protecting their mind. They're a mining company first and development company second. So they that's what they tell us and and so we've had some struggles with getting um uses on that. So, so this gap in this uh between the MU and the the technology manufacturing zone kind of makes it hard for our home occupations to grow in Haramman without having to go way down south and and kind of be in a an area that has limited visibility and and then they're they're stuck next to to maybe bigger um manufacturing type industry businesses. So, that's the reason why we set some goals of what we want to address with this new zone. We're calling it the flex, uh, the CF zone or commercial flex. Um, we we want to help loosen the the bands on those properties that haven't developed and and try to get them um some more tools

to to help those develop into commercial uses. Um, we definitely want to help out our home occupations to allow them to stay in Heramman. It's it's hard for us to see them grow and outgrow their home and and have to move to Riverton or to Draper or somewhere to to open their business. because there's not an opportunity here. Um, address that gap that we talked about. Um, hopefully do some things with the design to keep the cost down. Uh, and then have a space where these tenants can collaborate. Um, you might have a bunch of different makers making different widgets that if they collaborate, they can make a a really cool widget instead of bunch of individual ones. I don't know. So, um, there were four sections of code that were, um, amended, and these are the the sections. I'll just kind of run through each one quickly. 10 10-12 takes a little bit longer cuz it was the the heftiest one. But, um, the first one was the land use categories. We added these uses. Um, I forgot to mention, we have Kyle in the back here. He is, uh, a potential developer of one of these sites or one of these of using this zone. and applying it to a site. And as in working with him, um, we identified some of these other uses that aren't currently in our code. And our code says if a use isn't in there, it's not allowed. So, um, this this kind of opens up the code to a few more uses that we currently don't have addressed. Um, one thing is the storage has historically been addressed in the warehousing. Um, it's kind of fallen underneath that. This kind of gives it a more clear definition and uh that's been needed. So the next one is section 10-12 commercial and office zones. We added a purpose statement. Uh it kind of goes through and hits those goals that we talked about. And then the uses that are

allowed in the CF zone. We we currently don't allow as we heard about in the in Michael's presentation on the the last item is that we don't allow wholesale or warehousing in the C2 zone. Um this would allow wholesale and warehousing but kind of make it more of a um I guess extra use to to these areas. Um and and then we uh have included drive up and and indoor self storage as an accessory use. So you have to have a primary use of this maker space or these tenant areas. And then you if you have a site larger than five acres, we'll get to in a minute, then you're allowed to to do some storage in this area. Um and then we did put a couple of restrictions that you you can't have the drive up storage units exceed the number of tenant spaces. These are items that came that we discussed um in the work meeting when we discussed it. And uh drive up storage units will be restricted to only be used by owners of leis or primary tenant spaces. I I do know that that might be um concerning to the to the um users because you might end up with a bunch of empty drive up storage units if people don't want to pay the extra money to rent them. So, I don't know if there we didn't put in this, but there might be a mechanism to allow those to rent out if if they don't have any space, but I don't know how to address that part. Um and then we always have a conditional use approval required for a certain size of development. So this one we put just over an acre at 44,000 square feet. You have to go to get come to the planning commission for conditional use. The continuing on the development standards. This is where we were hoping to um have standards that would make it look nice but also allow them to um

build so that the cost isn't so much that it would be unachievable for people to move into these. So basically trying to keep things that are public that are facing the public streets and in the public view to our brick and stone glass and architectural metal panels typical with our C2 zone. But then getting back in behind you you can go to um a little bit toned down um architecture. Uh massing requires some bumpouts and some character. The uh one of the things is the the signing allowing for uniform plaque signs on the walls and logos and hours on the doors. We talked about fencing last time. We removed the chain link so you can only have rot iron um on the gate or metal panel that metal that complements the primary structure or matches it. Um we talked about parking being only allowed or storefront parking can't be reserved and then employees can park in the if there's gated areas in behind. And then reducing some landscaping as trucks drive through the site so we don't have landscaping areas that make it difficult to maneuver a larger vehicle that might be delivering or or going through the the area. Um setbacks. I highlighted items on this that vary from the C2 zone. Everything else is what we currently have in the C2. So it kind of matches if if we took a C2 site and and brought it to the commission and the council and it changed to CF, you'd you'd almost get the same thing except for if you had these accessory uses on these larger parcels, then you'd be able to uh have a minimized setback for those accessory uses um depending on the height. And then the uh the maximum allowable

lot coverage in the C2s is on it 60 and so it's it's proposed to be 75 in this the major corridor sign overlay zone. Uh we only had some minor changes in this. We just needed to add the CF zone as as one of the zones that this could apply to. And then we changed the distance. We noticed that the the distance between allowable signs was 200 feet. as I started looking at that that was pretty close. So 500 feet is a little bit more um reasonable um along Mountain View corridor and then the uh decrease the required acreage from 20 to 8. And then the lastly is the table of uses. So, as I broke this down, this includes the uses that were in the the first section that I um talked about. And then uh also some additional uses that are currently in the well, you can see here there's currently these ones on the left are ones that are not currently allowed in the C2 zone. Most of these are the ones we've added, but there's a few like wholesale and warehousing that we've taken. that's only allowed in the M1 and M2 zones right now and we're proposing to allow that in the C in the CF zone. And then you have the permitted uses. So these those ones in the middle would be permitted in CF and C2. And then the ones on the far right are proposed to be permitted in the CF zone, but they're currently conditional use in C2. And then this is the the bullet point that I mentioned earlier is drive up and indoor cell storage for um only allowed on lots that are five acres or more. And I kept that slide in there. That was my should have taken that one out. So I made a sample site. I think we were um kind of getting stuck on the the last

time we discussed this. there was a specific location we were kind of trying to apply this to. So, I just took a general 5 acre piece, typical size of a a 5acre section you'd see out here, and uh applied what could work here. This is a sample where you have a collector and arterial, and I was applying setbacks to see if it would even fit or work. It uh it laid out okay. Um, but this kind of gives you a visual of of what could what could be. Um, you'd enter in off the street. Maybe this thing has some bad topography or something. So, you have to have the access off of the local road over on the side. But, um, there's parking in the front. There's a reception meeting space that would be uh available for all all tenants to use. And then you have the drive up storage units up on the top part. You have all the flex spaces. And then since it was 5 acres, there's an indoor storage facility that with with that distance off the setback, that would only be like a twotory, like a 20 foot tall um facility. Um I think there was that one. And then I just had some photos with that showing maybe like the the reception meeting space could be that top right photo. Your indoor storage facility could be something like the bottom right. I know that one has some drive up on it, too, but it was really hard to find a picture I could steal off the internet that it would let me do. So, that was the one I got. And then bottom middle, that's that's possibly like those units 21 through 28 interior that aren't front facing. They're they're kind of toned down a bit. Um, and then those drive up self storage could be those ones on the bottom left. So, I believe this item's on for a public hearing and be happy to answer any questions before that or after.

I had a question on the retail. Does that include like a restaurant or like a bakery or something like that? Um, let's go back there. I don't think we put the the restaurants in here just because we'd want them in our commercial zones, but if if you wanted to include that, be happy to I guess you could put that in your recommendation to the council. So, these would be all the uses that we're proposing inside of here. Parking's hard with a restaurant. So,

I was kind of think because more with the commissary where there's like food trucks and things like that, sometimes maybe like a wholesale bakery or something might be interested, but Any questions for Blake? Okay, we'll go ahead and um open the public hearing. My name is Kyle Norton. I'm uh with uh my my company is Aspen Lake Construction. So, I'm a I'm a small contractor. Also do some development. do mostly commercial uh construction. Um uh Blake, thank you for uh taking the time to describe this. I think this is a a worthy thing for the city to consider. Uh I've done a lot of self- storage development and management in the past in other states uh but also here in the state of Utah and uh I've seen small businesses they go from being in their basement or their garage and they're trying to take that next step. Sometimes these are people they have an apartment but they want to be an entrepreneur and it's hard to run a business out of your apartment. So where do they go? They often go to self- storage. Problem is self storage is not built to be a place for a business. It's not set up for the electricity, the plumbing, the life safety, fire sprinklers, you get that. So I've had the opportunity to manage a few sites like this in other uh cities and states, Oram, Utah, St. George, Utah, uh the Bay Area, two sites out there, and the business community, the entrepreneurs love this. It gives them a

place to go to house their vehicles, so they don't have three work trucks in their neighborhood right on their driveway. It allows them to have a place for employees. It's really hard to acquire and retain employees when they're in your living room. It's just hard. They don't want it. You don't want it. It's just hard. So, we find a lot of people, they just love this product. Uh there's oftentimes wait lists of people saying, "Hey, as soon as something opens up, please let us know." Right? And we're already pushing the rents going, "Okay." Okay. But we don't want to push them too much because that's the the thing that makes this so valuable is it gives that somebody that first rung to grab onto a place for their business outside of their home. What we find is a lot of people will start with one unit and as their business grows they go to two or three or four units. And even at four units, these units are typically about a thousand square feet. It's still smaller than the smallest flex industrial space you can find out there. A lot of the stuff's 5,000 square ft, 10,000 square ft. So, this allows them to grow incrementally. The benefit of having it tied to a storage facility. Uh the classic example is the landscaping contractor. It's early spring. He goes to his supply house. He says, "I want to order 20,000 lineal feet of plastic pipe to put in the ground." He doesn't put that in in one weekend. He He puts that in overtime. He gets a discount for buying in bulk. He rents a 10 by30 in addition to his flex space. Puts it in there. And then by the end of the season, he's done with that. And he says, "Hey, I don't

need to rent that. I rent my flex space on a yearly basis, my inventory space, I can stop that rent, that lease monthtomonth. And so in the slow season, the winter, he's not renting it. So this is some of the synergies that they get um between these two uses. Um those are just some Oh uh one thing that wasn't mentioned is uh and and we haven't I have not done this in previous places but I want to do it here is the clubhouse idea. This one unit typically by the gate. It's typically a little bit more glass. It's a little bit more beautiful. It's got a conference room. It's got a little break room. You might put a ping pong table or a pool table in there. And this gives the facility a place to say, "Hey, you want to work on your SEO marketing? You want to get better at your tax strategies? We're going to have an expert come in this Friday. We're going to do a lunch and learn. Come and participate, right?" Um, but it's also something for them to use, you know, call at the end of the year and hey, let's have a company Christmas party, right? Uh, so that's uh the the project in a quick nut nutshell. Um, but yeah, I think the big thing here is it's that first rung that allows a business owner to get out of their home, get out of their garage, and to be in a commercial space, help them grow their business. Um, that's uh Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe I went over time. I apologize. Um, any questions that I can answer?

Let me close the public hearing and then they might have some questions for you. Thank you. Thank you. Motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Um, all in favor? I. Thank you. Do we want to ask him some questions or I I have one. It's It's just my only concern is the storage piece. Yeah. The true we'll call it the true public storage like you would traditionally see. How do you how do you make it so the businesses can use that storage, not it's contained with everybody's moving stuff?

Yeah, great question. Um, the answer is you do have to have an operator who knows what they're doing. Uh, somebody who's not familiar with real estate, they would say, "I want my facility 100% full." That is not how you manage a facility. If you don't have at least a few units, let me paint a quick example. Uh, Kyle, I have uh I I want to take up woodworking. I buy a table saw. I put it in my garage and I go, "What am I going to do with my mountain bikes? Going to store it in storage." Then let's take Jim. Jim just got laid off. He got a divorce and his dad died and he inherited all his dad's tools. Who needs the storage more? Kyle with a few mountain bikes or the guy who's trying to put half of his home in storage. Well, Jim does, right? So, as a manager of of a facility, if I have everything rented out, I can't take advantage of a gym coming and saying, "You know what? You typically rent your 10 by30s for $200. I don't care. I'll pay you $30." Sweet. Okay. So, if you're 100% full, you are missing the boat. Uh, I worked for a a company at one time. They loved it when sellers said, "Yeah, I've been full for 10 years." Because this buyer would come in and say, "Well, they don't know the market. They're below market. That's why they're full. Is their price too low?" Oh, yeah, sure. You think your project's worth 5 million because it's full? Great. we'll pay you five billion in a heartbeat because the thing was worth 10 because they didn't have some vacancy to allow you to take advantage of the

people on the margin, the people who really wanted it. And so your your question was, how do you make sure your storage is not just full of bikes and the business owner doesn't have a space to put his his landscaping sprinkler pipe? it really is up to the operator to be like, I don't want to be 100% full on any of my different sizes of storage. Um, so that's that's what I would tell you.

Thank you. Thank you.

I have a random question for Blake. with the uh change from the 20 acres to the eight contiguous acres for the why why eight and not five when it seems like all the other things are five acre minimums. I I don't know why I I opened up my draft and that's what I had written and so I I looked back through my notes and I couldn't find anything. I'm like there must be some reason to take. So if you wanted to recommend five it wouldn't break my heart. Um, okay.

I think, uh, one of the things we were trying to address at the same time was when Lifetime was coming in, we were trying all the timing we were trying to work out and it might have got mixed up with that. And so, um, but Lifetime got ahead of it. So, we we weren't too worried. I looked up and down Mountain View and there aren't too many parcels that are like bigger than five acres or something. Yeah, that's that's why I was because I'm I would assume that that five acre especially with all the that that might make more sense. There aren't too many acres or too many parcels bigger than five acres that currently don't have an agreement for a sign like the auto mall. Okay, so correct that statement. But yeah,

most of the parcels that would fit under this though, they're smaller than five, right? They're more in the two to three acre size. That's correct. I wonder if size makes it more difficult to put something like this on. And and we only have discussed potentially two sites. We're not bringing any parcels to ask to apply to this zone yet. That'll be next. But um just wanted to see if this what he Well, I think we look forward to your next plan to deal with the two and three acre sites. Yeah. Yeah. I kind of lean on we should keep it as it is and see how it works. We've never done something like this. No. before we open it too far. Let the market do

Well, I'm just talking about that signage thing just for consistency purposes, but yeah, I I can say I like the CF zone. I think it makes sense. Yeah, I think it's cool. Creates a It fills I thought I thought your little diagram showed it perfectly that between MU and and the uh M1 there was a gap.

There's a gap. And I failed to mention, but yeah, like buildings 31 or I tenant spaces 31 through 42 and 1 through 4, they all have frontage. So you get all these storefronts, too, that there's some good variation here if you're if you're a woodworker or if you sell clothes or if you I don't know, there's all these uses you can put in here. I think it does open up a good opportunity for for the home occupations to move into here. And I would say this is a great uh example of what could go in any of these sites because you identified about 20 of them across the city. Um and I happen to like Kyle's approach and I think it would be great as one of the 20. Um but I think at the other 19 sites this also applies well. So I say that one of 20 is great but also for 20 it's great. So

cool. Okay. Anything else? Yeah. For me, I was worried about the uses for the drive up self- storage, indoor self- storage, and vehicle and equipment rental. And more so, it just I'm worried about where this could be applied in some of the areas that may be a little more residential. That's where I'm worried about those certain uses and how they fit in to the neighborhoods. The other things I'm totally fine with. We would have to approve the zone change though in those instances.

Yeah. But once the zone change is there to Heather's point, once it's a C once it's zoned that that it's permitted at that point, right? Yeah. You'd have to change it from a C2 to a CF. So yeah, I'm saying if if that's the concern, then it's when it comes to be proposed for that zone change, we can say no, that's our concern. We don't want to do that zone change because of that reason. But I don't want to limit this tool because it might we might not like it in a in a given area. And in to do the storage, you have to have five acres. So that's another thing. There's there aren't a lot of five acre parcels out there. How many do we have?

How many fiveacre parcels? Well, for the commercial, yeah, it would apply to this. Uh let's go back and kind of look here without doing like a huge reszone of uh like residential areas. It's it's nice, right? Small. Two or three. How big is the ones that are like were in Rose that have never developed? How big are those lots? Um I think that the one that's kitty corner from the holiday oil up there. Yeah, that one is I think that's right at about five. Okay. It's pretty close to that. Um, there might be some news coming on that one soon though. So, that was it right there. Right.

There you go. And the one that we were just talking about, so everybody's kind of get the scale is that

that one right there. I don't know if I can show you, but that one. So really is. and the uh the Black Clover project if this it could fall underneath this too. It could it could be this type of use. I think it would be an allowable building in the CF zone. Um they were looking at a different site before they came into this new site and so we were that was kind of one of the things that started this work on on this zone was was speaking with them and then they were able to move on to the crescent piece and have a different avenue to achieve what they're trying to do. I almost could see this driving more of our support to our C1 and C2 long term. Like this is where you hop and then you eventually keep expanding

as long as it doesn't all turn into storage. I I the intent of it the intent of this is fabulous. I love the idea of bringing in and allowing these businesses to you know start in these smaller units and then move up. totally agree with you. But there's also nothing stopping it from being a school or a church. So I would rather have it be that than I would rather have some use that's for the full community than just schools. I mean I know they're important, but we've lost if you go look at most of those big red boxes. We claim them as commercial, but they really aren't. Yeah. Charter schools

or charter schools like like if you really followed through with it like the ones that big chunk right in the middle by Rose uh where Black Ridge Elementary School is. Those were three great commercial spots that they're just just schools. These maps are so small. It's this one, right? That that's where Black Ridge is. Yeah. So, I'm just saying like to me having more of those amenities would have been cool to have some more businesses there than squishing in a school. Yeah.

Well, I like it. I'm ready to make a recommendation. Are we done discussing it? I Yeah. Okay. All right. Go ahead and make a motion to recommend approval. For item 5.2, review and consideration recommendation to the city council regarding amendment to Herman City Commercial Zoning Code 10-3-6. Blah blah blah blah blah. The rest of that um with the one update of changing that from 8 to five so that could approve signage on those few lots. Do you want to second or you want me to? Oh, I'll second that.

All right. All right. So, we have a motion by Preston and a second by Jackson. And let's do a roll call. Um, Preston, yes. Daryl, yes. Adam, yes. Heather, no. And Jackson, yes. All right. So, that's four to one. So, that passes. Um, let's go back to item 4.1. Um, presentation and review of the Herman City. I'll make a motion to move back to 4.1. I'll second it.

Great. Thank you. Uh today we're providing uh just an overview of the report that was submitted uh back in August uh summarizing the actions and implementation steps that heroin's taken over the past year regarding moderate income housing. So, the moderate income housing plan has a requirement to annually report on the five-year implementation plan that is part of Harerman's plan. So today we'll we'll just do a quick overview of the key components that are in Herman's current moderate income housing plan, the state code requirements, uh what's included in that annual report, and then do a summary of where we are right now with housing in Haramman in regard to moderate income housing. Uh then we also just want to um discuss and provide the the options for some new strategies. uh the state has added since Herman adopted uh the moderate income housing plan and then just bring it up for next steps and any questions and discussion. So Herman originally adopted an updated moderate income housing plan in 2019. Uh it was part of our general plan update process. So we we started off by creating that new moderate income housing plan to respond to some of the the updated state requirements. Um, in 2022, the state uh revised those requirements uh with the five-year implementation plan and the annual reporting. So, at that time, we went back and just basically modified and reformatted Herman's moderate income housing plan to be set up for that annual reporting. Uh, and that was adopted in I think September of 2022 and

submitted um on time for the state's requirements that year. At the time, Haramman was one of only about 25% of cities uh met that initial deadline. Uh so you guys are already ahead of the game and just a leader in uh this whole effort statewide for moderate income housing. The plan contains one overall goal uh similar to other elements of the general plan. There's six strategies um out of the ones identified by the state for inclusion in moderate income housing plans and then six action items that Haramman has identified uh that implement one or more of those state strategies. Uh for year three where we are right now the 2024 to 2025 year uh there's eight different benchmarks that we reported on uh regarding progress towards moderate income housing. Uh so compliance with the Utah state code uh they have identified these shared strategies that cities need to select the ones that best fit their context and report on implementation towards those over a five-year time period. So these are the six strategies that Haramman has been working towards uh since 2022. Of course, we know that Herman's been working towards moderate income housing for much longer than that. And part of the reporting is being able to show you how the actions that have taken place over the past year are built on sort of this long-term endeavor towards housing over the past uh 10 to 20 years in housing and heroin regarding housing. So, strategy A is resoning for densities. Uh, strategy B is focused on infrastructure investments. Uh, strategy E, the focus is on accessory dwelling units. Strategy F, uh, it's the focus is on bringing housing into those

commercial or mixed use zones and near major transit investment corridors. Strategy G is focused more on amending your land use regulations uh, to support minor income housing. And then strategy K is focused on preserving existing as well as new moderate income housing uh through different initiatives such as deed restrictions uh and then also just maintaining um an understanding of the the current subsidized housing units in the city. So with the the implementation reporting uh it is from August 1st of the previous year to July 31st and then you generously get one extra day to submit the report uh on that previous year. So it's something that we work on mostly through the month of of June and July uh so that we're ready to submit by that that August 1 deadline every year. The items that are included in the report are action reporting. Uh so what what has Haramman been doing uh with regard to the action items and then also just discussing the different land use decisions that have been made. The state's also interested in knowing what barriers are out there to implementing and making housing uh affordable housing happen uh in Haramman and then understanding what the response by the market has been over the past year. How many units, what types of units have been built and where they also have been asking for information on accessory dwelling units. It's been a popular strategy statewide. uh there were some changes to state code to make cities allow internal ADUs uh in their residential zones. Uh and so most cities have have chosen that as a strategy to report on. Uh and then there's also been interest in understanding the number of entitled units that each city has whether it's through a development

agreement or the base zoning. So that's everything that goes into the report and now we just want to walk through uh Herman's accomplishments and action item reporting. Uh so we're going to talk a little bit about the the state of housing in Heramman. Uh and it's structured in this report and the summary report by the action items which is the framework for Herman's moderate income housing plan. So each action item supports one or more strategies. Uh the first one is to ensure that zoning designations allow for either higher density or moderate income housing development near your mixed two centers. So the town center near the Salt Lake Community College campus and adjacent to commercial and employment centers. Uh this one works towards um three different strategies. And so as we're reporting, you know, we have to sometimes be a little bit repetitive in the reporting format because it's by strategy. Uh and so we've just worked out a way to to show how um these different action items are supporting uh each strategy in slightly different ways. This is the the benchmark timeline. Uh so for this first action item, there was three different benchmarks. Uh the first two uh were addressed in years one and two and are complete. And then as you can see from here on out and this is true for both for this action item as well as the others that we are in sort of that home stretch for the benchmarks. So these are things that will be ongoing um actions and benchmarks that we'll be reporting on for years four and five as well. So initiating the resonings for densities that are necessary to facilitate that production of moderate income housing in areas that were identified according to uh prioritization by the city and those previous benchmarks. So what did Haramman do over the past year? So, we know that in conjunction

with some of the amendments to master development agreements that Haramman approved the reszoning of several areas, especially in the southeast section of the city, uh that supported an increased density of residential development. Uh this resoning allows for some smaller lot single family, attached single family, and multifamily apartment dwellings. Uh Harman has also been working on a process to create uh two new small lot single family residentials zones. So the R15 and the R18. Uh this is an ongoing effort. Uh city staff has been working on this over the past year or two years and that's something that um is coming back to the planning commission I think later this year. Uh so we also know that Herman's working on, you know, approving smaller scale zoning requests citywide that show that they're consistent with the general plan and the future land use map. Uh, one of the things that we reported on last year and just reiterated that the changes to the A110 zone um, helps to integrate smaller lot sizes uh, and increases the the base density within that zone which translates into the opportunity uh, for those lots to incorporate different types of housing. Our second action item uh is targeted towards encouraging planned unit developments in neighborhoods with the idea of supporting an integration of smaller lot sizes and offering a mix of housing options within the same neighborhood. Uh so there's a few PUB areas in Herman. Uh and the idea is that instead of just a standard lot size for one neighborhood uh that there can be a combination of small, medium, and large. Uh and this works to implement that strategy. A regarding reszoning. Uh so we're in the the fourth benchmark uh for action item two uh which is also

updating residential zones for allowing that integration of small lot sizes. Uh so we talked a little bit about the uh the small lot residential zones that are in process. Uh but a key aspect of Herman's um plan development overlay is that ability to mix the lot sizes. And we know that city staff has been evaluating options for updating this overlay, trying to make it a little bit more feasible for smaller scale development outside of those master development agreements. Uh the minimum acreage of 15 acres. Uh looking to perhaps reduce that that would make it more accessible uh to a broader range of development efforts. The third action item is focused on infrastructure investments. Uh with the moderate income housing plan, we chose to focus that action item on the rehabilitation or expansion of active transportation infrastructure uh to facilitate construction of moderate income housing and making sure that that moderate income housing has multiple modes of transportation uh and connection to both local and regional uh amenities and opportunities. uh this implements that strategy B and there's two benchmarks that are identified in um year three and moving forward. Uh we also reported on these last year and it's primarily focused on coordinating and prioritizing uh the funding of active transportation projects that connect the housing with regional transportation. uh and then initiating that rehabilitation in priority areas as identified in the city's active transportation plan. Uh so we know the city's been busy uh doing a lot of work uh on Main Street, uh the Minus Creek Trail. Uh what we reported on this year is just that continued work on restriping and updating roadways uh to add bike lanes, make sure that the

sidewalks are there uh and working to have that expanded active transportation network citywide. Uh the upgrades were completed on Main Street which was one of those high priority projects. Uh there's that planned widening and improvements to six 6000 West and also what we reported on was the approval of the the public infrastructure districts for the future Panorama and South Hills developments. Our fourth action item is focused on allowing detached accessory dwelling units in the right residential neighborhoods and then tracking both internal and attached ADUs as well as detached ADUs. uh this implements that strategy E and in um this third year moving forward uh we are at that fourth benchmark which is to prioritize and begin updating regulations to allow detached ADUs uh that meet the city's criteria. This is a process that was started last year. Uh so we reported uh you guys were a little bit of ahead of ahead of the game uh and we reported on the progress last year as well. Uh we know that the city's working to establish best practices for detached ADUs in Herman City and right now the plan is to regulate and allow for those based on lot size uh rather than limit it to just specific residential zones. Uh city staff has been working hard and the work is in progress to find that right fit for Herman City. uh and it's an active application that's being coordinated with several city departments to understand the utility requirements, impact fees, and the building permit process. The fifth action item is focused on allowing for multif family or town home development as buffers between commercial and single family residential areas uh as well as in areas such as the the Herman Town Center and near those major transit investment corridors that

are identified in the regional plan. It implements uh both strategies F and G. And with year three, the benchmark is the the third one to initiate that reszoning for a mix of housing uh including multif family and town homes in areas that are that are identified for priority areas. Uh and most of that is in those major transit investment corridors uh as well as the Herman Town Center. So, similar to some of the earlier action items, uh that this year we reported on prioritizing the location of mixeduse development, multifamily, attached single family and small at single family in areas of Haramman that are near uh major transit investment corridors or corridor preservation areas. uh but also as buffers to some of your commercial areas uh such as the town center, the community college campus uh near Mountain View corridor as well as um other areas with guidance from the general plan. So we know that Herman approved the resoning of several hundred acres in that southeast corner of the city back in November. Uh this involved also some of that reszoning of vertical mixed use into multif family as well as shifting the zoning of some areas that were still under an agricultural zone um or a larger lot single family uh to allow a mix of housing types. In December, Herman also approved that amendment to the Herman Town Center MDA to include up to 300 residential units in that commercial section uh of the the Herman Town Center Commons area. Uh so previously that was earmarked only for commercial um but negotiating for some residential development and we'll talk a little bit about it in the the last action item as well with the the effort to create the Southwest Athletic Complex. Uh there

were some amendments to both Teton Ranch and Olympia uh that included sort of converting uh some previously dedicated open space areas to housing uh in exchange for some of that land for the the athletic complex. So our last action item that we reported on this year uh was regarding establishing a housing task force to facilitate preservation and creation of attainable housing for moderate income house households. This implements strategy K. Um it's got several different benchmarks and most of these are ones that are being reported on um every year and there's three of them that focus on both monitoring the moderate income housing options uh in Herman. They're propos proportioned to overall housing and residential development monitoring those LITC housing projects and understanding and making sure that the city's aware of the expiration timing of those subsidized areas. uh and then prioritizing and establishing programs to preserve existing and new moderate income housing and sub subsidized units. Uh with this one, the housing task force uh that was originated and organized by Mayor Palmer continues to work on strategies and pursuing opportunities uh for preserving and creating attainable workforce housing options. The idea is to aim it at educators, first responders, entry- level city employees. Uh, and the main goal is to create and maintain deed restricted housing that helps provide and preserve housing for those that serve the community. So, that's an ongoing effort. Uh and regarding the monitoring of housing, uh Herman City, uh keeps pretty close tabs on residential development and housing options using the data from building permits as well as the MDAs. So all of those entitled units, how many have been built, how many are remaining, and

what's that proportion of multif family to single family that provides a general framework for monitoring potential moderate income housing options in Herman. Um while we know that not all of the multifamily or attached single family or even small at single family are currently affordable to moderate income households um that is sort of the the best um framework for potential options um if the market cooperates. Uh so the approximate split of 40% multif family dwellings which includes those attached single family town homes um to 60% single family represents the overall composition of dwelling units that are vested through the city's master development agreements. Um so it's tracking pretty close what's been built uh what's entitled and what um was planned u with these master development agreements for the last 20 years or so. Uh there's just the one litec project in Herman City that has 288 units. The majority of those 258 are set aside for low-income households. Uh the initial compliance period um for subsidizing those units ends in 2026, but there's uh an extended compliance period of 15 years as a minimum that ends in 2041. Um, with the previous uh strategy and action item, we talked a little bit about those those residential units in the the new Herman Town Center Commons area. And part of that negotiation by the housing task force in the city uh was to include a minimum of 10% affordable units in that development. So the state asks to understand what the market response has been. Um, in the past year we reported on the building permits and one of the things that we

talk about is how many of these are in an MDA versus not an MDA just to reflect the long-term uh strategies and efforts that Herman um has been doing with the the master development agreements uh that it's been administering for for quite a while. So 312 single family dwellings, 265 of those are in master development agreement areas, 153 multifamily. Again, this would include the attached uh single family town home. Nearly all of those, 150 are in an MDA. Uh with condos, there was 50 and they were all included in MDA. Uh and then one accessory dwelling unit um that was issued a permit and completed. Uh we also um did you have a an item to add?

So certificate of occupancy are only required for a new construction. Correct. If it's an existing single family home and they're asking for an existing basement space to convert it to uh an internal ADU, we don't require the certificate of occupancy to be issued. So it's kind of a technicality. We actually issued can't remember what the number was. It was like 20 for the the ADUs. Yeah. Yeah. That's what this next slide talks about. Um yeah, so we issued more. So that's a little bit

there was more permits issued for ADUs. Um but they were most of them were within existing homes. Uh so the state you know asks cities to track ADUs through one of I think three or four different ways. Herman primarily tracks the ADUs through that count of building permits issued. The total number um over over time since Herman started tracking using building permits uh is 18. a lot more um applicants have submitted uh but those are either still in process for approval or they've been withdrawn. But interesting to note that in the past year um 15 permits were issued uh for adding an ADU to an existing home or a new home. So the entitled units gives the state an idea of what the potential is for future housing uh that hasn't yet pulled a permit. Uh so entitled units by the state's definition or housing units that are legally allowed to be built in a city that haven't pulled a permit um but they could. And so that can be captured in a development agreement. Uh we know that that's something that heroin has been using for a long time. Not all cities do. Um, or it could just be through the current zoning, uh, what's allowed in a residential zone that hasn't yet been built, uh, or other mechanisms such as the overlay zone. Uh so what's out there that hasn't yet been built? Our estimates are through development agreements and this primarily is Olympia um some of the the amended South Hills and Panorama uh that there's about 13 and a half thousand units that are still um coming down the pipeline in the future uh when the

market and the developers are ready to make that happen and if a structure is in place uh to support that development outside of the MDA areas with just the residential zoning or the mixeduse zoning. when you look at the vacant land and you subtract um a percentage of that for infrastructure updates such as roads that there's potential for about 3,00 to 3500 additional units in your residential base zones that are not included in a development agreement with the overlay zone that is available citywide um for an increase in density uh based on certain conditions that could potentially add an additional 886 units. Uh and then for the last item, uh the state asks to understand how many units have will serve letters, have the roads, have the sewer, all the utilities in place, uh infrastructure ready units. Uh Heramman's at about 278 with the number of units that that could be built uh tomorrow and could go down and pull a permit from the city.

Can I ask a question on that? Yes. Can we go back one slide? So on the residential where it's like use zone. So for example, if we have an A1, right, it's like one house per acre. Mhm. That's just counting as one, right? It's not saying like, hey, this is five acres. This could be subdivided into a subdivision with quarter acre lots.

Yeah. So what we do is um the city's GIS uh department, you know, runs a tally of all the vacant land and then how much of that vacant land is in each zone. And so if there's, you know, 50 acres in the A1 zone, um that's 50 units, but we then subtract about 20% for roads that would need to go in to develop that for housing. Uh so we just did that citywide. And you know, some of that includes the mixeduse zoning that's that's down in that little southeast um tail of the city um on the other side. And you know, then there's just little pockets here and there that might currently be adjacent to other housing um but could in include additional housing. So

yeah, thank you. I was just like the number seemed really low, but that makes sense.

Yeah. So, okay. Uh so the next thing that we wanted to talk about so that that's the the quick summary um the the non-5page um written summary of of everything that we submitted to the state. Uh and just a a quick note about the the timing on that. Uh reports were due August 1st and then the state uh takes time to review every city and county's reports. They have 90 days to review those reports and then come back with um their recommendation regarding the completeness of that report if it meets um the state's requirements as far as you know are you reporting on all of the things that that you should be reporting on based on what's in your implementation plan and your five-year plan. Uh so we've we've had good luck in the past two years. uh we you know try to reiterate not just what Herman has been doing in the past year uh but has been setting the foundation for the things that have been able to happen in the last year. And so we'll we'll look for that report. If for some reason uh there is feedback that uh the reporting needs more detail, you do have a a period uh to respond to and update your report um before the the state would consider you you non-compliance. So, uh, so there's avenues, uh, for making those those updates, but we're we're hoping that it, um, gets the green light that we have gotten in the past two years. So, in the past year or so, the state has added some additional strategies since we worked on the moderate income housing plan and updated it back in 2022.

There were 24 or 25 strategies and now there are five additional strategies that have been included uh for cities to consider. They are primarily focused on promoting affordable home ownership. And these are things that Herman City could consider making another amendment to the plan if you felt like some of these strategies were a better fit for things that city is working on or is interested in working on. Uh so there's a home ownership promotion zone, uh a first home investment zone, or approving projects that receive funding from uh the Utah Homes Investment Program, or looking at things like adopting, uh home ownership density bonuses for single family, uh or home ownership density bonus for multifamily. Uh so those are the strategies that are out there uh that the city could consider. You know, either swapping out one of the strategies that's currently in there or adding new strategies um and providing a little bit more opportunity to essentially report on on the initiatives that the city has been taking rather than this is a new direction. It could be these are things that we've already been doing and we feel like these strategies might be a good fit for the direction Herman has been heading.

I have a question. What is the Utah Homes Investment Program? Uh so that's the a statewide program. Um it was initiated I think just in the the last year. Um, I don't have a lot of details about it, but it's intended to provide funding, I think, towards down payments or just reducing those barriers to um to owning homes for lower and moderate income families. Is this the zone that becomes eligible for some of those grant programs? Was it like the 20,000? I think it was like $20,000 for first-time home buyers or something.

Yeah. So would that be those first two zones would be eligible for the grants? Yeah. Yeah. I think that's the idea is that you create different mechanisms so that homes or development within um these zones have the opportunity to apply for and receive funding uh that the state has set aside for affordable home ownership. It's like a grant that you pay off when you sell it. Yeah. It's like a $20,000 credit basically for lack of a better term.

Okay. So, next steps, you know, as we reviewed with the action reporting, the actions that we reported on this year would be the same actions that we would report on uh for the next two years. So, year four and year five. uh based on the implementation plan that was adopted and approved by the state. Uh it's essentially continuing to report on those same types of things. what the city's been doing with reszoning, with infrastructure improvements, with accessory dwelling units, and um things that the housing task force is working on to to support uh monitoring and stabilization of new and existing uh moderate income housing units. I think the the other thing to consider the reporting um if you were to amend the plan, you wanted to add a new strategy or change a strategy, uh it doesn't completely reset the clock back to year zero, you would essentially keep on reporting on strategies that have already been in place that you still want to keep. So, you would report on those, but then you would report on the new strategies um as a firstear report, which is a little bit different than the follow-up reports.

So, does it make it harder for the city if we were to add more of those? It just makes it a little there's just a little bit more information that needs to be provided and we're not we're not under any requirement to add to it. Those were just suggested strategies that we could consider. Right.

Exactly. It's just things to consider if you feel like they might be a good fit for things the city is already doing. There's also, you know, 19 strategies that are already in state code uh that you could look at again as well and think about whether or not they might be a better fit for the things that are happening that you've been seeing, you know, trends and shifts uh in the market and knowing what what has been coming to you as a as a planning commission and what you might expect to to come in the next year or if there's things that might be a better fit for just showing how Herman is working towards uh this overall goal of of moderate income housing.

The feedback I've been hearing is now that we're in kind of the third year of this reporting cycle is that other cities are getting more requests for additional information this year than they had in the previous two cycles. So it's possible we if we receive that request, it's possible we could satisfy the requirement by just simply providing more detailed information

or it may require us to identify one of the other strategies that is more maybe applicable to our current condition or market opportunities to facilitate or encourage affordable housing in our community. So, we may we may need to make an adjustment, but right now we don't. Another thing we've been hearing, the Utah Leagues of Cities in Town has, uh, been meeting, uh, I think it's every few weeks, uh, you know, as they prepare for there was supposed to be an interim session, but obviously the next legis legislative session is just a few months away, and we've been hearing they're exploring making some changes to them to this whole program. So we may have new legislation, you know, next year sometime that might require us to change this again. Anyway, so we're just I think there's probably a good chance at this point in time we're going to be looking at an amendments.

Yeah, there will probably be be some new new information that comes out. Uh, and the other thing, and I brought this one back up specifically because what we've been hearing from other cities, is that if you show that you've essentially completed all of your benchmarks ahead of time that the state considers that strategy to be complete and then you need to have at

a minimum number of active strategies. Uh and the other thing to to note is that there's there's a minimum number which is three uh to be in compliance but then if you do five or more strategy you are eligible for priority consideration uh for the transportation funding. And so that's that's one of the reasons that we that we have the six strategies because that has made Heramman eligible for that priority consideration for for transportation and rent investment funds. And so it's something to to just consider that you know there might be another strategy that can be on the on deck to replace uh strategy E regarding ADUs. uh if that's something that that is implemented and you know we're also hearing that that that's an area where you know the state may make another push regarding detached ADUs that if cities don't have that in place uh that they may need to have that in place um over the next year. I was just going to say I know a lot of these, you know, all this stuff is words, but I feel like Herman actually has been working actively on these items

where we're trying to add new zones for smaller homes on smaller lots. Um I Yeah, interior ADUs I think are amazing because it just like reduces the entry or the cost of housing to just use your home that's already there in a better way with multiple dwellings within a home. Um, I think detached ADUs I I'm for it for sure. Uh, because it's somewhat using the existing infrastructure that's already there.

So, typically, you know, the cost is hopefully lower to do another dwelling unit on your property since you already have a primary dwelling. So, I just since I've been on the planning commission, I think we've actually done a pretty good job implementing these. Earlier in your report, you had mentioned the mitigation fund. What was that? Um, sorry. Could you say that again, Adria?

Oh, sorry. At the beginning of your report, you mentioned a mitigation fund. Do you remember what that is? Mitigation fund. Let's see. I think that was in strategy K. get back to the beginning. Um so strategy K um offers or the the intent is to preserve existing as well as new moderate income housing plans or units. Uh and it offers you know a few different options for doing that. the landlord incentive program, deed restricted units, using a grant program, or establishing a housing loss mitigation fund. Um, as far as I know, that's not something that Herman currently has in place. Uh and the other thing that we've talked about and it's there's not a specific place to report this, but the the funding the housing set aside fund that the city um gets from its redevelopment areas that thus far that that amount of funding has not been large enough to provide, you know, incentives for it to be appealing for developers to to incorporate subsidized units or lower income units.

Another um this may also be referencing Salt Lake City is the only city that I know of that has done this, but if someone voluntarily chooses to essentially demolish or remove a home out of, you know, from essentially the housing stock, there is a fee that is associated with that. the city collects that fee and puts it into this housing loss mitigation fund and then they can use that money towards, you know, like affordable housing or something like that. Um, so it it was kind of a way of not necessarily telling people that they can't take down a home and then maybe convert that to a non-residential land use, but there would be some kind of

financial impact, a fee associated with that, right? Because they really want to preserve housing stock. That was it's been long that's a long-held strategy that Salt Lake City has had. So I don't know of other cities who have done that. Yeah, I don't think it's very commonly used in Utah right now. Um, so some something I I went to several meetings for the transportation committee for Wasatch Front Regional Council and one of the things I kept trying to bring up is like we've dedicated a corridor for front or for tracks, right, to go through our city. Mhm.

And it's just like, well, it would be it would be nice to tell developers we know a certain within a certain amount of time, call it 10 years, I don't care. Mhm. that we know we're going to have that type of transportation available. Yeah. To incentivize developers to want to develop next to to right because I'm like transportation is a major cost, you know? I can't remember what the percentage is. It's 10% I don't know 15% of your living expenses is transportation, right? And so I was kind of like challenging UTA to like give the cities more structure of what they can plan on like where it's actually going to go, not just like, oh, we might do it or might not,

right? Because I'm like that's that would help with this this initiative of moderate income housing.

And that is one of the the things that we have have mentioned as far as barriers encountered. Uh so starting in in year one of this reporting uh for each of the the action items and strategies that relate to you investing and resoning and amending land use regulations for areas in transit investment corridors. uh just mentioning that you know Herman has been working towards you know building that transit oriented development but until the transit is actually built it's not it's not realizing its full potential or achieving the original intent um of those areas because you're right that that the housing plus transportation costs are the the complete picture for for families uh and especially moderate income housing families If they can remove or lower that that transportation cost by by being in one of those those units, then that makes that unit more affordable because they know that their transportation costs are are reduced if they're able to to easily uh access a regional transit option.

Does the moderate income go up every year? So the moderate income um for planning purposes is the county's moderate income housing or sorry the the county's annual um median household income. Uh so it has been rising but housing costs have been rising faster

higher and faster. Uh and so it's you know it's obviously not just a a Herman issue or a county issue. uh it's been an issue statewide. That is one of the other barriers that we that we talk about that the you know the market response uh higher interest rates all these things are contributing to making units that were intended to be affordable uh and geared towards moderate income households. Uh it's pushing them out of reach. Uh and those are things that are that are out of the city's control. you've been working on, you know, trying to create this framework to support a mix of housing and housing diversity uh citywide. Uh that the market is is playing a role in, you know, preventing some of that from from coming to fruition. Uh and the other barrier and market response that we've noted is the the trend to build um larger homes on smaller lots instead of smaller homes on smaller lots. And that makes those smaller lots less affordable than if the the homes were built that were more of the the starter home or the bungalow um that you historically would see uh on some of those smaller lots.

Okay. Did you want to add anything else, Michael? No, it the pulling together this report is a lot of work. uh it's a lot of data points and it's difficult because we also need to summarize it and and make it readable and so yeah, we're just anxious to see the state's response to our report this year.

Yeah. And I think once we do get that information back, that's that's an update that Michael can give you. Uh, and what we've done each year and we're in the process of doing right now is to to make a more userfriendly readable um, summary report of all the information that was provided. So, this is sort of that that overview uh, but we'll be putting that into the same format as the modern income housing plan uh, and the reports that we've done the the previous two years. So that's just an extra tool that the city felt was important to to do so that you know the the average person or resident um planning commissioner city council could see you know without reading through all the the very wordy um and maybe not easy to to navigate state report. uh that that summary report would provide a a good perspective of of what the city was doing and how they how they responded to the state.

This was great. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Thanks for thanks for having me and thank you for being flexible with the agenda. Um, and we will be back again to talk about water use and urban forests. So, there's there's a lot going on over the last the next couple of months. Uh, so thank you for thank you for your time and insights. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. All right. Um, so chair and commission comments, I just wanted to say thank you to Sheldon and good luck in your future endeavors. Good luck. Thank you, Sheldon. Thank you, Sheldon. Thank you. It's been so fun for all your work

seeing you from the beginning of like code enforcement and then moving into to this role. It's been fun to see you grow and you've been so incredible and I'm so grateful to have been able to work with you. So, thank you. Yep. Thank you very much. Yeah, I'd like to just express my appreciation to have the ability to work alongside the commission and help shaping, you know, Haramman city and Herman, you know, they are fortunate to have a commission who was, you know, willing to find that balance between the residents, the community and the city, you know, and again, appreciative staff and the opportunities that Herman City provided, you know, with offering me this opportunity to work here. So, again, thank you very much. Thank you so much. Thank you.

I've already warned Sheldon. I believe in phoning a friend. Yeah. Hello, Sheldon. What do we do? He's gonna change his number. Yeah. I have one thing and I don't know how to approach it, but it often drives me insane, so you know, I'm not patient. Is there a way that we could talk to developers? Most of the time we have developers and proposals that like they're to the point, they move along, but like sometimes we have things that I I find it really odd that we give residents only three minutes, but we give developers unlimited time.

I agree and I was thinking the same thing. ju just related to the we we've seen the proposal 400 times like we just needed to get to the stealth discussion like I I get it and I totally understand it and I notice a lot when it's an attorney driven thing and this is no pun towards attorneys um but Mike I really think we need to figure out a way to be more productive either a we need to give our residents more time we cut you off and you actually were giving us useful information. Um, but we we like we give the open mic to the developer for their presentation and often it's not productive. It's just long.

It's not new information. And I I feel like if I was a resident sitting out there, I would have been pissed that they only got three minutes and that guy got to ramble forever. I'm just saying I think and that was for a seven like it was a teeny little thing. Like it's we got to think of something cuz sometimes it just seems like we're wasting everyone's time to get to the point. Go ahead. Ogden, I think the chair has that ability to say, you know, we appreciate

get to the point. You got you got three more minutes. And I just wonder I I just wonder like in an initial presentation I mean it's totally different than like this report and study like that's different but when it's a development that is now I would understand if it was a 4,000 acre development. Maybe we need to take half an hour but we weren't even going through models. We weren't I just I wonder if there's like a way to say you know what you need to be kind of prepared to be done in 15 minutes. Maybe um maybe our we'll take the first crack. We could meet Andrea together and just talk about this and figure out how we can manage the meeting a little bit differently and if we need to we could even amend our policy or

Yeah. So we'll work on that. Yeah. I just it's just something that I really think our resident we owe more to our residents than we do to the developers and it seems like we often do it backwards. Always tell us how we have cell phones and we need our cell phones and stuff. you were like, "Yeah, we get it."

Um, I think another thing that's important to add, um, I've been doing some research in the background about adding an option for public comment, similar to how council does where they have a moment for public comment that's either about agenda items or not about agenda items kind of at the beginning. And I talked to um I believe Bluffale is the only one around us who does this, but they have gotten some pretty good comments out of it. Um, so if that's something that you're interested in, it doesn't solve what you're talking about. Um, but it is something that we're like concurrently working on. I support that as well. I think that I I think we need more resident input

and more to the point on business. That That's all I'm trying to say. That's that's that was Well, and I think most developers, just this one particular one, kept reiterating the same issue again and again about how he didn't want a stealth. Yeah. Sometimes uh at city council we hear a resident will come and address really a land use issue but they don't have another kind of public forum to raise that issue. Yeah. So if we had kind of that open portion of the beginning of the meeting at least it would be a venue where we could make that an option.

Also it is currently available on our website. So maybe during our next meeting um because I don't know that a ton of stuff is going to change within the next two weeks as far as this policy and stuff goes, but we can remind people that they do have access to give any land use comments or comments specifically about the agenda on our website. Um it's in the same place. You just check a box for about this or not about this. Um, but making sure people know that's available while we work through everything else. Okay, thank you.

All right. Um, the next city council meeting will be de September 24th. The next planning commission meeting will be October 1st and then another council meeting on October 8th. Motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Thank you. So Adam and Heather second. We're Man, exhausted.