Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

How's that? Welcome to the planning commission on April 9th, 2026. Um, we would like to open this meeting. We'll have a pledge of allegiance by Commissioner Trickler.

All rise. Repeat after me. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. I would uh look for a motion to approve tonight's agenda. I motion to um approve tonight's agenda. I second. I have a motion Commissioner Nielson Trickler and a second for Commissioner Nilson. All those in favor say I.

I. Any opposed? That passes. Do we have a motion for tonight's staff reports? A motion to approve tonight's staff reports. Second. I have a motion for Commissioner Shirley, a second from Commissioner Trickler. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? That passes. Are there any declarations of conflicts or abstensions from commission members?

Okay. Seeing none, we will continue. Um, item number one on our uh agenda is a public hearing to consider the request of Joan Giles for conditional use permit for a major home occupation for a preschool to allow up to 13 students located at 1172 West 880 North in the R18 single family residential zone. Turn the time over to Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, I'm Jacob Hawkins from the planning department. So, the first item that we have for today is for a preschool at 1172 West 880 North. And this property as well as all of the surrounding properties are in the R18 subdist or are in the R18 zone. Um, now this property is located pretty close to Mount Mahogany Elementary. Let me zoom out just a little bit. So here's where the subject property is and then Mount Mahogany Elementary is right there. So while there is already a school service nearby, the applicant is requesting to operate a preschool from their home because there's been an increase in demand for preschools. So daycarees or preschools are permitted in residential zones as a minor home occupation so long as there are six or fewer children as part of the daycare business. Uh on top of that, there is a section of code uh in chapters uh 10, 15,27 right here that outlines a few additional requirements such as that all state requirements will need to be met and that a conditional use permit is required for all preschools or daycarees that have more than six but less than 13 children. And I'll talk about that here in just a moment. But for tonight's application, uh, sorry, for tonight's presentation, I'll explain the what the requirement is for preschools as a major home occupation, and then I'll explain a little bit more about what the applicant's request is. So, first off, uh, the first requirement is that a home occupation shall not exceed 25% of the total floor area of the home. And so right here, this right here is where uh the home occupation will be. So in the basement,

they've got the great room or the living room. And then there is an adjacent bedroom right here. And then they have the bathroom right over here. And that is what will be used for uh where the applicant is going to keep the children. And while the children uh are on the property, um they'll spend so they'll spend the time here and then also they will spend some time in the back and in the sides yards um for exercise and uh for play. The preschool will have up to three sessions per day from Monday through Friday. Early morning classes will be from 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. Late morning classes will be from 11:30 to 12:30. and afternoon classes will be between 1:00 and 3 o'clock PM. The next requirement is that the permitted number of children, which can be less than 13 children, including the provider's own children, and that the provider must live in the home where the services are being provided. And I've had the opportunity to discuss this requirement with the applicant. And the applicant, who lives on the property, is now requesting up to 12 children for the preschool. Um, and the age range for the preschool will be between ages three and five. When it comes to employees, the requirements for a major home occupation permit for one non-resident employee to be on the premises between 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Subject to uh to the condition that no more than one non-resident employee is permitted for homes with lots that are under 12,000 square feet in size. Uh, and then on street parking is not permitted. Uh so the applicant does intend to have one non-resident employee at the preschool and then they also want to have a few trusted substitute individuals to be called upon if an emergency occurs. Um all teachers and residents of the home will complete a background check and will be licensed.

And then the last main requirement is for parking which may range up to eight per hour under a major home occupation provided sufficient off- streetet parking is provided and the use does not adversely affect the neighborhood. So the applicant does have a large paved driveway uh here on the south side of the home that can accommodate up to five vehicles at a time. So, with that being said, uh staff finds that the proposed preschool business would be in compliance with all the minimum requirements for daycare and recommends approval to the planning commission uh with any conditions that the commission finds necessary. And there could be some discussion on this front to meet the intentions of home occupations uh which is to permit home occupations as long as they are conducted in a way so that neighbors under normal conditions would not be aware of this existence. And to this point, uh, staff did receive a letter of opposition from a neighbor where they listed five concerns. Uh, the first concern was that the scale of the business would be a little bit too large. Uh, and that a facility catering to 13 children would be considered a large family child care operation and would change the character of the neighborhood. Um their second uh concern was that the local street is incapable of managing the traffic generated by a large preschool and may lead to hazardous conditions due to increased traffic. Uh the third con uh third concern was that there is a commercial land uh that there is commercial land otherwise available for preschools. Uh fourth is that a preschool would disrupt the quietude of the neighborhood. And fifth is that there would be a redundancy of services as Mount Mahogany Elementary is nearby. Um but that was uh from the letter of concern uh from the neighbor. Um and so to that point uh some of the conditions that could be recommended by staff uh would include that no on street parking

uh would be permitted as part of the home occupation. So if they can all park in the driveway. Um, and then one non-resident employee is permitted for the duration of the home occupation and all necessary licenses are obtained and maintained for all employees. And then all conditions for home occupations are met uh except that activities may be held in the side and rear yards uh so long as the place for exercise and activities is fenced in uh which it is. Uh and then that all final other that all final planning, engineering and fire department requirements are met otherwise. and I can take any questions. Okay. Are there any questions for Jacob?

Why do they not Why is no on street parking permitted? Um, we want to try to address the concerns from the neighbors about uh, you know, how if there's going to be a lot of business here at this location, having fewer people on the street will make it feel more like a home occupation where it's less noticeable. with that. Um, there's going to be like graduations or or holiday celebrations with it. And you're saying they that when the parents want to do a graduation there, there's not going to be parking for all the parents to come and enjoy that graduation. Yeah. And sometimes grandparents go to graduation.

That That's a great question. Um, yeah, I that'll be a great question for the applicant. Um, if you want to talk to her about graduations, the home is currently used as a a daycare with fewer pupils. Is that correct? Not currently. No. Not currently. Okay. So, it is uh an entirely new entirely new.

And as long as it's under 13, it does not hit the as long as it's under 13, then it would qualify for that conditional use permit requirement. Okay. Are there other questions for Jacob? Thank you, sir. Thank you. Is the applicant here? Uh, if you'd like to come to the podium, please state your name for the record. This is recorded in a public meeting. I'm Joanna Giles.

Okay. Is there anything you'd like to expound on or do you want questions? Um, I think the parking and the um traffic in the area would be very minimal based upon having a pretty big Oh, sorry. I don't know what I touched.

Okay. Sorry. Um, our driveway is pretty big. Um, it can state for people that need to park could be in the driveway during that time. Drop off. I can um make sure that I'm out there. At least one staff member is out there so parents can drop off. um in the area. We do have a little bit of a side um on the south, sorry, have to remember south side of 88 80 north. There is no homes on that one side that if parents can even kind of wait in their cars there and then they can drop off um and maybe just quick turnaround. Um during graduations and things like that, I would love to be able to have that but very minimal. maybe once in a year, maybe twice like a Christmas time and end of the year, but I don't feel like I would be out in the neighborhood or anything with the kids. I would keep them all on my property the whole time during um time. And if I needed to, I could do a graduation elsewhere if you know to make sure there's a park close by too that I could even rent or something. Thank you.

I just took if you said notifications out. If you sent notifications out and everybody had a problem, then you do with them. I'm but I can make it so that people don't have to park as much other than in the driveway and you know that they can just wait for just a few minutes and I can be out there and then you said that there are three sessions throughout the day.

I would love to have three sessions. One of the reasons why I'm doing this um is there is a big need for preschool for the that right now the district has actually um decreased the number of kids that can attend especially for three-year-olds for next year with the tuition based even at Mount Mahogany. um three-year-olds are not going to be able to attend. And I would love to be able to increase that by having a couple more sessions of preschool for three-year-olds. Um as well as even for those kids that are and I I hate to say baby threes, but kind of young three-year-olds that don't get into preschools elsewhere. Um I'm very um I do not like to discriminate among any child whether they have special needs or um typical developing. Um I have been in the school district for 31 years teaching special education preschool and as of June I am retiring from Alpine School District and would love to continue doing what I know best and would love to continue that. Um, and with the three sessions, would you have a third would you like to have 13 students in each of those three sessions or 13 or 12?

12 on each. Yes. Four days. So, Monday through Thursday. I I'm hoping to do Tuesday through Friday. Okay. Just because of all the holidays on Mondays. Okay. Um, so Mount Mahogany has a preschool. They do have a title one preschool. It's a a grant that gets some extra minutes. Yeah. special more special need and uh developmental kids with speech developments. But even in Pleasant Grove right now um Manila has the district's having to close down two of the preschools that are at Manila right now or closing down for next year. The next closest one that the district would offer would be Lynon. So it's kind of a big

area. My grandson goes to Mahogany with disability. So, I'm aware of that one. So, you're um I notice if it's anybody two years or younger, you need more employees there. I won't have anybody. It will be three and up. It will be three and up. Yes. And then your hours would you So, this is preschool, so you're kind of after rush hour type traffic. do 9:00 like a session from 9 to 10 and then a 10:15 to 12:15 and then a 12:45 to 3:15 just to help with kind of making sure it's only during the school day when kids are at school

and that's my next question. So you do plan on so 9 to3 basically is when you would have about 9 to 3:15. Um, with with that schedule, it sounds like you got about a 10 minutes. You're going to have pickup and drop off happening fairly close to each other. That that does create some increased in traffic, you know, hearing the neighbor concerns. So, I don't know if there would be we could increase to ease that if you increase the drop off setup times. And I'm not telling you how to run your business. I'm just saying that if that's a concern that we've heard, we want to make sure that, you know, good neighbors that we're we're trying to address everybody that that's there. And uh that's just a suggestion.

Actually, chair, uh I work at Groverest Elementary and their pickup drop off, well, their their pickup at the end of school, it's over in 10 minutes, and that's for the whole school. So, I don't think for 13 kids it would be more. Well, I don't know. That's just what I see. You've got a big drop off pickup lane, though. And that's, you know, we're talking the neighborhood. And that's and I would like to be able to be out there and ready for those kids to be, you know, have their parents pick them up and walk them out. And so the you would have to do a receiving handoff from the parents so the kids would not be That's the other issue is I know three to five year olds and they're like cats.

Yep. I I get it. I want their safety. Yeah. And also thinking of that age range, they'd have to be buckled in car seats and stuff. So that does take a little bit. It'll take a minute. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions or concerns for the applicant? Thank you. Thank you.

This this is a public hearing. We will open up to the public. I know there's a lot of public here. I don't know which of these hearings you're here for, but if something has been said and you have the exact same sentiment, rather than reiterate a lot so we can keep this meeting moving, we keep your comments to what is pertinent to this and we open up to the public. If you come to the pulpit, please state your name because it is a public meeting. Okay, seeing no one to come to that public, we'll bring it back up to uh the commissioners for discussions amongst ourselves and or a motion.

Um just because it is a neighborhood, I I like the recommendation. I mean, I would approve this, but with on condition of, you know, ages above three. Um, you know, the hour is between 9 and 3 p.m. I think I don't I guess that's I don't even know if we'd go to 5:00 p.m. if right now that seems like it's not something she wants. But as long as we just realize it is a neighborhood, it's a home business. So, we want it to work for the neighbors as well and traffic within that neighborhood. Chair,

yeah, we can add that as conditionals on this. Just make sure it's noted properly. I don't know if this is going to make a difference, but I I have a declaration of conflicts. I didn't know who was going to be presenting, so I won't be able to vote. Does that create that minimizes our quorum? Correct. So, yeah, I didn't know who. So, you have a you have a conflict of interest. I do. Okay. So, we cannot make a motion today. We have to continue the item. No. Okay. Because I I need a quorum forever. Then I would entertain a motion to continue and we will rehear this. My apologies. So it puts it back a bit, but that is within our our statutes and governing laws that we have to adhere to. Okay.

So, who wants to uh make a motion to continue? I'll make a motion to continue this to um what would be the date? Oh my gosh. That would be the April 23rd. The 20 I make a motion to continue this to the April 23 Planning Commission. I have a motion by Commissioner Tickler. Do I have a second? Second. I have a second by Commissioner Nelson. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? That passes. We will continue that to our next session. Okay. Our next uh item in the for our meeting is a public hearing to consider the request of Classic Jack Construction to amend the requirements to a conditional use permit 6376 general warehousing and storage located on the southern 3.17 acres of 11:30 West State Street general commercial zone. Jacob.

Go. All right. So, it's a little hard to see. This is the property that we're talking about, though. Uh 11:30 West State Road, State Street. Uh so, this is a request to amend an already approved conditional use permit for Classic Jack Construction. Uh so back in March 14th of 2024 uh the planning commission heard and approved a conditional use permit for Lance Ford uh to allow for general warehousing and storage for a flex space building. That's what they wanted to put in here. Uh and this conditional use permit was permitted with uh two conditions. First is that the proposal will be subject to a site plan review and approval by staff and by the design review board. And then in addition to the requirements outlined in section 101529 which is uh transitional standards for non-residential uses bordering residential zones. Uh the design of the building will be subject to the requirements found in the grove zone specifically the requirements found in section 101 1420 urban design standards. And that section uh goes into detail about like what kind of materials are permitted for the building. Uh so since the approval of the original conditional use permit, the applicant has been working with staff on the proposed site plan and is requesting to use metal sighting for the building. Uh so let me grab that for you guys so I can show you what they have in mind. Show and tell today.

This is the exterior. and then I'll come pick that up after the end. So, you can just hold on to it. Um, so this is called MCM, a metal sighting that surrounds a composite interior. Uh, so in the Grove Zone design requirements, metal sighting is typically only permitted as an accent material. Uh, so it can only occupy 49% or less of the building facade. Uh however, in the general commercial zone, which this property is in, uh there are no design requirements for proposed materials. So, metal would typically be permitted. It's only because of the conditional use permit that was approved where we were saying you need to meet the design requirements of the Grove Zone. And so, this is why they're back here tonight is to make sure that they can use metal. Uh so staff's recommendation of the proposed conditional use permit amendment is one of approval for a couple reasons. First that the project will still need to meet the provisions of section 101529 transitional development standards for non-residential uses bordering residential zones. Um that talks about things like having increased setbacks, better landscaping, uh you know um noise mitigation and um uh no loading docks facing residential uses, things like that. Uh and then second, the project will also need to be approved by the design review board uh who will determine if the proposed materials are in harmony with the characteristics of the surrounding developed commercial and residential areas. uh as stated in the general commercial zone. And so by meeting both these conditions that have already been approved for the conditional use permit, uh the design of the building should continue to be held uh to high standards uh similar to buildings within the Grove Zone, thus making the buildings feel more

harmonious to both the surrounding and commercial development. And so staff recommends approval and I can take any questions. Um I assume that it's with that it's probably an all steel building which I'm assuming that that is. Yeah, we're still working on the elevation plans and the materials but this is what they were proposing so far. Yeah, benefit is the R value versus site exterior and I can understand their desire to do that. Yes, potentially or a large percentage. We yeah, we'll know for sure whenever we get the site plan. Okay. But this does have to go through a design review.

It does need to go through the design review board and then through planning commission. Okay. So, anybody who's coming and they're like, "Oh, we can use metal." It at least has to be approved by design and metal is already approved for that area. It's just a condition that we approved prior Exactly. four years ago said no. So, it does meet the requirements. It just doesn't meet the condition that we gave it last time. Okay. Okay. I was here for that. Okay, any more questions? No. Thank you.

Is the applicant here? And if you are, you're welcome to come to the podium and make any statements. It's not a requirement. Okay, seeing everybody rush the podium at once, we'll close the public hearing and bring it back up to the commissioners if there's any further discussion or I will entertain a motion. I'm ready to approve. You guys are good.

Yeah. Okay. I move the planning commission approve the request of Classic Jack Construction to amend the conditions of their conditional use permit for use 6376 general warehousing and storage at 11:30 West State Street in the general commercial zone and adopting the exhibits, conditions, and findings of the staff report and as modified by the conditions below that all final planning, engineering, fire department requirements are met. The proposal will be subject to site plan review and approval by staff and by the design review board. Also, in addition to the requirements outlined in section 101529, the design of the building will be subject to the requirements found in the Grove Zone. Specifically, the requirements found in section 101420 urban design standards with the exception of allowing metal panel as a primary building material. Second.

I have a motion by Commissioner Shirley, a second by Commissioner Nilson. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? That will also pass tonight. Next item of business is a public hearing to consider the request of Julie Smith to amend section 10-13 overlay zones. The proposed text establishes the creation of a new overlay called residential cluster development. RCD overlay provides provisions throughout the chapter for the proposed zone. Thank you, Daniel.

Thank you, commissioners. Um, I appreciate you guys being here. The item that we have in front of us is a is a very interesting item in the way that is not very common. Okay, this is not an item where uh that a lot of us uh planners have worked on this or figured this out or and and but we're trying to make an approach and we're trying to take a stab at this. He already came to you guys uh a couple meetings ago, right? So, you guys have a little bit of the background. Let me tell you that this is not the first time that the applicant or the property owners or the property representatives have tried to do this. It's been a couple times in in in recent in recent years. I actually saw an application from 2013 where similar something similar tried to something similar tried to uh have a similar application to it and it only went to planning commission and he dial planning commission. Okay. So it's not like I say it's not the first time that we have seen or or taking a look at this problem and trying to find a solution for the problem trying to find a uh a way for for the applicant. It's a complicated situation and I'm going to try to explain to you guys why. One time I've heard that if you give me a second. One time I've heard that if you cannot explain something in a simplistic way means you don't understand it. So I'm gonna try to explain it very simple. But if I if I'm not making sense, please commissioners stop me and ask me because I got to make sure that this is clear and that we understand what we're trying to do here. Okay. All right, we have a a development. It's called uh let me see right here the full name of it actually the plaid and we're going to take a look at the plaid the Renaissance and Indian

Springs. Okay. And this is the property right here. This property uh you guys can see it. I'm I'm kind of like enclosing it by my mouse. This property was developed as a PD as a plan development and the developer or the designer whoever proposed this to the city when this was approved did something called cluster development. Okay. What happens in a cluster development? You get all the residential units and put them in one corner. I'm going to explain in a very simplistic way. Again, if I'm not doing a good job, please stop me. So in a cluster development, you kind of like put them group them together in one corner or in in a specific area and you leave the rest of the area open for multiple reasons. You can do it for open space because there's some uh natural landmarks or or or natural features or something that you want to respect, then you do that. developers usually do that also because then they don't have to do more roads and they don't have to do more um um connections more uh the lines for water and sewer are longer if you spread them out okay but this is a classic example of a cluster PD development cluster plan development and we can see in this development there's 42 homes okay you can see the 42 homes right here okay now the zone zone under the zone that allow for this development to happen is called right here the rural residential PD. Now that zone does not exist anymore. Okay. What that zone require as we can see RRPD it means that regardless of of being able to do a cluster development are we all here? Yeah. a cluster development. Regardless of that, the requirement are

still the same requirements for a rural residential zone. The requirement for a lot in the rural residential zone or the density says that it's only one residential unit per half acre lot. One unit per half acre lot. Meaning that for every acre, you get to have two units. Clear right there. Okay. So, the property has 42 units. 42 units. Okay. In your stat report, you guys have right there the the acreage. But if we take a look at the plaid, and this is the plaid, the recorder plaid. I think right here, it says it has the total acreage of it. It's not on this one, but I'm going to get it to you guys right away. So the total acreage of the project is um about is approx 21 acres. Okay, that's why they were able to do 42 units because they had almost 21 acres. So they can have a half acre per unit. You get 42 units. Okay, so far so good. All right. So, what's going on now is and this is where the the the difficulty happens. Okay. Or or or the the challenge, not the challenge happens is now the representative for the property saying, "Hey, Daniel, I would like community development, not Daniel, we like to change the rules of this." And the reason why we want to change the rules is because we would like to uh partition off or subdivide it about four acres of land for sale and for future redevelopment. The problem is if we do that that's that's what the staff said is that then

we're not going to have halfacre per lot anymore. Okay. So then we got to do something because that is already nonconforming because that zone does not exist anymore and we cannot make it we cannot make something more non-conforming. We cannot expand on the non-conformity of the issue. Okay. Now PDS have offered more problems than solutions. PDS uh or PUDS has uh they were really popular in the in in past years and now all the problems are resurfing okay or resurfacing when people are saying well since the since it's a PUD in a PUD you have private roads who's going to manage my road who's going to pay maintenance for for the sewer lines for the water lines well the HOA is supposed to be in charge of it that's why in a PUD you have a governing body which is the HOA however it has proven that is costly to do those type of maintenance repairments and stuff like that. So now it's common people are turning back to the city and say hey take over the road take over this take over this other situation or I meant my PUD and and cities are are are seeing that problem that's because now it's uh the problems are resurfacing like I'm saying the city in order to avoid that we completely pud code in in our city. So right now if someone comes with a PUD we will say no we don't allow PUDS in Plen Grove city okay so we don't allow PUDS now we have a the challenge here is that we already have an existing PUD and now we got to create code for something that already exist that is already there code that matches and I think the applicant did a good job trying to do their research and and uh what the applicant did they um found a a um or code and we have multiple overlays and what they did is grab an overlay and

then changes and make sure that it matches their needs. Does that make sense? Now you can tell me Daniel, why can't we just do a regular reszone of the property because we don't have a zone again that meets the requirements of what we have right there. Okay. You can tell me Daniel, how about we do an R1 R120? Well, the R120 requires 20,000 square feet per lot. In this case, the maximum acreage, I think the the minimum acreage that a lot has, they're about 6,0007,000 square feet. So, if we adopt the R120 for the entire property, it will be a problem because it doesn't meet those requirements. The R120 requires, for example, setbacks of 10 feet. They don't have 10 feet. So, we're not creating code for something that is going to be built. We're creating code for something that already exists. Okay. So, in regards of the setbacks and stuff like that, so uh the the code that is in front of you guys meets the requirements of the applicant. Okay? Because that is a draft that the applicant submitted to you. Okay? This is not a proposal from the city. This is not a proposal from community development. This is a proposal from the applicant. The language you guys going to find there is the language from the applicant saying hey we had a meeting where we had some discussions and we want to explore the uh the some commissioners I didn't got like a some commissioners I didn't get a straight direction from every everyone but some commissioners expressed their idea of creating an overlay and what you guys have in front of you guys is an overlay okay it's an overlay zone that will allow for this to happen Now whether the commissioners that send the the the the direction are here or not that's that's not the the the point but the situation is that the code that you guys have in

front of you guys matches or allows for that to happen. Okay. Now I think one of the requirements or one of the ideas that we were playing with last time it was the idea of creating some geographical constraints. this uh language in front of you guys does create the geographical constraints. Okay, that is already uh included in that code that says that this overlay can only be applied to uh properties that are I'm going to go to this over here south of 2600 and west of 1300 west and about north of uh north of 2300 which will be kind of like a quadrant right here. Okay. So, that's what the applicant is proposing. Um, so far so good. Or do we have any questions till this point that we can

question? Yes. The overlay zone includes the current homes. It only includes that property or includ the applicant gave us a quadrant

because because it's a quadrant. So, it's it's a it's a square. But I mean that whether that can be adjusted or modified that's that's up to that's up to you. Um and it has al it also has another requirement right there that says that at the minimum should be for 16 acres. Okay. And the reason why 16 acres because we already saw that the entire property it was almost 21 acres but if they remove four four acres or four and a half acres then what's left is 16 acres. Okay. So, some of the breaks or constraints are are already there in the in the code that I'm presenting to you guys. This item uh is a legislative decision. So, it will go to city council or we're planning to take it to city council on April 28th. Okay? So, we still have one more planning commission in the middle, but that will be the date that this this item will go to city council. Now, this is not for the reszone commissioners. I want to be clear. we're trying to or the applicant is proposing is to create code to create a new zone that can be applied to to what's left out of this property. Okay, I think I explained it. Anything else I'm missing? Uh or any questions that you guys might have?

Um the smallest zone we currently have in our city is an R18, correct? Which is 8,000 foot lot. R17. R17. Yes. That's still bigger than their proposal for the smallest lot here which is 6,500.

In regards to that, let let me tell you something about this. Okay, the and this is coming from the applicant, right? At the end of the day, what they want to do is section off four to four and a half acres around right here. Okay? And leave this leave this uh alone or at least that's the the idea. The applicant is right here. He can answer better to that question. Um in the proposal what the applicant is saying is like um let's not let's just let's count a density. Let's count let's let's not let me pull out the language and then we we can see because this this was interesting uh on the proposal. Give me one second. Now you guys going to see my folder but I'm going to bring it up right here. And what I'm going to open right now is just the what all of you guys have. There you go. So, in the proposal, there's an area that says um lot area. Home lots with the spring district shall be regulated by overall project density, not by a minimum lot size. Okay, so that's an idea that the applicant is proposing. And it says the minimum lot area of any lot or parcel in the spring districts shall be 6549 square feet which we can see that the numbers are very specific because it's very tailored to what we have in this case. Now

um what will be the the the final density if I I run some numbers and if okay if four acres are sectioned off and this is left out. Okay. And we as in the previous way, we counted the open area to average the density and to find the square footage requirement per lot. It will be about 3.34 of an acre. So it won't be half an acre. It won't be 0.5. If we section out this much, it will be about three uh.34 of an acre. 3.35 of an acre.

Um now my math might not be right, but it's 20.63 acres total property right now. Mhm. There are 42 homes on that property. So that means even now lot averaging they're smaller than the they're they're smaller than half acre even now. What I'm what I'm thinking is if you see when they did the subdivision right here for example they took off this portion right here you know they in in the platter. There's some sections that are missing here and there but if you see it's 040 you got 489 almost 49 which is it's about half an acre. That happens when they when people do like rope dedications and there's there's a little bit of land. Yeah, you estimate up or down a little bit. I get that.

So, but that's that's what the requirement was half an acre. So, they're they're pretty close to that by a decimal or something like that. Okay. Thank you. Just looking at the rough numbers in my head sitting here. Okay. That's what I have. Uh commissioners, I don't know if you guys have any questions. A couple easy ones. Um so, this is still part of the HOA. So the streets and everything that are constructed are private. Think so.

And then the next question is I understand it. Clarify the language for me. Well, tell me if I understand this correctly. This is an it is for a new zone overlay. It sounds like in the proposed text that it's very specific just to this area, but it would be an overlay for the entire city. So, someone could come along and it is an over it doesn't matter what somebody does, but it is an overlay for the entire city to be used throughout the city.

That's a good question. I'm going to answer in a very simple way. in the way they drafted it will not be applied to the entire city because they put geographical constraints. Okay, they're saying only can be applied on this area right here. Okay, but it is a precedent that it will be it will be right there. So anybody can come which already some people can come and do it but it will be a precedent of a changing of a PUD. So that I have but it will but it will be in the code. It will be recorded on the code and it will be on the code on our city code where that everybody can see or read it or something like that. Yes.

Okay. But they did put your graphical con the door for other people not this development but another developer to say hey I want to to use the same precedence I understand that to go there. My next question is what's the difference between what they've done and like a specific I forget what it's called. A development plan for a specific area which does does not a development agreement work for the entire city. Correct. A development agreement is just specifically for one area.

I don't understand your question. Can you repeat it? Can they does the city have anything that just allows for this area to break all the rules we have basically, but it only counts for one area? Does not become an overlay zone for the entire city or or said president. I mean, we were trying Let me see if I understood your question. Is there a method or is there a path where we can we can come up with something that is only applicable to this development? Is that what the question is?

Yes.

Yes. I think recently recently um through the state legislature uh cities were given the right hopefully I don't butcher this concept but cities were given the right to legislate through a a or or include legislative decisions on a development agreement in there are some cases in commercial uses in commercial uses when someone wants to build something and then that's kind of like a it's is a development agreement where the city agrees with the developer to build something and there's some some exchange and it's a win-win type of situation for example and I don't want to deviate so much from this but in a development agreement you go and say hey uh the applicant is saying that you I'm only allowed to build up to 25,000 I want to build 30,000 and the city might say yes but at least half of that half of the 30,000 meaning 15,000 needs to be retail. So it's kind of like a okay give and go.

It has to be a win-win for surrounding areas for the city for the developers. In most cases, yes. Okay. In most cases, yes. Thank you. This is a very good example because you can you guys can see two different uh PDs right here. We have one right here and we have right here another one right here. Okay. This is the boundaries for it. You guys can see here's a situation where they have this open space and now the applicant is saying hey and the has his reasons why they want to do that. But what I'm saying is like is we will set a precedent and then we have for example another PD right here and in the future can this development come and say this developer come and say hey now we want to build homes in this park right here. Yeah.

I mean that's that's the type of precedent that I'm that I'm speaking. Okay. Other than that, the code that the applicant uh proposes, like I said, it does has geographical constraints and it does have the requirements or the or or the the aspects that the the present or current conditions will be met and will be legal if this code is follow. Okay. Yep.

All right. That's what I have. Uh uh chair and commissioners I think the applicant is here and uh that's my presentation. We can give them some time. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. Applicant would now please state your name for the record so that we can record this in our public meeting.

Julie Smith. And also we were discussing last night. also appreciate comments as far as res not asks people anything. They love the area. So we came up with this idea that ac

The third page size, we discussed If we calcul came up with average Also on the next group, comangency. I didn't add district

again. I did my best to find number three. I also I have performance. lot size here. This was in 1998 when project was approved. It had setbacks, rear yard setbacks, front yard. So these are existing setbacks. This project

system.riv requirements. And so we have that multiple yard. are very specific. So I think there's four setbacks. Are there any questions for our applicant?

Thank you, Judy.

I'm sorry. I do have one more question. Um, number three on page seven, it says something about Oh, never mind. We're good. I misread it. Okay, it's a Before you come up, we're opening this up to as a public meeting. So, anyone is welcome to come up. If you come up, please state your name for the record and we'll open up to the rest of the public at this point. Thank you. Can you speak more into the mic?

We're having a hard time hearing you. Speak more into the mic. Actually, I don't think the mic is on. Can you verify that? I see. There you go. It wasn't on. There we go. Thank you.

I didn't turn it off. Okay. All right. Um, first off, we we appreciate the work that staff has done here. This is kind of our our third goround or third concept of what we thought originally would be relatively easy. This is the third one and we've worked with staff on this as as our consultant Julie Smith has indicated to you. We've tried to make this work. Um staff says some interesting things and again I respect staff and I've worked with them. uh uh I think we generally number one get along which is not always the case but we do and I think we respect each other and what we're trying to do here but we have some some differences of opinion here uh in staff's recommendation of a denial they talk about health safety welfare of the community sort of things let's get practical here if we as an HOA and we'll talk about that concept in a minute if we're not able to provide some meaningful financial relief, which is what this substitution of 4 acres out of our out of our HOA right now. If we can't get that approved, literally uh there there are some I mean, we have 80% of our owners that are 70 years old or more. It's not the designated senior community. Out of that, yes, there are some that do just fine. They're well taken care of. They're also, and I could name them, probably four or five single widows, divorcees, whatever they are. They're single women who are aged who literally would not be able to afford their home anymore if we were have to raise money. That's not a planning commission determination. That's more city council. I would agree. However, to say that it is not in the interest of the health and safety and welfare of the

community, that's stretching it a little bit in my mind. Secondly, um staff talks about um broader community benefit. I could use the same argument. Nobody wants a rundown neighborhood. And if uh if past managements citywide apparently, I don't know what others have done, but the issue has been uh other PUDs, other homeowners associations, they're no longer going to be allowed. and for good reason because people didn't manage them right. We as a as a board of this HOA are trying to fix that without putting the burden on the city financially, without having citizens come and say, "Hey guys, you need to help us. You need to take over our streets because we can't afford it or we're starting to kick out little old ladies." I mean, I hate to dramatize it, but literally that's what would happen. And so we're trying to fix it ourselves. We're taking the initiative. We're trying not to put a burden on the city that way. Staff talks about uh it's too specific. That was the whole idea is to be a little specific in the definitions that were being proposed in this overlay district. The idea was let's make it specific so that anyone else who would want to do that would be able to come to planning commission and city council and they would have to have their own reasons for doing it. Our neighboring uh subdivision who is also a pud, they have a park in the middle. That's part of the checks and balances that is built into state law right now where you need twothirds of a vote. We have we took kind of a preliminary

vote and while we initially had some opposition, I would dare say we have now near unonymity. We're going to be taking another vote shortly to make it official. But we have everybody behind us because they understand the purpose of what we're doing here. The concept of unintended precedence I think gets defeated also in the sense that there is that check and balance. People in their own neighborhoods. I mean this is America. We we like people to vote. We want people to express their opinions about their own neighborhoods where you have uh and I can't speak for the people in the neighborhoods of the south of us. We know many of them, frankly, they're in our ward, okay? But we we know what they're about. And yes, there are a few who have voiced opposition. Those people uh are the probably three or four lots that uh that are on the west side of what we're proposing to uh to se to segregate off and to subdivide on those four acres. Those are the people who are saying, "Gosh, I bought my house because I had a view of the pasture." That's fine. But Utah law has changed. As I understand it, views are not protected. Not that we're trying to say, "Hey, it's in your face," but we're trying to say, "Guys, if you want it, you can buy it." I mean, just like anybody else. And of course, most people can't. We understand that. So, we're not trying to be mean-spirited about it, but we are trying to help those people because our ultimate goal is to put ourselves and be self-determinate in what we're doing to to help neighbors to make our our subdivision better. We have said that whatever monies are raised

will go toward number one reserves because we don't know what's out there. And that's a smart play because we're our reserves now are meager. I mean, we've got literally $150,000 in reserves. It would cost more than that just to repave the road alone, let alone do other improvements. I can't help what happened in the past. I, as a president of this HOA, can't help what's happened in the past, but I can try to fix it. And I can get support of all the neighbors to do that. the only ones really protesting to my knowledge and I've talked to most if not all of them. I probably missed a few but not on purpose. Uh the only opposition is gee I want my view. Well, uh you're still going to have a very nice backyard and the houses that are going to be built, uh when you do the math, uh the average size lot would be uh you know, a third well 14,000, excuse me, the average size lot would could be 16,832 feet, which is well above 15,000 foot that would be allowed. in an R115 which is allowed in an R120. So, it's not like we're trying to do something unusual here. It would be a very good fit in the neighborhood and the homes that would be built there presumably would be similar to the same size homes that are being built you see in that part of town.

I appreciate that. That's all speculation though for future. We're here to hear your theme now. We're not speculating what will be built. Well, what would be built would just be in accordance with the zones. That's all I'm saying. Okay.

Okay. We would be consistent with that. Uh what else do I have here I'd like to make a point of? I think I'll leave it at that. We would we would for all those reasons uh which makes sense not just from a from a sociological standpoint let's call it that but also from uh the reason staff has said they would recommend a denial we think that those are u without dramatizing it we think that those have holes in them. We think that some good common sense uh legislation uh would allow for our application to be approved or be recommended by the planning commission to be approved and that would be our recommendation to you. So thank you.

Thank you. This is a public hearing. We invite you to come up if you'd like to speak. Please keep your comments pertinent and brief. Okay. It appears no one else wants to come. Um, will you would like Oh, okay. Um, Director Can Danielananiels, do you have some things you'd like to address at this point?

Yeah. So, I would just like to uh erout a couple uh a couple situations that that were mentioned. Uh Don and I have been working together and like like you say have a have a great relationship. We may have a difference of opinions in a couple things but that doesn't uh stop us from being able to work together to the point that we've been uh staff have been trying to find a way. It's just it's a complicated situation as as I expressed at the beginning. Um but so staff is not citing uh health, safety, and welfare as as the reasons why we recommend denial. Right? Those those weren't the reasons. And actually in the staff report you guys can read it. It says that the the language says that uh that it enhances the or for the health safety and welfare to to do the reason and the staff report only says like well it's not clear identify how this objectives will be achieved by by by doing the reason. That's what we're saying. Okay. The reasons why we recommended denial are number one because uh number one because there's a plan that's already approved. Okay, there's a plan that's already approved and it says right there it's very clear on the plat what that the future of that land for perpetual open space. Now I understand that that's why there's there's ways there's channels and I'm glad the applicant is pursuing some of those channels. I'm actually the one providing those channels say hey how about we do it this way how about we do it this way uh let's go to plan commission let's figure it out but that's one of the that's one of the reasons and the second one is because we don't I don't want to set a precedence a staff of taking a pud and and and um accommodate something just for this specific PUD so they can sell a portion of the property having said that I sympathize with their with their concerns and I sympathize with the problem and the situation they're having that's why I'm trying to to find a

channel that that we can make this one. Uh it hasn't been it's not a simple project if I want to say it like that. But uh I just want to reiterate my my appreciation for the for the applicant. We have uh met in my office a couple times. He has a lot of experience has helped me a lot. Julie as well has a lot of experience and we're just trying to find a a channel but fortunately staff hasn't felt uh comfortable with any of the ones that we have proposal we have how about this about that but still some concerns. Okay.

Okay. Well commissioners just bring it up for discussion. Um I am sympathetic to their needs but at the same time you know I personally do maintenance for four widow ladies in my neighborhood. We don't have the benefit of a gated community. We sold my mother's house so we couldn't afford it. That's just kind of realities. Um when when I couldn't afford to maintain her home. So I I understand their sympathies. We're not trying to put people out, but there's also a lot of realities. Um

I I just my understanding is this is in the RR zone. this is and if it's I mean they've already met their their capacity for homes within that acreage. Correct.

I do like what the current setup is where those homes are very I mean where the existing ones are there there's a setback from from the public roads. Um it's kept up very nice. Well, it looks very nice. You don't have these cluster of homes backing or right next to halfacres. Um, I missed the other meetings. I was not here for the beginning ones, but there just may be more solutions. I also don't like if we do an overlay even though it's specific. I don't like that some something reminiscent and cluster PUD could possibly be used in other parts of the city if I understand correctly some of the problems. So I'm all for people using the land they want but I just I don't like how this how it's been presented. I don't like how it works. There's too many problems for me that I think not benefit the overall city and maybe there could be better solutions. That's my opinion.

Any other comments? Any concerns? It's open for discussion. It just doesn't fit the zone. It is already It's already planned out. Yeah, it's already planned out through the years. Okay. Um, I would entertain a motion at this time and admit this is a I just want to make make emphasis that you guys gonna forward a recommendation for

recommendation. That's it. We're not making a final decision here. The final decision is in the house of this does go to city council. It's just our it formalizes our feelings for the city council. It will be heard at city council and they will make the final decisions. That is not under our jurisdiction. So if anyone like to make a proposal that we forward to city council. I would be willing to hear that proposal.

Um I I move the planning commission deny the request of Julie Smith for a code text amendment city code section 10-13 overlay zones to add new overlay zone article G called the Springs District overlay zone based on it does not fit the current zoning

commissioner. Let's change the language of that and instead of uh deny say forward a recommendation of denial if that's what you guys see inclined. So forward recommendation of denial or forward a recommendation of approval but is let's use those words forward a recommendation. Move the plan commission forward a recommendation of denial to request the of Julie Smith the code text amendment city code section 10-13 overlay zones to add new overlay zone article G called the Springs District overlay zone based on it does not fit the zone currently in it. I have a motion by Commissioner Trickler. Do I have a second?

Second. Have a second by Commissioner Nilson. All those in favor of forwarding a recommendation of denial to the city council. I I I.

Any opposed to the denial? That motion will stand to city council as a motion and a recommendation of denial to the city council. Okay. At this point, we will hear item number four on our agenda tonight. That is a public hearing to consider the request of Pleasant Grove City to amend section 10-6-2 definition sections 10-9A and 10 building height rural residential section 10 9B-9 building heights and rural residential zones. The proposes to amend the definition of height in section 10-6-2, provide an effective date in sections 10-9A10 and 10-9B9. It is a legislative item. All

righty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. See how quick we can make this one. So, the last item for tonight is a code text amendment. Uh it's it's a quick alteration to a code text amendment for building height. Uh now this was brought before the planning commission where it received a recommendation of approval and then it went to city council and uh during the city council meeting one of the members of the council asked about properties that are dug out of a hillside rather than built up. And so here is uh our response to that. We just made a quick change. And so just putting this at the very end of both the rural residential zone and the single family residential zone. This just says in no case shall a new development exceed 35 ft uh as measured from the finished grade. As measured from the finished grade and that's just to prevent somebody from digging into a hillside and then creating a 60story home. You do the averaging and it would be a

sure understood. Yeah. Well, and we're saying finish grade is between like the virgin soil original and then whatever's been on top. Yes. In between, I guess I should say. Okay. Yeah. So, so here's an example of what we looked at before. So, if the red line was the original grade and the blue line is the finished grade, we'd be going to the halfway point. And so actually that's a little bit dark. Here we go. Uh and so this is just uh in response to that. So if the red line again is the original grade and then they cut out a big portion and then made that the finished grade, technically they would be able to build a much taller house.

Technically speaking, um this just caps it at 35 from the finished grade no matter what. Uh if that were the case. Okay. Okay. Any other questions? No. Sure. Yes. Sorry. Um, so if the lot was on a very steep hillside and they and it's like on the front where the road is, it's just one story, but then it goes down like two stories, so they can still have a walk out basement. Sure.

Is it from the bo the back or is it from the front or is it from just the finished grade. Um, so either way it is going to be from the average between the original and the finished grade uh up to the peak of the roof. And you do that for all four sides. But what the code text amendment uh for tonight says is that in no case shall the building height exceed 35 ft from the finished grade. So no matter what. So any single portion of that house cannot exceed 35 ft effectively.

Okay. Effectively. Yeah. So if it's cut out of the back and it's only, you know, 12 feet in the front but goes way down, it can still be 35 ft in the tallest distance on the tallest wall. Is that correct?

Almost. Yeah. So, I mean this one I mean imagine if the blue line was up a little bit further. So there like there's not as much of a a difference here. Then this 35 ft would definitely go up higher for sure cuz once again we're doing this for all four sides of the building and getting the average from that. So, what you're seeing, uh, you know, on that tall side, it could still technically be like 36 or 37 feet or something like that, but it won't be all the way up to like say 40T or something like that like it like it has been. Um, I don't know if that's really making any sense, but uh, yeah. Okay. Thank you.

No problem. I'm more confused now. No, I think I get Okay. Just give me this example. Walk out basement. Sure. Property naturally drops. So like she said, it's the top the house on on virgin soil. They don't add anything to it. They go up 35 ft. Yeah. Then the land curves down and they have a walkout basement that is now approved at Okay. Yeah. So this they're just if it really falls steeply, they're going to have to adjust some things. But the the only change really depends on if they're cutting away or if they're adding to

uh the finish grade is ultimately what that change is. In this particular case, they added a whole bunch of dirt so that way the house can slope towards the right of way towards that front property line. That way the sewer can slope towards the right of way. Uh right. It's not really changing when we This isn't changing anything that we've already approved. Yeah. Um whereas this one that we are looking at now, this one is in terms of like a cut. Instead, because this is already draining towards the right of way, but you know, who wants to have their main level be underground, right?

You know, so if they cut away uh some of the land in order to place the house down. Okay. Okay. Well, now there is that difference in grade and so we're still going from that middle between the uh original and the finished grade. Oh, yes. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, no problem. Any other questions for Jacob? Okay. Seeing none. Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Thank you.

Again, it's a public meeting. If you'd like to come up to the pulpit, state your name for the record, and we will hear your comments. As I said, there's only two of you. We we chased the rest away somewhere.

Hello, my name is Parker. Um, as I just found out, it sounds like we're a little late to the ball with the uh mud hole neighborhood. We had recently moved in. We got the notice for the um uh business being built. Um I don't know anything of the backstory. It sounds like it will be a through street. Part of what we the appeal with our house is it's a dead end street. I have two kids. Um is my neighbor. This is back to item number two that we heard. The second one that we heard. Yeah. I it sounds like we missed our our opportunity. So there was the moment that they're talking about. Got

um I am against this. As I said, part of our appeal to the house was it's a dead end street. I have two kids. They like playing in the in the yard. We go around and my concern is the volume of traffic that will be passing through. Um, also my question with the feasibility of having a business run through a public residential street to get to State Street in this case. Oh, Parker Child.

Okay. So, there's the culdeac and you live below the cold at that dead end and 36 West 500 North. Is there a map? on street. And Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to talk with uh the client or with I forgot your name. I apologize. Parker, I'm happy to talk with Parker and anyone else about this project since we're not actually hearing the site plan just yet. Yeah. So, the the way the road develops, how that's going to come through, that is still to be determined. Right now, we determine the building types. Okay. So, we understand your concern. We're glad that you're here. We're not telling you no, but we do not know exactly how the roads and how that parcel is going to build out at this point. Understood.

So, you will receive a notice when that does come up. You'll have another opportunity to come talk to us and we will definitely take into account your concerns and we appreciate it. Understood. Thank you. Probably what Jacob will tell you when we talked about this before, they want traffic coming in from 1300 West, not the residential. Yeah, we're But Jacob, you could tell you a lot more. Yes. Yeah, and that that will be part of the discussion. So, I appreciate you guys and your concerns. So, thank you. I don't want you put it off, but that's a little little out of sequence right now. Yeah. No, no worries. Thank you for your Well, and it's in the future because we don't know either. So,

can I Okay. So, do you have comments other than that or Okay. Then then we will finish the height. Okay,

we will close the public portion of that. We'll bring it back up here. We will continue item number four for discussions and uh andor proposals or motions. I move the planning commission recommend that the city council approve the request to Pleasant Grove City for the code text amendment to city code section 10-6-2 def definitions to revise the def the definition for building height and to sections 10-9A 10 and 10-9B-9 to provide an effective date and adopting the exhibits conditions and findings of the staff report and as modified by conditions which are none.

Okay. I second. Sorry. I have a motion by Commissioner Nilson to forward a recommendation of positive with a second by Commissioner Shirley. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? That motion passes. Awesome. I would like to hear I would Man, I'm getting bad. So tired. Let's review and approve the minutes from the March 26 2026 meeting. I will um approve the minutes from the March 26th meeting. Okay. I have a motion by Commissioner Trickler. Do I have a second? Second.

Second by Commissioner Shirley. All those in favor of the Mono minutes from March 26 say I. I. Any opposed? That passes. At this point, I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. Second, second, third and fourth. Okay. So, so moved this motion is this meeting