Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge? Click Here
Start Position
CALL TO ORDER 1.                    INVOCTION/INSPIRATIONAL THOUGHTS/PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE Chair Brady opened the meeting at 6:00 pm. Craig Bown gave an invocation and led the pledge of allegiance. 2.
OPEN SESSION – There were no public comments. 3.
MINUTES REVIEW ANDAPPROVAL3.1    February 15, 2023MOTION: Anthony Jenkins made a motion to approve the February 15, 2023 meeting minutes. Craig Bown seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Craig Bown, Anthony Jenkins, Bryce Brady, and Graden Ostler. The motion passed unanimously. 4.                    BUSINESS ITEMS 4.1
Minor Site Plan Amendment Briam Perez gave a presentation on the minor site plan for Lot 05 of Eastlake at Geneva. The building façade was constructed differently, and a different color scheme was used than was originally approved by the Planning Commission on February 17, 2021. The applicant is seeking to amend the site plan to reflect the existing elevation and color scheme. The staff recommendation is to approve the amendment with the following modification: the applicant shall add a parapet to the middle of the building and adjust the blue color.
The applicant Chris Kephart came to the podium to answer questions. Bryce Brady asked why the plan was changed. Christ Kephart stated that the tenant of the building, Nutricost, requested to paint the building their company colors. Bryce Brady asked why the roof caps were left off. Chris Kephart stated they were too expensive.
Anthony Jenkins asked if colors are generally included in the site plan and changing paint would require an update to the site plan. Morgan Brim stated that yes, it would require a site plan amendment.
Anthony Jenkins stated that he was concerned about the architectural differences in the building. Morgan Brim stated that staff was more concerned about architecture than building colors.
Brandon Jensen, with Nutricost the tenant of the building, made a comment that they would like to keep the blue accent color.
Craig Bown made a comment that the architecture is consistent with the style of the older buildings and that it may not be possible to change the shape of the wall. Brandon Jensen stated it may be possible to add elements of up to 3 to 4 feet above the parapet wall without major reconstruction.
Anthony Jenkins asked staff if they reviewed the paint change request. Morgan Brim stated there was an internal communication error.
Anthony Jenkins asked staff how it would be possible to catch major architectural differences earlier on in the process. Morgan Brim stated that planning staff will be more involved in the pre-construction meeting and perform midpoint inspections.
Anthony Jenkins stated that he is more concerned about setting precedence for future buildings and developers.
Bryce Brady stated he is concerned about the architecture features. He asked the applicant to come back to the Planning Commission with updated plans that make the building look equal to the original plan. Chris Kephart summarized potential changes.
Morgan Brim stated that there is a construction bond in place and the building can be occupied.
Brandon Jensen asked if the roof could be a different color other than brown.
Bryce Brady called for a motion. A discussion concerning the conditions ensued.
MOTION: Anthony Jenkins made a motion to approve the minor site plan amendment with the condition the applicant roof caps, and awning are added, allowing for a gray color, and the new color scheme is approved. Craig Bown seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Craig Bown, Anthony Jenkins, Bryce Brady, and Graden Ostler. The motion passed unanimously. 4.2
PUBLIC HEARING – Zoning Text Amendment – Water Efficiency Standards Emily Kofoed presented proposed amendments to the Vineyard Zoning Code, Section 15.40 Landscaping regarding water efficiency standards. The purpose of these standards is to conserve the public’s water through requirements regarding the placement of turf.
Emily summarized the proposed standards.
There was a discussion on the definition of single-family units and if the code will be enforceable.
MOTION: Anthony Jenkins made a motion to open the public hearing. Craig Bown seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Craig Bown, Anthony Jenkins, Bryce Brady, and Graden Ostler. The motion passed unanimously.
Don Overson asked how this new ordinance will be enforced. Morgan Brim answered that a new position will be created to perform inspections. Naseem Ghandour stated the new single-family homes will be required to submit a landscaping plan that will require a final inspection.
Anthony Jenkins asked how the city will know if the water efficiency standards are successful. Emily Kofoed answered that we will track progress through data and goal monitoring.
Briam Perez showed the Planning Commission the final draft of the ordinance. Bryce Brady suggested adding language that would allow plants listed outside the Vineyard Tree and Landscape Manual. Staff stated that this power is granted to the City Engineer.
MOTION: Craig Bown made a motion to close the public hearing. Anthony Jenkins seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Craig Bown, Anthony Jenkins, Bryce Brady, and Graden Ostler. The motion passed unanimously.
MOTION: Anthony Jenkins made a motion to recommend approval of Ordinance 2023-12 as presented by staff also ensuring that City Council explores enforcement and public reporting and success measures. Craig Bown seconded the motion.  Roll Call: Those voting aye: Craig Bown, Anthony Jenkins, Bryce Brady, and Graden Ostler. The motion passed unanimously. 4.3
PUBLIC HEARING – General Plan Amendment – Public Utilities and Services MOTION: Craig Bown made a motion to continue this item to March 15, 2023 with the condition that the public hearing notice is reposted. Anthony Jenkins seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Craig Bown, Anthony Jenkins, Bryce Brady, and Graden Ostler. The motion passed unanimously.  5.                    WORKSESSION5.1
Domestic Livestock and FowlCache Hancey presented a suggested zoning text amendment. It would allow for egg-laying fowl on a range of lot sizes based on a tier system.
There was a discussion concerning the proposed setbacks. Bryce Brady asked to clarify setbacks of enclosures verse coops. Bryce Brady also suggested adding nuisance language to the code.
Don Overson asked what would happen if there is a conflict between the city code and HOA language. The HOA covenants would override city code. 5.2
Sign Code Text Amendment Cache Hancey presented a suggested zoning text amendment. It would remove the Sign Standard Waiver, create one additional sign type: Development Promotional/ Direction, and other minor technical changes.  6.                    TRAINING SESSION6.1
Segments of Strong Town’s Taco John were viewed and discussed by the Planning Commission. They received 15 minutes of training. 7.                    COMMISSION MEMBERS’ REPORTS AND EX PARTE DISCUSSIONDISCLOSURE
Morgan Brim gave an update on the Station Area Plan and stated that a parking study is being prepped for right now.
Emily Kofoed gave an update that engineering has three master plans in the process right now: Transportation, Wastewater, and Water Culinary system. 8.
ADJOURNMENT a Bryce Brady adjourned the meeting at 7:38 pm.   Minutes Certified correct on:February 28, 2023   Certified BY:   /s/ Rachel Stevens                           Rachel Stevens, Planning Tech
Rachel, we we good on. 00:01:40
Cool. 00:01:43
Chair, we're ready whenever. 00:01:46
All right. Welcome, everybody. It is March 1st, 2023. It is 6:01 PM and this is the Vineyard Planning Commission meeting. We'll 00:01:52
get things started with an invocation and a Pledge of Allegiance led by Craig. 00:01:58
I don't have my father grateful today to meet as a Commission and that's staff members and public and. 00:02:06
Be able to discuss. 00:02:14
Needs in wants. 00:02:16
We're grateful for the blessings that we have and for the moisture which we've received, and we ask that we might be able to. 00:02:18
All have clear minds. 00:02:27
Be able to express. 00:02:30
Thoughts and feelings for tonight and serious things and Jesus Christ. Amen. Thank you. All right, moving into an open session. 00:02:33
Oh, sorry. 00:02:41
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, 00:02:44
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 00:02:50
Still getting used to doing both of them in meetings though. 00:02:58
All right, well, we'll move into an open session. This is, Does any public comments come up to the podium and state them? 00:03:02
Seeing as there are none, we'll move into the Minutes review and approval. 00:03:10
I had a chance to review those and make a motion to approve the minutes from February 15th, 2023. Do I have a second Second All in 00:03:15
favor, aye? 00:03:20
All right. Moving into business. Item 4.1, Minor site plan amendment. 00:03:25
Screens. 00:04:17
Some images on the screen. 00:04:19
Good evening, Planning Commission. I'm Brian Amaya, Senior Planner. 00:04:23
We're looking at. 00:04:28
A cyclone amendment being proposed by Christopher Kephart with Vineyard Properties of Utah. 00:04:31
LLC This is regarding. 00:04:37
Lot 5 in East. 00:04:41
At Geneva in our industrial area. 00:04:44
There's an application. The site plan was originally approved back in February of 2021, February 17th, 2021. 00:04:48
Currently, the applicant has been moving forward with building permits. They've constructed two of the four buildings that were 00:04:57
originally approved. 00:05:02
The two largest buildings on the site each measure 64,000 square feet. 00:05:08
Most recently, they were not able to pass their final inspections. 00:05:16
To start moving tenants in because of some inconsistencies with the original approval from that Planning Commission meeting. 00:05:23
The applicant is also waiting to get a tenant into the building. 00:05:32
Nutri costs I believe is. 00:05:37
The name of that, That's correct. Thank you very much. 00:05:38
The applicant and the tenant are both here in the meeting. 00:05:43
So. 00:05:46
The inconsistency is that I'm referring to with the elevations with the exterior building elevations. 00:05:48
Have to do with the roof trim. 00:05:55
As we know. 00:05:58
The roof trim line of a building kind of determines a lot of how the massing comes through. 00:06:01
We tried the the vineyard zoning code tries to avoid at all possible the flat, monotonous. 00:06:07
Lengthy, unbroken roof lines. So we like to see that variation, that articulation that breaks up, that massing. 00:06:14
In the original. 00:06:24
Let me bring up what the. 00:06:26
I do, Yep. 00:06:29
Let me take this so it gets a little bigger. 00:06:34
So this this is the original building exterior that was approved in that Planning Commission meeting. Shows the colors. 00:06:37
Shows. 00:06:45
All of the architectural details. 00:06:47
What's missing currently is a few things, these copper ends. 00:06:50
Were not constructed, there's 6IN. 00:06:56
For each building, there's two on the corners and two or four on the corners, so one for every corner. 00:06:58
And two right in the middle of the building. 00:07:04
And then this concrete paneling that is. 00:07:09
Halfway or in the midpoints of the buildings. 00:07:14
We're also not installed on the RE. 00:07:17
Parts of the building, so the build. 00:07:20
I don't have a site plan to show you but the buildings. 00:07:22
Um. 00:07:27
In two rows basically. 00:07:27
The outsides of the buildings have the concrete paneling. The pointed concrete paneling. Brian will pull up the sideline just for 00:07:30
discussion purposes. Yeah, but you can keep going. Sure. OK. Awesome. Thank you, Morgan. 00:07:36
And so those. 00:07:44
Those are the architectural elements that are inconsistent and then the other elements have to do with the colors. So let me show 00:07:46
you. 00:07:50
Well, it's currently been built or installed. 00:07:55
So as you might be able to see, this corner pieces don't have the corners of the buildings, no longer have the copper caps. 00:07:59
And this is showing the outside, so yeah. 00:08:07
So in this case this is the east elevation, but this is the outsides of the building, the inside walls where the trucks are coming 00:08:16
in making. 00:08:20
Dropping off goods and. 00:08:26
These concrete panels. 00:08:28
Were not installed and So what we got is. 00:08:31
A lengthy. 00:08:34
Unart. 00:08:36
Roof line such as this, but at the full length of the building. 00:08:38
The problem is that those parts of the building are. It's all visible from the. 00:08:43
1750 N Public Right of way. And so we're just aiming for consistency in the zoning code. I put the zoning codes in the staff 00:08:50
report that talked about massing, talk about articulation, talk about the colors that the zoning code requires. 00:08:57
In terms of the colors that design code requires. 00:09:05
It talks about earth tone, colors, muted colors. Colors aren't impactful on the surrounding area or development. 00:09:09
Umm. 00:09:18
I will go. I want to go back up to the original colors that were approved here. 00:09:19
Oops, my computer finally sent you a screenshot of sci-fi. Thank you. 00:09:23
Thank you very much. Let's look at that site plan first. 00:09:28
OK. 00:09:38
This is the layout of the. 00:09:41
So 1750 North is here on the bottom part of the. 00:09:44
The power plant in venue this year to the West, Northwest. 00:09:48
Then this, this side of the building, the West side of this building has the art, the articulated elements that that we requested 00:09:52
in the original approval. 00:09:57
This interior side. 00:10:02
This interior side of this other building does not and but this side of this building does. 00:10:06
So we get the articulation on the outsides of the building. 00:10:12
So I was waving my hands around, not doing it. 00:10:15
As much this is just a picture, we do so. 00:10:18
Let me go back to the. 00:10:23
Have a page just showing the colors. 00:10:32
Here we go. 00:10:37
OK, so these were the colors that are proved. There's maroons, greens, kind of a tan color, Gray. 00:10:45
This earthy darker color things that darker green. 00:10:52
These all met the zoning code requirements. 00:10:57
These are the new colors that have been installed. 00:11:00
We looked at a definition of what earth tone actually means. 00:11:05
And it's basically along the lines of what was originally proven, yet these, you know, more muted colors. Browns, Tans, Grays. 00:11:10
But also says anything that is reflected like naturally, and it does include white. So our issue is. 00:11:17
Is mostly with the blue. We feel that the blue is just a little too bold. 00:11:27
And not muted or toned down enough to meet the zoning code. 00:11:33
Let me. 00:11:41
Photographs of what the building currently looks like. 00:11:43
Zoom in. 00:11:47
So here's the good example showing the backside of the building without the the variations. 00:11:50
Also does not have the corner caps. 00:11:56
The corner caps we can we can do without. I think there would be enough articulation without the caps, but if we can still get the 00:12:00
the pointed concrete panelling on the parapet wall. 00:12:06
I think that would that would meet the intent of the zoning code. 00:12:13
This is the the colors I. 00:12:18
And this last one. 00:12:23
Showing women on the articulation. 00:12:25
So that provides a little more visual interest from the public. 00:12:27
Yeah. So our recommendations, my recommendations that we put in, that I put into the staff report. 00:12:36
Is to get that concrete pointed, pointed paneling. Like I said, the copper caps. I think we could do without the shell. White is 00:12:44
OK, but I think we need to do something with the blue. So our recommendation from staff is to take those points into consideration 00:12:49
and. 00:12:55
The applicants. 00:13:02
Tell you guys anything further about the project that you'd like to know? 00:13:04
Umm. 00:13:08
So I'll let them take the stand if you'd like to ask questions. 00:13:08
Chris Kephart. 00:13:21
Yeah, I guess the question is. 00:13:24
What happened with the plan going from this original plan to? 00:13:28
Who started painting? 00:13:33
We. 00:13:35
A paint change request back in. 00:13:36
We emailed it, we told them verbally. We attached it to the portal. I guess maybe we attached it to the wrong section of the 00:13:40
portal, I don't know. 00:13:44
Besides emailing and getting confirmation that they received. 00:13:48
Pink color change request. 00:13:52
I don't think there is anything left for us to do other than them telling us no, it's not OK, but that never happened. It never 00:13:54
got reviewed and that was almost a year ago. So we started pinning it this red color because it would it would have matched the 00:13:59
caps. 00:14:03
And everybody preferred this, this, this rust looking color and as we painted it. 00:14:08
Each across the tenant drove, I saw it and they thought it was ugly. So we're like they said, hey, can you paint an art color And 00:14:16
we're like, yeah, no problem, we can do that. We want to match their colors. I believe Nutri Cost is probably the biggest employer 00:14:22
in Vineyard. 00:14:28
And we wanted to keep them happy. The only runoff two of our buildings and the rooms, now these two as well. 00:14:34
So we did what they asked us to do. We paint it. 00:14:41
We've never had a problem before and changing paint colors, numbers ever said anything so I didn't know. 00:14:46
It would be a problem. And then nobody reviewed our red, so then I we didn't think it'd be a problem changing again because. 00:14:52
Nobody said anything until final. 00:15:00
Inspecting my life. This was unacceptable. 00:15:03
OK, so after we completely painted that, I mean it's been we started doing the blue. 00:15:07
What back in March? 00:15:13
Yeah, swimming in the city Sauce pain and blue. They could have said something. Hey, stop. We need to take this to. 00:15:16
The zoning or the Planning Commission, but nobody said anything, so we just. 00:15:22
And then curious about the roof, the roof that we're going to go on and the roof concrete. 00:15:28
That was before my time. 00:15:35
So they just decided, hey, this is too expensive, this is the. 00:15:38
So somebody else made that. 00:15:42
I didn't know that call was made, but that's what they did, OK. 00:15:44
OK. 00:15:48
The Planning Commission I just kind of had. So I I think you have you have the code in front of you it calls for for Thomas and I 00:15:50
I think that's kind of the the the general requirement. We do have other buildings that have accent colors on them like there's a. 00:15:58
The first. 00:16:06
And so that's that that that's something for for you to consider is like generally are they are they meeting the, the requirement, 00:16:12
is this an accent color that? 00:16:16
Would would fit. If you feel like it doesn't meet, meet the code. 00:16:21
You know, you can always have them go back to what the original proposal is. 00:16:26
So that's that that's that's kind of up to you. I would say this is probably fairly consistent with some of the other buildings as 00:16:31
far as providing accent. 00:16:35
And we are in the process of updating our our zoning code and our standards. 00:16:40
And we're going to put more clarification as far as colors and if we I think that goal is to keep the earth tone work because most 00:16:46
buildings have that in in Vindered, but there are a lot of accents and so providing the flexibility for for market and for logos 00:16:52
and and colors that that that companies have. 00:16:59
Was what was the idea, so anyway. 00:17:07
So you kind of have that before you send the ordinance and whether or not you feel that it meets the the ordinance to strong 00:17:09
enough degree if not? 00:17:14
Then you're able to go back to the original color. SO question for staff on this. 00:17:19
You know, a building's been there for five years or whatever and they go to repaint it. 00:17:24
Is that something they would need to run by the city? Yeah, our site plan code, right? Right now is is fairly strict and so yeah, 00:17:29
it it it gets into those level details that'll be part of. 00:17:36
Our consideration in this next month, Rachel's done a great job. 00:17:43
Going through our our zoning. 00:17:47
And all of our design centers and kind of pulling out the things that we would want to discuss and so that that's that's one of 00:17:49
those. 00:17:53
But yeah, right now if someone does. 00:17:57
Then. 00:18:00
By the code, they would have to go through a site plan amendment. OK, so yeah. 00:18:02
Just a couple of quick comments from my end is. 00:18:09
You know, earth tones is subjective even though like what we approved, you know, if you stick with that obviously wouldn't be any 00:18:12
issues. I think it's in our best interest to make that as tight as possible, right? So there's less subjectivity there. So I think 00:18:16
that's smart there. 00:18:20
My bigger concern is with the architecture. 00:18:25
And I know it wasn't necessarily used specifically, but you know, if something gets approved and someone decides, actually we 00:18:29
don't want to do that because we want to save money, I'm guessing most. 00:18:33
People want to save money in their architecture. 00:18:38
So that's the one that concerns me more here, especially when there's really no. 00:18:42
I mean like you're not necessarily going to go back and retrofit things and? 00:18:47
I don't. I don't want to be like so ******** to make an example of anything, but I also don't want the norm to be. 00:18:52
Build whatever you want and then go tell the. 00:18:59
Oops. Kind of thing, you know, So I think that. 00:19:02
There are some cities that have probably gone to court over this kind of stuff. We've done a bunch of research and you know, I, I, 00:19:39
I, I think you know that that's the kind of thing that, you know, you could say essentially the white is, the blue clearly isn't. 00:19:45
You know, when and we looked at several definitions. 00:19:50
But you could say that's a, that's an accent color and you know we have a credit union in the city that has the blue, we have the 00:19:57
the floor life and you know it's a very attractive building and so especially for manufacturing I think they've done a good job 00:20:02
and we don't necessarily want to get into the. 00:20:07
I guess like my my thought is we don't want to get into telling my companies that they can't use their corporate like logo colors 00:20:13
and stuff like that if allowed through an accent. I think the city does have the the right to have like a general, you know, 00:20:19
standard. They do want to have like the earth tones, but allowing for the accent I think is important. 00:20:26
But there are architecture is more concerning and that's that's that's something that you know if you get your plans approved 00:20:33
through the Planning Commission the you know the expectation is that you're going to follow the architecture. 00:20:38
Those were my main questions and comments, yeah. 00:20:48
Any other comments you guys have? Any other questions? 00:20:52
I just like to make sure. Yeah, go ahead. 00:20:56
Yeah. So I'm sorry and in Jensen with Nutra cost and for us, you know, so we we have two buildings on that road right now. This 00:20:59
would be two more. I think that put us over 1/4 of a million square feet for that road. So the majority of the people on that road 00:21:05
are probably employees of ours. We we definitely want the blue. So Morgan, I appreciate your comments, Anthony. I certainly 00:21:10
understand that there's some architectural issues to work through. But from our standpoint, we would, we would love to be able to 00:21:16
keep the blue. 00:21:22
We saw the red going up and it's like, hey that's not that's not our color that's you know, so we were the ones that said, hey, 00:21:30
we. 00:21:33
We want to paint it this color. 00:21:36
You know for whatever reason we never saw any colors and then the color started to go up and so we were like hey let's let's not 00:21:38
do that and and so you know maybe we have some culpability there but we you know we requested the blue and and certainly would 00:21:44
would like to the blue to remain. 00:21:49
Just out of curiosity, what color are your other buildings? 00:21:58
So the other 2 billions are kind of a light Gray with a dark Gray and then we have our Nutri cost sign on each of those buildings 00:22:01
which has the blue with like the orange dot. 00:22:07
And the sky is blue and light is blue. 00:22:14
So if Utah Lake was that color, I think our property values would be a much higher. 00:22:18
Just saying, yeah, definition. So you you have different options. One could be to you know make them go back to as the original 00:22:23
approval is. It sounds like there might be some openness on the color that would be kind of our our feeling is that and I feel 00:22:30
like it would be consistent with with the bank and with you know the four life building. 00:22:37
The so you could do like basically a segmented approval where you prove that but you require the architecture of that was in the 00:22:46
plan and there are a couple things there are those those you know those end caps and then you do have some I think if there's like 00:22:52
a metal awning and there's there's a few things like that that would need to be added back to the building. 00:22:59
So. 00:23:08
From a general. 00:23:09
Like the architecture? 00:23:11
Although they didn't do that, which I understand was approved, is consistent with the area because there's old buildings there 00:23:14
that are completely flat. 00:23:18
And so I know it's. 00:23:23
I know this is a newer standard I'm assuming compared to what was there before. 00:23:24
And so I can't exactly tell if this is like one of those stand up concrete buildings, but. 00:23:30
It is, yeah. So yeah, tilt. So realistically. 00:23:36
Just pull out a panel and put up another one. It would have to be some sort of. 00:23:43
Attachment I guess, right? Like if on the back. 00:23:48
And. 00:23:53
Like, how much could you really do to try to bring it back? 00:23:55
That perspective, Does that make sense? Yeah. 00:24:00
I mean, because I'm assuming there might be some things we could do, not necessarily, say, pull out the whole wall and put up 00:24:05
something else, right, To try to meet the architectural intent. 00:24:09
So from from an increase standpoint, you could probably go three to four feet above the parapet wall, but then after that you're 00:24:14
starting to lose structural integrity to go in and do major retrofits. 00:24:20
Roof structure to panel structure, just to be able to get it to hold that right because you you're trying to attach it. 00:24:27
And I mean, there's a lot of different ways that you can go about it, but it does start to. 00:24:34
'Cause some, some fairly substantial. 00:24:41
Reconstruction in construction and reconstruction. 00:24:45
And that's, I guess, when we talk. 00:24:49
Yes. It doesn't meet what was approved like I. 00:24:53
And just saying go back and put it how it was approved isn't realistic. 00:24:56
From a structural standpoint is what I'm saying, so. 00:25:01
I guess. 00:25:06
Opinion I guess is that I think that the blue problem meets like an accent colored type of thing, but. 00:25:07
To try to hold true to what we are trying to do. Granted there was not any necessarily ill will, I guess. 00:25:14
That would be something I think. 00:25:21
More interesting to see is how they could improve it or bring it up well, bring the architecture a little bit more. 00:25:24
Does that make sense? So I mean yes you have different options. One could be tonight you could approve the the blue and then ask 00:25:31
them to provide a from a structural engineer whether or not the the feasibility of adding the the roof elements and the the awning 00:25:37
because there is an awning on the on kind of that that end cap that goes around the the buildings adds like an architectural 00:25:43
detail. 00:25:49
And I I don't that doesn't look like it would be as structural and we've had others that forgot to put their awnings on that then 00:25:56
added them later and they were able to do that. 00:26:00
And so you know you if you wanted to have them basically provide you that that information they they they they could do that and 00:26:05
bring it back and then so you could approve the blue tonight and then you know they at least have that kind of headache out of the 00:26:10
way and then have them come back on their on the the structural or you could just approve that was they have they're proposing now 00:26:15
I mean it's up it's up to you. 00:26:20
Umm. 00:26:31
Couple other questions and this is more looking forward. 00:26:31
So like they submitted a paint change request, is that something that the city never received? 00:26:39
You know, thanks. OK, we'll put that in the file. And so, you know, there just was kind of that disconnect. Yeah. So we're 00:27:14
actually looking at a new software program that would kind of integrate the departments more. So hopefully we don't have like 00:27:20
those gaps. Yeah, that one. Yeah, For that reason that makes me feel like a little less ******** on that one as well because it 00:27:25
seems like good effort was made to try to inform us on that. Also, again, this may be a discussion just about, you know, operation 00:27:31
making sure it doesn't. 00:27:37
Happen again in the future if there's something like this, but how could we catch? 00:27:44
Earlier on, because it's in everyone's best interest that way, right? The retrofitting, the changing, those types of things are 00:27:48
easier. Again, maybe a different discussion, but. 00:27:53
You know, I know that I ride on that trail that's right behind there quite a bit and you're like it's been there for 10 months or 00:27:58
something like that, so. 00:28:02
But we understand they're frustrating because that's that's probably when it's like, oh, now it's gonna cost a ton of money to 00:28:44
have to make any changes. So having like a midpoint like maybe when you go vertical. 00:28:49
You know the inspection at some point. 00:28:55
So. 00:28:58
Sorry, if I may, Brian again. What if we always put a condition of approval in any site plan conditioning permit that what we're 00:28:59
approving tonight is what needs to be built? 00:29:05
Like just a reminder, like just iterating that because that's. 00:29:11
Kind of the standard zoning code and in the building, yeah, I think that the pre app to really should should be the the time and 00:29:15
then you know also the contractor and the the, you know, the landowner they, I mean everyone holds some responsibility when 00:29:21
something gets approved. I mean that's what really needs to get built. And so it would be nice if we could catch it earlier, but 00:29:28
ultimately when you get a set of plans approved, you know it's your responsibility to to build to that set of plans. 00:29:34
The last comment I was going to make. 00:29:41
Truthfully, like this as is isn't going to keep me up at night. Like that's that. That's not the concern. My my concern is the 00:29:44
precedent that that's even potentially legally. I don't think anything was done in bad acting here. 00:29:50
But you know, if someone sees something like this and it's like, all right, it didn't meet what was approved? 00:29:58
In the site plan. 00:30:04
Does that give more people wiggle room in the future if they are, you know, acting in bad faith and say like, well? 00:30:05
You didn't hold these guys to it. How can you legally hold me to this. And that's what does keep me up I think is something like 00:30:13
that. It's just let the precedent that it could set. Well, one thing I think that is gonna help it's kind of clear clear clear the 00:30:19
table and reset things is what the the ordinance that Rachel is putting together. 00:30:24
Once that gets adopted that basically resets like the code and I think that that would be really good time for us to to get that 00:30:31
then the new software in place. I know that Naseem has talked about working and getting a construction inspector and so maybe 00:30:37
between the planning department and that construction inspector with the new software we could develop a better process to to try 00:30:44
and and and catch these moving forward and then just overall up. 00:30:51
The level of scrutiny that that per permits get because the ideal you'll have times where we catch a bunch of stuff and there's 00:30:58
other times something just gets certain you're like Oh my gosh, that clearly didn't beat the code. And so you know I I think like 00:31:05
the new code having that in place is a really good time to you know to elevate but the review. 00:31:12
So but we're we're happy with however you you would like to proceed so we'll take. 00:31:23
So I guess for me personally, I'm personally fine with color I feel like. 00:31:33
Is an accent. 00:31:39
Enough. It is the architectural things for me that are an issue and that missing awning and stuff. If you guys could come back 00:31:42
with something that you feel. 00:31:47
Is equal to or greater than the plans that were originally submitted, as far as the changes in the elevation changes or even. 00:31:53
Some kind of other additions to kind of break up that continuous wall, I think that would be good and I agree with Anthony. 00:32:04
We don't want to set a precedent of we approve plans and then we don't follow through. I want to see. 00:32:13
With the plans that you guys bring back? 00:32:20
Something that looks just as good or better than the original. 00:32:23
And how you do that, that's up to you guys. That's your discretion I think Chris, is that something maybe Chris you could you 00:32:26
provide some like maybe maybe insight from your end on the? 00:32:31
I'm sorry, because could you could you please come to the stand? Thank you. Rachel, could you switch over because I think it might 00:32:38
help on the elevations we have here to show the details. 00:32:43
What we're talking about with designs, but yeah, owners would be. 00:32:48
No problem, because we can manufacture that in the house. That's an easy thing for us to do. 00:32:52
So just show the awnings on the windows. 00:32:59
In front of the doors and on the corners of the way, Yeah, so that's no problem. 00:33:05
That's something easy. We can do that. 00:33:11
Talking with the contractor. 00:33:15
That's the little roof line, he said. That would just be Styrofoam and stucco. 00:33:18
And then your caps. 00:33:25
Metal. Some metal. 00:33:27
I mean, if you want to do the caps, we can do the caps, do some metal shooting. 00:33:30
Umm. 00:33:35
That should be a problem. 00:33:37
Like, the cost just skyrocketed during COVID. So like, our roof was probably double. 00:33:39
Than what previous buildings were just everything was pretty much double. 00:33:44
So concrete goes up every year anyway, but just our basic supplies all the materials. 00:33:49
American Steel. So then it's a little faster. 00:33:57
All the laborers in Utah, Utah County specifically. 00:34:02
So we have. 00:34:07
Great crew and they do a good job. 00:34:09
That was called maybe for me saying, hey, we need to cut some costs on this building. I didn't have anything that and then. 00:34:13
Yeah, I apologize for that. So if we need to do those caps, we need those caps and we can do the Army, nothing, that's no, that's 00:34:21
no problem. That's something we can do in House. 00:34:25
And manufacture it and then then we're. 00:34:30
Like all guardrail freeway sign instructors, we do all that stuff in London. 00:34:34
And that's what my my boss specializes in. So that's the only deal and we have a bond in place with Chris has been approved so 00:34:39
they can now occupy the the space and then in the meantime we would just work with him. So on on getting kind of the like the 00:34:45
finishing touches on architecture completed it doesn't matter. The question I I definitely don't if we want to be as business 00:34:51
friendly as possible and like not hold anything up and I I would even say that I think we want to be as reasonable as possible 00:34:57
when crazy things like COVID happen. 00:35:03
Prices skyrocket just as long as it goes to the proper channels for the change requests. What you're going to know it wasn't used 00:35:10
specifically, but I think that's that's really the only issue here I think. 00:35:15
People would understand like, hey, if those accents that aren't necessarily like make or break for the building cost twice as 00:35:21
much, now that's an undue burden or projects not going to happen. I think most people would be reasonable with that and be willing 00:35:26
to make adjustments as long as it's not just a unilateral decision. 00:35:31
A site plan amendment and get it approved. Yeah, I think that's that's that's the key thing that I want to drive on so. 00:35:39
So because I know this is going to come up, is this a good opportunity to talk about the color of that roof? 00:35:49
Sure. Because we definitely don't want it to be brown. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You probably, you probably want to put that. 00:35:55
Something in alignment with what was on the. 00:36:05
Even though it's not bronze, but there's those colored legends. 00:36:07
So then I I would include that in your motion then, so that maybe you provide them the flexibility to to choose a color if you'd 00:36:11
like on that and I think that's small enough in comparison for the rest of the coverage that you could call that an accent color. 00:36:18
So. 00:36:25
It's up to you. 00:36:27
Does somebody want to make a motion? 00:36:28
Are you personally wanting to? 00:36:30
With the plans and I think that it's, I think it's good enough with staff if you feel like it's like the elevations. 00:36:34
Meet or exceed what they originally proposed as far as the intent. 00:36:44
The variation in the walls, then the elevations that were most recently submitted from architecture. You're just talking about the 00:36:50
light, light like the roof caps and the awning. I mean, those are the the pieces that they would need to add. 00:36:57
OK. I was talking about the the inner wall, how it's just flat. I don't think the inner walls are actually submitted along with 00:37:04
the elevation in the included in the elevations that were most recently submitted. 00:37:12
I think those are those are missing from. 00:37:20
OK, it. 00:37:23
West and. 00:37:25
That actually have the artisan, but from what I saw it, I didn't see the interior ones. 00:37:27
That are. 00:37:32
Isn't it? Sorry. So I I have east elevation for building C and West elevation for building C. OK, let's, let's take a look. Yeah, 00:37:38
maybe. Maybe it's not. 00:37:43
It looks like the interior. They look fairly flat on the elevations like the internal ones. 00:37:50
It looks like it's like you can see the. 00:37:56
Maybe that's the backside. Yeah, The backside of the east side, yeah, Yeah. 00:37:59
So yeah, so these current elevations, if you approve these. 00:38:06
Would retain the flat. 00:38:09
OK. And this is what is built right now? That's what it's built right now, yes. And it looks like the original plans. 00:38:12
Originals are here. 00:38:19
Because that could be the backsides of all those. It looks like it is the backsides of all those. So that really is awnings and 00:38:23
the caps. 00:38:26
That's the difference, yeah. 00:38:31
Yeah, I'm fine. 00:38:34
And if you're OK allowing them the flexibility on the color of the of the roof caps, yeah. And I just want to add that when I went 00:38:36
out there. 00:38:40
These these panels. 00:38:46
Forward and back variation. So it's not just a flat wall, it is specifically the roof line that we were concerned about. 00:38:49
So. 00:38:58
Motion. 00:39:03
Sure, Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve the minor site plan amendment. 00:39:05
With the focus on. 00:39:12
End caps and awnings to meet the original architectural intent. 00:39:16
And then also to approve the current color palette that's already on the building. 00:39:21
And to give them liberty to change the material color of the caps. 00:39:27
Yeah, yeah, yeah. For that accent color of the cap, yeah, allow them to to choose that in line with what was discussed tonight. 00:39:32
OK. 00:39:39
Do I have anything black and Gray? Yeah. 00:39:40
I'll second. 00:39:43
All in favor, aye. 00:39:44
Right. 00:39:46
Thank. 00:39:47
Thank you, Commission. And you were saying there's more buildings to be built, right? 00:39:48
So just, you know, follow the plants. 00:39:54
Original site planning that had four, so we are two, four basically. 00:39:59
50,000, so we'll make sure everything we're about, so we'll make sure we need. 00:40:05
Thank you guys. 00:40:17
All right, moving on to 4.2, the public hearing and zoning for the zoning text amendment on the water efficiency standards. 00:40:19
Emily's got this one. 00:40:26
All right, good evening, Planning Commission. My name is Emily Kofa, and I'm talking about the water efficiency standards this 00:40:57
evening. 00:41:00
So I showed this slide last time. I just wanted to give you guys an update of where we are and a reminder that in January we 00:41:04
requested 3504 acre feet of water from C UW CD for over the next five years to help meet our demands. And C UW CD has asked that 00:41:12
we implement some things to qualify for that water. And so we've already. So one of the things they asked for was the water use 00:41:19
and preservation element. 00:41:26
To be added to our general plan according to Senate Bill 110, and that was approved by City Council and that's complete. The 00:41:35
second thing they asked was for us to implement a water conservation plan and that has been approved by the Utah Department of 00:41:43
Water Resources and it's been adopted by City Council this past City Council meeting. 00:41:51
And so today, we're moving on to the third item, which is the water efficiency standards. 00:41:59
That will are concerned with our landscaping code. I'll amend our code. And so the purpose of the water efficiency standards is to 00:42:05
conserve the public's water resources. 00:42:10
And they are all set according to CWC D's guidelines like straight from from what they suggested and all of these standards 00:42:16
concern. 00:42:21
The placement of turf in outdoor landscaping. 00:42:27
And So what we to adopt these water efficiency standards, we'd like to amend our code, our landscaping in particular, and add a 00:42:32
section entitled Water Efficiency Standards. 00:42:39
And see WCD. 00:42:46
Gave requirements recommendations and considerations and so we are only implementing the requirements that they have provided us. 00:42:50
Yes, the recommendations and considerations will work to put them into the vineyard Tree and landscape manual, because that's 00:42:59
because they're not legislative. 00:43:04
We didn't think that they were most appropriate within the zoning code, so we'll find an appropriate location for those 00:43:10
considerations in the manual. 00:43:13
Thanks. 00:43:20
So to quickly summarize these requirements, I'll just quickly read through it. So this concerns all new residential, commercial, 00:43:21
institutional and industrial construction receiving a certificate of occupancy. 00:43:28
As well as all new landscaping for public agencies, private development projects and developer installed landscaping development. 00:43:37
As well as developments receiving a certificate of occupancy after the adoption of this ordinance. 00:43:45
And it concerns the front yards of single family dwellings. 00:43:51
And so getting to the meat of this, to the standards. 00:43:56
CWCD, according to their guidelines, has recommended that we require turf to not be less than 8 feet wide at its narrowest point 00:44:00
and not to not exceed 35% of total landscaped area. 00:44:07
Turf shall not be installed and park strips pass or slopes greater than 25%. 00:44:15
And then at the maturity landscape shall have enough plant material to create at least 50% living plant cover at ground plain and 00:44:21
not including tree canopies. 00:44:27
And finally, for detached single family residential dwellings, they shall install landscaping within one year of their certificate 00:44:34
of occupancy. Brian wanted to add a few things. Oh yeah, so we currently don't have a requirement within the landscaping code that 00:44:41
requires people to install their their turf on their property at all. So we put in a requirement that only. 00:44:49
Require people to to landscape the front yard of their of a single of the detached single family dwelling. And if they're on a 00:44:58
corner lot then they also have to do the front yard and the. 00:45:04
How's it here? The exposed corner side, yards of all of all lots that are in a corner, so the parts that are exposed. 00:45:10
If they're behind a fence, then that doesn't need to be landscaped. 00:45:19
And then that, that year requirement, once they get that certificate of occupancy, then they have a year to get that landscaping. 00:45:26
Try to question in The Who it says our new residential, our new landscaping and developments with a. 00:45:34
And. 00:45:44
But then it says front yards of single family dwellings. Is that all new single family dwellings? Exactly. 00:45:46
We want to make a clarity that we want. 00:45:56
Gonna try to enforce like side yards in people's backyard thing. I think it's a bit of an overreach, yeah, and I think that with 00:45:59
Utah and. 00:46:03
Them having. 00:46:07
To. 00:46:09
Have people change their yards will be beneficial in helping people change over from sod to something else. 00:46:10
The question I always have with. 00:46:17
Any rule that's not going to be enforced, we shouldn't even have the rule. I think so like. 00:46:21
Someone doesn't install within a year what happens? Nothing. Or is it just words? Because if it's if it is just words, I'm not 00:46:27
knocking the words. They're good words. But like get rid of them if if we don't have a plan to enforce them is kind of what I'm, I 00:46:33
think our mechanism. Morgan, you can correct me. I mean that's that's what we have code enforcement for. 00:46:40
We'll take take them as as we come as appropriate and it more. 00:46:46
Citizen initiated. 00:46:52
Right, as long as it's clear. I just want to make sure. 00:46:56
Not just muddying up the books with a bunch of yeah. 00:46:59
The nice words, yeah. The benefit of this is also having having the landscape, not letting a yard sit there for, you know, an 00:47:03
indefinite amount of time without. 00:47:07
People putting the grass and or whatever type of their. 00:47:12
Like I said before, we're working on templates that we can help people show them what kind of landscape they can do. That would be 00:47:17
their escape from water wise so. 00:47:21
Hope to get those out soon enough, hopefully. 00:47:25
I have a silly question. 00:47:29
Detached single family residence. Is that a standard house? 00:47:32
Yeah, so that is not a duplex, not a four Plex, not multifamily and not attached. The sometimes Ted townhomes are referred to as 00:47:36
attached single family. 00:47:42
And then remind me. 00:47:49
The ordinance will approve that you can install auxiliary dwellings, right? 00:47:52
Oh yeah. 00:47:57
So. 00:48:01
Do we need to specifically? 00:48:03
Clock it doesn't. I mean, they're not coded the same way, I guess, right? So will there be? Is there any reason to worry if 00:48:05
there's going to be any conflict? 00:48:10
Those, those are only allowed in the backyard anyway. That's what I was thinking. It's like you can say, well, what about the 00:48:15
front yard of that? Yeah, I was thinking they're going to put that in and then they're all you got to landscape the backyard now 00:48:19
because that thing that anyways, I just want to make sure there wouldn't be a future conflict. 00:48:24
Good point. Good point. 00:48:30
All right. Any other questions? 00:48:33
Thank you. Thanks. 00:48:36
All right, I do have a motion to open this up for a public hearing. 00:48:39
Motion to open up a public hearing, All right. 00:48:45
Second, all in favor, aye, all right, now is the time to comment on if you want to make a comment on this. 00:48:48
Seeing as there aren't any, OK, here we go. 00:48:59
I know before when we were trying to. 00:49:07
Enforce. 00:49:10
How much? You know, the landscaping and all, I think we never had enough personnel. 00:49:12
So along with this. 00:49:16
Additional. 00:49:20
Amount of money that's going to be coming into the budget to handle the additional code enforcement you can have to have. 00:49:21
To do this kind of work. 00:49:28
Because. 00:49:30
Going around to every single family home, making sure. 00:49:31
At least 35. 00:49:34
You. 00:49:36
That's my concern. 00:49:39
You're talking about just. 00:49:41
Good. 00:49:44
Quite an awful lot, yeah. 00:49:47
That was a great question and that that is something I know over the next year Nassim has been working at getting some, getting a 00:49:50
position in place that could help potentially kind of overlap between the planning and the engineering department as far as 00:49:56
providing some construction inspections where they they be able to analyze some of those things. And so yeah, I I absolutely agree 00:50:02
with that. If we have a standard we need to be able to have a mechanism in place. Well, it's nice how we wrote this. So we made 00:50:08
sure that it was like. 00:50:14
New construction going forward? 00:50:21
We're not going to go retroactive and make all the neighbors, you know, all the existing residents, adhere to an ordinance that's 00:50:22
just put in place. But it would be that new construction. 00:50:26
Yeah, this is that is Sam Works Director of City Engineer. So as part of this as well as with. 00:50:31
Residents that happening in the landscape within a year part of the building permits requirements will it just be having the. 00:50:41
Building submitted landscaping plan at the time of submitting the building permit. 00:50:49
On that, and with that, you'll the city will be able to do his initial checks during its initial reviews of the percent. 00:50:53
And then from there, the good thing about the works is we're always outside, we're always driving around, we're always checking, 00:51:01
checking out things. So for example. 00:51:05
Our, excuse me, doing the inspections and going around on on homes we're able to check. 00:51:11
We're out there checking. Typically when I get a call for a violation, I end up picking up. I end up documenting five or six other 00:51:17
house homes. 00:51:21
Buildings that have violations on my way there, and sometimes it's the person who called me complaining about the violation. I and 00:51:27
the Brian them up for like several other violations as well because it's my job to document everything that that I see, regardless 00:51:31
of. 00:51:36
Who calls it in or doesn't call it in? Part of our, excuse me, part of our. 00:51:41
Miss 4 program or so programs to go out to make sure that the city's the Rose control like we don't have debris going into our 00:51:47
storm grain systems, so ensuring that residences have stabilizer soils and a proper time manner is to the advantage. Of course 00:51:55
everything does cost money and with this we'll be seeing updates to our fee schedule for pelonies, for individuals or companies 00:52:02
and so forth that do not divide to the to this because ultimately it does hurt the residences all. 00:52:10
And that's best case scenario. We don't have to worry about any violations. 00:52:18
Pardon me, Commission. Oh, did you want to ask any questions? I actually did have a question for Emily. 00:52:23
How will we know we're being successful in this? Like I think last meeting you mentioned you have some baseline numbers about. 00:52:32
Per capita water use or single family home water use like how will we know that? 00:52:40
The water efficiency standards are actually helping us be more efficient. 00:52:45
So we keep track of our of our data and our water usage. And so we'll be able to check it through data as well as through our 00:52:50
water conservation plan. We have several goals that we're trying to meet and one of those goals is to. 00:52:57
Reduce the amount of water we're using by a certain percentage. 00:53:06
And so that's one way to track it. That's a good question. So then do you have anything to add? 00:53:09
You did fantastic. 00:53:16
Committed. I just wanted to show you guys the difference. So the ordinance that you guys got in the packet today is a little bit 00:53:19
different. It's kind of different with these additions that we've been discussing that will be signed and approved sometime this 00:53:25
week or next week by by the mayor and and the recorder. 00:53:31
So I just wanted to show it to you what it's going to look like in its final form. We also put in a diagram. 00:53:38
To. 00:53:45
The example of what we mean in people's front yards and the corner yards. 00:53:46
Or the the side yards of a corner lot. 00:53:52
So in applicability we added this bullet point here bullet Point C. 00:53:56
So these these standards only apply to the front yards and so forth on the side area of a corner lot. And then we added this 00:54:02
diagram. 00:54:05
That shows the pics with the landscaping is. 00:54:09
And requirements we added. 00:54:20
So the landscaping requirements detached single family, residential, residential, dwelling. 00:54:24
Shall be installed within one year. That's the timeline detail. 00:54:30
So you'll be approving this this tonight? 00:54:35
Going back to the side yard for the. 00:54:39
You want to see the. 00:54:45
Yeah. 00:54:47
1. 00:54:53
OK. 00:55:00
I did have a question. 00:55:01
But insulation finds itself. 00:55:06
To the installation centers. 00:55:10
Yeah. 00:55:15
Right. 00:55:21
Can you make some kind of something that says? 00:55:23
It shall be within the dinner room last year annual. 00:55:29
Or you have to have Appro? 00:55:33
I believe the manual has. It provides the city engineer the ability to approve things outside as long as it meets the intent. The 00:55:37
intent is water wise, climate appropriate, low maintenance and so. 00:55:45
Yeah. So I think we're probably covered, but when we when we update update that manual, we we can just put the specific language 00:55:53
in there as well. 00:55:57
And again, the CMRS. The city engineer, who apparently proves the variances. But the city has a door strand. The city arborist is 00:56:02
very. 00:56:07
Integral part of this tree committee and he's very first in terms of. 00:56:13
Natural landscaping, real escaping and so and local escaping. So rest assured that any kind of variances that go to the tree 00:56:20
committee, the tree and landscape committee will be reviewed by. 00:56:25
Will be reviewed by our local experts in terms of that and as well as their council members who take a very active role and and 00:56:31
assuring that our city landscaping not only look is 0 escape but it also looks nice. 00:56:38
Married. 00:56:50
OK. 00:56:56
It's a question. Do I have a motion to close the public? 00:57:02
Motion to close the public hearing. 00:57:09
A second all in favor. 00:57:13
Yeah, I can make a motion. 00:57:18
I move to recommend approval of Ordinance 2023-12 as presented by city staff and also ensuring that City Council explores 00:57:20
enforcement. 00:57:26
And public reporting and success measures. 00:57:32
Do I have a second second. 00:57:37
This is a local or yeah, great. 00:57:38
Aye, aye. 00:57:45
Right now passes 4.3. 00:57:46
Pardon me, Chair, do you mind reading the exact wording in the in the agenda for the motion? Thanks. 00:57:58
Is that the March 15th something? 00:58:27
I'll listen to move that to March 15th. 00:58:30
And then it will be oh, and it'll be renoticed. 00:58:36
2nd. 00:58:40
Huh. 00:58:47
All in favor, aye. 00:58:49
All right, this is going to be me. Switch it over. 00:58:52
Great question. Oh, cash ante planner. 00:59:03
All right, so I have a little slideshow presentation. Shouldn't take too long. We've just been reached out, a few residents and 00:59:08
and some members of the City Council reached out to us about. 00:59:12
Reexamining our our code regarding domestic power chickens, currently our. 00:59:18
Only allows for domestic foul on lots that are one acre or larger. Larger here in Vineyard we don't have too many lots that are 00:59:23
that size. 00:59:27
And so I dissected the code and made a few changes and so for this work session we just want to get your thoughts on on these 00:59:32
changes and and so this is kind of what I've broken it down to. 00:59:37
Rather than just to have a blank statement of thoughts larger than one acre can have, I think it's like 25 chickens. We created a 00:59:42
tier system that would allow for lots of small 5000 square feet to have chickens and I'll I'll, I'll get into those with details 00:59:47
on later slides. 00:59:52
We would require all domestic foul to be confined outdoors in an enclosed area or a chicken coop. 00:59:58
It would prohibit the slaughtering of domestic fowl, it prohibits Roosters and then it includes the definition of domestic style 01:00:04
as a bird of one. 01:00:08
The breed that developed from the jungle fowl, Gallus Gallus, specialized for laying eggs. 01:00:13
So no pheasants, no pheasants, turkeys. 01:00:19
Yeah, Yeah, John. Yeah. OK, good. OK, So here here's the chart and this is where I think we want, we want most of your feedback. 01:00:23
So this is how we have it broken down. I noticed in the text in the the agenda that we sent out, there's a little oversight in 01:00:30
that. I completely erased the lots of one acre or larger could have up to 25 domestic foul. And so currently is is a threat in in 01:00:36
the agenda packet, lots of over an acre would only be able to have 6 chickens. So I want to know if you guys want to see that 01:00:42
increase to allow. 01:00:49
I think there might be like 6 lots that are an acre or more in the city if you want to continue allowing them to have the 20 hawk 01:00:56
chickens or if we should just cap it where I got these numbers from? Or I just examined nearby cities to see what they did and and 01:01:02
they were all very similar to this tiered system. 01:01:08
So do you have any questions or comments on that? 01:01:16
I just have. 01:01:19
Silly question SO. 01:01:21
5000 square feet. Is that the minimum lot size to build a single detached family house? No. So this. So this does limit correct. 01:01:23
Yeah yeah. I would say maybe half. I couldn't I don't even want to say another but but but it does limit. Morgan said 2500 is is 01:01:31
the smallest that that we Yeah, the smallest. 01:01:39
We were working on creating maps that would hopefully help us break that down so we could see percentages. 01:01:48
But if 5000, it is still pretty small I think. 01:01:55
I wish I had my map that I can show you or how I have it broken down. 01:01:59
Do you any questions or anything about that? 01:02:10
In the language I need to dive into it exactly. 01:02:14
Are we clear that these are? 01:02:18
The lot size of single family homes and not just. 01:02:19
Or would it apply? 01:02:22
And obviously like a four Plex would have. 01:02:25
Or like, yeah, I'm pretty sure it's a single family Watts. Yeah, yeah, I'll double check. I'll make sure when we come back for for 01:02:27
a tax amendment that it doesn't apply to commercial. Yeah, it does say in the code it is specific in in specific residential 01:02:33
zones. 01:02:39
Because yeah, you're right. We shouldn't, you know, know condo or town home should be having a little chicken coop and and the 01:02:47
other thing about the code. 01:02:50
The coop requirements does make it even more restrictive because of the the coupe. Essentially what it is is minimum flurry of two 01:02:55
square feet per per domestic foul if they're not allowed to. If the the chickens aren't allowed to to roam outside, it has to be 01:03:00
at least six square feet per domestic out and then there are setbacks so that your neighbor can't put a chicken coop right next to 01:03:06
your house. 01:03:12
We really don't want to make this become a burdensome task for code enforcement to handle. You know, we don't want them out there 01:03:51
measuring chicken coops and making sure that they're six feet away from somebody's house. I don't even think we'd do any kind of 01:03:57
like building permit review. 01:04:02
Yeah, I mean it depends. I mean our the bill increment is 200 square feet so that's where it would trigger. So they did a really 01:04:10
substantial one with like on a foundation or they put a electrical inside of it too that would trigger plumbing. And so we 01:04:16
remember we talked about this issue a couple years ago and I I believe you know some of the set back stuff that we looked at was 01:04:23
you know Brian just kind of said like the runoff and I think that that's a good point too is if. 01:04:30
You know you are going to have a bunch of chickens running around if like a chicken run or something. Having some set back is 01:04:38
probably appropriate what you know. 01:04:41
The water rolling on us on this property and there's also noise and stuff like that and potential odor on on how well they keep up 01:04:46
with it, but you'll get that with anything. This one has dogs and they don't, you know, take care of their their pets. You're 01:04:51
going to get older as well. 01:04:55
Real quick just just to go off about the code also is very specific that the chickens that their feed that everything like that 01:05:02
does have to maintain on site. So no odors or or sound or anything like that. You know all of our other ordinances have to be 01:05:08
observed. So if somebody does have some really loud chickens then you know we can we can do the code enforcement process to. 01:05:14
To solve that. OK, all right. So personally, I don't think we need the six feet from any dwelling. 01:05:21
And then it says the coop shall be located in the 20 feet or 30 feet. 01:05:28
Does that mean the enclosure? 01:05:33
Or can the coop be 20 feet from the property line and then it's enclosed? 01:05:36
All the way up to the. 01:05:41
If that makes sense, I'll clarify that language to make sure that the whole structure is 20 feet from the property line and 30 01:05:42
feet from the nearby residential dwellings. 01:05:47
Something to or so are you talking about like a chicken like run? She has a coop and then you have the fence, stereo, a lot of 01:05:53
stuff like that. Or what's your preference dude, you want the whole thing to maintain the set back. So this just had was calling 01:05:59
one an enclosure and then another one and then a coop. 01:06:05
Yeah. 01:06:12
Not sure what my preference would be. 01:06:15
I think having them. 01:06:20
That far away would be good for the neighbor, but also it kind of eats your entire backyard if you do something like that. 01:06:23
I think if not this. 01:06:32
I know. 01:06:36
To keep chickens, you need to. You're supposed to put them into their coop every night and bring them out every morning and stuff. 01:06:38
Maybe the concern would be. 01:06:47
If if if we're allowing the enclosed area to go all the way up to the fence or closer to the fence, maybe they would have some 01:06:51
time. 01:06:55
Some like specific time that they can let the chickens out. 01:07:00
Yeah, the code does allow them to like roam in the backyard, but they have to be maintained in that enclosed backyard. You can 01:07:03
have like a it has to be just fenced in. 01:07:08
But the coop itself, like where they would have their feet in water and sleep or whatever, that would have to be within those 01:07:14
setbacks. OK, OK. 01:07:18
Could AHOARCCNRS still restrict I? I believe so. I I reached out, right? Yeah. And I I reached out to to Waters Edge just because 01:07:23
that's the largest HOA and they just haven't gotten back to me yet. So even if this did pass, you know, we want to make sure that 01:07:30
that water judge is still OK with that and then it's not, then you know, it's up to them. But I just wouldn't want to cause any 01:07:37
problems with like people just saying like, hey, the city said go for it and it causes problems with the Hoas. 01:07:44
So just to give you a good idea, sorry this isn't the best chart in the world, but I just went around to different neighborhoods 01:07:51
and and just got a good gauge of of lot sizes. 01:07:57
Just to show you the different neighborhoods and what they would allow and you can see this pretty restrictive like none of these 01:08:03
neighborhoods here have the the lot size large enough that there might be somewhere if it's cul-de-sac or corner their their lot 01:08:07
might reach that. 01:08:12
That that smallest limit where they could have up to 3 chickens, but for the most part I'd say on average most lots if they can, 01:08:18
would be at the three to four range. 01:08:22
So yeah, besides that, I did want to go over a timeline. Like I said, I've had some residents that are pretty eager to to get this 01:08:31
going to for the spring so they can get some chickens if it is you know passed. And So what we were looking at doing would be 01:08:38
issuing a public notice for this tomorrow. So by the next public or by the next Planning Commission, we could have. 01:08:44
A public hearing, get a recommendation and then I would go to the City Council, I believe on the 22nd for their approval or 01:08:52
denial. 01:08:56
OK, so. 01:09:00
And I think it's not necessary to put in here, but it might be good to put in here anyway is that it still needs to meet. 01:09:01
If there's smell emanating from it, if there is X, like all these things that are code. 01:09:09
It might be good to just point it out like hey like, yeah, and I should have included that in the slideshow. So in the in the 01:09:15
domestic foul code section, it does talk all about that. This is just kind of the changes I'm making to that section of code. 01:09:22
But yeah, we we want to make sure that that no sound or odor or anything like that or even we included that like all the food has 01:09:31
to be stored in like rodent safe containers so that we're not getting like rats and stuff like that. 01:09:37
So, yeah, any questions about that? 01:09:45
And. 01:09:48
Sure. Yeah. Go ahead, Don. 01:09:51
So what if you have an HOA that? 01:09:56
And then you have to the ordinance that allows it. 01:10:02
Get some chickens. Then it would be up to the HOA to enforce that. And they do have their own code enforcement personnel that that 01:10:39
handle that. 01:10:42
Would you have something in this document that would basically state that, yeah, I could include language like that, but yeah, 01:10:46
absolutely. 01:10:50
Yeah, thanks for that comment. 01:10:55
Other than that, I think it looks good and when we did review this last time. 01:11:00
I was the one that was like pretty against most of the things so but this looks good. 01:11:05
Yeah, when we did the bees and the chickens last time. 01:11:10
Cool. 01:11:15
Yeah. Excited to see it. Thanks. 01:11:17
Cash. 01:11:21
Moving on to 5.2, the sign code text amendment. 01:11:23
It's me again. 01:11:28
So a few months ago we came to you guys with the science standard waiver for for a sign and and we told you we'd be coming back in 01:11:31
a few weeks or months for a work session to talk about the Science Center waiver. We staff just feel that we we don't know if 01:11:37
there's a lot of purpose in the sign standard waiver. We come into the Planning Commission meetings and I don't know if any of 01:11:44
them have ever gotten denied. You can correct me if I'm wrong. 01:11:51
And So what we did is we just took kind of what the sign standard waiver was accomplishing and put it into the code. 01:12:00
And and so I'll review all of that. So the zoning text amendment it would remove that sign send waiver and doing so it increase 01:12:06
the permitted sign sizes throughout the stand sign center waiver and I'll get into each one of those. 01:12:12
In addition, it would create a new sign type called Development Promotional Directional sign. 01:12:19
Just to get this one out of the way, when when a new development comes to the city, they often put up signs. I don't know if 01:12:27
you've seen like the car wash ones or even hold away farms or whatever they're calling it now. They've all put up these signs. The 01:12:33
Forge has one. They aren't currently allowed by our code. 01:12:38
And so we thought, we should allow them. 01:12:44
And that's what this does. So it includes a definition of what is allowed to be on the sign as well as the square footage size of 01:12:47
96 square feet, a height of 15 feet, as well as some setbacks and then a maximum of four signs if they have 4 frontages onto 01:12:54
streets so. 01:13:01
If you guys have any questions about that, I'm happy. Like does that forge sign even fit this? I I believe so. I I haven't 01:13:08
measured that one. That one is quite large. That one's probably taller than the 15 feet. I can go out there and measure it. If we 01:13:14
need to adjust just to accommodate, sure. But I mean, do you think that sign is fitting for its development? My only concern with 01:13:19
this is. 01:13:25
We don't want de facto billboards, that's for sure. 01:13:33
And as we've seen, some of those signs could be up there for years. So yeah, the language of this code does say that that it is a 01:13:36
proof of community development department and they are allowed to be up for one year and they're able to get one extension of that 01:13:43
for an additional year. For instance, if it is a large project that's taking multiple years, they could get that that approval 01:13:49
something like the Forge, I mean that's been up for who knows how long. It's a de facto billboard. 01:13:55
Yeah. 01:14:04
So you're absolutely right with that. Other cities what they do is they've stated in there that like signs have to be removed 01:14:06
before the last certificate of occupancy is issued. So there are some enforcement tactics that we could use or put into the code 01:14:13
if you think that that's necessary or if you think A2 year maximum length is is good enough. 01:14:19
But yeah, the meat of this text amendment is mostly that getting rid of the sign standard way or so whenever we come to you with 01:14:29
these applications. 01:14:33
There there's certain criteria that that we're able to to wave with the sign standard waiver, so that would be the placement, the 01:14:37
quantity, height, sign area and design features. 01:14:41
So if for instance the. 01:14:47
A developer wanted to put up a monument sign that was 18 feet tall. Our current code only allows 15 feet. They could say, you 01:14:49
know, we're on a busy St. we need better visibility. We have multiple tenants and then the Planning Commission, you know, can vote 01:14:54
to support that. Since 2019, there's been twenty of these applications. I think we've even had some planning permission meetings 01:15:00
where that was like our only agenda item. 01:15:05
And so we that's I think the biggest reason we wanted to do this tax amendment was just to clear that up. 01:15:11
So let's see, this would one of the other changes would be to include the DRU in the Science standard table. Currently it's not in 01:15:20
there and so if they want to have any signs over there, they need to follow. 01:15:26
This. 01:15:33
So the first sign is going to be a monument sign. I just picked some generic one. Just to give you a refresher of what those look 01:15:35
like, this would be a multi tenant monument. 01:15:39
So reviewing them, the single tenant only change would be. 01:15:46
It would increase the maximum height to 10 feet, and it's currently at six feet. That would be the only change, as that's what the 01:15:50
the sign standard waiver allows is is up to 10 feet. 01:15:54
Multi tenant, the size of 80 square feet would remain the same, but the height would be increased to 20 square feet would be 01:15:59
allowed outright. 01:16:03
And that currently is at 15 feet and I believe we have multiple one of these multi tenant signs from the yard to Maverick, they're 01:16:08
all above that 15 foot height. 01:16:12
And then we have little friends here, so I just took this from Google. 01:16:20
Images so you could see what those signs look. 01:16:24
So this is where it can get a little confusing. Our current sign code allows a wall sign up to 5% of the building's elevation, but 01:16:28
they can go up to 8% of the elevation if they borrow some of the sign allowance from a different elevation. 01:16:35
So in total assignment waiver would allow up to 8%. 01:16:43
We looked at other cities and thought they were well above that 8% limit and so we felt that a 10% limit would would solve that 01:16:47
issue. 01:16:51
The height there be no change to that the location. 01:16:56
It currently says the sign has to be located within 80% of the building frontage unless the. 01:17:01
Approved through sign center waivers you can see here like one of those signs I think falls within that 80%. 01:17:07
So we just said it cannot exist above the roof line. We just want them to be super tall or going beyond, beyond the building 01:17:16
itself and then quantity, no quantity limit would was proposed. We've had a few instances I think on some of the medical office 01:17:22
buildings where the size was fine but they had more. 01:17:27
Then is allowed and so they had to go through the current standard waiver process to get that approved. 01:17:34
So I have one example just to show you what that would look like the going the the wall sign going from the 5% to the 10%. 01:17:40
Let's see if this pops up. So this is the Cafe Rio building that just went up. 01:17:50
Just to give you an idea, this is their current sign. It's about 61 square feet and this is what the the code would allow up to. 01:17:55
That would be about 10% of the building facade. 01:18:00
On that side. 01:18:06
So I know I just went over a lot. Do you guys have any questions about that? 01:18:08
So I think it's a good thing that if you know we're issuing so many waivers that we just look at the main source and try to revise 01:18:15
it. So I think that is great to be proactive. 01:18:20
I'm complimenting you guys for doing that. So the intent after this though, do we still anticipate that there would be signs that 01:18:28
would need to get sign labours? 01:18:33
So this would completely remove the science standard waiver from the code. So OK, so my last different way. So if somebody doesn't 01:18:37
but they still want to go bigger than that, they would not. It would be correct. They'd have to go through like a zoning text 01:18:45
amendment to increase the sign allowance or whatever it may be. But we could just administratively deny it, OK. 01:18:52
I just want to point out there, there might be an instance where you get. 01:19:04
Especially like in the downtown where your architecture is going to be you know fair fairly large. I mean they've talked 01:19:08
potentially like there there may be a couple buildings or 10 plus stories that they could have. 01:19:13
And so I think that's probably how we would handle, you know, something really special like that, OK. And that honestly. 01:19:51
Trying to get out was that there has to be some way. So I appreciate clarification. Yeah. And and other things we will be we we 01:19:59
just weren't ready this time around to to go over. But we will be coming back hopefully soon addressing murals and how that 01:20:06
affects science because a lot of times you can have a mural and within that mural you'll have a sign. So for instance the the. 01:20:13
Mult. 01:20:21
The multifamily building that that's going up by the yard from what they've proposed, they're going to have these like murals on 01:20:22
the building, but inside the mural is the work the yard or something like that. And so we'll be coming back with with language to 01:20:29
help clarify that, to talk about how how we can differentiate murals from signs. 01:20:35
And how we'd measure the sign within a mural or whatever it may be. 01:20:42
Are there? 01:20:48
Signs that are out of compliance that need to be addressed. Again, like maybe you don't know off the top of your head, but. 01:20:50
I know. 01:20:57
A. 01:20:59
Like for lease or like now, we sure like those types like a temporary sign. What temporary, but five years, you know? 01:21:01
I'm just curious as part of this if there's a renewed push. I know it takes man hours and things like that, but. 01:21:10
I'm I'm not sure I haven't. I mean I haven't like gone around driving around looking for for non conforming signs. 01:21:16
Same thing like if, If we're gonna update this and make it the way we want, I think we need to make sure that. 01:21:24
Everything else is. 01:21:30
Thinking the megaplex has that like Spire at the top. 01:21:37
And I'm fine with that. I just would, you know, as we're like. 01:21:45
Fine tuning everything. Just make sure that it's always going to like reset and say. 01:21:49
But yeah, when I come back with the actual text amendment, I can do a drive around and look out for stuff like that and see how 01:21:57
that would fit within this code and and how we could address that, OK? 01:22:03
I did. 01:22:13
I didn't have a question about murals. 01:22:13
Um. 01:22:17
It says 30% of the building professor facade, so I should have addressed that. We put that in this and then I realized I wasn't 01:22:17
quite ready to dress up because things like the water tank that is going up that we were going to put a mirror on, it would take 01:22:25
over more than 30% of that. So we as a department need to to review how we want to do that plus the the creation of this new park. 01:22:32
Committee that would that will be reviewing murals and stuff like that. So that I wasn't quite ready but I realized I put it into 01:22:41
the the agenda packet so that wouldn't be part of this zoning text 11. 01:22:47
I just, I guess just a comment and I sure, yeah, it doesn't matter. Is a lot of the coolest murals take up the whole stuff, right? 01:22:54
That's exactly what I thought of today. I was like, it'd be weird to have just a tiny little mural in this building. Yeah. 01:22:59
Especially having like I said that that water tank, we wanna make one of the biggest murals in the state and if we restrict 01:23:05
ourselves to 30% of it, it looked pretty bad. Yeah. 01:23:10
So yeah, we'll we'll make sure to tidy that up when we when we come back. 01:23:16
Cool. 01:23:21
All right. That's everything on that. Then we'll move into 6.1 segments of Strong Towns Taco. 01:23:22
John. 01:23:32
Yeah, would cash for Brian, would you guys mind pulling that up? I sent you a link. 01:23:35
Yeah, Are you all good if we get ghetto training? 01:23:41
Video I know Anthony got a bounce pretty soon. 01:23:46
Maybe we can just do like 10 minutes and then we. This is one that's been probably doing parts or anything, Rachel, she said. It 01:23:50
was 6 minutes long. It's a short video. 01:23:55
Yeah. And we can let us listen to it now and then our next meeting, we could discuss it in more detail. 01:24:01
Well, the speed thing doesn't count. We have to get the time. 01:24:08
I. 01:24:19
So if we slow it down then we can count that, but if we speed it up. 01:24:26
Thank you. 01:24:31
Yeah, because those engineering conferences are so lively. 01:24:48
Sure. 01:24:53
That's right. 01:24:57
These are two identical blocks in my hometown. These blocks are the same exact size, the same area they have, but the same 01:25:07
highway, the same neighborhood. They have the same amount of public infrastructure investment. Everything about them is the same 01:25:12
except for the building. 01:25:17
This was the 1920s version. 01:25:22
So what you're looking at here is the cheapest investment that you could have made in 1920 to get a place started. But what 01:25:26
happened after this is that we had marching in World War 2 and then we had a completely new development staff which is skipped 01:25:31
regular over these places and started building on the edge of town. 01:25:36
These places have stagnated for 90 years. Two blocks over used to look just weapons, and the city labeled it light had torn down. 01:25:43
And now you have this funny Tucker Chip. This met all the city's regulations. 01:25:52
Made of all the engineers happy because you improved traffic flow. It's got good parking, it's got good for area ratios. The sign 01:25:59
is correct. It needs to code. The environmental people were happy because you have you know now more green space or more native 01:26:05
plants. You know it meant everybody, everybody was thrilled with this transaction. The only problem is that we stopped initially 01:26:11
with the financial. 01:26:17
That olden plated block has a total value of $1.1 million at shiny and new Taco joint. The same size area, the same amount of 01:26:23
public infrastructure, the same everything, just a different style of development has a total value from the 800,000. The city is 01:26:32
actually getting 41% more taxes off of that old flight and contact block than they are in the brand new place. Understand what 01:26:40
you're looking at when you're looking at the traditional development pack the way we have built places around the world. 01:26:48
With thousands and thousands of years. 01:26:57
Infant form after 90 years of neglect and it still outperforms by a wide margin our new experimental approach. 01:27:00
And we all know the trajectory of the tacos 20 years from now would be a new Taco St. This one will be turned into a used car lot. 01:27:11
10 years after that, it will be boarded up and the city will be looking for a correct amount of torn down with something. We've 01:27:18
all been around long enough to see this. We see the same kind of thing on the edge of our communities. 01:27:25
This site is 19 acres. You've got the Mills Big box which is double big box store. You've got an auto dealership and a gas 01:27:33
station. This is the most valuable piece of property in the area. When the Mills people show up at a council meeting, you need to 01:27:39
stop council meeting and pass them. You know what can you do for you, right? This is 19 acres of rainers downtown. 01:27:46
As much as the second and third stories are unoccupied, a lot of the first stories are unoccupied in places. This is our struggle 01:27:53
to make it. For the most part, the investments in the downtown in my lifetime have been when we wait for a building to burn down, 01:28:01
we clean up the rubble and then we pave it into a parking lot. If we look at the Mills property on the edge, the one that we value 01:28:09
is the pilot. It has a total value point, $6 million rate. But there's a huge sum if we go to the downtown. 01:28:16
We have the same area, just a different approach. You can retrieve 1.1. 01:28:25
The city is getting 78% more tax revenue. 01:28:33
That is being collected on that brand new. 01:28:41
Nice mills complex on the edges. What happens when mills? What happens to that 19 acre site? 01:28:44
There are 134 different properties in September. What happens when one of them loses A10 or goes out of business? 01:28:57
So highly adaptive, we can reconfigure apartments to be offices, offices to be partners, retail stores to be coffee shops. 01:29:05
In the new experimental style development, you have a building pattern that does not very financially productive. It is really 01:29:13
really fragile. 01:29:17
In the traditional style development, you have a building form and approach that is financially really productive. 01:29:23
And highly adaptable and resilient overtime. 01:29:31
So we just want to show that just to kind of show that like as we as we develop, it's important that we look at kind of the, the 01:29:44
pattern and land use and how it affects the overall value. I think it's cool to just he does a deep dive in another video that's 01:29:51
like 45 minutes long about the two blocks, the top of John's block and then the traditional downtown block. And then he shows like 01:29:57
the level investment, like the city's subsidized the Taco John's. They they help put in the infrastructure. They use RDA resources 01:30:04
to do that. 01:30:10
And whereas the other one, they didn't put any investment in, but the values were so, so very different. 01:30:17
And so just kind of understanding as we make investments from a land use standpoint, you know that there is is definitely a a 01:30:25
fiscal analysis that that that that we should look at as well as as we develop in that the traditional development. I mean it's 01:30:30
what has happened for you know a long, long time and there's there's a reason for it, it's a lot more adaptable and from a value 01:30:36
standpoint. 01:30:42
Has a greater. 01:30:48
I don't know if you guys want to talk more about it, but we thought that was done like in depth analysis and I know we don't have. 01:30:50
A whole bunch of different shopping areas. 01:30:58
Where is the best land use? 01:31:01
Vineyard right now or where? Areas that we've learned from that maybe? 01:31:05
In the best use of. 01:31:12
And then it also, you know talking about like these old boarded up buildings and things like that. 01:31:14
I think there's a fine line between. 01:31:19
You know, like property rights let people build what they want to build and and also like kind of looking around corners and 01:31:22
making sure that you're not setting yourself up for failure. 01:31:26
I'm personally concerned that we're going to have three car washes on the same Rd. within five or half a mile of each other. 01:31:31
I think you're kidding yourself if you don't think 10 years from now one of those is going to be boarded up or two of them, right? 01:31:38
We're down to two now, OK? But you know what I'm saying? Like if stuff like that happens, like. 01:31:42
Maybe not the government's job to intervene, right? Like let let private land owners do what they want, but at the same time. 01:31:48
You have to understand like what potentially or could likely happen in these areas. So yeah, that was just. 01:31:54
Like a lot of times we look at land use as being, you know what, restricted we don't want to get involved, we don't, you know, we 01:32:03
don't want to like put too much burden. 01:32:07
A lot of times it's helping to like vision, what could happen in an area and you know. 01:32:13
Just can you change the code? So maybe if there were code changes in the future, like for a car wash, you know, you have a Blvd. 01:32:19
that allows for car washes and that's what's hot right now. And so there's a lot of startup car car washes and there are and so 01:32:23
it's not necessarily like. 01:32:28
You're you're saying OK, we'll just let the free market have at it and build four or five car washes, but you say OK what do we 01:32:33
want for that corridor and you know maybe you restrict one use but then you'll allow for other uses and so and so I I think a lot 01:32:40
of times what I found with zoning and economic development is that you can still provide a very high value of return for someone 01:32:48
and and get use of that are going to add value to to to the city and to to the community. 01:32:55
Because sometimes that you know coming on the other other hand, you know if you just let whatever is going to happen, happen 01:33:03
that's that's not always the best either. I mean guiding economic development actually helps economic development. And so like 01:33:08
like building you know districts that are consistent like 1 instance of that's going to be the downtown and and like the boardwalk 01:33:13
area, the boardwalk area is the place where we're going to want to be really careful with how we design the infrastructure and how 01:33:19
we design. 01:33:24
You know the the buildings we want a really high quality product that that that comes in. 01:33:31
But we're not going to say exactly what's gonna come into each place, but providing kind of the infrastructure that'll help. 01:33:35
Bring in really great restaurants and help to provide that that atmosphere. So that's all you know, that's probably an area where 01:33:42
we wouldn't ever allow for a car wash or a gas station, you know right there, but that's not necessarily restricting the, the, 01:33:47
the. 01:33:52
The development, I mean, you're helping to lay the groundwork for a really great experience, you know? And I think it would help. 01:33:58
Really. That that whole district, if we do it right? 01:34:06
I think that with these examples that they were giving, the reason that there's so much more valuable is because I mean. 01:34:09
There's not parking taken up by the block, so the parking has to be put in somewhere, whereas and there are some certain types of 01:34:18
buildings that need the parking like that, like you gave the example of the. 01:34:25
Of the gigantic grocery store, department store, whatever. Like they have to have parking. There's not a single grocery store 01:34:33
around here that doesn't have a bunch of parking because they know that they need it. I would love to see a bunch of, like tiny 01:34:39
grocery stores all around the city, but there is not a business model currently that does something like that. So there's 01:34:45
definitely a. 01:34:51
Some things that. 01:34:59
They need parking. I think the better example than the department store that he was showing was that. 01:35:01
Little restaurant with it, Tons of parking versus. 01:35:09
That one little block could have had 20 restaurants in it. So I think that. 01:35:13
Yeah, there's definitely times. 01:35:21
Let's get it in like, come and park here, park somewhere on the street somewhere, and stay in the area for a while. And there are 01:35:24
other places where it's like you're coming here to a home improvement store, You're bringing your truck. 01:35:30
You're not gonna carry that home. 01:35:37
Kind of thing. So there's definitely. 01:35:40
Give and take with some stuff like that. And there are needs of a city like our residents want a grocery store more than anything, 01:35:44
and even if that doesn't bring in as much value. 01:35:50
In tax dollars, it's value for the city and there's value and there's also services like providing services people want. You know, 01:35:57
like dry cleaners was wanted for to quote quite a bit too, like, so there's a dry cleaner. And I remember before we had like sport 01:36:03
clips, like people say, like can you get a Barber? 01:36:09
You know so. 01:36:16
Yeah, the value is important, but also like this, the services providing things, because you want to be a walkable community, you 01:36:17
got to provide the services that you know aren't, you know, so you're not having to drive across the freeway to get something you 01:36:21
need. 01:36:25
I thought it's cool though. Cool. 01:36:31
Moving on to Commission member reports and ex parte discussion disclosure reports from the Commission. 01:36:35
No. 01:36:42
Anything from staff? 01:36:43
Yeah. For us, we have some pretty interesting plans To give. Just a couple highlights, the station area plan funding was approved 01:36:47
through MAG. So we received $100,000 from the state that will be sent through MAG. And then if you remember in the last budget we 01:36:53
approved $100,000 match. 01:36:59
I said what that will do is take the entire downtown and marry it with the east side, what we call East Geneva, so the 450 acres 01:37:06
on that side. So it'll be a plan that'll look at UVU, the E union of a piece, the transit station, and then the downtown to the 01:37:14
lake, that whole area. So you're looking at about 850 acres and and developing A cohesive master plan between the all those uses. 01:37:23
And so that'll be a really exciting project that the Planning Commission will be tied in, you know, closely for, for reviews and 01:37:32
we'll be bringing that to you on several occasions. So yeah, look, look for that. 01:37:38
Parking study is something that we are prepping right now. The planning services contract was approved, so we approved 5 separate 01:37:45
firms each with different varying skill sets with architectural landscape, architecture planning. 01:37:52
And so, you know, they'll be able to help us out with, with a whole variety of projects, anything from open space to helping us 01:38:00
kind of. 01:38:05
Do some some mock ups for the fire station analyzing feasibilities of different locations. 01:38:11
And so we plan to utilize that at a higher level park and study will be one of the first projects that we pull a trigger on. Those 01:38:19
are kind of our immediate projects, awesome. 01:38:24
If that's everything from today, yeah. From Engineering slash Public Works side, we have 3 Master plans underway. The 01:38:32
Transportation Master Plan and the Wastewater Master Plan have just begun. And then with the Water Master Plan, the Culinary Water 01:38:37
Master Plan. 01:38:42
We are backtracking a little bit and restarting that one as well to account for HTRZ and other demands that have increased 01:38:49
recently. 01:38:54
Right. 01:39:01
Thanks, Emily. 01:39:02
Siding up down the corridor plan, hopefully we can try to get it by the by next Planning Commission. 01:39:07
If not by the by the next one, by the first one in April, then cool, yeah, great. 01:39:15
Cool. If that's everything from staff, then meeting agenda. 01:39:25
What do you have going on that you're trying to get off to? 01:39:34
Nothing. 01:39:42
Link
Start video at
Social
Embed
* you need to log in to manage your favorites
My Favorites List
You haven't added any favorites yet. Click the "Add Favorite" button on any media page, and they'll show up here.
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Unable to preview the file.
Unable to preview the file.
Rachel, we we good on. 00:01:40
Cool. 00:01:43
Chair, we're ready whenever. 00:01:46
All right. Welcome, everybody. It is March 1st, 2023. It is 6:01 PM and this is the Vineyard Planning Commission meeting. We'll 00:01:52
get things started with an invocation and a Pledge of Allegiance led by Craig. 00:01:58
I don't have my father grateful today to meet as a Commission and that's staff members and public and. 00:02:06
Be able to discuss. 00:02:14
Needs in wants. 00:02:16
We're grateful for the blessings that we have and for the moisture which we've received, and we ask that we might be able to. 00:02:18
All have clear minds. 00:02:27
Be able to express. 00:02:30
Thoughts and feelings for tonight and serious things and Jesus Christ. Amen. Thank you. All right, moving into an open session. 00:02:33
Oh, sorry. 00:02:41
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, 00:02:44
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. 00:02:50
Still getting used to doing both of them in meetings though. 00:02:58
All right, well, we'll move into an open session. This is, Does any public comments come up to the podium and state them? 00:03:02
Seeing as there are none, we'll move into the Minutes review and approval. 00:03:10
I had a chance to review those and make a motion to approve the minutes from February 15th, 2023. Do I have a second Second All in 00:03:15
favor, aye? 00:03:20
All right. Moving into business. Item 4.1, Minor site plan amendment. 00:03:25
Screens. 00:04:17
Some images on the screen. 00:04:19
Good evening, Planning Commission. I'm Brian Amaya, Senior Planner. 00:04:23
We're looking at. 00:04:28
A cyclone amendment being proposed by Christopher Kephart with Vineyard Properties of Utah. 00:04:31
LLC This is regarding. 00:04:37
Lot 5 in East. 00:04:41
At Geneva in our industrial area. 00:04:44
There's an application. The site plan was originally approved back in February of 2021, February 17th, 2021. 00:04:48
Currently, the applicant has been moving forward with building permits. They've constructed two of the four buildings that were 00:04:57
originally approved. 00:05:02
The two largest buildings on the site each measure 64,000 square feet. 00:05:08
Most recently, they were not able to pass their final inspections. 00:05:16
To start moving tenants in because of some inconsistencies with the original approval from that Planning Commission meeting. 00:05:23
The applicant is also waiting to get a tenant into the building. 00:05:32
Nutri costs I believe is. 00:05:37
The name of that, That's correct. Thank you very much. 00:05:38
The applicant and the tenant are both here in the meeting. 00:05:43
So. 00:05:46
The inconsistency is that I'm referring to with the elevations with the exterior building elevations. 00:05:48
Have to do with the roof trim. 00:05:55
As we know. 00:05:58
The roof trim line of a building kind of determines a lot of how the massing comes through. 00:06:01
We tried the the vineyard zoning code tries to avoid at all possible the flat, monotonous. 00:06:07
Lengthy, unbroken roof lines. So we like to see that variation, that articulation that breaks up, that massing. 00:06:14
In the original. 00:06:24
Let me bring up what the. 00:06:26
I do, Yep. 00:06:29
Let me take this so it gets a little bigger. 00:06:34
So this this is the original building exterior that was approved in that Planning Commission meeting. Shows the colors. 00:06:37
Shows. 00:06:45
All of the architectural details. 00:06:47
What's missing currently is a few things, these copper ends. 00:06:50
Were not constructed, there's 6IN. 00:06:56
For each building, there's two on the corners and two or four on the corners, so one for every corner. 00:06:58
And two right in the middle of the building. 00:07:04
And then this concrete paneling that is. 00:07:09
Halfway or in the midpoints of the buildings. 00:07:14
We're also not installed on the RE. 00:07:17
Parts of the building, so the build. 00:07:20
I don't have a site plan to show you but the buildings. 00:07:22
Um. 00:07:27
In two rows basically. 00:07:27
The outsides of the buildings have the concrete paneling. The pointed concrete paneling. Brian will pull up the sideline just for 00:07:30
discussion purposes. Yeah, but you can keep going. Sure. OK. Awesome. Thank you, Morgan. 00:07:36
And so those. 00:07:44
Those are the architectural elements that are inconsistent and then the other elements have to do with the colors. So let me show 00:07:46
you. 00:07:50
Well, it's currently been built or installed. 00:07:55
So as you might be able to see, this corner pieces don't have the corners of the buildings, no longer have the copper caps. 00:07:59
And this is showing the outside, so yeah. 00:08:07
So in this case this is the east elevation, but this is the outsides of the building, the inside walls where the trucks are coming 00:08:16
in making. 00:08:20
Dropping off goods and. 00:08:26
These concrete panels. 00:08:28
Were not installed and So what we got is. 00:08:31
A lengthy. 00:08:34
Unart. 00:08:36
Roof line such as this, but at the full length of the building. 00:08:38
The problem is that those parts of the building are. It's all visible from the. 00:08:43
1750 N Public Right of way. And so we're just aiming for consistency in the zoning code. I put the zoning codes in the staff 00:08:50
report that talked about massing, talk about articulation, talk about the colors that the zoning code requires. 00:08:57
In terms of the colors that design code requires. 00:09:05
It talks about earth tone, colors, muted colors. Colors aren't impactful on the surrounding area or development. 00:09:09
Umm. 00:09:18
I will go. I want to go back up to the original colors that were approved here. 00:09:19
Oops, my computer finally sent you a screenshot of sci-fi. Thank you. 00:09:23
Thank you very much. Let's look at that site plan first. 00:09:28
OK. 00:09:38
This is the layout of the. 00:09:41
So 1750 North is here on the bottom part of the. 00:09:44
The power plant in venue this year to the West, Northwest. 00:09:48
Then this, this side of the building, the West side of this building has the art, the articulated elements that that we requested 00:09:52
in the original approval. 00:09:57
This interior side. 00:10:02
This interior side of this other building does not and but this side of this building does. 00:10:06
So we get the articulation on the outsides of the building. 00:10:12
So I was waving my hands around, not doing it. 00:10:15
As much this is just a picture, we do so. 00:10:18
Let me go back to the. 00:10:23
Have a page just showing the colors. 00:10:32
Here we go. 00:10:37
OK, so these were the colors that are proved. There's maroons, greens, kind of a tan color, Gray. 00:10:45
This earthy darker color things that darker green. 00:10:52
These all met the zoning code requirements. 00:10:57
These are the new colors that have been installed. 00:11:00
We looked at a definition of what earth tone actually means. 00:11:05
And it's basically along the lines of what was originally proven, yet these, you know, more muted colors. Browns, Tans, Grays. 00:11:10
But also says anything that is reflected like naturally, and it does include white. So our issue is. 00:11:17
Is mostly with the blue. We feel that the blue is just a little too bold. 00:11:27
And not muted or toned down enough to meet the zoning code. 00:11:33
Let me. 00:11:41
Photographs of what the building currently looks like. 00:11:43
Zoom in. 00:11:47
So here's the good example showing the backside of the building without the the variations. 00:11:50
Also does not have the corner caps. 00:11:56
The corner caps we can we can do without. I think there would be enough articulation without the caps, but if we can still get the 00:12:00
the pointed concrete panelling on the parapet wall. 00:12:06
I think that would that would meet the intent of the zoning code. 00:12:13
This is the the colors I. 00:12:18
And this last one. 00:12:23
Showing women on the articulation. 00:12:25
So that provides a little more visual interest from the public. 00:12:27
Yeah. So our recommendations, my recommendations that we put in, that I put into the staff report. 00:12:36
Is to get that concrete pointed, pointed paneling. Like I said, the copper caps. I think we could do without the shell. White is 00:12:44
OK, but I think we need to do something with the blue. So our recommendation from staff is to take those points into consideration 00:12:49
and. 00:12:55
The applicants. 00:13:02
Tell you guys anything further about the project that you'd like to know? 00:13:04
Umm. 00:13:08
So I'll let them take the stand if you'd like to ask questions. 00:13:08
Chris Kephart. 00:13:21
Yeah, I guess the question is. 00:13:24
What happened with the plan going from this original plan to? 00:13:28
Who started painting? 00:13:33
We. 00:13:35
A paint change request back in. 00:13:36
We emailed it, we told them verbally. We attached it to the portal. I guess maybe we attached it to the wrong section of the 00:13:40
portal, I don't know. 00:13:44
Besides emailing and getting confirmation that they received. 00:13:48
Pink color change request. 00:13:52
I don't think there is anything left for us to do other than them telling us no, it's not OK, but that never happened. It never 00:13:54
got reviewed and that was almost a year ago. So we started pinning it this red color because it would it would have matched the 00:13:59
caps. 00:14:03
And everybody preferred this, this, this rust looking color and as we painted it. 00:14:08
Each across the tenant drove, I saw it and they thought it was ugly. So we're like they said, hey, can you paint an art color And 00:14:16
we're like, yeah, no problem, we can do that. We want to match their colors. I believe Nutri Cost is probably the biggest employer 00:14:22
in Vineyard. 00:14:28
And we wanted to keep them happy. The only runoff two of our buildings and the rooms, now these two as well. 00:14:34
So we did what they asked us to do. We paint it. 00:14:41
We've never had a problem before and changing paint colors, numbers ever said anything so I didn't know. 00:14:46
It would be a problem. And then nobody reviewed our red, so then I we didn't think it'd be a problem changing again because. 00:14:52
Nobody said anything until final. 00:15:00
Inspecting my life. This was unacceptable. 00:15:03
OK, so after we completely painted that, I mean it's been we started doing the blue. 00:15:07
What back in March? 00:15:13
Yeah, swimming in the city Sauce pain and blue. They could have said something. Hey, stop. We need to take this to. 00:15:16
The zoning or the Planning Commission, but nobody said anything, so we just. 00:15:22
And then curious about the roof, the roof that we're going to go on and the roof concrete. 00:15:28
That was before my time. 00:15:35
So they just decided, hey, this is too expensive, this is the. 00:15:38
So somebody else made that. 00:15:42
I didn't know that call was made, but that's what they did, OK. 00:15:44
OK. 00:15:48
The Planning Commission I just kind of had. So I I think you have you have the code in front of you it calls for for Thomas and I 00:15:50
I think that's kind of the the the general requirement. We do have other buildings that have accent colors on them like there's a. 00:15:58
The first. 00:16:06
And so that's that that that's something for for you to consider is like generally are they are they meeting the, the requirement, 00:16:12
is this an accent color that? 00:16:16
Would would fit. If you feel like it doesn't meet, meet the code. 00:16:21
You know, you can always have them go back to what the original proposal is. 00:16:26
So that's that that's that's kind of up to you. I would say this is probably fairly consistent with some of the other buildings as 00:16:31
far as providing accent. 00:16:35
And we are in the process of updating our our zoning code and our standards. 00:16:40
And we're going to put more clarification as far as colors and if we I think that goal is to keep the earth tone work because most 00:16:46
buildings have that in in Vindered, but there are a lot of accents and so providing the flexibility for for market and for logos 00:16:52
and and colors that that that companies have. 00:16:59
Was what was the idea, so anyway. 00:17:07
So you kind of have that before you send the ordinance and whether or not you feel that it meets the the ordinance to strong 00:17:09
enough degree if not? 00:17:14
Then you're able to go back to the original color. SO question for staff on this. 00:17:19
You know, a building's been there for five years or whatever and they go to repaint it. 00:17:24
Is that something they would need to run by the city? Yeah, our site plan code, right? Right now is is fairly strict and so yeah, 00:17:29
it it it gets into those level details that'll be part of. 00:17:36
Our consideration in this next month, Rachel's done a great job. 00:17:43
Going through our our zoning. 00:17:47
And all of our design centers and kind of pulling out the things that we would want to discuss and so that that's that's one of 00:17:49
those. 00:17:53
But yeah, right now if someone does. 00:17:57
Then. 00:18:00
By the code, they would have to go through a site plan amendment. OK, so yeah. 00:18:02
Just a couple of quick comments from my end is. 00:18:09
You know, earth tones is subjective even though like what we approved, you know, if you stick with that obviously wouldn't be any 00:18:12
issues. I think it's in our best interest to make that as tight as possible, right? So there's less subjectivity there. So I think 00:18:16
that's smart there. 00:18:20
My bigger concern is with the architecture. 00:18:25
And I know it wasn't necessarily used specifically, but you know, if something gets approved and someone decides, actually we 00:18:29
don't want to do that because we want to save money, I'm guessing most. 00:18:33
People want to save money in their architecture. 00:18:38
So that's the one that concerns me more here, especially when there's really no. 00:18:42
I mean like you're not necessarily going to go back and retrofit things and? 00:18:47
I don't. I don't want to be like so ******** to make an example of anything, but I also don't want the norm to be. 00:18:52
Build whatever you want and then go tell the. 00:18:59
Oops. Kind of thing, you know, So I think that. 00:19:02
There are some cities that have probably gone to court over this kind of stuff. We've done a bunch of research and you know, I, I, 00:19:39
I, I think you know that that's the kind of thing that, you know, you could say essentially the white is, the blue clearly isn't. 00:19:45
You know, when and we looked at several definitions. 00:19:50
But you could say that's a, that's an accent color and you know we have a credit union in the city that has the blue, we have the 00:19:57
the floor life and you know it's a very attractive building and so especially for manufacturing I think they've done a good job 00:20:02
and we don't necessarily want to get into the. 00:20:07
I guess like my my thought is we don't want to get into telling my companies that they can't use their corporate like logo colors 00:20:13
and stuff like that if allowed through an accent. I think the city does have the the right to have like a general, you know, 00:20:19
standard. They do want to have like the earth tones, but allowing for the accent I think is important. 00:20:26
But there are architecture is more concerning and that's that's that's something that you know if you get your plans approved 00:20:33
through the Planning Commission the you know the expectation is that you're going to follow the architecture. 00:20:38
Those were my main questions and comments, yeah. 00:20:48
Any other comments you guys have? Any other questions? 00:20:52
I just like to make sure. Yeah, go ahead. 00:20:56
Yeah. So I'm sorry and in Jensen with Nutra cost and for us, you know, so we we have two buildings on that road right now. This 00:20:59
would be two more. I think that put us over 1/4 of a million square feet for that road. So the majority of the people on that road 00:21:05
are probably employees of ours. We we definitely want the blue. So Morgan, I appreciate your comments, Anthony. I certainly 00:21:10
understand that there's some architectural issues to work through. But from our standpoint, we would, we would love to be able to 00:21:16
keep the blue. 00:21:22
We saw the red going up and it's like, hey that's not that's not our color that's you know, so we were the ones that said, hey, 00:21:30
we. 00:21:33
We want to paint it this color. 00:21:36
You know for whatever reason we never saw any colors and then the color started to go up and so we were like hey let's let's not 00:21:38
do that and and so you know maybe we have some culpability there but we you know we requested the blue and and certainly would 00:21:44
would like to the blue to remain. 00:21:49
Just out of curiosity, what color are your other buildings? 00:21:58
So the other 2 billions are kind of a light Gray with a dark Gray and then we have our Nutri cost sign on each of those buildings 00:22:01
which has the blue with like the orange dot. 00:22:07
And the sky is blue and light is blue. 00:22:14
So if Utah Lake was that color, I think our property values would be a much higher. 00:22:18
Just saying, yeah, definition. So you you have different options. One could be to you know make them go back to as the original 00:22:23
approval is. It sounds like there might be some openness on the color that would be kind of our our feeling is that and I feel 00:22:30
like it would be consistent with with the bank and with you know the four life building. 00:22:37
The so you could do like basically a segmented approval where you prove that but you require the architecture of that was in the 00:22:46
plan and there are a couple things there are those those you know those end caps and then you do have some I think if there's like 00:22:52
a metal awning and there's there's a few things like that that would need to be added back to the building. 00:22:59
So. 00:23:08
From a general. 00:23:09
Like the architecture? 00:23:11
Although they didn't do that, which I understand was approved, is consistent with the area because there's old buildings there 00:23:14
that are completely flat. 00:23:18
And so I know it's. 00:23:23
I know this is a newer standard I'm assuming compared to what was there before. 00:23:24
And so I can't exactly tell if this is like one of those stand up concrete buildings, but. 00:23:30
It is, yeah. So yeah, tilt. So realistically. 00:23:36
Just pull out a panel and put up another one. It would have to be some sort of. 00:23:43
Attachment I guess, right? Like if on the back. 00:23:48
And. 00:23:53
Like, how much could you really do to try to bring it back? 00:23:55
That perspective, Does that make sense? Yeah. 00:24:00
I mean, because I'm assuming there might be some things we could do, not necessarily, say, pull out the whole wall and put up 00:24:05
something else, right, To try to meet the architectural intent. 00:24:09
So from from an increase standpoint, you could probably go three to four feet above the parapet wall, but then after that you're 00:24:14
starting to lose structural integrity to go in and do major retrofits. 00:24:20
Roof structure to panel structure, just to be able to get it to hold that right because you you're trying to attach it. 00:24:27
And I mean, there's a lot of different ways that you can go about it, but it does start to. 00:24:34
'Cause some, some fairly substantial. 00:24:41
Reconstruction in construction and reconstruction. 00:24:45
And that's, I guess, when we talk. 00:24:49
Yes. It doesn't meet what was approved like I. 00:24:53
And just saying go back and put it how it was approved isn't realistic. 00:24:56
From a structural standpoint is what I'm saying, so. 00:25:01
I guess. 00:25:06
Opinion I guess is that I think that the blue problem meets like an accent colored type of thing, but. 00:25:07
To try to hold true to what we are trying to do. Granted there was not any necessarily ill will, I guess. 00:25:14
That would be something I think. 00:25:21
More interesting to see is how they could improve it or bring it up well, bring the architecture a little bit more. 00:25:24
Does that make sense? So I mean yes you have different options. One could be tonight you could approve the the blue and then ask 00:25:31
them to provide a from a structural engineer whether or not the the feasibility of adding the the roof elements and the the awning 00:25:37
because there is an awning on the on kind of that that end cap that goes around the the buildings adds like an architectural 00:25:43
detail. 00:25:49
And I I don't that doesn't look like it would be as structural and we've had others that forgot to put their awnings on that then 00:25:56
added them later and they were able to do that. 00:26:00
And so you know you if you wanted to have them basically provide you that that information they they they they could do that and 00:26:05
bring it back and then so you could approve the blue tonight and then you know they at least have that kind of headache out of the 00:26:10
way and then have them come back on their on the the structural or you could just approve that was they have they're proposing now 00:26:15
I mean it's up it's up to you. 00:26:20
Umm. 00:26:31
Couple other questions and this is more looking forward. 00:26:31
So like they submitted a paint change request, is that something that the city never received? 00:26:39
You know, thanks. OK, we'll put that in the file. And so, you know, there just was kind of that disconnect. Yeah. So we're 00:27:14
actually looking at a new software program that would kind of integrate the departments more. So hopefully we don't have like 00:27:20
those gaps. Yeah, that one. Yeah, For that reason that makes me feel like a little less ******** on that one as well because it 00:27:25
seems like good effort was made to try to inform us on that. Also, again, this may be a discussion just about, you know, operation 00:27:31
making sure it doesn't. 00:27:37
Happen again in the future if there's something like this, but how could we catch? 00:27:44
Earlier on, because it's in everyone's best interest that way, right? The retrofitting, the changing, those types of things are 00:27:48
easier. Again, maybe a different discussion, but. 00:27:53
You know, I know that I ride on that trail that's right behind there quite a bit and you're like it's been there for 10 months or 00:27:58
something like that, so. 00:28:02
But we understand they're frustrating because that's that's probably when it's like, oh, now it's gonna cost a ton of money to 00:28:44
have to make any changes. So having like a midpoint like maybe when you go vertical. 00:28:49
You know the inspection at some point. 00:28:55
So. 00:28:58
Sorry, if I may, Brian again. What if we always put a condition of approval in any site plan conditioning permit that what we're 00:28:59
approving tonight is what needs to be built? 00:29:05
Like just a reminder, like just iterating that because that's. 00:29:11
Kind of the standard zoning code and in the building, yeah, I think that the pre app to really should should be the the time and 00:29:15
then you know also the contractor and the the, you know, the landowner they, I mean everyone holds some responsibility when 00:29:21
something gets approved. I mean that's what really needs to get built. And so it would be nice if we could catch it earlier, but 00:29:28
ultimately when you get a set of plans approved, you know it's your responsibility to to build to that set of plans. 00:29:34
The last comment I was going to make. 00:29:41
Truthfully, like this as is isn't going to keep me up at night. Like that's that. That's not the concern. My my concern is the 00:29:44
precedent that that's even potentially legally. I don't think anything was done in bad acting here. 00:29:50
But you know, if someone sees something like this and it's like, all right, it didn't meet what was approved? 00:29:58
In the site plan. 00:30:04
Does that give more people wiggle room in the future if they are, you know, acting in bad faith and say like, well? 00:30:05
You didn't hold these guys to it. How can you legally hold me to this. And that's what does keep me up I think is something like 00:30:13
that. It's just let the precedent that it could set. Well, one thing I think that is gonna help it's kind of clear clear clear the 00:30:19
table and reset things is what the the ordinance that Rachel is putting together. 00:30:24
Once that gets adopted that basically resets like the code and I think that that would be really good time for us to to get that 00:30:31
then the new software in place. I know that Naseem has talked about working and getting a construction inspector and so maybe 00:30:37
between the planning department and that construction inspector with the new software we could develop a better process to to try 00:30:44
and and and catch these moving forward and then just overall up. 00:30:51
The level of scrutiny that that per permits get because the ideal you'll have times where we catch a bunch of stuff and there's 00:30:58
other times something just gets certain you're like Oh my gosh, that clearly didn't beat the code. And so you know I I think like 00:31:05
the new code having that in place is a really good time to you know to elevate but the review. 00:31:12
So but we're we're happy with however you you would like to proceed so we'll take. 00:31:23
So I guess for me personally, I'm personally fine with color I feel like. 00:31:33
Is an accent. 00:31:39
Enough. It is the architectural things for me that are an issue and that missing awning and stuff. If you guys could come back 00:31:42
with something that you feel. 00:31:47
Is equal to or greater than the plans that were originally submitted, as far as the changes in the elevation changes or even. 00:31:53
Some kind of other additions to kind of break up that continuous wall, I think that would be good and I agree with Anthony. 00:32:04
We don't want to set a precedent of we approve plans and then we don't follow through. I want to see. 00:32:13
With the plans that you guys bring back? 00:32:20
Something that looks just as good or better than the original. 00:32:23
And how you do that, that's up to you guys. That's your discretion I think Chris, is that something maybe Chris you could you 00:32:26
provide some like maybe maybe insight from your end on the? 00:32:31
I'm sorry, because could you could you please come to the stand? Thank you. Rachel, could you switch over because I think it might 00:32:38
help on the elevations we have here to show the details. 00:32:43
What we're talking about with designs, but yeah, owners would be. 00:32:48
No problem, because we can manufacture that in the house. That's an easy thing for us to do. 00:32:52
So just show the awnings on the windows. 00:32:59
In front of the doors and on the corners of the way, Yeah, so that's no problem. 00:33:05
That's something easy. We can do that. 00:33:11
Talking with the contractor. 00:33:15
That's the little roof line, he said. That would just be Styrofoam and stucco. 00:33:18
And then your caps. 00:33:25
Metal. Some metal. 00:33:27
I mean, if you want to do the caps, we can do the caps, do some metal shooting. 00:33:30
Umm. 00:33:35
That should be a problem. 00:33:37
Like, the cost just skyrocketed during COVID. So like, our roof was probably double. 00:33:39
Than what previous buildings were just everything was pretty much double. 00:33:44
So concrete goes up every year anyway, but just our basic supplies all the materials. 00:33:49
American Steel. So then it's a little faster. 00:33:57
All the laborers in Utah, Utah County specifically. 00:34:02
So we have. 00:34:07
Great crew and they do a good job. 00:34:09
That was called maybe for me saying, hey, we need to cut some costs on this building. I didn't have anything that and then. 00:34:13
Yeah, I apologize for that. So if we need to do those caps, we need those caps and we can do the Army, nothing, that's no, that's 00:34:21
no problem. That's something we can do in House. 00:34:25
And manufacture it and then then we're. 00:34:30
Like all guardrail freeway sign instructors, we do all that stuff in London. 00:34:34
And that's what my my boss specializes in. So that's the only deal and we have a bond in place with Chris has been approved so 00:34:39
they can now occupy the the space and then in the meantime we would just work with him. So on on getting kind of the like the 00:34:45
finishing touches on architecture completed it doesn't matter. The question I I definitely don't if we want to be as business 00:34:51
friendly as possible and like not hold anything up and I I would even say that I think we want to be as reasonable as possible 00:34:57
when crazy things like COVID happen. 00:35:03
Prices skyrocket just as long as it goes to the proper channels for the change requests. What you're going to know it wasn't used 00:35:10
specifically, but I think that's that's really the only issue here I think. 00:35:15
People would understand like, hey, if those accents that aren't necessarily like make or break for the building cost twice as 00:35:21
much, now that's an undue burden or projects not going to happen. I think most people would be reasonable with that and be willing 00:35:26
to make adjustments as long as it's not just a unilateral decision. 00:35:31
A site plan amendment and get it approved. Yeah, I think that's that's that's the key thing that I want to drive on so. 00:35:39
So because I know this is going to come up, is this a good opportunity to talk about the color of that roof? 00:35:49
Sure. Because we definitely don't want it to be brown. Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You probably, you probably want to put that. 00:35:55
Something in alignment with what was on the. 00:36:05
Even though it's not bronze, but there's those colored legends. 00:36:07
So then I I would include that in your motion then, so that maybe you provide them the flexibility to to choose a color if you'd 00:36:11
like on that and I think that's small enough in comparison for the rest of the coverage that you could call that an accent color. 00:36:18
So. 00:36:25
It's up to you. 00:36:27
Does somebody want to make a motion? 00:36:28
Are you personally wanting to? 00:36:30
With the plans and I think that it's, I think it's good enough with staff if you feel like it's like the elevations. 00:36:34
Meet or exceed what they originally proposed as far as the intent. 00:36:44
The variation in the walls, then the elevations that were most recently submitted from architecture. You're just talking about the 00:36:50
light, light like the roof caps and the awning. I mean, those are the the pieces that they would need to add. 00:36:57
OK. I was talking about the the inner wall, how it's just flat. I don't think the inner walls are actually submitted along with 00:37:04
the elevation in the included in the elevations that were most recently submitted. 00:37:12
I think those are those are missing from. 00:37:20
OK, it. 00:37:23
West and. 00:37:25
That actually have the artisan, but from what I saw it, I didn't see the interior ones. 00:37:27
That are. 00:37:32
Isn't it? Sorry. So I I have east elevation for building C and West elevation for building C. OK, let's, let's take a look. Yeah, 00:37:38
maybe. Maybe it's not. 00:37:43
It looks like the interior. They look fairly flat on the elevations like the internal ones. 00:37:50
It looks like it's like you can see the. 00:37:56
Maybe that's the backside. Yeah, The backside of the east side, yeah, Yeah. 00:37:59
So yeah, so these current elevations, if you approve these. 00:38:06
Would retain the flat. 00:38:09
OK. And this is what is built right now? That's what it's built right now, yes. And it looks like the original plans. 00:38:12
Originals are here. 00:38:19
Because that could be the backsides of all those. It looks like it is the backsides of all those. So that really is awnings and 00:38:23
the caps. 00:38:26
That's the difference, yeah. 00:38:31
Yeah, I'm fine. 00:38:34
And if you're OK allowing them the flexibility on the color of the of the roof caps, yeah. And I just want to add that when I went 00:38:36
out there. 00:38:40
These these panels. 00:38:46
Forward and back variation. So it's not just a flat wall, it is specifically the roof line that we were concerned about. 00:38:49
So. 00:38:58
Motion. 00:39:03
Sure, Yeah. I'll make a motion to approve the minor site plan amendment. 00:39:05
With the focus on. 00:39:12
End caps and awnings to meet the original architectural intent. 00:39:16
And then also to approve the current color palette that's already on the building. 00:39:21
And to give them liberty to change the material color of the caps. 00:39:27
Yeah, yeah, yeah. For that accent color of the cap, yeah, allow them to to choose that in line with what was discussed tonight. 00:39:32
OK. 00:39:39
Do I have anything black and Gray? Yeah. 00:39:40
I'll second. 00:39:43
All in favor, aye. 00:39:44
Right. 00:39:46
Thank. 00:39:47
Thank you, Commission. And you were saying there's more buildings to be built, right? 00:39:48
So just, you know, follow the plants. 00:39:54
Original site planning that had four, so we are two, four basically. 00:39:59
50,000, so we'll make sure everything we're about, so we'll make sure we need. 00:40:05
Thank you guys. 00:40:17
All right, moving on to 4.2, the public hearing and zoning for the zoning text amendment on the water efficiency standards. 00:40:19
Emily's got this one. 00:40:26
All right, good evening, Planning Commission. My name is Emily Kofa, and I'm talking about the water efficiency standards this 00:40:57
evening. 00:41:00
So I showed this slide last time. I just wanted to give you guys an update of where we are and a reminder that in January we 00:41:04
requested 3504 acre feet of water from C UW CD for over the next five years to help meet our demands. And C UW CD has asked that 00:41:12
we implement some things to qualify for that water. And so we've already. So one of the things they asked for was the water use 00:41:19
and preservation element. 00:41:26
To be added to our general plan according to Senate Bill 110, and that was approved by City Council and that's complete. The 00:41:35
second thing they asked was for us to implement a water conservation plan and that has been approved by the Utah Department of 00:41:43
Water Resources and it's been adopted by City Council this past City Council meeting. 00:41:51
And so today, we're moving on to the third item, which is the water efficiency standards. 00:41:59
That will are concerned with our landscaping code. I'll amend our code. And so the purpose of the water efficiency standards is to 00:42:05
conserve the public's water resources. 00:42:10
And they are all set according to CWC D's guidelines like straight from from what they suggested and all of these standards 00:42:16
concern. 00:42:21
The placement of turf in outdoor landscaping. 00:42:27
And So what we to adopt these water efficiency standards, we'd like to amend our code, our landscaping in particular, and add a 00:42:32
section entitled Water Efficiency Standards. 00:42:39
And see WCD. 00:42:46
Gave requirements recommendations and considerations and so we are only implementing the requirements that they have provided us. 00:42:50
Yes, the recommendations and considerations will work to put them into the vineyard Tree and landscape manual, because that's 00:42:59
because they're not legislative. 00:43:04
We didn't think that they were most appropriate within the zoning code, so we'll find an appropriate location for those 00:43:10
considerations in the manual. 00:43:13
Thanks. 00:43:20
So to quickly summarize these requirements, I'll just quickly read through it. So this concerns all new residential, commercial, 00:43:21
institutional and industrial construction receiving a certificate of occupancy. 00:43:28
As well as all new landscaping for public agencies, private development projects and developer installed landscaping development. 00:43:37
As well as developments receiving a certificate of occupancy after the adoption of this ordinance. 00:43:45
And it concerns the front yards of single family dwellings. 00:43:51
And so getting to the meat of this, to the standards. 00:43:56
CWCD, according to their guidelines, has recommended that we require turf to not be less than 8 feet wide at its narrowest point 00:44:00
and not to not exceed 35% of total landscaped area. 00:44:07
Turf shall not be installed and park strips pass or slopes greater than 25%. 00:44:15
And then at the maturity landscape shall have enough plant material to create at least 50% living plant cover at ground plain and 00:44:21
not including tree canopies. 00:44:27
And finally, for detached single family residential dwellings, they shall install landscaping within one year of their certificate 00:44:34
of occupancy. Brian wanted to add a few things. Oh yeah, so we currently don't have a requirement within the landscaping code that 00:44:41
requires people to install their their turf on their property at all. So we put in a requirement that only. 00:44:49
Require people to to landscape the front yard of their of a single of the detached single family dwelling. And if they're on a 00:44:58
corner lot then they also have to do the front yard and the. 00:45:04
How's it here? The exposed corner side, yards of all of all lots that are in a corner, so the parts that are exposed. 00:45:10
If they're behind a fence, then that doesn't need to be landscaped. 00:45:19
And then that, that year requirement, once they get that certificate of occupancy, then they have a year to get that landscaping. 00:45:26
Try to question in The Who it says our new residential, our new landscaping and developments with a. 00:45:34
And. 00:45:44
But then it says front yards of single family dwellings. Is that all new single family dwellings? Exactly. 00:45:46
We want to make a clarity that we want. 00:45:56
Gonna try to enforce like side yards in people's backyard thing. I think it's a bit of an overreach, yeah, and I think that with 00:45:59
Utah and. 00:46:03