Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I'll call to order our work session tonight for the Royce City Planning Commission for May 26, 2026. And we will start with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Commissioner Bailey.

I pledge allegiance 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.

Right. Our first item tonight is the continued discussion on garage sales. So the last time we talked,

We had a good discussion. You wanted me to invite the code enforcement officer to come to kind of answer a few more questions. So I've got Brock Gresham here, who's our code enforcement. Now, he doesn't have anything written in front of him because I asked him two hours ago to come. I forgot. But I know there was a few questions on why, how come, and what for. So I'll let you guys kind of ask him.

I'll start. So one of the questions I know that the public had had was, is there a way to address whatever the situation is that's come up with existing code? Is that something from your perspective that there's just a fundamental gap? You know, we were just not able to do it.

That's what I've had to try to do so far because we don't have anything that addresses yard sales.

Okay.

But I think that biggest... Well, the biggest issues was, and probably the reason why I brought it to Steve initially was because of the enduring yard sales, the ones that continuously go and they leave them up all summer long. And there really isn't anything that addresses that. We can put it in. I mean, Can you address it as like outdoor storage? Maybe, but is it outdoor storage? It's yard sale stuff. And as I thought about it, across the Wasatch Front, you can look in just about everybody's municipal code and everybody has a yard sale municipal code. Something in ordinance that addresses yard sales. And I thought that it would be easy enough to send to you guys and you guys could make it as whatever you guys wanted it to be. If you felt like it needed to be strict, I don't necessarily know it needs to be crazy strict, but maybe something that addresses a timeframe that things should be moved and how they should look. Yeah, that's helpful.

Thank you. So what circumstance would have to be in play for... the state to require me to have a business license. So if I'm every weekend have goods mostly new being sold out of my garage, doesn't that constitute a business? So wouldn't I have to conform to some sort of state code?

Well, the issue comes is our ordinance say you can't run a business out of your garage or on your, in your property.

So that means you couldn't, if you interpret that in a literal sense, it means you can't have a garage sale at all.

Right. Some of the conflict is what our business license requires or where you can actually have a business versus yard sales are typical.

I don't think that's what we're trying to do. We're not trying to take yard sales completely away from anybody. I think they're let people do what they want on their property sort of a thing. Sure. That is a good point.

As far as what's already in place, if you're operating like a business, you know, if you're doing it more than one weekend at a time, to me that constitutes a business. Whereas most people in the spirit of a yard sale, it's one weekend, maybe two. And they're shipping the rest of it.

Same thing applies. If I go and say, hey, you're operating a business, they're just like, no, this is a yard sale. Where... That's where the definitions will come in that you guys make up also.

And just to be clear, businesses aren't regulated by the state in terms of the business license. They're with the city. But like the sales tax, you'd have to register with the tax commission, the BBA, those types of things. So just to clarify that a little bit. What I guess maybe kind of if I can question, because I wasn't here for the last work session, is you're looking more for a definition. So if there is kind of those things that are in perpetuity, right now it's just kind of unclear, you know, do they need a business license? Is this a garage sale? So just something that puts into place. So there's something that you can look at and be like, okay, does this meet the definition of what a yard sale is? Or is this something that's beyond the scope of what we determine a yard sale is?

And then putting some criteria behind all of it also. Yeah. Yeah.

And the discussion came up last time was, do we need to actually implement new policy or is there something that's in our current code that we could modify to help with that framework a little better? That's sort of where this all has come to. And that's why I'm asking the questions I'm asking is how much do we really need to generate new code here versus can we just, do we have, you know, with your question, can we just modify what's already here?

Sounds like the answer is no. That's what it is. Well, the easiest thing, and as Brock said, talked about and most everybody in the last time it gave you six or seven different things and the two that you guys were liking are just definitions yeah it's not in the code it's just defined what a garage sale is so then when it says you know however long or how many times a year you can do it then brock has that ability to say you know you're in violation of this and this is definition of it right so the two you guys like were clinton's and ogden's they did have a timeframe. They did have kind of a definition of what you can. I mean, some of the ones that go on all year long or all summer long, you'd think at some point the stuff starts diminishing, you know, from 10 tables to down to one, but there's a couple of just 10 tables, stay 10 tables and they're all full.

And I think I mentioned outdoor storage and that is one way to like, That's one way that I've thought about addressing it in the past. But I don't know that that's the spirit of outdoor storage. Outdoor storage is one thing to me. It's not yard sale in your front yard where people are out there trying to sell this stuff.

And just so you know, we also had some strong input from the public that was here in that meeting, really pushing back on more code, more regulation.

So does that mean if we decide the It sounds like the problem is like the pallet sales. People get this stuff and they're selling it all the time. That's because I go yard selling and that's what I see. The same people have their pallets that they're buying from Amazon and they're selling those all year long.

Very well could be what they're doing. But like you said, I get a handful of complaints every summer about like the enduring yard sale.

When we have those though. Mm-hmm.

All summer? Or is it my wife? So I can keep my wife from going.

My question is though, we have those and we know those are going on and they happen every weekend. And then if we define the yard sales, does that mean then we're going to have to turn around and look at, like, does that constitute a business that people can have a business in their garage? Because how are you going to stop that?

I think we already have.

So then they could, then that's when you could just go in and enforce that and stop that. Okay. So I understand. That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure.

And I, just as we discussed last time, I'm a fan of one that defines both the frequency that you can have these during the year, as well as a timeframe for them so that it's, look, you've got 48 hours. It can be a weekend or, you know, if you want to pick two days during the week, consecutive days, and then you can do this three, four times a year. I mean, like you said, I'm not looking to be punitive here, but I go, there's got to be something that sets some sort of a parameter and it's got to be sightly. I mean, I don't know. I know there's been a few that we've looked at there that I was also a fan of.

There's like six months in the summer, six times a year on a weekend.

We can look at Quentin's eight times up to three days when I was reading through the packet. I mean, that could be 24.

Well, eight days calendar year. with no more than three consecutive days in one event. So you really get three events in eight days. Yeah. Two for three days and one for two days. We're going to go to Ogden, which is a little, I don't think it says how many times you can do it in a year.

No more frequently than three days on any one calendar.

Three days in one quarter.

So four times a year, three days.

Another thing that I was kind of going through in my head We have a sign ordinance and I understand it. The sign ordinance applies to the property that it signs on. So you have these people that come out and they bring their yard sale signs and they put them on fences and street corners. I don't know if there's a way that you guys could word or would want to think about incorporating how that comes back to the yard sale.

I think we could make legislation on that all we want. I don't think it's going to stop the problem.

Don't we already have an anti-earth sale sign? It can't be on telephone poles and stop signs.

You just can't put anything on stop signs, telephone poles in public. Well, now you can't put it in public right away, thanks to the state, because you can't look at... It's for political signs only, so I can read the content, but the state or the Supreme Court says you can't read the content, so... Help yourself. But the state even says you can't be on telephone poles or stop signs. Yeah.

That poll on the 44800 and 1900.

And it will already take.

There's like seven kegs of nails in there. Oh, it's fine.

I'm not worried about the sign ordinances. It's just more of, you know, which definition do we like of the two? You want to modify them a little bit? Did you have a thought, Brock?

You started to share something.

No. You see, you already, and then that's where your thought ended. Probably spend an inordinate amount of time every weekend.

And I lost my train of thought. I don't even remember what I was doing. I think we were talking about signs, but Monday morning, it's take-down sign day. That's where I figured you were going with that.

If I think about it, I'll bring it back up a little bit.

I like Clinton's. I think it's close to us, so it would be consistent.

The other one's Ogden.

They're close to us. I like Ogden's.

Yeah, I like Clinton's.

Quarterly, once a quarter for two or three days.

I think I lean towards Clinton's just because it defines it a little bit more of what it is, but I'm not married to any one of them. I'm really... Do you like just once a quarter for three days, so it gives you four opportunities? people are going to do in the winter time no so you know your your first quarter and last quarter probably next night so maybe this one works better i can do it three times in the summer yeah versus once a quarter that makes that makes sense and then just defining what garage sale is you know moving cell junk estate typical goods on your driveway carport oh okay

Do you want to add pallet in there?

No, but I am thinking about, like, you see often as you're driving, you see, like, the boutiques pop up at Mother's Day and Easter and those kind of things. And so is that still okay to do for people? Because you see that quite often.

In people's yards?

Yeah, you see them have their little boutiques out there where they're selling, like, flower arrangements for Mother's Day or whatever.

I usually see those in commercial zones, not necessarily residential areas.

I guess if it's in their yard, would it still be considered a yard sale?

Well, I would stop, but I don't know.

I see those in the order of 19 and 56. These just popped up on a Friday night.

Oh, yeah, I guess. Okay.

I mean, technically, they're supposed to have a business license and a sales tax number and all that, but most of them are gone by noon and they're up at 5. This would be on property. More residential. I like this one.

I do too. Anything in there we don't like? Just while you're...

The one thing that sticks out to me is when you're talking about goods, it says any new. I mean, really, is that what a yard sale is? Like new or gently used? Like new, gently used. I'm great, but... Or just unwanted. But the fact that the new is in there, you know, if we're trying to avoid... The whole concept of the Amazon buying pallets and making it a business.

I still think that that gets limited by some of the other language that's in here. I really do. Because I mean, if you end up, I think there's other things that they could sell that are new that wouldn't necessarily be a problem.

Like my Bob Ross grilled cheesemaker. Hello. There you go.

Fair enough. Bob Ross cheesemaker. He made it.

He does. I have a Bob Ross grilled cheesemaker.

The little grilled cheesemaker.

Has his little face on it, got it for five bucks. Kids at school love it.

If you were going to sell it, let me know. I was proud of you and love it.

You can borrow it, but you can't have it.

Oh, okay. I was like, I would too. He's got everything Bob Ross.

Anytime you want to borrow it, but you can't have it.

He's got a power drink or something. This is Bob Ross. He's got a picture up on his ceiling.

Well, I can't wait to send Brody an email with a picture of my eyebrows.

I think you should let us borrow it.

I can borrow it. We're going to give you lunch. You want to borrow it? Stop on over. I'll give it to you.

Okay. Next item is continued discussion on multifamily open space conversion when near a public park. Thank you very much.

Have a good night. Good luck. Yeah, that's great. Thanks.

See you guys. So this is just a continued, I didn't put anything on the slideshow. The water conservation plan kind of talked about an idea of if I live within an X distance of a park, we'd have to define that. Then I can convert some of my required open space to other things so the park can be used. So last time we discussed this in February, there isn't a lot of cities out there with this type of language. It's more of in lieu of. Pay us money in lieu of putting your park in. Pay us money in lieu of having an open space requirement. We're pretty much built out, so there's really no need for us to get money from them to build a park. I guess you could do there. I digress there. So the question really is, I gave you kind of some language. And I will admit, this is an AI generated, ask a question, give me some answers. But it at least can get you flowing, you know, asking some right questions, or I like this idea, or I don't like that idea. I could bring it up if you want.

Just if I can ask just a preliminary question, Steve. Remind me what the impetus of this was. Like what was the reason why?

Yeah. Well, in the water conservation plan, it had kind of nine or ten things that we should look at doing in order to conserve water. So right now, our multifamily requires 45% of the project to be impervious surface or pervious surface, there we go. And of that, 25 has to be active open space. But if I'm within a half mile or quarter mile of a park, why do I need the active space when I've got an active space at a park? So it's kind of looking at reducing that or eliminating that requirement because of the park. I mean, I think the best one would be Rail Runner to West Park. Or if 4800 South happened to got rezoned and they were gonna build that one, they're right across the street from a park. So there's places out there that this could apply and maybe help conserve water on their end and be able to use the parks more on the other end. I could if you want we can continue this discussion I can go take some pictures of places that have done this active but it's more it's not grass it's like it got some picnic tables or chess tables or you know other little activities that they can do it's going to be hardscape of some sort but it's not open active grass That way we can say, okay, you take that 25% of that active space and do these types of things with it. So they're more passive stuff rather than play football or throw a ball in. So the language isn't the greatest thing, but when there's nothing out there, I had to kind of... throw something out just to see what it can do. It did give some examples of what we could do to our code towards the end if we wanted to modify our existing, you know, modify AE or add AF or something just to do it. So some of the questions are, you know, what's that minimum distance, a quarter or half mile? What's the percentage we could reduce it down? Can they build extra units if they reduce it down? I mean, it's a big discussion. I'm not in a hurry to have, you know, try to force this to get going on it quickly. So it's more of, should I continue to pursue down this? It's a pristine topic. Yeah.

So, oh, continue, sorry. Yeah, it's like if they build a multifamily alongside 5,600 for houses used to be, Municipal Park is within a half mile.

Now, this would just be in the R3, R4, R5 zones, not the multi.

I know. Just an illustration of what could happen.

Yep. We still have a few places that can be developed multifamily and that are near parks.

So it's like Rail Runner. It would be that's within a quarter mile area. Not as a crow fly, or as a crow fly?

Well, they actually have three access points right to the trail. Okay, they do. They take you right to it.

Okay.

I have it written down there. Phase three is going to have two additional access points. Yeah.

All are under construction. I didn't want to get run over. No, you're fine.

So is there something you want me to just continue on? I can give you some examples of what open space could look like.

I have a couple of thoughts.

I think Brody was going to... Just a couple of questions. Just a couple of questions because, I mean, I am interested in this concept. So we talked about multifamily. I mean, what could hypothetically be built there? Would it just be single family homes? Could it be an apartment building? Would it be...

Anything the zone allows. So it could be, say there are four, they could have single family homes on 5,000 square foot lots, 12 units an acre, whether it be an apartment building or townhomes. So there's a variety of things that they could do. Or if they wanted to build duplexes, just a bunch of them that are 12 units an acre. But there is that open space requirement, even on the single family homes, they still have that open space requirement.

Just mulling through this, you had something. Yeah, I'm fine not doing anything. But if we do do it, because this is something I was a little bit interested in when you brought it up and kind of presented it, I think we'd need to clearly define what the walkable thing is. Because if you have to cross train tracks and things like that, the other side, like it's got to be like an actual... I had an actual thing, you know, like a pro runners connected to the trail, which makes sense. That's exactly it. That's a good one. The other thing is I'm not really interested in necessarily increasing the density, but what I would be is kind of like you were talking about, if there's an area that you can have a reading garden, a place to play chess or spaces. But as I've talked with some different people, you know, at the state and some of my friends who are in the planning world, none of them really have any, Good idea of what that space could look like because it just doesn't exist, you know and i'm fine like we want to trade out grass to have you know some open space that's that's available and I don't know what that.

could look like so I I can't really give any good, I know a couple of projects we've looked at pressure to when we're doing the water conservation we. You had some examples of existing multifamily, so there's a couple that we used. I'll go take pictures of those and then just see what I can find elsewhere of what could be there.

Yeah, I'm just thinking, if I'm a father and I'm living in one of these developments, how comfortable am I distance-wise, situationally, having my kids? yeah, go play, be back by supper, you know. Am I going to want them crossing 4800 or 1900 West? Is there a clear, half a mile seems like, for me, kind of a long way for my kids to go to play. Maybe by today's standards, maybe not so much when I was a kid, but by today's standards, as a dad, I'm not wanting my kids to go half a mile away.

And crossing main roads.

So all those things I'm thinking in my mind, is it realistic? You know, as a parent, as a kid, am I going to want to walk half a mile to go swing on some swings? Probably not. You know, so are we just doing all this for nothing?

And how much space do we have that really could meet? Well, that was my other question. There's not a lot. Right.

Because I think there are, I mean, just broadly speaking, I'm not necessarily saying in Roy, but I think there may be some places where this could make sense. I go, look, if you've got ready access to a park and you could maybe fit a unit or two more in there for duplex, apartment complex, whatever. I have no issue with that. Truly, I don't. I just don't know what that would look like here.

I don't want you to think just because we're more parking for the community.

I don't want you to think just because we are built out doesn't mean that someone doesn't come and buy 10 homes that are built in the 1930s

that would be, you know, and want to redevelop. So we got to think beyond just our own confinements.

Well, and I'm even talking about just

completely agree i'm even talking about just in proximity to where the parks are now you know are there spaces where this still would make sense where like you said you're not crossing main roads i just don't want i think we could put language in there if you're crossing a busy road and find what those roads are and that needs to be within a x number i half mile i say just because when you're looking at park requirements within everybody should be within a half mile of the park This could be a quarter mile or what have you. It's just anything we want. I can continue on looking to see what we can find. If we're going to spend the time on doing it, I think it needs to make sense. That's all. I like the idea of it has to be within convenience. I mean, half miles of crow flies is not a half mile.

Like truly accessible.

Yeah. Well, runner and West Park, I think just because they do have access right directly to the front runner DNRG and DNRG and West Park have a connection that makes more sense there. But there may be others that have that ability that aren't crossing main roads or busy roads or aren't confined by railroad tracks or. Yeah. So let me let me do a little bit more research and is there any Please read. I know it was a lot. Look through it and say, you know, hey, guys, I really like this or that. And as we start getting closer and closer to.

They keep hammering us over the head to conserve water. But I'm old enough where we had too much water several times. I sandbagged in Salt Lake on State Street. I remember the lake was pushing up into West Point. and houses were flooding.

I remember them putting those pumps on that west side. Oh, yeah.

They turned them on one time to tell them.

That was it. That was it. Now just reverse it, put a pipe into the ocean on it. There you go.

Actually, they're going to reverse them. There's pools on the other side that they're going to suck out and put back in the lake and dry the salt flats out so we can race.

That'll help for about a month

We will move on to the next item, which is a discussion regarding detached ADUs.

So we kind of went over the bills that have passed, and this is one that we will have to address. Senate Bill 284 was a big one, but this is one of those aspects we're going to look at. Just looking at the code, it does go into effect regardless of what we do October 1st of this year. So regardless of what we do, these are the requirements. Now the state has allowed the cities to look at other things. They say a minimum, anything 11,000 square feet or larger is allowed to have a detached single family accessory use. Cities can, if they would want to and choose to, can allow a detached ADU on a lot smaller than 11,000 square feet.

That's pretty tight.

So that's a question we got to look at. Other cities, there are cities, Farmington does allow for ADUs detached on smaller lots. I want to say Clearfield, but don't quote me. There are other cities out there that allow them on smaller lots. So that's one question. The size, you know, kind of the questions that we got. So a lot smaller than 11,000 square feet. What's the max or minimum size of the unit allowed? How many should be allowed per lot?

Yeah.

Can someone have both an I-80 unit Detached ADU. Why is that D-A-U? It should be D-A-D-U. Anyway. Number of parking stalls required. Now in the code, it does have parameters on size and parking requirements. So anything 650 and less, the city can only allow or require one. Anything 650 and above, we can require no more than two. But size is still something we need to work out. So the parking stalls will kind of configure with what size we do allow. What are the setbacks from both dwelling and property lines? And how tall can it be, one or two stories? Now, I did reference some code in the packet. I don't know if you guys went and looked at it at all. I assumed you didn't, so I kind of brought it into this slideshow. Gray and smaller doesn't really apply to this question. So 101028 talks about accessory buildings and accessory uses. So this is a portion of the code we will have to change. So number five, detached accessory buildings shall meet the requirements location of detached buildings provided herein, and that's the next 10-10-29. If they're on corner lots, they must meet the side yard setbacks applicable in the zone. Accessory buildings should not be used as dwelling units for human occupancy, so obviously nine's going to have to change. separate utility right now if you have a garage you can't put a separate meter on the garage it has to come from the house and then you have a panel on the accessory building i don't know what building code will say you know do they have to have a meter on the a livable space or can it be all still from the the main one but that's something we have to look at uh no portion of the building should be allowed to extend over property line Please don't look at changing that. So there's things in the code we'll have to look at, not just allowing the use, but how do we modify, especially the one that says can't be for the dwelling unit for human occupancy. I still think we have to have a definition of what accessory building is, typical and a detached ADU definition. About 10.10.29, which we talked about, This one talks about walls no greater than 18 feet, peak of roof no taller than 25. Accessory buildings in A and B are a little different. So A is if it's less than 10 feet from behind the building, we will consider it attached to the home and must maintain the same setbacks as the home, so side and rear. And B is if it's more than 10 feet, then it can be within three feet of rear and side property line. The difference is, let's get it into the backyard and have a different set of rules than if it's associated or attached to the building. So do we want to keep those same type of setbacks as what we've got in this? Or does an I-80 or a D-80U have different allowances? I don't think it'd be hard to argue either way. I'll look at the attorney on that one and let him scratch his head if I do something wrong. And then the size currently in an accessory dwelling unit or an accessory building and all the R1 zones can be greater than 1,250 square feet or 25% of the rear yard. And then in the RE zones, it can be 25% or 2,500 square feet. I don't think we want an accessory dwelling unit that's 2,500 square feet. In fact, many years ago, I lived in an 1,100 square foot house with three bedrooms, one bath. So 1,250 is still your three or four bedrooms or three bed, two bath, something big. So again, that size requirement is something. Now, in the code, it also talks about having language to convert existing detached accessory buildings into livable space? Or are you talking about like a living space above a garage? Well, the question of do we want to allow for one-story or two-story? Right now, accessory buildings are one-story only. So we do have a lot of things we need to look at. This is just a table of everything I kind of went through before. Here's the definition. Well, in table of uses in Chapter 17, this is what an internal accessory dwelling unit is defined as. Parking requirements is one stall, not in the front yard setback. Some of these I do want to continue, so must be occupied by the primary residents of record. So property owner must still live there, whether it be in the small unit or the big unit. Even in IADU, we don't define which one they have to be in. Rented for more than 30 days. I think this code talks about 90 days. Obtain a dwelling license, rental dwelling license, and then we record something with the county. We don't have to on that one. The internal one just makes it easier to define the difference between a second kitchen that single family home is using, even though mom may live down there, but they're not renting it versus a rental. So we can define this. I just took the same ones and applied it. So going back to the questions, oh, and then parking stalls. So do we want to allow one lots smaller than 11,000 square feet?

That's a quarter acre. That's what I was just going to ask is what's that? I'm looking at the engineer.

It's a little bigger than a standard quarter acre, yeah.

just no i would say for now that's the last thing we mess with we leave it alone thousand square feet for now and then we do have it's going to be allowed in all zones because i may have a maybe an r16 but i have a half acre of property right yeah or i have 15 000 square feet because i'm on a cul-de-sac and it's triangular shape so this it doesn't say what zone should allow it's just a lot bigger than so that's practical so yeah

Nick, it's tough because my lot is 0.27 acres, but it's deep. Yeah. So like I could easily, I wouldn't because I like having a garden and things, but you know, like my neighbors, they have a 0.25 acre and like, there's the way it's laid out. You can never, never build something like that. It just wouldn't work. Yeah. Okay, so unit size. I think we leave it at the 11,000 for now. Agreed. Until something else makes sense. Yeah.

Unit size? My first apartment was 800 square feet, and they're talking 650 going smaller than that. I don't know how that even would be practical.

What do you think if it's just a studio apartment where the bed and the kitchen and living room are all together?

Like a New York apartment?

And how big are those? I mean, tiny.

Three, four hundred square feet. That's it.

Three or four hundred square feet. It's one room that they have the corners all figured out.

I've paid twice what rent is. The rent controls.

I know I got a lot of to go there. Keep this PC. So size, you know, I showed you what our code allows. 25% of the rear yard or 1,250 square feet. I think that's really big. I do too.

Yeah. Especially on a quarter acre lot.

That's massive. But I can have a garage that big. I'm going to be the devil's advocate here. So if I can fit it on my property.

I don't think you should have a garage that big. I'm just kidding.

So I think I'm less concerned about the size and more concerned about the setbacks. Because once you put people in the dwelling and things like that, getting within three feet is one thing with a shed. When you're putting a house there, I think that's a different.

Well, building code kicks in anything closer than five feet. For every foot, you're closer than it's a one hour firewall. So just by cost and economics, if I stay five feet, I don't have to do anything extraordinary. If I'm at three feet, I've got a two hour firewall that I've got to include on my building. It becomes a little bit more pricey. So most people look at that and say, eh, I'll stay five.

Until somebody just builds one, and then they come in and complain, and we say no, and then they go to the council, and the council's like, oh, make an exception.

And then all of a sudden, it's not a building that's... But you do have some, again, that aspect of the code that says you've got to allow for the conversion of an existing ADU that might be at three feet. But the building code still kicks in then. Yeah. Depending on when it was built would depend on what... So if it is built in 2014, just throwing a number out there, and it's at three feet, it already has a two-hour firewall in it. If it was built in 1960, and it's a two-foot, and it probably doesn't have a firewall, if they want to convert a building code, we'll require that. But I think, you know, in some of the language we got in, type out, but setback-wise...

Is there a way that we can just proportion this, Steve? It can't be more than X percent of the property. I just think that that begins to take away some of the question of minimum versus maximum.

Well, like it says, the existing no more than, no greater than 25% of the rear or 1,250 square feet, whichever is less. Okay. Sometimes, you know, some people's lots, I've got 25 feet from back of the house, the back property line, 25% is pretty small.

Yeah.

If I'm, you know, money bags over here and I got a really deep lot, 25%. It's not 0.27 acres.

27 acres.

Point. There's a point.

Yes. To answer your question, yes, we could. You know, and I'm just going to throw out numbers. It could be 900 square feet or a certain percentage. Yeah. will limit but i just look at 1250 square feet and half of sunset is smaller than that and those are actual trailing units yeah but it's like you said if we implement certain setbacks that'll take care of itself i think okay then parking requirements So if we allow for bigger than, we'll just put in the code. If it's smaller than 650, it's one. If it's bigger than, it's two. That makes sense. Keep what the state requires or allows. Okay. Fourth one, can I have both an interior and a detached?

The parking is going to be a killer.

If I'm on a half acre, parking is not going to be that big of a deal.

Like I have a property where I could do both of those. Like between the two. I mean, I look at this and I think I could put like a little house right between my two houses.

So the question comes is, do we want to turn a single family home into a duplex or a triplex? because the interior is on any lot yeah as long as you can park it anybody can do it so if I'm on a 6 000 square foot lot and I have just me and my wife and have a basement that I can convert into an apartment I can do it my thought on this is I think you're gonna we're gonna be really limited on where this is actually going to be applicable in Roy so if you can do it more

Is that going to be both? If you have big enough space, why not? Why should we limit that? Just a question. I'm answering with a question. I don't think that this is going to come up very often, if ever, with what's available in Roy. But if someone has enough property that they can do it, and they have family or whoever that wants to live close by, what's the harm going to be? If they can park it, and they have the space for it, and they meet setbacks, why not? I'm just throwing that out there. Anyone else?

Agree, disagree? Indifferent?

I'm not making up my mind here. I'm just putting it out there. Yeah. That's my point. I don't think it's going to... Yeah, I mean, probably a half dozen times.

Yeah. Well, I mean... Sam's a little different. She is on a half acre or larger, and there are neighborhoods out there.

Our whole neighborhood is all the way down, 3,200.

So they probably could.

Well, because those lots are so deep. Like their houses, they have this long, long, long. I put apartment complex down there. That's why I like there. Nobody would be behind me. Now they might be behind me.

So let me ask you this, Steve. I mean, just, and this is, you can go for hours on hypotheticals, but let's say that you do have two people that want to build one of these attached, excuse me, detached dwelling units. You've got two backyards. Both people want to build that. How does that work?

I mean, on different parcels? Yeah, on different parcels.

I have to resolve it as one, wouldn't you?

I'm not rezoning. This is allowed by right.

But I mean, you could put two people side by side and make like a duplex.

Oh, if I want to build two of them.

Yeah. I'm sorry. Let's say you meet the setback requirement, but then you're too close to the detached dwelling unit behind you. How does that?

Well, it's going to be the same answer if I just have a shed, and there's four of us have a corner, and we all want to put it in the same corner. Ordinance or zoning allows it to be within three feet of property line. So in essence, every building should be six feet apart from each other. So it's meeting fire code. That makes sense. If it requires a building permit, then that three feet is going to have a two-hour firewall. And it's for every side that's closer than five feet. So even that, not just the two walls, but the return is also gonna have. So the building code has already kind of taken care of those. Now granted, it doesn't take into account the fence that can still catch on fire and burn you, but those buildings are a certain distance apart by fire code. That's why if you're five feet, you're really 10 feet apart. Okay. Number of parking stalls we kind of already went. Setbacks. We keep it what our existing code is. If you're less than 10 feet behind the home, then you're meeting the same setbacks as the house. If you're further than 10 feet, then you could be within three feet of property lines. Or do you want to keep five feet? I mean, that kind of self-regulates itself. If I have a lot more money to spend, I'm going to maybe say three feet. I want to make it less expensive. I'm going to go five.

Three feels awfully close. It does. I agree.

You're not going to have any windows on those sides, no doors. I'm not going to be able to reach out and touch somebody. Still far enough away that when it rains, the water's not flowing onto the neighbor's property.

It's like you said, the building code will help regulate that. If you want to build it within three feet of the property line, you're just going to have to have more robust structure.

And that helps with that aspect of allowing for conversion of existing.

My issue with that is if I'm the neighbor, having a dwelling unit three feet from my property line seems a little too close. So we got to think about the neighbors too. Right. That's why you're here.

So that's like to take people. So if they have their big tough shed, they can't convert that to like a living place. It kind of deters that.

Well, I mean, if I want to turn a tough shed, that's, you know, 10 by 20, you just have to meet the building code, which is really prohibitive for something like that.

But Hey, that's what I mean. But This is going to be a problem I can already tell you.

Another aspect that I didn't go over too much was our home occupation. Right now, it says you can't have an occupation in any detached structures. And all of a sudden, you have a detached ADU, and I shouldn't prohibit you from having an online business. A lot of our code is going to get changed a bit. not just a simple throw it in.

This is where it gets complicated when it gets Mandated without the Supporting direction with it. Yeah. Yeah, because if we could go back in time and shift houses to the sides of lots allow for less setback on one side to allow for Roads back in. I mean, there's a lot of things that if you were building a new subdivision like you could Almost even promote this kind of thing where it's built out and just gets harder and harder.

The thing I like about Roy's code and the thing I don't like about Roy's code is the same thing. Eight foot side yard setbacks. It's great because I can get a bigger house on the property. But now if I want to have a parking stall on the side, it's a nine foot. I can't get that. If I want to get somebody into the backyard, I can't get that. So I kind of wish the city would have, in 73, said, okay, 8 and 10 or something so I have a bigger side yard so I can get into the backyard with a trailer. So it's kind of a good and bad all at the same time.

Again, I think this issue is going to self-regulate for the most part. Six, seven people may qualify for being able to do this.

Well, she's got 12 in her neighborhood, so... well that they do have those big lots like all connected backyards that are really deep next one one or two stories my heart says one again you gotta think about the neighbors here i was gonna say if there's an aspect of the cone i didn't present it can't be i mean if your house is a rambler and it's one story your accessory building can't be taller in your house yeah okay so there's already an aspect there but i you know to me are we looking to build a taj mahal behind my taj mahal or do i want just a rentable unit for for somebody so that's the question one or two stories water table kind of adds into that because well neighborhood we got basements a little bit down the road they can story.

I think if you can build a basement, more power to you if you're not in an area with a high water table. Going down isn't an issue. It's just, do you let them go?

And if they're looming over their neighbors, if you've got the one-story home and you've got, I mean, that's a nightmare.

Our neighborhood, we've got basements. They're all one-story houses. You go down by Midland,

Go down the block.

There are patios and they're two-story house because they can't have a basement.

I think thinking of the neighbors, I think one story should be what it is.

One of the purpose of this is to provide lower cost housing. I think letting it be whatever size fits the area I think is good, but then also if you keep it one story, it does keep that cost. building a house and just go okay well isn't it cheaper to build up than out though probably yeah i thought it's cheaper to build a two-story house than a one-level house but that's going to self-regulate the cost of the housing because you're not going to build a sprawling okay mcmansion one i like one one You're going to have some thoughts over there.

You're just going to have less... When it does apply, you're going to have less neighbors ticked off about it. I mean, they're going to be ticked off no matter what. But you have someone with an application for a two-story, it's going to really burn some people.

Maybe the house... Accessories should be to match the neighborhood and the existing house in height.

Match the neighbor. What if I have a two-story and my neighbor has a one, has a Rambler?

Get a one and a half.

I'd be more inclined to say one than two. That's kind of the way I'm looking at it.

I mean, you want to let people do what they can do on their property, but there's got to be some kind of reason here. And I think the two is sort of pushing past the purpose of what we're trying to do with the ADU.

And are we getting into HOA territory?

I don't care about HOAs. I don't either. Let them do it.

How many HOAs run?

All I know is HOAs have to abide by this too. As a minimum. How much HOAs are on 6,000 square foot lots and there's no way of building anything on them. No. Okay. Well, I'll put some stuff together, and we'll just continue the discussion. I have really till September to have a public hearing on this. So we've got some time to dot I's cross T's. I'll put some language together. We're going to look at it and go through it. Now, are we on to the next item yet? That's all I have. Hey, Commissioner Svendit, anybody?

I want to ask if since the council voted against those two properties that we talked about, will they come back with different proposals or are they like there's nothing they can do?

I don't know. That's a great question. Which properties were these? The rezone in 48. It was denied for a general plan and then therefore the rezone. And then the development agreement for 43 units, that was denied. Now, the 43 units was denied 3 to 2. The rezone was denied 5-0. So you might see the development agreement come back in the council.

So was the guy that presented, is he the owner of that property?

He is under contract.

But he doesn't own it. No. So he's the developer for a third.

He's got it under contract. I can't say necessarily he'll be developing it.

Well, I don't know what that means. Like he has the agreement to develop.

He's got a purchase agreement to buy the property to develop it. And I'm guessing that agreement's depending on whether he's going to be able to make it a profitable property.

I asked one question, though, about that. Am I allowed to? Well, after I was thinking about it and the people were talking about how they love that park and all that, isn't that someone's property that owns that? It's not city property. So aren't they all trespassing?

Yes. Did you hear my comment when we went out of public hearing? And one of the comments was, I'm glad everybody admitted for trespassing on someone else's property.

That enlisted a few groans, I think, actually. You did say that. It is what it is. There were a few groans. It was like, well, that's what you admitted to.

And I have one more question about a public hearing. You said one. I'm sorry, I have two. I mean, and I'll admit, like, I got really, like, that public hearing, the way it was so loud and it was very, like, how do we handle that so that it was very distracting to try to focus on the topic, the way people were, and Brian, you did a good job. This isn't a criticism for anyone, but no, but it's very distracting to try to focus. And, you know, like, I know I got put on Facebook because I said the comment about how we aren't here because of, My understanding of being a planning commissioner is our whole responsibility is to see if it fits, if it's appropriate for the zone.

We don't have to play politics. That's what I like about it. But what I just do is write.

So like, and I know I got trashed all over Facebook that I was, you know, working for the city and blah, blah, blah. If y'all can hear me say it again. But isn't that our whole, all we do is say this property and this fits this zone and according to the rules that are passed in, that we have to follow.

Yes.

That's all we look at. We don't look at like the neighbor saying they want to, because I want to tell us people you got your trust passing.

Yes and no. On administrative items, I think that's absolutely correct.

I can't remember if they were administrative.

These were legislative. Legislative. So with legislative, I think we have a little bit different role. But I think it's also important to note that we don't necessarily represent the people. We're not elected by people. It's not like a city council. We're individuals from the city that comprise the planning commission. And we bring our ideas and say, yeah, we think that's a good fit for that property or not. We're a recommending body. But we don't really represent that. the people the same way that a candidate does, who's running for office, that's making those decisions in kind of the Republic type of way.

My best example would be, is you're here to make sure, does this work for the city at this location?

Like meet all the requirements.

Not for legislative. On an administrative item, yes. For a rezone, does that zone, is that appropriate, this property, or not. I should say it doesn't matter what the citizens have to say. You take in their comments and that may sway you one way or the other, but it's more of holistically as a city, does it make sense there? If it doesn't, then you say no. It meets the rules and or do we want to make an exception?

Because we can rezone, we can change.

It's like when they're asking for the rezone. They're asking us to change the rules.

So are we having a public hearing next time? Yes. Next planning commission. So the next work section, can we have just a fast training again just to refresh everyone?

It's already in the works.

Oh, well, look at us.

Matt Wilson already asked me to get on that, and I've got something prepared. I've sent it over to him. We're going to workshop it.

I was hoping for a different training just to get it all refreshed.

So on your agenda, I've split it. When it says legislative, If you don't like it, that's your opinion. You can say, I don't like it, and this is why I'm voting no. If it's administrative, it meets the law, you've got to say yes. So that's the difference between the two.

I just like a training that now that we have more public input and more public interest, maybe a training would be a good refresher for us, and maybe that would help the public.

I wasn't able to get that done in time for this work session, but I think probably next month we'll have that. I appreciate that.

Yeah.

Good to stop refreshers.

Yeah, but if there are ideas, you know, I tried to, I even smacked the gavel. That's the first time I've smacked the gavel the whole time I've been.

No, I'm not criticizing you at all.

I'm just saying if there are suggestions. I know we give the three minutes, and that seems to have worked pretty good. I was looking at some other municipalities, kind of the Weber County plus Clinton, and some of them do two minutes. Three minutes is a long time. That's three-fourths of a page, single-spaced. You know, and I want people to express. I have a hard time when they get loud and interrupt.

The cheering.

The cheering, and that's what we tried to call it. So if there's ideas like I'm open to hearing that because we want people to express the opinions that be heard.

People need to understand that they somehow have the, I say them, I shouldn't blanket statement this, but there's differing opinions in the room and that people need to be respectful of that. There's the applicant that has their rights too. And when the group is applauding, it's really showing a lot of disrespect toward the applicant if they're an opposing opinion. And I don't think that's appropriate. I mean, it's not a sporting event.

And they do what they want with their property. I just go, you can whine and complain. You know, you have a right to do that. But at the end of the day, if this person's property rights are in question.

The rezone was a lot different than some of the other projects that have come in because that was actually the landowner that was here presenting it. And she took it really well, but I honestly felt bad for her. I did too. Here she was presenting her idea for her.

And she did a great job.

And you know, I think we, I'll speak for myself. I saw some issues with that type of a rezone with that property to where I didn't think that was a, a good idea, but I felt bad that it was, you know, the animosity was so contentious there when it's somebody who's really trying to do something with their property, whether we agreed with that or not, but I didn't like that. If people want to get mad at us as planning commissioners, by all means, I mean, go on Facebook, say I'm in the pocket of the developer. We know that we don't take a dime, but yell at us who are making the decision, but to treat people that way, I felt really bad about the way that particular one was

I mean, technically, it should be treated. Your meeting council should be treated like a courtroom.

I agree.

I was going to point out, you said that to me a couple of times. It should be quiet. There should be no clamor in the back. I mean, town hall meeting is something different. We want your opinion. Plenty of commissioners, you have a right to be there. And at certain times, you have a right to talk, just like council meetings. That's what it should be.

It's very distracting, though. I mean, is there a way to do a five-second warning so that people know?

Try to. We try to.

Oh, five minutes is our way with technology, with the timer. So if they're going and they get their three minutes, like at five seconds, there's a bing bing, and then it, I mean, I guess one of us could start our phones at a different time so the timer goes off.

Yeah, I think he tries to do like a 15 second. I just try to let him know when we're down.

I just wondered if we had two phones going. So one went off at like five seconds before. And then they know that it's time to stop.

I mean, if the time is three minutes, you can always just set it to two minutes and 45 seconds. And then when it goes off, that's their sign drop. So you don't have to have two phones going. You just set it for shorter. And then you just manually count down the last 10 seconds.

But they didn't stop.

They didn't.

Ryan, please don't think that's a criticism. You handled it. You guys were doing great. I just felt like it was really hard to focus because pretty soon it was just really chaotic. I almost thought, gosh, we need a bailiff here so they'll be quiet because it gets distracting when you're trying to focus. I want that lady to know I thought she did a really nice job. She did a great job at the council too. I thought she was well prepared. I hope she comes back and readjusts.

always have this fear that what when something extraordinary happens like let's say in one of these here legislative items and you do get a community within the room that's what options do we have short of pushing the button and bringing the police in are we allowed to move into a different room or are we violating the public's right to hear?

You know, I was wondering what move. Sorry, finish your thought, and then I'll.

No, that's what I, are we allowed to dismiss the public and say, we need, this has gotten to where it's out of hand, we need to clear the room. Can we do that, or can we remove ourselves from the room? What? That's a good research question for me. I don't know if you can remove yourselves from the room, because I don't know, we'd have to look into the, Cause we had public when we were trying to have our discussion on the panel, very being very persistent and system and trying to make themselves part of our discussion. And there's two or three times I had to put my hand up and say, and I'm just like, that was pretty mild. What if it gets really out of control?

I mean, he does have a button underneath. I don't know if there's a cop waiting for us to push a button. Um, I have posed the question to the police chief and his response is, do you want to pay the overtime? Sure. So we can't really have, you know, we'll have to kind of pursue and see what we can do.

I just have that fear that there's one of these times where it's going to get, because I've seen it happen before, not here in Roy, but I've been part of it. They were in one city, they were talking about trails and there were a lot of people. that got really bent out of shape about it to where it almost got violent.

Well, that's how it got Brigham over the data center. If you watch the news, the box elder, yeah.

I mean, what do we do?

They finished the rooms though. They did.

What can we do?

Yeah. Yeah.

Our commission rules do allow us to remove individuals who are interrupting.

Who's going to do that? But how do you physically do that? You can tell them, get out, heard this rule, but how do you enforce it? Which I think that's the bigger question.

And Ryan, I really want to say I appreciate that when someone tried to come back up, I mean, I really appreciate that you said, sorry, you've already had your turn. And I think that's a great, we should keep that. Because that's when it becomes an arguing thing. So I wanted to say I appreciate you doing that by telling them that they need to Your time's up.

Good discussion. And I'm open to ideas. I mean, I think we've come up with, I think, some pretty good rules. But there's always room to dust. OK. Any other questions?

OK. Well, I actually did have a question. The roundabout out on the 4400 in Cozydale?

It's open.

They finished that finally?

The roadblock on Hinkley Drive is gone. So I suspect it's...

So Airport Road, I can get... We can get through down Airport Road now?

Walmart? No.

Oh.

I was like, the bridge isn't... The airport is over by America First. I haven't been down there.

The bridge is not open. No, not the bridge.

I'm talking about the roundabout that they just tore up there. That's Roy City Project, I'm assuming. Are we, is the access open now?

I guess I didn't even know there was a, I checked over there for about a month, which roundabout, the one, each of them, they tore the asphalt out and put concrete in because the asphalt.

Oh, I think that, yeah. I think you not was doing that because they're the ones fixing the bridge and kind of rolled it over into. Okay.

Yeah.

Cause it just, that whole access was closed. Airport road was closed off through there. Yeah.

They were sealing the joints on Thursday, and the painters were going to stripe it on Friday and Saturday.

I was wondering when that was supposed to be done.

When I saw the detour sign, the Hinkley Drive and Otterleaf gone, I assumed it's open.

I haven't driven over there to see. I've avoided that area for a while.

Well, I live right there, so I'm not concerned. It's a great way to get into Riverdale. Well, that part's one thing. This is a different issue altogether.

Now you've heard from him. I'll let him introduce himself. This is Colton.

I'll forgive you. Schlesinger. Schlesinger. We've been rebranding over the last couple centuries. It used to have a Z and a Y in it. Schlesinger, but we're streamlining it now. So I'm originally from Arkansas. That's where I was born. I lived in Northwest Arkansas. I lived for about nine and a half years in Twin Falls, Idaho. It was where I did like elementary and early part of junior high school, high school and college in Arkansas. So I graduated from The University of Central Arkansas. I'm not old, right?

But the years are blending together. So we can't get you to do a SUI then because you're not a hog.

No, you can't. No, no, no. I'm not that U of A. But if my dad or my brother were here, they would gladly call the hogs for you.

Central.

Yeah, Central. So yeah, I did that. And then so my wife and I got married in 2020. She's from Layton. Her family still lives there. We've got family all.

What's her name?

Kershaw, Lauren Kershaw. Dave and Suzanne, her parents. So she got her bachelor's in social work. So she graduated... The month before we got married, I still had about three, four semesters at my school, but I had a full ride scholarship and I wasn't going to give that up for nothing these days. And so she moved out to Arkansas and she started working as a social worker so that I could finish my degree. And then, you know, I occasionally lived in Utah, but nothing ever permanent. I said, well, you know, you came out for me and you've missed your family so well. So my plan was either to go into the U or BYU. And BYU was less expensive. More class. And so I went to BYU for law school. What's that? Don't throw anything at us. I went to BYU for law school. I graduated last April. We have two kids. One of them is three, Darcy. She just turned three in March, and then we just had her second a month ago. Her name is Josie, so two girls. After I graduated, I passed the bar. First try. Thank you. And I got a clerkship out in with the Nevada Supreme Court. I was working with Justice Lee out in Carson City. She lived down in Vegas, so I only saw her about a week every month. And it was great. I had a wonderful time. It was a great experience. There just wasn't as much mentorship. as I thought with her being so far. And it felt mostly like being an associate. My wife's pregnancy got really, really tough. And it was hard to be away from family. And we knew we wanted to come back to Utah at some point eventually. So I started kind of keeping my eye out for opportunities to come back. And I saw this opportunity opened up. I applied for it. I thought, maybe they'll be nice and hold it till August when I'm done. But if not, it's OK. And then Matt Wilson's like, if you can be here in eight weeks, it's yours. And I was just like, well, okay, let's go. This clerkship is going to end in a couple months anyway. And so we packed everything up. And in the last 12 months, we've lived in three apartments. Three times. We celebrate six years of marriage next month, and we moved, I think, six times. Three of those have been cross-state orders. And you're still together, so that's... Yeah, 26 years, and that was one too many. And so hopefully saving for a house at this point. Just, you know, family four, very happy to be back. We're closer to her family, and life's good. So happy to be here. Welcome.

Thank you. So the new PTAN has CS.

Matt Wilson keeps trying to come up with... funny nicknames like P-10 or whatever. All he's got so far is a slush hammer. That's pretty good. I would encourage no one to use it. Not because it bothers me, but because it gives Matt Wilson, like, it would make him, like, feel a little too apparent.

Yeah, we had to avoid that to the extent possible. We just need to make his head as big as possible.

I did pass along your comment from last time. I was immediately shot with two Nerf bullets. He kept one in his desk.

So what did he turn off to? He's at the state AG's office doing insurance fraud.

I thought he left the... No, no, no.

It was up at Weaver County.

That's right.

So yeah, it's insurance fraud, something like that. I hope it's exciting. I like that poem.

Well, last week he was in St. George and he seemed to He gets to, you know, St. George. Travel a little bit.

Yeah. In my case, I'm out and do for the road and give that guy anything. Hey, so welcome. What else you got for us, Steve?

Really nothing much. I mean, Agora Heights around 5450 is digging and putting in their building permits close to being some issues. So it's kind of

I know this is Riverdale, but do you know what they're putting in by the Sam's Club in Riverdale? They've cleared that whole lot right there.

You should have seen that coming.

Really, I wondered what they're building right there. No idea.

The sad part is I know more what's going on in Roy than the city I live in. Apparently Costco opened up in Syracuse and I didn't even know about it. It's really far. Okay, well.

motion to dispense motion to adjourn second second all in favor aye opposed we are dismissed still waiting for chris chris like to hang around too much