Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hello and welcome to the planning commission meeting. Today is Thursday, January 22nd, 2026. It's 6:30 p.m. We are going to start off tonight with a prayer by member Wilson and then please join me in rising for the pledge of allegiance. Thank you. Our father in heaven, we rarest before thee once again at the beginning of this ply exoting meeting. We're grateful for the opportunity we have to live in this beautiful valley with all of our neighbors in France. We pray that thy spirit might attend us this night that as we discuss these proposals that we may be able to make decisions that are good for both parties and we ask for these things name Jesus Christ.

I aliance 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. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda for tonight? Motion by member Sessions. Second. Second by member McMillan. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? Motion carries unanimous. Any conflict of interest with anything on our agenda tonight? Seeing none, we will now move into public comment. All of the items on our agenda tonight are administrative, so there will not be a public hearing for any of the items on the agenda. If there's anything you would like to speak to us about, you may come forward now. Um, if you do so, please state your name for the record. Thank you. Seeing no takers, we will move on to our first administrative item for the evening.

Madam Chair, and good evening to the planning commission. Item number six on your agenda is the range phase one number one clad amendment. It's file number 25.052. The applicant is Chase Freeburn. Uh member of that organization has been in the audience tonight. Madam Chair, the owner is CW The Range LLC. The property is identified as really the whole subdivision uh but is uh identified by the parcel numbers and serial numbers in your meeting packet tonight. Madam Chair, the current zoning of the of the subdivision is R120, which is a which is a residential one unit per 20,000 square foot minimum zone. The acreage is approximately 19.29 acres combined for the whole subdivision. And in the request for tonight is to remove the temporary fire access easement located along the north boundary of the range phase one subdivision. Madam Chair, the uh subdivision plat was recorded uh last year, I believe in the fall, and was uh recorded with an easement that originally required uh that was required the subdivision to provide emergency fire access during development. Uh the subdivision roadway North Frontier Drive has been constructed to a point where it will provide safe ingress and ingress egress for the subdivision for emergency and and at a future point general traffic within a a public 60oot rideway making the temporary easement unnecessary. That said, the reviewing staff consisting of the planning office, the county engineer, county surveyor, the county recorder, and the fire department. All having to reviewed, I recommend approval to this body tonight. Madam Chair, Josh and I are happy to answer any questions of staff. Thank

you. Thank you. for fire. Is there a secondary emergency access?

Yeah, the secondary emergency access is through Trappers Point. That's not Yeah, that's not correct. So, um the road into the range is complete. The only thing that they haven't done is um seal coat and uh striping. UD do has provided them approval an emergency um I don't remember the exact word that they use but it's an emergency approval allowing it for construction and emergency vehicles to continue to access that through the winter until they can stripe it because they need to wait for uh temperatures greater than 50° in order to do the seal coat. Um those have been constructed. Um the striping's not in. Um they need to wait for the 50° in order to do the seal code in the striping. And so UD do gave them temporary approval to use their entrance for emergency and construction. Um yeah, that way the construction traffic is not going to go through Trappers Point um anymore. It should just go through their their entrance. Yep. I have a question just about in in general these types of things and they they just seem annoying. Is there a way to do this in the future where they're self extinguishing, you know, based on certain criteria, they just disappear. They don't have to go through the plat amendment process.

Unfortunately, since they showed it on the plat in order to get rid of that easement, it has to go through a plat. But in the future, if we have situations like this, is there a way to just avoid this? It just seems silly to uh plat amendments are required for changing a plat. So, I don't think so. Um I can talk to the county commission and uh if they choose, they can hear this directly instead of it going through the planning commission, but that'd be up to them. No, that's not my suggestion. My suggestion is either it's not shown on the plat at all and it's just a separate easement or it's shown on the plat as a self-extinguishing easement. So, it just goes away.

Yeah. If it's going to be shown on the plat, it's not going to be self-extinguishing. It needs to be removed through a plat amendment. So, uh, this was requested to be put on the plat, uh, by the fire department and as such it was placed on the plat. Any more questions from staff? The applicant is welcome to speak if you would like to. I think it's pretty straightforward, but you are welcome if you'd like to come forward. Any additional discussion?

Want a motion? If you want a motion, uh, I'll make a motion. I move that we recommend approval to the county commission of the range phase one number one flat amendment application number 25.052 052 to remove the temporary fire access easement located along the north boundary of the range phase 1 subdivision based on the findings and with the conditions listed in the staff report dated January 22nd 2026. Second. I have a motion by member Taylor, a second by member W. All in favor? I. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimous.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Item seven on the agenda is the Village at Trappers Loop Town Home Site Plan application 25.044. The applicant is Wayne Johnson. Two of the members of that organization are in the audience tonight. Madam Chair, the owner is Soderby Ltd. The project location is approximately 600 foot south of the intersection of North Queens Garden Road and West Old Highway Road in Mountain Green. And as identified by the parcel number and serial number in your staff report tonight, the current zoning is RM15, which is a multiple residential district. The acreage uh total for the parcel is 8.45 acres. And the request for tonight is for site plan approval of the village of Trappers Loop Town Home Subdivision to allow for the construction of 45 town homes. Madam Chair, that's 10 buildings approximately 9.24 units per acre. The review of a site plan includes well it's multiaceted. It includes a review of landscaping, parking, lighting, um elevations and similarly the building materials as well as the multif family residential design standards. The landscaping calls out for 15% of the site to be landscaped and 85% of that number to be plant material. Lighting is is a review conducted by photometrics plan which the county engineer largely uh reviews. Parking is uh a little bit confusing. It's it's in our code and has a has a table and just got to match it up right per the request and the building materials is included in your packet. Um if you click the link there are each building is shown. Uh the reviewing staff for this application includes the planning department as well as the county engineer, the Mountain Green Fire

Protection District and uh the secondary county engineer for drainage specifically. Reading my notes here. Um that's actually all I have, Madam Chair. Again, the applicants in the audience and Josh and I can answer questions as staff. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Any questions for staff? I got a couple questions. Um, your landscaping chart that you have in our packet. Um, it says that the developed park area is 69,000 square ft for 28% of the development. And that is an I believe in air. It's only it was 7,589 according to the the plat or the the plan. So So the actual percentage the that 28.4 is the landscape area not the park. All that green We'll take a look at that number.

We can have them correct that uh on the final plans. So the the actual percent goes up to 37.7% in landscaped area. So it even is even more than that chart represents. Then I have a question on the materials. Normally when we get I noticed on the notes it has the different building materials identified by number but there's no corresponding numbers on the elevation to know what is what. My concern is there's a lot of stuckco.

Yeah. I I don't know. I can't It looks like the all the sides and back. We had the same concern. Um so I had Jeremy reach out today um to find out what percentage of stucco and they sent us updated drawings that remove the stucco completely. Okay. It's substituted for hardy board. cuz I I remember we had that quite a discussion with the Rome ones and we limited it the stuckco to%. Our code does limit the percentage. It's got to be less than 51% if I remember correctly and we did have that long discussion several I think we got it down to 30. Yes.

Yeah. Um the new drawings that we were sent today from the engineer uh removed the stucco completely. So, does that become part of this official submittal and what we would be approving tonight? Uh, yeah. You would just make a um a condition or a stipulation in your motion that the the elevations that show no stucco are the approved elevations. Is it possible to pull that up? Yeah, I'll have Jeremy do that. See him over. Okay, no worries. I have a question. I have a question. Go ahead. You're first. Go.

I'll wait for Jeremy to come back.

Sorry. Thank you. So those end elevations are hardy as well.

Yes. If it was stuck, you'd have to prove with specific authority is spelled out in code. Of course, stucco is defined as for like accents and other things like that. So, no need for that tonight.

I have a question u not related to these faces, these photos, but this is this is a narrow area and there's a description in there about how access during development is going to take place. Could you just kind of outline that for me on the on the board? I'm worried about the disruption all the vehicles, all the building. That's a narrow place with private land and it talks about access roads during development. Could you just kind of lay that out for me?

Yeah, it's not really a discussion point. Um the engineer has reviewed this. They're good with the the design of the roads. They're going to be private. Um, which allows for the hammerheads to be used. Um, before construction can even begin, we'll have a preconstruction meeting with our engineer, our water engineer, um, water, sewer, and all the other players. But typically that takes place uh, during the pre-construction. Um, then I'll withdraw my question.

Thank you. I have a question about parking. Uh, I can see the driveway length in here and it and it says that there's two stalls per unit. That's correct. provided and two stalls per unit required under the code. It only requires two stalls for single family or multif family. Uh, guest and um other visitor parking is not a requirement of our code. Um, so unfortunately we can't require that. the two spaces within the garage count as the two spaces.

I guess that was my question. H how do we number one I didn't see I didn't see the difference in the county code that's called out in the new state code for the 9 by20 exterior and the 10 by 20 interior. And I can't I didn't see any floor plans in here that would allow me to verify number one the width of the driveway or number two the the dimensions of the garage. So I'm assuming that it must mean that you've checked that.

Yeah, we have checked that. Uh the scales uh are on the site plan. We can measure those in blue beam. Uh the garages will have to be a minimum of 18 ft wide by you know 20 ft deep. um to have two garage parking stalls. Yeah. Each space is 9 by 18. Is that what we say in our code? Yeah, our code. Mhm. So, our our code's smaller. We allow smaller than the state.

I believe it says 9 by 20 in our code, but it might say 9 by 18, one of the two. But it is in our code. I don't know about the state code. I just know about ours. says you can't it if they meet 10 by 20 in a garage then that has to count as a stall. We could go smaller. Um and and 10 uh 9 by 20 in the driveway. So I just wasn't able to measure it on anything.

Yeah. I mean the dimensions are on the I mean the dimensions are on the the site plan. We provided a link to the drawings that you could have pulled up the the full sets. Um our engineers checked it. We've done our check. Uh the the two parking spaces for the garage appear to to work. Um is that I guess something we can look into? I I've just developed stuff like this and and that's actually pretty decent parking. But our parking code at two, they've gone over and above the the parking code, right? With two in the garage, two in the driveway. I mean functionally

functionally that exceeds our code by double. Yeah. Um if you want to make a motion that we double check before the county commission meeting, we can do that. But as far as my professional opinion and our engineer and um in our review, it meets our code. I I'm fine with this functionally. I think it'll it'll be work great. I'm just a little more concerned about our code in general just with two stalls. that that seems to be yeah no argument inviting trouble. Yeah, there should be I mean most codes also require visitor parking things like that and ours does not.

Okay. The applicant does provide visitor parking. Yeah, I see. They they've gone kind of above and beyond. Uh another question on on those hammerheads. Does the applicant own that property that the proposed hammerheads are on? Um, I'll let the applicant speak to that. Uh, I know the individual that owns that. I don't know if the applicant's a partner with them or not. That would be up for them to discuss. I guess the question is, is is there a guarantee that these people have the right to use that hammerhead and rely on that on those hammerheads on somebody else's property if they don't own it? Well, we would require a signed easement to be recorded. Okay.

Then then I don't it's fine. Okay. as long as you guys take care of that. And then uh I didn't see anything in the code where it limits the number of units and I and I don't know it it labels this as a public street on the right hand side of the drawing there. Rollins Ranch Road. Does Rollins Ranch Road exist north of West Old Highway Road but not south yet? So this subdivision and and and the fire marshall has reviewed this. I'm just curious for is part of the review. Yeah. How far do we how far can how many units can somebody put in with only one way out? Well, it depends on whether they're sprinkled or not. Number one,

are these sprinkled?

You'll have to ask the applicant. Um, we do have a sprinkler code and there are exceptions in that code. Uh, they will have to meet fire code uh and fire signoff during the pre-construction meeting in order to proceed. Um, fire has reviewed this. Um, the way we calculate the number of um, number of units that a property can have, we take the total acreage, we subtract out 8,000 square ft for the first unit, and then we divide the remaining by 3500 square ft, which gives you the total amount of units that you typically you might be able to fit on there. Uh, this is far lower than that.

Yeah. And I've just fought this back and forth that they the fire code would definitely allow this because they're town homes even if they're not sprinkled, but I didn't know if the county had some additional restriction that it doesn't sound like. No, it's the fire code and the the authority having jurisdiction, the AHJ, um would be the one to sign off. Any additional questions for staff? Um, the applicant is welcome to speak if you'd like to. If you would like to come forward, you're welcome to speak. The applicant Wayne,

if you would like to speak, you're welcome to. Do you have a question about sprinkling? No, I'm fine without it. Any on fire. I heard you ask a question. We have a million gallon tank. We have a 10-in line stuffed in from the other side of Le's Market right now. We can easy flow 2,000 gallons of water a minute. Any other questions for the applicant?

We're good. Thank you. for a motion discussion. Good.

I move we recommend approval to the county commission for the village at Trappers Loop Town Homes site plan application number 25.044 044 allowing for the proposed multifamily development located approximately 600 ft south of the intersection of North Queens Garden Road and West Old Highway Road in unincorporated Morgan County based on the findings and with the conditions listed in the staff report dated January 22nd, 2026 with the following added condition that the elevations s show that no stuckle will be used as a building material

and the updated landscape. No, I'll second. Motion by member Sessions, second by member Taylor. All in favor? I

opposed. Motion carries unanimous. Thank you, Madam Chair. Little bit of deja v deja vu. This is the same applicant and same project, but this is the village of trappers loop town home preliminary plat application number 25.030. Same affir same affformentioned applicant. Wayne Johnson Soderby LLC is the owner. Uh same location 600 foot south of the intersection of North Queens Garden Road and West Old Highway Road with the parcel number serial number identified in your packet tonight. Current zoning is multiple residential district the RM15 and the acreage is 8.45 acres. The request is for preliminary plat approval of the village at Trappers Loop town home subdivision to allow for the construction of 45 town homes. Um again madam chair the RM15 zone is a medium density residential zoning and where the site plan looked at the um affformentioned tenants of landscaping and parking etc. The preliminary plan looks at the subdivision boundaries the lot layouts therein looks at grading and drainage and utility plans and also takes a look looks specifically at infrastructure and public facilities. the reviewing staff, Madam Chair, consisting of the planning department, county engineer, the Morgan County addressing official, and the Mountain Green Fire Department, all having reviewed this and and recommending approval of this application uh to to well, recommending approval of this application uh the planning commission providing a recommendation to the county commission. Otherwise, I Josh and I are happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. questions for staff. It is nice to see the amenity in phase one. for a motion. I'll make a motion. I move we recommend approval of the county commission of the village of Trappers Loop town home town homes preliminary plat application number 25.030 030 allowing for a 45 unit town home subdivision of land located approximately 600 ft south of the intersection of North Queens Garden Road and West Old Highway Road in unincorporated Morgan County based on the findings and with the conditions listed in the staff report jed dated January 22nd, 2026.

Motion by member Taylor. Second. Second by member McMillan. All in favor? I I opposed. Motion carries unanimous easier ones.

Do you guys have any staff or business questions for us? Unfortunately, the next uh the next agenda is not going to be all administrative items. There's going to be some other stuff including a continuence that uh that occurred I think in December um for the shooting range. Okay. Uh we are going to have training. I'm going to talk to um Garrett, Mike, and Matt and see if they want to do it next meeting or if they want to push it off to the second meeting in February where it might be a lighter agenda.

Um but that's pretty much it. Uh there's usually a spring training uh conference for planning. Uh if anybody I'll keep my eye out for when it's posted if anybody wants to attend something like that. Uh we do have funding um for that um here in the state. So um just let me know. So our bylaws say the election of our officers their first of Mar first meeting in March. Oh, it is first meeting in March. Our bylaws say that. Yeah. Okay. Um I just figured it was the first meeting in January, but we can hold it uh off until till March. That's fine.

Speaking of bylaws, I think we're supposed to update them per the county commission. I think they're super dated. They are really dated before even Yeah. was even done. Yeah. Yeah. So maybe I know it sounds like the next meeting is pretty packed, but maybe on a lighter meeting we Yeah. If someone wants to nudge me, I do have it in my task list. Okay. But honestly, unless I get nudged, it probably doesn't rise to the top of it. Okay. Which it does. It should be.

Okay. Um, cool. And then I was not at the last meeting, but I watched it and you guys looked like you had a lot of fun. And um, I know I love the laughs. Um, I know civic review was brought up and it seems like we don't have access to that. We used to. Is there a reason we don't have access to civic review? Do you want to answer that or do you want me to? Yeah, I can.

Um, so the planning planning commission's uh duties are not to doublech checkck staff and whether we've done all the reviews and gotten everything done. There's a list of eight things in our code that the planning commission's duties require. And having access to everything that staff has access to is not typically technically your job. So, in my discussions with the county commissioners, which is what they're going to come talk to you about, um, your job is to stick to the duties that are found in the zoning ordinance. um which basically states that you review the items that staff provides along with the report and you make your recommendation accordingly.

I think the concern I found watching the meeting was not that anyone's double-checking work. There was information that wasn't provided that might have been helpful for the planning commission to have like that was asked about um presentation

the presentation to review maybe more in depth. Again, that's not our presentation to give to you. Um, the staff uh gave you a staff report. We provided you the documentation that we felt you needed to review and make your recommendation. The applicant presented their presentation. Um, and because of that, um, you were to make a recommendation based on the information you had received both from staff and the applicant. Yeah, it's in our ordinances that the planning commission base their recommendation on the staff report and what staff provides. And it's really to ensure that staff is doing their job and getting everything together. I mean, that's their job is to pull the vital things and check off all the boxes to make sure that everything you need to review per the ordinance is included. Um, and yeah, and then it just happens with some of these applicants. There's more things that people want that, you know, I I don't know that we can anticipate everything. So certainly like if you notice and going through the packet beforehand and come down to planning and and ask and see if those things are available or that's something that can be included because that would help a lot too so that we're not scrambling during the meeting trying to find it. Any other questions?

I will put the invitation out there again. I'm more than willing to meet with any of the planning commissioners during the week before the meeting. And if you have specific questions, I I have no problem going through it with you. I don't I don't think and maybe I'm wrong watching it looked like there was they and I don't know when the presentation came about. it. I don't think people knew that there would be a presentation. Does that make sense? That was just the third party vibe I got watching. Does that It wasn't like engineers comments. Do you know what I mean? Because a lot of times in our packet, it says engineer approves of comments. And we could come to you and be like, "Hey Josh, the engineer approved this." Like,

yeah. This wasn't reviewed by an engineer. This was reviewed by our attorneys and me. Uh we spent 18 months on it. We went through it with them. um they provided the documentation that they needed to get on the agenda. Uh it was their choice to give a presentation. Okay.

Questions? Do I have a motion to approve the January 8th, 2026 planning commission meeting? So moved. Motion by member Sessions. Second. Second by member Watt. All in favor? I I opposed. Motion carries unanimous. Uh motion to Do I have a motion to adjurnn?