Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

cross.

Okay. So, you're a little east. Okay. Great. with say and five years later you I me and his brother been best friends since third grade and so I'm really good friends both we we hang out at his place like and our place when we went over we play dungeon I said he plays over at our house and Yeah, good times. Yeah, I've known Jordan for sure. 30 30 years. My daughter, my youngest daughter texted me said, "Is it going to be a long wait?" Called her back really quick. Hey, beat her back real quick. I'm Well, we've got two items and we've got train. Oh, are we getting

I think the only one we're missing is Jace, right?

I may need to borrow your pen. Not yet. Just put it right there.

You're coming up here. Yeah. I don't I can't look into them. Pressure. Pressure. Get up here. You're more important than we are.

I don't know. I think there's a lot more pressure around that little round table, but here.

Oh, yeah. I wouldn't ever want that. That sounds awful. Well, now I have to I know. Yeah, I know.

Guess we only have the one right now. Sounds ready to go. Noah

Royce. All right, go ahead and get started. We'll bring to order the Syracuse City Planning Commission meeting, September 2nd, 2025. Uh, we will have an invocation or thought by Commissioner Anderson and the pledge of allegiance led by Commissioner Baker. No, she Yes, Baker. Sorry. Sorry, Blake. Got it. Grace, heavenly father, are grateful to be able to meet together and to be able to be here for our city and to be able to discuss the needs and of our city and help uh move things forward. and ask please bless that we'll be able to have a thoughtful meeting and uh say things in Jesus Christ. Amen.

Amen. Rise for the pledge of allegiance. 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. All right. Thank you. We will uh have an adoption of uh today's meeting agenda which has been posted in accordance with state law. Take a motion to adopt. I move to adopt. We have a motion. Do we have a second? Second. All in favor? I. I.

Any opposed? Okay. We will move on to the meeting minutes and we will be uh adopting the uh regular meeting and work session for the meeting on August 19th, 2025. If there are no notes or updates that need to be done on the meeting minutes, we'll take a motion to adopt. Chair, I'll make a motion that we adopt the meeting minutes for the regular meeting and work session for August 19th, 2025. We have a motion and a second. I second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? And all abstained was not present. Fair enough.

Okay. Next item. We have the public comment section. This is an opportunity for members of the city to address the planning commission regarding items not scheduled for public hearing on this agenda. If you are here to discuss an item on the agenda, we ask that you wait for that time. Otherwise, uh, please keep your time to 3 minutes or less. Anybody online? Cool. We'll go ahead and close public comment. All right. Our number fourth item is public hearing for revised site plan for commercial site. Rice.

Okay. So, we uh we discussed this one a little bit last time in the upcoming uh agenda items, but this is a it's a revised site plan for uh one that was approved a few months ago. Um we met in August with the ARC and there was one recommendation. There's uh but it's kind of dependent on whether these landings are going to end up actually being built or not. So, uh, there was just a question about getting around the exterior of the building for anything that needed to be taken from back of house out to the front of the building. Um, so the, uh, I'll go down to the site plan, kind of give you an idea of what they were talking about. All right. So, yeah, I guess that probably shows it well enough. So, this is the building outline here. So there's there's the potential that there's going to be some concrete out here, but also depending on the way that it's set up, they might not have it. So it is shown here on the updated plan with a a side kind of connection there. So this uh this was something that was recommended by the the ARC. It's not required by code. They are required by fire code if they have fire risers in the back and also if they have doorways that they have some sort of walkway back there. But um but other than that uh and again not a code thing but other than that the review of this um every all the comments have been addressed and sorry I'm just going to let our engineer in. Um all the comments have been addressed. The uh the only real differences here are that the previous site plan showed a drive-thru coming down along the back and then along the south side of the building. And since that's been removed, they just have increased landscaping and the building is is a little bit bigger than it was

before. So, um, let's see. Let me go down to landscape here. So the landscaping that's proposed is uh pretty much the same as what was there before mixture of trees and shrubs and then like a gravel base. Um so water-wise, landscaping and uh they still have maintained uh previous uh recommendations that were uh applied by the planning commission uh namely that the access here on the south side and I've been working with the applicant on the property to the east and they're they're amanable to that as well. We just haven't received an updated plan that shows that change. So, uh, the difference in this case being that with the previous drive-thru, uh, that was one of the main concerns was just making sure that the drive-thru had two lines of of, uh, access to exit the the property. So, this would essentially just allow for cross access uh, if people wanted to access a uh, drive-thru on the other building. So, kind of thinking ahead and where we do have the application in in line, uh, this this is still going to be effective for that. It allows people to be able to access that drive-thru across this property and across the other one in case there are conflicts over here that would prevent access. So, um, less traffic jams is good, I guess. So, uh, but again, we uh, all the staff comments have been addressed. All the city code uh, uh, meets all the requirements of the city code. So, we would recommend approval. That's all I have.

Awesome. Thank you. All right. This item is open for public hearing. Uh for this, we will go ahead and open public hearing. Again, as a public comment, if you have any comments, please limit your comments to 3 minutes or less. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close public hearing. Chair, I need to recuse myself from this item. We'll note that for the minutes uh for meeting. All right. Uh open it up to discussion or motion. Oh, I'm sorry. Where did you You're looking at me. Did you ask us? Oh, sorry. I was I was talking with Noah

the line and then you may not contact me. I don't have any concerns, chair. Okay. And I noticed that some of them have uh wall lighting sconces on some of the depictions, but it doesn't look like there's any that are in the um profile view specifically. And then the lighting analysis doesn't have any coming off of the building. They only have the parking lot. Is there will there be lighting involved there? Has that been checked? All of that parking lot.

So the lighting in this one's a little different. Uh so that you can see these these marks here. Um the the lighting actually is located in the awning facing downward. So it's going to be a full cut off light, but it's just in the actual metal of the awning extending from the building. Perfect. I just didn't want them to be shining like they have in the in the one depiction. They're shining up and down. And Royce, do we need to go back to our newest ordinance of bicycles for this or uh they actually show the bike parking on here. So, it's located down there. So, that that's a hold over from the previous one. Yep.

Perfect. That was going to be my comment as well. So, all right. If nothing else, we'll take a motion. I can make a motion. Uh I move the planning commission approve the request of Father Wellen for amended site plan on lot 3A of Atlant Analopee Station subdivision located at 1604 South 3000 West containing 0.58 acres in the GZ GC zone. Thank you Commissioner Anderson. Second, Commissioner Garner. We have motion and a second. All in favor I.

Any opposed? Okay. Motion is adopted. Next item, discussion in the motion. This is not a public hearing or a final platce park west phase three. I apologize, my reviews are just massive because I've got all this copied and pasted code, but there we go. Okay, so this is going to be the third and and final uh plat for the RC's Park West project that started a few years ago. Uh replacing the RC Willie property. Um so this this is going to be on the north side of the road, north side of 2700 where the old parking lot was. And uh there's also some properties to the west of the parking lot that are included. So uh mixture of town homes and single family housing for this one. So, this is 2700 down here. And then there's private drives that come up for the town homes. Um, and then we've got two single family properties that will access the public drive up here. Um, so yeah, this one's pretty straightforward. All the staff comments have been addressed, meets all the requirements of the city code. Um, so we'd recommend approval.

Awesome. Um, quick question. So to to clarify, those two single families will be kind of adopted into the existing uh north facing area and they won't have access to that private road.

Yeah. So it kind of backs this private drive, but yeah, and I suppose potentially they could access it. I guess it's a weird sort of pseudo double frontage lot, but um there is a Yeah. So we've got a little bit of a landscape buffer on the south side. So, this this property on the west side doesn't have access onto it, but um I guess it's really up to the property owner if they wanted to access a garage or something back there. And it is a private drive, so we don't have like a double frontage lot standard for something like that in the code.

Okay. All right. Um discussion or a motion Chair, there was a question the engineer brought up about a width of roadway or access road. Has that been resolved? It was only 6 in difference, but I'm just curious for the access road up here. This section I page 25. Let me grab that. It's just as why is

Oh, 500s of road being dedicated on 27 South Street and not 33. Okay. And is that is that in our engineer review? Okay. Uh we do have our engineer online. Uh Brian, can you speak to that? Yeah, I sure can. Um I have not seen an updated set of plans since I did this review. Um, so I'm not sure if it has been, but I know they were working on plans last week. Um, but if you just approved it with a conditional approval, I'd be fine with that with these comments being addressed.

And so, Brian, were all of your other questions addressed? Your No. No. All those comments are still outstanding as far as I know. I haven't, like I said, I haven't seen a new set of plans yet for this one, but I don't I don't think any of them are major enough to to hold it out. So, I think if what you said is we can approve this just based on um pending approval of your comments. Correct. Yeah. If you just did a conditional approval with with these comments, I'd be fine with that.

So, whatever motion, let's make sure we get that included in that as well. All right. Make a motion. I'll make a motion. Okay. I move the planning commission approve the request of John Nelson for a final plat called RC Park West Base 3 on property located at 1693 West, 2700 South, containing 1.654 654 acres in the PRD zone including the additional uh pending requests made by the city engineer.

So conditional upon that conditional upon the approval of uh the engineer. Okay. All right. We have a motion. We have a second. Second. All right. We have a second. All in favor? I I Any opposed? Motion is adopted. Next item is to adjourn to work session. Take a motion. Motion to adjurnn. Okay, we all in favor? I post opposed. All right, we are adjourned to work session. All right. Uh we will start as usual with our city council liaison. What?

No, I'm kidding. All right. Um city attorney Welcome to part one of our 10-minute trainings. As promised or as threatened, here we go.

I thought we'd spend tonight talking about uh for about 10 minutes the difference between land use decisions and land use regulations. Those are two very different things in the Utah code. There are dozens of Supreme Court opinions that fight and change as to what that means. the legislature changes the actual definition in the statute every couple of years and so it's a moving target. But I'm going to give you the the really basic rule that will make you be right most of the time. And here it is. If the action item is adopted or enacted by an ordinance by the city council, it is almost always a land use regulation. If the final decision is reached by the planning commission or planning staff, it is almost always a land use decision. Now, that doesn't always hold true. Works for most of the time. So, we got 10 true or false questions. Feel free to keep track if you want. I won't have you raise your hands. I won't have you report your scores. But, let's talk about each of these 10 questions and briefly what the answers are. Number one, a general plan is a land use decision. True or false? Ask yourself who adopts the general plan. Is it the planning commission or the city council? If you answered false, you are correct. It is not a land use decision. It is a land use regulation because it's adopted by the city council upon recommendation of the planning commission. Let me digress for just a minute. What are the two things you did tonight? Decisions or regulations?

Decision. Decisions. Decisions because we made the decision. You made the final enact. You made the final adoption or the final enactment. Okay. Question number two. Number two. That's not the answer by the way. It may or may not be. Question number two. The adoption or amendment of a zoning map is a land use decision. True or false? Who changes the zoning map? You or the city council? Council.

City council on your recommendation. So if the city council does it, it's generally a regulation. Correct. So that answer would have been false. The adoption of an amendment. Adoption or an amendment of a zoning map is a land use regulation. Number three, true or false? A general plan is a binding guide for land use regulations and land use decisions. True or false? Is it binding or is it not binding? Say that again. Read it again.

A general plan is a binding guide for land use regulations and land use decisions. It's a general plan. It is not binding. It is advisory. Okay. The city council can do things in contravention of the general plan if they have a good reason. Uh, next question number four. A zone change is a land use decision. True or false? Who makes the decision? City council. City council. The city council does it. It's generally a land use

regulation. regulation. Next one. True or false? The determination of permitted and conditional uses in a specified zone is a land use regulation. True or false? True. That comes up through the planning commission on recommendation to the city council and the city council adopts the ordinance that sets what the permitted uses and the conditional uses are. Next one. See, the wording on that made it sound like we were making a decision on the I'm a lawyer. That's my job.

Did you notice that when he when he started this whole thing, he said almost always? So, he wasn't finding himself into a corner. Yeah. The last question the last question is, which member of the planning commission is going to complain the most about the questions?

Okay, next one. The city council can adopt a land use regulation that has not been vetted by the planning commission. True or false? Generally, the answer would be false. Right? It comes through the planning commission. You hold a public hearing. You make a recommendation for or against. Either way, that recommendation recommendation goes to the city council and they make the ultimate decision. Generally, that's how it works. Okay, we'll get back to the exception to the rule. Next one. True or false? The city council may consider the planning commission's failure to make a recommendation as a negative recommendation. You get an application, you hold a public hearing, you table it, nothing happens, you never come back to it. Does the city council have to wait for you or can they act and say you didn't give them a recommendation therefore we're going to treat that as a negative recommendation? They can do that which is why you always end up making a recommendation to the city council and never just throw it up to them without a recommendation. Okay, next one. The city council can decline to address a recommendation from the planning commission. Now you've held your public hearing. You've made your recommendation in favor of the zone change. You send it up to them. They're not sure what they want to do. So they're the ones that table it and table it and table it. Can they do that forever or do they eventually have to make a decision?

They have to make a decision and they have to make it timely. Although reasonably timely is that great debate in the courts. Oh, let's see. I think we're down to about number eight or nine here. Yep.

The planning commission may amend the boundaries of a zoning district. True or false? You can amend the boundary of a zoning district. No, you can only make a recommendation to the city council that is a land use regulation which is adopted by ordinance. Number 10. The city council may enact a temporary land use regulation without a recommendation from the planning commission. True, they can. This is an exception to the general rule that they have to have your recommendation, but they can adopt temporary regulations. They can't last more than 6 months. You've probably heard that they can do a moratorum. There's a reason there's a six-month deadline because they can do what they need to do or they think they need to do. But if it didn't come up to them through the planning planning commission, it can only last for 6 months. Then they have to go back and do it again. Hopefully, they send it to you in the meantime. So if they ever decide to do a moratorum without your input, they'll adopt the moratorum. Then they'll send it to you and have you study it for 6 months and send it back to them so they can decide whether they want to make a permanent change or not. All right. If you got more than half the questions right, you get to go home at the end of this meeting. And if you didn't get more than half the questions right, you still get to go home at the end of this meeting. We'll talk again in two weeks or four weeks. Thank you.

I just want to add to your, you know, example with the moratorum. Um, that doesn't mean there's no work going on. if they, you know, they say, "No, we're going to put a moratorium on town houses built along this area until we get some more things in place or we adopt policies or whatever it is." But during that six months, there usually should be a lot of work going on. So, you don't have to extend that. When there is a temporary land use regulation, you are exactly correct. The purpose of that temporary regulation is to figure out what the problem is and to address the problem within those six months. You're absolutely right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Colin. All right. Uh upcoming agenda items.

All right. So, a lot of the same uh that we've had. So, let's see. We've got uh so we've got that that building that I mentioned to the east uh of the commercial property we were talking about today. I'm still working on that. I talked with the applicant last week and just waiting on some revised plans. Um, we let's see. I I mentioned uh there was a site plan on on 500 West down by 2700 for a it's a preschool. I talked with the applicant about that last week. That may be on hold. They're trying to decide what they want to do. Um, so that's that's not going to be quite as pressing. We might see that in a while. We might not see it. Um, see, we have a subdivision application for the property. We just did the West Lake Landing subdivision. I'll show you on the map here. Um, so we just did the commercial property here. Um, recently there's also property owned down here. Uh, there's zoned residential and we received a residential application for that. So, we'll be looking at that one soon. Um, see, we also have uh phase four of the Sades Glenn project. So, just a continuation of the town homes and and single family uh 55 plus community over here. Um, and then see, we also have an application for a subdivision plat down here. did a reszone on this a few months ago and they're looking at potentially just uh building a culdesac. Um so we'll see what happens with that one in terms of whether it goes through or whether it's a culde-sac but they've proposed a just single family housing in there. That's why we just just stay on that picture for a minute because it just brings up a a question because we're I think one of

our jobs should be to try to prevent these little islands from existing in the middle of a So this access to this piece of property where will it come from? So it currently kind of sits between these two stubs here and this this property is not owned by them. So they they can't go through without these properties developing. But yeah, they do have a stub there. Um, but you are correct. Yeah, we want to try and prevent landlocked parcels like that. So, with this one, yeah, the big question is whether or not it's it's going to be required to punch through or whether they can just put in a culde-sac and then these guys would do a culde-sac. Um, so we'll see what we end up with.

Hey, thanks. That's a great picture. Thanks. Yeah, based on based on timing of some of the houses built out there, that was quite a while ago, right? Yep. That's all I have. Thank you. All right. Commissioner reports. All right. We'll take a motion to adjurnn. Move to adjourn. We have a motion. A second. Second. All in favor? We are adjourned. Thank you everyone. Okay.

What are we looking at? Are there going to be times where you're gone mention that you know you went to training or something you wanted to share with everyone that would be a good time

yeah generic anything like chair chairman He was on the committee for school district. So, there would like you want to say, hey, how hot has it been outside?

Time to do that. Okay. So this general city the same the same thing public comment public comment section it's kind of our check

it doesn't generally it's not anything to happen because our discussion for a while.

I just said I don't not half over half. It can't it can't be three, right? That's why we have another Also we don't have to worry about splitting every

and if we get a vote then so it's not table it does a negative I believe that's a default If we don't have a general consensus that is helpful. Thank you. Make sure that it will always be if somebody doesn't do something for six months.

We're never going to do that. That's why I said it. Set it in a reasonable trap. I don't want I said That seems well there is that clause that says that each day could be considered a separate event and that's why stacks up. I wouldn't even mind if if we

because in all reality a lot of times we just charge them for the first offense and second the second offense.