Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

January 14th, 2026, first of the year. Very exciting. The first thing we do um in these meetings is we stand say the pledge of allegiance. So, if you wouldn't mind standing. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you for that. Can we get a roll call vote, please?

Chair Anderson is excused. Vice Chair Ericson here. Uh, Commissioner Tibbitz here. Commissioner Snow here. Commissioner Litkkey here. Commissioner Edwards here. Commissioner Casparian here. Thank you. Did everyone have a chance to review the minutes from December 10th? Yes. Yes. Did anyone any comment? I didn't have any. I make a motion that we approve the minutes from December 10th, 2025. Second. All in favor? I I Any opposed?

Thank you. All right, let's get going. Um, we have two items on our public hearing list. First up is Paul Jones requests freezone approval for 7634 South, 7636 South, 7638 South, and 7640 to 7642 South State Street totaling approximately 2.17 acres. It is proposed that these properties currently zoned in the transit oriented development TOD zone be reszoned to the state street SSC zone. Information regarding the proposed regulations, prohibitions, and permitted uses that the properties will be subject to if the reszone is adopted can be found in the Mun Midville Municipal Code 17-7-7. And Jonathan is presenting.

Thanks, Vice Chair Ericson. Sorry, that was a bit of a mouthful. Um, so this is a reszone for a number of properties. Um, I've got them here on the screen for you. Is this TV working? Yep.

Okay, perfect. Um, so these are the four in question. Um, this is the current zoning map. Um, so as it stated, they're currently in the TOD zone, the transit oriented development zone. They're seeking a reszone to the State Street zone um, in order to operate a vehicle sales business. Um, I'll kind of go through this a little bit here. Um, these properties are in one of our opportunity areas, um, the Middle State Street, um, which is, uh, connecting some corridors between the Center Street Station, um, and North State Street, which is got the 7200 South, um, and State Street intersection. So, there's plenty of opportunity for mixed use and commercial uh, opportunities here. Um, I've got a list in here. Um, I didn't talk too much in the staff report about it, but it's mostly for your information of what uses would be added or allowed at this property if the the reszone were passed. Um, so I'll just kind of briefly go through these. So, like assembly use, cafe, deli, car wash, um, a number of itinerate merchant, master plan development, um, some funeral homes, etc. Um, outdoor storage is another one. And the ones, like I said, they're interested in is vehicle sales. Um yeah, here's this is the criteria in our municipal code that a reszone would have to meet um that you as the commission would recommend to the city council. Um and then they would have to ultimately find that it meets um these. Um as staff, we are we are recommending that you recommend approval for this. Um, we think that it brings a good opportunity for some potential more commercial uses in the area. Um, with where it's located, I'll kind of jump back to our zoning map real quick here. Um, it's on the edge of the current State Street

zone, um, and far enough away from the track station that we don't anticipate any development in the near future of these parcels specifically. um and it could provide um a potential good transition for um future development as well. And the TOD serves the purpose to um be a transitionary zone for the todo which um would probably not reach this far north um that we would anticipate. Any questions for me? And Mr. Jones is here if you have questions for him as well. I don't have any questions at this time. No, I won't write it now either. Okay. Yeah.

Thank you. And we have a I have a motion when you're ready as well. Okay, great. Mr. Jones, did you want to present anything that maybe Johnny missed or explain the project? Uh, no, just thank you for your consideration. I think it's all in the packet. So, okay. Thanks so much. Yes. Thank you. All right. So, I think our next step is to open this up for the public hearing portion. So, it's open. If you have a comment or would like to say anything, you're more than welcome to to step up, state your name. Okay. Seeing there is no one, I make a motion we close the public hearing. Second. All in favor?

Any opposed? All right. Thank you. Um Garrett, so this is a legislative decision which means that the planning commission um has quite a bit of uh latitude to make their recommendation to the city council ultimately that it will be the city council who will make this decision when they exercise their power. Thank you. That was legal for anyone that Yeah, it's more polite to call him by his name than legal. Any comments here?

I didn't have any issues with it. I like that it's right next to the zone that it's going to be absorbed into and so it makes sense to me. Yeah, I agree. I mean, if it was kind of an inscillary property, I would have more of a concern, but since it's right on the border and I don't see the TOD going that far north, I mean, when there's so much more along Center Street. Correct. Yeah. Yeah.

Okay. Um, I'll go ahead and make a motion. I move that we recommend approval of the zoning map amendment to reszone 7634 South, 7636 South, 7638 South, and 7640-7642 South State Street of approximately 2.17 acres from the transit orient oriented development to zone to the state street SSC zone with the findings included in the staff report. Second. Can we get a roll call vote? Vice Chair Ericson. Yes, Commissioner Tippetsz. Yes, Commissioner Snow. Yes, Commissioner Ludgeki. Yes, Commissioner Casparian. Yes.

Thank you for that. So, continue to work with staff if you have any questions and they'll be able to um get this on to the city council.

Thank you. All right. Next up on the agenda, we have Midvil City initiated request to modify Midvil Municipal Code section 17-7-17.3 to zone to provide design flexibility of the commercial mixeduse requirement. Bendelin is presenting. Uh good evening This um should look familiar to you because we've talked about this before. Um and it's a couple of months ago now. Um last time was in November. So I will just make sure everyone also um the public who's here is sort of on the same page. Um we're talking about an amendment to the TOD zone transit oriented development overlay. That's what TOD stands for. And one can divide the zone basically into two subcategories. Um areas that are zoned to odo and include it in one of these two um figures here. Um these are the areas where the zone requires mixed uses mixed uses. Areas that are outside of these um two um sections also have mixed use but at a at a lesser requirement especially if you want to get incentives. Um this here is um sort of another piece of

the puzzle that you you'll understand in a minute why um this is included. This is an excerpt from our transportation master plan and it shows the different road classifications. And I mean roughly you could say uh if you look at the legend um if a road is mentioned higher up in the legend it's a bigger facility an arterial for example portions of uh Fort Union Boulevard are arterials then there are minor arterials the eastern portion of Fort Union or State Street. Um then center street it's its own category. Then we have collectors. Um Bingham Junction is one of those um feeders and minor streets. Minor streets are what probably most people would term local streets. Your home may front onto one of those. So just just keep that in mind. Um now to the amendment that we are talking about. Currently the code um requires if the property is located in one of these mapped areas that a minimum of 50% of the building footprint should be an office, retail or restaurant. Um so we're proposing to change that to um basically a different paradigm. We don't say anymore it's the footprint of the building but we we say it's a percentage of the frontage that the building has on a public street.

So the proposal is uh a minimum of of 65% of the street facing building facades and same thing again they should be office retail or restaurant. Um on the left side currently the code has sort of a special instruction and that's it says that buildings that front onto Fort Union Boulevard um may not contain offices on the first floor. Um that fund we are also working with. We are basically expanding that to not only include Fort Union but also center street. Then another new um mechanism is clustering. So the new language says if you have one of these requirements you are allowed to cluster. So let's say you have a corner lot. So your building is exposed to a street on two sides. Then um you could say well you could try to bring whatever you know you want to bring to just one frontage um and have more commercial on that frontage less on the other. Um and the code then also says where you are allowed to do that and that's whenever um there's an arterial a minor arterial center street collector or a feeder road. And so this this basically refers back to the map in the transportation

master plan that I had up. And then down here again, the expansion of the requirement that you cannot have office now would apply to Fort Union Boulevard and to Center Street. At the last um and let let me just finish this up. Paragraph H, which is the one we are looking at, um, is for the areas that are not in the mapped section that we we just talked about. And it's the same same idea. So, it's the same language changes were inserted here. And um, the percentage is different. Currently it reads the minimum is 25% in office, retail or restaurant. Um under the new idea um it's 40% of the street facing building facads. Now when we discussed this last time, there was a concern brought up that what if there were a developer who basically says, well, I really care about um the residential uses in the upper stories of a building, but I really don't need very much commercial space um on the main floor in order to make the project happen. and I minimize that uh to the point where maybe that commercial space isn't all that useful from a practical perspective. Um so after that comment was um um brought up, we discussed that um as city staff a little more and did some

research and we thought well we we could think about uh a way to address this at least a little bit so that you know we can make sure that there aren't any um you know constellations where we might actually see something like that and um in order to get at that everything in the proposed language stays the same except this middle sentence is something that we are proposing to you know insert. So the addition would be the resulting office, retail or restaurant space shall have a minimum depth of 25 ft measured at a right angle from the interior surface of the front wall to the interior surface of the real wall. So the idea here is you know we have a dimension 25 ft and the right angle is really just there in order to avoid that someone comes and says well my diagonal dimension from the front left corner to the rear right corner is 25 ft. And we we did some research and talked with um some you know people in the development world and and we got mostly feedback that this may work. Of course with when you have a hard and fast um standard like this, there's always the possibility that we run into a project that you know may have all dimensions and for whatever reason this doesn't work. um you know that risk is always there.

If that happens then as the city of course there's the choice of opening up the ordinance and contemplating to you know have some kind of a safety valve that there could be a special approval um for less than this. But at this point in time sort of our analysis was this may not be very likely and um this is the most conservative approach. I mean if we ever run into a problem we can still amend the language if needed. And with this um inserted um the full language for the proposal is on the right side here. And it's exactly what we had just with the blue sentence inserted. And then paragraph H looks like this. and then the blue sentence inserted and everything else that was part of the original proposal. Do you have any questions on this?

Not at this time. Wasn't part of this is for parking that you didn't want to take up all of their main floor and have no parking and end up with more parking lot rather than podium parking and being able to give them a little bit more podium parking and have it hidden rather than spread out. Um yes that's

that's one of the effects of this and um currently the way um I guess costs are in the development world um we do see a lot of podium parking um parking structures seem to not be as you know as desired right now just probably because of cost. Yeah, I'm good. Yeah, I don't have any questions. I do like I do like the requirement. I like the the space requirement. Cool.

All right, I think we're ready to move on to the public hearing. So, I will open this up for public hearing. If you have any comments, please feel free to come forward, state your name, get on the record. Hi, I'm back. I'm Alan Argon with Hybrid Commercial. We do uh we're partnered with JDH Development um that owns some parcels in this overlay zone. We are uh in a favor of this. It fits our project very well and that's just want to say we're in favor. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, good to hear. Don't know.

I'll entertain a motion. Seeing there's no one else coming forward, I make a motion we close the public hearing. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Good. Garrett, can you weigh in, please? This also is a legislative decision. So, uh, you have a great amount of discretion with your recommendation that you're making to the city council. Ultimately, it'll be the city council to make the final decision of whether it's approved or denied.

Awesome. Thank you. I like the time the city staff has put into this and and adding that component of the depth. Um, I think it makes sense that you don't use up the whole, you know, 50% of that floor space just for commercial when it may not work as efficiently as having this flexibility and and stuff because it's really the street facing that we would want to see that that development or that commercial space uh the mixed use being required on. And so, um, I like that we're not requiring the developers to use up half their space just to meet this requirement, but that we're using it for I I like what you've done. And I like that it make gives it some depth so you can't just make it tiny spaces for

that nobody can use. Yeah. Display windows. Yeah, display windows. And that was kind of a concern that we had and had was brought up. And so I I like that because now it's it has to be usable spa, usable commercial space. Okay. I'll make a motion. Awesome. I move that we recommend approval of the Midbell city initiated request to modify Midbell Municipal Code section 17-7-17.3 the TOD zone to provide design flexibility of the commercial mixeduse requirement with the finding noted in the staff report. Second. Can we get a roll call vote, please? Vice Chair Ericson, yes. Commissioner Tippetsz, yes. Commissioner Snow,

yes. Commissioner Litkkey, yes. Commissioner Casperian. Yes. The motion passes. Awesome. Thank you. Staff, work with yourselves. Okay, good work there.

I think next up we have staff updates. And I know Vendalin has some prepared stuff. Yes, there there have been a few things that came up over the holidays and a little bit before and a little bit after. And I just wanted to let you know about that. And if you feel like it, maybe you'll instruct other staff to do something. So um there a couple of things. Um, every year we elect uh a chair and a vice chair and in the bylaws you know we have the language up here and you know over time we've talked a little bit about that if it's good or not good overall to have a chair that potentially changes every year and you know Commissioner Litkkey um has brought this up and it's beginning of the year so we all thinking about new resolutions and question for you is basically do you want to pursue making a change here then you know I can put together language that we could change in the bylaws or do you feel like this is actually a good way to go? I mean, there's ups and downs to everything. Um, I I like the I I just think it brings more consistency because I think once you figure out what you're doing as

a chairman,

then you get voted out and you got a new person. And so I think it makes it hard on the city staff to constantly be changing um the chair. Um I think it brings consistency there. And then I think for the chair it brings consistency. You know that first year they got it fig they're figuring it out. The second year then it's status quo. Um now with that being said if you were chair and it's like okay I can't do this a second year. um that is certainly an option to be able to say, you know, I I I can't do this again. And I think that's okay. But I think the expectation should be that the chair is voted in for two years. And and same with the vice chair, I think it just keeps that consistency. and especially for city staff and then also just the it's I think it's easier for the chair

to do that and to to rotate everybody out just to have everybody have an opportunity. Um not everybody has to have that opportunity and I don't think it's necessary that everybody has to serve as chairman. Can I summarize what I heard you say? You say you want the chair to serve for multiple years without an election in between. Two two years. one election, they would be appointed for two years. One term, two years. One term, two years. One term, two years. Yeah.

And I totally agree with what Shane said. Um, be having served as chair and both of us have before. That first year is like you're learning the ropes and by the second year, you got it and then it changes. So, so I think it is beneficial to have a two-year term. And I will be the contrarian here where I feel like sharing sharing the love and the responsibility of this position is actually very beneficial. Um and having been in a chair or vice chair position for several years, I need out like I I I feel like there's a burnout situation and I feel like two years could definitely burn more people out.

Yeah. So I get what you're saying. Yeah. Because having the option to be reelected is on the table. That's true. So that is true. I say we leave it and if that person wants to be reelected, they can they can voice their opinion that hey, I'll stick around if you guys want to vote me in. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe that way it leaves the door open. That's the way I am. And I Robin kind of talked to me about this too and I think she feels the same way. Okay. So it gives the variability of multi-year as chair but doesn't require it. But I like the the problem solving thinking because that first year that you're chair or vice chair is very intimidating. It is absolutely. I mean it does get better the more you do it,

but that's maybe more incentive to and and I'm okay with elections every year. I just think the expectation should be for two years and that if you know a after one year you're like I'm done. That's okay. Then okay. Well, then you're not on the table anymore. But if the the thing is is yeah, I've I'm fine for another year, then I say at that point you voice that you're okay with that and we just reelect you in. I think we are depending on people's autonomy to be able to speak up and and say their own. I mean, but I think we're all expected to do that as commissioners.

And I and I totally get what you're saying. And I think maybe that should be more true than just saying two years. I think you give the chair an opportunity to say I can do this another year. If you guys want me to stay, then you you vote me in. A lot can change in two years. I mean, yeah, it's true. We get our lives are busy and Yeah. Yeah. And I mean, if you set the expectation at two years, that may somebody may not want to do it. that could dissuade them for sure. Yeah. I don't want to be expected to especially if you've never done it before. Yeah. To make the commitment to take kind of that reign to meet prior to the meetings and stuff. That's a lot of work. It is. Yeah. And I and I I think too that not everybody has to be chairman.

Yeah. And if it's just a constant rotation every year, then I think I mean Yeah. But that isn't that up to us as members, too? Yeah. I put names out there that we think can serve and you can say no. Yeah. Yeah, we did get that in there. You do not have to accept the nomination. Yes. Yes, we did. That is very specifically in there. I remember I remember that throwing that up. I leave it the way it is. Yeah, I I'm okay with leaving it. I feel like Okay. The that the second year can definitely happen. Um you you just have to let the fellow commissioners know that you're interested.

I mean we can't make the assumption if you don't say anything. Sure. Sure.

Yeah. And you know the bylaws that your bylaws really I mean they just can't you know violate any city ordinance or state or federal law. So, you know, this can always be, you know, brought up again if if you ever feel like a change is needed. Um, there's a second item I just wanted to um point out to you. Um, alternate members. So the bylaws currently say alternate members should hold a first or second alternate position within the commission with a first alternate filling in for the first vacancy. So if I translate that, what this means is if for example Candy isn't here, then the first alternate which is Matt um gets to vote in behalf of Candy basically. Now, our bylaws actually doesn't they don't really say how we determine who the first and who the second alternate is. Um I think there's been an assumption that it's done by seniority. Whoever has been here the longer among the alternates um is the first one and the one who hasn't been here as long as the second one. Is that basically what

Yeah, I thought that was my So yeah, that was my assumption also. Yeah, I'm not going to lie. I thought it was in writing. Pardon me. Surprise. I know. So, are you bringing this up for the suggestion of maybe getting it written down based on seniority, based on service to the commission? I I wonder if that's something you I think that might be helpful. Yeah. Okay. That way when we're not all here, they know what we Yeah. It's It's just, you know, if if there's clarity, then there can't be any, you know, misunderstandings. If everyone knows how it works, then Yeah. Maybe rock, paper, scissors is enough.

Yeah, I can put that in here, too. Okay, then I I'll I'll bring some some language and we'll just advertise it so that you can vote on it. I think we should seriously consider the rock paper scissors though. Okay, I can I can give you two alternatives and pick a number between 1 and 10. Yeah. Well, thank you for bringing that to our attention.

Yeah, you're welcome. Um, last item. It's been a while since we've had planning commission dinner and um Johnny has scoped out some restaurants. Good job, Johnny. Yes. and he is suggesting Longhorn Steakhouse in part because they seem to be very willing to have a group our size. That's been a problem. Yeah. There's not a lot of restaurants in our area that can support a group our size.

Yeah. And so that that was very refreshing to have someone say we can do that. Mhm. And it would save us from waiting for how long was it the one time? 45 minutes, an hour. Yeah, that was a long Yeah, that was really long. So, yeah. So, anyway, that's a suggestion if if that's the way you want to go. Um, and we would need to come up with a date and time that works for all of you. Can we do it on Valentine's Day? I tried to say that last year. Two birds. I must not have been paying attention.

I can't do that. That's okay. So, probably a Thursday, I think, is what we typically choose in February. We're thinking that might get me at a birthday. Oh, yeah. Let's do Well, what date? The 19th of February. What day is president's weekend? That same week of that week. So I am only available on the 5th and the 26th in February, but don't base it on my availability. We also have to consider Robin is

That's true. That's true. And I know her calendar's funky. I don't know. I mean text her. No, my We can run it by her, you know, and make sure she can do it. If if you know, you can find a date that works for all of you. Well, to help Casperian out, I think we should pencil a circle around the 19th of February. The 19th. Yeah. And powers that be. Okay. Thank you. Okay. So I'll and then we'll confirm at our next meeting. Yeah, let's confirm. Yeah, but we all have it kind of I'm not available, but that's okay.

I will miss you. Well, I have a celebrity wedding I'm doing. I have to be in Chattanooga. Oh, okay. Sorry we couldn't get you out of it. It'll be interesting. Can we have dinner there? Sure. You all have to fly. I don't think she'll pay for you guys to fly. She's paying me. But yeah, I mean, there are two choices. Um, you you pay for your your own way there or we all dinner. Okay. But I that's about all I can do, right? And maybe lodging. All right. So, I think we're all done. Yeah, that was everything. Thank you. All right. I move that we adjourn. Oh, wait. Can I do this? Mhm. Okay. I move that we adjourn at 6:36. All in favor?

I I. Any opposed? Perfect. No. Thank you. Thank you. Nice to see you, Adam.