Planning Commission
Live stream not working in Chrome or Edge?
Troubleshooting steps
In your browser: open Menu (three dots) → Settings → System → turn off “Use graphics acceleration when available.” Then restart the browser.
Bookmark list
* use Ctrl+F (Cmd+F on Mac) to search in document
Loading...
Loading...
Transcript
| Welcome everybody. It is June 22nd. | 00:00:02 | |
| And it is 6:03 PM. | 00:00:07 | |
| This is the Vineyard Planning Commission meeting. We'll move right into an open session. If you have any public comments, feel | 00:00:10 | |
| free to come to the. | 00:00:14 | |
| Oh yeah, sorry, into the Chris is actually going to go Pledge of Allegiance. | 00:00:20 | |
| I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, | 00:00:28 | |
| indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. | 00:00:36 | |
| One day I'm I'm going to not forget something. | 00:00:45 | |
| All right, so now we'll move into the open session. Thanks, David. If you have any public comments, now is your time. Just come to | 00:00:49 | |
| the podium, state your name. Nothing new, no. | 00:00:53 | |
| Cool. We'll move out of the open session into minutes for there are no minutes for review and approval. We'll just move right into | 00:00:59 | |
| business items sign standard waiver. | 00:01:04 | |
| OK, my name is Brian Amaya, City Planner. | 00:01:15 | |
| The applicant X of elements seeking approval of two multi tenant monument signs and two single tenant monument signs. But we're | 00:01:19 | |
| really here in terms of the science standard. We're only here to discuss the the two multi tenant monument signs because the two | 00:01:25 | |
| single tenant monument signs can be approved administratively, but some of the characteristics of the. | 00:01:31 | |
| Multi tenant monument signs require a sign standing waiver. | 00:01:38 | |
| So in regards to that, the multi time the multi tenant signs exceed the already permitted height of 15 feet and include a Halo | 00:01:42 | |
| effect on some of the lettering. A Halo effect on your standard type letters. The faces of the letters are not lit up at night. | 00:01:48 | |
| Instead the lighting is directed behind the letters and is reflected back in a Halo effect. In other words, the Halo letters come | 00:01:54 | |
| alive at night and give off an iridescent glow. When you create a Halo effect, you give your letters an enhanced 3D look in | 00:02:00 | |
| addition. | 00:02:06 | |
| Effects enhances letters makes them stand out from the signed background. The reason a sign standard waiver is needed for the Halo | 00:02:12 | |
| effect letters is because they have the potential to have a greater impact on the surrounding development and on and on drivers on | 00:02:19 | |
| the road do their ability to possess special lighting effects and their ability to be viewed at longer distances. But with this | 00:02:25 | |
| application that's not really an issue because it's so subtle and the design is is not as impactful as as that. | 00:02:32 | |
| So we don't, we don't really see an issue with the design that's being proposed. | 00:02:40 | |
| There actually isn't is already an existing similar multi tenant sign at the yard A at the intersection of Mill Road and 600 N and | 00:02:44 | |
| we've never that I'm aware of, we've never received a complaint about that sign so. | 00:02:51 | |
| The Singleton Monument signs do not do not appear to have a Halo effect letter unless I'm wrong. Only the the multitimate the | 00:03:00 | |
| multi tenant signs. | 00:03:05 | |
| The quantity of the multi sentence signs is determined by the street frontage along public roads. The code allows master | 00:03:12 | |
| development to 800 feet or more St. frontage to install one sign for every 400 feet of frontage. The applicants total frontage | 00:03:20 | |
| measured is 3625 feet. The applicant has chosen to propose only two freestanding multi sentiment signs. | 00:03:27 | |
| Which is well below their allowable limit in terms of the sign height. | 00:03:36 | |
| You may choose to You may choose to allow them a sign height of up to 20 feet through a sign standard river, but the applicant is | 00:03:42 | |
| only seeking the height approval of 18 feet and a maximum sign area of 80 feet, which the 80 feet is outrightly approved as well. | 00:03:51 | |
| City staff recommends approval of the of the signed standard waiver and the Singleton Monument signs are well within their | 00:04:01 | |
| allowable heightened sign area as well. So the applicants here, if you want to ask them any questions and we have all their plans. | 00:04:08 | |
| That's if you have questions about like design or anything like that. What's the difference between a waiver and a variance? | 00:04:14 | |
| So a waiver is we have some outlying criteria within the code that's already set in place to allow for, for example like height, | 00:04:22 | |
| our outrightly permitted height limit is 15. The waiver allows you to go up to 20. In other conditions you can allow a greater | 00:04:31 | |
| amount of quantity of signs, for example on building elevations. So those are kind of more set in place. We have specific. | 00:04:40 | |
| Code references for variances as well. | 00:04:49 | |
| But that has to do with other other things that I can pull up. Yeah, that variances are essay. I say like a state process that we | 00:04:52 | |
| have to follow. And so there's five criteria and I, I don't know them all right at the back, but essentially it's for cases where | 00:04:59 | |
| and I, I you have to meet all 5 criteria in order to be approved, but allows you to vary from the from the code in specific | 00:05:07 | |
| instances. And like one of those, like I've only seen a few approved. One of them was because there was a lot line. | 00:05:14 | |
| Or a, a fault line, sorry, a fault line that ran through a property in the foothills in Tottenham Heights where I worked. And it | 00:05:22 | |
| was discovered when they, the property owner did it, their geotechnical report. And due to the 25 foot front set back, 25 foot | 00:05:28 | |
| rear set back, 15 foot side setbacks, it gave them like a very small sliver to the building. So they were able to get a variance | 00:05:34 | |
| on the front. So they were able to build like 5 feet. And so there there's like 5 criteria and, and one of them is basically if | 00:05:40 | |
| you. | 00:05:46 | |
| By the zoning ordinance as it's written, does it take away a substantial property right? And so being the being able to build your | 00:05:52 | |
| house is a substantial property right and applying the the code in that instance, you know took that right away. So they they were | 00:05:57 | |
| able to get in that case. | 00:06:01 | |
| Did you have any questions? | 00:06:08 | |
| Developer. | 00:06:10 | |
| No, no. You guys have a motion. | 00:06:12 | |
| Motion to approve as requested. | 00:06:17 | |
| All right, yeah. So you can see. | 00:06:21 | |
| And I just. | 00:06:24 | |
| Read it back. Yeah, you just read the. | 00:06:26 | |
| Proposed motion. | 00:06:29 | |
| Yeah, it's on the screen there, if you can see it. We just have two conditions that mostly have to do with biting, like local and | 00:06:32 | |
| federal laws and things like that and paying, paying fees. | 00:06:38 | |
| Proposed. I guess the proposal as written that the applicant pay any outstanding fees and make any red line corrections and the | 00:06:44 | |
| applicant is subject to all federal, state and local laws. | 00:06:50 | |
| And then the proposed motion and then that proposed motion, I've moved to approve the sign application and sign standard waiver | 00:06:56 | |
| application as requested by Eric Shinsato with all red electric sign and awning with the proposed conditions. And just that's | 00:07:02 | |
| Allied Electric signs. Oh, sorry, Allied Electric sign, I'll second that. All in favour. | 00:07:09 | |
| Moving on to public hearing, do I have a motion to open up a public hearing? I move to open the public hearing. I have a second. | 00:07:18 | |
| Second all in favor, aye. | 00:07:27 | |
| All right, we're in a public hearing. This is for the Geneva Rd. mixed-use zoning text amendment and zoning Map amendment as our | 00:07:30 | |
| first item. | 00:07:35 | |
| Great. Thank you, Chairman and Planning Commission. | 00:07:45 | |
| Where sometimes we have all eight members and it's packed, other times we just have a few so. | 00:07:49 | |
| But hey, we're still, we're still good to go. I appreciate you guys doing their duty and showing up and serving this community | 00:07:55 | |
| because there's, there's a lot going on and we're only going to get busier and busier. The Geneva Rd. mixed-use district is a, is | 00:08:02 | |
| a district that encompasses the, the Geneva retail frontage plat. If I think Bryce, you were here when that I was approved back in | 00:08:10 | |
| my 2018, 2017. | 00:08:17 | |
| I think you came on just kind of after that, maybe a year or so later, but that that was the the plat that took essentially 11 | 00:08:24 | |
| parcels and subdivided them as an essentially like a .9 to A1 acre. | 00:08:31 | |
| Development pads of those one was built out that's O'reilly's on the South end and essentially what the applicant is looking for | 00:08:41 | |
| is to incorporate auto, automotive services and automotive oriented type uses. | 00:08:48 | |
| Within that district right now the RMU code is fairly restrictive when it comes to automotive uses. It does not permit for repair | 00:08:56 | |
| sales, you know equipment rental. I know that those those kind of kinds of things and it was kind of contemplated with the | 00:09:04 | |
| adjacency to the residential as you see here the Edgewater townhomes potentially there, there could be some conflicts if we just | 00:09:11 | |
| allow those outright and this is when we did the full global. | 00:09:19 | |
| Yours back in 2017 and so we didn't get down into the very specific details, but we did kind of look just generally at uses and so | 00:09:26 | |
| some of those uses were taken away. Car washes were also made a conditional use in the RMU code. So the acronym to apply for a | 00:09:34 | |
| zoning text amendment and for a zoning map amendment, the zoning text amendment would create the the GRMU code, the Geneva Rd. | 00:09:41 | |
| mixed-use code and that would fall under our special zoning book. | 00:09:49 | |
| That is really kind of a companion document to the zoning ordinance. It applies the district. | 00:09:57 | |
| To the retail the Geneva Retail Frontage subdivision, another Watts, 2311. | 00:10:03 | |
| And, and so last time we had asked that if O'reilly's were to be a part of that, that we needed an authorization letter and we | 00:10:11 | |
| didn't receive one, but we did receive one for the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. And so that's the wow, that's like | 00:10:18 | |
| right here. That's where they, yeah, just got split front to back. And so they agreed to be a part of it. Their conditional use | 00:10:25 | |
| that was approved, I believe it was a year ago for the Bell site that is still in effect. And they, they are invested under. | 00:10:32 | |
| Approval and they have done work and I think most of you know, they found that the water quality was was not sufficient and and | 00:10:40 | |
| they're looking at ways to potentially upgrade the water quality of that site or you know, they the applicant is to talk about a | 00:10:46 | |
| desire to incorporate that lot into into their development. So potentially you you could see that kind of that half acre be a part | 00:10:53 | |
| of the overall. | 00:10:59 | |
| Development that the applicants take it on ex development. | 00:11:06 | |
| Term zonings RMU it's. | 00:11:11 | |
| Project areas about 9 acres bounded by Florida N to the north, Geneva Road to the east O'Reilly out of parts of the South | 00:11:13 | |
| Edgewater townhouse with us the shows the zoning that would be proposed GRMU on those on those lots general plan we provided kind | 00:11:20 | |
| of an overall. | 00:11:26 | |
| A list of kind of where we felt that it aligned with the general plan and it's pretty good. I mean anywhere from the economic | 00:11:35 | |
| development, pieces of land use, transportation. | 00:11:39 | |
| We feel like if this done right, it could provide really great services that would allow for people to walk. Additionally, you | 00:11:45 | |
| know, with the amount of residential there, you got 500, basically 500 townhomes adjacent to site. That's a couple 1000 people. | 00:11:52 | |
| Those are services that they they can walk to or drive too quickly and also employment. And so that's and that's that's something | 00:11:58 | |
| that we are trying to be very target of. We found that one of the best ways to. | 00:12:05 | |
| You know, to kind of assist with the overall transportation issues that we're seeing in the traffic is providing jobs and | 00:12:12 | |
| residential close by in a way that. | 00:12:16 | |
| You can easily connect to them either short driving or by walking or other means. | 00:12:22 | |
| The GMU, it provides a mixture of commercial, office, residential uses along the Geneva Rd. You know, we talked about the | 00:12:29 | |
| automotive uses and the code currently does not permit those. A new code would permit them. | 00:12:36 | |
| And it would also it it would allow for light and heavy vehicle and equipment sales and rentals as a conditional use. | 00:12:46 | |
| There was within a discrepancy and I think this was from our actual code and the zoning code. I I believe most likely Jason | 00:12:55 | |
| probably took the the the standard code that we had and drop it in just so it was consistent. But we'll and I have that later list | 00:13:02 | |
| that we will need to do a cleanup on, on one of those residential is captured at a 2350 units and that was increased last year | 00:13:08 | |
| through the the RV. So the cap was met. | 00:13:15 | |
| So that this this this code if it was approved it would be a new code. I would allow for a districtal residential units, multi | 00:13:23 | |
| family and two family units are allowed. | 00:13:28 | |
| The Commission expressed a desire that stand alone residents will be taken out. And so that would mean we would need to clarify on | 00:13:34 | |
| the table that A2 family units are are not allowed because typically that's a duplex in most orientations. Those are standalone. | 00:13:42 | |
| The three access point off Geneva Rd. access easements on the east and West side of the project area running South and north. | 00:13:50 | |
| Our recommendation would be and the the plaque kind of contemplates this as well. | 00:13:59 | |
| That that's a temporary easement on the east side. And if we do a mixed-use building kind of where that that lands, we want to see | 00:14:04 | |
| the access easement pulled down. We don't want at least a parallel drive to the frontage of of a mixed-use building. We want that | 00:14:10 | |
| pushed up as reasonably possible to, to to both streets to kind of mirror the, the mixed-use development that's going to happen on | 00:14:16 | |
| the north side of Florida north. | 00:14:22 | |
| There right now the residential density is at 26 units per acre. They can be increased through development agreement. | 00:14:30 | |
| There's no women on non residential intensity. There's a good thing you want the site to build out with a lot of jobs. | 00:14:37 | |
| And apply for economic development. They did try to address some of the high issues. It was 65 feet that dropped at 5 feet down to | 00:14:43 | |
| 60. | 00:14:47 | |
| It's it is important with commercial if they do an office or eviction spilling that they do have kind of the space. | 00:14:53 | |
| That where they they can get at least like a good quality four story building due to the, you know, the depth lot. They might not | 00:15:01 | |
| be able to do that, but at least it would provide kind of the architect some flexibility as opposed going down to like a 45 foot. | 00:15:07 | |
| But there there was some concern. I kind of what we're anticipating is most of it is going to be single story on the South side | 00:15:15 | |
| and then on the north side I think it was mixed just built in. That's where you would see more of a high increase. | 00:15:21 | |
| This shows kind of the OK, I'm so one of the things kind of that way we found with the with the setbacks is the setbacks of the | 00:15:29 | |
| code are talking about pulling those from the easement line. We you know, we just want to stated that it's pulled from the | 00:15:34 | |
| property line. That's that, that's where we the rest of our codes that we pull our our setbacks. And so that would be something we | 00:15:40 | |
| would just want clarified. | 00:15:45 | |
| Yeah. | 00:15:54 | |
| So the easement on the east side is 30 feet on, then on the rear side here it is 35 feet. That's a utilities mat and that's a | 00:15:56 | |
| access easement on the front side. | 00:16:01 | |
| From utility. | 00:16:07 | |
| But, and it seems like kind of discrepancy, there's another spot where it says 5 feet from Janice Geneva Rd. So that's why if we | 00:16:11 | |
| just stay, it's from the, the property lines, you know, we're, we're OK with that. And really with this district, I mean, there's | 00:16:17 | |
| not like it's actually a good thing to go up as as close to the street as we can. And so, you know, having a small set back | 00:16:24 | |
| opportunity. Geneva Rd. even with the non mixed-use buildings, I think it provides more billable pads. | 00:16:31 | |
| Ability this note here basically what that says that's a flat note is that the access season is contemplated to be a temporary | 00:16:38 | |
| easement and that as each property builds out, they would then record an access easement across their property. It's supposed to | 00:16:45 | |
| be a fluid easement. And so it depends if that's supposed to provide kind of generally the ability to to place your building pad | 00:16:53 | |
| where it makes the most sense and then they would record an easement so so if you pulled up to the street then you know maybe. | 00:17:00 | |
| Goes around, but you still need to provide for that easement for cars to to go from one month to to the other. | 00:17:08 | |
| Yeah, there's no internal side setbacks and 20 feet from the street sides and then there's a rear set back that's 20 feet. | 00:17:16 | |
| OK. So yeah, so this is these are all kind of the site plan elements of the code. | 00:17:28 | |
| Well, what it indicates is the main structure on lot 11, the project area shall the design is that is comparable and compatible | 00:17:35 | |
| with the structures of the north side of the 400 N. You know staff would like to see something that may be a little bit more | 00:17:40 | |
| substantial. We're only talking about like a .9 acre lot and so you know, we have kind of contemplated going to to four bots to | 00:17:46 | |
| provide a really sizable project. | 00:17:51 | |
| But you know, we'd we'd like to see more than than than than one lot. | 00:17:58 | |
| It calls out development plan throughout the code. That's something that is kind of carried on in the RMU code. This is where our | 00:18:04 | |
| own zoning conflicts. So we do have in our zoning code where it allows for the Planning Commission to approve all site plans. The | 00:18:10 | |
| RMU had some discrepancies with that. So we've always kind of give the benefit to the the developer. So we've always had the | 00:18:16 | |
| Planning Commission even under the RMU approved site plans. So we would like to make sure that that. | 00:18:22 | |
| Kind of stays consistent with this. | 00:18:29 | |
| And so instead of having the City Council approve the site plans, the Planning Commission should be the board as our practice has | 00:18:31 | |
| been to approve site plans and then also taking out kind of the language of development plan and replace that with site plan. | 00:18:36 | |
| Yeah. I talked about connect interconnections with other projects we thought was really good. Residential projects shall have 50% | 00:18:44 | |
| open space, recreational amenities, Our office space areas shall be on and maintained by the property owned association. So that | 00:18:50 | |
| that's good, but I'm not really contemplating public parks, but there would be private open space with this area that would be | 00:18:56 | |
| maintained by by the OR the association. | 00:19:02 | |
| Detention Detention basins will not be counted towards open space. | 00:19:09 | |
| However, and talking with engineer, we saw that it was important if they went to the, you know, the cost of putting an underground | 00:19:13 | |
| system and, and many developers do that to utilize space more efficiently. That if, if it maintained the same quality of the open | 00:19:19 | |
| space and the recreational, you know, amenities there that, that we could count that towards open space. But that would, that | 00:19:25 | |
| would provide the same the, the discretion making sure that the system worked well and that also the, you know, the open space on | 00:19:31 | |
| top was. | 00:19:37 | |
| Usable. | 00:19:43 | |
| I have parking to be told me by the city planner. We feel like it should follow the the city code, the the our parking ordinance. | 00:19:46 | |
| There's a landscaping theme, which we thought was good. One thing that says the district states character will bring about a | 00:19:52 | |
| familiar traditional setting for users while allowing for a diversity of building styles. That's not really specific. It's it's | 00:19:57 | |
| kind of general. It does sort of align with some of our general plan language having like traditional billing styles, but I just | 00:20:03 | |
| kind of pointed that out. | 00:20:09 | |
| They'll emphasize the oriented towards Eva Rd. So like if you have a chromo building on 400 N that you would also want it to | 00:20:15 | |
| Orient towards for the north 'cause you're going to have a mixed-use building on the north side of that. And so having kind of the | 00:20:22 | |
| two, they don't necessarily have to match exactly, but having kind of a general urban design form that that that kind of matches, | 00:20:28 | |
| you know, build his face or like entrances facing both. | 00:20:34 | |
| Buildings are encouraged to include passive solar. | 00:20:42 | |
| When so that using the words encouraged, it means that we can't require it, but it's kind of a farming whoever's building there in | 00:20:46 | |
| the city would like to see that requires 30% glass and windows on the ground floor, 1 inches on the street side, but only one on | 00:20:53 | |
| the corner lot. We'd like that up so that if there is a corner building on Geneva and 4 N that there is an entrance. I mean 1 can | 00:21:01 | |
| be main entrance, but providing another entrance so that there's it. It has like an architectural connectivity with with with. | 00:21:08 | |
| We felt was important. | 00:21:16 | |
| Sorry there it's it's a it's a big it's important. So I mean, if you have any questions, feel free to stop. But there's other | 00:21:19 | |
| architectural standards, you know, making sure that the there's not monotonous wild pains that they get broken on the counter, | 00:21:25 | |
| equipment gets screened, buildings are designed with the base metal on top so that so that, you know, it kind of helps create that | 00:21:30 | |
| the human scale thing. So if you think about just instead of having one really large glass building that's maybe four stories | 00:21:36 | |
| tall, you would have like. | 00:21:42 | |
| A distinction between the architectural planes that they would be, you need to be able to distinguish between them that that | 00:21:48 | |
| actually helps kind of with the human scale portion of it. You're able to see the ground floor. | 00:21:55 | |
| And then there's other things like encouraging architectural features, they call them 3D features on the on the building, Qantas | 00:22:02 | |
| and stuff like that. If you know, if we're going to do that, that's one of those things that it should be a shallow. | 00:22:10 | |
| You know, it shall be a shallow. I think something like that is better as a as a requirement, but then you provide kind of the | 00:22:18 | |
| flexibility for the architect inside, what types of features that they incorporate into their into their building. And then it | 00:22:24 | |
| calls that like building materials like sandstorm brick or base brick. Let's call that as as desirable. It tells about like | 00:22:30 | |
| encouraging an iconic architectural. | 00:22:37 | |
| Elements. So it's not necessarily something that's that's required, but it's encouraged. | 00:22:44 | |
| And then lighting should be downcast and directed. We feel that's important that that we have something in there that it's | 00:22:49 | |
| directed away from residential. They do have some language in there for architectural features and, and that's, and that's kind of | 00:22:55 | |
| a cool thing. You'll see like some of these nice buildings where they use the lighting to really highlight different features of | 00:23:02 | |
| it and, and provides a nice aesthetic at night. But we do need to be cognizant of other residences. | 00:23:08 | |
| And so, you know, maybe there's an element we could allow for uplift elements, but we need to make sure that that's maybe on sides | 00:23:15 | |
| not facing the the residential and that it's fully captured either within like an Eid system or, or, you know, an awning that it's | 00:23:22 | |
| not just a light just to shoot it up because that you know, that that that could have impacted the the neighbors. Northern 4 lots | 00:23:29 | |
| shall be accessed by a rear alley and placed up close to Team Rd. as feasible. | 00:23:37 | |
| The parking area shall be shall not be permitted in the front yards of the lots. | 00:23:44 | |
| Standards for auto oriented uses, there's a lot of these. Hopefully you guys have kind of gone through it. I'm sorry, that's like | 00:23:50 | |
| I hate there's so much stuff, but there there are standards that help overall with the the impact to the to, to the residents as | 00:23:57 | |
| well. I'll come. We'll kind of go through the car washers. I know there's there's some concern with that. The applicant has put a | 00:24:04 | |
| step back for the, for the actual building of 50 feet. So that would be much more than the other buildings in the district. | 00:24:10 | |
| They are limited to the southern 5 lots. Car washes are and vacuums. The vacuum shall be set back 25 feet. | 00:24:18 | |
| They're, they're all of the lots required to have the landscape buffer of 10 feet, which we could provide trees and screening | 00:24:26 | |
| elements. And then probably the most, most important thing is the hours of operation or when it's 7:00 AM to 9:00 PM, so you don't | 00:24:31 | |
| have vacuums running at midnight. | 00:24:37 | |
| Can I ask a question, I know we discussed last time a lot about the vacuum annoyance. Has there was there any other internal | 00:24:44 | |
| discussion that came about of impact for that? And I know for the because it's the southern 5 lots where that can be. So the | 00:24:51 | |
| Edgewater homes are I think 16 feet easement from from the property line. From the property line you're looking at 40 feet | 00:24:57 | |
| distance between the vacuums and those homes. Yeah. | 00:25:04 | |
| Yeah. And so I think Jason mentioned having some sound studies. And so when they do their presentation, I think that would be a | 00:25:12 | |
| good thing for for them to discuss. That's also why we put the hours of operation in place. And then we could add some language to | 00:25:18 | |
| require like trees within the the buffer landscape area and that that may help with some, you know, some of the sound blockage or | 00:25:23 | |
| you know, whatever you want to call it. | 00:25:29 | |
| And then there's some standards for the the light repair. | 00:25:39 | |
| Limiting the the base to four, having the exit doors not facing the residential. | 00:25:45 | |
| Things of that nature, a big one too. This is what I dealt with in Virginia when I worked there. No inoperable vehicles shall be | 00:25:52 | |
| parked slash stored on site. It's important we say that at one city that the code was just very general and we had like 5 or 6 of | 00:25:58 | |
| them that had just broken down cars all on the front end. It's you need, you need clear language and I think that's, that's fairly | 00:26:04 | |
| clear for us to enforce. | 00:26:10 | |
| Some of their other auto, auto oriented standards for drive-throughs, drive-throughs are going to have to meet the zoning code. So | 00:26:18 | |
| we're we already do have that within our code I. | 00:26:23 | |
| And there there was a limitation on on on Bayes as well. | 00:26:30 | |
| Let's see if there's anything else. | 00:26:37 | |
| Here are some of our proposed conditions should you choose to approve the, the, the ordinance tonight. And I'll, I'll read through | 00:26:40 | |
| those and we can, we can talk about them as much as you'd like. So first of all, remove the redundancy and the use table regarding | 00:26:47 | |
| vehicle and equipment repair. And so you can see just kind of on the right, we were just basically take, take that one out. I | 00:26:54 | |
| think that was, that's something that's already in our RMU code. So we probably would need to do the same. | 00:27:01 | |
| Or in the. | 00:27:08 | |
| The district use table and the zoning codes, we probably needed to make that correction there as well, removing the east axis E | 00:27:10 | |
| limit from mixed-use building lots on the north side. And that's one thing that the site plan process contemplates within the plat | 00:27:17 | |
| is that you basically put the building where you need it, but you provide the access so that it makes sense so that they would | 00:27:23 | |
| record a new access easement once they file their their site plan. | 00:27:30 | |
| We have two family dwellings and clarify and use table that stand alone residential is not permitted. | 00:27:38 | |
| Have actually measured from property lines and not easements. I understand kind of their, their, their overall intent, but I think | 00:27:43 | |
| it, you know, I just want the language to be very consistent for the the zoning code just makes it harder to minister if it's we | 00:27:47 | |
| have different standards. | 00:27:52 | |
| And then to replace the. | 00:27:58 | |
| The broader plan with side plan and Planning Commission to be authorized to for approval of site plan permits within the district. | 00:28:00 | |
| City engineer may approve underground storm water facilities count towards open space requirements. The quality of open space | 00:28:05 | |
| recreational amenities maintained 7 parking requirements in the zoning arts will be used. Remove city planner termination | 00:28:09 | |
| language. | 00:28:14 | |
| Building located on the corner of Florida North and Geneva Rd. should have entrance located facing both streets. Alighting shall | 00:28:19 | |
| be fully contained within the project side, not spill onto residential property. What are you using? Obviously there's going to be | 00:28:26 | |
| a little bit, but the photometric plants that really do help us look at the intensity. Typically those are those are put together | 00:28:32 | |
| by a lighting engineer or you know a civil engineer that has like lighting design experience. | 00:28:39 | |
| Let's see ten 3D architectural features shall be incorporated into all building elevations. So that's one thing that we've we've | 00:28:48 | |
| kind of done as we've looked at these projects, making sure that our front facade you typically those are great, but that you | 00:28:55 | |
| carry kind of the same and that's 11 similar architectural design and material shall be incorporated on all building elevations. | 00:29:02 | |
| So you can go heavy on the front elevation, but as long as you're not having blank elevations on the back or just like. | 00:29:09 | |
| Amassing with with no undulation, you know, I mean it, it could be downplayed and we could get into like specific standards if you | 00:29:17 | |
| want. But overall, you know, if they're using some of the same material, there's brick on the ground floor, then, you know, you | 00:29:23 | |
| pull that into some sort of orientation on the, the sides and, and the, and the back elevation so that you don't just get great | 00:29:29 | |
| front facade and then everything else is just, you know, flat. | 00:29:36 | |
| And then should you choose to approve it. | 00:29:44 | |
| We provided a motion for the ordinance. Ordinance would approve both Geneva Rd. mixed-use District zoning text amendment and also | 00:29:48 | |
| the zoning map amendment with the 11 conditions listed in the staff report, or if you choose to modify those or take them away, | 00:29:54 | |
| add some, then we would just change that language a little bit. | 00:30:00 | |
| And the applicant doesn't have a presentation. Thanks Morgan. | 00:30:07 | |
| Yeah, you guys. | 00:30:13 | |
| Make your presentation I suppose. | 00:30:15 | |
| It is on all right and I have. | 00:30:24 | |
| Some over copies with. | 00:30:27 | |
| Red Line and the red line version of what we saw last night based on the conversation. So my name is Jason, Bold snow and warmer. | 00:30:31 | |
| I'm here with X Development. Really grateful for the opportunity to be here. Really grateful for staff. Morgan and I think talked | 00:30:38 | |
| several times today on the phone and lots of emails back and forth and not just today over the last couple weeks as well about | 00:30:44 | |
| this code text amendment. | 00:30:50 | |
| We are if you want to go to the next. | 00:30:57 | |
| Slide. So talking about property, it's currently zoned as regional mixed-use. The proposal is to create a new zone and change the | 00:31:01 | |
| map. This is the area we're going to identify. So the O'reilly's is not. When we came before you last time there was consideration | 00:31:10 | |
| of including the O'reilly's given that it's developed project and. | 00:31:18 | |
| Most likely will not meet the standards we are looking to adopt. It's probably best to not include it and create a a non | 00:31:27 | |
| conforming non conforming building. | 00:31:31 | |
| This is the plot and the next one we're going to outline. All right, so this really is the meat of why it is we're here. We are | 00:31:37 | |
| asking for a new zone, in essence to allow car washes as a right. Car washes are currently a conditional use permit. | 00:31:46 | |
| And to allow light automotive repair as a permitted use, that is what our ask is in exchange for that we are proposing. | 00:31:57 | |
| To as Morgan went through that long list of design criteria, that's not required in the regional excuse zone as it currently sits. | 00:32:10 | |
| So in exchange for in essence those two items, we are willing to adopt this new code, these new regulations. | 00:32:20 | |
| To that would require development on this property really to be designed. | 00:32:33 | |
| In a way that's that's thoughtful and that's meaningful. And as Morgan has mentioned, you know, this is an entry feature, an entry | 00:32:39 | |
| property to the city and wanting to make sure that it's done right. And that's really our intent is identifying design standards | 00:32:46 | |
| and development standards that that makes sense for this property. And so a lot of the things, quite honestly, I think almost | 00:32:53 | |
| everything we talked about last time. | 00:33:00 | |
| Has been incorporated. | 00:33:08 | |
| We made changes to the proposed code. | 00:33:09 | |
| You know, the stand alone residential uses, we heard that, you know, this is the commercial area of the regional mixed-use. That's | 00:33:14 | |
| what the intent was. And so we've eliminated the ability to have a standalone residential use. | 00:33:21 | |
| The design guidelines. | 00:33:30 | |
| And then so I went through some of them, obviously not as in depth as as Morgan did, but you know with the building orientation, | 00:33:33 | |
| the ground floor activation. | 00:33:37 | |
| Architectural character. Meaningful design elements when it comes to commercial buildings. | 00:33:43 | |
| And the requiring compatible and comparable uses, so or design not uses comparable compatible design. And I hear it's lot 3, it's | 00:33:50 | |
| the northernmost lot. Depending on which document you look at, I think there's three or four different numbers that that lot | 00:33:58 | |
| received. So the northernmost lot so that it does tie in with the mixed-use project across 400. | 00:34:07 | |
| Connectivity isn't. It was expressed was very important. | 00:34:16 | |
| And that's that's incorporated into the code to ensure that that happens. | 00:34:20 | |
| Shared parking is also something that is contemplated and enabled. This code would enable a shared parking with adjacent | 00:34:25 | |
| developments and then establishing specific U standards for car washes and light vehicle repair and drive through uses and one of | 00:34:34 | |
| the things I want to talk about in regards to to those specific uses so. | 00:34:42 | |
| Car Car washes currently are a conditional use permit in this this zone so. | 00:34:51 | |
| You have an applicant that could come before you and say, hey, this is what we're proposing. We've mitigated all of the impacts | 00:34:56 | |
| and it would be up to you to determine whether or not those impacts are actually mitigated. | 00:35:04 | |
| And rather than going through that kind of the back and forth through the conditional use permit. | 00:35:14 | |
| This is my personal opinion as somebody that's worked. Umm. | 00:35:21 | |
| On that side in the public sector. | 00:35:25 | |
| It's better to adopt specific standards that work as opposed to requiring conditional use permit and asking an applicant to | 00:35:29 | |
| mitigate, to come up with their best way of mitigating those impacts. And so the mechanisms that we're proposing of of this | 00:35:37 | |
| ordinance which adopt specific standards for those uses. | 00:35:45 | |
| In our opinion it's it's a win win because from the developer side we know what the standards are. | 00:35:54 | |
| And from the City side, you're adopting standards that's that work. And when I say that they work so the the car wash uses I | 00:36:01 | |
| spent. | 00:36:06 | |
| About two days going through a multitude of different. | 00:36:13 | |
| Car wash permits throughout the West and looking at different noise studies and looking at different. | 00:36:16 | |
| Requirements that were placed. | 00:36:23 | |
| And the what we've what we're proposing is in most cases more than what was required, but definitely in line with with those other | 00:36:27 | |
| with what other jurisdictions have required for car washes. So with that I don't know if you want to go through some of the | 00:36:35 | |
| specific items that have that have changed or if you have questions. | 00:36:43 | |
| You guys have any specific questions right now? | 00:36:56 | |
| Not like this again. | 00:36:59 | |
| Should I open it up for public to make any comments or questions that? Yeah, absolutely. And then once that's done, we can, if | 00:37:02 | |
| there's comments, then we that'll give the then you want to provide the applicant the opportunity to respond to those so that we | 00:37:08 | |
| can continue the discussion. Cool. Yeah, let's do that real quick. Yeah, if you don't mind. | 00:37:14 | |
| Any of the members of the public have any questions or comments that they'd like to make regarding Item 5.1? What we've just done | 00:37:19 | |
| over now is your time. | 00:37:23 | |
| Just come up and state your name. | 00:37:31 | |
| I'm Kirk Beecher with Central Utah Water. | 00:37:38 | |
| So we own one lot in that proposed area there and the only question I had was there was discussion about the northern foremost | 00:37:42 | |
| lots would provide drive through and parking and all that for those lots. | 00:37:50 | |
| Are the four lots our lot and then the three others to the east and north of us, is that where you're talking about? So the, the | 00:38:00 | |
| code that was proposed says 4 lots. How we've said it kind of been our our staff report is the four lots of the Geneva retail | 00:38:09 | |
| frontage plot. And so that the new plot is the Geneva retail fund is flat B Yeah, Plat B. | 00:38:17 | |
| And so that those four lots, that's what I'm asking, are those the four lots you're talking about? | 00:38:26 | |
| I'm sorry, not the platter. So the ones I'm talking about are like we call out the the original platted, platted lodge. Those | 00:38:33 | |
| don't exist any longer. That didn't amend the entire plot. So, so your bottom, your bottom lines are still existing. Yeah, but so | 00:38:38 | |
| you're talking about only lots. | 00:38:44 | |
| 87. | 00:38:52 | |
| 65 and 4 then. | 00:38:54 | |
| So that's probably there's a discrepancy under the code, it just says, it says 4 lots. And so if you guys want to clarify maybe | 00:38:57 | |
| what what you mean by that portion amended the original plat to that right there, OK. And plat B is, is lots 12/13/14 and 15 and | 00:39:05 | |
| lots 9/10/11 do not exist any longer. | 00:39:14 | |
| OK. So which lots are you talking about on the floor? | 00:39:22 | |
| So the ones that were contemplating are part of the original and so that's and so, so that's from from like a staff side when we | 00:39:26 | |
| say those, the four we're talking about, about the original lots because that would be one beyond that. | 00:39:34 | |
| I I know, I know, but there there is a plat. And so if you talk about the original plat, so they don't exist anymore. OK, So what, | 00:39:44 | |
| what, what, what are you, what's what I'm asking are the four lots you're talking about. | 00:39:51 | |
| Lots 12/13/14 and 15, so that are you talking about lots. So what staff is talking about is, is the the four lots that that are | 00:39:58 | |
| shown in the amended plat and also those are the only four lots of Michelle and also and also lot 8 of the of the the original | 00:40:06 | |
| plan. Can you pull up that map for me so that we can all be talking about the same 4 lots? | 00:40:14 | |
| Including lot 8 will be difficult because. | 00:40:23 | |
| Our loss will be totally fenced. There will not be access through our lot. | 00:40:28 | |
| Along that West side, OK. | 00:40:35 | |
| In which lot of ours is 13 on the amendment, it's the smaller of the of the two ones, the back one. | 00:40:37 | |
| Our lot will be. It will not have public access. | 00:40:45 | |
| Because it is a a public facility, it will be a well site, so it will not have public access. | 00:40:48 | |
| We'll access it from the north. | 00:40:58 | |
| From 400 N. | 00:41:00 | |
| Along the along the 45 foot that's along that website. | 00:41:03 | |
| Yes. Well, that's it from that east of there along the utility easement and then we have an additional 10 feet outside of that 35 | 00:41:08 | |
| foot utility easement as well. | 00:41:12 | |
| So that's that's my question is what are you trying to say with that the four lives? | 00:41:22 | |
| OK, I'm going to pull it up. | 00:41:29 | |
| OK. | 00:41:31 | |
| Yeah, and that's and and this is so, I mean, that's the sketch. So we'll need to provide some some clarifying language. So this | 00:41:39 | |
| lot. | 00:41:42 | |
| Is going to be fenced off totally, yeah. And so the language could be amended that. | 00:41:46 | |
| The Ali would would either go around it. | 00:41:54 | |
| So that it's not, it's not an impact on your side. That's my question. And so, yeah, so we could call out lot 13 of this plat as | 00:41:57 | |
| you know having the the alleyway basically circumvent that lot, OK. | 00:42:05 | |
| And that's, that's all I was asking. Yeah, that's it. It's just that because that is a a public water facility, it will not be | 00:42:13 | |
| accessible to the public. Yeah. So that's why I need to make that clear. | 00:42:19 | |
| We can't have a driveway through a public water facility. That would be bad. And I, I, I guess too there's there's there's been a | 00:42:27 | |
| lot of questions as to whether or not you guys are are moving forward. OK, OK, OK. So we've yeah, we've heard, we've heard | 00:42:33 | |
| different. So we're drilling the will we have revised the contract for the well. | 00:42:40 | |
| Driller that was working, that's been working out there and he's drilling that well and then he's also going to drill the well | 00:42:47 | |
| over by behind the elementary school. | 00:42:50 | |
| So both wells are going to be drilled and we'll add them into our system. | 00:42:54 | |
| Yeah, so. | 00:42:58 | |
| Great. Does that make sense? It does. OK, good. Thank you for that. Yeah, no problem. Yeah. | 00:43:00 | |
| All right. Any other public comments? | 00:43:07 | |
| All right. | 00:43:11 | |
| OK. And then you you'd want to close the public hearing, should we close it and then reopen it for the holdaway farms? | 00:43:13 | |
| Development agreement. Those are those are two separate ones. Yeah. Yeah. So you would you would open the holy farms for that one. | 00:43:21 | |
| So you would close it for for this work. All right. Do I have a motion to close the public hearing? I move to close the public | 00:43:26 | |
| hearing. | 00:43:31 | |
| All in favor, aye. All right. | 00:43:36 | |
| So if you guys don't have any questions right off the bat, I suppose I do. So you're saying with the with this development, the | 00:43:41 | |
| two things that you're really wanting are the? | 00:43:47 | |
| The car washes and the. | 00:43:55 | |
| Light auto repair with the residential intensity. | 00:43:59 | |
| Could we make it so that? | 00:44:07 | |
| Any residential has to go through a development agreement and if so, can we also make it to be a specific percentage of the | 00:44:10 | |
| retail? | 00:44:13 | |
| What are your thoughts on something like that? | 00:44:18 | |
| So is there any residential go through a DA? | 00:44:23 | |
| And what was the second item? And that we have some kind of percentage. I don't know what that would be or something that's it | 00:44:28 | |
| might be easier just because we don't we don't know how intense the site is is going to build out. Because if they do, if they do | 00:44:34 | |
| like auto uses that, you know, like their, their numbers are going to are going to be different. So if it's like 25% or something | 00:44:41 | |
| like that. | 00:44:47 | |
| I think it might be easier to do just like a unit number, so you know whether it's like 100 or what, what whatever that is like if | 00:44:54 | |
| you want to put a cap in it. | 00:44:58 | |
| Or the development agreement, because they would come back through Planning Commission and City Council. So you could say that the | 00:45:03 | |
| development agreement would determine the, the, the number of units. So if they went with four with the residential project, then | 00:45:10 | |
| they, they could, you know, analyze the, the site and bring a number that that makes sense for that site and then bring it back. | 00:45:17 | |
| And then you would have the opportunity to, you know, and, and I guess another shot at it if you wanted to do it that way. | 00:45:23 | |
| Or you could cap it in the ordinance at 100 to be approved through a development agreement or whatever that that number is. | 00:45:31 | |
| Because I, I just wanted to be clear in the development, like clear to any future planning commissioner and City Council, that the | 00:45:37 | |
| only way we would really want any residential is if we're getting a massive. | 00:45:43 | |
| Retail use. | 00:45:51 | |
| Is there a way we can like? | 00:45:55 | |
| Really substantial on a huge benefit to the city from a, you know, financial standpoint, even if we were to say no residential | 00:46:28 | |
| development agreement could come in and add residential, could it not? | 00:46:34 | |
| Or would this this would have to be amended either way? Yeah, you would want. So if if you pull out residential, you wouldn't be | 00:46:41 | |
| able to just do a development agreement to add residential. You're like you would want your zoning to to to guide the the uses. | 00:46:47 | |
| And so you would say, you know, residential is permitted through provision of a of a development agreement and the number of units | 00:46:53 | |
| will be will will be determined by the the City Council. And so that that way it would allow the developer to put put together a | 00:46:59 | |
| proposal that. | 00:47:05 | |
| Makes sense. And then you would have the opportunity to look at it at that time, which might make more sense that the site would | 00:47:11 | |
| be building out and then and then you could say you know like. | 00:47:15 | |
| Like the yeah, I was still like you're under building the retail. We want to see more retail. I mean, you'd be able to kind of | 00:47:21 | |
| negotiate it at that point as opposed to right now. It's just it's hard to know the level of intensity, Okay. | 00:47:26 | |
| Yeah. So if I can. | 00:47:32 | |
| Maybe under residential intensity, you know, we scratched the maximum residential density and we in essence modify or scratch the | 00:47:35 | |
| that it may be increased instead out of condition that it specifies mixed-use residential because we've scratched the standalone. | 00:47:44 | |
| So mixed-use residential may be permitted, it permitted through a development agreement. | 00:47:52 | |
| Yeah. | 00:48:00 | |
| Yeah. And then remove the, I think this is gonna be said, but yeah. And then remove the density, the 26 units per breaker, I would | 00:48:02 | |
| just take that out. Yep. | 00:48:05 | |
| Yeah, because it is. I agree with Morgan. It's difficult to judge that that intensity without knowing. I mean, there's lots of | 00:48:10 | |
| different metrics and ways of doing it. And so it's better as well as timing because with your development agreement, you have the | 00:48:17 | |
| opportunity to see what's there and what's being provided at that time. And you, you also, it puts you in a pretty strong position | 00:48:24 | |
| because it's looked at a development agreement from a land use side, like when it's actually providing like land use. | 00:48:30 | |
| Allowances. | 00:48:38 | |
| At that point and you know, you'd have the ability to to control the project. So you don't get, you know, like residential | 00:49:10 | |
| spilling all the way down to six spots or something like that. | 00:49:15 | |
| And then? | 00:49:25 | |
| So as far as right now I. | 00:49:26 | |
| Then you guys had it as mixed-use in just the top lot essentially or? | 00:49:30 | |
| Or rather that the. | 00:49:37 | |
| How do I want to wear this that? | 00:49:40 | |
| Buildings match what's on the northern part of the property you guys had for just the very northernmost lot. | 00:49:42 | |
| Is that something that can be moved It Morgan was saying in for the comments from staff that they want to see four lots. Obviously | 00:49:51 | |
| with Central Utah water that might be not possible. Yeah, we we would need to call out out the lots if I mean we you could say | 00:50:00 | |
| 1514 and 12 of this flat and then lot 8 of the of the original plat if you wanted like like kind of those four or whatever. | 00:50:10 | |
| The number is I mean that that's where I think maybe here for the applicant has to like what they would be willing to do | 00:50:20 | |
| beautiful. | 00:50:24 | |
| So you're talking about the the design? | 00:50:29 | |
| Being similar. | 00:50:34 | |
| Yeah. So the design elements fading a little bit more into other property instead of just being the 1.9 acre lot going into two, | 00:50:35 | |
| but up to four lots. Yeah. And I mean and as it's written, it does, it's not like one of them would be. | 00:50:44 | |
| Look completely different than all the others 'cause it does require consistency throughout, but that I think that's something | 00:50:54 | |
| that I mean that the Northern we'd identify those lots have. | 00:51:01 | |
| Design similar to the mixtures building across the street is that. | 00:51:09 | |
| Up to four lots being mixed-use, whether that's retail and office or retail or the actual requirement that it is mixed-use. Yeah. | 00:51:17 | |
| And so Worry and I, we've had conversations about it and I think. | 00:51:24 | |
| That is, that's a concern. | 00:51:32 | |
| We're I'm not aware of any zoning codes that requires a specific use for a specific property and so. | 00:51:35 | |
| But I, I don't to limit the, the options and say you have to do this. We think is, is a little more of a ask than what we think. | 00:51:46 | |
| But you know, what we're proposing is much more than what you have now in essence with the design guidelines. And so to push that | 00:51:55 | |
| further and say, well, not only does it have to look this way, but it has to be this use. | 00:52:03 | |
| I don't think we're comfortable. | 00:52:13 | |
| To give that up at this point, OK. | 00:52:17 | |
| OK. If that's, I mean if that makes sense. Yeah, Yeah, I understand. Well, I guess the concern is getting, you know, I mean if we | 00:52:20 | |
| take out standalone residential and and they did a residential project there, then that would push it into a mixed-use category, | 00:52:27 | |
| you know, just because you can't do standalone. | 00:52:33 | |
| I, I don't know, I mean, it's, it's, it's something that like we've, we've talked about quite, quite a bit. I think that was kind | 00:52:41 | |
| of like the overall like vision of what the city when we looked at the side is having something compatible with the, the, the, | 00:52:48 | |
| that northern project. And that's a much larger project than you know, when you're just looking at like 1 lot. | 00:52:54 | |
| I, I, I don't know if, if that really does it, but you know, if the form, I mean that we're really talking about like the urban | 00:53:02 | |
| form, then maybe the specific use. And if you take away the standalone residential, then you may get like that mixed-use filling | 00:53:08 | |
| anyway. Or if you got a large office building that had a decent urban form that was similar to across the street that that that | 00:53:15 | |
| probably gets us there. I mean, I would think that's that that's kind of the. | 00:53:21 | |
| I would say like, like the goal of the city. | 00:53:29 | |
| Is to have just a good urban form so that that functions like a like a nice gateway as you come in, you have stuff that kind of | 00:53:31 | |
| same multiple size, yeah. | 00:53:35 | |
| Yeah. And I mean, I think we've taken that to heart with the design guidelines that we've incorporated. The intent is to bring it | 00:53:39 | |
| as close to Geneva Rd. you know, and that's one of the things that we're going to talk about with the. I think on the that front | 00:53:45 | |
| set back, we're OK eliminating the set back from that access easement and just utilizing the front property line. We just included | 00:53:51 | |
| it because we recognize it exists on the plat. | 00:53:57 | |
| But the you know, the five foot set back in essence to be able to utilize and push those buildings. | 00:54:04 | |
| As close to Geneva road to provide that that gateway feature on both sides of of 400 N is is the intent. | 00:54:10 | |
| OK. You guys have any questions? | 00:54:21 | |
| I'm still concerned just about the vacuums and 40 feet. I was reading a. | 00:54:25 | |
| Some BYU professors put out stuff on the wiki watch specifically at one where they measured the volume and the nuisance it created | 00:54:32 | |
| and the distance from the neighbors. They calculated topic of a wall in here that that you would need a wall doesn't do much. They | 00:54:38 | |
| said, you know, 100 foot, 12 foot cement wall, you're going to lower decibels by like 3 or 4 decibels. So I just want to make | 00:54:44 | |
| sure, you know, we acknowledge if it's 40 feet. | 00:54:50 | |
| What it's going to be, I do think it's gonna be a nuisance for people that are living there. And I think in Edgewater some of | 00:54:57 | |
| those are rentals investments, but I think some are individually owned as well. A lot of us do own those units we do live in own | 00:55:05 | |
| them yeah as well. One of the the things that's important to note about that Wiggy Wash and Orem is the way the building was | 00:55:12 | |
| already on it and the exit cause the exit with the dryers are what's facing the residential and that's where. | 00:55:20 | |
| The noise comes from the, the noise on the entrance side is half to 1/3 than what it is on the exit side with the dryers and with | 00:55:27 | |
| the blowers. And so that's one of the things that we're incorporating and making sure that it's not exiting towards the | 00:55:34 | |
| residential units, it's exiting towards Geneva Road. And we've proposed that you know they at least 25 feet and I mean we're, we | 00:55:41 | |
| can increase that. | 00:55:48 | |
| To 35 feet. | 00:55:56 | |
| If that would make you more comfortable to make sure that those the vacuums are pushed away. Morgan also had mentioned that | 00:55:59 | |
| landscaping. | 00:56:03 | |
| Buffer that 10 foot. I think it's. | 00:56:08 | |
| I agree and I think it's appropriate that as one of the conditions or that is one of the standards we identify what kind of | 00:56:12 | |
| landscaping goes in that that buffer that's you know trees and shrubs. It's not grass and flowers that don't. | 00:56:21 | |
| Have an impact on the South yeah, I don't think I mean if 100 foot 12 foot wall won't decrease out I don't think we can expect it | 00:56:31 | |
| yeah the difference between like. | 00:56:36 | |
| Trees and chubbery it that they absorb sound where the wall will bounce sound around and sometimes that creates more an extra | 00:56:44 | |
| sound. It is terrible. So if we can't, I don't know, I'd love to see. | 00:56:52 | |
| I'd love to see what. | 00:57:01 | |
| Would mitigate the sound by enough decibels that. | 00:57:05 | |
| When we're outside of our homes, we don't. | 00:57:11 | |
| Like we, we barely know there's car wash behind there, you know, it'll be hard to go from empty lots to very, very loud. | 00:57:15 | |
| Yeah, I don't. I did not. I don't have them with me. I apologize because I thought about that on the way down. I should have | 00:57:26 | |
| grabbed those. | 00:57:30 | |
| What's the decibel ordinance? Is it very clear hours? It is, it's yeah, it's depends on the hours. So obviously like late at | 00:57:34 | |
| night, it's it's much lower and that's, and that's one thing where the code does help out. They've, you know, after 9:00 PM it it | 00:57:40 | |
| drops off. | 00:57:46 | |
| But it's measured at the property lines here. | 00:57:54 | |
| Sorry if this board is everybody. | 00:58:02 | |
| So I think the other thing. | 00:58:08 | |
| So 65 decibels during during the daytime. | 00:58:10 | |
| And that and that's and that and that's measured at the property line. Yeah, our sound, our noise awareness was put in place when | 00:58:14 | |
| we were in just an agricultural community. So we actually might need to update that, that a little bit, but it's 65 at the and | 00:58:19 | |
| that's measured at the property line. | 00:58:25 | |
| And we have a noise meter. I mean, we could drive around and. | 00:58:33 | |
| The hours in it as well, yeah, that says to 10:30 PM, is that right? Yeah, 7:00 AM to 10:30 PM So their code actually brings it, | 00:58:37 | |
| brings it earlier an hour and a half. | 00:58:43 | |
| Right. | 00:58:49 | |
| That's for operation, but the noise. | 00:58:51 | |
| Yeah, I like that inclusion. I guess I'm just wondering. | 00:59:25 | |
| Like you will want it to be a lower decibel at the property line by the residentials. | 00:59:30 | |
| And it's probably established what that is as well during hours of use and not just during quiet hours. | 00:59:37 | |
| If that makes sense. | 00:59:45 | |
| Because everyone gets home between like four and then we're all generally outside. | 00:59:47 | |
| Until 7:00 or 8:00 and we gotta hear each other talking, then I don't know. It's not a very good community feeling. | 00:59:55 | |
| Do you know specifically what law you're looking at? Yeah, I mean, I think no, to answer your question, no. And that's one of the | 01:00:09 | |
| things that were we've kind of talked to staff and went through these things where we're talking about the zoning code as opposed | 01:00:14 | |
| to a specific site plan. And so it's kind of. | 01:00:19 | |
| You know, chicken and egg. As far as identifying specific uses, again, what kind of back that specific uses on specific lots? | 01:00:25 | |
| And I will kind of point out, and Jason mentioned this before, right now it's a conditional use under the RMU. And so this | 01:00:34 | |
| actually provides standards at what we don't have now. So it increases those standards, our conditional use permit, it would allow | 01:00:41 | |
| us to add conditions to help mitigate, you know, potential impacts. But the strongest, most enforceable standards you can have the | 01:00:49 | |
| ones that are written in the code. So if we put one in there and said must have a, you know, a 200 foot set back. | 01:00:56 | |
| You know, during the instrument they could say, well, that's, that's impossible, that's, that's, that's unreasonable and we | 01:01:04 | |
| probably wouldn't lose that. And so, so in a way like this actually provides us some, some some good standards that, and then if | 01:01:09 | |
| we pushed it back 35 feet and maybe added trees. | 01:01:14 | |
| That might not get us 100% there, but I, I think that's getting this kind of where where we're looking. What about hours of | 01:01:20 | |
| operation? I mean, is, is 9, is 9:00 the, is that their standard, the for the user you guys are working with? That's my | 01:01:25 | |
| understanding, yeah. | 01:01:30 | |
| Instead of the standard. | 01:01:36 | |
| Yeah. And I don't think that's year round or all the time, but that is they do utilize that. What about Sundays because I I mean | 01:01:39 | |
| is, would it be closed on Sunday? | 01:01:45 | |
| I personally am comfortable. | 01:01:56 | |
| With allowing car washes as long as we have very strict. | 01:01:58 | |
| Measurement of decibel at property line towards residential. Does that make sense? So I. | 01:02:04 | |
| Yeah, the vacuums. | 01:02:13 | |
| Sure, yeah. | 01:02:18 | |
| So when you're talking about the decibels, are you the measured decibels while operating? We need to decide what is okay. | 01:02:20 | |
| When it like it. | 01:02:31 | |
| At the property line where it hits residential. So if we can determine. | 01:02:34 | |
| A something that works for you know that is reasonable. | 01:02:41 | |
| It is a car wash but also is comfortable for people living there. | 01:02:46 | |
| But if we can both win, that's where I want to hit. Yeah. More. What was the noise or this language again? Sorry. It's 65 decibels | 01:02:52 | |
| and that's a it's a weighted decibels measurement. So I'm not sure what that means, but 65, that's what we have a sound meter. So | 01:02:59 | |
| we were just look at it during the day or is that. | 01:03:05 | |
| 7:00 AM to 10:30 PM and that's 65 decibels currently. | 01:03:13 | |
| Normal conversation. | 01:03:21 | |
| Yeah. So I mean that's the existing standard. OK. So nuisance ordinance, that was what I was wondering if that was just quiet | 01:03:24 | |
| hours or regular time. OK, Yeah. I mean kind of the tough things too is if you if you do allow a car wash, I mean, obviously, I | 01:03:30 | |
| mean, I think that's a sustained noise volume, right? Isn't that like that? So you know, you might have as you were talking, you | 01:03:36 | |
| know. | 01:03:43 | |
| A kid might scream and so you're going to shoot up, but it's talking about like on your average sustained decibels. | 01:03:50 | |
| And and reality, there may be times where the vacuum is gonna gonna go over because if you feel, if you look up looks like you're | 01:03:57 | |
| saying it's like a normal conversation, maybe you're talking. | 01:04:01 | |
| You know, a little exaggerated or something, but it's not, it's not like screaming, but like it's like a general. | 01:04:07 | |
| Does that's fine. | 01:04:17 | |
| Yeah, if we wanted to so. | 01:04:20 | |
| I mean, that's, that's kind of up to the Commission. If you if you wanted to see the the noise studies, then that that would | 01:04:23 | |
| require continuing it to have to, to get kind of that, that data from the from the applicant unless you feel comfortable with | 01:04:29 | |
| maybe a condition or something like that. | 01:04:35 | |
| So I'm not sure really how to happen. | 01:04:43 | |
| Is that something you guys want to see is some kind of studies showing what there is? There are a lot of conditions, more than I | 01:04:46 | |
| think we've seen in something in ever maybe I think I've ever seen. Personally, I'd be fine continuing it just because I would | 01:04:51 | |
| like to see the conditions that you have. | 01:04:57 | |
| Made made as changes into the code. | 01:05:04 | |
| If if I can propose you know that as part of that permitted use a sound study. | 01:05:09 | |
| Is provided. | 01:05:18 | |
| To show that it meets the the noise ordinance requirements. Yeah. | 01:05:20 | |
| I like that a lot. | 01:05:25 | |
| Yeah. I mean, I'm happy to get permits. Yeah, that's yeah, that's a good condition. So. | 01:05:32 | |
| And they say how do we craft that? So with the other conditions, the things that you have planned like when you file for site plan | 01:05:39 | |
| A, a noise study. | 01:05:44 | |
| From the proper property line is provided showing what the what the dust that. | 01:05:49 | |
| What the decibels will be and that it shall meet the noise ordinance of the city. Do you do you think Jason, from what you've seen | 01:05:54 | |
| that at. | 01:06:00 | |
| A 35 foot set back at the property line you'd be able to meet the 65. | 01:06:06 | |
| Decibel, I don't want to put you in a position where you're like guaranteed to lose on this, but I just want I I'm not an agnoise | 01:06:12 | |
| engineer, it's our sound engineer. I have no idea. From what I've seen in the studies I've seen the the noise issue does not come | 01:06:19 | |
| from the entrance side, it's the exit side and so the blowers. | 01:06:26 | |
| And so, I mean, yeah, I think. | 01:06:34 | |
| But that's something that's. | 01:06:38 | |
| Can be obtained yeah. And if for some reason it goes over then that even though it's just a permitted use site plan they had they | 01:06:41 | |
| would have to meet that. And so that that would mean if they need to add more trees, if they need to scoot the the vacuums back, I | 01:06:49 | |
| mean basically that condition would would say they they would have to meet that that, that requirement no matter what they have to | 01:06:56 | |
| meet the code. You know I, I personally would be comfortable with that, but they they would have to have like a sound engineer. | 01:07:03 | |
| Make a submission, I'm sure a car wash, if there are, you know, a large car wash that and they've done that a million times. I'm | 01:07:11 | |
| sure that's a requirement in a lot of communities, right? Yeah. I mean, if they do their due diligence, we see the data and that | 01:07:17 | |
| all tracks, I'm comfortable with that being added as a permitted use. Yeah. And then it kind of depends. I mean, they have the | 01:07:24 | |
| blowers and the vacuums themselves don't make a lot of noise. It's just. | 01:07:30 | |
| Where they have their compressors, where they have their. | 01:07:37 | |
| The actual vacuums, not the hoses and stuff, but the actual vacuums. But things like that need to be enclosed I think. | 01:07:41 | |
| Can I make a comment Eric? Eric with X Development as the applicant. Eric Towner. I think we need to remember these homes are 200 | 01:07:49 | |
| feet away from Geneva Rd. with 18 wheel semi trucks on what's going to be a 7 lane highway planned by U dot. | 01:07:56 | |
| Currently we have a conditional use allowed here permitted that would be a lot less stringent than what we're proposing today. I | 01:08:06 | |
| don't see a need to add anything above and beyond your current city code where you have noise ordinances already in place. To tie | 01:08:12 | |
| it to a development zoning code makes no sense to me whatsoever. | 01:08:17 | |
| For a myriad of reasons, finance ability, leaseability, actually getting a project out of the ground. The more you guys like to | 01:08:25 | |
| tie these things that make sense, I understand in this room. | 01:08:30 | |
| It doesn't make sense outside of this room being next to Geneva Rd. I think would be something to contemplate and really think | 01:08:35 | |
| about. We're next to A7 lane highway. What what you does planned here? | 01:08:41 | |
| And what we are requiring is mostly the biggest, the biggest issue I've seen with car washes is the orientation of the dryers. I, | 01:08:49 | |
| I don't think it makes sense to put those dryers towards the residents. And so that's why we've required it to go towards Geneva | 01:08:54 | |
| Rd. Even though that might not be optimal for the site plan for the actual operator, I think that's better for the residents and | 01:09:00 | |
| we can tie that today. Yeah. And that and my, my experience. So we did Platinum car Wash and Cotton Heights. I think I was now on | 01:09:05 | |
| Mr. Car Wash. | 01:09:11 | |
| They oriented their blowers away from the, the the residential uses because we have another one that had them like facing them and | 01:09:17 | |
| it, it does, it does help. And so I, I didn't go out there with the noise beater, but that, that was the. | 01:09:23 | |
| Like the most down generated can came from the blowers exiting. And so that does help substantially. But so how we have it written | 01:09:30 | |
| is I know a study must be provided during the site plan submission that meets the noise ordinance. And so that that would then | 01:09:36 | |
| give you the opportunity to, you know, they'd have to get a sound engineer or civil engineer that has, you know, experience with | 01:09:42 | |
| those types of studies and submit as far as their package so. | 01:09:48 | |
| For me personally, with the with the with that requiring the sound stuff. | 01:09:55 | |
| Personally, I think it's kind of overkill because if they don't meet the ordinance. | 01:10:01 | |
| And they're not complying with the city code, then they're going to have to go back and restructure stuff, which is a huge pain in | 01:10:06 | |
| the **** I'm sure. So personally, I don't, I don't think it's necessary because it's going to cost them a lot more money to fix | 01:10:12 | |
| something that they haven't done right in the 1st place. But. | 01:10:18 | |
| Whatever you guys say. | 01:10:26 | |
| Citizens to file complaints and go through that whole process of nuisance and then. | 01:10:30 | |
| Possibly. | 01:10:36 | |
| That we acquired a current enabled initiatives. | 01:10:38 | |
| I think we should, we could require the vacuum to be at least 50 feet, the vacuum enclosure 50 feet. I think that I mean that's | 01:10:41 | |
| double what I think was proposed in here originally because the sound, the sound orienting towards Geneva Rd. we've already | 01:10:47 | |
| mitigated as well as we could that noise, right. So let's push the vacuums as far, you know, make a minimum of 50 foot distance on | 01:10:53 | |
| the vacuum and then. | 01:10:59 | |
| The doctor's father had not been assigned to study. | 01:11:06 | |
| In which I'm not comfortable with doing any type of requirements above and beyond what we're currently allowed and and invested | 01:11:11 | |
| with our rights with the zoning we're in today. Why would I rezone the project to something that's more stringent than I already | 01:11:18 | |
| have today? I don't think it's necessary to do that. So I would say, let's, let's put design guideline requirements in here and | 01:11:24 | |
| let's put orientation requirements. So move the vacuums with that requirement in today as a part of the code. | 01:11:31 | |
| At no closer than 50 feet from the property line, let's require the orientation of the dryer to be pushed towards. | 01:11:39 | |
| Towards Geneva Rd. I think those are some some winds that we can get out of this and on. | 01:11:45 | |
| Well, and here's the other thing too. The the site planning code does allow for you to require. | 01:11:54 | |
| Things to to demonstrate that, that they meet the code. So if you had a if you had a substantial, you know, concern about it, | 01:12:02 | |
| that's something once they they came to you, you could say, you know, we would like a a noise study that shows that that you mean | 01:12:07 | |
| the, the noise code or you could require it out front. I mean, it's it, it, it is that I mean, it ultimately is the City Council. | 01:12:13 | |
| But I mean, if it's up to, you know, how you, you, you craft a recommendation. | 01:12:19 | |
| Like post post development, getting the sound study done. | 01:12:25 | |
| To, you know, see if it. | 01:12:32 | |
| Is where it should be. | 01:12:34 | |
| Is that it's difficult to get that done as if there's a speed study. | 01:12:36 | |
| Here's the hard thing is once the development is operational and and going forward. | 01:12:41 | |
| You know, like they're set in place, they have an approved site plan. Then typically you're gonna be dealing through code | 01:12:48 | |
| enforcement. Yeah. And and it, it, it could get ugly. I mean, if you're, if you're showing like 90 decibels at the property of | 01:12:54 | |
| mine on a continual basis sustained, then it's gonna be up to the city on on how they they want to enforce enforce it or, or not | 01:13:00 | |
| enforce it. So. | 01:13:06 | |
| You know, I it's always harder after the fact when something's been built to then try to come in and and enforce code, especially | 01:13:13 | |
| on something we have infrastructure in place. | 01:13:17 | |
| Yeah. | 01:13:22 | |
| Is can we point something out to Brian? Did a search on on a car on a on a major car wash and it's showing closure at 8 PM, 7:30 | 01:13:24 | |
| AM to 8:00 PM and then on Sunday closing at 6:00 PM. And it actually seems pretty consistent with with most of the car washes in | 01:13:32 | |
| the area. So I don't know if they would follow the same thing, but potentially. | 01:13:41 | |
| It looks like the industry average might might even be closing early earlier, OK. | 01:13:51 | |
| Having them comment on that. | 01:13:57 | |
| Is a sound study something you guys is requiring a sound study something you guys have seen? It depends on the city. And like I | 01:13:59 | |
| know Paradise Valley, that's a resort town. They have a lot of resorts and they have like a little outside concert venues within, | 01:14:05 | |
| within some of their, their resorts. So the surrounding residents are very concerned about about noise. So they'll, they'll, | 01:14:11 | |
| they'll require a noise study from a, you know, sound engineer. | 01:14:18 | |
| So I mean, it's not, I don't know, maybe Park City and it's typically when you get in kind of like the resorting time communities | 01:14:25 | |
| where. | 01:14:28 | |
| It's someone's second home and they're on vacation and like they, they get a lot more concerned about that stuff. But I, I listen | 01:14:32 | |
| to our valley. I haven't, I haven't heard of, of any, you know, we, we deal in code enforcement. So we, we tend to hear about the | 01:14:40 | |
| more common stuff and noise at least like requiring like sound studies and those things. I haven't, I haven't heard of one here, | 01:14:47 | |
| but it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. So the, the wiki watch study in Oreo that's right here in the backyard. | 01:14:54 | |
| Which is something far below, Yeah. But we know the complaints though that they were getting about that too. | 01:15:03 | |
| Yeah, based off of that and I think they're about one day 53. | 01:15:11 | |
| Just again, that wiggy wash is exiting towards the residential units. I think a better comparison would be the quick Lac by | 01:15:18 | |
| Costco. And now they have the dryers facing the gas station and Costco. | 01:15:25 | |
| And then the vacuums are right next to it. | 01:15:32 | |
| Yeah. So I mean I. | 01:15:39 | |
| It seems like like Eric mentioned that they would even push it and right now they're showing 25 feet, They're proposing 50 feet. I | 01:15:40 | |
| mean that that seems pretty decent. I mean, you could, I mean, ultimately it is up to the plank Commission on your recommendation. | 01:15:47 | |
| If you want to keep a noise study in there, you can so. | 01:15:54 | |
| Yeah. | 01:16:05 | |
| And it can't go into use. | 01:16:10 | |
| Into a little that sound level verified yeah, I think I'm so I mean that that's a pretty good idea. I know from our our billion | 01:16:13 | |
| official he says from a legal standpoint, it gets it starts to get more difficult holding up an occupancy. So if you let someone | 01:16:19 | |
| go all the way to an occupancy and we've done it a few times with like number of units. | 01:16:25 | |
| You know, like like in the totally farms, you know, there's like, like maybe we're requiring certain parks to come online before a | 01:16:32 | |
| certain number of of units get get occupied. That, that that's really easier. But if it's something where it like they would have | 01:16:38 | |
| to redesign the entire site, I, I'd be a little cautious. That's something I'd probably want to get a, an opinion from our, our | 01:16:44 | |
| legal counsel. | 01:16:50 | |
| Plus also with something like that if they were to build it then being next to Geneva Rd. like a highway Highway. According to | 01:16:56 | |
| this highway noise is 70 to 80 decibels from 50 feet. | 01:17:02 | |
| So even if they were to build their building and there was highway noise going on in the background, the highway noise might be. | 01:17:07 | |
| Yeah, but the buildings are blocking a lot of the highway noise. Yeah, but I'm just saying that it would make it difficult to have | 01:17:12 | |
| like. | 01:17:17 | |
| I don't know. I if the landscape area has some solid tree, some solid Bush going on. It's like really like sucking in that noise | 01:17:24 | |
| in the leaves like it should. And it's not just spray, but like it's at there and it's not just concrete noise bouncing around and | 01:17:31 | |
| being louder. | 01:17:38 | |
| That's already. | 01:17:46 | |
| That's already huge and with the vacuums so far away with the blower spacing. Geneva. | 01:17:48 | |
| And I know the things we've added tonight, the things that we are being presented, I like these conditions. | 01:18:00 | |
| I feel OK about them. I don't feel like my neighbors are going to come and get me. | 01:18:08 | |
| With the amended and see what we have in front of us. | 01:18:15 | |
| I don't. I think that there are other. | 01:18:23 | |
| I want it, I don't know. | 01:18:32 | |
| That it's. | 01:18:34 | |
| It might be too big of an *** if that makes sense. Do you know what I mean? Because it's it's a lot. | 01:18:39 | |
| I mean, I think it would be expected that it'd be 35 feet if it was that. Or did you think it's fifty? Yeah, I mean 50 feet four. | 01:18:50 | |
| And I think Bryce had mentioned Lutheran clothes. And so the vacuum enclosure would be 50 feet. | 01:18:57 | |
| Away. I think we could get a lot of nuisance complaints from it, but I think we want development there as well. So yeah. | 01:19:05 | |
| We're aware to get the process that, yeah. | 01:19:13 | |
| And just real quick, I guess with the enclosures, how are they oriented? | 01:19:17 | |
| It's very closed. I don't know how you're how they're planning on being closed or how that yeah, I think typically, I mean it's a | 01:19:22 | |
| four wall solid structure that's I mean and there may even be some sound insulation. | 01:19:28 | |
| Like pull into a building and we're talking where the vacuums are, the vacuum, the the parking stalls would be open and then the | 01:19:35 | |
| vacuum enclosure sits separately. Oh, like the vacuum itself? Yes. OK. And is it just like the hose that sticks out? So you're | 01:19:41 | |
| you're a kid. | 01:19:47 | |
| Are these vacuum ones that you have to like activate or like when you pull it off? Like wherever the they turn on as soon as you | 01:19:55 | |
| grab it? | 01:19:59 | |
| When you guys are talking about vacuums, are you talking about the nozzles of the vacuums or the vacuum itself? | 01:20:06 | |
| OK. But you guys are you guys when it's 50 feet? What are you talking about? The nozzles like that, the hoses, Yeah. | 01:20:15 | |
| Yeah, I mean, it's 50 feet and enclosed. So it's enclosed, Yeah, if it's enclosed, you probably won't hear it at all, even if it | 01:20:27 | |
| was 10 feet away from the ambulance. | 01:20:32 | |
| But you didn't have any concerns about the nozzles or anything? Just really, I guess you bring that up. I was imagining it was | 01:20:38 | |
| all. | 01:20:41 | |
| And headline. So usually they do like one or two big vacuum units and then connect it through piping to the bays, the parking bays | 01:20:45 | |
| and then you have the nozzles at each of the bays. So the the wiggy wash study, they based it off of the phase volume, but it was | 01:20:53 | |
| still 53 and so 50 feet away for basically off of the day volume, which we similar to 2nd wise. | 01:21:01 | |
| Ordinance so. | 01:21:09 | |
| OK. How far, just out of curiosity, how far away are the bays themselves? Is there, is that written anywhere? Again, we're talking | 01:21:12 | |
| site design stuff that Yeah, yeah, we're talking. We're trying to figure out the framework where we can do the site design and so. | 01:21:19 | |
| OK, cool. OK. So noise study removing that. | 01:21:27 | |
| Keeping it, I think we can and remove that personally. | 01:21:34 | |
| So there's the. | 01:21:40 | |
| We're modifying the vacuum distance to 50 feet and for the enclosure and it's enclosed and then so that was that the only addition | 01:21:45 | |
| here for the car wash, the landscaping. | 01:21:52 | |
| Yeah, yeah, the trees, yeah, they need to be actual plants that absorb noise. | 01:22:05 | |
| OK, and we can add, I can work and modify the code. We can modify and make sure that. | 01:22:11 | |
| The right terminology of species and. | 01:22:19 | |
| Science Intensity. | 01:22:23 | |
| Is that something you're comfortable this morning? Yeah, and and the landscaping plan would come back. | 01:22:26 | |
| For site plan through the through the Planning Commission, yes. So you'd be able to see that too. So let me think. | 01:22:31 | |
| OK, that's why I wasn't quite worried about landscaping yet. | 01:22:39 | |
| It's time for you, right the 10. | 01:22:45 | |
| I. | 01:22:51 | |
| Just give me a second to take this out. | 01:22:58 | |
| So, are you updating your condition? Excellent. | 01:23:01 | |
| I can't see it though, my eyes are terrible. | 01:23:04 | |
| As far as the other conditions that Morgan ever had, you guys are finding, yeah, I mean, I want to just look at the list one more | 01:23:10 | |
| time, but I think we're fairly comfortable, although I do have another one. We probably want to make Public Utilities and public | 01:23:18 | |
| facilities of permitted use. | 01:23:26 | |
| Just because you have the century, because the water, Yeah, I think there are conditional use right now Like they they they went | 01:23:37 | |
| through a conditional use permit. | 01:23:41 | |
| So I would just, I would just keep it, yeah. | 01:23:46 | |
| We've approved all this trying to make it easy for you. | 01:23:52 | |
| A tenfold landscape buffer with trees and vegetation for the purposes of mitigating noise shall be provided adjacent to the | 01:24:01 | |
| residential property lines. | 01:24:05 | |
| For car wash uses. | 01:24:13 | |
| Lots of they're talking about it, they they want to increase it, they could. | 01:24:23 | |
| Yeah, that's the bottom line. A10 foot landscape buffer with trees and vegetation purposes mitigating noise shall be provided | 01:24:34 | |
| adjacent to the residential property lines for car wash issues. | 01:24:38 | |
| I'm hearing from the. | 01:24:52 | |
| Audience that there's a pipeline under underneath there on the landscape buffer adjacent to the property line. | 01:24:55 | |
| At 35 feet, is that what it is? Water and sewer? | 01:25:02 | |
| That's what that 35 feet is for. | 01:25:09 | |
| How, how? How was the easement language? | 01:25:17 | |
| Like does it, does it have certain types of vegetation that's that's restricted? | 01:25:22 | |
| Yeah, yeah. So there's, there's going to be some types of restrictions I think adjacent to the the wall there, but there's going | 01:25:29 | |
| to be certain route restrictions. | 01:25:34 | |
| A general landscaping, I think that we could definitely find some shrubs and some trees that will that will. | 01:25:41 | |
| Be approved by the city for sure. | 01:25:47 | |
| Where? Where exactly? | 01:25:51 | |
| Inside of that 35 feet, we've got your storm water sewer. | 01:25:55 | |
| Gas and power, yeah, inside that 35 feet. | 01:26:02 | |
| Sullivan is there are the trees located in the O'reilly's lot. | 01:26:05 | |
| Down in the back. | 01:26:10 | |
| But I mean, landscape screening, I believe we're able to put Trello so fine. I, I think there's plenty of options we have, I think | 01:26:17 | |
| with within. | 01:26:22 | |
| Yeah, I'm just trying to think how to write this. Then. I mean, you could do so if you have 50 feet, you're going to have some | 01:26:30 | |
| room. There's obviously you're going to have driveways and whatnot. Parking, however it's set up, we're not looking at the site | 01:26:36 | |
| plan. It's hard to know. Would you be able to provide a landscape buffer? | 01:26:41 | |
| That is, you know, is planted that provides some sort of separation between that and the residential property line. So I guess | 01:26:47 | |
| what I'm saying is your your land, like maybe you create a landscape island within the development that provides the, you know, | 01:26:54 | |
| the the buffer as opposed to adjacent to the property line. | 01:27:00 | |
| So my concern is that you put it up there and then if you know the district has has authority to to restrict trees there, then | 01:27:08 | |
| it's a condition that's not going to be fulfilled. I want something that's going to be enforceable. | 01:27:14 | |
| O'reilly's looks like it has trees planted behind there, so it appears that the sewer line is about 30 feet east of the east | 01:27:21 | |
| property line of Edgewater development and the water line sits within that area. So that whole area would be restricted as to what | 01:27:28 | |
| type of vegetation could go in possibly. | 01:27:35 | |
| Most. Most likely. | 01:27:42 | |
| Is it just gala non deep education? Yeah, Typically there's any deep rooted vegetation. So you would be very limited on trees. | 01:27:45 | |
| There would be some shrubbery that would probably be allowed, but I doubt you'd get the the height that you needed to block the | 01:27:51 | |
| noise adequately in my opinion. Sullivan, have you guys. | 01:27:57 | |
| Have you guys entertained the? | 01:28:07 | |
| Semi below grade planter. | 01:28:12 | |
| Options. | 01:28:14 | |
| With enclosed root barriers. | 01:28:16 | |
| I don't know that we've looked at those specifically. I guess our. | 01:28:19 | |
| Our view would be, you know, what the longevity of those plants would be if you're restricting the root, you know, system and then | 01:28:24 | |
| if you had to come in there and excavate the water line and whatnot. | 01:28:30 | |
| Would you be able to move those boxes to get those out of the way? How easy would that be? And, and whose responsibility? I mean, | 01:28:37 | |
| typically what, what our. | 01:28:42 | |
| Responsibilities are, is we're responsible for repair and maintenance of water lines. Anything below the ground we would bring | 01:28:46 | |
| back up to, to subgrade or, or, or, you know, grade level if it's not paved. And then you or the, the property owner is | 01:28:53 | |
| responsible for any repairs or reparations above grade. So anything like that, you know, we feel like we have the authority to | 01:29:00 | |
| move. I think it's damaging that moving. | 01:29:06 | |
| Then then we wouldn't be responsible for the repair. | 01:29:13 | |
| So you're saying the water line is 30 feet off the process, The sewer line is sewer line and so within that 30 feet is the water? | 01:29:18 | |
| Yeah, and I don't have that. Let me pull that up. So you're correct. | 01:29:28 | |
| Water lines. Let's pull that up here real quick. | 01:29:34 | |
| So if I can. | 01:29:40 | |
| I think there's the storm drain is next. There's definitely some constraints. However, the condition in the zoning ordinance is | 01:29:44 | |
| going to have to be fulfilled. And so I mean, I think we could go through and pull up a list of plants and identify the specific | 01:29:51 | |
| ones or we could move. I mean, basically you're saying this has to be done and it has to be done for noise mitigation purposes and | 01:29:58 | |
| it's going to be reviewed again. | 01:30:05 | |
| That site plan and so you know, rather than putting the onus on you per se, like basically it's up to the developers to make sure | 01:30:13 | |
| that this requirement is fulfilled. So if you take out 13, so if you take that back out the 10 foot landscape buffer, do I mean | 01:30:20 | |
| they are increasing the set back up to 50 feet. I think that's A and that double s it from the 25 feet that was originally | 01:30:26 | |
| proposed. | 01:30:33 | |
| But without being able to put trees there, I think you have to move forward with kind of the assumption that you're not going to | 01:30:42 | |
| have trees there. Are you? Or do you want a sound study? | 01:30:46 | |
| You can still request 1:00 during the site plan. It provides the Planning Commission the ability to request information to make | 01:30:51 | |
| sure code is met, but it's always a lot stronger if it's just up front in the code. Would you guys feel more comfortable with | 01:30:57 | |
| having #13 in there or having a sound study in there? | 01:31:02 | |
| And what's the concern are you guys designed with with doing a sound study? | 01:31:11 | |
| Let me ask you this too. Would they be, I mean, if they could provide the landscape buffer with the trees and stuff around the | 01:31:17 | |
| equipment that's making the noise that may be perhaps further from the, you know, like if you're, if you're a compressor, you're | 01:31:23 | |
| you're vacuum is 50 feet from the parking line and you surround that with a planter and trees, then you're going to restrict that | 01:31:28 | |
| noise to that location. | 01:31:34 | |
| The sound study with the issue is we're dealing with a certain size lot, a small lot that has constraints and we're talking about | 01:31:41 | |
| specific site design elements that yes, it might be possible, but if we require the site or the sound study, it's up to them to | 01:31:48 | |
| make sure that it it meets the standards. And if that means putting a landscape island in, they'll put a landscape island in if | 01:31:55 | |
| there's vegetation that they can put in that 10 skateland landscaping buffer. | 01:32:03 | |
| That won't interfere. That's approved by the city. They'll do that. | 01:32:11 | |
| Sounds good. Yeah, Yeah. | 01:32:18 | |
| I. | 01:32:22 | |
| Anything else? Any other questions? | 01:32:26 | |
| No, I flipped through everything again. So. | 01:32:29 | |
| It'd be nice to see it all. | 01:32:32 | |
| All right. Together, yeah. | 01:32:35 | |
| Sorry, are you saying you want to? | 01:32:39 | |
| Continue it or. | 01:32:44 | |
| I think you might continue just so we can see it all put together and. | 01:32:46 | |
| I don't know. | 01:32:52 | |
| Our hope was to go before. | 01:32:56 | |
| City Council, you know, and that's why we've worked really hard to make those modifications and quite honestly, these conditions. | 01:32:58 | |
| Most of them are. | 01:33:08 | |
| Converting the shells or the maize to be shells, in a lot of instances there's nothing. I don't see anything in here that's not. | 01:33:10 | |
| There's nothing new in here that's not addressed. In essence, it's moving parking. So parking requirements, instead of it being up | 01:33:21 | |
| to the city planner, it's up to the zoning code. | 01:33:26 | |
| You know I. | 01:33:33 | |
| Something that's not in here Morgan is the removing residential and making it developer agreement. | 01:33:35 | |
| Yeah, I mean, I think that's the biggest substantive change, right? I mean, that's just like that's just my learning disorder to | 01:33:44 | |
| need to see it in my in my face, but. | 01:33:50 | |
| Yes, that means. | 01:33:58 | |
| And on that, Morgan, sorry, let me bring this up so I can end it. | 01:33:59 | |
| Sorry, could we make it also with the development agreement? | 01:34:11 | |
| Do you think it makes sense to make it to say with the development agreement they could go up to 26 units per acre or? | 01:34:17 | |
| Should we leave it open? | 01:34:25 | |
| Just one second, Sir. | 01:34:31 | |
| I. | 01:34:48 | |
| I. | 01:35:00 | |
| In this case, we're removing residential completely, but then we allow it through the provision of a development grant. So that's | 01:35:41 | |
| that's the worst things. We're moving it from the table. | 01:35:46 | |
| Yeah. So mixed-use residential, Yeah, there's can be permitted through a development agreement, yeah. | 01:35:51 | |
| OK. I'm sorry, Bryce, what were you saying and then? | 01:36:06 | |
| Do you think we should make a cap on that as well? | 01:36:09 | |
| Now, well, how, if you, if you wanted, The thing is, I'm a little concerned with that because I kind of want the, the market to, | 01:36:13 | |
| to drive it. So let's say they want to take the top like 2 watts or the, you know, 2 1/2 lots, not including the, the district's | 01:36:21 | |
| property. But if they wanted to to do those, you know, I, I, I'd like it to be more driven by, by the design. You have the | 01:36:28 | |
| architect look at it, you know what, what's going to make a great product and then they come through. | 01:36:36 | |
| The Planning Commission of City Council, because they're going through a development agreement to get more residential, it | 01:36:43 | |
| actually provides the, you know, the city quite, quite a bit of power. And like if they come in with 300 units, you know, you | 01:36:50 | |
| could say, well, I mean, you could treat it essentially like like a zone change. But unless, if you want to just for like just to | 01:36:57 | |
| tap it at 100 or I don't know if you want to talk to the applicant to see kind of what. So I just wanted to be such that. | 01:37:04 | |
| The city feels like they don't have to do anything. | 01:37:12 | |
| Like they don't need to improve anything, but it would have to be some some circumstance that's abnormal that they would want to. | 01:37:16 | |
| So how considerate how how we put in the code. | 01:37:25 | |
| As a. | 01:37:30 | |
| So, OK, so mixing residential may be permitted through the approval of a development agreement. So it may and that and that's the | 01:37:33 | |
| time where it's going to use may, like the city of May approve it. You're not, you're not required to to approve it. And | 01:37:39 | |
| essentially it's considered a zone change. And so it's not it, it doesn't like you, you have more power from a, from a City side | 01:37:46 | |
| requiring them to go through a development agreement and there would be like a public hearing and everything. | 01:37:52 | |
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. Just like the whole way farms. They would go through public hearing with the Planning Commission and City | 01:38:00 | |
| Council. | 01:38:03 | |
| OK. It'd be, it'd be approved by by a national ordinance like an ordinance number with the warehouses and all that. So. | 01:38:07 | |
| OK. And it's already pretty limited just just by virtue of? | 01:38:15 | |
| The allowed height of the building, yeah. | 01:38:21 | |
| Yes, I mean you could if you, if you're concerned about you could, you could restrict where residential is is located. | 01:38:24 | |
| And so that that might have further restricted if you want to say like the. | 01:38:33 | |
| Death. You want to ignore that so. | 01:38:39 | |
| The top 2 northern lot, what do you think? Yeah, so it makes use residential may be permitted through a development agreement on | 01:38:43 | |
| the northern. | 01:38:47 | |
| Two lots. 3 lots. | 01:38:53 | |
| 2 1/2 lots 4 lots the northern 4 lots of. | 01:38:56 | |
| How about that? | 01:39:03 | |
| Yeah, we need you can get the lot. | 01:39:04 | |
| Negotiated through our DA, you said. | 01:39:09 | |
| So lot 881214 and 15, yeah. | 01:39:13 | |
| He's like, you know what? I was 1314 and 15. | 01:39:24 | |
| Yeah, we could do 12/13/14 and 15. | 01:39:28 | |
| It's just those, Yeah, 12 doesn't count, but eight? We could just, like, build a little branch over the world. | 01:39:31 | |
| I'm just thinking about how long many units could be on here. | 01:39:43 | |
| What do you guys think? | 01:39:52 | |
| Yeah, I think that puts it like a Max of four stories just. | 01:39:54 | |
| I mean, we haven't had have won this intense in a long time. | 01:40:00 | |
| That's a lot, and would be a lot. | 01:40:05 | |
| With the northern 215. | 01:40:10 | |
| 15. | 01:40:16 | |
| Retail. | 01:40:20 | |
| I mean as far as. | 01:40:21 | |
| Yeah, it would be nice to not have to do that, but also like. | 01:40:25 | |
| It's. | 01:40:34 | |
| There anything you wanted to add Morgan, I will bring it back on. | 01:40:37 | |
| OK. So 3 mixed-use residential may be permitted through the approval of the development agreement laws ADA to achieve the retail | 01:40:51 | |
| front of subdivision flat and lots 1214 and 15 of the Dominican retail fund and subdivision property. | 01:40:58 | |
| Oh, that's what. That's what's right. | 01:41:10 | |
| All right, give me a second. | 01:41:13 | |
| We're getting there. | 01:41:17 | |
| At 12/14/15. | 01:41:20 | |
| Of yeah. | 01:41:22 | |
| Isn't that right? That's not right. | 01:41:27 | |
| That's right. | 01:41:30 | |
| Yeah, that's right. | 01:41:32 | |
| I don't think there was one. OK, sorry. I thought you were saying that I mixed up the lot. Sorry. I think we're good. | 01:41:36 | |
| There you go. Anything else you guys wanted to add or? | 01:41:45 | |
| I can't think of anything else. OK, all right. I have a motion then. | 01:41:51 | |
| Is it too? | 01:41:59 | |
| Recommend. | 01:42:01 | |
| Yeah. So here one second, let me get to that. So, yeah, so I motion to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council Board | 01:42:03 | |
| and it was 20/22/09 for the Geneva Rd. makes you kind of read that out and then with conditions. | 01:42:11 | |
| With the 14. | 01:42:20 | |
| Yeah, with the 14 conditions listed in the staff route that the staff presentation provided on June 22nd, 2022. So you just change | 01:42:23 | |
| a lot into 14. Okay. I motion to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council of Ordinance 2022-09 for the Geneva Rd. | 01:42:30 | |
| mixed-use District Zoning Text Amendment and Zoning Map amendment with the 14 conditions listed in the staff presentation provided | 01:42:38 | |
| on June 22nd, 2022. | 01:42:45 | |
| I apologize and this is really annoying. Could you add this one to just reread it? But say with the 14 conditions as modified | 01:42:53 | |
| listed in the staff presentation, I would say as modified. So it's it's clear that they're modified conditions as modified. Okay. | 01:43:01 | |
| I'm motion to you forward a positive recommendation to the City Council of Ordinance 2022, Dash 09. | 01:43:10 | |
| For the Geneva Rd. mixed-use District Zoning Text amendment and Zoning Map amendment with the 14 conditions as modified. | 01:43:18 | |
| By staff. | 01:43:29 | |
| Listed in the staff presentation by Nineteen 22nd 2022. Is there a second second? | 01:43:32 | |
| Yes. | 01:43:41 | |
| Hi. | 01:43:45 | |
| Hey. Hi, Bryce. I. | 01:43:46 | |
| All right, great. Thank you very much. Yeah, thanks. Can I have like 5 minutes? | 01:43:49 | |
| Like just a 5 minute break real quick. These conversations are really. | 01:43:56 | |
| What's important to you and what we need to be focusing on as we transition to site design So. | 01:44:03 | |
| Because it'll be back before you do 5.2 hold away farms development agreement. Do I have a motion to open a public hearing? | 01:44:08 | |
| Aye. So move right a second. Second. All in favor. Aye, Aye. All right. We are in a public hearing. We have a presentation by | 01:44:17 | |
| Morgan. All right. | 01:44:23 | |
| Well, that was fun. | 01:44:49 | |
| Every now and then we, we, we get one of those kind of complex ones. So that's, that was a big one. I mean a mixed-use district | 01:44:50 | |
| with a, with a zoning map amount of. So I appreciate your guys patience and, and being able to, to dig through those, those | 01:44:56 | |
| important issues. So tonight it's not necessarily as much as a presentation. I'll have the development agreement up the project | 01:45:02 | |
| that was approved the whole way. | 01:45:08 | |
| Farms special zoning district and and overall like neighborhood plan that's that was approved in the past. | 01:45:15 | |
| Is, you know, same plan, so the things that you've you've looked at and considered in the past. | 01:45:22 | |
| Nothing has just changed in, in that regard. What this development agreement does is that provides kind of the the ability with, | 01:45:29 | |
| with phasing. That's a really important thing as we know with like Main Street and foreigners South, it's always like it's gonna | 01:45:36 | |
| keep coming up. Helps us to get a better idea of kind of when those elements will come online. | 01:45:42 | |
| There's also like an infrastructure kind of some of the things that you didn't. | 01:45:51 | |
| That more of staff has worked on is the. | 01:45:55 | |
| Is there the collector roads and foreigners South and Main Street those are? | 01:45:59 | |
| You know, under our plan it shows putting collective roads in, we can only require the developer to build infrastructure to fit | 01:46:06 | |
| their needs. And so we're required to take it from a local up to a collector standard if we want the full collector and so it it | 01:46:12 | |
| provides. | 01:46:18 | |
| Basically an agreement in there that the city will help participate. | 01:46:26 | |
| And those two Rd. segments to get it from, you know, to get it up to the fall collector road right of way and it caps it at | 01:46:30 | |
| $250,000. And so it provides kind of some safeguard in, in, in that regard. | 01:46:37 | |
| The the phasing kind of the important things to point out. I know this has also been a concern with other developments. I'm | 01:46:46 | |
| wanting to make sure that amenities come online sooner rather than later. If you remember the entrance park, that's the the park | 01:46:51 | |
| that sits behind. | 01:46:56 | |
| Jake Holdaways house and how we have that written is that that will be completed before the 103rd certificate of occupancy. | 01:47:03 | |
| The community park. | 01:47:14 | |
| Would come, that's the kind of the trailhead park that sits above the adjacent Lake Park and that would come online prior to the | 01:47:17 | |
| 163rd certificate of occupancy and the neighborhood park would come online prior to the 222nd certificate of occupancy. And we | 01:47:25 | |
| also have the private amenities that are associated with the age restricted units. | 01:47:33 | |
| And so the clubhouse pool and the kind of the associated amenities, recreational amenities with them and those would be required | 01:47:42 | |
| to be. | 01:47:46 | |
| Final prior to the 63rd age restricted unit and so we felt it was important to make sure that I've had those those in there so | 01:47:51 | |
| that we're not waiting till the very end before amenities come online. If you kind of remember with with water's edge we didn't | 01:47:57 | |
| have a lot of those things in place. And so you know the clubhouses and the parks came online way after residents have been there. | 01:48:03 | |
| So it was several years of residents living in the development. So we took all those importance make sure that the development | 01:48:09 | |
| agreement. | 01:48:15 | |
| Play to that the same anything from anything that you'd want to highlight for maybe the infrastructure standpoint. | 01:48:21 | |
| So in regards to the non development agreement on infrastructure, I think there's one item that probably highlight that the | 01:48:30 | |
| developers are doing is on the park space that they're they're incorporating underground detention system into the park space. You | 01:48:37 | |
| know, I just want to highlight that that's kind of. | 01:48:44 | |
| Well used of optimizing space, the green space and ensuring about with and me and the storm and water quality but. | 01:48:53 | |
| Facility that I need so I know in the past in other areas that yeah there's like called that that zones that spaces on there. So I | 01:49:02 | |
| want I want to highlight the developers. | 01:49:09 | |
| Taking the opportunity to do something like that, that's on the West side, like the larger park on the West side on that. And then | 01:49:18 | |
| of course in terms of the development agreement when it comes to the infrastructure that we discussed and I believe, I believe | 01:49:24 | |
| Morgan touched up on it with the connection of for Main Street and 400 S that where that connection connectivity being tied to to | 01:49:31 | |
| Phase 2. | 01:49:37 | |
| Of that of the particular development. | 01:49:43 | |
| Oh, so, so with that being said, obviously working, working with developer to ensure that while that's going in that we're | 01:49:47 | |
| incorporating other other parts of the infrastructure traffic system to ensure that when that goes in that we're that the cities | 01:49:54 | |
| kind of incorporating other, incorporating other traffic needs as well to the surrounding and then zip and nail portion of it. The | 01:50:01 | |
| development agreement has a developer. | 01:50:08 | |
| Providing support to the city in terms of doing the traffic, traffic calming study. | 01:50:16 | |
| For an area that's outside their development and due to that would be corporate is part of it future connectivity which is where | 01:50:22 | |
| the where the connection is going to be made by a different developer as well. The city would still be the one that would | 01:50:30 | |
| implement the actual measures at the deems necessary in order excuse me in order to accommodate. | 01:50:37 | |
| Proper traffic calming measures along Zippendale, but we feel confident that the developer has gone. | 01:50:46 | |
| Well, to a limit of. | 01:50:54 | |
| Cooperation with the city. | 01:50:56 | |
| And Bryce, I believe you had and thank you, Miss Sam. I believe Andy correct confirm you, you brought up two things when you | 01:51:00 | |
| reviewed the development agreement. One was to have the Planning Commission review the traffic calming measures prior to the city | 01:51:07 | |
| engineer approving the city engineer sales authority to approve those. But you'd at least be able to say, no, we don't want a | 01:51:14 | |
| bunch of speed bonds. Or you know, you could, you could look at some, some of the the options out there being provided. | 01:51:21 | |
| Yeah. So I think we could if you in your motion, if you approve it, then I would, you know, add that in there. Yeah. And then the | 01:51:28 | |
| other item I believe you had mentioned this is we have the same here to discuss this. But so building out the park and the road in | 01:51:38 | |
| phase two, but not making the connection to Zinfandel Lane until the end of the project. So like in phase eight, I believe. | 01:51:47 | |
| And so the scene wasn't here for when we had that conversation, but. | 01:51:57 | |
| That might be good out here and maybe the developers gonna provide their comfort. Yeah, making again with 7 Dale making the | 01:52:01 | |
| connection to from the proposed development to the existing Zippendale on the north side would require to. | 01:52:09 | |
| First, in coordination cooperation with the current the minor in center which is home center. I have no doubt that home center on | 01:52:19 | |
| their development with accommodate that What I would say is that I think that we take into consideration. | 01:52:26 | |
| The situation at the time of the connections are being made in terms of that we're making the making connections. | 01:52:34 | |
| Early or may be able to help provide for some type of additional connectivity especially for the individuals who live on | 01:52:45 | |
| Zippendale as well. So the problem that I'm seeing with the residents on Zinfandel is that they don't want us at the very least. | 01:52:54 | |
| They want Main Street to connect to Florida South. They don't want Zinfandel to be an option for people to exit or enter the rest | 01:53:04 | |
| of the city because of that neighborhood. Probably 80% of them have kids under the age of five. So they don't want that to be | 01:53:11 | |
| through Rd. I think for that for something I've had to change. And again, Morgan, I apologize for cutting you off, but I think | 01:53:17 | |
| something like that for for that to change the home center development would have to. | 01:53:24 | |
| I think that the plans is with the development of the North being home center. | 01:53:31 | |
| Has to be made and I believe that was part of the city's plan all along. For that to change, we would there would have to be | 01:53:37 | |
| other, other proposals and as well as the developer would have to make considerable changes. But not this developer, excuse me, | 01:53:43 | |
| but the home center developer. We have to make some considerable changes to the design as well. | 01:53:50 | |
| As far as designed to connect it, I mean I want it should connect. I'm just saying that you wanted to wait until after 4th South | 01:53:58 | |
| and mainstream connected before you open up the Zinfandel. | 01:54:04 | |
| Is that right? Yeah, and I believe that would be done tent anyway, because again to make the connections of the bell, there would | 01:54:11 | |
| be there's a second developer who's on the room that would have to that would be that we would have to do the coordination dance | 01:54:17 | |
| with where the developer that that's currently in the room has. | 01:54:23 | |
| Their, their, their, their construction development is tied to being able to make the connections for foreigners South and Main | 01:54:30 | |
| St. in order to get the connectivity that they need in order to building permits. | 01:54:35 | |
| Connection for $7.00 not yeah. But what I can say is when we do make the connection at Zippendale, we can the city can make sure | 01:54:42 | |
| that any kind of additional measures for traffic comment that would need to be put in place would be I would, I would, I say this | 01:54:50 | |
| as a state engineers, I would would want to see those things put in place parts in making the final connection. So this way. | 01:54:58 | |
| Prior, so it requires for example 20 speed bumps, which I would not support anyway. | 01:55:08 | |
| As I exaggerate example that we would install those 20 speed bumps before making a connection. So when drivers are on the road | 01:55:14 | |
| that they're whatever traffic measures their their use is in place and that they get used to that power measures as far as their | 01:55:21 | |
| half driving habits. So they can choose not to drive on Sippandale if they if they don't want to do that, yes. So should we put | 01:55:29 | |
| something in this that just says I think you're you're city engineer. Here's you guys I I I don't. | 01:55:36 | |
| He's gonna move, move. You know, it sounds like that would be his intent too. Is that that connection before he makes that? Cause | 01:55:44 | |
| what could happen is if you make that connection first, I think what you're, what you're getting at is you're gonna have people | 01:55:49 | |
| using that. And you know, Zinfandel turns into a collector Rd. when it, when you know, we, we would rather people their habits | 01:55:55 | |
| get, you know, yeah. We don't want another whole guy. No offense. | 01:56:01 | |
| But I don't think you need to put down the development grant, but if you want it there, we're happy to accommodate. | 01:56:10 | |
| OK, OK. I don't I, I mean, if we're on the same page, I don't think that means to be there. Just wanted to make it clear. | 01:56:15 | |
| So we just have the one the one change then. | 01:56:24 | |
| I don't think you need to add that in the scene. I mean, however you want. I mean, he's here. He's hearing you that you want to | 01:56:29 | |
| review it. We're on the same page, right? Yeah. | 01:56:32 | |
| Try again. Yes, you don't necessarily get out as long as Naseem is here in a few years to like right here. | 01:56:37 | |
| So the other the other thing it mentions in the in this. | 01:56:47 | |
| Let me see if I can find it. As far as parking, it says that they'll go with the city's overnight parking plan, but we have | 01:56:54 | |
| multiple. We have the one that's in the one neighborhood where people can get permits, and we have the one that's in the other | 01:56:59 | |
| neighborhood where there are no permits. So I think we need to define that. | 01:57:04 | |
| I'm trying to think of what we would call. | 01:57:11 | |
| One versus the other, I mean, I think their intent was the permit parking, OK. And so we can clarify that, that they'll go with | 01:57:14 | |
| the the the permit overnight parking. That's that's the difference between the two. One doesn't even allow it the other | 01:57:20 | |
| department. | 01:57:25 | |
| Is that right? | 01:57:31 | |
| Let's add permit parking. I was, I did think it was awesome with the storm water in the parks. I was, I did have a question about | 01:57:34 | |
| that. I don't anymore. And then the other thing I was wondering kind of with the street. | 01:57:40 | |
| When this was going through the Planning Commission and the City Council, it was all we're going to connect. | 01:57:47 | |
| Further South and Main St. This is a huge benefit for the city that we're connecting this and it's a lot of upfront cost for us to | 01:57:53 | |
| do this. So I was really surprised to see that the city's like. | 01:57:58 | |
| Has to provide the extra 250,000 to make it what you guys said it was going to be. | 01:58:04 | |
| So I was just kind of disappointed in that. I know I've talked to Morgan a little bit about it, that legally you guys don't have | 01:58:10 | |
| to, but. | 01:58:14 | |
| I I just felt kind of gross inside after seeing that personally. | 01:58:18 | |
| We don't want you to feel gross inside. | 01:58:25 | |
| But I'll speak to that in our conversations from the very beginning a year and a half ago with Don Overson, that was very clear | 01:58:30 | |
| upfront that the city would participate in the construction of the road. Yes, we did present that that would be made because we're | 01:58:36 | |
| the land owners and we control whether that connections made unless you eminent domain it, we've donated the land. We're not | 01:58:43 | |
| asking the city to pay for the cost of the extra land to construct the road, but from the very beginning. | 01:58:49 | |
| In our meetings with staff and with Don specifically, was clear that we were. | 01:58:56 | |
| That this was above and beyond for the project and would need to be paid for by the city. And so we weren't trying to hide it. It | 01:59:01 | |
| was simply a conversation that we had an understanding on. And and, and yeah, we did point out that this project enabled the | 01:59:09 | |
| connection of mainstream 4 S to take place. So, but you said you donated the land. So it is, are we getting more out of it than | 01:59:16 | |
| even we're so we're getting, we're getting the land for the road that they that they originally proposed so. | 01:59:23 | |
| To kind of point out so they yeah, So what the city is requiring is the 77 foot right of way. And you know, there's like | 02:00:01 | |
| difference in here and like what they're required to is like the 56. And so basically they're they're not charged in the city for | 02:00:08 | |
| the increase in land for the right of way so. | 02:00:15 | |
| Yeah, it works out. | 02:00:25 | |
| Is there anything, if you guys have a chance to go over this? Is there anything that you had questions about or comments about? | 02:00:30 | |
| No, no. | 02:00:37 | |
| Anything else you want to? | 02:00:39 | |
| No, no, Yeah, this is a yeah. Our code just requires the public hearing. So I I think did you guys open the public hearing yet? | 02:00:41 | |
| OK. | 02:00:45 | |
| Yeah, I guess we'll have some public comments. | 02:00:52 | |
| Hi, it's David, Loray, resident. | 02:01:01 | |
| Yeah, I wanted to ask a little bit about the the continuation of 400 S because I look at the at the phase map where you know the | 02:01:03 | |
| hot pink area is is zone 2. It shows that continuing out to the corner of Holloway Rd. | 02:01:11 | |
| And which is cool, but I wonder what the city has has planned for. We're taking it from there over to the Orem border where where | 02:01:20 | |
| it's because it's not it's not really room there for a four lane. You know this extra wide Rd. you're making here won't continue | 02:01:27 | |
| and connect to the rest of our S would. | 02:01:34 | |
| So how wide is how? It's a 77 foot wide Rd. isn't it? If I remember correctly off of the. | 02:01:42 | |
| Yeah. I don't know what that that one portion is. Yeah. So I. | 02:01:49 | |
| I'm talking about the one star which is on the east side of Geneva. No, I'm talking about 400 S just immediately east of Holdaway | 02:01:56 | |
| Rd. | 02:02:03 | |
| I understand so I mean the attack on the 400 S would be to east of four way roads 33 lane Rd. | 02:02:12 | |
| It's a three line run. | 02:02:20 | |
| Yeah, so. | 02:02:26 | |
| I mean, it turns out, I mean the intent is to, excuse me, the intent is to provide like to we'll go through the track this | 02:02:29 | |
| evening. We'll do the traffic transportation master plan in the next coming year to see exactly if there needs to be a widening of | 02:02:37 | |
| bad roads going to the east side of things. Again, it comes, it kind of comes out to the double edged sword where you know you are | 02:02:44 | |
| in the road, add more traffic and then you've got more you then get. | 02:02:51 | |
| With higher speeds, which kind of which which conflicts with the land use of the park. You have the large park, you have the | 02:02:59 | |
| elementary school, you have residential in that area, which again comes down to the cylindrical effects of having to not to play | 02:03:05 | |
| on road diet. | 02:03:11 | |
| And to decrease the volume and decrease the speed. I believe our intent is to maximize the right of way that we currently have in | 02:03:17 | |
| order to incorporate active transportation. | 02:03:25 | |
| Most means for example by bike lanes and so forth, and then try to address those narrow parts. | 02:03:34 | |
| Narrow parts by incorporating trails, additional bikes on that not not to try to. | 02:03:43 | |
| Increase the volume of cars that goes there, but to increase the accessibility of things, right? Yeah. My only concern is why are | 02:03:49 | |
| we paying the extra money to have a wide Rd. If if, if there's that choke point, there's a wide anyway. Why pay extra, have a wire | 02:03:56 | |
| Rd. when the rest of it isn't wide enough for the cars to get? How wide is is the proposed Rd. in comparison to the current | 02:04:02 | |
| forecast? | 02:04:08 | |
| Off the top of my head, I don't know what the difference is, but there with the development agreement shows that the development | 02:04:15 | |
| agreement has where the city would pay up to a certain dollar amount the city does not have to. | 02:04:20 | |
| Take advantage of that particular item, the developer can build the road as as it is obviously any kind of additional costs in the | 02:04:25 | |
| future. The city would want to take the right away to preserve the preserve the corridor for any kind of future for any kind of | 02:04:34 | |
| future that means. So we look at the math, the phasing map real quick. Is it possible to bring up on the screen? | 02:04:43 | |
| But yes, I don't know, like I said to say, we want to take advantage of preserving the corridor for that wider right away. And | 02:04:55 | |
| then of course, if the state chooses to go ahead with the wider areas, then we would do so with the planner trying to acquire some | 02:05:02 | |
| right away at the areas where it does choke down. So perhaps it looks like I just answered your question that it may be off a | 02:05:09 | |
| little bit on this, but it looks like it was about 60 feet for the three lane segment of. | 02:05:17 | |
| 400 S but that road didn't contemplate like bike lanes and and you know, the active transportation stuff. | 02:05:24 | |
| So with and I saw, I saw in the agreement it's the 77 foot wide Rd. So that would include the bike lanes and the one lane each way | 02:05:32 | |
| and the center lane I assume, yeah. | 02:05:38 | |
| I'm really hiding in favor of the 77 foot wide Rd. going through all the way to Geneva Rd. I mean that that's I'd like to see that | 02:05:45 | |
| or better, which I think we have if, if we fix that choke point right there just immediately east of where that pink ends. Looks | 02:05:52 | |
| like there's some property there. It's in the way. | 02:05:58 | |
| East side of that. | 02:06:06 | |
| Area that's West of Holdaway Rd. as well. I know that's Jake Holdaways. It's actually east of of South Hallway Rd. the one that | 02:06:10 | |
| goes up. | 02:06:16 | |
| I understand there's a meaning problem there was far South and whether it's Holdaway Rd. there in that corner, that little strip | 02:06:23 | |
| there, but the land right in front of Robert Kimora Holway's old home, that that's the place I'm looking at right in there. And | 02:06:28 | |
| then it continues over I think over to Ashley. | 02:06:32 | |
| Acres. | 02:06:39 | |
| That's the strip I'm looking at there. Yeah. So the church, the church property and then Ashley Acres. | 02:06:40 | |
| So again, to answer to answer the question in regards to that I mean. | 02:06:48 | |
| Season the cities are going to go through transformation master plan next fiscal year and that's it. And that would be an area | 02:06:52 | |
| that the city would obviously make some considerations as to is it work is in order to take right away from existing property. | 02:06:58 | |
| It's much more expensive than trying to get right away from undeveloped properly, especially when the developer is donating to us | 02:07:05 | |
| at no cost. | 02:07:11 | |
| So that would be something that the city would have to see. What's the advantages of that financially as well as operationally? | 02:07:18 | |
| And then turn into the budget in order to make to be able to acquire the set profit these side a whole wave Rd. actually looks | 02:07:25 | |
| pretty good. This is a 60 foot. But I think what you're saying, David, is this right here like I'm saying, I'm saying like it's a | 02:07:32 | |
| 77 foot wide clear up to that corner, which is great. But to continue at 77 foot wide, you're going to have to buy some land. | 02:07:40 | |
| You'd have to cut 17 feet extra on that road. Yeah. And then I I think we'd have to we'd have to look at the master plan. | 02:07:47 | |
| Make that level investment like OK, I, I yeah. And that was, and you recall there was well, the whole reason there was the whole | 02:07:55 | |
| recall issue is because some of the residents over there were afraid of that exact issue. And so anyway, I was just a. | 02:08:03 | |
| One of the reasons I really don't want to follow up with that, see what what the tough part is. I mean, you go up to 77 the whole | 02:08:11 | |
| way. I mean, it, it would be fairly expensive. We, I mean, you're taking out front yards and stuff. So we have to really look at | 02:08:17 | |
| that and see if if it's, you know, using the master. | 02:08:23 | |
| Transportation Plan. | 02:08:31 | |
| So I think that that should tell us if it's if it's warranted or not, but. | 02:08:33 | |
| This right here, I mean the improvements going to this development could, you know, really help the situation. Yeah, No, I, I | 02:08:37 | |
| agree. I like the idea. I just, I just if we're not going to buy the extra property, we're going to to connect them is why we have | 02:08:45 | |
| the why we make building the extra Rd. you know, capacity won't use I mean, I mean, if you can't get there from here. | 02:08:52 | |
| To answer that question. | 02:09:02 | |
| Right away that's the right way for descending 7th is that, you know, like I said, the developer is going to provide that. | 02:09:05 | |
| To the city and then but and then the party development agreement would be up to a certain dollar amount of the city chooses to | 02:09:13 | |
| only add 2 feet to the current Rd. I'm sure the developer with accommodate that build out to the full length. I'm sure that the | 02:09:18 | |
| developer it's in the development agreement that the developer will accommodate that as well. Yeah, there's nothing about this | 02:09:24 | |
| this development needs to change. I like what's happening there. I'm just talking about after that area ends that that strip there | 02:09:30 | |
| that however long that strip is. | 02:09:36 | |
| Yeah. And then that's all And I just if it's possible to make sure that gets on the, when you, I know you're doing a study next | 02:09:42 | |
| year, can you make sure that that's high, high priority look at that in that study? Yeah. So again, that would be definitely an | 02:09:48 | |
| area that we would have to consult and take a look at to see about the feasibility. Again, it comes out to be cost versus | 02:09:54 | |
| operational and as well as other areas of the city. | 02:10:00 | |
| If we make it too wide, it may be an attractive three-way to future projects farther out. | 02:10:06 | |
| Oh, there you go. | 02:10:15 | |
| Yeah. | 02:10:18 | |
| Thanks, David. | 02:10:20 | |
| Also something cool if if we have this with the bike lanes in the road and it's pulled away Rd. becomes a bike Blvd. then those | 02:10:22 | |
| bike lanes I mean they'll end right there until all the way hold away Rd. which would be cool. | 02:10:30 | |
| So I have one addition, the adding permit parking language. | 02:10:40 | |
| To the overnight program. | 02:10:47 | |
| Anything else? | 02:10:50 | |
| No, so I just wanted to read real quick. | 02:10:53 | |
| So, so in this just going back to the whole Zinfandel thing, it says the developer shall coordinate with the city and the | 02:11:06 | |
| developer of the property adjacent to the property's northern border to stub a road connection to E Zinfandel Lane from the | 02:11:13 | |
| project prior to the city's issuance of 103rd certificate. So I think we just need to define that better because it says that | 02:11:19 | |
| they'll work with the city and the property owner to get it done before the 103rd. I think we just need to. | 02:11:26 | |
| To clarify that that because if they're doing that, if they're. | 02:11:35 | |
| If we don't want it to connect or they can't connect with with home center. | 02:11:40 | |
| Then I mean, they're not abiding by the development agreement. So I think that we need to adjust that so that they are compliant | 02:11:46 | |
| with that. | 02:11:50 | |
| I'm trying to understand what you're asking. If you don't want it or want it because it was, there's only one place for that road. | 02:11:57 | |
| OK, but there's only one place for it to go, so I don't even know why. That's not even my argument either. No, it's just that that | 02:12:05 | |
| it needs to connect before the 103rd certificate is what it says in here. | 02:12:10 | |
| And I'm just saying don't connect it until you're just done with the project. But we can't, we wouldn't do that for a lot of | 02:12:16 | |
| reasons, because we have to put the park in which has to have parking and we're not going to come back and put in a stub Rd. after | 02:12:22 | |
| we built part. So I mean, I kind of have to go in when that part goes in. I guess that part goes in when up to 103rd. That's why | 02:12:28 | |
| we put it at the 103rd. So if you want to delay the park, I guess we could delay. So. So in that case, then I think we need to | 02:12:34 | |
| make it clear. | 02:12:40 | |
| We need that the road goes in, but we make it so that it is non accessible as far as like through traffic. Like we put a chain | 02:12:46 | |
| across the road. So it wouldn't be unless the developer to the north did something. And what I'm saying is in this it says that | 02:12:54 | |
| you'll work with the property owner of the north to connect it. And I'm saying get rid of that. So it doesn't say that. | 02:13:02 | |
| All we can do is stuck to the property and the only location that can go is there, yes. So if I this is benefiting you guys, | 02:13:09 | |
| that's why I'm saying. | 02:13:14 | |
| They can meet their their requirement by simply stubbing it there. Yeah. The same is humanity. And she's over the infrastructure. | 02:13:20 | |
| So he's getting, you know, depends on the timing. I mean, he can make sure that's it. Yeah. I think we just need to clarify that | 02:13:26 | |
| in this, that they stab it to the edge of their property at the very least. | 02:13:33 | |
| I mean. | 02:13:42 | |
| Well, again I would like to speak the language as is. I mean to work with other developer, make sure that the designs are | 02:13:45 | |
| coordinated and everything, all the lines are done. But again, what is going to be a public road and the city may choose to block | 02:13:50 | |
| it as it wishes. | 02:13:54 | |
| So I mean at the end of the day when the department, this developer builds the road and you know it's meets the requirements of | 02:13:59 | |
| the city and stay accepted. | 02:14:05 | |
| From that point forward, it's turned over to the city for the city's use of the city decides to close the road off 100% as long as | 02:14:11 | |
| it's not affecting developers ability to move forward into the development. The city has sole control over that road. It doesn't | 02:14:17 | |
| impact us. My only concern is is that. | 02:14:23 | |
| You can't go through a field anyways and developer does. Either way, it doesn't matter to us. I'm just saying in the event that | 02:14:56 | |
| the developer doesn't cooperate, there's no other option for us other than build a road where it's designed and shown. | 02:15:01 | |
| And that that'll be up to the city to to there. We work really well with that developer. So we're not, you know, we want to have | 02:15:08 | |
| coordination. I just didn't want there to be some kind of numbers like OK. | 02:15:14 | |
| Yeah, OK. | 02:15:23 | |
| No other questions or anything. | 02:15:24 | |
| Do I have a motion to close the public hearing? | 02:15:29 | |
| Motion to close the public hearing, Yes. | 02:15:35 | |
| Second all in favor, aye. | 02:15:37 | |
| Right, I have a motion. | 02:15:40 | |
| Is there anything else you wanted to add Morgan or? | 02:15:43 | |
| Yeah. | 02:15:53 | |
| I guess I don't know how to work this motion. | 02:16:02 | |
| So. | 02:16:10 | |
| OK, correct. | 02:16:33 | |
| I forward a positive recommendation to the City Council of Ordinance 2022-10, Holdaway Farms Development Agreement with the | 02:16:36 | |
| condition that the. | 02:16:42 | |
| Parking. | 02:16:49 | |
| To clarify that it is the permitted parking for overnight parking. | 02:16:54 | |
| And a second. | 02:17:00 | |
| Sure. | 02:17:03 | |
| Yes, for a second, second. This is a roll call. So Chris, aye, aye. | 02:17:08 | |
| All right. | 02:17:16 | |
| Yeah, yeah, yeah. I wish that was. | 02:17:23 | |
| Moving on to Commission member report and staff report and expertise, discussion and disclosure. | 02:17:31 | |
| I got nothing. | 02:17:39 | |
| Nothing, Seth. | 02:17:41 | |
| Yeah, nothing from from us. We'll, we'll, we'll have, we'll, we'll give you a good update probably in the next meeting. | 02:17:44 | |
| Sounds good. Is is Jeff? Is he officially off the Commission? Yes. Yeah. So they will be. Yes. So the mayor is charged with making | 02:17:51 | |
| the appointment and we will chat with her and see kind of what her her what how she wants to move forward with it. OK. And I know | 02:17:58 | |
| we only have three members here tonight. Is there any discussion happening for. | 02:18:05 | |
| Any replacement of yeah, well, like that's the mayor pick somebody new and then Tim and Anthony works yesterday are two | 02:18:13 | |
| alternates. Yeah. So potentially on how she wants them. So how how the how the bylaws read is 3 consecutive meetings. And so this | 02:18:22 | |
| this will be I think 4 meetings, but three. | 02:18:30 | |
| Consecutive like, like actual beings, right? Yeah. Because we, we've had a special meeting and I don't know if we can count that | 02:18:39 | |
| or not. | 02:18:42 | |
| It's denies technically a special meeting, but anyway, I think I think we're past the threshold and so it'll be be up to the | 02:18:46 | |
| mayor. We talked with her. I mean, we definitely our preference would be for people who are appointed to show up and you know, but | 02:18:52 | |
| we're we're kind of at that point where we tonight, let's say if one of you got sick, then we'd have two major developments that | 02:18:59 | |
| would not be able to move forward, You know, so this is this is a really real close one, I mean, like. | 02:19:05 | |
| I mean I would have. | 02:19:15 | |
| Gotten sick again. I would have zoomed in and at least you'd have that. Yeah, we can zoom. So when's our next scheduled meeting? | 02:19:17 | |
| Yeah, seriously. | 02:19:21 | |
| Our next scheduled meeting is in July, OK, July 6th, and we do have quite a few items for that meeting, OK. | 02:19:27 | |
| So if that is everything. | 02:19:34 | |
| Anything adjourned? | 02:19:37 | |
| I have only one comment. | 02:19:40 |