Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'll be fine.

make your day. How about with the rack and I left it at a basketball game and Janelle's son grabbed it. I just never never quite got together with Jason. Yes sir. How are you? Ask me in 7:30. Okay. All right. I'm usually here. The last couple were just conference and kidney stones. Oh, really? Yeah. I'm fine.

I hate those now. I've had three of those. Did you know One of my favorite people in the world. Is he? He's fun. He was at Riverdale with my husband. Okay. I never knew him and we went golfing one day and he was in our group and he's just hilarious. He is heart of gold. It was just fun golfing with him. He was a great coach. He worked in Riverdale. Talk about somebody that's eating an elephant. What? She run up against Mike Schulz. I know. That's like an elephant. Is it done? Yeah. Oh, no.

It is. Well, no, she has. But she is going up against You could put a sign. You could put a sign in my yard. I live on 4800. I know. Has it depend on the Oh my gosh, it's sitting on my coffee table. I live on If you can print out another one, I'll hurry and fill it out. The light at Midland, you know, where the 30 is that 3100? No, 30. What street is that? I've only lived there, you know, 20 years. 31. Yeah, it's like

I'm on the south side of the street. I'm just kidding from long that I don't put soccer banners on because that would be against rules.

Brock comes and tells me and I take him down. Didn't have to tell you. Yeah, sometimes people just do it. I forget. But it's for the kids.

I call him the chicken little sky. I like these houses right there.

What's that? Sam. What? Sam. No. And maybe I'm hollering at you.

Interest. You're just all over the place, Sam. pres.

I thought Jeremy said that he may not make it. I haven't seen anything from Jeremy. He sent a message that something happened. He replied and if you check your email you sent out, he replied to it and said something about like I'll read it to you. I think it was Oh, maybe I'm wrong. You're really on summer break, aren't you? No, I just read it because I thought it was weird how he responded to everybody.

I do until a week from Friday. Oh, see there's no response. The last one there was he wrote something and he sent it to you. Let's not send it to everybody. new attorney. Ryan, is this our new attorney?

I don't know him. So, I would it would seem to be so, but

someone will win them. I just do a hot spot on my phone.

I just don't trust public Wi-Fi networks. So, right here, hero. I'm planning to attend but now have I'm investigating. I will come drop 414 right there. 414. This is from Jeremy. No, we'll just just try and face the flag and just protect. Interesting. As soon as you say I everybody else jump in on it. My gosh. Would you just stop? just because you you can't trust a teacher in the last two weeks of school.

You know how many credits I'm trying to recover so we don't have ungraduated children in our district? Yeah, but you bailed. You're not teaching anymore. Oh, you are college is different. Seems to work pretty well. We're just as lazy, actually. I think it's perfect. I think if you said I can't wait for

Trent week from Friday email shut off. Perfect. All right. Yep. And there's no financial gain with any of them. That's the That's the main conflict that No, Anna is. You're off the hook. We just need to make sure that you're up to make the recommendations.

Ask Jason. I was a good sidekick when you had to be in charge. You were terrific. really good. It was great. Excellent. I felt so bad that night. I had three kidney stones. Like I pass one and I'm like, "Okay, I'm finally feeling good." Then it's like they're like razor sharp. Round two and then round three. And I don't get them as bad as some I mean it's still not something you want to go through. Like some people I know it's like do you know Chris who used to teach it one day and he had like a prescription filled with like so

I ain't saving them. Nope. Yeah, that's the job I know how to do. I'm teasing.

You ready, Steve?

All right, we're going to call to order our planning commission meeting for May 12th of 2026 for Roy City. Um we'll begin with the pledge of allegiance led by Commissioner Graph. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Do any of the planning commissioners have conflicts that they need to declare? No.

No. Okay. No conflicts. We'll move on to agenda item number two, which is approval of the March 10th, 2026 regular meeting minutes. Any discussion or motions in order? I'll make a motion if there's no discussion. Do you have a comment, Anna? Oh. Um, I'd like to approve the minutes from March the pre. Sorry, you're good. I'd like to make a motion to approve the March minutes. So, we have a motion to approve the March 10th minutes. Do we have a second? Second. We have a second. All in favor?

I. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. All right. We will move on to agenda item number three which is a public hearing to consider a request to amend the following maps for the property located approximately 2715 west 4800 south general plan future land use map from single family residential to multifamily residential and zoning map from RE20 residential estates to either R3 multifamily residential and there's not either on that so just to R3 multif family residential um we'll begin with the applicant. If the applicant's here, if they'll please come up, state their name and their city of residence, and uh we'll go from there.

Hi, I am Monica Law and I live in Roy, Utah. I am Monica Law and I live in Roy, Utah. Excellent. and just tell us a little bit about your project and what you're you're wanting to do and maybe some of the reasons behind it. We have our PowerPoint, but I also have um some flyers that I would like to pass out to the community. You can just set them on the um thing behind you.

And would you like me to set them just maybe behind you where people can grab them or you can just hand them out and people can And maybe if you tilt your microphone up just a little. How would I do if you tip the back towards me? I have no expertise in this at all. You're doing great. Okay, thank you. Is that better? Oh, yeah. A lot better. Okay, good. All right. So, me and um it does say about me in the PowerPoint. If we could just start that.

There's an explanation about me and my family and the property. Okay. Can we go back one slide? Okay. Great. Okay. All right. Good evening, members of the council and my fellow Roy neighbors. My name is Monica Law and I am 59 years old and a mother of three. I have lived in Weber County my entire life, but Roy is my hometown. It is where my heart is and tonight I want to share why this proposal matters to my family and to our community. Tonight, I will walk you through seven sections that tell a complete story. We start with our family's deep roots in Roy then move into what we are proposing for our property on 4800 South. From there we will look at the location, water saving, housing needs, economic benefits, and finally address any concerns head on. And before I talk about zoning and numbers, I want you to know who we are. Our family is not a developer from out of town. We are your neighbors. This is personal for us and I hope you will see that way too. Growing up in Roy, I remember swimming at the Roy Pool, walking to Scaggs for 25 cent ice creams and watching movies at Roy Theater. I remember when Riverdale Road was just two lanes. I went to Roy Junior High and graduated from Roy High. Roy has grown to 39,000 proud citizens since then. Some things change and some things stay the same, like our burger bar, which I hope never changes. But one thing we do need to rethink is housing for the next generation. Our family has owned our beautiful property on 4800 South for 20 years, and

I have loved every moment. But life moves on. My mother passed away, my father is getting older, and I have been facing my own health challenges. Every year maintaining these pastures and big trees gets harder, especially with the water restrictions. After much prayer and thought with my daughter, we decided that instead of fighting changes in our city, we want to be the to be a part of the right kind of change. Now that you know our story, let me share what we are proposing. This is not about squeezing in as much as possible. It is about building something thoughtful that fits our neighborhood and helps Roy grow the right way. We are applying to reszone our property to R3 so we can build town homes or apartments that fit the character of our of our neighborhood. By replacing our thirsty pastures with water-wise landscaping, we will reduce water usage on this corner. We want to help Roy meets its housing goals without disrupting what makes our community community special. This is just one example of a development plan that would fit within Royy's existing height guidelines with units that feel like they belong here. We are also keeping the D and RGW rail trail beautiful. Less than 2% or approximately 300 ft of trail frontage would be visually affected. Everything will comply fully with Roy City's laws, ordinances, and building codes. Let me show you why this specific corner is ideal for this kind of development. The location speaks for itself. Our property sits in one of the most connected spots in Roy. We are less than a mile from the Front Runner Station. Midland Elementary, Sandridge Junior High, and Roy High are all within walking distance. Roy West Park is directly across the

street and the aquatic center is a half a mile away. Groceries, I-15, Hill Air Force Base and more. Everything a family needs is within reach. Imagine families living here who can walk across the street to Roy West Park or half a mile to the aquatic center. They can watch the Roy Days fireworks from their own front porches just like my family has done for two decades. This is not just a development. It is an extension of the recreation hub Roy has already built. This is exactly where thoughtful density belongs. We are less than three miles from Hill Air Force Base and right next to the Front Runner tracks. We watch that train go by every day. When people can live, work, and commute without needing extra cars, that is good for traffic, good for the environment, and good for Roy. It means more money is spent at our local businesses right here in town. Now, let me talk about water because this is one of the strongest arguments for this project. The numbers are dramatic and I think they will surprise you. Our projections are modeled using current Roy City tax rates and peer-reviewed water data from Utah State University. We use conservative estimates so you can be confident in the baseline savings we are about to present today. Please note that we adhere to the water watering guidelines, but with the watering systems we have, it is hard to come close to watering as much as the guidelines would allow. I am sure people driving by have been able to tell our property is less green every year. Watering our pastures is getting harder and harder. It used to be lush and green, but now we are basically just trying to keep everything from dying. Utah is facing a real water crisis. We have all seen what's happening with the Great Salt Lake. Transitioning our property from thirsty grass to drought tolerant water-wise landscaping is not

just good for our family. It aligns with what the state is asking us all to do. Here are the numbers. Right now, our property uses an estimated upwards of 1.6 gallons of water per year. With zerocape town home development, that just drops to just 170,000 gallons. A 90% reduction saving over 1.4 million gallons every year. Yes, indoor water water usage goes up with more households, but water saving features will keep total consumption well below what our pastures use today. From a city standpoint, this resoning is a clear net win for Royy's water future. Now I want to talk about the people the real families who need this kind of housing in Roy. This is not about building. It is about our neighbors. When we talk about R3 re R3 zoning, it is easy to focus on buildings and numbers. But let us focus on who could live here. These multif family homes are for the young teachers at Roy High buying their first home. They are for the enlisted stationed at Hill Air Force Base. They are for lifelong residents like me who may want to downsize with the without leaving the town we love. And they are for our kids and grandkids who are being priced out of Roy and forced to move away. We should not be losing our young families because we do not have enough housing options. This proposal works handinhand with state and city legislation. House Bill 462 gave us a clear message. We need housing affordability and diverse options. The stationary area plan calls for multif family homes and mixed housing near transit. While our property is just outside the halfmile guideline at 0.9 miles, we sit right on the trail and provide a natural transition between higher density areas and standard homes.

As of 2026, Utah is still prioritizing exactly this kind of missing middle housing. Approving this reszone directly fulfills the state's modern income housing strategies and enables people of all incomes to fully participate in Roy life and meets House Bill 462 requirements proactively as the state has mandated it. As the quote says, growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of our character is not. Community character is not. This is exactly our approach. Royce city-owned general plan supports this. The plan directs the city to guide reszone applications toward higher density options to approve reszones that align with the plan and to consider neighborhood fit even when the proposal does not perfectly match the land use map. Our application checks all these boxes. The city zone framework telling us this is the right direction. We are not the first enro to do this and that is exactly the point. Midland Square was approved in 2018, Orchards at 19th later that same year, and Abington Heights in 2021. All three were similar reszones, and each one added quality town home housing that fits right into the neighborhood. I would like to add that almost 90% of the town homes in Roy are are adjacent to single family homes. Well, their developments are adjacent. The precedent is clear. The results speak for themselves and our proposal follows the same proven path. Beyond housing and water, this project makes strong financial sense for Roy. Let me show you the numbers. Multifamily development generates significantly more tax revenue per acre than a single family lot. That extra revenue goes directly back into Roy, into our schools through Weber School

District, into our roads and infrastructure, and into our police and fire departments. This is not just housing, it's an investment in Royy's future. Even at a conservative estimate of just 10 town home units, the numbers are compelling. Our property currently contributes about 3,000 a year in taxes. A moderate estimate of 10 town homes at 400,000 each would generate $25,000 a year, a staggering 837% increase from that same exact footprint. That is enough to help maintain a neighborhood park or outfitter police cruiser every year. And because schools receive the largest share of the property tax, this small resoning would generate measurable revenue a year for Weber School District, contributing, excuse me, contributing to our teachers salaries from one corner lot. These are just some potential estimates of what this project could contribute to our town. I know change can be uncomfortable and I respect that. So, let me address the concerns I have heard previously directly and honestly. We have four main concerns and I want to address each one. On traffic, we are a mile from the Front Runner station and on the rail trail and our corner lot allows access from both 4,800 South and 2700 West. And I also just um saw in some paperwork that 4,800 was already when they did the construction they took in pre like what traffic would be in the future if it was busier on neighborhood character. These are strictly two to three story town homes with Royy's height guidelines just like orchards at 19th. our city resources. This development generates far more tax revenue per acre funding our schools,

police, and parks. And on the need to reszone, this directly fulfills House Bill 462 and Royy's own stationary plan and the general plan. Roy is growing whether we act or not. The question is whether we lead that growth or let it happen to us. Tonight I have shown you that this resoning would conserve valuable water, create housing our families need, and generate revenue for our schools and services. All from one 2acre corner lot. So I am respectfully asking the council to approve the R3 reszone at 2715 West and 4,800 South. Let's build a vibrant Roy together. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions from any of the planning commissioners? That was a great presentation. Thank you. A lot of research. You did a good job. Thank you. I do just need to note for the record that I have had a conversation with one of the nearby property owners about this property request.

Reflect that in the record. Any Oh, sorry. We'll go over to Steve now for staff presentation. Okay, as mentioned, this is a request by a property owner to uh change the general plan, the future land use map from single family residential to multifamily residential and the zoning map from RE20 residential estates to here it is either but to R3 multifamily residential as mentioned the property is on the southwest corner of 48 and 2700 west uh just down from the Front Runner station and very close to the DNRG trail and West Park. Part of her some of the requirements for these type of requests is to give you kind of a brief explanation of why, how come, and what for. It was in your your packet, but she in her presentation did a great job of presenting the the information that she would like. um future land use map. This does show the area to be single family residential. So it would take the change requirement for multifamily. And in the zoning map, you can see that there's R3 already in the area. The West Park subdivision is zoned R3 even though it was built single family homes. Um so that would be adjacent and contiguous to an existing zone. Um, with that, staff would recommend a positive recommendation to the city council um, with the findings as outlined in the staff report.

Thank you. Any questions for Steve? So, what is the maximum number of town home units that could be built on this? It's 1.68 acres. Um, well, it's 12 units an acre. So, because I did 20 was my guess in my head. Is that probably about there? Right about there is the maximum number that it could be. Yeah. Okay. Are they considering apartments instead of town homes right now? Well, the again the zone allows for town homes and or apartments. So, we can't specify which one. Okay. Just got to think that is the zone appropriate in this area.

The presentation shows town home. So, I'm assuming that's Sorry, could you repeat that? Which part? What was appropriate in this area? The question is, is R3 appropriate in the area? Oh, thank you. You were saying it already. Point of order. We'll have a public comment in just a minute. Yeah. Any other questions for Steve? Does that conclude your thoughts on Steve? That's concluded mine.

Okay. So, now we will move to public comment. Um, and we want to make sure that everybody has a chance to comment. Um, I see some familiar faces, but a lot of new faces. Um, so the way this will work is we'll have you come up to the microphone and you can stand in line. So if somebody's at the microphone, there can be one or two people behind them to facilitate it. Um, we'll give each of you up to three minutes. Um, we'll give you a notice when there's about 15 seconds left. Um, three minutes is almost a page worth of notes to give. So it does give you an opportunity to speak. Um, if you would please refrain from repeating things that other people have said, you can say, "Hey, I agree with this point." Um but just to facilitate things, we can move along pretty quickly there. Um and just be respectful of of each other. So we, you know, would appreciate having no applause or things like that. And if you'll direct your questions towards me as the chair, um we'll make notes of those and then after the public comment period, um then we'll go through and we'll answer all of those questions. Um so with that, um a motion's in order.

Motion to go into public hearing. We have a motion to go in public hearing. Second and a second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. We're now in public hearing. So,

thank you. This I'm Dr. Amy Buckway and I live at 4863 South, 2700 West, right next to I live directly south of the property in question. So, my husband and I bought the property next to Monica and Ray Lee um about 10 years ago in order to fulfill a dream to kind of live sustainably and kind of be like in a in a farm setting in the city. Um we love Roy. I've been in Roy since I was 18 years old. Um and we've loved living there. We love our property. Um but this is um not not what we had envisioned. this is like taking a giant turd on our dream. So that's how I feel about it. Um, as I reviewed the current city planning documents, principle number six states that you want to encourage neighborhood identity and expression. And I really feel like the identity and expression with this in this neighborhood is kind of more like just that farm look and the farm feel and um biodiversity just the birds and town homes and apartments especially apartments would not um be that principle number seven wants a unified city of distinct neighborhoods. We would not be distinct with a bunch of ugly apartments and town houses next to us. Um, I would request that we leave the distinctly farmlike quality intact at the very least. I mean, if you want to like muck it up and make it ugly, maybe put parking for the park that you want to put in and the trails and stuff, that would be better. At least I would still have my view and I wouldn't have all the lovely graffiti that we have at 5600 from those great apartments down there. Um, the current plan has our area zoned for single family homes. We'd like I I'm

opposed to more single I'm not opposed to more single family homes over there. Um if they wanted to develop it with more single family homes on the property because it is 1.6 acres that would be okay um in my mind but not apartment complex. Um anyway and I am concerned on that corner the effects on traffic and how to safely build on that slope lot with a bunch of apartments. Um, but that whenever we have trains stopped and going through, traffic backs up both ways and that getting out on 48 is a problem. They could go out on 27, but going left right on the corner is going to be a problem. So, I just want to maintain some of Royy's farming history as established by the Mail family from the early 1900s and keep our neighborhood beautiful. I don't I don't want a bunch of apartments there. Anyway,

thank you for listening. Thank you. And thank you to Anna for coming to ask my questions.

Hi, Bull Espelin, 4523 Trailside Drive. Um, this is within a mile. In your packet, it says half a mile, but I'm glad she clarified that. Monica, it's a little less than a mile as a crow flies, but today mapping it out on Google Maps, it's 1.6 miles to walk there. You have to cross 4,800 North. That trail crossing is becoming dicey anymore. I've seen people get hit and just about get hit there. Uh, driving distance is 2.2 miles, so it's not super close. Um, exhibit B by the landowner states that we are seeing similar growth to the north side of 4,800 above the park. That is the only admission I see of the Railrunner Apartments. Uh, the Railrunner Apartments, 67 houses, it was zoned for 72, 67 houses in the West Park neighborhood that is now the gateway to 300 and some odd apartments coming in. about 100 of them are occupied. We're now seeing 170 units occupied coming out there of West Park, soon to be over 400. Now, I realize there's only 20, but she said it'd be profitable at 10. I don't think it's suitable for anything. Let me tell you why. Uh she said she wanted to be transparent. I would love to see an updated traffic study. The last traffic study I saw was 2019. Now, if the railroad has something, great. I would love to see an updated traffic study, an ingress, egress, and ingress. I wish I had time. I wish I could plot it out. I looked at it today. The only safe way to get in and out of there is going south on 2700 South. The only safe way to get out is going south on 2700 South. You show me. I would love to see either Monica and especially the commission, especially the council, show me how you're going to safely ingress and egress out of this property. It just isn't there. In addition, the railroad is planning on putting a dual line in before the Olympics. Starting this fall, they're going to be ripping up the tracks. Maybe early next year. It won't be done till 2030. Let's revisit this in 2030 when that construction's done and see if it's appropriate. This lot is no way inappropriate to put more people

coming in and out. Drive by the area. It's a postage stamp lot. Drive by at 7:25 to 7:40 in the morning. And when the right Roy High School rushes there when they're in session, it backs up all the way past the roundabout all the way down to Weineers. I drive it often. The Roy High School Rush will back up all the way to Wineers. Now, you tell me how somebody's going to get in and out of that property. A freight train comes, same problem. You'd have to have additional lanes. You'd have to have additional traffic signals. It's just not going to work. And with Railrunner, they were supposed to have three ingress, egress. Somebody got ahead of themselves. There's essentially one. We won't talk about the north one. That's a whole other ball of wax. There's essentially one in and out of Railroad. There's supposed to be three. Please slow down. Do your due diligence. And yes, that's a legal term. Do your due diligence. It says right in there. Point number two, consider the health and welfare, the safety of the residents. I beg you, don't do this. And you will be seeing more of me at city council. You'll be seeing more of me at these planning commissions until somebody can show me this will be safe. I'll be here. My neighbors will be here. I've rallied our neighborhood before. I will rally our neighborhood again. Don't let this happen.

Thank you for your comments. Hold your applause, please. Hi, my name is Robert Men. As Huh? Closer to the mic. Nobody can hear.

Sorry. Hi, my name is Robert Men. I actually live north. I mean, not north, sorry, west of her at 2777 West, 4,800 South. Um, she wants to do this for the community. She says, "I have literally talked with her. She came to my house. She wants to do this for the money. I have actually offered to buy her place. Kim, the neighbor on the south side, has actually offered to buy her place." And this whole one thing, um, single resident, no, there's actually two houses on that property. I do know this my pro I've been here since 1978. My family has been here since 1918. We are one of the very first people to buy property. This right here is a complete disaster. We've had already since neighbors from across the street to the south and down below have entered into multiple properties, have had stolen properties. We've had to call cops. We've had to run people off. We put more houses or apartments into this place. All the neighbors around are going to lose not just sleep, but probably their properties or it's going to get repeated by kids. And like the gentleman said, 4,800 is a joke and 2700 is getting just as bad for traffic. We We should not be doing this. We should leave it as it is. Let her move away. Let one of us who wants to buy the property and keep it as is do that. That's all I have to say.

Please hold your applause. That no, that's not appropriate in this meeting. Wouldn't do it in court. So,

good afternoon. My name is Tamara McGrder. I also live on 2700 South at 5489 West or 2700 West at 54 and 89 South. Sorry, dyslexic. Sometimes things get twisted around. I would like to say that I agree with um point number two and point number six and point number seven in our in the codes that have already been stated. Again, those are all true and they're going to affect people. The traffic again is awful. When the train stops across 4,800, 2700 becomes a parking lot. I live almost to 5600 west and I can't pull out of my own driveway. And you're going to add 18 to 20 new units times two cars a piece at least. That's 40 more cars getting in and out of that every morning during morning traffic and 40 more cars going up and down our street in the evening. We do have a unique feel on our street. We have what at the south end we call the commune or the clan and it's a group of neighbors who barbecue together, who spend time together, who ride their horses together, who help each other when their animals are sick. It's a wonderful, amazing feeling. And when you start putting apartments in instead, that feeling goes away. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Melanie Schwarz. I live at 5085 on 27. Sorry, I'm half dead. I'm rude. They're They're talking as loud as they can. Oh, no. I've got louder. How's that? I was trying to use my nonfarm.

Please refrain from applauding. We're trying to hear the public comments here. I had seven doublesided pages of notes going over discrepancies with the future use plan, the general use plan, the Roy focus plan, um all those things. Zoning that R3 is not in character with any of those things. And although the West Park development is zoned R3, it was developed more like R16. But more importantly, because I would be repeating everything everybody said here and I the traffic is horrendous. The 4,800 crossing, people are going to die. People are going to die going across the rail trail crossing, too. It is not safe and we need to build up that infrastructure before we start putting more things in there. I have been clipped by a car walking down the sidewalk on 4,800 to access the rail trail because they are not going through the traffic circle. They are making an illegal U-turn coming out of the West Park development. I can go on a bunch of very discreet points have been made by everybody, but more importantly, let's just go with how do the people feel. This is from social media. This was May 7th. Today's the day. The sun is shining and there's baby sheep. Baby sheep. There are baby sheep. I've been waiting for the day. My house is opposite the trail from the farms. I done saint th all the pregnant sheeps and goats and every morning I go out and bleed at them. This morning the literal mother of all mornings. There's a baby sheep and I'm way too excited about this. My kids are awake now because the kids have a mother that's way too excited about some baby farm animal. I possess almost two acres. My horses were almost shot the other night on the trail. Is that going to become a more common occurrence? Are we going to take

away from the rest of the citizens that commented? Awesome. I love this. Today's the day. This is awesome. I love it. And I love you shared your joy. Nobody trolled this post. I love this. And even holy sheep, I love this. Can you give me the address? Not yours, but just a general idea where I can take the grandkids to them. The simple joys of life. I needed this today. Four stars. Four hearts. Three hearts. Thank you for sharing this. The pure joy in this post made me super happy for you. Ma'am, you're my kind of lady. This world needs more folks to be excited about things like this. Natural sweetness.

The point being, I have just today offered to buy that property from the owner and she's not interested. We are taking away the last green belt we have here. I restored a 1912 farmhouse that would have been lost as part of the history of Roy. Thank you for your comments.

My name is Canyon Laws and I live at 2715 4800 South. My mother was the one putting in the application. Like to note that I might be the only person speaking under 30 today and we are concerned about the future. Um, my mother has three children. So, we have a 1.678 acre property. Even if there is a second home on it, which is a weird mother-in-law dwelling, she has three children. So, only two of them can live there. Right now, I'm utilizing that, but my sisters can't because I'm there and my mother is there. So, the other two children cannot utilize this without everyone living in the same space. I think the American dream is kind of to have your own house, your own property, to be able to do your own things. Okay. I would also like to note very quickly that I participated and was selling at the Roy Farmers Market last year. It's about I think it was the fourth year it's been running. I was the only one that from this green belt that was selling there. There was one other person that was a Roy local. They are from Midland in 1900. That's where their farm is. So, I don't know why everyone's talking about community. None of them sell at the community market. I was the only one last year. That's all.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is uh Tom Spencer. I live at 585 South and 2700. Um my the uh point I want to bring up is about uh the Royy's plan for the green belt areas. Um I don't have the uh the specifics um pages or points right now, but from my understanding there's two. There's the rail trail green belt and then a future one in the power corridor. Um right now the rail trail has the bonus of it's existing. Roy doesn't have to do anything and it's there versus the power corridor which when as I understand it the trail goes through there will be a very nice uh trail the but again that's sometime in the future. We don't know when that's going to be. Um another concern I have is with creep. Um as mentioned before the R3 density is right across the street. If this gets moved on onto the 4,8 or the south side of 4,800, what's the stop halfway down from uh 4,800 and then further down and further down? And once you lose large parcels of land, you don't get them back. You're not going to tear down an apartment complex and put in a farmhouse. Um, and it it goes again goes to the community. Like my wife said uh about the comments on the social media. There's one more that I really liked and it really to me brings this all home. It says, "E, thank you for sharing this. Definitely inviting the neighborhood families for a group walk. I've never seen a comment saying, "Let's go take a group walk past the new apartments."

Thank you. Thank you.

Shelley Pollston. I live in Roy uh south of Triple Stop. I had a conversation with Diane Wilson. We were talking about all this building that's going on in Roy. uh as she told me that they have a mandate from the state to build, this is her words, all these apartments. Um and if you don't reszone to build all these apartments, the state will come in and reszone for you. Those were her words. I don't know if that is true but that is what she shared with me. First of all, if you are given a mandate, the next question is by whose authority? And if it isn't a law, they don't have the authority to give it. It violates your constitutional rights. I don't want to see more apartments. If this planning commission wants to do something for Roy, why aren't you attracting more businesses here? It's ridiculous. And the other mandate was affordable housing, she said. Is this going to be affordable housing? And what is the definition of affordable housing? Because these apartments are going for the same amount as the houses in Roy and these kids can't afford it. So, I don't know who's fooling who, but I will tell you the developers are laughing all the way to the bank, but I don't want it. The traffic is horrible. I think you're in the wrong lane with all this stuff. Work on getting

businesses in this city. You move all these people in, they're going to Leighton to eat. They're going to Riverdale to eat. They're going anywhere. Have you seen what they're doing in West Haven? They're really working on their businesses down there. Roy has failed to do that. You just want to dump people in here and suck off of them instead of getting business in here that help revitalize this town. Thank you. Thank you.

Um Lance Hip. I live on 2700 just a few houses away from it. Uh I would like to take exception to what was said earlier about saying that this is adjacent to the ones across the street. If you look at how where the apartments actually are, you have a little alleyway that goes into that railroad and goes around. They're not touching. They're not adjacent. And we have a very specific flavor of the area between the the trails and the railroad track and 5600 and 4,800. It is the one place where we have some open ground, where we have a little bit of farming, where you watch your neighbors, goats, jump around and play, where you get a chance to take in a bum lamb of one of your neighbors and when you need to leave, you know you have a neighbor there that will come and put in the three times a day feeding of it. where you get to see your the ducks from your neighbors, share your eggs, have your pig that goes up and talks to anybody who comes near it. That is not conducive to the apartments. And I'd like to because my feeling here is that we're not adjacent. There's a very strict dividing line there at 4,800. And the apartments are not on 4,800. They are back to the side. You take the flavor of the houses and the rural feeling that you get right there and you're throwing a piece of manure into some ice cream and it's going to totally change the flavor and the feel of the

area. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Teresa Hislip. I live in 4875 South, 2700 West, um about well less than a tenth of a mile, just three doors down from the proposed area to be reszoned. I have three specific concerns. The first concern is about the water estimates as I I would suggest that we look close more closely into that. True. If we use water- wise landscaping on an apartment complex, then the watering of the plants will be much less much less than what's watered on pasture. But I I don't believe I couldn't see any evidence that there was taking into effect how much water 20 families would use and that has to be added into the water use. So I think that the figures of the water saved were deceiving because they did not take into account how much water would actually used by 20 families. That's my first concern. My second concern is um echoes what was said about the creep. Um there is a very distinct green belt in Roy right now between 5600 and 4,800. We have a beautiful community green belt and if we allow apartments into that then we open Pandora's box and the creep will keep creeping and we'll lose this precious asset. The third thing that I very very strongly and vehemently disagree with is that the proposal fits with the character of the neighborhood. It absolutely does not. There is nothing in our little green belt that suggests that 12 to 20 homes, apartments, town houses would fit in. It's an an aberration. It does not fit. Thank you.

Thank you.

I came in a little late. Um so I but I think I've got the gist of what's being said and what I'm hearing. I don't I usually have notes. I have nothing. So, forgive the old brain if I sound stupid. Can you um Can you state who you are?

I'm sorry. I apologize. Chris Lewis, 5126 South, 3550 West. Um I think what I'm hearing um and I think everyone behind me will agree is we're talking about planning and city planning, okay? And we have we have general plan. We have all this stuff that comes into play. And and we've heard over the last few years the same redundant excuse. If we don't reszone, the city will get sued. That is not 100% true. In fact, it's probably 99% false. I've been following a development up in North Ogden and a few other cities, but the North Ogden one comes to mind first because it started in January. You know, they approached the planning commission and the whole process like we do here in every city. And planning commission asked a lot of questions. There were 150 people in the meeting. They made recommendations. The developer had to come back, change those plans. City, the planning commission said, "Change it again." And then it finally got to where they wanted it. They moved it over to the city council. Even they requested changes. They went from high density to all single family homes on single small lots. But the American dream single family home. My point is you all don't have to cave to developers. Developers are making money. The city is losing. The plan to keep it a a bedroom community is gone. I live a little farther west. This doesn't even really affect me. these two developments, the apartments, but all the traffic issues, that's already been discussed. But where's the real plan? Where's the real plan? I know he can't answer me, but that's who I'm talking to. Where's the real plan? Talk to North Ogden. In fact, I'm going to take some time these next few days, and I'm going to send you all links to the notes, the or yeah, the minutes from these meetings. They didn't

cave to the plan to the developer. They listened because of what they wanted the city of Roy or city of North Ogden to look like. I think you all can do that. We have very little left. Very little left here. It's just it's not helping any commercials being reszoned into high density. We get nothing out of it. The only people winning is the developer. Thank you. So, I'm Ty Chaston and according to state law, I don't need to give my address, but that's fine. Said your city of residence and your name is fine.

That's right. Um, everything that's been said here makes me wonder about the general plan. The general plan doesn't exist. We've done so many changes. No matter what we do, it's open for lawsuit. The the main concern that I have with all this multi-purpose housing, I drive special needs bus. Most of these places that are being built. We're supposed to pick up doorside. Can't do it. How are they How are these kids supposed to come out in the winter, make it down an HOA tiny road to a main road to get on the bus or for us to pull out the lift onto a sidewalk where the city's plowed the snow onto the sidewalk, hasn't been plowed on the sidewalk. There's no way that these kids who are special needs are going to be able to get on the bus because we've zoned it. So, the roads are so narrow and the cars are all parked all over the road, we're literally going to have to load them in the middle of the street. I think you should really take a look at what's happened to our zoning. this multi-ousing does not work for them. That's not the American dream for them. And most of them can't get up here and speak for them. Hello, Deian Chaston. I understand that everybody should have the right to develop their property as is legal and as it's zoned. Absolutely. We need to

hear that out. What I am not understanding in general in Roy City is we have a general plan. We have a future land use map that went through public vetting. People from the public were invited to come in and talk about that and say what they saw for the future of their community. It was I I'm sorry I did not participate in that, but I am familiar with how that goes. So, we know what they said about this area. The same thing that was said about this area was the same thing said about the area at 6,000 6,000 near the tracks too. And I asked this same question then is zoned single family. Right now it's in the general plan as single family. It's in the future land use as single family. And as we've heard today, we have state mandates about affordable housing and that you guys have to answer too. I get that. And maybe that's where my beef is. I don't know. But where is the transparency for the people? Because now you're going against that general plan that they had input on. Now you're going against that future land use map. They expected single family homes here. That's what they told you all they wanted. Yes, the state is putting pressure on. I I'm not quite understanding all of that. And you have to check certain check boxes every year. You have to report to them. If you don't, certain things happen. I get that. But where is the public input for that? We already did our public input. It's on the general plan. You're changing that. You changed it on 6,000. When I asked why, you said because that's a great place to do it at. And I get you're kind of like looking for the places to bring that affordable housing. But let's talk about that affordable housing. Let's define that. Somebody said, "What's the definition?" It's 30% of area median income. Area median income is $90,000 here in Roy. That means everybody in the house, everything they're making, not average it. Median is a little bit different than average, but that's about 30,000 every year that should be going towards h sorry home or housing. Okay, so that includes your mortgage, that includes your insurance,

that includes your utilities. So, new information tonight, everybody. $400,000 for a town home. That's what I heard the applicant say. What is the mortgage on a $400,000 town home? I don't know. Correct me if I'm wrong. AI says $2,600. That's over area median income for 30%. You won't that will barely pay your mortgage. You won't have time or any extras for utilities. you won't have anything for um insurance, HOA fees, which this would be two, that doesn't include that. So, don't let them fool you. This is not affordable housing by their own definition. So, hey, we need to do this for the state to get affordable housing. It's not. And that's what I said about 6,000 as well. So, let's like be like realistic here.

Thank you.

Thank you. Hi, I'm Victor Chaston. Um, again, I live in Roy, Utah, just as I assume everybody, almost everybody here does too. Um, I'm 17 years old. So, when we talk about, you know, young people moving in, young people finding jobs, young people making families, I'm 17. I'm not even making a family. I'm not even an adult. But I can tell you right now, a lot of my generation at Roy High, abroad, the state, even the whole nation would rather be caught dead than in an apartment or a town home. We don't want to be in there. Our parents had normal houses that had backyards, front yards, big garages with a parking lot that could allow us to have cars, allow us to have a trailer to go camping. That's what we want. We don't want apartments. We won't want town homes. No one is happy in those. And sure, obviously people say, "Well, maybe when you get married or you're trying to establish yourself, you live in a town home." Well, we don't have a college, so it's kind of useless to put apartments there to go there. Um, on top of that, again, none of us really want to live there. And I assume that most people here also don't live in town homes or apartments. And if you do, and that's a choice that you like and that you're okay with, that's you. But again, I want to speak on the people of my generation, the future of Roy. We don't want to live in town homes. We don't want to live in apartments. We want to live in normal houses. The American dream, it's what we talk about all the time. And putting town homes in, putting in apartments, that destroys the American dream. We have less single family houses going in, which makes it so there's not a lot of supply, increasing the demand, making it so they get more expensive. If we had more single family houses built and we maintain them and they didn't go away, it would make it more possible for more young people to strive for the American dream. And if you want to kill the American dream, go ahead, be my guest.

Thank you. You've already been up. Sorry, Tamarind McRder. I forgot one really important thing. I ask you all to watch the biggest little farm and pay attention to the idea of permaculture. Water use does not have to be millions of gallons a year to have two acres green and growing. Is there anybody else that would like to make public comment? Want to make sure everybody has a chance. So if you want to speak, please raise your hand and let us know. All right, a motion is in order. Motion to close public comment. Second. Motion is second. All in favor? I

I. Any opposed? All right, we are now out of public comment. Um, Steve.

Okay, let's see if we can get through all. There's a lot of just comments, not a lot of questions. So let me um for clarification railrunner railrunner apartments the max is 295 not 300 or 400. At no point in time was it required to have three accesses only two. Uh the north one does count as a fire access. So that was the fire department's requirement. Uh traffic studies are usually done when the development is occurring, not during a reasonzone. I mean, the simplest phrase I can give you is why spend all the money when you don't even know if you can do something. So, it's it's kind of I I wouldn't say against the American dream, but to require someone to spend thousands and thousands of dollars for something that is not even allowed um it's unfortunate that um those within the West Park subdivision or make any legal turns. Um, we can probably get with public works and extend the the median that's in there down farther to make it a lot harder. Um, uh, I've heard a couple comments about Green Belt. Uh, just so you know, there's only two properties in a green belt, and that's north of 4,000. And these are not in a green belt. Yes, they are large. Yes, they do have farm animals, but they're not in a green belt. So, protecting that is is not an issue. Uh the rail trail and power corridor is part of the green belt. Uh the power corridor is a in the general plan for a future trail. Nothing's been designed. Nothing's been looked at. Uh

yes, we did get a grant to look at possible designs of what it could look like. Um but up until then, we don't know what what's even possible. Um, Rocky Mountain Power owns most of that land, so you'd have to get approvals through them. Conversation with Diane Wilson. Uh, yes, the state is mandating that cities build more affordable housing. No, we won't get sued. But what the state can do is if we don't meet each of those aspects and we have seven moderate income housing elements in our general plan that if we don't meet those we do lose tax monies or the ability to receive tax money. So part of it is funding. Um we haven't missed yet. Um this year we don't have to report on the number of reszones and that's been approved and or denied. But um the sad part about the state mandating most of those in the state legislation are developers or homebuilders. So um it really comes down to who we vote there, not necessarily the city. Um the the comment that West Haven is succeeding at commercial and Roy is failing. Um most developers will look at how many house tops or house roofs are in an area and if we don't meet that they're not coming. It's not the Roy is isn't trying to find that. It's just no developer for commercials looking to come just by their their quot and mile rooftops. So it's it's not that we aren't trying. We we are this body is not in not part of that requirement or to deal with it.

They just look at what's being developed and what um the code says. Water estimates. We can look at the the general plan amendment for the water conservation plan that was just adopted in December. Um what she presented may or may not be accurate. I don't know. Um it is nice just to see a developer or someone who wants to develop looking that water conservation is important. Um, yes, even in our element, it did say that even though there's more people there, indoor water does go up, but outdoor water goes down. Um, but 100 residents, whether it's in town homes or single family, the indoor intake is the same. The outdoor is is where we we save a lot of money or a lot of water. Um, Um, our general plan does exist. This is a request to amend the general plan in the future land use map. Um, yes, it was adopted in 20 23 no 20 23 or 21 I can't. It was just after co whenever that was

22 somewhere 22. Yeah, 21 23 some that time frame. So these are amendments to that. Yes. Um there was a lot of time spent on what aspects where del de development should be and whatnot. Um the sad part is there's more people in this room today than we ever got in any of the public open houses for the general plan. So hopefully the next time we do it in 15 years, we do get a bigger turnout so that those 10 people aren't deciding the future of everybody. And just another comment on that, Steve, we do have public hearings whenever there's a legislative change, which whenever we change the general plan or zoning plan, which does give people the opportunity to provide input on that. So, we did have input at the time the plan was made and then if we're going to alter that plan and and one thing to note, none of the planning commissioners are proposing any of the things that really come before us. these are property owners or people with property that are proposing these things and they come and they're asking for a change to be made, we we consider that, but there always is public comment whenever those documents are altered. Um, median income when people are looking for affordable, it's usually 80% median income, not down to 30. 30 doesn't need a lot of state and county support. Um, if this was a development the city was participating in with tax monies or what have you, then we could restrict the what rents could be or what they could be selling for. But this is an atmarket rate. Um, part of things that I look at as well is, and again, this is according to Steve, not according to Roy City Planner, is that the supply and demand. until we have our supply high enough that the demand isn't meeting that prices will go down. Right now, there's

more demand than supply. So, the supplier can get whatever the amount of money they would like out of it. It's it's the unfortunate part is Utah has a lot of kids having, you know, kids and they're staying in the the state that want to stay live here. We got people moving into the state from out of state that want to live here. Um, so that supply isn't matching the the number of people coming in. Um, yeah, an American dream is to own property, not necessarily a single family home, but I mean, I lived in a town home for over a decade and I had no issues with it. But that's me other than that.

Okay. Any questions? You can if the developer or the property owner would like, she can come up and make comments. Can I ask a question? I have to wait. You want to ask a question? I don't recall in her presentation if these were going to be for sale or if it was going to be a like a an apartment building managed by someone and they're all rentals. The unfortunate part is that's not a question we can ask. Okay. Because it is just a reszone request. The question is, okay, should this area be I just heard people mention that. So then I was I didn't hear that. So then I thought maybe I missed something. Thank you. Sorry.

I just wanted to say that I did get tongue tied, but what I meant to say was that um when they build roads, they take in consideration of the possible growth in the future when they build the roads. And that 4,800 is not a like a side street. It It's not in a cul-de-sac. It's not in a subdivision. These are main streets in Roy. And uh not only do we drive on these roads, but also everybody that lives below us, they drive through our city on these roads. So these are major roads in Roy. It's not like a side street or a subdivision. And um I'm sure that Steve took in consideration, it seems like I read in his report that he took into consideration the traffic and what the effect of traffic would be. And uh to wrap it up, I just wanted to thank everybody for coming and thank you for sharing your uh views and your thoughts on the matter. I appreciate everybody coming and sharing. And that's it.

Thank you. Right. Any more questions for Steve or discussion?

I don't um just asking for a little bit of clarification about the supply and demand. Um because I hear a lot about like how many rental listings or how many house listings that we have at a general time uh just by like hopping up onto Zillow or something like that. How do we look at supply and demand um from the perspective of planning and when we have open listings and that kind of a thing? How do we interpret that as part of that supply and demand shifting?

That would take a a bigger team than I've got currently. Um that's not something we look at because you hold come on sell and rent daily and then go off. So it's not something we look at. Okay. just knowing that, you know, our um occupancy rate is pretty high, so there's not many that are just sitting there unoccupied. Okay. Thank you.

Right. Any further discussion or this would be two separate motions, one for the plan and one for the zoning map. Well, one concern I have about this development um is that um I I do agree that um I don't know that this is the best fit for this corner uh for this area of Roy. um my my commute to work takes me past that intersection and uh it's not a fun intersection and I I worry about the impact that could have on an intersection. Um, not that it's going to be great numbers, but the the compounding frustration of the people who end up buying these things and wondering why we allowed it to go in there. I'm I'm not thrilled about it. Um, honestly, I um I I appreciate that the property owner wants to do something with it and that's their right and they've applied. Um, but my feeling is that this is this not necessarily a good fit. Um, for all the reasons that have been clearly been stated, but my my biggest concern is again the traffic impact. Um, and then it's a it it's kind of a spot zone in a sense. I mean, it's close to related to, but you know, the general plan does still call it for single family and um to me it seems like it should stay that way. how I

um I I would echo Commissioner Tanner's comments there about the concerns about the traffic and I I'm concerned about point one of our considerations, the effect of the proposed amendment on the character of the surrounding area and whether or not it is uh suitable for the uses and activities allowed by the proposed amendment. And um I I know we just flashed the uh the zoning and the future zoning um maps up there, but just as I've been mulling over this and I walked the trail um a couple of times and there is a very distinct there is a very distinct atmosphere and design in this area and I don't know that this is going the right direction to make sure that we are taking all of these considerations and meeting them.

Okay. Any more discussion or motions? I need to ask something to Steve. Yeah.

So, I live on 4,800 and it's I actually think with the 5600 expansion and then the new roundabout they put in, I actually find it easier where I'm a teacher. I leave early and I get all the traffic to high as well. I find it actually easier to get out of my driveway with the difference in the 5600. Um, Midland on the other hand at school time if people wouldn't park on the streets where they're not supposed to. That is kind of a mess. But I went and drove past this property and if I looked at it correctly. So would all of them face 48? Because it didn't seem like many would face 2700 because it seemed like it was more long like it the way it's this way. It's would they we don't know that. Oh, is this I see. Okay.

Yeah. I I don't know. So, we have to do that because I was thinking if they faced 48, I think that that would be easier than like I get on 2700. That is kind of a tough road, but okay. So, that's why I didn't know. Never mind. Preferably just like orchards at 19th and others. We try to get town homes fronting the the street. Now depending on how they propose the development if this goes through and they go to build we'll take a look that at the site plan but I couldn't say they'd be at 48 or 27 or both or none or you probably have to have an access at least on both. Yeah, you'll probably have an access on both.

Yeah. And then remind me I remember in the notes 31 it so remind me the numbers because there was something about 31. That's the other one. This one. Okay. Okay, this one's 1.6. Oh my gosh, I'm not my best today. Sorry, I don't good. 20. Okay, that's what I was thinking. Okay, when you look when you look at the turnout on to 4,800 and the island that they've already got put in. Yeah, it's I mean we're talking about they they can right turn only out. Yeah.

And if this if it's backed up for trains, planes, and automobiles just for the fun of it, it's going to be I just think it's going to be congested. It just seems like it it's just going to create more frustration for whoever lives there. And I just don't know that we're going to be doing anybody any good by by doing that. And and creating more congestion in that in that that intersection just doesn't seem like a responsible thing for us to do. So do you think if the median was extended though, it would help like Steve said? Well, no, because there's still there's still right turnout. You can't go left turn on 48 from that from that development. trying to go. Well, people people are told they can't. They're supposed to go down and do the the flip around,

but you can't you can't stop people from Yeah, I don't doing things they should be doing. It just it's unfortunate. But and then the 2700 I just I can't see. It's just right out on everything and I I wouldn't live in a place that everything's right out that I have to go I have to go south to go north. It would be a little frustration. So,

I mean, I appre I appreciate the concerns on the people on 2700 because my daughter grew up with a lot of those kids like the Packards and I remember the Hlips would bring their animals to the to Midland and I know my cute art teacher friend from Rocky. But, um I guess I don't know. I don't know how I feel yet. And I've thought about this all day long. I really have because it'll impact me too because I live on 4,800. So, I don't know. But I also think that's a lot of property for property owners to take care of if they get and they don't want to move and they're trying to I don't know.

Well, I don't know that we're saying that it can only be town homes or nothing because they can come back and say we want to subdivide it and then put in single family homes and instead of having two, they could put on three on that or something, but still preserve a single family um option. So, we're not we're not saying it's either or. It's okay, these don't seem like a good fit. come back and let's look at something else. And it could be depending on the size, they could put three or four houses on there and make it still fit within the continuity of that community. But if you do a zone too small, no, let me think. I don't know. I've thought about this all day. I think Jason was going to say something.

I don't know. I got to think. You just I'm gonna think for a second. You go on. Okay. We have to make a determination on whether or not this amendment is deny or table. Yeah, we'd make a motion on the general plan and it can be a positive a favorable or negative or you can vote, you know, if it's a favorable recommendation, you can vote negatively or if it's negative, you can vote favor like the motion just needs to be should we change the general plan and does it have to be R3? That's what they're proposing. But so if if we think that's too many Then we it's a it's a change to R3 right now. Yeah.

Because I would think if we're going to consider other zones like they need to come back and propose that to us. Correct. I mean I I think it's fair with the public hearing that we make a decision on what was presented to us. That's what I mean. But like if it's the R3 is too many places to build too many houses or town homes or apartments or whatever they decide. We just have to think of the potential of what that could imply if we approved in our not us but council but we have microphone. We have to make that motion. Yeah. But I just mean if if people are concerned about the number not necessarily the change like if it was a bigger number so they couldn't put in as many. But right now we can't restrict that. We just have to

Yeah. But we could that's what we're deciding is if we should approve R3 or if it needs to be changed to a different number. or stay the way it is. Stay the way it is. The way it is, right? Dan, do you want to make a motion? I mean, you could make the motion that it be a different zone. Um, just looking at the surrounding, you got manufacturing, which is across the street, or R18, which is on the east side of the railroad. Um, R18, you're basically saying it's single family, 8,000 square foot lots. Um, if they just do

800, they would get nine, go ahead and say it out loud. But those would all have to be fronting one of the streets. 2,700 likely. Yep. Yeah. I personally I think it would just be tough to change it to another zone because I I really respect property rights and the owner's perspective and and I know you do but I just don't think it would be appropriate to change it to something else. I think they should come back a if if that was the case and I make that motion for what they want and not up to us to decide what it should be.

That's what I was saying though like if if I think that that's a too too many places then I would have to say nay and that means they could come back. That's what I was asking like what would be the next zone that would be more appropriate that would be and they need to come back for that. Yeah, I want them to come back. I understand that part. So, I'd like to make a motion to deny the general plan change from single family residents to multif family residents. I'll second it. So, we have a motion to deny it, which would leave it the way it's currently correct done. And that was with the general plan, right? And then second and this will be a roll call vote. Commissioner Reid. Hi,

Commissioner Gaff Graph. Sorry. I Commissioner Felt. I Commissioner Kelly. I Commissioner Bills. I Commissioner Tanner. I passes. When I say pass, it was a recommendation of negative. You wanted to say the same for clarity. Yeah, that's what I was trying to get at. Make sure I I know this sometimes can get a little I don't feel very good today. They do have to vote on the reszone. I assume it's going to follow suit, but you do have to. Do we need an additional motion for that? Yes, we do. Um, I'll go ahead and make that motion to uh deny that request for the reszone as well. Second.

Okay. Motion a second. This will be a roll call as well. Commissioner Callie, I. Commissioner Tanner. I. Mr. Reed, I. Commissioner Felt. I Commissioner Bills I Commissioner Graph I again that also passes on a negative I had to catch myself and think through what I was that's why I was trying to articulate it and then this will still go to the council but the negative recommendations there still is that understood it will be going on next week to the council so this is just a recommendation nothing's been decided.

Sorry. Okay, we will move on to agenda item number four, which is also a public hearing, and this will be to consider a request to annex into Royce City, 3.96 acre parallel parcel located approximately 2175 west and 3750 south. And is the applicant here for this? And we'll have you wait just one moment while some people clear out. You're welcome to come up here. We'll just wait for them to

Thank you for being here.

All right, you're you're good now. And if you'll just tell us your name, your city of residence, and then tell us about uh this little property and why you want to annex in Droy.

Yeah, so Brad Brown. I live in Riverdale and um this is a project we've been working on for a while. Um the we discovered I I think everybody thought it had been annexed into the city and it's just one little sliver of county ground that um you know is between West Haven and and Roy and this is part of the the land that is going to be deed to to the city. Um, so it, you know, um, staff recommendation was this is pretty, you know, pretty standard. Let's just get this annexed into the city. Um, it was more painful than we thought being close to the the airport. We had to go through city council at Ogden City to be approved by their the airport board. But yeah, now we're now we're here. Um, yeah, not not a whole lot. Not a whole lot to say about it, but I'm open to any questions if there are any.

Perfect. And you are the property owner, is that correct? Uh, yes. Awesome. I I think this one's a pretty straightforward one as well. Um, any questions? All right. Thank you. Um, Steve,

um, as mentioned, this is a request to annex into Roy. So, from unincorporated Weaver County into Roy almost four acres there approximately. When I say approximately, I mean it's approximately um 2175 and 3750 south. Um as indicated on the aerial, it's just kind of this little sliver of land to the south of the yellow currently is owned by Roy City. Um the yellow and the rest of the green up to Hinckley um has been farmed by the Hansen over the years and they're they're getting out of the business. Um so they have sold to to Brad and his his team. So this was one aspect in order before they can start a development um they have to get this little section annexed in. Uh if you remember years ago I think it was 2018 2019 time frame when this county we had a bunch of islands and the county deemed that they could be annexed into cities. They purposely left this one out and I'm not sure why. Um the only reason I got was well you don't encircle the whole thing. Okay, whatever. So, uh we're just here to annex this into the city so that it the ground can be developed. Um our annexation policy plan had this area already looked at to be part of Roy City. Now granted, some of this goes into West Haven. This is long before West Haven uh went this far east or west, whatever you want to call it. Um our future land use map did call out this area to be uh station mixed use and the current zoning is station north. So staff would just recommend you forward a positive recommendation to the council to annex this property in and to

designate zoning wise as station north. Any questions for Steve? Okay, motion's in order. Motion to go into public hearing. Second. I have a motion, a second to go into public hearing. All in favor? I.

Any opposed? We're now in public hearing. Um, so now we'll provide the same opportunity, same rules apply. State your name, your residence. Um, we'll give you up to to three minutes uh to to speak. Anybody want to speak to this issue? Becky Fabac Roy, what are the plans for that property? How tall are the buildings going to be that right behind my house right next to the railroad trucks? They're taking the public path that was supposed to be a rail trail and they want to take that, too. So, what are the plans? I don't want high density housing there. I don't want what they just put behind my friend's house. They just put apartments behind my friend's house right next to the station. They have people looking into their backyard. These are $500,000 homes that I don't think they plan to have apartments behind. We'll answer the questions after the public hearing.

Thank you.

I didn't get your name. Anybody else want to speak to this? All right. Motion's in order. Motion to close the public hearing. Oh, hold on. I did have one email. Sorry. Okay. Um, it was from Sher K who lives there on 3925 South. Um, apologize I unable to attend the meeting and I want to let you know vote no. I I like those emails. Short and sweet. Right to the point. Um, you were making a motion. Motion to close the public hearing. I'll second. Motion and a second. All in favor? I. Any opposed?

We are now out of public comment. Steve, can you address the the zoning that that would come in under?

Um the zoning is which is already existing there is station north. Um there are no plans because again it's still going through the vetting process to get all the the properties involved. Um as the developer did say there is a land swap and we had a development agreement I want to say a couple months ago that came through on this. So the city the property the city owns uh just north of 4000 will become theirs and then we get land up towards Hinckley. Um they'll take over the this detention pond which we don't have to maintain but they will get to maintain. So it's a great win for us on on that aspect. But uh the buildings in this area can be 60 feet tall. Um so plans are still yet. I know they've got several buildings that are being looked at, but again, no plans have been submitted, no application for what type of development.

Okay. Thank you. Any discussion or a motion? I will make a motion to forward a positive recommendation to council uh to annex with the don to annex this property with the zoning designation for the area of SN station north. Second motion to second. This will be a roll call. Commissioner Bills I. Commissioner Felt I. Commissioner Reid I Mr. Tanner I. Mr. Kelly I Mr. graph I

okay 6 positive I do believe this is also going to be on next week's agenda they're moving quick on those which is good um we'll now move on to agenda item number five which is to consider request for development agreement with Seward Land Company regarding a project located approximately 3925 west 4965 south to allow 43 single family dwellings on similar lots and is the applicant here for What was that? Um, did you send it to me an email?

Yes. Oh, yeah. I don't I don't didn't get it. Okay. Is there a way to connect to it? There might be. You're an Apple.

No, this is a Microsoft. So I might be able This will be one as well.

I knew what I wanted to say. Trying to help right up. I don't know if there's a different input to switch it over. Maybe not.

Okay, I can send this to you later if you guys would like to see it. But anyways, Brad Brown Riverdale. Um I'm with Steuart Land Company. Um, and we've, you know, this is really close to my home and it's been a city that, uh, I really enjoy working with and working in. Um, the project we're looking at, I can't show you, but um, is uh, it's an infield development over um, there it is kind of by 3900 West. Um we're looking to do some some cottage lots, some small lots. And um it's very similar to another subdivision that was recently approved. We we brought this into the city and and uh at at staff's recommendation, they said this could be like the Highgate Cove. And so we we kind of well, not kind of, we we based our our design and our development agreement off of that one um very closely. Um, we're pretty excited about it. It's It's a nice little spot, a nice little neighborhood. Um, and some of the reasons why this is good for Roy is Oh, you got it. Hey, there we go. You want to go one more? Um, some of the reasons this is good is that, uh, it uses the existing infrastructure efficiently. Um, you know, it it has two stub roads. it makes um good use of those. We don't have to do a lot more infrastructure. Um but it also creates attainable ownership opportunities. I know there was some talk about affordable um and that's a a hard word to both define and to to meet, but this is attainable. And I think, you know, speaking to those that are trying to find something that uh is reasonable to purchase, um this is what we're

shooting for. Um, I I also have siblings that are, you know, grew up in Weaver County, want to buy a home. There's just it's hard. It's hard these days. So, these this this is a step towards that with these kind of smaller homes. Um, it creates some housing diversity and we feel like it it does maintain the same character of of that neighborhood. Um, also the police chief mentioned he would uh he would be happy if this got developed because he gets a lot of nuisance calls. I feel kind of bad because I hear kids like to ride motorcycles out there and feel sacriiggious because I would have loved that as a kid to have someone to ride out my backyard. But um but yes, that's that's what the police chief told us. Um, this is, you know, we're trying to say consistent with the the model one that the the staff recommended. Um, so on the top is our design. The bottom one right there is is uh the Highgate Cove and I took some pictures there of of just what that looks like, the kind of product that would be going in. And then and and then I know there was a some comments about um the in the staff report about changing the density and um you know we're hoping that you know would that we feel like that's more of a a preference item and not necessarily um relying on code but go to the next one. So we feel like this is great for the city. a vote yes is, you know, a path to home ownership and diversity of homes um efficient use of the utilities um and infrastructure.

And then it's uh you know, I think it it's it's as close as we can come to getting that that attainable housing. I know you know the there's been opposition to the apartments and the town homes. Um so this is a smaller version. We hope that that um can meet in the middle and meet both goals. Um and then also staying consistent with, you know, previous presidents. So, we're excited. We think this will be a great project for the city and and happy to answer any questions if there are any. But I think that comes after. Is that right?

Yeah, we can ask some questions now and then if we have some more after, we'll do that as well. Any questions before we move over to Steve? Okay, you're good for now. All right. Thanks. Thank you.

As mentioned, this is a a request for a development agreement um with Steuart Land there in a property that's been vacant for ever. um the two property owners have finally decided to cooperate with each other. When one wanted to sell, the other one didn't and vice versa. So, it was uh combative for a long time. Um so, I sat so long just here in the kind of in the middle of a neighborhood. As mentioned, it does have two access points um east and west and then the streets go up to to 4,800 South, same road. Anyway, uh this is kind of the proposed layout. Um this hasn't necessarily gone through all of DRC to, you know, to vet out. Um when they did come and and talk to us, there was some things that we needed to do. Like single family homes can't have a a road on the front of them and behind them. So, there would be some landscaping that would put in between that road and those five homes that are there. Um but aspect-wise it would still go through the same review um for a subdivision for storm water, for sewer and water, for every for everything else. Um Steve, hang on a second.

There's a lot of noise coming from the audience that it's making it difficult to hear him.

If we can please pause comments and allow him to finish and then when we open it up, you can go ahead and have your conversations. Thank you. While somebody else is presenting, we're just asking not to talk so that you don't talk over them. That's what we're asking. Thank you. So, everything still has to be gone through. Um, you know, fire department still has to go through it and make sure they can get a fire truck in and around. So, this is just kind of a conceptual idea of what it could lay out to be. Uh, the final design will be a little different. Now, how different I I couldn't tell you at this time until um each department gets a hold of it and figures out what they what they need and what changes would come. So, again, this is just a the idea of of of the type of development like you mentioned. Um Highgate Cove over there by Bridge Academy was similar in aspect. Um neighborhood didn't want town homes. Developer needed more units than what the underlying zone would would do. So the development agreement was there for single family homes. This would have the same front yard and sideyard setbacks as Highgate. So 20 in the front, 15 in the rear, and five and five on the sides. Um Highgate Cove, the homes are 2400 square feet, twocar garages. So they are still comparable in big big homes even though lots are a lot smaller. So staff would recommend a positive recommendation of the council.

Okay. Any questions for Steve or a motion's in order? Just remind me what the lot sizes are around this particular development. Uh to the west there are R17, so 7,000 square foot and to the east and this is R18. So north, south, and east are R18. And just again the lot size of the proposed I think they ranged from 3200 square feet was the smallest on up to I want to say 5,000ish.

Okay. I can't read that small print. 2700 2700 3500 I'm seeing I7 I'm old also 2800 2800 okay just want to make sure that's on the record

okay motion's in order to go into public comment I'll make a motion to go into public comment I'll second motion a second all in favor I. Any opposed? All right, we are now in public comment. So, now I'll turn the time over to the public. Same rules as the previous two. Please state your name, your city that you live in, and then we'll give you up to to three minutes. And please be respectful. No clapping, applauding, those types of things. So, go ahead. My name is Trevor Foys. I live directly a uh I live in Roy, so I live directly adjacent.

Yeah, sorry about that. I'm a little taller. So Trevor Foy, I live in directly adjacent to the proposed development area. Um, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak here tonight regarding the proposed development. I've lived here for over a year, year and a half. Um, I want to be clear that my concerns are not about growth itself. I understand Roy City will continue to grow and evolve. My concerns with this with this is the scale, the density, and the compatibility of the specific proposal and the long-term impacts it could have on the existing neighborhood and surrounding homeowners. After reviewing the staff report and development agreement, one thing became very clear. Even staff acknowledges this proposal dramatically exceeds the uh dramatically exceeds what would normally be expected under the current zoning. The staff report specifically states that the project would effectively double the number of residence units and created twice the normal traffic volume on minor residential roads that do not directly connect to major roads. The underlining R-1-8 zoning was intended to support approximately 18 to 19 lots on the property. This proposal originally requested at 43 homes and still seek substantially more density than the established zoning pattern and surrounding neighborhood character support. The surrounding neighborhoods were built and purchased with the expectation the 7,000 to 8,000 square foot lots the standard. This proposal includes lots as small as approximately, excuse me, 2,700 square feet, creating a development pattern that is dramatically inconsistent with the surrounding areas. I'm also concerned that critical issues have not been fully analyzed and addressed prior to cons consideration of the agreement, including traffic impact and vehicle congestion, parking overflow on surrounding streets, emergency vehicle access on private roads, drainage and storm water impact on neighborhood properties, long-term maintenance of roads or private roads and private storm water systems,

backyard privacy concerns from home homes permitted upon or up to the 35 ft in height overall compatibility with the existing neighborhood structure ing infrastructure. The development agreement isn't itself states that it conflicts the existing between the normal R-18 zoning standards and this agreement. The agreement will govern that means the projection and expectation associated with this existing zoning are effectively being overridden for the project. I respectfully ask the planning commission and city council to seriously consider whether this proposal is truly compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and whether the request density is appropriate for that location. Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Sterling Dabney. I live not far from the Highgate community that he's talking about. I purchased my Well, originally I lived in Utah in Roy specifically for 30 years and then I moved away and moved back this last year and purchased a house just down the road. what he's proposing is trying to build affordable housing. And I'd like to beg to differ considering when I bought my house, there was several houses for sale in Highgate neighborhood that were going from anywhere from 460 to 480 on top of the HOA that they have to pay for that's 130 if not more. Um, I think we can do something a little bit better with this property, especially, uh, offering some availability for some younger generations to come. I'm 34 years old. I have a three-year-old son at home, and quite honestly, I don't see myself staying here in Royal Utah, especially with all the changes that are happening. The proposal to build affordable housing is bull crap. I think we can do better than this. And my personal opinion, we can either do some single family homes that are on a equivalent lot size for around the neighborhood or we can do something else or leave it the way it is. Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, hi, my name is Teresa Yara. Um I live in Roy on 3900. Um I'm come here as a concerned mom. Uh that the amount that is being considered hasn't been considering like the little kids that live in that neighborhood that's going to increase the traffic and um the commissioner or the planner is saying that no traffic uh reports can be done until the things can be approved. But I per I urge you to deny this um request from even if it's 31 to 43 and keep it at the 18 to 19 lot that was originally um in your plan. um just because little kids are playing in the neighborhood and I don't see how having twice like if you have 43 single family homes I don't even know where they're going to park um if their lots are so small but if you're thinking that two people are having home I mean cars there that would be 86 cars driving down 3900 if you're thinking two cars per family. Um, so please consider the safety of the kids that live in that neighborhood already on 3900 that you're thinking that it will be a thorough road. I mean, it's not 4,800. 4,800 already people are driving an excessive amount of 35 miles per hour and now they want to create 3900 a residential side street into a thorough way for this commercial um development. That's it.

Thank you.

Uh my name is Klay Crabtree. I live in Roy. Um I my property is on the north side of the proposed building. Um I stood here seven or eight years ago and they tried to reszone it again at that point in time. Um they want we was at that time it was an R10 which was probably too high. They wanted to take it down to an R six. Um, we proposed that we go to an R8 um to match the surrounding area that was already there. Um, the neighborhood has been there has been there for 30 years at least or more or more and those houses are well established. Um, I'm okay with, you know, building stuff there. It's their right to build stuff there, but it's been zoned in R8 for a long time and I've proposed that it needs to stay that R8. Um it adds a lot more houses and traffic that goes down 3900. It says it has two access. It does. Um but the one going out cuts all the way through have to wind through all the neighborhood. So it's going to put a lot more traffic on 3900. Um 90% of the traffic will go on that road instead of going the other way. Um, also there is uh a large water problem in that field at the time. It still has water sitting in it right now. Even be as dry as it's been. Um, we've had many floods in our backyard that I've had two to three almost a foot of water in my standing backyard coming off that field. It's we're in a swampy area out there. Um it needs to be considered that um for water retention and water drainage and keeping the water off other properties and with the amount of houses they proposed in that area um there's no room

for water drainage or holdings. Um I just ask that you guys follow what the previous people have zoned it at is is in the R8 and leaving it the R18. um is they've tried to change it many times. Um thank you. Thank you.

Uh my name is Trevor Dean. Um I live also on Roy in the immediate area on 3900. um the the two entrances to the neighborhood. Uh one of them would be I feel scarcely used because of the winding to go in and out. Um and as mentioned the 80 plus cars uh that are going to go down 3900. Uh every still once in a while we do get cars that fly down 3900 and it's very scary. There are lots of kids on bikes, on skateboards, on scooters, uh lots of families walking around. um that will increase um in the proposal of the from the police chief. Um I highly disagree. Uh maybe that there might be five or six uh noise complaints a year in that field because kids are playing and having fun and being children. Um I guarantee that number would go up because of robberies and other things in that area. Um, so I don't know if police chief is looking for more excitement in the area, but that is the only thing that would come in that area other than responding to kids riding on their bikes, their dirt bikes being children. Um, and so the immediate safety of there are so many children that play in that area all over those roads, sidewalks, yards. We don't have issues with them currently. But if you put 80 plus cars that are going to use the main I feel the main entrance to this community that will go up sadly in in ways that we don't want to hear as a city. We already have too many kids being hit on scooters, skateboards, bikes all over the city. And we see the

uproar that that happens on social media. That will increase. And I promise that. And this is not an area that you want to put 43 units in such a small area. It's just not possible. It's not compatible. I'm fine with building something there. Let's give those kids a park. Let's go. Let's give those kids somewhere to go to other than all the way over to Emma Russell. They they got across a very busy road if they're going to get there. That park, I guarantee you would be very busy all day long with families, kids playing there all day long. Thank you.

Thank you. Hi again. Uh my name again is Victor Chaston and I live here in Roy City. Um again I'm 17. Um you know I have prospects for American for the American dream and all my peers that I meet that are my age, Gen Z, whether they're almost 18, whether they're already 18 going on to 20. I see that we want to maintain what's already there. We want normal houses. We don't want this whole cramped, feel like a hamster living with this person right next to you, this person right next to you, so many cars going in and out. We want to have space. That's what the American dream is, is to have space, to have autonomy, to not feel like you're caged like a hamster in the Soviet Union. Like, do we really want to be the Soviet Union? Having these big apartment complexes, having these blocks that are just you live like a hamster because you're the Soviet communist you are. I think I'm an American. I don't want to be a Soviet. I want to be able to have the freedom, the American dream. Um, more into this, when I study history, Thomas Jefferson, uh, founding father, as you may have heard in history class, he specifically said that there that democracy is built on the ability to live off the land, to have autonomy on what you own. He goes more into this to say again, you shouldn't be living like a hamster. You should be able to expand. You'll be able to have autonomy on your own land. And by squishing us all together, by not letting us have a lot autonomy as we have less space to spread out, to be people, that goes against directly what Jefferson wanted. Jefferson wanted people to have bigger plots, to have families, to establish themselves, to have autonomy. And if anything, I want to say that he was a great definer of the American dream ever since America was born. So if we want to look towards Thomas Jefferson, especially these

ideals that he pointed out in history, I would say keep it as is. Don't squish us all together. Don't make us Soviet. Don't make us Russian. Don't make us communist. Let us live the American dream. Let the people of Roy, the future of Roy, live as Americans, not as communists. Connie Edmonson. I live on 3900 West. If I wanted to live in a mobile home park, I could, but I won't because I love where I live. I don't want to have to sneeze and have my neighbor hand me a tissue. And this is what you are asking us to have in our neighborhood. Granted, something needs to be done with that property. And I propose that it stays at R8. Put the 20 homes in there. How many of you here on the comm on on the planning commission can sit in your front room, watch TV any time of the day night and not have 84 headlights in your room? I live right where the access is. And that's exactly what will happen to me. That I cannot enjoy my home without 48 46 how many headlights in my living room. That's not fair. And when he says that's not going to take our property values down, you put them cheap little homes in there and I will lose $100,000 on my value of my home. You can guarantee that.

It's me again, Shelley Poll. There seems to be a recurring theme and that's greed. Greed, money. Um, I see the houses they built over by Bridger. It's right by my house. I see them all the time when I come out of my subdivision. People really shouldn't have to live that way. And if we're talking about affordable housing, we're talking about starter homes. We're not talking 2500 square ft. Maybe we're talking 1,500 and then maybe we can build something that is affordable for people to buy. I lived in a mobile home park. I did my time. It's horrible. You're corraling people. You put people that close together. You don't have happy campers because people don't thrive when they live on top of each other. They don't. And I don't think that is what Roy should be. And I'm tired of these people coming in with I want to help make it better. And I know their bottom line is the almighty dollar. And that's not okay. I don't like it. And all the people that are going to suffer so they can laugh all the way to the bank. It's not okay. It's disgusting. Thank you.

All right. Good evening. Uh my name is Jason Tuker and I actually live, you can see on the access road right there at the bottom. So, uh 3972s 4950 South. So, this directly impacts me. Um I want to thank Anna for coming out today and talking with us. It goes a long way. So, um I agree with pretty much everything anybody everybody said. This is a very tightknit neighborhood out here with a lot of kids. Um they shut the roads down here. We have a block party in this neighborhood in July. Uh everybody barbecues. Everybody gets together. Everybody's worried about everybody's kids. We look out for each other. My biggest concern with this being city planning is from all the research I've done over the years with the potential development of this property, the 10 lots on this southside down here, which is in the second parcel, um, still show that that is annexed for or that is a designated wetland with the state of Utah. Um, I don't know if we've looked into that, what's going on in there, but like everybody said, there's ducks in there all year long. There's fragmitees in there. There's cattails in there. It's wet all year for that reason. Um, I guess my questions are if you guys are going to permit them to build in the wetland and if they're going to be required to get a 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers if they're going to mess with that wetland. So, I mean, I'm not opposed to it being developed how it is specked for now. I would love to see homes in there. I'm not going to lie. I live right on the edge. They never mow along the fence. I've got three-foot weeds that I've got to weed eat every single year to try to keep them from messing up my fence. I've been there 12 years. I've dealt with it. I mean, I would love to see homes or something go in there. I mean, if we're going to stick it to the amount of houses that end, I mean, do they do a

park down there where it's a wetland? What are what are the plans in that aspect of things? So, thank you. Thank you.

I'm Stacy Crabtree. I live in Roy. Um, so every so many years, yes, we haven't had much rain this year, but every year that it snows and then we have rain, I have water that fills our yard. And for him to say that there is no water issue, that's a lie. There is a major water issue. I have to get an gas powered pump to pump the water off of my property. Um, I have sent pictures to Steve, um, the last time that this was brought up of the amount of water that we are drowning in sometimes in our property. Um, and the nuisance from the kids, we face the field. We listen to them on their motorbikes all day long, summer long. And I have never complained. I don't know where the complaints are coming from, but we I like that they are out there playing instead of sitting inside on their Nintendos. Um I like that they have a place to run and play. Um and I love that um they come by and wave. They know us. They know that I'm not complaining. They start a fire in the field and I will complain to them about that one. Uh we only had one time of that. Um but it was us taking care of it. there was no emergency called. Um, but those kids learned their lesson quick. Um, also we we have so many houses that have little kids as they have talked about that if it was it leaving and going straight out to 4,800, that would be a different aspect. But you're driving through neighborhoods where little kids are always on their bikes. Um, my kids ride their bikes to school every day. they will be joining at Country View Elementary if if this has is there. I don't know how the school system can handle that many houses either into that school. Um, but we need to look at many more aspects than just let's fill the lot. We would

love to have it developed, but we also want it done correctly and left in the same um lot size that it is now so that we can have safe neighborhoods and we can we have a sheriff, a police department. We have all these police within the street. So, it is not like that we have a lot of incidences. We listen to cars race up and down 4,800 all night long. That is the racing strip from uh triple stop down to the four-way stop and listen to those cars race all night long. And we're just going to add to it if we make it for the 43. Thank you.

Thank you. Hi, my name is Sarah Ferola. I live on 3900 and the access um route uh directly faces my home. Um and so for me, this is very personally going to change our life, right? This will change our home. This this will change what my children are able to do. Um because there would be so many people who would be coming out of that access point. Um and so again I echo as people before me have said I am not opposed to the field being developed. I am not opposed um to affordable housing. Um I am opposed to the density that is being proposed um at this point. And so I would just ask that you really consider that really thoughtfully consider that. Um, it sounds like there needs to be um some more studies done into the impact before um it would be prudent to allow for this type of development to take place. Um, thank you for your time.

Thank you.

I'm a lot shorter, so we're going to have to adjust that. Um, my name is Heather Harard and I also live on 3900. Um, my kids actually play with Sarah's kids all the time, running around on that street. So, as a mother of two girls that are very active and outside all the time, I am also very concerned about the amount of traffic coming through that area. Um, I also had a conversation with a neighbor a little bit down the street who's been here a lot longer. I've been here 13 years now and they've been there 25, 30 years. And they said when they started developing past that field and they built higher, all the water had been draining down that way. So, none of us have swamp or sump pumps, but they all do. And I'm wondering, this is a question like, how are they going to mitigate all of that water? Because you will have to build that filled up. And if you do have to build that filled up so that the new homes aren't getting water in their basement, what about like my friend Stacy who's got her sump pump coming going constantly and multiple other people I've talked to on that street that have more than one sump pump because the water years can be really bad. Um I I want to know also about that responsibility of how are we doing this responsibly to take care of the existing residents as well as any potential new residents. Um, I'd also like to echo because there are so many of our kids there and again our kids all play together. Um, a park would be a really nice development to put there instead. Again, protecting that water area, maybe a nice little pond, something that's going to take care of the water and take care of the residents. Thank you.

Thank you. My name is Ashton Dayton and I live on 3900 and 4,800. So, I am right on the corner. Um, and I am also a concerned mom. My three kids like to play with their best friends who live right across 3900. And we always make sure crossing the street. Obviously, parents, we all take turns. Hey, you're walking her across the street or you're walking her across the street. If you put 80 more cars coming through our neighborhood, our kids are not going to be able to play out in the front yard anymore. And coming down uh 4,800, I've heard a bunch of people say people will haul down that road. We've had to put boulders, um a brick mailbox, and trees in front of our house because I am scared somebody coming down that corner will crash into our yard. So, my concern is I don't want any more cars than we already have. Um, and he was saying something about the police chief approving this. Um, the kids go down there like everyone else is saying, nobody gets in trouble. Nobody's causing any havoc. Everyone is having fun. They're riding bikes. They're playing. I love this neighborhood. I love my house. I love all of my neighbors. And I don't want all this traffic, all these other people coming in and ruining it for my kids. So, I'm just a concerned mom. That's it. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Jan Rushton. I live at 3973 West, 4950 South. Um, my house is also connected um to the empty U plot. Um, so this is a huge concern. Um, a little backstory, our story is a little bit different. We just moved here from um out of state and we picked Roy. There was no question we wanted to be here because of the country feel, because of the quiet neighborhood. Um, we we picked our house. Uh, we knew that that plot of land would probably eventually um be developed. However, um, okay, full disclosure, my ex-husband was a planner, so I knew I learned a lot, right? And I learned that as you are building and building onto neighborhoods, it needs to look the same. and needs to continue um with the trend of that neighborhood. Um so imagine last week when I got the letter from Steve Parkinson um stating that we would be having possibly 43 single family homes in that little teeny um plot of land. Um I also am not against growth. I think it's just the way it is, right? Utah's a pretty amazing place to live. Um, but it is so important that we keep the integrity of Roy. Um, I also wanted to add to the noise complaint. We are part of that noise complaint in my family. We have a four-wheeler and and we love that plot of land. Um, we love to use it. Um, and it will be sad to see that go, but once again, it's understandable. Um, I do have a question for Steve. Uh, you mentioned why would we do traffic pattern studies if we don't even know if we're going to do it. But why would we even know if we want to do it if we

don't do those traffic pattern studies? Um, you know, we're going to have a lot of people coming right by our house and I would like to know the plans for all of that traffic. um and and how are we going to make sure that our roads are maintained and how are we going to make sure that um you know people are safe um as we are as there's going to be a lot more traffic. Um, so last week was kind of devastating for our neighborhood because not only did we get notification that our property tax would be raised um, next year, but then we also got notification that um, we were going to get a lot of homes not like ours built right in our neighborhood. And I am very worried despite what people are saying about the drop in my home value. Um, I am proud of my home. Um, I take good care of my home. You have 10 seconds left. So, thank you.

Okay. So, um you guys are very nice people. I thought I was going to be coming and having to talk to people who are going to try and take my money, and I can see you guys want to do the right thing, and I'm so grateful. I'm so grateful. So, thank you. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Mike Oberry. I live on 3900 West also. And did anybody mention all the kids that live out there? and you're going to shove 43 sardine cans in that area. That's just absurd. And they're talking about two ways to get in there. On the west side, you have turned on 3925 west off of 4,800 south and you make four 90 degree turns before you get into that area. And 3900 is a speedway already. So, let's throw 86 more vehicles in there. Cut that number in half and it'll be fine. If you do the 43, let me know so I can sell my house before the crap begins.

Thank you. Hi, my name is Michelle Nelson Pugmier and I live um right backed up to the fence. We've lived there for 20 years. We have seen so many families come and go. Sorry, when I get angry I get booby. Um I understand that has to be developed. Absolutely does. But when we moved in, there was an expectation as everybody who moved into that neighborhood that we would keep the continuity of the neighborhood. Right. So 1920 ohms, yes, this this is going to cause an increase in crime. It is going to cause an increase in nuisance. It's going to cause an increase in traffic offenses. It's going to cause a decrease in our kids playing in our neighborhoods. It's also going to affect the public school systems. Because you put 43 house and you say even one kid per that's country view that I'm a teacher that affects the schools a lot and it raises the per capita child teacher which isn't even that's just a little problem. Um, but more from the human aspect. You know the traffic, you've heard all the points, you've heard all of that stuff, but from the humic ha human aspect, go look at that lot. And if you live there and you see how small that lot is, would you want 43 houses built there that you look at that look into your yard every day that are there that are compact that there isn't a safe road in and out? Because look how small that is. Those roads are going to be so very narrow. And this map makes it look much bigger

than what it actually is. It is not a big lot. It is under It is under three. It's under the last lot you showed us. It's probably three and a half acres. So, we're looking at 11 point Think about how big an acre is. We're looking at 11.2 houses per acre. That's a lot. That is dense. That is not what we moved into this neighborhood for. Thank you. I just want to address that also for as far as a shorting outage goes. Please state your name for the

uh sorry. Yeah, Jeff Fulmer, Roy, Utah. Um, as far as a shorting outage goes, there is several houses in that neighborhood that have been for sale for quite a long time, and there were they was one in particular that they remodeled and was on the market for well over a year before it finally sold. I'm just curious about these houses and how long they're going to sit there, too. Thank you. Yeah, I'm Ty Chaston and I will let you know that I manage over 250 apartments from Leighton all the way to Tmont and Logan and mostly down into Ogden and quite a few here in Roy. When we talk about housing shortage or affordable housing, it's not affordable housing. It's housing availability. That's what we should call it. Half these apartments are vacant. And I know that because I manage them. And I'll let you think on that. My name is Amy Hus and I live just right over there. Um, this has been so much fun. I have to admit I'm a teacher and I just have to thank you. I taught today about the Constitution and we talked about we the people and what does that mean and this is what this means. We are the people. You are our representatives. You're here to represent us. You're here to hear our comments and make decisions based off of that. when they say, "Would you want this in your backyard?" That's exactly what you should be thinking about. Is this what you want? And they're right. You look at this map. I

actually was looking at the map you guys sent us. And I was like, "Maybe 10, 15 houses. How the heck are you going to get 43 in there? It really does not show the neighborhoods and the continuity of those of the houses doesn't at all go with this." So, the questions that I would like asked and a lot of people asked them, um, I appreciate the one about the traffic impacts. I know Steve you said that, um, why would somebody pay for something if they're not going to get it? Well, because it might kill somebody. And they brought that up. We've got kids that are I don't have little kids, but I drive through. There are kids everywhere. You have to be so careful. And my kids are of the age that are buying homes. So, I actually appreciate, you know, affordable housing. We want that for our kids. And this is not going to be affordable for my kids. My kids can't afford $400,000. Let's be honest. They're in apartments paying $1,600 in rent. This is not for my kids. They can't afford $400,000. So that's that's not the reality that we're looking at. This is going to make somebody a lot of money. And I appreciate that. We all want to make more money, right? But I do think, can we table this until we have studies on safety? Can we table it until we know what the traffic impacts? I mean, the kids are everywhere and if we add I mean, even 20 cars, I get that we're zoned for that. But again, another thing I want to ask is um the retention, can we ask for a retention pond? My house floods every two to three years. I have two sump pumps that run constantly all year long. If you drive through our neighborhoods, you can see water going out onto the street every single day because of the water that are in our homes. Why aren't we thinking about a retention pond for this? So, we can fix the water problems that are currently here. So, can we do that? Is that something we can look at? I don't I don't understand zoning stuff, but that's why we have you guys. Um, another thing, uh, if like if this is what's going to happen, can we go around the This is not the map

that you showed us. I understand you put like 43, but the map that we saw was that one. Okay. That doesn't really show that. Can we show the neighbors? Can everybody see this? Like until we actually make a decision. Can we table things so that people know what you're actually saying? Cuz that's the other one is insane. And can these be addressed before you guys make a vote? Because like I said, you represent us. Sorry. And I want you to represent us fairly, which means we all have the right information and hopefully more people will show up. But thank you guys. I love this. This is awesome.

Thank you. Hi, my name is Melissa Barton. I um live where the field is in my backyard in Roy. And first of all, I just want to say if you would um allow, and I I'm not asking this, but if you would allow everybody in this room to stand up who is against this, I would bet almost everybody would be standing. Um, second of all, I have lived in Roy my whole life. Um, and we don't want this here. We don't want it developed. It's fine the way it is. I work from my home. So, for those who are complaining about the noise, I'm at my home all day every day and I'm calling people and I'm asking for social security numbers and very personal information and they that noise does not directly affect my job. So, I want you to know that. Also lastly, I just want to know if there the homes that are being proposed to be built here, is there going to be an HOA in that development? Because that we just would like to know that. I don't know if we can get the answer to that, but um I'm looking around at so many people who have stood up here on both sides, like all of the sides actually, and I know most of them, and nobody wants this. So, I would just ask that each of you go down to that lot and look to see this the actual size of it. There is no way it is big enough to do what is proposed. Thank you.

Would anybody else like to speak to this? Please raise your hand. We want to make sure everybody has a chance. Motion to go out of public hearing. We have a motion to go out. Second. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? That passes. We're now out of public comment. Yes, sir. which was I can I just make a note for the record that I did speak to two residents that uh live near this property. Both a resident and a resident's family member. Just have that on the record, please.

Where to begin? Um Okay. So earlier we heard we don't want town homes, we want single family. Now we don't want single family, we want larger lots on bigger homes. Um so there's a quandry going on. Building heights will be the same as the existing zone allows. Uh just like this the single family homes that are around it. 35 feet to peak a roof is what the building height can be. Uh the traffic um a traffic study could be done but generally is not done at a development stage. It's done at at time of development so they know what is required. Will medians need to be done or or you know at 48 or in 39. Jason can probably talk more about that than I can. Uh parking similar to the single family homes around it. Our ordinance requires two-car parking side by side for every single family home. Uh no different than than the homes around it. Now, I know if you have kids and they have cars or you have toys and trailers, that comes into play, but zoning can't park for that. It it's it's not built for that. And if you have toys, you should be able to park it on your property or or find a different place to park it. Uh yes, there would be an HOA because those roads would be private um and not city owned. So maintenance would be on their own. Everything else would be done. All the other roads that are existing are city-owned. So we would consider con talk would be continuous as what's been done today. Um we heard a lot about traffic and and children. Um that's an issue everywhere. Uh we've heard it in basically every

public hearing that we've we've talked about. Um the city is concerned about the safety of kids. That's why we do have parks and you do have yards to play in. Um you know, I grew up in a in a culde-sac so I could play in the street a lot easier than others that did not. But uh the streets aren't places for us to play. They should be elsewhere. Um going down through the list. Sorry. talk about that. Um, the United States will never become a Soviet Union or a communist. Um, it's unfathomable to think that uh people will live where they could live where they can afford. Um the comment was that someone rent or manages apartments that are half of them aren't rented out. Question would be is why? Um location is always an issue or if they're in high areas like in universities, people are, you know, out of out of school now and and leaving. But also rent, you know, if the rent's too high, no one's going to rent it. But those are things that the property owner and manager management companies control. Um, if the rent goes down, people most likely rent. Even if it's, you know, my first apartment, if it's garbage, you found a place to to live and and with a roof over your head and a place to put your bed. Um, I I did like the comment that was really paraphrased from Thomas Jefferson about bigger plots to spread out. I don't think that was in in anything he had mentioned. But uh we do have the desire as the American dream to have

ownership of land. Um the sad part is land isn't being made. We are running out of it. So at some point in time we've got to look at how do we build homes on what size lots do they need should they be on in order for people to live and have that that dream. Um, nowhere does it say the American dream died when you when you live in a town home that you own or a condo that you own. Look at New York. People live in condos and are spending 8 $9,000 a month on rent or mortgage. Um, starter homes is something that I know the governor has has requested. These could be that. Again, you still have to have twocar parking or it's in a garage or um somewhere on on parking. Doesn't mean that these couldn't be built that way, but that's really up to the developer and the product he's wanting to look at. Not us, unless we as a city are willing to give them money um in order to to help with the development. I really can't or we really can't dictate what type of homes, what size of homes can be on there. The dictate what would dictate it is the size of lot the setbacks that are already there or being proposed. Um wetlands I am unaware of the FEMA maps that have this as a wetland area. Doesn't mean that there's not water. Um all subdivisions including the one that was around are required to drain water. This one would require some sort of retention or detention pond for the water to go to it. Now, will that help with the neighborhood? Most likely, but it's going to be geared towards this development, not necessarily everybody else's, unless the city's willing to put

again put more money into it to make it bigger um so that the rest of the neighborhood um comes into or gets included in it. Um, knowing the issue with taxes being raised and the money I I don't think the city wants to put any more money into things that we don't have. Um, kind of goes to say, you know, building a park, great idea. City can't afford it. Um, not just the land, but to to put everything in it that it would be needed. Um, on a side note, I I I love and granted I I do that did this when I was growing up, ride your bikes and and go-karts and everything on somebody else's property. And so, I'm kind of trespassing now on somebody else's to have that fun time. I I I'd love to say, "Hey, land owner, donate it to the kids so they can play on it." But, um, until somebody else buys it, it is what it is. and we've got someone who's looking to to buy it. The property owners have been difficult to work with in the past and I'm surprised that they're working together today, but um we have what we have. Uh the fun part, let's see, traffic is traffic and I've said that many times. Um unless we're willing to get out of our cars and start walking, we're we're still part of the traffic problem. Um, neighborhoods are quiet. I don't think that this would change that. The noise just because the numbers would increase a little, but it's still single family homes and the kids playing would still would still be that. Uh, the plan is kind of what's been proposed. Now, the ultimate development plan will change a bit. Um, like I

mentioned before, there will be required to have a detention pond. Will that take one or two lots? Don't know until they design that and our engineer confirms that it meets the requirements. Uh, roads being too small, the fire department still has to go through it to make sure that they can make all those corners and turns and and access each of those lots. Um, if it doesn't, then things have to change and widen or, you know, reduce. So, there's things that the city does at a different time in order to make sure that this development is safe, that it is co cohesive with the neighborhood. Um, so couple more pages. I mean, the planning commission does have the ability to to table this, approve it with conditions, approve, and granted I don't say approve it. you guys are making recommendations to the council. So, it's it's not your decision. You're just making the recommendation after you heard from the the audience. One thing I did hear, and it's one thing that's probably not widely known, and it may be new to some, you're not elected individuals. So, you don't necessarily look at the residents themselves. You look at what's best for the city and the neighborhood around it. Um, reason why you're not appointed or you're not elected is the state requires every city to have a planning commission that's not affected by elections and it's not driven by will I get voted in again if I make this decision. Uh, you are to look at and debate what's best for the city, best for this area. Um, you don't represent the the individuals. So that's the council and that's where it needs to to be.

I think I got everything. Get off my soap box. Thank you, Steve. Any questions or discussion? If you want the developer to kind of re

um I want you to know I I took copious notes. I I really am concerned about the concerns of of the uh you know of the citizens. Um, and I know that may sound tright or fall in deaf ears, but you know, I heard a lot of a lot of things and I'm genuinely concerned about the same things. And if there are concerns, you know, with traffic or with infrastructure or with safety, those are our concerns too and we want to make sure that um we take care of those and you know there are measures for that. you know, the city, if it's required that, you know, you know, Jason, you know, we'll have to do a traffic study. We'll have to do these things and comply with what will make it safe. Um, but what I I I think what I heard underlying all that is what we have is we like what we have. What we have is special and we don't want to lose that. And I completely understand that and I would probably feel the same way and you know that's common human reaction. Um but I I think also if we look at okay you know someone here mentioned they were been here for 20 years and when we move in a place anything new scares us but probably everything that happened since then is not the worst thing ever. you know, it it may be part of what makes it special, but that uncertainty, I know, is is um scary. I would feel the same way. Um but we hope that we can contribute to what makes it special and you know, address the issues. um you know and do like like Steve said, make something that's great for the

community and um and we want to be good neighbors. We want to help. You know, we know um that there are hurdles. There are things that still have to be figured out and we want to be good partners with the city in doing that. So, thank you.

Thank you. I guess my question would be development agreements. Well, for you or for the applicant, they have their place and I've we've reviewed a lot of them, approved a lot of them. Generally, they're applicable when the character or the characteristic of the property doesn't support or there's there's an application to improve what's already in place. Can you tell me how this particular application, this particular development agreement does that? Is there something about the characteristics of the property that aren't conducive to developing it as an R18 as it's currently zoned? Or what do you feel about this development that goes above and beyond and improves what an R18 is?

I'll let you take that, Brad. And if that's an unfair question, tell me. Well, um, there's I I know what you're saying, and a lot of things have very specific things. This doesn't have a necessarily very specific um item except for geometry um you know workable sellers and and the price and you know what makes it feasible and um marketable. So, okay.

Well, I and I've stated to this in other in other um meetings. Um affordability is kind of a really loose term sometimes when it comes to housing. You can you can shrink a lot but still build a half million dollar house on a smaller lot. and and what really makes that affordable that it's got a a smaller lot tax, but you still have the half million dollar house on it. And so when we look at building affordable housing, I'm I'm looking at, you know, if we're going to shrink this down, then let's put affordable houses on it that teachers, firefighters, police officers, somebody that can can buy it, live in it, and be contributors to that neighborhood, but not have to go sell a child to afford a house. Because we see this with developers, they they they want to build more on less. Without a doubt, we get that.

But we don't see affordable housing being proposed. We see still half million dollar houses want to be dropped on smaller lots and and we hear this everywhere. And and to talk about, yes, we're going to shrink the size so it could be affordable housing. How what I mean you talk about putting on single family houses and twocar garages that you know the American dream of owning a home with two-car garage and all that but the American dream has to be affordable and so my question when we looking at this and I know if we if we stretch that out we're still going to put half million dollar houses on 8,000 foot lots and and that that then that takes us out of the affordability because now we got that total But for me, when we're looking at this agreement, what kind of agreement can we make that says, okay, if we agree to do this, how are you going to make it affordable? And how do we make it so it can be utilized by a class that can't afford half million dollar houses? So, you know, that that that is a great question and one that I wrestle with a lot. I I wish I knew a silver bullet to answer that. Um, but the reality is it's it's the markets. If I could control that, I I would love to.

And and I and I hear that a lot and I wave my BS flag. Okay. And I'm sorry because we hear the market market, but there there are market tiers without a doubt. There are people that are making,

you know, six figures, seven figures that can afford housing. I work for a town that has those kind of um opportunities. The when we're looking at the medium income in Roy and we're saying we want to drop in half million dollar houses, they don't align. And for me, you know, when we say that's what the market bears, I I would double dog dare somebody to go out there and build 500 units of a Rambler style that's in the 250s and see if they don't fill those things faster than they can build them because there's certain u people and an economy that says, "I can't do that." And it's a starter home that says, "Okay, I'm going to get started. I'm going to establish. I'm going to build equity. Then I'm going to go move up into those bigger houses that you're building elsewhere." But they got to get started someplace.

We've heard, we know, talk about apartments and how evil they are. Well, my generation started on apartments because we didn't couldn't afford bigger houses. We couldn't afford the newer houses. We had to start someplace. Apartments pay your water. Apartments pay part of the cost of what we would pay garbage and um and um those type of things that that apartments get us started. Well, right now we go from apartments or town houses to half million dollar houses and it just seems like there's this imbalance. And to say that's what the market bears, I I just don't I don't I don't I don't agree with that. I really don't. I feel like developers are wanting to obviously make as much money as they can. part of what we do here in America. But I still struggle with, you know, what what are you guys realistically saying is affordable because what I don't I don't know what market studies you're looking at and the legislative body in my opinion is not a barometer. It's got to be something a little more economical. Somebody who's actually looking at all of the, you know, what are the wages in within a certain area. You look at Royy's medium income and and you just think how many can afford a half million dollar househ

and it's just a struggle. We want to give them the American dream allow to have a house. This would not be a lot of yard but it would certainly be a house. Mhm. But it'd be nice if it was a lot not a lot of yard but not a lot of um cost associated with it. So I I I appreciate the comment. I've heard it. It seems like to me it's a canned answer

because it just doesn't hold merit to what we're facing in the economy and the challenges that my kids and my grandkids are going to be facing when they want to go buy a house. All we're doing is buying building these brand new houses and they're half million more and it's like they they don't come out of high school making six figures. they some of them maybe come out with with um inheritances which allow them to do that but I don't think in our area that people are walking out with money to be able to afford half million dollar houses and survive and so as I look at this and I look at how it is being proposed I I don't I don't agree I don't agree that it's going to it's going to help us with the affordable housing when like I said you're still putting half million dollar house just on a small lot.

Okay.

So, so I I completely see where you're coming from and again I wish I I had a great response and as as Steuart, we're a land development company. We're going to build this out and we'll sell lots to builders and and typically, you know, and and as I look at these builders, I see their their proformas and how much it cost them and how much they sell it for and how much they can pay for lots. Um, and it's just a simple function of if they get a lot a certain size, they got to maximize what they can put on it. And, you know, yeah, you're right. A a 3500 or 4,000 foot lot is probably going to be uh, you know, a $400,000 home.

And, um, I I wish I knew a way to to change that. um you know and and um somebody asked Steve if he he does market studies and you know track tracks that um well we do our best but really the the the big builders the underwriters the banks they do do that and you know if there was a product that I knew I could build and sell for 150,000 I would love to do that and you know We're, in fact, that's a a a passion of mine. I'm I'm constantly studying ways to do that,

and I don't have an answer yet. Um, and as far as, you know, our kids not being able to buy that. We have a housing crisis. You know, I don't know what the latest number is, 50,000 people in the state, uh, that, uh, need somewhere to live and don't have it. Would buy if they could. Um, and really what happens is, you know, regardless of what's built, you know, the top one in 20, the top 5% of people that, like you said, have the six figure incomes, they end up being the ones that buy the new homes. And so I I agree, there's this whole portion of the population that is not being addressed. A and you mentioned it, the filtering. I mean, if somebody moves in a new house where where they were becomes available or that apartment becomes available and and people can work their way up. I I do agree as it's still wildly imbalanced. Um I feel like this is is a step towards that. this is, you know, barring towards the missing middle housing that allows for that um upward mobility, but it's not it's not solving it. I I mean, and again, I I would welcome any ideas on on how to solve it. You know, our mission is to move the needle in that, but it's it's not a simple it's not a simple answer. And um you know, we're doing our best,

right? And I and I've made this statement before. When we look at the style houses that are currently down there, we don't see the the styles that we're seeing being developed. We don't see the the cathedral ceilings and all the things that are being put in there that cost more money to be put into a home. And so when we look at affordable, can we look at, you know, building something that's in the style of what's surrounding them in a lower option? I mean, we know we can build a home for 250,000. We know one can be built. And we know it doesn't have to be fancy. It doesn't have to have all the nicities because she I remember nine kids in a, you know, a four bedroomedroom house and we all just survived. Um, and sometimes you just live where you can afford. But if we're not looking at opportunities, and I and I get that sometimes we have and because it's scary when we look at houses that were built in the 30s and 40s, their values at 450,000, too. And and and for us to say, okay, you know, starter homes can be the older homes. Well, right now the market's just killing it. And so, uh, for me, I I don't I don't know if I buy into this affordability thing on smaller lots. I just don't because

it just doesn't feel like you're creating a um affordability. You're it's certainly going to be more affordable than a 600 or 700,000 you're building on, you know, halfacre lot someplace else. I get that. But still, for the area and the medium income, it just doesn't feel like it's an affordable house on a smaller lot. I I think you made your point like, thank you. I I appreciate it. One one quick question though in response. I mean, I know that the density is a concern. If we if we cut that density in half, do you think that helps that problem or hurts it?

Well, can I interject here? I just my concern isn't about economics. We don't have any control over that. We don't have any control over what people can sell something for, what people can buy for. My concern is strictly just what's the best application for this property? And my question is, is this is zoned R18? Is there any reason why we can't develop it as an R18 and still be profitable? Right. Again, it's not even a question of profitability. Is there just any reason why this property can't be developed reasonably as an R18? And I apologize. I was going to come around to that. Why can't we just go to one R8? Why do we have to co color it as affordable thing and and and put more units on it? Well,

I don't think he's colored this as affordable. I mean, it is smaller lots and but I I think you've been very careful. Yeah, we we try and say fair to you because that's closer to the reality, you know, and and again, I don't think that's for 95% of the people it's even attainable. But uh yeah,

and and if to to be fair, if he came in and said, you know, we're building $250,000 lots here, all the neighbors would still be upset because then it's so much less than the value around them. I mean, like there there's a lot of discussion that could be here. And I I think it's dangerous to go down the road of economics. I'm I'm kind of in between because I look at this and everybody else that's come into Roy City would have been proposing town homes, high density housing and this kind of a thing asking for reszone. You came in and proposed single family homes which I actually really appreciate because in the same lot um what is it 4.75 acres I think is what I read in the packet. So back the napkin math 56 town homes or apartments could be built on that same lot. He could easily be here standing here proposing that same density. And I think all of us would look at that and be like, "Holy crap, that's a bad place to put 56 town homes." Now, I I to your point that you're making, I think 43 is probably really heavy on the density there. I do appreciate that it is single family homes and that's what we've heard from residents all the time is like, "Quit building multi-family residences. single and then we get called Soviet hamsters, I guess, if we build single family homes. I I I honestly I don't understand what direction to go if if we, you know, just listen to what everybody's saying all the time because it's just we're going back and forth and it's a giant tugof-war. But I I really do appreciate that it is single family. I think if we can lower that density down, I I think the concept and I'm okay with a development agreement in this case and typically I'm kind of against development agreements because I think we need to find zones and and things that people can just come in and build. But I think in this case where it is single family, I think there's a spot in between there where a development agreement could be very reasonable in increasing over what could be built there in the R18, but somewhere way less than the 43 that's kind of proposed

here. And that that's kind of where I'm at in my my thinking. And I'd love to hear other thoughts. Yeah, I'm I'm definitely a little bit shy of that 43 option on this space. I as well. Yeah, that's what I was thinking the entire time. So, yeah, like what would be an appropriate number to recommend to the C? So, assuming if we did, what would be an appropriate I I don't know the answer to that. I mean, that's the current zoning.

That's what's appropriate is what it's zoned, but that the purpose of a development agreement is what's the best application for this property that we can come up with for the for the the owner and the residents to keep continuity. That's But if everyone agrees on housing, don't we just approve and then let the council sort that out? That's

because to me, all we do is say, is it is it appropriate? Yeah. Do people like it? No. But then that's why they vote for the council. I mean, it comes unfortunately like I agree with Steve. And then if they when they come in and they decide all the ins and the outs and they never get as many houses as they want after they say you need this exit and this garbage can and this here and these, I just think you we kind of have to just do what is appropriate for the city and then let the city council have the fight. Well, and I I think an important point that you bring up, Sam, is a city council is fundamentally different than a planning commission. We're we're not elected by the people. We're appointed by the mayor with consent from the city. Like we don't have communications with developers. Like that's inappropriate for us to do. Those are exparte. Um I know there's discussions online that were in the back pocket of like we literally don't have those types of discussions. But the council can have those types of discussions in in their capacity. And so that that's kind of where I'm at. I know I can't make a motion, but my my thought is is in some form I think we recommend this on and then let them sort out what the appropriate density is. But I I think we do need to note that I think at least from my perspective, and I'll reach out to our city council should this move forward, is that there needs to be a density quite a bit substantially less than than 43 if it is somewhere above

the R18. And that kind of comes down to like when all the committees get involved in the fire department and everyone looks at everything. And I mean I think that's a discussion for the people that make those decisions. Isn't that more of our role though, Steve? Like if people present it and it's appropriate may not be favorable, but if it's appropriate, we kind of have a responsibility to say this is worst case scenario. Now you guys go fight it out. I mean that's how I understand our role. And maybe I missed it. Different than if it just was a resone request. That's what I mean. I feel like we don't get to decide.

We say it meets the and then you have to go fight. Unfortunately, that's how the system is set up to keep it continuity of fairness, I guess. But you know, but I I think continuity single family homes is single family homes. Lot size is lot size. I mean,

the size of home is is mainly what matters. I mean, I I appreciate Commissioner Tanner's push on on affordability and um you know, maybe they can do some of them and that's where the council can get in with the development agreement say, "Hey, we'll give you and this is just a number thrown out. We'll give you the 43, but certain percentage have to be this size or you know those are things that the the council can do, but your your question is right. Is this appropriate or not?" And you can always, you know, forward to saying that we think you know, give you a positive recommendation of the development agreement and then if you want to throw in, you know, somewhere less than 43, I probably wouldn't

give a number, but let them the council have their their their say. Maybe another way to look at this would be if we had a proposal to reszone this property to let's say R16 and these lots are half that size, how would we feel about it? because that's essentially what we're saying with this development agreement is we're applying a much smaller zone in the middle of an R18. Is that appropriate? Would we think that was appropriate?

But if we think about that presentation we had before from the guy from the legislature that came in and making all the deals with like out west where they have the little houses and then the middlesize and then the bigger houses. I mean, this is to me, this is kind of similar where you have established neighborhoods and now you have some vacant land and then you have some I mean, unfortunately, $400,000 is more affordable. I didn't make when I got out of college, I made $9 an hour to work for the state of Utah. They don't start at $9 anymore. And I've got kids of this age, too. And I'm like, well, you guys better figure it out. That's what my mom told me. Unfortunately, that's what I tell my kids. And they're 28, 24, and 23. So, I think that they have the established homes and then the city council can figure it out with the DRC and all the coding people and the ins and outs and the exits and all that stuff. That isn't our role. We just decide if it's a starting point for someone else is what I kind of always look at. And people have the right to do what they want with their property as well as people that live around it. I know that's not a popular opinion, but I'm a teacher, too.

And you'd be at about 30. You'd be at about 30 units at the R16 if I did the math right. But we can't change that. We propose an R16 reszone in the middle of an R18. How would I thought we couldn't change that? You can make that recommendation. You can put something, you know, somewhere around. So, we would approve with conditions. You could. Is that what you're saying? Recommend approve with conditions. Again, the council's the one that's going to finally decide it. I I think if you're going to I think that's fair. Give some sort of number less than 43, at least. Yeah, I think that's give reasons why.

Um if you really don't have reasons why, just forward it on as it is. And the the council will get this, you know, communication dialogue in the packet. So, I got the feeling from Ryan, though, he'd be more comfortable if we were a little more specific on the conversation detail, but I'm fine to saying there's a concern with the density. I mean, I I don't know. But I think you make a good point too, Jason, that you know, if if this was an R16, what would the dialogue be here? Because that's kind of what we're talking about in the development agreement, then would you need the development agreement or it just seems to me like a way of getting around that. So, and we would look at it totally different, but we shouldn't.

I apologize. I'm sorry. So, you make that motion and then let's vote. I'm happy to make the motion. I I'm not comfortable with the proposal. Um because if this were a reszone, we I think we'd flatly deny it. But I mean with the condition of the R16, but that's our to make a a rational and reasonable recommendation. That's what I mean.

And to me, a proposal of a smaller zone in the middle of an R18 isn't appropriate. That's so my if I were to make a a motion if you that's what you're asking me to do. My motion I motion that we forward a negative recommendation to the council for the proposed development agreement and then they'll come back. No, I made No, I mean then then people I know it would still go to the city council to either way to review but people could still come back and he said hypothetically know that I've turned around and I said I've I'm making a motion for the record

I am making I'm proposing a motion that we recom that we forward a negative recommendation to the council for the proposed development agreement. second in before we have a second. Is there any discussion to that? So now they'll So I I want you explain that. I want to make sure I understand what you're saying. You don't agree with the our I'm not in favor of the current saying. So the motion on the table is to deny and then let the council decide if because this will forward on to the council and then they can decide if they could do a different Okay, I agree with that. Thank you.

So the motion is for a negative recommendation for the development agreement. Braden second. Seconded. Have a motion second and this will be a roll call vote. Make sure when you're voting you understand this is for negative. So if you say no, you're meaning you're wanting positive. So a yes vote is to yes is to agree with that it's negative. Yes. Okay. I think I've forgotten what order to go this in. So we'll just go commissioner Tanner. I was that yes. Yes. I Commissioner Bills. Yes. Commissioner Callie. Yes. Commissioner Felt. Hi. Commissioner Graph. I. Commissioner Reid.

Hi. Okay. So, this will also go to the the city council next week. Okay. We will move on to agenda item number six, which is a request for site plan and building elevation exceptions to the zoning code for Mountain America Credit Union located at approximately 1900 West and 5600 South. And if the applicants here, if they'd come forward, we'll wait just a minute before they present to us. U point of order. We are after 8:30 and there are rules. So if we need a motion to suspend rules for that and then I make that motion to be able to continue the meeting.

This is the next item. The next item is an administrative item. So administrative your rules and procedure says nothing new after 8 8:30. But we can't Is that okay for us to suspend the rules then? Okay. I I think it appropriate. I didn't expect three public hearings to go that long. So, did you make does somebody I did I made a move to a motion to suspend the rules in order to finish the items on the agenda. I'm okay to proceed. These these are administrative. So, was that a second? Second. Okay. Commissioner Felt seconded. So, all in favor of suspending the rules say I. I. Any opposed? Let's get through this. Okay. Wow. We've actually gone past 8:30. I know. This is crazy.

Like the twice twice in 12 years. Are you the applicant for the next item? I am. I'm a representative. My name is Brooke Bean and I work at Sanders Associate Architects. We are the architects for Mountain America Credit Union.

Um, so we are coming before you today as a business, which hopefully is refreshing after our huge discussions about not having businesses in Roy. Um, we have the property on the southwest corner of 1900 South and 5600 West. Um, Mountain America has purchased the property after the road widening of 5600 and we ended up with a challenging property line that has a 45 degree corner that cuts off the corner um of 56 and 1900. There is a current zoning current zoning ordinance that we have to be within 15 feet of the property line, no more and no less. Um, sorry, they're distracting me. And we currently meet that setback off of 5600 West and are having a difficulty meeting that on 1900 West without creating a floor plan that's not usable for Mountain America Credit Union. So, we are asking for the exception to be 15 feet off of 5600 West, but not on 1900 West as shown in the site plan on the screen. And um yeah, so that is what we're here for. We are excited to try and come into the city of Roy for Mountain America Credit Union. This is actually the second site that they're looking at. the first site didn't work because of challenges and so now we're back here with another site with challenges. So we're hopeful that we can work through this um issue and get get this approved and get a Mountain America Credit Union in Roy City. Um and the other thing is there is a zoning ordinance where an the main entry is supposed to be on the

road. So, we have added an entry on 5600 South and just wanting your opinion on if that entry is appropriate. Um, it's gonna be up. So, one of the reasons why we are our hesitance to build any closer to 1900 is if any widening does happen. I don't want to our building to have to be a casualty of the road widening as we had all seen down 5600 South. And so, um, we have a workable plan that that works really well for Mountain America. It's a beautiful building where we like to use nice materials and we think that this would be a real asset on that corner. Thank you.

Thank you. Appreciate that. Any questions for the applicant? Have you Sorry, snuck way too fast. Sorry. Just have you met with the highway department because both of these roads, 1900 West and 5600 South, are state highways. Yes. So, they're going to ultimately be the ones who are going to decide whether an access is appropriate or not. Have you met with them yet? Um, we're actually not looking for access onto those roads. Um, we will use the the development access that's already there. Okay.

So, we're not we're not going to add any of that. It's just we're we're concerned that if 1900 did get wider, I don't know that there's future plans for that. We did try to reach out to you do to see and we didn't get a response in time for this meeting. Um we just worry that if we're 15 feet from our property line which is like the middle of the sidewalk there would be nowhere for them to go and those east parcels are so small already. I feel like they would take it from the west ones. I I don't have any backing to that. I just Okay. would like our building to stay because Mountain America is a great community partner. Sure. And I think when she was saying entrance, she meant physical entrance.

Okay. Yeah. I I apologize. I'm looking at this going I proposed to the building. Okay. Sorry. Thank you. Yes. For clarifying. Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you. You can sneak away now.

All right. Steve. Um, as mentioned, this is just for some exceptions to the zoning code. Uh, the planning commission does have that ability to look at and if there's extraordinary circumstances to make some modifications. Um, when I review it, I just I can only go by what the code says and what is required. Um, as mentioned, this is the southwest corner 56 and 19. To answer the question, 19 won't widen anymore. If it did, it would go to the west. Um, Rancheritos, I think that's the place, or Beetho, whatever. That building was actually supposed to be torn down so it could go wider. Um, but there was some, um, how do you put this polite? Good. Some talk. There we go. Of not taking down that building um to to leave it there. So, they they did lose a turn lane. I can't remember if it was to go west or to go east, but they did lose some stuff there.

Wow. We'll get rid of him now. Rookie. Rookie.

Um, so it is not for vehicle access. So the request like as mentioned is our code says that you have a 15 foot setback from 19 and 56. It's not more, it's not less, it's 15 feet. Um the when the ordinance was originally being written, it was zero to 15, so you could go all the way up to the street or have a setback. The council felt that these roads, it was more appropriate to have a 15 foot, which is not bad. It's one of those that, you know, if I have a a coffee shop, then we can have seating out in between the the sidewalk in the building to make it a little bit more um walkable, accessible. um city's trying to create a downtown. So staff would recommend to deny that request just because our our code does state it has to be 15 ft. As for the access point, the code says very specifically that the main access to the building will be off of the street or corner, not in the back. So, um, what they've got proposed here is a secondary man door that kind of doesn't say, "Hey, you know, we're we're a walking community. Let's come into the building." It's it's and I know and understand what the the bank is trying to do and why it's there, but just our code does not allow for um a secondary type access. It needs to be the primary. It needs to be big. It needs to be open and and and show. So that's hence why their request to to get those modifications to the code. Um so staff's recommendation is deny this request so they build to what the code is requiring

and the alternative is a variance. Uh, variance to what? What? What of the the setback for as far as the set the I guess you could go for a variance, but is that a hardship of the land or the building type? I I I just don't think the the hearing officer would be able to say yes to that. That's why we didn't go down that road of variance. But you said there's something in the code that allows the planning commission to do what? Again,

you can make modifications simp issues and will allow you to have a a bigger setback than typical and yes, we see there's issues on a man door, the main entrance on the street. But realize that you make those exceptions, everybody's going to want them.

Yeah. This and this is where the public got needs to understand I'm their friend when they make application and do the development. I'm their enemy at this meeting and then become their friend again. So I'll have to apologize to her tomorrow when we start the development. But tonight our code is just very specific for a downtown and if you remember right Wells Fargo had an entrance on the corner. Can I ask a clarifying question on the purpose of that code? Uhu. Is part of the reason that we have that code um due to ADA accessibility? No, because they would be required to do that regardless if there was an access up front or in the back.

Okay. It's just to have an access from the walkable area, not necessarily when you look at it downtown, like 25th Street for example, you park on the street, you walk through a door. They'll have a back door to the back parking lot, but that's kind of a secondary. It's not double doors, not, you know, set up like the main entrance. Yeah. I can't quite tell what the um sidewalk setup is here, wrapping around the edge of the building or where it cuts off right there on the corner. This is all concrete. This is all concrete. No, you're good. Okay.

I don't know what you're smiling at me for. Thinking if we deny we're three for three. I know, right? Four for four. Four for four. No, we approved one. So, three for four. I don't know how to do anything else. Yeah, we had a question. This is a administrative item. It's not open to the public. I'm sorry. Sorry, I'm speaking for you. No, you're spot on. But if it's for the applicant, we can bring the applicant back up. Do you mind coming back up for a minute? Oh, it was a member of the public. Okay. Yeah. Sorry, I thought it was one of the planning commissioners to ask you a question. Oh, no, that's it. It

was from the public and it's not a public comment. Okay. I did have a clarification on how we came up with the design for the door on 5600. There is a a picture in the code where it's supposed to look like a storefront for 25th Street kind of and that's what I tried to mimic with the big large windows that would be like display windows um with the recessed door like you see on 25th. That's why we recessed the door, thinking it would provide a little bit of shelter as you're trying to enter in and try to mimic that picture that I found in your guys' zoning code. So, that's how we came up with that one. Okay. Thank you. Yeah,

you could take the one on the south, put a north and one on the north and south fine. Well, that's why she's here. I've already told her no and so I don't see that we have much choice here. So,

let's just get it over with. Make a recommendation to deny the request for site plan. No recommendation. No, no recommendation. This is only Okay, so uh we deny the request for site plan and building eleations. There's no public comment. It's administrative item. That that's what we were just saying. Can Can the owner representative from Mountain America speak? Go ahead and come up.

Yeah. Uh just to re uh my name is Joe Evans. I'm the real estate manager at Mountain America Credit Union. Uh just to reiterate, uh Brooke and um Sanders and Associates team. Um, we've we have desired to get in the city of uh the city of Roy and this community and be a part of it for uh I mean I've been touring almost a decade. Uh we've looked at Harmons. We've uh we purchased a site of the old Firestone. Uh tore that building down, cleaned it up real nice. Uh recently sold that to a vet clinic so the Pet Pro can expand their doggy daycare and well the vet clinic. So they closed about a week ago. So, we're excited that that one's getting developed, but we do understand the challenges of the code and this parcel kind of got hacked up a little bit by UD do on both sides. So, um but we just driving into this meeting, we feel like this is the premier corner in town and we we're excited to hopefully be a part of the community. That's all.

Yeah. And we'd love to have you like truly like Yeah. But anyway, I just Yeah, we're we're invested in this a lot of years. Is there is there no way you can design this so it meets this the requirements? I mean if you chop the corner off the building, but we're we're trying to avoid the same fate of the Wells Fargo. So is there any way I mean at least for the entrance to flip the building and put like just mirror it and put the main entrance out on 5600 South? That's more of a Brook question. No, that's one issue. I'm just one issue. Say that again. I'm just saying I know there's two issues here we're we're dealing with that at least with one if you could just mirror the building and put that main entrance out on 5600 South I think that would

alleviate the one concern. Yeah. But I mean help you here. Yeah. 99% of our members park and walk in the building and I uh we've had this issue in other cities like Farmington for example and uh we we gave the door but over a 10-year period almost nobody used it because people park and go in but we are trying to at least create a design element to um but it would force every member to park and walk around the building is but again I'm not an architect so

double entrance on both sides There are that's a possibility but there are security issues with that and um we you know dealing with um just watching things but we um I don't know Brooke any of that sorry I'm not an architect. No that's okay. Um double doors on both sides is something that Mountain America has explored before. um they I think that that would maybe be something that they would be open to. We just felt that that that facade met that storefront zone in your zoning code and that's why we designed it that way.

I'm just thinking if you put the double doors on the north and the single door on the south, it's still an access point and it doesn't prevent anybody from coming in that way. True. And I and I I'm almost I'm inclined to say that they would prefer double doors on both if if we were to go down that route. Okay. The code doesn't say you can't have two entrances. Main one has to be on the front. Yeah.

Well, entrance is an entrance as far as I'm concerned. Like if I go to a Maverick, the main entrance is on the one side, but I will park my car on the side and come in the side entrance. So to me, it's an access point. It's to me it's a question of aesthetics. You know what the main entrance could be on 5600 South, but again that doesn't prohibit anybody from parking and coming on the south if they wanted to if it even if it's just a single door. But I'm I'm not a real estate agent. Yeah. Or an architect. But I'm just trying to think of ways to help. Help me to understand the Wells Fargo effect they keep talking about as far as doing a diagonal.

The main interest was up front. Well, on the front on the corner that front 5619, we know that they had to chop it at an angle. Um, and it sounds like that's not a preferred thing for your building and and I'm not sure.

Um, if we're wanting to put it in, and I know it's not your stereotypical design. I was in one of your buildings earlier today and it looks just kind of like that without a doubt. But um can it be a a non-typical building with that same kind of design and still meet a setback that it slides over? You're just cutting that one at a diagonal and and and redesign it. Still with the same kind of architectural look, just just a little different zone. Yes, we could we could redesign the building to to meet the setbacks. We were just trying to keep the brand integrity that people have come to expect when they when they see Mountain America. We we have this design with the double pitch butterfly roof to as a symbol for Mountain America. So, we were trying to keep brand identity across across branches so people know what they're seeing without having to use bold colors or the other things that you see other people doing to identify their their corporate identity. Um, we try and use just really nice materials, natural materials to make the buildings beautiful and then let the architecture be similar enough through different sites to create that brand identity. Um, and we I I think the bigger fear is that if it does widen, like we don't want to have to tear it down is is our concern. But

for what it's worth, and this is just me speaking as Jason Everyday Joe, when I go to the bank, I'm just glad it's there. Yeah. I don't really care what it looks like. Yeah. I mean, and I know that you're trying to keep a trademark and a brand identity. I respect that. But if you're just trying to consider the general public, me, Jo, Jason, I'm just glad it's available and close by. So, if you can, I I would be happy if you could make it work here for sure as a resident of Roy somehow.

Okay. Thank you. It's not a public hearing and we've he's on the team. Can you come up to the mic? Okay. Sorry.

My name is Mike Medina. I'm with New Mark Mountain West. I'm the commercial broker that put this deal together. And I what I wanted to kind of articulate is we've seen Mountain America. We spent a lot of years trying to identify a site and they actually came to this corner and recognized the challenges with the narrowness and with the width of the of the of the roadway. Um there were some conversations about it being compared to like 25th Street in downtown and and 5600 and 1900. One of the challenges we saw is that we've got 50,000 cars going at this intersection per day. If we put an entrance towards the towards a road that does 30,000 cars per day, it's very it's not real feasible and safe for the members and for our employees to have people coming through the back door and running out onto a roadway if that makes sense. And and from an ADA perspective, it gets very challenging um to have them go around the building to enter into from 5600. So, there's a lot of challenges that happen. Um, and being, you know, being involved, I mean, I've been a broker here 26 years just in Weaver County alone. And a couple of things that I I would note there is when we get to an intersection like this, um, the board, we have to be very careful that the security is safe, the members are safe, and the employees are safe. And so, that's one of the challenges we run into here. Um, and we were really excited to have this be part of the entrance into Roy City. So, we got this new intersection, this new interchange, and it's right there. And so, anyway, we're we're doing everything we can uh as it relates to cutting a portion of the building off to make it feasible. It becomes challenging because you can't operate a full service branch at that point. And so, it's, you know, it's it becomes really not feasible to support the community with it. So, anyway, just want to make sure you guys are aware of that.

Yeah. I mean, because I think if we're going to do something like this, I think we've got to change the entire code that we've done because if we make exceptions here and like I really want to accommodate this one, but if we make exceptions here, I mean, it's going forward on every every business and that may be the right thing to do, but that I think is bigger than just the one one project. And and I I question um I mean obviously you've got kind of a cookie cut design. Kind of a weird phrase, right? You build the same kind of building everywhere you go. What is I mean what is the real risk of bringing it in conformity with what the city setback is? What's the real risk? I mean you can still do your double pitch in some part of it. there's just one side that faces, you know, 19 is going to look a little different. I mean, we're not saying you have to put the entrance on the corner. We're saying it has to be either on 19 or 56. So, if you move the 56 and put the double entrance on there and on the other side on the on the south side and all you do is just build the building so that it conforms. I I don't know. I think you can accommodate both.

It's a good question. One of the things, one of the challenges why you see a consistent prototypical site plan or a space plan for like an In-N-Out, Chick-fil-A, um, Mountain America, all of this, there's a reason for it, and it's it's just because of the operations. They find that if they orient the offices, lending offices, the the branch in a certain way, the members or the customer is able to get their Chick-fil-A sandwich quickly, their their burgers quickly, or their money. And what happens is is when you start cutting a building off, what you do is you limit the you basically take a certain amount of volume that a branch can do and you eliminate let's say two offices or three offices. What that does is it alters the production of the branch which makes it not serviceable which becomes a Wells Fargo or a company that doesn't so it's a long-term solution is what they're looking for.

Well, I and I don't see that you're cutting anything off. I'd see you adding if you look at the current design and just say you're going to come into conformity with setback on 19 actually adding and then the curb I mean make it a waiting room. I mean I I do remember when I went down there today that you had to go to the kiosk and wait for somebody to invite you into the office to talk about things. Yes, that couldn't be a sitting area for that. instead of an office. It could be that where that the kiosk is and they can they can go in and punch in and sit down and wait for their invitation to come in an office. I I I just I'm really struggling with why if if I may. We can't be that way. Yeah, if I may. Are we going to have a work session this this month?

Yes. I think we should talk about the attached ADUs and Okay. My my thought here is we're already three hours and 15 minutes way late. I I can't make motions, but my thought is we table this and just add this to our discussion at the at the work session, right? You can I mean because I I don't think we're getting anywhere. It doesn't sound like Yeah, doesn't sound like it. One thing to take into consideration is the narrowness of the parcel, too. That's one thing to take. So, what happens is what is the future of the site if if it's not this? My iPad. I can't can't read it. Thank you. It' just be to table it if we're

That's It's your guys's decision if you want to table it or continue on with what your motion. Well, we still have the motion that you made. I mean, that's still actually on the table. So, it'd have to be a substitute motion if we were to table. What motion is currently on the table? He had a table to deny it. I I have a motion to deny it. I think that's really all we can do at this point. Yeah. So, I'm going to second Now, that was just for the site plan because you said site plan. Yeah. Okay. So, I have a motion to deny the site plan and a second. And this will be voice vote. All in favor say I.

I. All opposed. Nay. I was n Oh, I should have said I. I'm sorry. I I say nay. I don't know. I just I think so. Are you for denying it or are you against denying it? I'm against denying it. Okay. So, Commissioner Bills and I are against. Okay. And then a motion for the architectural. Motion to deny architectural. A substitute motion. I'd like to have this discussed in a planning session where we can also address the impact to ADA. ADA is not a zoning issue. That's a building code issue. Mhm.

Thank you. I would still like to uh substitute motion to have this brought up during a work session. So we're table you're motioning it to table. Yes. Motion to table for work session. The architectural well this motion will be if her motion fails then it'll go back to the can I clarify that the architectural is in regards to the entrance situation not the setback. Okay. Then yes. So, I'd like to continue my motion. Okay. So, we have a motion to table it. Do we have a second? I'll second that. We have a second. All in favor of tableabling the architecture say I. I. Oh, I. Those opposed? Nay.

Nay. So, are we four to two? Okay. So, then it's tabled. Okay. Okay. My gosh, we can't work this hard right before school's out. And do we need a motion to move past the other agenda items or can I just do that as a chair move to the Okay, I I don't know what the You can just go MO to adjurnn. Okay, I think we just skip commissioner's minute and staff update unless you have anything burning, Steve. Okay, motion's in order. Make a motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. Motion a second. All in favor? I any opposed? What? We're

seconded. You're good. No, we're usually we're usually 20 minutes.

I sit down. I gave you plenty of rope. I know you did. And I didn't disagree with what you were saying.

I always want to make sure everybody has a chance to express.

I got building.

Yeah, but it's costing three times as much because the building cost tariffs, gas prices. I sometimes it's just sometimes you walk away feeling like you did no good. That's where I was at. No, I get it. And I like the idea, but to me, it just felt like don't do what

for up to them, not to me. between a situation.

Well, they they take public comment and then they take that into consideration on their decision. So, it should it can work. Well, there are certain things that they can't ask legally. What's the building design? How tall are they? All those things. There are certain things they cannot ask legally at these times. Those are this is allowed. So there are certain things that they can and can't prov.

Well, no, it it is because Traffic is traffic. You're saying stay out of the road, but you have to cross the street. You have to cross either either. It's one of those it's it's situation. There's always going to be cars regardless if this development happens or not. But more or less cars. Well, even if there's 20 homes, there's more cars. But not let's be fair. there would be a and it's but what I'm asking you literally said what we said should