Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We need to call the meeting to order.

Welcome everybody to our Riverdale City Planning Commission meeting for Tuesday, May 26, 2026. We have everybody in attendance except for Jason, who is excused. We'll begin with public comments. We don't have any public here, so we'll move on to presentation reports. Mr. Cooper.

Awesome. Thank you. Welcome back, everyone. Just a couple of things. One is for you. We have a development review committee meeting tomorrow at 2. So we'll be looking at the CarMax site plan for the first time. We saw some concepts of that during the rezone process that they showed us, but hopefully we'll have a bit more detail to review with site civil and some other things. So that'll be a fun meeting. And then hopefully the following meeting here, you'll bring back a report and discuss it with the council or the commission to see if there's any input. Also, we have a groundbreaking tomorrow. So this is different. We usually do ribbon cuttings of completed projects. If you remember the River Park retail project over by Joanne's that was approved, they want to do a groundbreaking. So we'll probably see that project multiple times. I would imagine that we'll do a groundbreaking. And then when they get tenants in each one of the units, we'll probably have some ribbon cutting events for the actual tenants. So tomorrow at 11.30, we'll have some shovels. So if you can make it, shovels are first come, first served. So if you really want to be in that photo op.

early beat the mayor out of it your own show bring your own shovel yeah as a side note to that i was by there today they had a uh grater out there grading the lot looked like they were mostly just uh removing the the weeds and things like that off of the surface i didn't want to stand in the weeds yeah i mean what's going in there smoothies and oil change uh they don't have the um

They were thinking of kind of a Brothers type of a thing. Oh, that's right. But they had a tropical smoothie and a beans and brew, I think, already signed up. So typical strip mall stuff. Yeah.

That's it. Okay. Along with that, our previous DRC meeting that we had was discussing the proposed – well, yeah, still proposed – the townhomes that are going to be – by the trailer park. And just a couple of things with that. There were several items that were brought up that they needed to work on. They weren't as ready as the group that's doing the town homes over here behind Krispy Kreme. But they did a nice job with their presentation. I'm sure there's going to be more to come on that as they complete the things that we talked about and asked them to do.

So I don't think the commission has seen much there. So just may I give a little background?

Sandy Brook? Yes, Tony Brook. Tony Brook, yeah. So that is zone R5, I believe, R4, R5.

R5. And it's been approved for, I think it was 43 apartments. That sounds right. Originally. And that was kind of part of the same project with Across the Street. That had 155 apartments where the old Leslie's used to be. So obviously CarMax is going on the big parcel. The small parcel, Across the Street, they still want to do some multifamily, but it's changed from, apartments to townhomes both are allowed in the zone and um and the drc the development review committee just gave the the group a first look at that so they're proposing i believe 26 townhomes so that's a drastic reduction to the 45 apartments just on the north side of 4400 not taking out any trailers it's a little over an acre so it it It's pretty tight. They'll probably end up losing some based on the feedback that we gave them. That's my thought.

Yeah, one of the big things was we didn't feel like that they had enough area for snow removal to have places to put the snow removal. Parking was also an issue as far as additional parking, although they did have enough to meet the – criteria, we still felt like it was something that might be an issue. Can you remember anything else? I can't remember off the top of my head.

There's no amenities. The landscaping was very bare. There's no grass whatsoever, which is fun to talk about in a water drought situation, but terrible to live in when you're confined in such a tight space.

It's right on the roundabout.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So there's no grass. The setbacks are good. So it will feel nice. It won't feel like it's crowding the roundabout. It's set back in a decent way. But the interesting part of this is that it's in the R5. What did I say? Five? Five, uh-huh. And so that's the base zone. But because it is not consistent with the R5... base zone guidelines, it would be under the new plan development overlay that we enacted just recently. So essentially, the terms are dictated both by the commission and by the council. So if they want to do the project, it has to be done in a way that is agreed upon, essentially, through a development agreement. So it's an interesting approach. They're being very cooperative in terms of taking the feedback that we gave them. But it will be tight.

I'm just curious. It's been about two weeks now since we met with them. Have they come back with anything yet? Nothing.

No. I suspect they will, but there's just some significant changes. So you'll see it for the first time as a site plan application. And again, the plan development overlay will give – A little bit of flexibility to the commission and the council, but we do want to be careful not to just throw at them a wish list of things because we still have to live in practical reality. We don't want a vacant lot there forever. So we... We're in a partnership with our development partners to build stuff that they can build and that they can make money on, but also contributes to the neighborhood and to the community. So we've got to just find that balance. And it's okay to go back and forth with iterations. I think that's just fine.

Just for your information, it'll be three stories if it's built the way that they're proposing. And one thing that Jason brought up, the side of the building would face 700 West. And Jason mentioned that the sides of the buildings often look pretty bare, pretty stark. And so he was making some suggestions that might make that be a little bit more attractive where that's right on 700 West. So I appreciated him doing that. Thank you.

How many entrances and exits to that area are there going to be? 700?

No, there will just be one off of 4,400. Yeah, and it would be split. The way they have it right now, it's split. So basically it's got an in and an out, I think, is the way it's supposed to be. Yeah. Yeah, but it has like a median in the middle of it. So that's the way it looked anyway. So anything else?

No.

So then we'll proceed on to consent items. We have the minutes for the meeting from May 12th, 2026. Any additions or changes that need to be made to those meetings, to those minutes, sorry. Then go ahead with a motion is in order.

I move to approve the minutes from May 12th, 2026 for a regular session.

I second it. Any discussion? All in favor say yes. Yes. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you very much. That passes. We're on to number E, which is our public hearing. CONSIDERATION TO FORWARD RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TEXT AMENDMENT TO TITLE 10 OF THE RIVERDALE CITY CODE FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF NEW AND UNLISTED BUSINESS USES. MR. COOPER.

I CAN GIVE MY PRESENTATION AND THEN YOU CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING OR YOU CAN OPEN IT AND THEN I CAN GIVE THE PRESENTATION, WHICHEVER YOU CHOOSE.

We might as well open the public hearing. Does somebody want to make a motion to do that?

I approve.

Consider that we open the public hearing.

Okay. Second? Okay.

We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Okay. So our public hearing is open, Mr. Cooper.

Okay. Thank you. So, Michelle, do you mind pulling up the red line version of the packet, please? So while she's getting that, I'll just draw your attention to what was sent to you in the transmittal. This is a proposal for a text amendment to Title 10, Chapter 3. So our Chapter 3 right now is reserved. There's nothing in it, which is why you don't see any strikethrough language. This is all brand-new proposed language, not to replace anything that we currently have. It's a result of... A bill that was passed a couple of years ago that requires cities to create a process for classifying new or unlisted business uses. So as you know, in each of our zones, we have a definition or a listed business that is a permitted use. If it's not on that list, it's not a permitted use. In some cases, we have other business uses that are conditional. So between conditional and permitted, those are the business types, the business uses that we allow in any given zone. Representative Musselman a couple of years ago decided that it would be important for cities to have a process to deal with a proposal of a business use that wasn't listed at all, whether conditional or permitted. And so what I'm proposing today is really just a – PROCESS KIND OF JUICED UP FROM THE ACTUAL STATUTE. I THINK I INCLUDED THE STATUTE IN YOUR PACKET, SO I HOPE YOU READ THAT STATUTE. THAT'S THE STATE CODE. AND WE'RE JUST FOLLOWING IT AS CLOSELY AS WE CAN TO COME UP WITH A PROCESS. SO LET ME GO OVER THE PROCESS, AND YOU CAN FOLLOW ALONG IN THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE HERE. SO 1031 IS JUST THE STATEMENT OF THE PURPOSE. AS I'VE MENTIONED, IT'S IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT NEW STATE STATUTE 102507. Number 10.3.2 is really one of the big questions for you tonight. We largely can't affect a lot of this because it is required. So even if we didn't follow it, or excuse me, if we didn't implement something, we'd still have to follow it because state statute requires it. But we are asked to create our own process. So in 10.3.2, all land use decisions need to be made by a land use authority. That land use authority is a designated decision maker, and it can vary from each land use decision. So, for instance, a subdivision, a residential subdivision for townhomes and single-family homes, the land use authority has been decided that it's the planning commission, not the city council. The state actually helped us make that decision. But in that case, it's the planning commission. So in 1032, as a default, I've just listed myself as the land use authority. And let me just read it. The community development director is designated as the administrative land use authority authorized to review and determine if the proposed new or unlisted use aligns with an existing land use in the city zoning ordinances and its impact on surrounding areas. So this is really a two-step process. The first step is, as it's described there, to determine if the proposed land use authority aligns with anything existing. If it doesn't, then there's a second step, which would then go to the legislative body, which is the council. That's given to us in statute. We can't change that. But the question for you tonight is, do you agree with my proposal here to have the director be the land use authority to determine if the proposed use aligns with existing land? Or would you like that to be the commission? That's entirely up to you. That's one of the few kind of variables that you get to adjust in this process. You don't need to answer that right this second. Let me explain the rest of the process, and then we'll come back to that. Okay, so 10.3.3 are the definitions. Basically, that first step is the classification request. So is this new business use that I'm proposing appropriate? uh, align with anything that you currently have on the books. Um, the second definition is newer unlisted business use that, that one is essentially identifying a business use that's not expressly identified in the city's zoning tables and can't reasonably be classified. So that's really the, um, the process there. So if you go to, um, 10 3 5, the applicant makes application to myself, um, I determine if it aligns with an existing permitted or conditional use in Title 10. I use the elements found under 2, Section 2 in 10.3.5. So there's a handful of elements there. So the nature and proposal of the use, the types and goods and services provided. So all of those elements there are the criteria that I would use to determine if the proposed new use aligns with anything that we currently might have on the books. If I determine or the land use authority, right, in this case, whether it's me or the commission, if it's determined that the proposed use is substantially similar, to an existing use, then the proposal should be categorized as that use and it would then be – all the regulations that apply to that existing use would be applied to the new use. So that's pretty cut and dry, straightforward. The question there is whether or not you all want to be that land use authority making that decision or if that is something that you feel comfortable with myself doing. Number four goes into the second step. In the event that the proposed use cannot be classified similar to an existing use, then it goes to the city council and the city council determines what to do with it. And they essentially have a lot more discretion than we would as the land use authority, but they would use some of the similar criteria that I've listed there. Most of four is the process of how that is to be done. There's to be a meeting 60 days after the submission. And essentially, if it's approved, then that use can be designated in one or multiple zones.

That's actually in five, isn't it?

Four. Four. Okay. Yep. Okay.

Because I'm looking at 1035, and that's where it shows the application and the community development.

Yeah, yeah, 1035 subsection 4.

Oh, I apologize.

It should be on your screen. It might be easier to see.

It's easier for me to see. Oh, is it? Okay.

I have that same problem, too. I can't see far away. Okay, so yeah, subsection four is just kind of that process. Again, if it's approved, then it gets included in the zoning designation. If it's denied, then a written statement is given to the applicant, and that use isn't permitted. But the process was followed, and that was what Representative Musselman wanted to – create when he proposed the state statute is for cities just to have a transparent and open process to give applicants the opportunity to have a new use listed in the zoning table. Doesn't mean you have to approve it. Let's see. So subsection five is an appeal. So essentially, if the land use authority, whether that's myself or you, makes a determination that the applicant disagrees with, then they can appeal to the city council. If the city council makes a decision that they disagree with, they appeal to district court, which is kind of similar to what legislative actions are done now. And then 1036 is the effect of the approval, and then there will be a fee for this. I gave some basic language because the city has a fee schedule. That fee schedule changes periodically. It's easier to change the fee schedule than it is individual fees throughout all the ordinances. So it's just whatever the city adopts as the fee, which is undetermined at this point. So really that's the process. It's pretty straightforward. It, again, just gives us the opportunity to deal with a proposed new use that might not be permitted in the city right now. You're not the final decision in terms of if it does not align, right? So, again, that goes to the city council. But it can be you, if you like, or it can be me, if you like, to determine if it does align.

Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. So the purpose of what we're discussing then tonight is not a proposal of a new business, but just the process. So just to be clear. And if there's anybody that is wanting to make comments to the public comment, just understand that we're not discussing a specific business. We're just discussing a process. So thank you very much. And so I see we've got a few members of the public here. If any of you have anything that you'd like to say, please step up to the microphone, state your name, and then you can take up to three minutes to express your desired feelings about this process.

We're actually the group that's here for converting Ruby River into another use, which is some of it. And so the real trick is because we started out wrong, all we want to do is clarify what our business is going to be and then learn how to do it correctly since I'm actually a doctor, not a restaurateur. So I can answer any questions. But the idea is we want to... clarify, do it right, get the right paperwork in, and figure out the correct way to do everything to have it work out. Because what we're planning is really going to be fun for everybody, and it's kind of hard to describe it. So I chose to describe it like it's a honky tonk, which it couldn't be further from a honky tonk. But it's a large location. It's 11,700 square feet. so then it'd be expensive to maintain. And a traditional restaurant is usually open for just a couple hours each day for each meal. And so if you're going to make it a viable business, you got to have multi-use. So my dream is actually to have an inexpensive restaurant, which will be barbecue style for the public, especially kids. And if I can come get it up, I wanted something for the kids to be able to do. Because I don't know about you guys, but when I was a little kid, I hated restaurants. Because you just had to sit there. And so that's a day use. And I'd like to have the meals for a couple to be able to walk out under $20. That's possible if you do it barbecue style. But then as the day goes on, it needs to be changing. And one of the things I was going to do, because it's a log cabin, is mechanical bulls. Well, those are safe enough that you can have small kids during the day. And that's where the honky-tonk concept came in, which this couldn't be further from that. But the mechanical bulls are going to be where the brewery was. And they'll be facing each other as it's going back and forth. You can watch it. So it'll be very, very well defined in an area that's very cushioned. And it'll be really fun. And the screens and stuff. They're going to be competing against each other so you can watch it. It's a fun event. And then there'll be some other stuff in there. At night, after 8 o'clock at night, if the venue goes to allowing dancing and moving around, then that makes a good use so that you could then use the facility up until midnight. It also concentrates any of the stuff in a narrow area. But I don't want to be associated with running the motorcycle bar, and I had no intentions of doing that at all. This is a fun venue. The only other alternative is to bulldoze it, and that's a tragedy. So me personally, as the investor a long time ago, it wasn't a good idea, but it's an iconic building. No one can argue it's gorgeous. I've been offered quite a bit to bulldoze it. I'm now retired. and basically we're going to make it work and make it fun, and it's not about the money. It's a nice gift to the Riverdale community. But we've got to do it right, and I started out wrong because I'm a little impetuous, and I kind of bulldoze into things. So anyway, I'm here to try and learn, and I got fired last week from my job, so my new job is doing this.

All right, thank you.

Sir, what was your name?

Jed Nesbitt.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Jed. Now, any other public comments? Okay. Then we... Go ahead. Is there somebody else? Okay. Then we need a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

And second?

Second.

Okay. All in favor? Yes. Any opposed? Okay. Discussion on the proposal that we're looking at tonight. What are your thoughts? Cody?

I have a question for Brandon. So I assume the... land use authority would strictly be for efficiency to get it a request and get it turned around a little quicker without having to bring it to an agenda yeah okay if that was the case would you really need 60 days to get it to the council

That's just what the statute calls for. So that's the maximum amount of time that we – so if there was – No later than 60 days.

That's right.

Yeah, if there was a decision that the proposal did not align with a current use, then it would have to be transmitted to the council within that 60 days to meet state statute. Okay. That's all I have. Okay.

I had a question because you said that the Utah Code talked about how it has to go to city council if we can't find a designated use. Maybe I'm just not seeing it in there. Like the section that we have on our packet under Utah Code, is that where it talks about it has to go to city council?

Uh-huh. It's 2507, 10-2507. Okay.

I'm not in the right thing then. Okay.

And it's in the packet. Okay. Yeah, that one. It's just a one-pager. And the state's secret language for city council is the legislative body.

Okay, that's how I can find it. Thank you.

Any other discussion? What are your thoughts about who the authority should be?

I think it should be Brandon.

Yeah.

Okay. I'm comfortable with that.

All right. If there's no other discussion, then a motion is in order.

And may I just remind everyone, this is just a recommendation to the city council, as all text amendments are, so they'd be taking final action. They could agree with your recommendation to keep me as the land use authority. They could change that, but I just wanted to remind you that the final action is with the council.

Okay. So the main difference is just that you get the say when it comes across your desk that it fits.

Or does not.

Or does not fit within there.

Yeah, it's a pretty objective review. I listed the criteria. We have a list of permitted uses. We would find something that's similar that would kind of correspond with that criteria. I think the state wanted it to be as objective as possible. We also want it to be objective. But it is for efficiency. You know, it would be weeks before an applicant would get it before the commission, whereas I could do it in a couple of days. And then if it didn't align, then it could go immediately to the council. So it's just as Cody mentioned, efficiency. Okay.

All right. Go ahead, Cody. I'd make a motion that we forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council for the proposed text amendment to Title 10, Chapter 3 of the Riverdale City Code for the classification of new and unlisted business uses.

I'll second that.

All right. Any discussion on the motion? Then we'll pull the commission. Michelle?

Commissioner... Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Okay. That passes then.

The next order item on the agenda is, I've got one. Okay. Thank you. Comments from Planning Commission? Any comments from Planning Commissioner staff? Not related to? Okay. Then a motion is in order. Okay. Adjourned. Okay. Second? Second. Okay. All in favor? Yes. Yes. Any opposed? We are adjourned. And now we will go into our work session with Mr. Hanson to discuss TAN section.