Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

uh planning commission meeting for Tuesday, April says April. That's not right. It's Tuesday, April 12th. May 12th. May 12th. May 12th. Screen has the 28th. Yeah. Oh, that wasn't the right one. I don't know. He was just reading it. So, that's okay. um for Tuesday, May 12th. And um we have all of the planning commission here, which is uh wonderful to see everybody. Um and I'd like to as a personal note, uh wish all of our mothers a happy Mother's Day. I know we're a couple of days past, but uh still

Mother's Month.

We we Yeah, you get the whole month. You should You deserve it. Uh first item on our agenda today is um uh public comment. Uh we don't have any public here so we'll move on to item C which is presentation reports. Uh Mr. Cooper. Thank you. Welcome everyone. Good to see you all. um a couple of housekeeping items just to keep you up to date and um explain item number uh one under action items and then I'll turn the time back over to you chair to talk about uh some of the things you learned in our development review committee if that's okay. Uh so as you recall on the 28th you all set a public hearing to um deal with a text amendment uh regarding the new classification for businesses. um you set that for today. Uh there's a required noticing period for that. Um in addition to what you did, there's a 10-day notice. There was a glitch in that system and it didn't get noticed properly. So that's why we're not having that public hearing today. We'd ask that under um item E1 that you reschedu that for uh the next meeting is probably the soonest and most appropriate. So any questions about that?

No. little shift in how we thought we would be doing it today. Um, and before I turn it over to you, chair, let me explain. Um, if you recall, you all recommended approval of the new plan development ordinance to the council. They passed that and in that um, there are changes required to be made to the design review committee which you all recommended approval for that as well. And so those changes have been made. The design review committee, which originally just met to look at elevations and architecture and colors um for new proposals, is now the first step in the development review process. We also added um in addition to the planning commission and the mayor, we added a city council uh seat in that committee. So now any development application that comes in um goes through the the development review committee and that committee um has the ability to provide input early on in the development process so that these applicants can get the um get input from the planning commission and the city council upfront instead of just staff. Hopefully the goal there is to prevent um misalignment when we bring these applications to the planning commission and to this um council. Um and there's a lot more consensus there. It's not going to be perfect. Um it all is reliant on the feedback that you all get from those representatives in that committee which is uh your chair here um in terms of what he saw and what he would like to communicate to you. So periodically when we have these meetings and we've had two since then. We've had one on the town home project behind Crispy Cream and we've had another related to Crispy Cream building. Um there's a proposal to turn that into a Dave's Hot Chicken.

And so we've looked at um both of those prop um those concept ideas. It hasn't turned into a formal submitt. You haven't seen it as a site plan or anything like that just yet. This is all conceptual. There's no formal approvals. there's no anything other than collaboration with our applicant partners. So, with that, um, chair, I'd turn it over to you to share with the commission what you learned. I'll pull up, um, the drawing so everyone can see what you're talking about. Let's start with the town homes, maybe.

Okay. And again, this this is meant for you to communicate together in a discussion format and provide the chair who is your representative on that committee any thoughts or feedback that you might want him to bring back to the to the applicant. Who's the city council member? Uh Michael Richter. Okay. So there you can see the general layout of what this would look like. Uh this is uh the hillside there behind um um

yeah all those businesses Crispy Cream and and the other businesses. If you look at the the small little um uh one of the the upper left hand corner um that is on that property that's uh across the street. So it's just uh right next to those buildings that are across across the street. Uh could you go to the the next one the next slide? Uh that's the only slide that I provided.

Oh okay. So um sorry on the hillside um they are planning uh amenities. I wanted to I'd kind of like to show them the landscaping. Can we do that? I don't know. Um

it's in your invite, Michelle. That um that calendar invite for last week if if you want to look at it there. But um I guess there currently is kind of a trail that runs through that area and uh I think from what I my understanding is is their plan is to continue that trail but make it more formalized. So uh it will have um it won't be paved uh and they're not using rock. I can't remember exactly what it was that they were talking about using on that trail, but it will have uh a coating on top of it of some kind that that uh I'm sorry. Go ahead, Laura. You say where is the trail going to be in in conjunction with the town homes?

Behind it. It Yeah, it's on the It's on that hillside that's up behind where the town homes would be. Yes, I know. Yeah, sorry. It was and uh my understanding is it it uh starts up by the sidewalk at 300

and then it comes all the way down through and um along the trail it will have um uh some amenities that will be they're trying to work it to where children's uh it won't be traditional children's playground equipment, but it will be more things that uh that fit into more of a natural setting like that. Uh so they're going to have some some uh some things like that that up there which I thought was kind of cool.

Um also uh uh I know Allan has mentioned and I think Cody might have too um about uh all the springs that are in that hillside along there. Um they are aware of all of that. Uh they have plans to uh it they have three different um uh areas that they're going to be uh doing water um retention. Yes. Exactly. Land drains. So yes. So one is about halfway down the hillside, one is towards the bottom, and then they're doing uh uh land drains around each one of the buildings as well.

What about the south hillside that goes up towards Cherry Drive? Um, go if we go back to the site plan,

but that I think that's the hillside that we were talking about. So, that would be on the far left there. Yeah. Yep. Bottom left.

Yep. So, there'll be land drains there. Um, these land drains will drain into um into that triangle piece there um in between the Hail properties, PET boys, and and um the the 550 West. So, there's that weird triangle that's currently kind of a wetland area. So, some of the land drains will drain there. Some of the other land drains will actually drain into the UDOT storm system that goes out into Riverdale Road. So, that's good because that's where they're currently draining. And then that retention pond at the top there uh just off of 500 West that'll take the surface drainage. Right. So roads.

They also are planning on um uh there'll be kind of a a rocked stream that will run down through it. Um and uh that go also goes into it's it's just water that uh comes from from the hillside and uh that will also uh run into um uh the drain as well on the on the bottom end of that. Another question I would have because I'm close to this the trees and the hold that hillside together. Yeah. And I didn't know what they're going to be planning on doing with a lot of those trees because certain areas there that could just take them out. They're going to have the hillside come down. That's one.

So, if you're familiar, the slope is very wooded and then it gets flat and that's pretty that's just covered in weeds and things. So, the slope is our concern as well. We have an ordinance that governs what they can and can't do with hillside slopes. So um as part of their submission to us for site plan review and subdivision, they will um hire a geotechnical engineer. I think they've already done that. and heal. He or she um will uh analyze the soil, the groundwater, the runoff, the the canopy, everything related to that hillside and provide recommendations um to them as the developer on how to maintain slope stability. And we'll review that. Our city engineer will review that and uh that will become part of the approval. So they'll be required to maintain those recommendations and a lot of that will be to minimize any cutting of trees, right? Especially removing of roots. Uh and so they'll they'll be very um surgical in how they maneuver their equipment up through the hillside, what how they excavate, what they replant, how they replant, how they water, that kind of stuff.

Okay. Good. At at the same time, they're they're going to clean that up. Uh so they will uh so that you know it all looks better um and uh uh so they'll it will be all all cleaned as well. The engineer sorry chair I just want to add one thing. The engineer who is doing the hillside for America first where you see those giant um Yep. Uh there is probably just as much water on that hillside that they've had to figure out how to manage as there is here. That might be um speculative, but there's a lot of water and they've done a great job doing exactly there what they're proposing to do here. So, we have some confidence in the engineer at least.

They're putting up walls like that. No, no. Um that was just to retain the hillside. There's no retention necessary here, but the water management became just as big of a problem there as it will be here. And they've managed the water really well. Is that hillside already at a 2 to1 slope or is it Do we know what that's at? This one here, it's probably greater. Yeah, it's pretty steep. Mhm. In some ca in some areas for sure.

Water and a lot of my people that live around here and they found out I was on the commission. I kind of talked to Shell about a little bit. They're saying where is the water coming from to flush their toilets, stuff like that. and she tried to explain it to me about water rights that the developer has to sell back to us. Is that right? Yes.

Not quite that terminology, but they have to provide uh access to water. That comes in two ways. they can provide to us water shares um that are equivalent to their water usage and that's a math calculation that we determine based on the number of units the the amount of outdoor landscaping both in turf and zeros escape and so they either can provide us a water share that uh satisfies that usage or they can buy water that we have already contracted for with Weber Basin and that water isn't an actual share it's just an allocation to that property in perpetuity. And that is done in acre feet. We pay $22,400 per acre foot for the water through Weber Basin. They would just that would just be a pass through directly to them and that would allocate water to the project.

They just I just need to be able to explain it to them because they're saying are they taking water away from us? It doesn't sound like it. It's coming from another source. They are buying water that's allocated to their specific use. Okay. Whether it's provided through water shares or buy bought through existing water rights. It's a good question though, especially with everything we're going through right now. Yeah.

Anything any other comments or questions about the project? They feel good about their amount of uh parking and those adjacent business owners feel good about it. the parking exceeds the requirement. Uh there is some part uh some interesting parking proposals. So you'll see on 550 West they're proposing to add 19 parking stalls that are half on their property, half on the city rightway and then um about 15 stalls on that east side of 550 West. Um, all of those are meant to contribute to the parking count, but they're in excess of the requirement. So, if you I know

requirement is not very high, though. Um, it actually it is. So, each each home is required to park two, right? So, each unit has two. Um, and then it's required to have uh one half per unit. um that just looks like there's going to be some really convenient parking over in the businesses for that area. I agree.

And one thing we'll probably ask them to do is um have some discussion with the businesses um they I don't know if they've done that to date, but that'll be something that will be uh probably something we asked them to do in the review process um to get that feedback. All of that stuff is private. You know, there's a public easement, I think, that runs across the backside that dead ends, unfortunately, into one business right now. Um, but that's a public access to get you to 300. So, there'll be rights that the uh residents will have there. And obviously 500 and 550 are public roads. So, parking inside the inside the actual parking lots will need to be addressed. If you look at the parking count on the right side, um the the total parking required is 2.25 per unit. Um and they have 100, so that's 183 required. They have 252. That's including the uh you know 1519, so 35 units stalls over on 550.

I still think my main concern is going to be the traffic and the issues it's going to cause. That's why I've said no, I voted against this. I think we're going to see more of an issue than I think we're really ready for.

Um the uh the submission will include a parking study. So they'll give us a study to show uh trips, peak hours, turning movements, that kind of thing. So that will be information that you'll see formally. And this is a byite development, meaning that they're not asking for um for a reasonzone. They've already done that, right? So, that was approved. Uh they're asking for a subdivision and a site plan. And generally speaking, if those things meet the city ordinances, then it's a buyight development. All of these will be for sale. Um and um we were talking to about uh kind of limiting um trying to limit the um by you and then rent, you know, type situations um as much as possible. And there are some things that can be done with the CCNRs and things like that um that can do that um that can help with that. But um uh so that that was something that that uh has been discussed. So I don't think we can totally eliminate it, but uh it can be um restricted I I guess would be the best way to put it.

Well, there'll be homeowner associations type things here. There will be an HOA and they can those people that are elected to that can have a lot of control on what you just were talking about. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah, the developer is committed that the first round of sale, meaning whatever they control, right, that first owner is going to be um owner occupied, occupied. Beyond that, they have no control. Yeah. So, other than what they put in the HOA and that's very hard to manage. It is. Yeah. How long do they require the owner occupied? They they won't have any requirement. We don't have a requirement.

Okay. So, it's just that initial commitment of we'll sell every unit to a owner occupant, not a a bulk buyer, not a an LLC or an institutional buyer. We'll sell it to individual owner occupants, but then after that, yeah, after that is what you're saying. They have to move in Yeah. And and then they would have to sell it to someone else that would um in order I I think from what you just said, would they have to sell it to somebody else for it to be a rental then? Right. Once the developer makes that initial sale,

there wouldn't be any occupancy requirements in terms of length of time that we would impose. I doubt they would impose any. So that new owner could then turn around and sell it to whomever they would like or rent it or whatever.

Right. Okay. Um so right now we're we're very preliminary as far as this is concerned. it still has to go before um like the fire department and it has to be uh looked at by engineers. They have to get you know a lot more information to them and things like that. So these are just this is all just preliminary. So just uh want to keep you informed um going so that uh you're aware of what's happening.

So just a quick question. I've heard um concerns which are all valid. Is there any specific feedback that you want to give to address those concerns? So, for instance, you mentioned parking. I said that they're providing a traffic study. That's a reasonable request. Is there anything else like that that you would think to um recommend at this point?

And traffic you mentioned. Well, yeah. I think that traffic is that traffic study is huge because of the fact if you go in there Saturday a, you know, Saturday afternoon, Friday afternoons, Wednesday afternoons, that's busy through there and then you're going to put parking across that's just waiting for an accident. Those 19 stalls, that's a horrible idea. Well, I think that the bigger issue with traffic is all of those owners are going to have to go out to Riverdale Road if they want to go up the terrace. I mean, that's already really hard getting up to 300, but we don't have that right away all the way through, right? Which would be a great help to that traffic. Yeah. It's just going to be because right now they'll go to the light by Rudy River probably

because I remember I remember talking to the gentleman that was here doing this and he just was I I don't know what he had no idea. I was like, "What? All that traffic comes out to 500. What are you going to do?" Well, there's two, you know, there's the the two points and then if you can snake your way out the other side. Um, but then you're going to get people on 500 trying to go left. But there's a light there. Yeah. Yeah. That's where we want them to 550. There's a light. 500 there is not. Oh, no. No. If they go up. Yeah. Yeah. Most people are going to take the path of least resistance and so they'll go to the light. Yeah. Um,

but again, those are valid concerns. Is there anything that you want them to particularly look at in the traffic study? Um if you know these are general things that they would look at anyway like turning movements. Yeah, I mean they're going to look at that. So I mean they're going to look at turning movements. Um the traffic like the the busy times when it's going to what it's going to normal for the city to give up our own space for parking. That was a that was a big conversation in the meeting. We weren't super jazzed about the 19 stalls. Is that setting a precedent for other developers saying, "Well, we need some of your spots for parking, too, to I don't I don't get what's the net." If that takes them over the limit, then what's the point,

right? It's in a weird spot, I think. So, we talked about that exact thing. Um because it is um an amount that takes them over the limit. It's at our discretion. So, we talked about maybe um xening those four on the curve and keeping the 11 um that are parallel there. We saw some value in that, but the the four around that curve, we're like, you don't need it to meet your parking count. Um

those would be stalls that we would stripe and maintain. So, it's it's totally at at our city discretion and we'll have that um resolved in the review. So, I'll have an answer back when we come back to you. The 19 was um again totally um optional, not required, uh just something to help. But there is a requirement on our side to do partial maintenance. We'd have to work out an agreement with them. So, that was a bit more clunky. Uh so, um uh Sean, our public works director, was in the DRC meeting and uh he'll make a determination on that when we bring it to you. Also, uh there was a concern with the curve and things. So, uh we've recommended that they turn those into 45° angle stalls instead of uh 90° angle stalls. That's right.

So that um that way they're they're facing you know towards the curve and so when they back out they you know automatically head that direction. So they'll probably lose a couple of stalls by doing that but it's you know they're already way over. So this is, by the way, if you look at that, that's inside the curb on the um on the street. And so that actually ends up being on their property, but because of the way that it is, like Brandon said, he uh you know, the city will kind of take over maintenance of that area even though it's on on their property. I know my daughter lives in town homes in Farmington and there's a you know it's it's barely two two cars for each town home

but they do have parking across the street similar to that for guests or people visiting because otherwise people start parking like anywhere they can find a place. Well, and you can see throughout the the um on the inside even there's there's parking stalls uh here, here, you know, um all the way along that all the way along that uh uh eastern side. There's parking all the way along there. Um so there's they they've got parking stalls throughout. Uh and then there are the twocar garages that's underneath each one of them. And then who will monitor that? Because so everything inside the property line is private,

right? Um the streets are private, the parking's private except on 550. If Sally has a party and they park wherever, then it's what? No one's going to Yeah, there really won't be a room inside for addition extra parking. I mean, they can't park along the street or anything like that. There's just not room. Um and they're responsible for taking care of their own snow removal and that sort of thing. There be no parking signs. uh the HOA will be responsible for that.

So there'll be a couple of things. The current the concern that we have is that um a town home is parked internally and a new parking stall now is a 9 by 20. So if you have two inside of a town home, you have to have a town home with a footprint big enough to accommodate that that size. Um but a lot of times people just put their junk in the garage and park somewhere else. Somewhere else. So, we brought that up and that'll be something that the HOA will a restrict. They'll restrict um having your garage not for cars and b they'll restrict on street parking. So, this will have garages

underneath. Yes. Underneath them. Every unit will park two cars. Unless you have like a F450. Probably not. In the traffic study, do they take into account the effect this has on the congestion on Riverdale Road? Um, only if we ask them to. So, they'll look at the immediate intersections 550, 500, and maybe 300. Um, and then internal circulation. So, if we want them to look at the impact on a larger scale, that's why we're having these conversations. Because there's one thing that happens because I go this way a lot down Riverdale Road.

If you've ever gone down Riverdale Road to the towards the Starbucks, you know, from over the vioduct, there's three lanes. The two left lanes are fairly open. A lot of times they move. The right lane can be backed up clear up on top of the three because you're turning to 300 West and that's the trick. Yeah. But I don't think that this is going to make that just I think I I think the opposite. I think it will because anybody that wants to head up the terrace is going to go in that lane. True. And so status of negotiations got to go into that lane. Unknown.

Even if they want to go down to Trader Joe's or something further, it's that's a big backup right there. If they're going to do a study of 300 West, that fulfills my concern. Okay. Good feedback. So, I'm hearing to expand that traffic study to include 300 and maybe some impacts along Riverdale Road to the south. 300's already a mess. It's hard. It's hard to get into 300 West and I was uh to come here today. I just came early. I was backed up to where you turn in to the back part of uh uh Trader Joe's. So keep in mind all the way

that a traffic study um will quantify what that means because backing up in in the eyes of a traffic engineer is not inherently bad. It's the length of time that you're backed up that determines whether or not that intersection or that turning movement is a failure or not based on acceptable um levels. And we can get into all that when we talk about this, but backing up is not inherently bad. If you're backed up for 12 or 15 or 20 minutes, maybe that starts to creep into the failure um categorization. They do that study after school is out for the year. That'll be a lot different. Do it now. Do it. Unfortunately, it's a point in time. So, yeah.

Yeah. Because they'll do it mid July and this is so good feedback. I'll I'll uh make sure that's incorporated into what they provide to you as a commission. Anything else about this? Let's move on then to the Dave's Hot Chicken. This is much easier. Healthier. So, is Crispy Cream closed? No, it's still there. There's still It's kind of kind of the same situation as Goodwood. We don't really know what there what there is happening there. Barely. I've gone there before. It's like You go there at 8 o'clock in the morning, they don't have donuts. It's bad. They don't have any. Is that what you said?

On a Saturday. We went on Saturday and they were out of half of their donuts at 8 at 8:30. Wow. I'm like, well, that's a good sign. That's peak sales time. Well, he said we didn't make enough. Looks like mom designed it. What's that? Obviously. Yeah. On a Saturday at 8:30 in the morning. That's like peak sales time. Yeah. You would think something. That's a look. Yeah. Who designed that? You should see the one in Logan. It's insane. 1980. You want to make any comments about this before we start?

Yeah. So, um, the building isn't changing. The site isn't changing. So, this actually won't come to you as a commission. Um, because the DRC still retains their ability to approve just the exterior colors and things. Um, so you won't actually see this beyond tonight. Um, it will get a building permit for the in interior renovations, but you folks don't see those. So anyway, we just wanted to share this with you because um we uh it's a it's an interesting take on a brand. When is this set to happen? I don't know. They didn't really give us a time frame. Looks great. So hot chicken like spicy. Oh yeah. Yeah.

Oh yeah. Right next to Raising Canes. Yeah. Crazy. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Basically on the same property as Raising Canes. Yeah. So I have a funny running joke with the mayor. Um, in terms in an attempt to create a a greater identity for Riverdale, I always kid with him that Riverdale is the home of Northrup Grumman. A lot of people don't know that the renov the Roy Innovation Center is in Riverdale. So, it's really the Riverdale Innovation Center. We're the home of um we're the home of America First. That's huge. And we're also the um the uh chicken capital chicken capital of the world. Yeah, it's like another. Yeah, count. Yeah, count on your count on your fingers how many.

So, we need a banner that says all those things. Can we get that better than the car dealership, you know, image? Yeah, we're shifting, right? Going up. Shifting from car dealership to chicken capital. So, this is kind of what they look like if you um if you Google it. Um you can see what some of their other buildings look like, their existing buildings. look like this. Compared to their existing buildings, this is very mild. Oh, yeah. Um Yeah. Michelle, can you from Logan? They're basically um they basically cover their their buildings with It is in

almost like graffiti. Um and they actually have uh artists that come out and and do the painting. It sounds like they do hand painting of all this, doesn't it? To it would be a mural type painting, not a wrap. Right. Um, and there was a request by the mayor to have a local, well, they said local artists do it there and and kind of a local theme as well. So, the request was before we the the actual the DRC actually gave a conditional approval that subject to the final artwork. Great. Yeah. You come down Main Street in Logan there's one in Logan

the I don't know in Utah Jason. Yes, sir. Uh, other than the one in Logan, are you aware of any others in Utah? Uh, there's one in Lehi, I believe. You can see it right off the freeway. Utah. Well, there's at least there's at least a couple others. Yeah, there's a there's a bunch of them in Utah. Yeah, I'm talking about just in Utah. I think they're out of Texas, aren't they? I can't remember where they're at. Anyway, but yeah, it's

So, this is just kind of for your information. Uh, again, we really don't know a lot about what's going on at this location. uh as far as the existing business is concerned. So um you know you're free to talk about it but um you know it it's kind of bad if the employees hear from somebody else that their business may be closing and then maybe they don't. Who knows? We don't know what's going to happen. I've done there before and honestly I walked in the lobby and was like where is anybody working? Well, and I drove by Arby's last week

and uh and they were taking the sign down and there was a huge dumpster in the drive-through window area and I thought, "Okay, well, Arby's is closed." Yeah. Ar shut down. So, the one right here in Riverdale. Yeah. The one right here for another They were really slow access maybe. No hope. Big thing. Oh, you were right. So, so yeah. So, we lost Arby's too. So, all right. Another chicken place. I was just going to say, yeah, anybody got a million dollar idea? Chicken place. Yeah. The brand.

So, if you uh if you know anybody that is looking for a place to put a business, there you go. Perfect. Now, they throw away the Subway coupons and the Arby's coupons. Yep. Arby's right up on 1900. Yeah, there's one in Roy. We're not going to go into Roy.

You got to keep our money. And and there's also one right up on Harrison that's not far away either. So, all right. Any other any any questions or comments about Dave's Hot Chicken? Okay, we can move on then. Thank you very much. Um the next item on the agenda will be the um uh public hearing. Um, which uh we are as um I'm sorry, chair. Um I don't believe we did the consent items. Oh, you're right. Sorry. Thank you. The agenda didn't come up. So,

um lightning fingers try and get it done. Consent items. Uh any uh additions or changes to the minutes? Then a motion is in order to approve the consent items that we approve the April 26th work session and regular meeting minutes. Okay. Actually 28th. 28th. 28th. 28th. All right. The 28th. I'll second the agenda, but it's right on the second it. Okay. We have a motion and second. Everyone in favor say yes. Yes.

Okay. That's unanimous. Uh and now the um uh item E action items consideration to reschedule the public hearing. Um so I I don't think we need uh does anybody have any discussion or questions about that? Okay. Then a motion is in order. I move that we reschedu the public hearing for the 28th of May. May 26th. Is it the 26th? Yeah. Okay. 26. Yeah. Too many in numbers.

Move that uh public hearing for the 26th of May at uh for this meeting. Second. Second. Okay. All in favor? Yes. Okay. Any opposed? And item two, consideration to approve the subdivision plat amendment for Peacock Ridge Estates preliminary plat. Mr. Cooper.

Okay. Thank you. We'll get a little presentation up here. I might ask you to advance the slides for me. Please go ahead. Okay. So, Peacock Ridge, um, go ahead to the next one. um is an existing subdivision up off of uh 1200 West. So there's an aerial map. It's kind of the southwest part of town. That's Hill Air Force Base there. Up in the top corner, left corner, you start to see um the beginnings of the Riverdale Innovation Center.

Um this was a subdivision that was approved uh quite some time ago. You can go to the next uh slide. Um, this was actually approved in uh 2021. It was a eight lot subdivision. Uh, Mr. Kent Hill purchased this land and the planning commission and city council approved the subdivision as you see it uh before you today. Um, if you're familiar with that area, if you would mind going back to the aerial, please. Yep. Uh, that's basically a hillside. Um, all of the homes there that front 1200 West

have retainage on the back side. So, it was a difficult subdivision. Um, they got a canal right behind it.

Yep. There's the the Davis uh Weaver Canal right behind it. So, it was a difficult subdiv subdivision, but it was approved nonetheless. Um, in 2024, I was working with Mr. Kent Hill on the subdivision and trying to figure out a feasible way in which he could develop based on what was approved. And it beca it began to be challenging in terms of what he was willing to do versus what we were going to require him to do. And so the city council approved a purchase of this land I think in 24 or 25. So the city owns this property now. Um, so if you go don't mind going through, go to the next one. There's u the top of the culde-sac if you're familiar. There used to be a home there. Um, and uh, now it's just access. And so if you go to the next one, you'll see what we're proposing to you tonight. So this this is a preliminary PLA uh, request. It's initiated by the city because we are the land owner. Um, we would propose that we vacate the original eight lots that exist today and replace it with this plat, which would create three new lots. Lot one R would be the largest lot, and that would be the bulk of the hillside, and we um anticipate selling that to the canal company. That's already been approved by the concept's already been approved by the council. um the deal has not been approved like the actual contract. It's subject to this action. Um so lot one R would be would be its own lot sold to the Davis uh Weaver Canal Company. Lot 2R and 3R would be retained by the city in our ownership and we would put those up for sale for residential uh homes. This is an R2

zone. So, these two lots um uh comply with the R2 zone based on how we've drawn this up. Uh go ahead. Next slide. R2, is that single family? Okay, that's what I thought. I just wanted to make sure. So, minimum lot size um you know, residentialbased

that kind of thing. The the the lots will have a challenge um because of the slope. It's still there. So there will be some retention. There will be some considerations to manage that hillside, but uh I think it's buildable. Um if we put them on the market and in a period of time that we determine that's adequate, we don't sell them. We could end up combining um the two lots into one and just selling one lot for a bigger home. Just kind of put it back to what it was originally. But the key is that we wanted to create a subdivision that we could um essentially put most of that hillside into the ownership of the canal company who would then reserve it for just their easement purposes. It would be access if you don't mind going back to the subdivision. Uh you can see right there on the curve that's the top of the culde-sac. Um there is an access easement there that they would um be able to cross that property and get into that um section of of the land

and you Yeah, that's you've spoken with the canal company and they are interested in purchasing that property. Their board has approved it. We've approved the price. We just haven't um approved the actual purchase and sale agreement yet until we until this until this is approved.

Um the commission is the final action. It doesn't go to the plan and to the city council because this is technically a single family dwelling subdivision and so our ordinance and the state law just makes you the land use authority. Um we've designed it again to be applicable to all the zoning standards um in terms of access and all of the things. It was a residential area in the past. It still will be. Go ahead. Um, there are some conditions that I would recommend to you as you think about a motion. Um, our ordinance requires that anybody that's to be built, anything that's to be built on those two lots that they would require um to transfer water. So, we would ask that that's done at the time of um of building permit. Typically, when an owner has a development, a subdivision that they're intending to develop, they um they uh provide water to us at the time of subdivision approval. This is a little bit different because we are the city. So we would ask that we would condition the approval on the fact that when we sell the lots, the owner would bring the water. Um the city crews will install the water in the sewer. So again, subdivisions typically have um requirements for the developer to bond and to do the stuff for the public improvements. That's all us. So it's kind of a moot point. We control all of that. There's no risk that we're going to default to oursel, that kind of thing. And then there are a few things that we'll need to work out still on the on the uh utilities and stuff. And that's all final plat things. What you're looking at is a preliminary plat mostly as a zoning check. Does it comply with the R2 zone? Is it appropriate? Those kind of things. Uh we will work out with ourselves what all the final plat requirements are to be.

So that's the um the highle update. It's a little bit of a unique situation, but I think um I I I know that the city feels like it's a better situation to have two homes there and an easement for the canal than the eight homes that were previously approved. It's taken a while and a lot of money to get to this point, but I think it ultimately is a a good protection of that hillside. Okay. Thank you. Any questions or discussions from the council? Will we get our money back?

Not entirely. We'll get um it depends on what we sell the lots for. Uh the uh canal company, their purchase price is a little under $200,000. We paid I think it was close to six 550, something like that. Um, so we'll sell it to the canal company for a little under two and then if we can sell each lot, you know, for at market or just slightly below, I think we'll be okay. What's the going rate for those size lots? Probably over a hundred. But again, if I was buying it, you know, it'd be like, well, there's a hillside. Sell them on the market or auction or we just list them. List them.

Mhm. But they felt like it was more beneficial to put it in two lots versus just selling it as one like it was originally. Yeah, we we felt like so we're stubbing the utilities for two. Um and uh we felt like two would fit. So they're big lots, but I've been up there a lot. Depends on how you retain that hillside because it comes around. Exactly. So the on paper the building footprint is adequate for a nice size home. It does have an increased site cost to it. Very increased. Yeah. But some people, you know, people build on hill build on hillsides all the time. And yeah, I just was thinking it would be more appealing as one lot because of how that culde-sac sits.

So I wondered why why you put it in two, but I'm guessing it's money. Yeah. We try to recoup our money. Yeah. What's happening with all the uh accessory buildings in the what the part we're selling to the canal company? Looks like there's a half dozen sheds or garages or whatever up in the Are you looking at an old aerial is probably. Yeah, they've all been demolished. All gone. Mhm. That was a requirement of the seller when we bought it. He to he he tore everything down.

Any other discussion? Then a motion's in order. I move to approve the subdivision plat amendment for Peacock Ridge Estates preliminary plat with the following conditions. That they complete the water transfer at the time of sale for lot two and three. That the city installs the water and sewer and that they comply with all city standards and regulations regarding final plat approval. I'll second that. Any discussion? Okay. All um that uh I got you. I want to say approve. I want to say oppose. All that approved, please say yes. We need to roll call. Yes.

You got to roll call it. Oh, roll call it. Okay. Commissioner Hilton. Yes. Commissioner Kerry? Yes. Commissioner Herman? Yes. Commissioner Francis? Yes. Commissioner Hansen? Yes. Commissioner Henstra? Yes. Commissioner Bowart? Yes. All right. Well, that's unanimous then. Thank you very much. Uh, next item on the agenda is uh, comments from uh, planning commission and city staff. Anybody have any general comments they'd like to make? Then a motion to adjurnn is in order. Yes, Michelle. Because I thought Brandon was going to um, our work session that was scheduled for after this. We're going to do that in a minute. We don't need to. Okay.

U Mike's not going to be here, so we don't have anything. Well, I know, but Brandon gave me some instructions on what we should do as far as procedure is concerned. So, you you could do it now. Okay. Um, as Michelle's indicating, so if uh because there is no um there's no information for the work session, so you can just Okay. cancel it now if you like. So yeah, there will be no work session because uh Mike Hansen uh uh didn't have uh any new information for us ready to go. So um so after uh our meeting is adjourned, we will not need to stay for a work session.

Okay. So now uh a motion is in order to adjourn. Motion to adjurnn. I'll second that. Okay. All in favor? Yes. Thank you. That was pins. What? Did you say satisfying? Yeah. I just want some hot chicken. They've got some in there that put blisters in