Certainly send it.

We good.

All right, good evening.

Welcome everyone to our Draper City Planning Commission meeting.

So today's date is August 28th.

I'm Andrew Adams.

Uh want to welcome all the commissioners up here and thank them for their time and their volunteering that they do every other week.

Uh we also want to thank the staff for getting everything ready, putting up those yellow notice signs and working with the applicants throughout the year just to get them to this point.

So we appreciate you doing that in an efficient manner, and then of course staying late on these late night meetings.

And then thanks to all the applicants that are here and all our neighbors and friends.

So welcome to our our meeting.

So we'll go ahead and start off with the agenda exactly as it's been posted.

I haven't been notified that there's any changes.

So we've got a couple action items, plenty of public hearings tonight, so it should be fun and exciting.

Um we'll go ahead and start off with our agenda as posted with the first action item on here.

We've got three approvals of planning commission meeting minutes.

So why don't we kind of bundle these together?

But I'm gonna read them off.

We've got the approval for the planning commission meeting minutes for June 12th, 2025.

We also have the approval of the minutes for June 26, 2025, and we also have the approval of minutes for the meeting on July 10th of 2025.

So, commissioners, are any of those meetings uh and the minutes needing any attention, or can we put a motion together and put them in the books?

I think they were very well written, so I'll make a motion.

Sweet, go ahead, Susan.

Okay, I move that we approve the minutes of June 12, 2025, June 26, 2025, and July 10, 10, 2025 as submitted.

Great, thanks, Susan.

Who will give her motion a second?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Lisa.

Let's go ahead and put that to a vote.

Then for approval of the minutes for June 12th, June 26th, and July 10th of 2025.

So Susan, how do you vote?

Yes, Lisa.

Yes, Laura.

Yes, Gary?

Yes.

And Shavom.

Yes.

All right.

So those are all approved.

Thank you.

Well done.

Our first public hearing of the night is the Big Willow Creek Sixth Development Agreement Amendment.

It's on the request of Peter Grant Gambrulis representing Ivory Homes, a development agreement amendment for the big Willow Creek Phase 5 development on approximately 9.3 acres, and it's located at approximately 11670 South.

Wild Rye Field Way, known as application 2025-0196-DA.

And Mary Ann Pickering is our staff contact.

So Mary Ann, I'll turn it over to you.

Thank you.

The subject property is located on the western portion of the city.

It's over between 700 west.

There we go, there's the mouse.

And I-15.

This is a detailed view of the property.

It's also known as phase five of Big Willow, which is the subdivision by Ivory Homes that wraps around here.

The land use designation on this is residential medium density, and the zoning on it already is R4.

This sixth DA amendment is being done to modify the minimum size of two lots that are located within phase five.

The original development agreement, the first one that Ivory Homes did with the city required 20,000 square foot to be located along Big Willow Creek.

There's now a cul-de-sac needed due to the approved layout and design of Jensen Farms developed to the south.

And there was also an easement that has already been dedicated for a trail and utilities that was not anticipated originally by the developer or the city.

So this DA amendment would make two of the lots less than 20,000 square feet.

What's being modified is the exhibit from the original DA, which is this one here.

And the blue lots are the ones that back onto Big Willow Creek that were required to be a minimum of 20,000.

So lot eight over here is being reduced.

This is the one that's being reduced because of the trail and utility easement.

And then lot one is the one that's being reduced even more, but that's because they had to design a cul-de-sac in order to make that turnaround because they was no connection to Jensen Farms that was approved with Jensen Farms.

This is the proposed plat for Ivory Home.

So this is where that trail has already been dedicated that connects to the trail system.

And then you can see the cul-de-sac down here, and those eat up a lot of square footage.

So that's why that one got smaller.

So we just need to amend the development agreement so that we can get phase five going and approved for ivory.

I didn't receive any public comments on this item, and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Does the with the modification does it affect any of the setbacks?

I'm gonna still big enough lots, I'm sure.

Yeah, this the this one is just under or it's just over 18,000.

This one's 14,000, so they'll still have the same setbacks as the R4 zone, similar to all the other lots around it.

Thanks.

All right, thanks, Mary Ann.

I don't think we have any more questions for you, so we'll go ahead and invite the applicant up.

Is the applicant here?

The applicant is out of town.

He was gonna send somebody else from Ivory Homes.

Jackson was supposed to be here.

Okay, no worries.

Well, we gave them a shot.

So this is also a public hearing, so we'll go ahead and open it up to public comment.

If anyone's here tonight to address this agenda item, uh I'll give you the uh the rundown on how these will work.

So because we'll have you're probably here for a different one.

Um we've got a three-minute timer up there.

Anyone's uh allowed to come up and speak for up to three minutes.

You don't need to take the whole time.

We just asked you don't go over.

And uh you're welcome to do that now on this agenda item.

So give that a minute.

So we don't see anyone that wants to address this public hearing.

So we'll go ahead and close the public hearing on this one.

All right, commissioners.

Pretty straightforward.

This is a development agreement, so that means that you can really just uh make exceptions like this when they make sense.

What are your thoughts?

Well, we've seen this four times.

Yeah.

Right.

Um, and I'm I'm fine with the changes.

I think it um really helps the neighborhood and uh the developments I'll make a motion.

Perfect, let's have it.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the sixth development agreement amend agreement amendment as requested by Peter Gambrulos of uh Ivory Homes application 2025-0196 based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated August 19, 2025.

And I uh my feeling is that they the development agrees with um our code, Draper code.

Perfect.

Thanks for that motion.

Can we get a second for that for from Lisa?

I'll second that.

Thanks, Gary.

All right, let's go ahead and put this to a vote.

Then this is for a positive recommendation forwarded to the city council.

Uh let's go and start with you, Lisa.

How do you vote?

Yes.

Gary?

Yes.

Chavon?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And Laura.

Yes.

All right.

Congrats on that to the applicant when they come back into town.

Let them know.

All right.

So we've got the next public hearing tonight.

It is Think Him Inc.

Home Occupation Conditional Use Permit Request.

It's on the request of Tammy Schlappy representing Think Him Inc., a home occupation conditional use permit to operate a cottage business home occupation that creates small jewelry.

It's approximately 0.32 acres located at 641 East Pheasant Haven Court.

It's known as application 2025-0134-USE.

And Nick Whitaker's our staff contact.

So go ahead, Nick.

Thank you.

Um yeah, so this is the uh think him Inc.

home occupation conditional use permit request.

Uh here is a vicinity map.

The subject property is the red dot in the center.

Aerial map.

It's primarily residential area.

Here's the land use map.

It is residential medium density.

And the zoning map, uh, it is in the R3 zone, the property.

Um the applicant has indicated areas where they intend to uh park employee vehicles.

There will be two employees coming to the uh home to uh work.

Um I'll revisit this as we continue on through the uh presentation.

Um the um the home occupation uh is a uh a cottage business where the applicant is assembling um small pieces of art I'm sorry, small pieces of jewelry.

Um the applicant has two uh additional employees who don't who do not live at the property um who come over uh and work as well and um no customers come to the home, they fulfill orders online, and uh of course the uh final items are uh mailed out the uh workspace is located um uh in the basement.

Whoops, and impact analysis and mitigation is that uh two uh two or the identified potential impacts are two additional non-resident employees working at the home and employee vehicles, parking and related traffic.

Um the proposed mitigation is that all requirements of the Draper City Engineering Public Works Building Planning and Fire Division shall be satisfied prior to the issuance of a business license or its renewal, and the applicant shall maintain an active business license for as long as the business is in operation from the uh from the residents.

No customers shall be permitted to come to the home.

Uh only two non-resident employees shall be permitted to work at the property.

Um that the uh that prior to the issuance of the business license that a revised parking plan be provided to the planning staff showing the location of two off-street parking stalls for use of the non-resident employees.

Parking stalls for employees may not block access to the minimum required parking stalls for the residents located in the garage.

Um stalls shall each uh stalls shall each measuring a minimum uh of nine uh nine feet wide by eighteen feet deep, and the business related production of jewelry shall be confined to the designated workspace as illustrated on the approved plans, and that the business shall only operate on Monday through Friday between the hours of 9 a.m.

and 5 p.m.

Uh, the reason we are requesting an updated um parking plan is the plan provided.

Um would essentially allow a car to park here and another car to park here.

So they would have two um access points to the garage.

However, the way that the parking is stacked up would make it difficult for this uh uh the vehicle in this garage to come and go.

Uh looking at the plan, we there there are other ways that this could be arranged that that could work.

Um we'll work with the applicant to make sure that that's provided prior to issuing the building permit.

Or I'm sorry, the uh um business license.

Sure.

Hey Nick, just a quick question on that.

So it when we have access to the garage, can you not just block the third car and call it two access points through the second, the two-car garage?

Is that what it is?

You need to have the third car accessible plus one of the two.

Yes, typically we could do that.

The issue is that we would have two cars.

The way that the plan is shown, you'd have a car, you'd create a very slim passage here to be able to pull the car out and uh you know get onto the road and pull a car in.

Um again, though, looking at the property, there are ways uh that this could be reorganized to make a uh a less um impactful uh parking situation.

Right, it's just but but that's that's the code, correct?

That we need to have that might be something we may want to review down on put it on the list of hedgerows and those things that may need to just have some common sense readjustment in my opinion.

So I know that's not what's on the table here, but just uh if it were only a two-car garage house, it'd be perfect, right?

They could just park two cars over there and slot them in there.

So anyway, that's my only question or thought.

Thanks.

I appreciate that.

Yeah.

Do you know um Nick if there's room?

Sorry, um for the cars to go in this direction instead of this direction next to each other.

Um sorry, this is a very sensitive master.

We don't know the measurements, right?

Of that space.

It could be, and that's something that we need to explore with the applicant.

Um but I mean, visually, and just in the measurements that we've taken, they should be able to meet the the required um parking standards.

It's just it needs to be a little we just need to reorganize it a little bit.

Perfect.

Um that is uh my presentation.

Great, thank you.

All right, is the applicant here?

Hi.

If you want to come on down, this is your time to shine, don't be nervous.

So if you just state your name, and then you can add anything to Nick's presentation, and we may have some questions for you.

Thank you.

My name is Tammy Shilapi, and I live here.

And the reason that the parking is so strange is because my husband's in a wheelchair, so we only use the double car garage for one car.

That's why we park there, and I we park there all the time for somebody to park in in between.

And I have plenty of room in my smaller garage to get out of there.

But we do have a lot of other parking that we can we can park lots of places.

Yeah, it looks like you have plenty of options.

So yeah, I know you guys will get it worked out.

I'm not too worried about it.

So uh what are we?

And and right now we only have uh it's my sister and our friend and they carpool every day.

And we only do it two days a week.

Good.

Have you talked to your neighbors?

Are they cool with this?

Oh, yes, absolutely.

Yeah, awesome.

Yeah, yeah, employees are easy to control, and then you don't have any clients coming to pick up, you're just shipping out at the post office or whatever.

Yeah, perfect.

Well, any questions for the applicant while they're up here?

Okay, well, we sure appreciate you doing it the right way.

Thanks for being a good citizen and drapery.

You're on the on the good approved list.

So let's see if we can get this pushed through for you.

Thanks to all of the you gotta we'll invite you back up if we uh if we have any uh questions for you after the public hearing.

So this is a public hearing.

We'll go ahead and open this up just like before to public comment.

Who would like to address this agenda item?

All right, so the crowd's not here for this one.

I think you lucked out.

All right, we'll go ahead.

We don't see anyone, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion.

Uh commissioners, what are your thoughts on this?

Pretty straightforward, isn't it?

Yeah, I think this is this is really easy.

There's plenty of concrete there for parking.

I can see that I don't I'm not worried about parking, I'm not worried about traffic or the impact.

So I'd like to make a motion.

Go ahead, Gary.

I move that we approve the home occupational conditional use permit as requested by Tammy Shilapi representing Think Him Inc.

application 2025-USE based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions lifted listed in the staff report dated August 14th.

And the findings for approval is it complies with the standards for approval for our code uh and has a negative impact.

And the any impact has been mitigated by the applicant.

So I propose we we grant it.

Great.

Thanks, Gary.

Who'll second that motion for approval?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura.

Let's put it to a vote.

This is to get it approved.

Gary, how do you vote?

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And Shabon.

Yes.

All right, congrats on that.

Good luck with your business.

We appreciate you.

All right, let's move on to our next public hearing.

Uh, if you're following along, this is item one F is in Foxtrot.

So we've got our public hearing next.

Uh the Goodrich Point Land Use Map and Zoning Map Amendments.

This is on the request of Alan Print Prince representing the Crescent Irrevocable Trust, a land use amendment for residential low to medium density to residential medium density and a zoning map amendment from RA1, which is residential agricultural to R4, which is single family residential for approximately 8.7 acres, located at approximately 1175 south 700 West.

It's known as applications 2025-0109-MA and 2025-0105-MA.

And Mary Ann Pickering again's our staff contact.

So go ahead, Mary Ann.

Thank you.

This project is similar to the last one I had.

It's on the western edge of the city, and it actually backs up to the one we just had the discussion about.

This one does have direct frontage on 700 east.

And for reference, this is the development agreement site we just talked about.

There's currently two lots on the property.

There is one that is developed at this time.

And the current zoning is RA1.

This is a request from the property owners to change the land use from residential low medium density to residential medium density.

And then that zone change that corresponds with that would be RA1, which is one acre lots to R4, which is quarter acre lot minimum.

We do know there's a future subdivision plan, and that would be considered at a future date.

And this is a recommendation to the city council.

And they're just a reminder there would be two motions on this one.

One for the land use, one for the zoning.

And I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

We don't see any.

Thanks, Mary Ann.

All right, is the applicant here?

If you want to come on down, add anything you like to state your name.

Good evening.

My name's Alan Prince.

Uh I uh represent a company called MPG, and uh we've been working on this project on this site for more than three years now to finally arrive at this evening, and grateful for the chance to be here.

Um if I may, I'd like to uh advance a plat to you.

This uh parcel of ground is uh uh a consolidation of three three different parcels.

Uh it's a total of uh just over eight acres.

I think it's about eight point seven acres.

Unusual to find that much uh anymore in Draper.

If you can see the area there of lots one, two, and three.

That's the third there are two parcels above and one parcel right there.

The uh on lot number two right now is an old rental home that faces away from the road, believe it or not, faces the wrong direction, and is typically housing several families at once in that old dwelling.

So I I imagine that the neighbors to the uh adjacent south will be really thrilled if you'll approve this zoning and we'll remove that structure.

Um I want to address the issue of density, because I think that's the big issue on everyone's mind.

Why would we ask for R4 zoning when it's uh the zone that it is right now?

And the answer to that is we were trying to match that that is already in the area adjacent to us to the to the immediate south is a project that uh Tim Goff, a good friend of mine developed several years ago.

Uh we are matching the frontages of that uh particular project.

So if you know where that is, it's very lovely on the west side of or east side of uh 7th West.

Um what we needed were uh frontages.

We needed a zone that gave us frontages, gave us setbacks, and gave us lot size that we could use on this regular kind of an irregularly shaped parcel of ground.

So we've assembled the ground, you can see the layout.

Uh there would actually be two phases involved.

Uh you can see the lots numbered, and then to the right, uh down along the creek, the Goodrich family parcel.

Uh uh the Goodrich family Rebecca Watson, who's my good has become a dear friend over these three years, uh, is living in the home that you can see there.

The other is an outbuilding uh kind of storage shed garage where she wants us to uh help her create a lot for her daughter, and she and her daughter would then live on this site.

Well, with the 12 lots that you can see that we would uh bring before you for a preliminary plat, uh there would then be the daughter's lot added to that and uh the lot that Rebecca lives on.

So a total of 14 lots.

If you take the zoning that is there now, the R RA1, it allows two units per acre.

So two units times the eight, there's about seventeen and a half lots presently allowed.

And I'll call it 17.

They're not gonna split any lots in half.

Uh so that would then be 14 total lots, and so there is no density change by zoning this property to R4.

I want to make sure that's completely crystal clear.

Uh you'd think by changing from one to the other that you're suddenly going to open up to a whole bunch of new housing units and they're going to be out of place.

That's simply not the case here.

We are actually under what is presently allowed.

Uh I was concerned, and I would be if I were you.

If we zone this big of a parcel, what could happen with that Goodrich family parcel?

Could that become suddenly more lots?

And the answer was I had my engineers lay this out.

The total density that is achievable on this piece of ground is 16 lots.

Now we're not chasing 16 lots.

We would be after 14 lots.

But in the future, if uh Rebecca were to wish to sell that and redevelop it, uh, she could get a total of six of uh two more lots than what we would start with.

So we'd go from 14 to 16, still under those allowed under the maximum allowed on the present zone if nothing changed at all.

So I I it's really fundamental that we understand that.

And in the letters that have been received, there's several different uh uh issues.

One of them was I think there was a concern that no that what about homes fronting out on 7th West?

There are no homes fronting on 7th West.

We'll be putting up uh a masonry wall all along 700 West.

Uh I didn't uh know anything about the development agreement that was discussed earlier tonight, but our plan happens to coincide with everything that was said.

We would be dedicating uh joining that that's already been dedicated by Ivory Home.

So we would be dedicating a nearly half an acre, a little over half an acre down along the creek bed.

We would also be creating a maintenance swath all along the creek for its future maintenance for FEMA, Draper City, and Salt Lake County flood control.

And the two lots that we have that back onto the lot, as you can see, lots eight and nine, are both three-quarters of an acre, a little over 25,000 square feet.

So they happen to meet the criteria that you had formerly placed on Ivory Homes, even though I didn't know that was going to be uh required, it will be uh met and satisfied.

I'm running out of points.

Was there any questions that you would like to ask me?

No.

Well done.

I think we're good for now, so we'll go ahead and open it up to public comment and I'll invite you back up if you'd like too much.

You got it.

All right.

So, as mentioned before, this is a public hearing, so come on up.

You've got your three minutes.

We just ask that you stay under that.

And just as a protocol, if you'll just state your name before you start speaking.

My name's Rebecca Goodrich Watson.

I do live on the property.

I'm retaining this big piece of property.

My parents purchased this property in 1968, and my brother and I grew up there.

My brothers always lived there with my parents, and I relocated in 2018 to move to move down here to take care of my mother and my brother.

We've been maintaining this large piece of property for quite some time now, and we don't have any further plans to put horses or cows back on it, considering what's happening in our neighborhood already.

Um both of my parents have now passed away, and as you know, when that kind of happens, we do need to sell some of that property.

Five acres is what we're selling on our property, coinciding with Kalani Whites.

I think nine homes is uh pretty low density, and we have two accesses out to 700 West.

Um we have been working, I say, to with Alan for over three years at this project to benefit both my daughter and I and our family to continue living there and to create a really great um community for our community.

We care about our community, we've been here for 57 years.

So we respectfully ask that you approve our Good Rich Point project, and thank you.

Thank you for that.

All right, who else?

Hi there.

Hi.

My name's Jan Sharp.

Um I live on 7th West, and I'm part of the irrigation company, and I'm I'm not actually objecting to the lots and the and the rezoning, but I just want to know from the developer, how aware are you of the irrigation line that runs through there, our ditch that will need to be protected and during the summer from May and through September.

Is that part of the plan?

So I just I really want to make sure that that does not get forgotten because we need to irrigate.

Thank you.

All right, anyone else?

Hello, commissioners.

Uh Greg Wilding, I uh the engineering company that uh is working with Mr.

Alan Prince on this, so I thought I would just take a moment and answer the question that was just brought up.

Uh, we have met with the irrigation company out on site.

Uh we already have a great battle plan to maintain our area, the irrigation service going through the property, and so all the downstream users will continue to have access to it.

Thank you very much.

Perfect.

It's nice to meet the face behind the name we see on all these plates.

So nice to meet you very much.

All right, anyone else?

Come on down.

Don't be shy.

It's still early.

We're all in a good mood.

Hello.

Hello, my name is Michael, and I work across the street from the proposed new development, um, directly across the street.

I'm not opposed to the rezoning and development of the land, but I would like to ask the city and the current and soon-to-be property owners to save and protect a small portion of land for the wildlife of Draper, especially along the canal and the creek.

We have a butterfly farm, and we often use the milkweed on the property to feed some of our monarch butterflies we raise on our farm.

For those of you who don't know, milkweed is the only plant that monarch butterflies can eat when they're still caterpillars.

It used to be a very abundant plant across Utah and North America, uh, but due to a lot of habitat loss and other reasons, the monarchs are on the cusp of being declared endangered.

Um, has anyone here ever seen a monarch caterpillar in the wild?

Yeah.

Not very many people.

This used to be a mainstay.

I talked to a lot of people.

This used to be a mainstay of childhood for many people.

So the patch of land, the patch of milkweed on this land is likely one of the biggest milkweed sanctuaries left in Salt Lake County.

We find wild monarch eggs under the leaves.

Um, in fact, I have two in my hand right now that are baby caterpillars that I found on this land.

We also see many other types of butterflies, bees, and other pollinating insects that can be found among the various blooming plants on this field throughout the year.

In addition to butterflies, I have personally observed many species of warblers, tanagers, woodpeckers, oroles, lots of different types of birds uh foraging and nesting on the property.

Every year there's a pair of red tailed hawks that make their nest in the trees on this property.

And I've seen them carry off snakes and rodents that they catch off the field.

There are so little wild areas left in Draper and Salt Lake City.

And these beautiful creatures I've listed, including I forgot to mention the deer, which can be actually annoying sometimes.

But many more less obvious or appreciated animals will be banished to ever vanishing scraps of suitable habitat elsewhere if this land is clear-cut and turned into suburban homes with no thought towards them.

I'm going to miss the milkweed patch that we use to raise our monarchs, but I think the wildlife is going to miss it more.

I ask that the city and property owners portion a small section of this land, especially along the canal, to be protected so that our people and children can see the natural and beautiful wildlife that also make their home in Draper.

Thank you.

Michael, could you please state your last name?

Michael Boutner.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

Yeah.

All right.

Anyone else?

Okay.

I don't see anyone else, so we'll go once, go twice, and then we'll close the public hearing portion.

So the way that the questions worked, uh, I know it's kind of an awkward silence.

You're staring at us asking a question, and we don't answer.

I uh the way this will work, I'll take notes up here.

We'll invite the applicant back up, we'll hit him with the questions, and hopefully we've done a good job of uh kind of facilitating those for you.

So if you want to come back up, Alan, you can to come answer a couple of these.

So the irrigation was uh addressed, uh it was quite questioned and then addressed by engineering, right?

So you've got that covered.

Yes, we can uh and you can still, I'm sure they can talk to you offline about that.

Um the I do have a question for you.

The piece that you sent up here, there's two pieces that were I didn't see them in this in the slideshow, but there's some dedicated, some proposed dedications from the canal to the east.

And then what's the other one here?

It looks like there's yeah, so to Draper City.

Tell me about that.

Uh, one will be uh we and we haven't met yet and had our DRC meeting, but I'm assuming when we do, there'll be certain criteria that that they would like to have a protective corridor, a maintenance quarter, as it were, down along the edge of the bank of the creek.

Uh I believe FEMA has a claim down there.

Uh Salt Lake County flood control has a claim down there, and Draper City has a claim down there.

So we'll work with staff to come up with the exact measurement of whatever that setback is.

I'd also like to say uh I've noticed this gentleman's uh uh butterfly farm sign, and I've been very, very curious about it because my grandkids would dig that.

So if there is uh seeds or uh uh bulbs or whatever would need to be for milkweed, we would be happy to volunteer a little bit of money along that portion that we're dedicating to Draper City and scatter that and try and keep him in in butterfly larva.

I'd like that a lot.

But and I may go see him about my grandkids for a Christmas gift anyway.

So yeah, you we haven't uh just asked Steph.

We've never I've been up here what since 2012, and so I've never had anything like that with uh request for some preservation.

Uh what what's available for that?

We've got an interesting situation there that I've never been confronted with, so tell me about that, Jennifer, if you can for a second.

Um yeah, so when what looking at our code, when the applicant comes in, they'll have to do um basically provide a study showing um impacts to the property.

Um that does include animals, um protected species, things, waterways, things like that.

Um it's typically not uh fully in-depth study, but it just analyzes what what may be impacted with the development.

Um if there's something that's protected or something like wetlands, um, there may be additional things that need to happen.

Um we don't have anything specifically in our code that would say open space has to be provided unless there's another mechanism with uh state or federal.

Yeah that kicks up.

I was and I'm asking, does the city even have authority to say this is protected?

No, I think I don't even think I don't even think they do, do they?

So that would be something that would just be almost a gentleman's agreement to say, hey, if we want to do that as community, that's totally offline.

So volunteers the with the applicant, the developer, the neighbors, the butterfly farmers, and all that, right?

Correct.

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

So I just like I said, I'm it's never come up.

Do you recall anything like that that we've ever been?

I was asked to draw a mural on my buildings.

You were a mural, just something for preservation and cultural cultural.

Interesting.

So, no, that's a first for me, so thank you for that.

And yeah, grandkids alike.

So see what you can work out.

Okay, that's the best we can do up here.

If that's fair.

All right.

Any other questions for the applicant before we go through these two?

Uh the land use and the zoning.

I just want to remind the public that we're still going to look at next uh we still have an application for the plat, right?

Yeah, the plat's doing so that'll come back and we'll talk about it some more.

That's a good point, Lisa.

Yeah.

So even though the plat was shown, and and what we're really looking at here is density, and I like the point made by the applicant of that you know that the density here could be 14 lots.

If this this bigger one were subdivided in the future, it could be an extra two, getting up to 16, and then with the acreage that we have, that's still well within what's everywhere around it.

R4 to the east, south.

Yeah, I'd like to see that map again now that I've seen the layout that you've you've brought for us.

I'd like to see how it fits.

It's actually pretty nice that we had the two on the same night, because you can kind of see what we what was going on up there with ivory and now here with this development.

If I may just make a comment on the case, please do.

Yeah, you're still you're still welcome to.

We have uh, as I mentioned, three parcels.

One of them is already zoned R4.

So part of our subdivision is already R4.

We were adjoining R4 on two different contiguous sides, but it seemed like we weren't introducing anything to the neighborhood that wasn't already there, and just made sense.

But again, I want to stress that that does not change density.

If anything, it lowers density.

Yeah, perfect.

And that's good to bring this map up for that.

So if we don't have any other questions for the applicant, we'll excuse you and uh we'll put this up to a vote.

Sound fair?

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, commissioners.

What are your thoughts?

We've got a I think it's I've got a question for Jen.

Can we fact check that?

Is that true?

R1 16 17 lots, and this is I'm sure it's true, but this is not a higher density.

Well, what he's saying, can we fact check that?

Is that true?

That R4 is not high density.

No, that Shabom's asking that is is that really all that can be put on there?

And it's it's based off the two dwellings per acre, and it's two what the uh is it the Goodriches, but the Goodridges lot is two acres.

So if you that could be cut down into four at a future time because that's all we're looking at right here.

Regardless of the Okay.

What's the worst they could do?

And the worst they could do is tomorrow turn this into a 16 lot development.

Regardless of what they just showed us here tonight.

And that's all we need to be conscious of.

Yeah, so the property is eight point eight point seven acres.

Um, and it is zoned already one, so that's one acre lot zoning, so 40,000 square foot lots.

Cool.

There you go.

Thank you.

So that's so we're just looking at what's the worst.

What's the the worst that could happen if we say yes to that?

Well, not only that, it doesn't factor in streets.

Yeah, you know, you have to take that out.

So that's a gross amount.

But I think this is actually very well thought out, right?

Actually, I'm actually impressed with the density that it's not increasing the density, and I think it's very well thought out and took three years to get there.

That's what happens when you take three years.

It turns out pretty good.

And it sounds like the applicant would be willing to work with our butterfly expert.

Um, and I would hope that that would be um that that would take place.

Yeah, that was nice to hear.

So all right.

Well, uh, we've got two items on here.

We've got the land use map amendment.

We need a motion for that uh for a recommendation for the city council, and then we also have one for the zoning map amendment.

Land use if you want.

Yeah, go ahead, Shabom.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the land use map amendment as requested by Alan Prince representing the Crescent Irrevocable Trust for the Good Rich Point Land Use Map Amendment application 2025-0109-MA based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated August 19th, 2025.

Thanks, Shabom.

Who will second that?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Susan.

Okay, let's put this to a vote then for a positive recommendation on the map amendment uh being forwarded to the city council.

So we'll start with you, Shabom.

How do you vote?

Yes, Susan?

Yes, Lisa?

Yes, Laura?

Yes, and Gary.

Yes.

All right.

Now the next one is the zoning.

Let's hit that one, the zoning map amendment.

I'm I'll make a motion.

Okay, go ahead, Susan.

Okay.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the zoning map amendment as requested by Alan Prince representing the Crescent Irrevocable Trust for the Good Rich Point Land Use Map Amendment.

Application 2025-0105-MA based on the findings of approval listed in the staff report, dated August 19, 2025.

And there are five findings of approval as listed.

Thanks, Susan.

Who will second that motion?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Gary.

Okay, let's go ahead and put this to a vote.

Then this is for positive recommendations of the city council on the zoning map.

Susan.

Yes.

Gary.

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

And Shabom.

Yes.

All right.

Congrats on that.

Good luck with City Council.

We appreciate you coming in tonight.

All right.

Our our next public hearing is the Pratt Fence conditional use permit.

It's on the request of Spencer and Holly Pratt, a conditional use permit to allow for a fence that is taller than six feet, approximately 0.16 acres located at 296 East Red Leaf Drive.

This is known as application 2025-0031-USE.

And Nick Whitaker's our staff contact.

So take it away, Nick.

Thank you.

So this is the Pratt fence conditional use permit.

Here's the vicinity map of the property.

Again, the red dot is where the property is.

By the time you get to the corner, you're at nine feet eight inches.

And this section here is uh begins at eight feet two inches.

By the time you get to this corner again, it's eight feet four inches.

This is the property now.

As you can see, the applicant also has a deck that is right here.

Um begins uh with the the uh uh property uh or begins with the established grade here, and then begins to uh follow the uh um the slope and it gains height.

Um there's also the fencing in the front.

And I should be clear this is not front yard fencing, this is behind the front yard plane, so this would not be considered front yard fencing.

The impact analysis and mitigation is that uh the identified potential impacts is um are uh minor impacts to visibility for pedestrians utilizing the adjacent sidewalk.

And I'd also like to show one other thing.

The fence is being used as well for um safety to prevent people from falling off of the deck.

Um the proposed mitigation to the uh identified potential impacts are that all requirements of the Draper City Engineering Building and Planning Divisions are satisfied throughout the construction of the fence, including permitting that the fencing shall not exceed nine feet and eight inches in height and shall be constructed only in the locations indicated on the approved site plan, and that the applicant obtains a building permit for the fencing in the locations indicated on the approved site plan.

Here's a picture of the property.

And that's the end of my presentation.

Hey Nick, so I've got another common sense question for you.

So if you look at the that's a great picture where you show the the red decking there, right?

The patio it almost looks like what's the height from the red where the patio starts to go up.

Is that six foot there?

Because this looks to me like the the only problem with this is that instead of a retaining wall, they've used vinyl fencing covering the retainer because I know all that stuff's retained.

The fence isn't holding it in.

So is that where the beef is with the city?

Is that where they're is that where the city's saying that that's that fence is really that tall?

Because if I go off that line that you see right there where they've taken the top slats off, couldn't they just get around this by pulling that bottom part out and just I'm not saying to do this, but just leave it ugly and raw and let it be retaining wall behind that and then have the fence start where the top rungs have been removed?

Would that then be in compliance?

It would look it would look bad, but that would then be in compliance, correct?

They could put it up on top of the is another one of those common sense things.

It's like, yeah, that looks like it's a 12-foot fence, but in reality it's they've just that they've put vinyl cladding in front of the retaining wall.

Actually, I do not believe there's retaining wall that the deck is built above the grade of the slope that's underneath it.

So you're telling me that vinyl fence is holding that slab in.

No, the the grade is underneath the deck running downhill.

They they did have some retaining walls in there, but they're probably hidden by the fencing as well.

Yeah, so that's what I mean.

So an expensive or a less uh you know aesthetically pleasing version of this would be just bring the retaining wall out and then up to that level, put a big huge ugly slab and then put your fencing on top of that.

But that's but you guys are working through that with the building permit.

Yeah, that there is another section of code where your your railing would need to be opaque or non-opaque uh with a deck in the in that yard.

Um so it couldn't necessarily be just a solid fence.

Was the deck built with the fence, or was the deck existing before?

Because I'm reading the staff report I'm thinking.

The fence prevents people from falling off the deck, and I'm thinking that that sounds so funny that I actually had to drive by just because it just sounded like people falling off the deck, really.

Um what's the status of the deck and the fence?

So we we will have to have the applic the applicant confirm that.

But in conversations that I've had with the applicant, he has indicated that they were built at the same time.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, well, we'll invite them up.

So I think that's that's all we've got for staff, right?

Anyone else?

Yeah, okay.

All right, is the applicant here?

All right, come on down, shed some light on this.

And by the way, just as you're walking down, just remember to state your name.

Did Red Leaf did the property to the uh in the picture to the whatever that is, the south.

Did they not come in and ask for a higher fence a while back, or am I just making that up because it's all run together.

They did, didn't they?

Yes.

And they're they just haven't put it in.

Did they get it?

No, they did put it in.

Oh, it is in.

Okay, good.

Yeah, but this all looks like deja vu.

I'm thinking it's just one house down down the hill.

Okay, go ahead.

If you'll state your name, I'll give you your time.

Just add anything you'd like and help us understand.

Yeah, I'm Spencer Pratt.

This is my wife Holly Pratt.

Uh wanna thank Nick for a great presentation and Nick and Jen for uh you know being generous with us with their time and being professional.

They refused to advise us, but they were super helpful with uh with our questions.

Um Andrew, you nailed it exactly.

That's our contention is exactly what you said is that if you drive through our neighborhood, there's endless fences that are really high, and they're all on top of retaining walls, including uh right when you turn a manila, the your the house on your very first left, I think has a fence that's gotta be 18 to 20 feet high on top of you know it's a it's a six-foot vinyl fence, but on top of an enormous retaining wall.

Every side of my of our yard, Holly, in my yard, uh, is that it's a fence on a retaining wall, every side, uh, every every fence.

And so in this one section, it um it fits better and it looks better uh to do it this way and then to answer uh was it Susan to answer Susan your question?

Yes, the deck and the fence were built together.

When we first moved in, we had a really young family.

Uh we had little kids, um, and uh and we we hired a contractor to build this.

Um we didn't know we were running afoul of any rules uh until actually it's it's crazy, it was maybe 15 years ago that we did this.

And like after 15, and no one complained for 15 years, and and and then uh we found out that we didn't do it the right way, and we've tried been trying to comply ever since.

But uh you guys have been spot on with your analysis, including the fence that's really tall uh to the south of us is been built uh as well.

So um you guys nailed everything with your questions.

So that the the decking material that that's like a trex deck, right?

It looked to me like it was just red red colored cement, but it's a trek, it's a deck, right?

Okay, that's decking there, got it.

Okay.

Yeah, that I'm clear on that.

All right, any other questions for the applicants?

Okay, we'll invite you back up after public hearing if we need you, okay?

Thanks for coming in.

All right, this is a public hearing.

We'll go ahead and open this up to public comment.

Who would like to address this agenda item?

Feel free to come on down.

Okay, I don't think I see some movement, but it's just all right.

I don't see anyone, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion.

All right, commissioners, what are your thoughts?

I'm I'm really comfortable with approving this.

Anyone else want to make a comment?

No.

I think it's a good solution for this property.

So it makes a lot of sense.

Yeah.

Okay, I'm gonna make a motion then.

Perfect.

I move that we approve the conditional use permit as requested by Spencer and Holly Pratt.

Application 2025-0031-USE based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, dated August 15, 2025.

Um, the proposal complies with the standards for approval found in the um Draper code, section nine-five-080E, and potential negative impacts are mitigated through the imposition of imposition of reasonable conditions.

Thank you, Lisa.

I didn't know if you were done there, but yeah, I'm done.

All right.

So uh anyone want to second that motion.

I'll second it.

All right, thanks, Laura.

So we'll go ahead and put this then to a vote.

This is for approval.

Uh Lisa, how do you vote?

Yes, Laura?

Yes, Gary?

Yes.

Shabom?

Yes.

And Susan.

Yes.

All right, okay.

Congrats on that.

Put those slats back up there, and thanks for coming in and enjoying your backyard there in Draper with your neighbors.

All right, let's go ahead and move on to uh our next agenda item.

It's one H is in hotel public hearing.

It's the city initiated Concord Properties Land Use and Zoning Map Amendment.

This is on the request of Draper City.

It's a land use map and zoning amendment to change the land use design from open space parks to community commercial and the zoning designation from RA2, which is residential agricultural, to CG general commercial for approximately 0.27 acres.

And this is all located at approximately 687 west, 1230 south, and it's known as application 2025-0197-ma and 2025-206-ma.

And Todd Draper's our staff contact.

So go ahead, Todd.

All right, thank you.

Uh this one is uh also uh two uh different applications, so two motions.

Uh this is as you may remember about end of 2023.

We had a rezone for the rest of the property here.

Uh this is specialized manufacturing uh right there out on uh uh where they would like to go in on 123rd.

Um after that meeting and and subsequently um the city had this little piece of land that was not part of that original uh parcel.

Uh the city did sell to Concord Properties, which is specialized manufacturing.

So here you can see the aerial.

There's really nothing there right now.

Uh the land use map is uh showing that that is open space and parks because it was over here part of uh Glena Park land at the time.

As you can see, it really wasn't utilized really for park.

Um, and then of course the uh current zoning is RA2.

They're looking to move that into the same zone, the CG zone.

So uh this is just a request to move that to the community commercial, make it match the rest of the property, and uh have the zoning match the rest of the property as well.

And just so you do know the property has been uh sold and has been combined all as one, so there are not two separate properties there.

That's just a side photo of what it looks like essentially today, if you've been out and driven past it.

Uh and uh again, uh I did have a public comment that I did include in the packet.

So hopefully you've seen that as well.

And if there's any questions for me.

You're the applicant, so we'll go ahead and we'll drill you now.

No tough questions.

Okay, all right, thank you.

This is a public hearing, so we'll go ahead and open up this one for public comment.

Who would like to address this agenda item on this parcel that people weren't even aware of?

It definitely surprised me.

All right, we don't see anyone, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing.

All right, commissioners, thoughts on this one.

Makes sense.

I can do it.

Go ahead.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the land use map amendment as requested by Draper City application 2025-0206-MA based on the following findings and the criteria for approval listing listed in the staff report dated August 19, 2025.

Thanks, Shabam.

Who will second that?

Okay.

We'll let Susan take it.

All right, let's put that to a vote.

Then this for a positive recommendation, right, Shabam?

Yes.

So Shabam, how do you vote?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

And Gary.

Yes.

All right.

We have a second one on there.

That's it.

No, we have a zoning map and then.

I'm happy.

So let's go ahead and get a motion for that one.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the zoning map amendment as requested by the Draper City application 2025-0197-MA based on the following findings and the criteria for approval listed in the staff report dated August 19th, 2025.

Thanks, Shabam.

Who'll second that one?

I'll second.

All right, thanks, Lisa.

All right.

This is again for positive recommendations, city council on that.

Shabom.

Yes.

Lisa.

Yes.

Susan.

Yes.

Laura.

Yes.

And Gary.

Yes.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay.

Next on our list.

We've got we've got another uh public hearing.

It's another city initiated preschool limited text amendment requests on the request of Draper City for a text amendment to Draper City Municipal Code, Section 9 3 040.

It's in order to adjust the number of children allowed in a preschool limited use.

Application number 2025-0189-TA.

And staff on this is Jennifer Jastrimski.

Hi Jennifer, go ahead.

Yeah, so we're changing the definition of preschool limited use to increase the number of um children allowed within within that use.

So a um preschool limited is a home based business.

So you've seen these come through with a conditional use permit request to operate.

So it's a preschool out of the home.

The current code allows up to 10 kids per session and two sessions per day.

Our home occupation code allows outright one employee who doesn't live at the home.

So our our code is out of line with the state.

So Utah Department of Health and Human Services allows eight kids with one caregiver and up to 16 kids with two caregivers.

So we're proposing tonight to change the code to kind of match up with the state because we're kind of allowing half where they could they can have that second caregiver, but they just can't go up to the 16 kids that they can have with that second caregiver.

So the uh code change itself is pretty simple.

We're just changing uh 10 to 16.

Just to align more uh with the state state guidelines.

Perfect.

I have a question, Jen.

Does our code um communicate or restrict or have any like um size requirements for the eight versus the 16?

So when they come in with their conditional use permit, we would be looking at their drop-off pickup plan, parking plans, things like that.

Um under the state regulations, they have certain area standards that they have to have, like per kid, that kind of thing.

Oh, good, okay, thank you.

So it doesn't turn into a little sweatshop in there, right?

So we've got the well, and I think the health health department may have something to do with that also regulating it.

Just a comment.

I'm personally I think 16 is a lot, but in a previous experiences, it is a little confusing or frustrating for a preschool employee or owner to go get their license at the state, and they're told 16, and then they get to the city and they're find out that it's a less amount, and then that's a whole different financial situation for them.

So that's been frustrating.

I've seen in the past, so I personally am glad to see that the city's more you know, gonna be the same as the state.

I think this is a good proposal.

Good.

Perfect.

All right.

Well, thanks to the applicant there.

We'll go ahead and open it up to public hearing.

So who'd like to address this preschool agenda item?

And if you just remember to state your name.

Yeah, good evening.

My name's Andrew Bates.

Good to meet another Andrew.

Hi, yeah.

I've also bought a butterfly, so shout out to the butterfly guy.

Uh I so the person who submitted this.

Um, my daughters attend her preschool, and I'm here to support her.

And I personally think uh our conversation should be around how do we do more of this?

Because it's a great community builder, it's uh you know, uh a woman running a business.

Um it's it's just really impactful for our community.

So I'm very much in in favor of this and and hope you will be too.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

All right, anyone else.

Hi there.

Hello, my name's Sanchi Winley.

My son currently goes to the same preschool.

Um, and I already have my two-year-old daughter on a wait list for it.

Miss Jen is amazing.

I think it's she's good enough to know what she can handle.

Most preschool teachers and teachers in general know what they can handle, and I think increasing it for those people who can handle it would be beneficial, and the people who can't, it's gonna show Miss Jen has a like five-year waiting list because people want that value.

She's proven herself as a great teacher, and so giving them the opportunity, and my kids the opportunity to have a great teacher instead of having to hunt for somebody else, it's good for the community.

Getting those kids that early start is important.

Thank you.

Hi there.

Hello, my name's Joyce Linglover, and I live in Sandy, and two of my grandchildren actually go to Miss Jen's preschool as well.

It came highly recommended.

Um the two little guys are cousins, so that's awesome that she allows them to come together.

But one of my daughters actually drives from Woods Cross to come out to Draper for three-year-old preschool, which I think says a lot for how well she does and how much care and love she gives, and just seeing the growth and how much the two little guys learned last year and how excited they are for next week for school to start again.

So I do believe that in her individual case, especially she knows where our limit is, and if she has a couple of hard kids, would probably not take on, but I do feel that it is important to keep our city regulations with the state and keep everything in line so it's not so confusing when people are trying to set up a small business and make a living and improve our children's and our future.

So thank you.

Thank you.

All right, anyone else.

Hi.

Hi, my name is Jennifer O'Neill, and I wasn't gonna say anything, but with that kind of backup and support, I wanted to come up and say something, and I wanted to thank Jennifer.

I want to thank Jennifer and Mike Parker and um a few of the people in the city that have helped work with this when a problem arose and the support that I've gotten from them and the backup and the professionalism to be able to hear information and look at the state information and compare to the school districts and kindergarten teachers and other preschools um outside of our county and how they're operating, um, and some of them being grandfathered in because they've um had larger amounts of kids for a larger time in a successful business and um and also just the fact that preschools self-regulate.

If you don't do a good job, you don't have a preschool.

Parents are very smart about their children, they're very aware of everything that goes on, um, and they they know what's happening for their kids and their education, and the preschools aren't daycare, they are it's a school.

Um I don't have a child care license, it's actually a preschool license for a listed as um education and other with the state.

So anyway, I appreciate Jennifer.

Thank you, and Mike Barker and um Heather uh Bryn Heather Johnson for taking the time to listen and um look at this.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thanks for that.

And by the way, will you did you state your name?

I did Jennifer O'Neill.

Okay, Jennifer O'Neill, that's right, you did.

So you're Miss Jen.

I'm Miss Jen for you.

Thank you, Miss Jen.

All right, good.

I was just making sure I heard that right.

So great job.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, anyone else?

Okay, I don't see anyone else, so we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion on this preschool item.

So, commissioners, what are your thoughts on this?

I want to make a positive motion.

Anyone else want to make comments first in our group?

Okay.

Um, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the text amendment as requested by Draper City for the city initiated preschool limited text amendment application 2025-0189-TA, based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated August 25, 2025.

And uh, we need to be in compliance with the state.

So I think this is a great motion.

Great application.

Thanks, Lisa.

Who will second that?

I'll second that.

Thanks, Gary.

Okay, let's go ahead and put this then to a vote.

So this is for positive recommendation of the city council.

Lisa, how do you vote?

Yes.

Gary.

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And Shabom.

Yes.

All right.

Well, hurdle one, so uh Tuesday night city council meeting.

So I think it'll go well.

Okay.

So can we take a break?

Our next item.

We have consultants joining us on Zoom, and there are audio issues with our Z.

Sure.

Yeah, let's take a break and then we're going to excuse Gary, right?

So you won't be back up.

I will probably excuse you out of their own.

Okay.

Great.

We'll take a what 10 minute break, Jennifer.

Five, eight.

Ten's great.

Great.

Let's do ten.

All right.

I think our two minutes has lapsed.

What do you say we'd get restarted?

All right.

Let's readjourn our meeting.

Welcome back from our break.

Do we have our audio attendees?

I believe so.

We double check that and then we can get back on track.

Perfect.

Thanks, guys.

All right.

Thanks for the break and thanks for being patient with us.

Let's go ahead and get uh kick it right back in where we left off.

Uh this is a public hearing.

It's the Draper front runner.

And I think this is our last agenda item for the evening, correct?

This is our Draper front runner Vista Kimballs Lane and Crescent View Station Area Plans General Plan Amendment Request.

So this is on the request of Draper City.

It's a request to adopt the Draper Front Runner Vista Kimball's Lane and Crescent View Station Area Plans as part of the general plan.

It's known as application 2025-0195-TA.

And Todd Taylor is our staff contact.

So we'll go ahead and turn it over to you, Todd.

Take it away.

Thanks.

This is actually a unique item tonight where we're having our consultant present uh this item to us, and they are online.

So uh I will turn it over to Mariana Stuck, who is with Design Workshop and who is uh the city's consultant.

Hi, thank you, Todd.

Good evening, everyone, and thanks for having us tonight.

Uh, we will present um the final plan for the Draper station areas.

This includes three station areas, and we're gonna be giving you a high-level overview of the project process and uh specifically the final recommendations.

Um you've probably seen this before, um, but just a reminder that uh per use of House Bill 462, the cities are required to have um plan, a stationary plan, half mile radius around any um public transit station, such as front runner or tracks.

Um so we're aiming to get a guide that uh can help future development within this half mile radius and make sure that we respond to the city's vision and what we heard from the community and the process.

Um what you see on the right side here are the three stations we uh have been working on.

So the VISA front runner station on the left side where we extended a little bit the boundary to incorporate the area up to Bangar Highway, um, just to make that sure that was part of our study area.

Then we have Kimball's Lane and Crescent View, and you can see that those half mile radiuses are um and at the at the city limit uh with Sandy to the north and to the east.

The overall plan goals as a reminder were to create a vision for these station areas, uh especially paying attention to housing and affordable housing, thinking about sustain sustainable environmental conditions, preserving the character of surrounding neighborhoods, especially around Kimball's Lane and uh Crescent View, increasing transportation choices and options, uh enhancing access to various opportunities and involving key stakeholders from the beginning, uh which we have done with UPA, USA, different property owners, business owners, and residents.

The plan process, uh, we started in February this year and are now in the final step with a final document that I believe you all have uh received.

And um looking at adoption, we have a planned city council meeting next uh Tuesday.

Uh quick high-level overview of what we did for public engagement.

We started with various small group meetings in March this year.

We had a two-day decision where we worked with key stakeholders and city staff in April.

Um, and then from that we signed, we developed two alternatives, alternatives for each one of the stations, uh, which we presented uh during an open house in June this year.

And we also had an online survey that was launched during that open house.

We had over 790 complete responses, which is a great number.

The intent of the survey was to get feedback on these alternatives that were developed after the design charred.

And here what the community wanted to see in each one of the station areas.

You can see here a pretty high-level overview of some of those responses, but basically, what were some of the big moves that people liked that we were showing, what were some of the transportation recommendations that the community was preferring, and also what were some of the concerns for each one of these stations.

And with that, we moved into the final recommendations that are part of the final station area plan.

So I'm going to spend a little bit of time talking about these for each one of the stations, starting with the Draper Vista front runner station.

You can see on the right side what are the what we're calling the principles, but really key things that we're focusing on in this particular station.

The first one is to activate the public realm.

We heard from the community that it felt very disconnected this area.

There are some neighborhoods around it, there's some new developments starting to come in.

There is big employment center, but it's really disconnected and it doesn't feel like a place, and it doesn't have places where people can water gather or connect socially.

So transforming that and thinking about places that could that can make this a more identifiable area within Draper.

The second one was to build a new east-west pedestrian connection.

We heard a lot about how disconnected the two sides of the rail line were and how hard it was for some people working on the big employment centers on the east to get to the actual station platform.

So we're thinking about a major connection that helps unify the overall station area and that improves access from employment centers from the neighborhoods to the east, and hopefully drives additional transit use.

But thinking about is there an opportunity as those get revised and go through the final approval process to incorporate some small scale retail, such as a small corner store or a service shop or a restaurant that can provide everyday amenities for residents, employees, transit users, and also future uses of the high school, the kind of tech high school that is going to go in there in the former eBay building.

And also considering the over 2,0500 vested units that exist as part of those master plans, is there an opportunity to incorporate that amenity?

The other principle is to create a green space network along Vista Boulevard to make sure Vista Boulevard is more pedestrian friendly.

We were thinking that it could have a linear park on its east side, and also a series of smaller connected pocket parks and community spaces that will provide an internal framework to the area.

And then finally integrating adjacent uses to the station area.

So that's creating these new connections that we talked about to employment centers, neighborhoods, also to the Jordan River and the trail system to just bring cohesion to this area and enhance connectivity and also thinking about the future development of the points on the south side here.

So this is what kind of the final plan looks like, integrating those principles.

We are naming some of the design strategies here.

Like you can see that it's basically the ones I just described, like the green clover link would be this new multi-use path, pedestrian path on the east side that connects to the south and also connects to the north, integrating that neighborhood and employment centers, and we have the community crossing, which we are proposing is a bridge over the rail line.

And then what you see there is Vista Commons is basically creating like a small commercial mixed-use hub that can be integrated into new development.

And we have socket parks and trail links that connect to existing trail network.

And this is just a perspective of what this could look like.

This is you can see the little key map there in the top right corner.

So in the area we're calling the Vista Commons, which could be this kind of mixed use, a little bit more active spine that connects east-west, kind of looking towards the rail station.

You can see there at the at the back end of the image, the bridge crossing over the rail line.

Then if we move to Kimball's Lane station, same approach.

We have a series of principles that we integrated into a final concept.

One of the things I want to highlight is we are looking at the half-mile radius, but when we look at more specific land use and development recommendations, we really focus on some of these opportunity sites that we discussed with the city, and that we knew could be more prone to redevelopment in the near future.

So here is really about managing transitions in existing agricultural lands and what can happen there when growth occurs and when new development comes, and how can this be integrated with the existing residential neighborhood neighborhoods and that scale.

We have heard that people don't want to see a lot of density and height here, so being very conscious of that.

You can see that the one on the east side of the rail line here, in this case, the tracks line, is uh studied as an area where some redevelopment, mixed use development could happen.

There's an opportunity to make better use of this area and also expand more housing here.

And we know because of the analysis that this parking lot is operating under capacity, so it is an opportunity to think about some side of mixed-use development.

We also looked at improving the Porter Rockwell Trail access and connections, and also thinking about how connecting adjacent neighborhoods and future residents to the school, and thinking that students can access the school safely, either walking or biking.

That was a top priority.

And also thinking about completing some missing sidewalk segments in the area and some bike lane gaps on Kimballs Lane and 700 east.

Um, and thinking about how in the future some of the existing neighborhoods there might be some opportunities for specific infill that could happen here, and thinking about how that could happen in the future.

So this is the final view of what we were seeing in the previous slide, which is that redevelopment site to the west of the tracks line where the creek is, and also the UTA lot higher development that max that out at four stories, like condo style could be more in the middle of the site, and then a lower edge townhouses, and even uh building type like cottage homes could be on the side to work on that transition with the existing uh neighborhood.

And then this again is a view of uh what the redevelopment in the UTA parking lot could look like.

You can see the little key map uh showing where this is where this view is taking from.

So basically along 700 east, looking towards the station, you can see there on the left side the station platform and the train.

And the idea is that this could be some mixed-use development with retail on the first floor that can help activate a little bit the area and also support existing residential uses.

And then finally, we have a present view station, which um it's really more about stabilizing the neighborhood.

I mean, present view is really on Sunday side, the half mile radio here is a very small portion, and it's a very well-established residential neighborhood.

Um, so there is not an area where we um would think about a lot of redevelopment or change happening, so we really want to respect that, but think about how that existing neighborhood can be stabilized and how there might be an opportunity at the current Harmon's grocery store site that you see there on the images on the left of the screen, uh maintaining the grocery store, but maybe thinking about uh reutilizing some of the large parking lots areas to uh potentially have also some smaller mixed use development where maintaining the existing retail, but also thinking about uh incorporating some more retailer services there, and we also looked at improvements for 114 south.

And uh this is a view that shows that proposed kind of mixed use development on the Harmon side and what it could look like if you're looking uh from the main street there into the grocery store here would be kind of at the back of the picture if you can see there behind the trees.

And so that's um pretty um high-level overview of the plan and the main recommendations for the three station areas.

Um so yeah, we'll open it up for any questions or comments.

Thanks, Marianne.

This is Andrew, uh chairperson here.

Thanks for that presentation.

Um we'll go ahead.

Do you have any?

Does the staff have do we have any questions for Marianne?

No.

I I do.

Do you go ahead, Lisa?

Um well, it's either Marianne or perhaps Todd, anyone in the staff could answer.

As I was looking, I love the plan.

I was looking through it.

Um, one of my questions is does does UDOT have any um motivation from the legislature, from the co from the Utah Code, um, or uh uh from some other source to cooperate with us in this plan.

There were quite a few th streets that belong to UDOT that would need some alterations or some sidewalks, for example.

Um how can we motivate UDOT to uh work with us in Draper?

Any thoughts?

Oh, that is a question that came up at during city council.

Um, and we are uh we have put into the plan that we will be working with UDOT.

So I think it's just the city continually working with UDOT to try to encourage and lobby them to uh make the improvements that are needed on the section of 700 East behind between you know 123rd and and 114.

Will the governor's office you think lean on them a little bit because we're required to have a station area plan and to implement and uh if you dot blocks it, what do we do?

I mean, it's you know I think it's in their best interest for UDOT.

We hope so.

Hope they'll think that way.

Yeah, it's a good question, Lisa.

Go ahead, Marion.

We actually had a meeting with Utah yesterday.

So then uh consultant from Fair Piaz here is on the on the call, so and maybe then you can talk a little bit more about that.

We did discuss improvements to 700.

Yeah, thanks, Marianne.

This is Dan College Terriers.

Uh Tamari's point.

We did speak with the region two planner from UDAT yesterday, and he was largely supportive or broadly supportive of what we've included in the plan.

You he didn't see anything in there that uh you dot would immediately oppose or or uh try to make sure it doesn't happen.

Um, but I think to to the original question about what can be done to motivate or compel UDOT to actually work with the city on this.

Uh they are uh a large organization attempting to do a whole lot of stuff across the state.

And I think in this case, um being a as squeaky a wheel as you are willing to be, which is probably one of the best ways you can you can move some of this along.

Um we we are designing or we may need recommendations to complement or work with their typical standards for how roads get built.

Um it is on their longer term list coming out of the WFRC long-rate transportation plan to uh widen this portion of 70s between 114 and 123rd, but that is very likely at least a decade out as it is not yet currently funded.

Um but in terms of filling in some of the sidewalk gaps, trying to complete the bike network, make this more comfortable.

Uh, there is increasing movement at the state level through their statewide trail network to try to make some of these multimodal improvements happen.

Um, but I do think continuing to make this ask in a consistent and uh concerted ways is probably the most likely way to advance some of these ideas.

Thanks, Dan and Mary Ann.

Good question, Lisa.

I had one question.

No, go ahead.

I had a question.

We got an email from one of the stakeholders about for the Vista station, indicating they were a major stakeholder and that they've never been contacted regarding the plan.

Does have any response?

Because I was surprised to see this.

So yeah, when we started the uh the planning process, we looked through the areas and tried to brainstorm you know who we knew in these areas.

We looked through GIS to see if we could we if we recognize any property owners.

This was one of the properties that's under an LLC and had a registered agent, and we just weren't aware of them.

We did invite uh the Gardner and Boyer groups that were the original developers of Vista station uh as part of the stakeholder group.

And um but they were probably notified, but it probably went to whatever LLC address they had, and maybe it didn't get to the person who obviously responded in this email uh being a stakeholder and having 40 plus acres in the area.

To me, that's a huge issue if they have not been aware of it or whatever.

Yes, so we reached out to stakeholders that we could readily find in contact information for.

We did not you know send letters or emails to all property owners within the area.

Uh the stationary plan looks at a half mile radius, so we did not do that research to contact every single property owner.

Oh yeah, I get that that's a lot.

That's a lot of property.

This is just when this was such a large surveys out, right?

Now yeah, I'm just surprised that they didn't know.

So anyway, yeah.

So now this property owner, we have had a couple meetings with them in the last couple weeks.

They have seen the draft um uh plan, so they they are aware of what's in it.

It sounds like there's quite a bit that aligns with what they're thinking of doing on the property in the future.

Oh, good.

Okay, thanks.

Good.

They've raised their hand and said they'd like to participate.

Great.

Thanks for catching up on that, both of you.

Anything else?

I've been to most of these meetings.

It's it's it's a long time coming.

I am very impressed with the renderings though.

Yeah, you would think it's already in place.

So well done.

A lot of hard work.

Yeah, those rendering are amazing.

I'm like, yeah, look at that.

That's front runner in the back and Harman's in the back, and wow.

So great job, guys.

You fooled me.

All right, so let's go ahead.

And this is a public hearing, so we'll go ahead and open this up for public comment.

I know you guys have been waiting, so we'll get you guys out of your chairs if you guys would like to uh get your input uh to us.

So uh let's go ahead and shift over now to the public hearing.

So who would like to take uh up to three minutes to share with us anything you've got?

If you would just state your name before you speak.

Yes, my name is Karen Johansson, and I would like to expound upon that information about notifying the property owners because in the Crescent View Station on 114th South, it's owned by Harmons, it's a single owner, and they were not notified that this was to be in place.

Now there are currently two, I don't know what to call them, um two buildings filled with small businesses.

Um several of those are single owner, one mom and pop shops.

Um Harman's just made uh a large improvement on their property.

They were not notified that this that they were going to change these buildings and these structures.

It I notified them because we leased the property from Harman's my daughter owns one of those small businesses, and we were horrified to see that our business was going to be raised to the ground and torn down.

We had we had no idea.

Harman's had no idea.

Um we asked them for information, they had no information.

I went to the planning commission, I talked to this gentleman over here, and uh I was told that businesses come and go.

Quote unquote, um, which this business has been in this location for 20 years now.

I'm not sure when the buildings were built.

And um, but it it looks beautiful on paper, but you are taking away people's livelihood by doing this.

And I'm wondering what accommodations do you have for them?

Um, how much warning will you give them and what are their accommodations for them if you take away their place of business?

How do they stay in business?

They will not have enough, say they can't go somewhere else and come back when it's finished because they will have no income during that time.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Andrew Shuries pause and kind of reiterate that this is a concept, no one's tearing anything.

Yeah, I think let's let's go ahead.

Can we do that?

Or staff does that?

Can you uh yeah, let's do put a quick pause on it.

So I won't wear you out here, so stay right there.

Yeah, so yeah, just just to put this, Jennifer.

Is that okay?

Just to kind of put just the this is we in a bubble.

Yeah, yeah.

So um these are concept plans.

Um, so everything is really up to the individual property owners to come in.

And we have spoken to Harman's, and at this time they are not interested in doing anything on their property.

Um, that may change in the future.

Yeah.

Um, the the other property owner in VISTA is very interested in doing something on their property.

We'll probably see something in the next year or two from them.

Um, but it really is up to the individual property owners whether they come in to develop when they come in to develop.

Um, and these are concept plans.

So what gets developed may not be exactly what is shown.

And they'll have to come back every time something new gets developed, or wants to get developed, right?

Yes, yeah, they'll have to go through the regular development process through site plans, potentially subdivisions, depending on what they're doing.

Um, so that would have to go through Planning Commission for site plan approvals.

And also any any notifications that do go out are to the property owner typically, and not maybe maybe necessarily the business owner, and so hopefully that trickle does happen, but you're right, you are required only to the property owner, not every individual tenant.

Correct.

We uh send notices to the property owner based on what information they have with the county.

Right.

Thank you.

Hold on, hold on.

Yeah, we've so I've got the notice was not sent to the property owner or the business owner, it was sent out to the public by mass email.

Yeah, we appreciate that.

So I'm gonna take control of the meeting again here because it's a little bit unorthodox that we've got uh remote presenter and something that looks this ominous and this big.

First, let me remind you that this is a dry run.

So this is the planning commission, so nothing will be decided here, everything will be pushed on with a positive or negative recommendation from us to the city council, the people that you elect and vote in, and then those meetings are on Tuesday nights.

So I want to make sure that you guys uh when you leave here tonight, no matter what we decide.

First of all, this is 10, 20 years out.

We all hope to be around to enjoy all this this air quotes goodness, and then at the same yeah, possibly fit possibly, yeah.

I mean, hopefully in our lifetime, hopefully, if we take our vitamins and work out and go to the gym and well, maybe we'll make it Shabam.

I don't know.

So maybe we'll see this.

But again, it and it is America and there are property rights.

We cannot just say, look, we're kicking you out, and the city is eminent, domaining your property and putting in shops where there ought not to be any more shops or vice versa.

So I know it sounds ominous and notification, I mean all this kind of stuff.

It helped me at the very beginning of all this because we've been discussing and and being able to uh review and look at these type of things for almost a year now, right?

Hasn't it been over uh it feels like a year, maybe it's been nine months, something like that.

But the reason for it is that the state wants us to make plans so that we're not caught flat footed 50 years from now that hey, this is what we'd like to see around these UTA track stations and these public transit stations in these areas.

So that's why those three are actually on there.

And I might be preaching to the choir.

You guys may have been at these uh at these meetings.

Um, you know, you may not.

So I'm just uh putting that out there for people that might be coming for the first time tonight thinking what's happening.

Are we, you know, uh the police states coming in and and you know, gonna abuse us.

So that's not the case.

So thank you for Shabom for pointing that out because it does sound scary.

It does.

And I don't think it's nearly as scary as it may sound.

Um what this is is this is uh what we're gonna do tonight is we're gonna uh after we've soaked in this presentation, then soaked in your uh public input.

This is great because now the city council's listening in, these are recorded.

Uh the consultants that have worked their hearts out on this, they're listening in, and this is all being kind of still soaked in, and then it'll be put to a vote and finalized.

And again, what Jennifer's point was is that this is just a plan, it's just a concept.

And if Harmans doesn't want to play, then Harman's doesn't play, and if another property owner does, then they all work together.

And then Lisa brought up if you dot doesn't want to play, then it puts the screeching breaks on everything.

Um, how long did it take for us to have our Michigan roundabout?

Uh how long we've been blessed with that thing here in Draper on 123rd.

Remember when we used to have huge backup getting on I-15, and now we've just got the backup going the other direction.

So but again, it takes a long time.

There's a big big big machine, big machine.

So thanks for putting a pause on that, Shabon.

That was a good point.

So let's get back to our public hearing.

What do you say?

All right, so let's go ahead.

I'll it's still open for public comment.

So come on up.

Thanks that you took a seat, and I didn't have to revive you there.

So if you state your name, I'll give you your three minutes.

Um I'm Chris Clegg.

Uh I think it's important uh that we talk about the history of the Vista station.

Uh I live in a neighborhood.

The road to my neighborhood is 28 feet wide.

It was billed in the early 2000s.

Uh at that time, Gleena Hills Park was going to be an elementary where the Vista station is was going to be a hundred houses on acre lots.

Uh the vehicle traffic on 550 West or Vista Station Boulevard, uh residential road was gonna be several hundred vehicle traffic a day.

I would encourage all of you to pull up the Vista Station uh concept plan from Boyer.

The road turned at the dog pound and went around the park and went into the Vista station and it went to 60 feet wide.

And it was called a grand boulevard.

That was to slow down the traffic.

Nowhere else in Draper do we have a major commercial artery dumping into a residential road and then on the other end of it dumping into a major commercial artery.

That's from your own transportation plans.

This consultant must not have read them because in 2009 you were going to go around the park.

In 2013, you were going to do it again.

And if you read the 2019 transportation plans, you're going to do it in 2025.

Right?

It is dangerous at that park to have a 28-foot road and have kids on one side, football fields on the other.

In the fall, when we have the seasons change and it gets dark.

I myself have bought a wheel and a tire for a truck because I hit a curb rather than a kid.

And it is very dangerous.

And we've added tens of thousands of vehicles.

This report calls out that they are going underutilized parking.

Well, I encourage you to look at, say, 2019 before COVID.

The parking lots were full.

There were uh there's four or five thousand parking spots, and there might have been eight hundred that were empty.

Go to figure uh twenty-three, please.

That figure shows a half mile and it shows up into the park and it shows up into the Gleena Hills neighborhood.

That is a half mile.

Now go to figure twenty-three, whoever's running the mouse, please.

And they say we don't have all the figures in the plan.

Oh, okay.

So they've shrunk that down when they come to the transportation point.

So at one end of this development, you have a six-lane highway dumping into a four-lane highway, and at the other end, you've got it dumping into a 28-foot wide road, and you're putting Draper's most valuable asset competing with 3,000 pound cars.

We're putting our kids running across park roads.

Looks like my time's up.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

All right, who else?

Good evening.

My name is Amro.

I work with Ivory Innovations, and we own a parcel to the south of Vista Station Boulevard, just to the south of Cornell Canyon Creek.

In figure 18, some of these lots are highlighted in orange, but the legend doesn't say what that means.

So I would appreciate a clarification for that.

Thank you.

Come on down.

Good evening, Commissioner.

My name is Brandon Watson with Edge Homes.

Uh so we have a uh a vested interest in the Kimballs uh lane portion of this presentation.

Uh just a couple of uh items, and I appreciate the clarification on the concept plans uh that are being shown.

Uh obviously, as a as a landowner that's very uh heavily involved and interested in this, it's a little shocking sometimes to see uh you know a concept plan on property you own that uh you you know it's just a little shocking, so I can appreciate the public's input here.

Um and you can see the dichotomy that we have here where we've got interests from an outside consultant, interests from a city, uh, interests from UDOT, interest from the state, and interest from landowners, and we're trying to marry this all together.

So I see the dichotomy that we're all faced with this evening.

Um, but I just want to uh again.

I'm speaking specifically to the Kimballs Lane Station.

Um, design workshops proposed concept plan from what we can tell here.

Uh it's this is very indicative of you know a downtown Denver fill of studio apartments, uh 600 square foot, maybe 700 square foot studio apartments, and that is not what we want to do on this particular piece of property.

Uh we recently got this rezoned and we signed a development agreement with the city that would vest us to 25 to 27 units to the acre.

We intend to build uh what Edge homes and what we know the Utah market wants, which is you know, two three-bedroom apartments or uh condominiums, not apartments.

We want four cell product here, not four rent.

We want the ability for your children, my children to be able to live close to home, to be able to own close to home, and to be able to hop on tracks and go and do what they want.

I mean, it wasn't too long ago that I was living in this very type of community, and I appreciated living next to a track station that I could go and write up to the University of Utah and and get my degree and come home to my wife and my and my you know my kid at the time.

Uh obviously my family has grown since then, but um this type of uh concept that you're seeing here is just not indicative to what the Utah market demands today, and that's ownership, three bedroom, two and a half bath, uh you know, 1300 to 1600 square foot condos uh that would go in this type of density.

So I want to make sure uh that whatever decision you guys make this evening to go forward to city council.

Um our request is simply that on this, you just show that this is subject to an already approved development agreement vested at 25 to 27 units to the acre, and uh to please don't go forward with a preconceived concept of what this is gonna look like without fully uh hearing what the property owners want to do with that.

So I appreciate your time this evening.

Appreciate that.

Thanks, Brandon.

All right, anyone else.

Okay.

We'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion of this agenda item tonight.

So, commissioners, again, this uh is there anything that you guys want to add?

Uh again, we'll just treat you as the applicant here with the consulting firm.

So, Dan, Marianne, anything you guys would like to add or clarify.

Again, these are concept plans.

I think the biggest thing I got out of all this, honestly, was whether Kimball's Lane, if we were gonna straighten that out and shoot it straight through to seventh, or if we were gonna keep that curve, and frankly, those are the things that we can control, right?

We can control like where's the where's the traffic flow gonna go if you ought to work with us, or if it's all solely up to us.

Um, but those were some things that were kind of enlightening to me through this.

Everything else, again, it's property rights owners, it's zoning, it's everything we you know, nothing.

This looks really heavy-handed, and I sometimes scratch my head and say, what are we what are we even doing here, right?

We're doing these these awesome conceptual plans that uh we can only do if everyone's on board.

So um, but it is uh, you know, uh, and and it was encouraging because we needed to do the this because it was a requirement, right?

From from the state.

We needed to submit this by a certain time.

It is it is because the state wants to know what we're gonna do in the future, and at least so we look like we have a plan.

Yeah, so it is a requirement of the state uh to do these.

Um I will say the stationary plan does have language, noticing that that these are concepts.

Um, so that last item that was just brought up there that we need to put any kind of caveat or any kind of disclosure, and that's in there.

It does also reference the development agreement on the edge homes property with that 25 to 27 dwelling units per acre.

Um, the concept we have on that property is within that density range.

It is a little bit different concept than what Edge is looking at doing, but it does incorporate uh three to four-story uh condo buildings on there.

So there are some differences between the two concepts.

We realize that um the concept we have may not be exactly what gets built.

The edge is coming in with a concept of their own, and that's something that we'll be working with them on.

Yeah.

They came in before we're doing this.

So that should take precedence, right?

We don't have any approved uh plans, though.

So we have the development agreement that has the density approved.

Good point.

And we've seen we've seen some early concepts, some rough concepts, but we don't have uh a flesh out plan from them.

And so, for example, if I can just what I did in my mind, knowing that Edge owns that property near Kimball's, I was just transposing in my mind those little yellow flat top condos go to the pitched roof product that they have on the condominium side and then the townhomes that are attached.

So the flat roof is a little bit deceiving.

It does look urban, it does look like Denver, and it's just not a product that I mean it's like like dorms or it's kind of like what we have.

What's this called down here with the mixed use?

Moda, it's very Moda-ish.

But uh Edge is not that.

I um one of the one of the comments was about figure 18 in the plan for the Vista station.

They wanted to know what the orange highlighted area is, and so I'm wondering if Dan or Mary Ann can clarify for us on that one.

Yeah, so the the orange, um I don't I have the PowerPoint here not the document, but the orange is um I think we're calling it plant development, and it includes that property, and it includes two more properties kind of on that point that forms to the southward uh between the rail line and banger highway, uh, which uh basically was indicated that the city that is developments are in the pipeline.

So we just wanted to highlight those properties uh area where there's already kind of uh things that are being studied uh and potential future development happening there in the modern uh near future.

Right.

One of them, for example, is developed is in process of being developed, I know.

So thank you for clarifying that.

Yeah, but that yep, and you know, one one thing I would add to the various comments we just heard is uh like Jennifer was saying, we're just providing a framework here.

Um so if change happens in the future and any of these patients, the city has a guiding document to help them envision what that change would look like, what the community would like to see there.

We're just really focusing on that, and that's why each one of the stations starts with the principles, which are much more high-level ideas, they're not focused on the shape of the buildings for showing in the plants, but really thinking about things like in the case of Kimba's like transitions to a lower scale residential neighborhood or integrating green spaces or creating some commercial uses and and VISA and things like that.

So that's why we wanted to highlight those project principles for each one of the stations because those are really the high-level ideas we heard from the community that they wanted that they thought were important here.

Uh, more than just kind of the images or just our presentation we're trying to use to show what that could look like, but it doesn't mean that that's what it's gonna look like at the end.

So I have another question then.

One of the comments was about the 2019 transportation plan that it would be implemented by 2025.

I'm not aware of that transportation plan.

I don't know what it entails.

Does anybody know?

Staff Brian?

That's our current master plan that we have for the citywide improvements based on growth and based on um current deficiencies within our system.

Uh-huh.

Um, a lot of those are long range projections, and we classify those in typically a short-term, medium-term, and long-term.

And as you know, with a lot of high dollar value improvements, five years could end up being 15 or 20 years, and 10 years could end up being 50 years again.

And so that sometimes they just get pushed out as funding becomes available, then we try and do these projects.

Currently, we're doing 138th, that's master planned improvement.

And so you can kind of see that 138 took a lot of years to get to the point where we are today.

And in historically, we've done third east in portions, we've done 13th east in portions uh on the horizons, Fort Street.

Um, we're looking at trying to improve pioneer.

So there's a lot of roads that we try and address in our master plan, and the priorities are kind of put by the city council.

So, how do you think, Brian?

How do you think this will this concept will um jive with our transportation master plan in this area?

I am worried about all of the the neighborhoods versus um heavy traffic because of retail, because of the station, because of the schools.

Um, will we be able to protect or have a safe, you know, a safe area for people to drive and not run over children because they're you know active there.

At the time of our master plan, we didn't anticipate the state law requiring the increased density at these transit stations.

So I imagine that once we have an idea of what will be included in the transit stations, we'll have to go back in and modify our master plan and project again what if future improvements will be needed on each of the major streets in the area and what what traffic we might anticipate from these increased densities and how we'll address that and mitigate any issues with that, such as you know, crossings or pedestrian safety projects or you know, traffic calming, those sorts of things.

So, where's the park that that uh the comment was addressing?

Is it Galena?

Is it gleaning?

Galena Park to the north.

Okay, just all the football, all the little little league football games, soccer games, all that stuff.

And it is, I mean, it's been a while since my kids have been doing that, but it's a it's sketchy.

I mean, you've got uh cars parked on both sides of that road.

I don't know if maybe now they've got you know no parking on one side, but imagine it's the same thing we get on uh well well down by Smithfield Park when they do soccer or football or even the farmers market there.

I mean, that is just uh you gotta just as a uh knowing the area you just drive two miles an hour because there's kids darting across.

You've got cars parked on both sides and then kids just darting out from cars.

It's like a video game in a bad way.

It's like a it really can be a horror show and a scary place to drive through.

And uh a lighting, uh I think Alina, you know, as it starts to get dark, uh some of those sports stop, right?

As it gets dark earlier.

But yeah, those are those are uh galena's an interesting one because it affects this plan because it is a huge huge uh you know, volume street that all of a sudden just screeches down into the into Galena Park.

And so that uh with what we're talking about tonight, that's probably the the that's a that's a good takeaway just to see if there's even any mitigation we can do on that that has nothing to do with this.

So well, as we will evaluate um site plans as developers come in and do these these this area, we'll uh we'll consider that and we'll watch for it.

And we'll hope our mass we can um change our master plan to accommodate and be safe.

So it's not like this is the end, right?

We're gonna think through things.

Well, what I like is that if anything, it opens up the your the the mindset to the density that could be allowed here.

I mean, everyone is against high density, right?

You hear high density and you instantly clinch up and say, not in my town, and these areas are are the areas that that you know if it's done right and done well and planned out on the three-year plan, right, Susan.

Everything's better after three years.

So you do the three-year plan.

I mean, you know, we've got a big head start on this.

So again, a lot of this stuff was input from the community.

Everybody wants green space, everybody wants parks, everyone wants links to trails.

Those don't make any money, they cost money.

So when you go to a developer or landowner and say, hey, well, can we just turn out your place in a nice new park here and have you pay for it?

The answer is usually no.

So, but I like it.

I mean, it's nice to see all this green space and open space, and um it's a good idea of what we could ask for.

And if a developer wants to, you know, if they can they can make it pencil out and make it nice.

Here's a template for developers and property owners as they make improvements, they can add the things that our community wants, and our communities ask for.

That's right.

So that's what I see that we've gained from.

The developer wants to do that.

If they want to do it, hey, if you want to if you can afford to do it, if they can afford to do it.

You want to do it?

This is a great way to do it.

Yep.

Uh, and you know, there's been a lot of resources that have been put in this because the state has demanded it or required it, I should say.

They don't demand much, they just ask and we say yes.

Yeah, they ask right the answer.

They ask nicely and we say yes nicely.

Like on it's the law.

It's yeah, I think that that's key.

Yeah, it's the law.

In 2019, we weren't mandated.

I'm gonna use that word man.

Yeah, so to have a plan.

Yeah, so now that this is nice, and and I really do welcome the public input.

So thank you for that for the kids and the traffic, and it makes us aware.

Everyone listening, this is all recorded, it's all in the records, and so keep squeaking that wheel, and let's see if we can get some of that stuff addressed.

Um, all right, commissioners, let's get we've got um a positive or negative recommendation to send forward with this.

If now's the time, let's do it.

I'm ready.

Go ahead, Shabom.

First of all, I think thank you to staff, consultants.

This has taken a lot of time and effort.

It's not easy to come in to a city and design a master plan based on concepts and ideas and surveys.

So thank you for giving us an idea and giving us uh a roadmap.

I recommend that we we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the Draper Front Runner Vista, Kimball's Lane, and Crescent View Station Area Plans, General Plan Amendment as requested by Draper City application number 2025-0195-TA based on the following findings for approval and the criteria for adaptation as listed in the staff report dated August 14th, 2025.

Thanks, Shabam.

Who will second that motion for a positive recommendation?

Um I'll second, and I'd like to add the well, I can't add anything if I second, can I?

Uh we can we can cancel the motion and or just ask Shabam to amend it and then second it.

Or Chavam, will you read the findings for approval that's listed under the motion, please?

Happy to findings for approval, number one.

A public hearing before the planning commission was held in accordance with Utah State Code Section 10-9A-404.

Number two, the general plan amendment is consistent with the requirements of Utah State Code and is appropriate.

Thank you.

And I second.

Perfect.

Well done, you two.

All right, let's go ahead and put that to a vote then.

This is for a positive recommendation moving forward to the city council.

Uh Shivam, how do you vote?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And Laura.

Yes.

All right.

Okay, thank you all for attending, and thank you so much for staying until the very end of that meeting.

We're sorry that we put that on the on the end.

I'm sure that was because of the consultant schedule or or presenters, but thank you for staying late with us.

All right, do we see anything else on our uh agenda tonight?

Just one quick announcement.

Um we do have the local chapter of the American Planning Association fall conference coming up October 9th and 10th.

If there are any of you that might be interested in attending, I either Jennifer, myself, or Lori know, and we can uh work out uh registration for that.

Where is it, please, Todd?

So it will be held in Salt Lake City at the depot and the megaplex theater there this year.

Up at the gateway on October 9th.

Yeah, what was that?

Don't we have that in commission on the day?

Yeah.

That stuff's during the day.

Okay, so they're daytime.

Thank you.

Can you send us an email on that on that?

You would like to email some out of the way.

Well just with a link or whatever.

I don't know.

Who knows?

We'll get home and forget and go.

Oh, I missed.

I meant to call it to say yes or whatever.

Thank you.

Would you send me a calendar invite?

Is that what you said?

Yeah, there we can send some more information.

Okay, please.

Thank you.

Yeah.

All right.

And then go ahead, Lisa.

And then that we adjourn.

Adjourn.

I know I was like, I'm gonna say it ready.

Okay.

Wow, I think it over.

I was trying to move.

You know what?

You're the one person we're gonna let get away with.

Yeah.

Thanks for adding that.

That was really good.

Andrew, well, well, hey, Andrew.

Andrew does such a good job.

Thank you.

If I run it, you guys how much you sound both like we have here.

I don't know how she points and I already see.