I'd like to welcome you all to the Draper City Planning Commission tonight.

It's um Thursday, October 23rd, 2025 at 6 30 p.m.

My name's Lisa Fowler.

I'm the vice chair of the planning commission.

Our chair is absent tonight, so I'm filling in.

Um because there's only five of us up here, and I am a voting member.

I will also be voting.

Um participating.

We'd like to thank the planning commissioners for all being here tonight for your volunteer work.

Um thank you to the city staff for preparing our agenda and all the reports that we'll we've reviewed, and um for being here with us.

Um also like to thank the public for and applicants for joining us tonight, and we look forward to hearing your comments.

Um before we begin, just to note notice that the last two items are continued to late future meetings.

So the plumber zoning map amendment request and the FETSER land use and zoning map amendment requests are both continued.

So if you're here for those items, um we're not going to be hearing them tonight.

Okay, um, the first item on our agenda tonight is an action item to approve the planning commission meeting minutes for September 25th, 2025.

Commissioners, do I have a motion or um questions about that?

I'll make a motion, Susan.

I move to approve the minutes of September 25th, 2025.

All two and a half pages of them as submitted.

So thank you.

Do we have a second?

Oh second.

Thanks, Mary.

Let's put it to a vote.

Susan, yes.

And Mary?

Yes.

Lara?

Yes.

Christine?

Yes.

And myself, I'm Lisa, yes.

Okay.

Item one B is a public hearing for the Pond Lane Platte amendment request on the request of Garrett Daw, representing Trent and Candice Iyer for a plat amendment on point five four acres of property located at 291 East Pond Lane in the RA2, which is residential agricultural zone.

Application 2025-0082-SUB.

Todd Draper's our staff contact.

So Todd, go ahead and give us your presentation.

All right.

Uh and I'm filling in for Jennifer tonight.

Uh this was her application, and she's not in the office.

So this is the vicinity map.

Uh, and you can see here uh location of the property, uh, pond lane and over uh just off of third east.

Here's the aerial.

You can see the subdivision uh with the three lots here and the three existing homes.

The land use is residential medium density, and the zoning is RA2.

This is the existing recorded subdivision.

Uh, this is a little bit of a different uh situation here.

Uh with this subdivision, there were setbacks recorded, and uh there was a settlement agreement uh that was recently amended.

Uh I'm trying to remember a couple weeks ago with the council, and I believe it's been included with the packet.

Um what they're seeking to do this time.

The settlement agreement's been approved and signed, and now we're looking to just make an amendment to the plat to amend the the uh setbacks for this side yard uh on plot two.

And then this is what that amendment would look like.

Really, it's just changing that piece, and this is the existing home.

And you can kind of see their their amendment is so that they can do an addition out to the side in this area.

With that, are there any other questions you might have for me?

No questions.

Okay, we'll invite the applicant to come up.

Is anyone here?

Yes.

Will you please state your name and then share with with us what you'd like to share?

Yeah, my name's Trent Iyer, live at 291 East Pond Lane.

Um, I really don't have much to say other than we're asking for this plat amendment and switching that setback from 20 feet to 12 feet, which stays within city code.

And I mean, it's pretty simple.

So I don't know.

I don't know if I need to add anything else to that.

Anyone have questions for Trent?

Oh, okay.

If we need to call you back up, we will.

Okay, thank you.

So this is a public hearing.

Um, so we'll be opening our meeting to public comment in a minute.

Um because it's the first one of the night.

I just want to let the community know that if you want to make comments, um, you're welcome to come up, just state your name, um, share your comment.

There's a timer here for three minutes.

Um, so limit your comment to three minutes, and um we won't be having a conversation with you as you make your comment, but we will take notes and then we'll discuss and also have the applicant and the city count city staff um answer question any questions you might have had uh when you were making your comment.

But again, it's not a discussion, we'll just take notes.

So okay, we'll open this um up to a public comment.

Is anybody like to make a comment about this item?

My name's Art Johnson.

The property uh that I own is lot number one, and uh the setback, not a problem at all.

I've signed that off and and uh it's okay with me.

I don't have any problem.

That's the only property line that the intersects that that would have any problems with this uh plan.

So thank you.

Okay, thanks.

Anyone else like to make a comment?

Okay, commissioners.

Um we'll close the public hearing then and uh commissioners.

Any discussion about this item?

No.

Do we have a motion?

I think it looks good and and especially since the agreement's already been approved.

This kind of seems almost redundant, but but official, but official, yes, true.

But no, I think it's a good proposal.

I don't have any issues.

Okay, do you want to make a motion, Susan?

Or sure, then go ahead.

Give me a sec here.

Let's see.

I move that we approve the plat amendment as requested by Garrett Daw representing uh Trent and Canis IR for Pond Main Plat Amendment, application 2025-0082-SUB, based on the following findings for approval and subject to the requirements listed in the staff report dated October 9th, 2025, and the findings for approval is that there is good cause for the vacation or amendment, and no public street or municipal utilities has been vacated or amended.

Thanks, Susan.

Um, do we have a second?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura.

Okay, we'll put it to a vote.

Susan, yes.

Lara?

Yes, Christine?

Yes.

And Mary?

Yes.

And I'm Lisa, and I also vote yes.

So congrats on that.

We move forward.

Okay.

Our next item is a public hearing for specialized manufacturing site plan, conditional use permit, and deviation requests.

Um this is a request of Robert Simons site plan, conditional use permit and deviation request for construction of a new commercial building for limited manufacturing and limited wholesale and warehousing uses on approximately 4.2 acres, located at approximately 687 west, 123rd South, sorry, 1230 South, known as applications 2025-0123-spenty five-0079-USE, and 2025-0219 V A R.

Todd is our contact, so go ahead, Todd.

Thank you.

So this is uh three applications kind of all together.

Uh as uh you noticed it's a site plan application, a conditional use permit for a couple of uses uh that were conditional in that zone, and then uh some parking DV parking deviation request.

So this is the vicinity map.

Uh it's out here on uh 123rd uh south as you're kind of leaving town and going over to Riverton.

Um this is the aerial map.

Uh you'll probably remember we did the uh took the rezone to the city council a little while ago to to take care of the little corner here, so it's now all uh zoned the same.

Uh this is the land use map.

It is community commercial, thanks to those uh land use map and zone changes, and the zone is CG or general commercial.

This is the site plan.

Uh building will be centrally located.

There'll be a shared entrance with the property to the east.

Uh car rental, I believe, and then another uh exit out onto exit and entry right in right out over uh on the west side.

Uh you'll note in the staff report that one of the conditions is that they get the final U dot approval.

We're pretty sure that will happen.

Uh if it hasn't already, um Brian might be able to speak to that.

Um but as part of that UDOT, I believe is requiring that they extend this portion of uh that uh median out in the road.

The parking spaces are kind of evenly distributed around the building, um, and then freight uh will be essentially directed to come in the shared access and is immediately routed towards the back.

There are a few smaller doors here for say box trucks, things like that, and then larger trucks can pull around the back if they need to unload into the docks that are located there.

This is the landscape plan, at least the colorized version of it.

Um just noting in there, there's uh uh condition also included the use of grass is a little bit too high, and so uh we're just looking tonight.

If you do approve it, include the condition that uh they make those modifications, or you they just need to reduce the grass up the number of plants and the and the landscape coverage, but there's no real change to the the actual locations where the landscaping is that's needed.

These are the elevations that they do comply with the materials.

This will be an architectural precast tilt-up concrete, it'll be colored.

Uh, it will have the scoring and additional architectural details that we would require.

Uh the height uh is a little bit close, but it is uh within limits of I believe it was uh 35 feet, and then they do have the additional mechanical screening on the roof.

You'll notice it's here on the north side of the building.

This is looking into the property, obviously.

This is the west, and then as you might have noticed from that uh overhead, uh this kind of dips away, so that's kind of why it's a little uh lightened and grade scaled out there.

Same here on that southwest corner of the building, and then south of the building, east elevation, and then even though they're not required, they did provide uh kind of a three-dimensional view so that you can help kind of orient yourself.

This is uh looking kind of to the north or looking to the southeast from the northwest corner.

So this would be kind of the main entrance.

Uh colors materials again.

Uh, some of the other ones will be some of the uh the ACM panels uh in some different colors, and then just some of the different coloring for the actual concrete that will be uh cast, and then again, just with the the dumpster will be kind of a similar uh precast panel.

Uh it'll be painted to match the building.

This is the floor plan initially.

Specialized manufacturing will be on this half.

Uh the idea is that over time they could expand, uh, but that is why they wanted kind of both of these conditional uses.

Uh they may have uh tenant lined up to to lease the other areas or tenants.

Uh they might be able to speak more to that.

And then again, there'll be some second floor mezzanine space, and that's also been included in our parking calculations.

Design of the trash enclosure, design of the fencing they'll be required.

Uh we kind of slide back to the maybe the landscape plan.

Um six-foot fence would be required as part of uh the land use buffer on the western side, on the southern side for this portion right here where the parking is a little bit closer.

It actually would need to go to the eight-foot uh height so that they can have a 10-foot buffer instead of the 20.

This is of course uh city park just to the south.

So that will help with the screening there.

As far as the condition use permit is concerned, it's looking for these two uses which are conditional.

One is uh limited manufacturing, and that's simply one that's basically completely enclosed building, doesn't have any of that outside noise odor vibration.

The other is limited uh wholesale and warehousing.

This would be uh warehousing and and that's all taking place inside the building.

Um outside storage, so that's kind of what differentiates it from just your standard warehousing.

Parking deviation, the study was provided.

They are requesting increase in the number of stalls from the 94 that would be the maximum allowed under the natural deviation to 135, and the study uh staff concluded was a valid study.

This is a site photo.

You've probably seen it a few times now.

Uh also to just kind of point out another piece of the staff report there.

There is this overhead power line.

They are working with Rocky Mountain Power as part of the plan to bring the power they will need to the building and to actually kind of get rid of that.

It really only served the property here.

Um the issue is right now some of the the street trees they proposed are not of the from the list that's allowed under uh the power line, and so we've just included as a condition that if indeed uh they're able to remove it, trees are fine if they're not, but then they would just replace those with uh species from the tree list that's allowed.

Um I think that's everything I had.

Are there any questions you have that I can help answer?

Just a quick question.

You said that it's they have too much grass, but is it is it turf or grass or both?

It's we use it kind of the same, it's turf, it's too much too much turf grass.

Um it's a little bit too high.

There's the limit on 20% of the overall landscaped area.

Okay.

Um what the actual percentage was, it was just a little bit high.

So they just need to reduce that and and basically put in a planting bed instead.

And and then the other thing was they were a little bit short on the coverage rate with the plants.

Um, really close though.

We require the 75% coverage of maturity, the calculated uh rate with what they had right now is at about 68%.

Um so it was just a few more plants uh that needed to go in.

Uh, and then obviously if they're taking the turf replacing with the other, uh, they should be pretty good to just do that without any need to change the amount of landscaping on the site or that area amount.

All right.

Any other questions?

Okay, why don't we call up the applicant?

Um, please state your name first and tell us tell us what you'd like to share.

So my name's Bob Simons, and this is uh our project.

So just a little history.

We started this business 30 years ago here in Draper.

This will be our fourth location in Draper, and we've continued to expand.

This will be almost an 80,000 foot building, then and we'll have uh you know somewhere around a hundred or so employees.

So we we we've been in Draper, we want to be in Draper, we want to continue to be here if we can, and and hopefully this all works well.

So we're excited about this project.

Um we're currently on Minuteman over by Chico's auto, which is another building we own that uh we'll move out of.

And so, anyways, we're excited about this.

Hopefully, we can keep this moving so we can start moving some dirt and build a building.

So thank you for your time.

Any questions for me?

I like the built-in growth plan.

Yeah, like this building.

Yeah, we started with three people, and now we're at about almost 80, and so we continue to grow.

So we like you said, we've been here, we want to be here.

We live here, so hopefully you'll keep us moving.

So we'll go ahead, Susan.

Oh, did you say that you had a hundred employees?

Oh, we expect no, we're about 70, not quite 80, but we we plan to expand uh as we get into more space.

So the uh requested increased parking, is that due mainly because of the employees or just anticipating?

Yeah, we're just anticipating.

We seem to run out of power and parking in the last locations we've had, so we're just trying to kind of play the odds in our favor.

Oh, that okay.

It's interesting because I read through the uh parking analysis, which is uncommon to be requesting more and significantly more, but it already justified it makes sense.

So thanks for including that.

I appreciate that.

And we're sorry we have too much grass.

It doesn't seem like that should be a problem, but anyways, it's all good.

So you don't mind removing some of the grass?

Uh no, whatever.

Yeah, I mean, it seems like grass is a good thing, but we're happy to meet whatever you need us to do in some respects.

So great.

Any other questions?

No, okay, thanks.

We might call you back up.

We'll see how it goes.

All right.

Um we'll open up to public comment now.

Remember, we've got the timer here.

So if anyone would like to uh make a comment, please come on up.

Hi, my name is Mason Chavez.

I'm one of the architects working on the project.

Um, it's been great to work with Bob and Robbie on this and kind of their local draper history.

Um I just kind of wanted to respond to a few of the comments that Todd made.

Um we've been working close with Todd and Jennifer throughout this process to make sure we're compliant.

And like the comments that he brought up are accurate.

We you know that site plan, it did have a little too much grass or some of these issues that came up, but we already have addressed those and re-applied to the city, even though we knew we were on this planning commission.

We wanted to make sure we were doing our part and making sure we apply uh or comply.

So just want to let you guys know.

We've we've tried to do our best to make sure that happens, and I know they're very excited to have their business to continue here in Draper, and we're excited to be a part of the process as well.

Thanks.

Anyone else?

All right, we'll close the public hearing portion.

And um, commissioners, do you have questions for staff or the applicant or some discussion?

Any discussion?

I love the request for more parking.

Most of our applicants are gonna run out of parking.

We feel like parking is an issue, right?

We want more parking always.

So you want to make a motion, anyone?

I'll make a motion.

It looks like we've got several that we need to address.

Go ahead, Mary Mary.

Start with uh parking since we all love it so much.

Good.

I move that we approve the parking deviation as requested by Robert Simons representing Concord properties.

Application 2025-0219-VAR based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated October 16, 2025.

Great.

Do we have a second for that motion?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura.

Okay, we'll vote.

Uh Mary, yes.

And Laura?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Christine?

Yes.

And I'm Lisa, and I also vote yes.

So great.

Let's move on to the next.

Uh the next one is the site plan.

Um, we need a motion, please.

So is this where we need to modify the landscaping in this?

It that is already included as one of the recommended conditions.

So I don't know that there's anything that you need to modify unless you want to.

Oh, there it is.

All right, thank you.

Sorry, missed that.

I'll make a motion.

Okay, Susan.

I move that we approve the site plan as requested by Robert Simons representing Concord properties for the specialized manufacturing site.

Application 2025-0123-sp based on the findings of approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report gated October 16, 2025.

And I think the conditions covered the issues that we talked about.

So whether they've complied already or not, they will have to be taken care of.

So I'm comfortable with that.

Great, Susan, thank you.

And uh second, please.

I'll second.

Thanks, Christine.

All right, Susan, how do you vote?

Yes.

And Christine?

Yes.

And Laura?

Yes.

And Mary.

Yes.

And I also vote yes, I'm Lisa.

Okay.

Looks like we've got um one more.

It's the conditional use permit.

I'll make that motion.

Okay, thank you.

Um, I didn't see any issues that needed to be mitigated in these, so it looks like we probably have a clear path for approval.

I move that we approve the conditional use permit as requested by Robert Simons representing Concord properties for the limited manufacturing and limited wholesale and wholesale and warehousing uses.

Application 2025-0079-USE based on the findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated October 16th, 2025.

Great.

Do we have a second?

Thanks, Laura.

Okay, we'll vote.

Um, Mary, yes.

And Laura?

Yes.

Christine?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

And I'm Lisa, and I also vote yes.

So thanks for coming and doing it right.

We look forward to watching that building grow up from the ground.

All right.

The next application is um also a public hearing.

So it's premier engraving and awards, home occupational condition conditional use permit on the request of Chloe Wardle.

Um representing premier engraving and awards, a home occupational condition use conditional use permit to operate a cottage business for approximately 0.5 acres located at approximately 201 east, 13560 south, known as application 2025-0173-USE.

And our staff contact is Nick Whitaker.

Go ahead, Nick.

Thank you.

Yeah, so this is the premier engraving and awards home occupation conditional use permit request.

Here's the vicinity map of the property right here.

This red square is the subject property.

An aerial map of the property here.

And the zoning map, it's RA2.

So an overview of what's being asked is uh the applicant is seeking a home occupation conditional use permit to operate a cottage business, which provides custom engraving and creates small custom awards and gifts that are sold online.

Um city municipal code would consider this a cottage business per the definition listed here.

Here is a site plan offered by the applicant.

Um provided by the applicant, rather.

Um there are no customers that come to the home.

They do not uh use any business vehicles, it's all contained within the home.

Here's the floor plan.

Um they utilize two spaces in the home.

Um one is an office area.

Um that has a couple of computers and some storage space, and then another is in the garage.

Um that's where three engraving machines are, two UV printers, and four computers.

Oh I always get this mouse type.

I'm cursed.

So frustrating.

Okay.

Thanks.

Keep going.

Okay.

Um so the identified potential impacts are the potential for loud noises and traffic generated by customers.

However, these are um the proposed mitigation is that all engraving and assembly of the custom gifts, uh gift items shall be confined to the areas indicated in the report, and as shown on uh the approved site plans.

Um no customers come to the home.

Um all requirements uh all requirements of the Draper City Engineering, Public Works, Building, Planning, and Fire Division shall be satisfied, and the applicant shall maintain an active business license for as long as the business is in operation from the residents.

Here's a picture of the exterior.

And any questions or comments?

Any questions for Nick?

No.

I I have a question.

So obviously the customer traffic won't be an issue because customers aren't coming to the house, but the um the noise issue.

What kind of equipment will be utilized?

I mean, I saw computers and engraving machines.

So are they is that sound that will be heard outside the home?

According to the to the um application submittals by the applicant to uh they mentioned that they do not make uh discernible noise.

Um the applicant is here tonight though, if if we need to ask more questions regarding that.

Okay, great.

Any other questions for Nick?

Let's invite the applicant up then.

Come on, share about share so share a little bit about your business.

My name is Chloe Wardle.

Um my husband and I just purchased this business.

The previous owners ran it out of their home located in Taylorsville for 35 years with no complaints.

So the equipment, um, we have three engraving machines and two UV printers.

Um it's very minimal.

The UV printers do use um like air suction to hold it, but it's all like contained within a room.

So even in our home, if we're working in the garage, it's not something that you can hear um even throughout the house or outside.

So no noise will be outside of the home.

What about um mail or delivery as you your your it's an online business?

So do you take your product and and mail it somewhere else, or will uh like a UPS truck come by?

Nope, we've been taking all of our mail to um the Draper post office and dropping it off there, so we're not doing any um outbound mail outside of our home.

Um very minimal for supplies.

Um we'll have that, but for the most part, that's maybe one or two, but contained to like normal UPS shipping, nothing that's gonna be like a large freight over um I think is it like 10 feet?

I think that it has to go up to freight.

We don't have any products that are that large.

Okay, so it's like an Amazon package.

Yes.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thanks.

Any other questions for Chloe?

All right, we'll have you sit down and we'll open it up to the public.

Okay, we'll do our public portion, our public hearing portion of this application.

Um again, we've got our timer, so if anyone would like to come up and comment, please please do so.

I don't see any um takers, so we'll close the public portion of our meet of our hearing of our meeting and um commissioners.

Any discussion?

What do you think?

I think it's uh as long as it's not as loud as a leaf blower, like if I it's it sounds like it's not.

Leaf blowers are the worst, especially on Saturday morning at too early.

Yes.

All right.

Well, do I have a motion then?

Anyone want to make a motion?

I'll make a motion.

Thanks, Laura.

I move we approve the home occupational conditional use permit as requested by Chloe Wardle representing premier engraving and awards known as application 2025-0173-use based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditional conditions listed in the staff report.

The proposal complies with the standards for approval found in DMCMC section nine.

Potential negative impacts are mitigated through the imposition of reasonable condition.

Right.

Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Okay, Susan, thanks.

We'll put it to a vote.

Laura, how do you vote?

Yes.

Susan?

Yes.

Mary?

Yes.

And Laura, uh, Christine.

Yes, sorry.

And I'm Lisa, and I also vote yes.

So good luck with that.

Sounds sounds like a great great idea for your space.

All right.

Um, next up, we have our last application for the evening.

This is Eagle Crest number three at Suncrest Subdivision Platte Amendment request um by John and Krista LaBaren on.83 acres of property located at 15641 South, winged Trace Court in R R 22, which is a rural residential zone.

The Sun Craft Suncrest and the Suncrest Development Agreement, Suncrest Development Agreement, known as application 2025-0056 SUB.

Our staff contact is Nick.

So go ahead, Nick.

Tell us tell us what we need to know.

Thank you.

So yes, this is the Eagle Crest number three at Suncrest subdivision plat amendment request.

Here is the vicinity map.

And of course, the property is here.

The red aerial map of the property.

Um it's very rural beyond the property lines.

So here's the project summary.

It's a proposed adjustment of the area of non-disturbance located on the subject property.

The adjustment to the area of non-disturbance is to allow for more developable space on the property.

Um as required a geotechnical study was conducted at the subject property.

The report concludes that the proposed non-disturbance area can support development so long as the structures built in that area follow the stipulations listed in the geotechnical report.

Here's a site plan.

So if you look at this red line, well, first let's uh find this kind of lavender line here.

This is the original non-disturbance area.

This is the boundary.

Uh the applicant is proposing to uh to uh change that non-disturbance area um to this uh as is shown here uh with the red lines.

I would go down this way and this area here is not yet developed.

Um that this is what they're hoping to develop by uh changing this.

But it uh goes down and follows through over to the edge of the property here.

So it doesn't remove the uh non-disturbance area, but it does uh uh push it back a little bit.

So here's the current subdivision plat.

Here's their property down here, and here is the non-disturbance area as shown on the original subdivision plat.

I should mention there there has not been an amendment to Eagle Crest number three at Suncrest uh to date.

And here is the uh a copy of the proposed plat amendment.

Um boundary lines are being changed.

Um it's all uh the non-disturbance area that is being changed, and that is uh my presentation.

Any questions or comments?

Nick, did you measure how much area is the difference?

I mean um from one map to the other.

Maybe yeah.

Let's see, I think how much is being removed from non-disturbance.

I believe I have that in my report.

Um let me see here.

Let's see.

So the non-disturbance area of the subject property is approximately 0.54 acres.

Um the uh the total acreage of the property is 0.83 acres, so it's a significant amount of the property is the non-disturbance area.

Um that I'm sorry, that's um existing.

Um what's proposed?

You know, I didn't I didn't add that into the report, the difference.

Um, but I can pull this up here so you can see this again.

Again, the uh uh the lavender line here is the original, and this is what's being changed.

Maybe an eighth.

Yeah, it's quite a bit.

Can you show us the map, please?

That shows the um how the just non-disturbance area continues from one lot to the other.

I'm sorry, one second.

I'm sorry, what was that?

What was the request?

Um, there was a it was maybe your second to last slide.

How the non-disturbance, no, the one before this one.

There we go.

Um so the current, I'm just looking how it goes from how it flows from one lot to the next, and that that connection line on our right, yeah, right where your arrow is.

Those connection lines don't change, it's just the curve of the line that changes.

That's correct, yes.

I had a question.

There was a comment um or a condition of approval as long as it complies with a geotechnical report.

Then you know, to approve that's a condition of approval.

But my question is says this city engineer since he's here.

Um I'm sure at some point in time he reviews this.

My question is is have they had the opportunity to record review that at this point?

Yes, I have reviewed the geotechnical report, and we were reviewing this to verify there was no issues with pulling the non-disturbance back towards the lot lines.

We didn't find any.

There's conditions in there for construction of the building, but we don't see any issues with with the removal of this area of the non-disturbance.

Okay, thank you.

So this was more of a limitation on development than it was a geotechnical issue.

Is that my interpretation would be it was more of an area trying to protect the natural landscaping or natural feel of the the area to mitigate some of the development impacts rather than a restriction due to some geologic or or other issue.

Okay, wildlife or something I I'd like to uh point out too I found um that the uh proposed uh it was so that what they they would be removing uh 1,641 square feet of the non-disturbance area on the aerial, it looks like something's already built there.

Is this something already built there?

Uh on uh this area here.

Yeah, um there is not so there's proposed structures that uh to be built.

I believe there is a garden bed in this area though.

And and I can maybe answer that a little bit too.

The uh the uh property owners actually disturbed that before they knew there was non-disturbance.

So we've this is also to kind of correct some of that.

Uh but they are mainly doing this to uh be allowed to do some future construction expansion of the home.

This will also bring um so as you can see here, there are these retaining walls that existed um that were built in the non-disturbance area.

This would actually correct that.

Um pulling them out of that non-disturbance area.

I'd like to see the neighborhood map again, please.

Yes, that one.

Um my question or my concern I'd like to talk about with you all commissioners, is um this sets of precedents, right?

If we allow our um a change to the non-disturbance area of this lot, what will we what will others come and ask for?

Um or who else will just build something and then they go.

I don't know.

I didn't know about that.

I'm worried about that too.

Um it does seem like they have the most non-disturbance area on their lot, but it is a big lot.

5.39.

Maybe the others aren't too far off.

They're all 5.3 something.

I don't have an issue with it as long as it can be mitigated by you know do you want to put the geotech report calls for them to do?

I think they ought to be able to utilize the property as much as possible as long as they build it correctly and comply.

So it's good for them.

So it feels safe.

Yeah.

Yeah, I think so.

Well, and the square footage increase seemed pretty minimal.

I think 16 something hundred square feet.

So we're not talking about a significant reduction in the non-disturbance area either.

Yeah, in proportion to how big the lot is and and the non-disturbance area.

So yeah.

All right, well, maybe we should hear from the applicant.

Nick, does anything else you wanted to add?

Well, I um I just like to add a comment too that um given the concern of uh anybody just coming in to you know uh remove the non-disturbance area.

There is a procedure that they would still have to follow, which does require a geotechnical report.

So that the city um I mean we we do review the geotechnical report before we'd ever make a recommendation or uh or or I'm sorry, not recommendation, but take anybody to see the planning commission.

Right.

So they'd have to go through that process, of course.

Yeah.

All right.

Well, let's call the applicant up.

Um do either of you want to come up and share anything.

Or both of you.

No, I wasn't.

Sorry, I lost.

I lost my voice.

Oh no, I'm gonna speak.

Okay, what's your name?

Okay, my name's John LeBaron.

I'm one of the homeowners.

Uh my wife, Krista is the other homeowner.

And uh we've lived here 10 years, and uh we love it up in Suncrest.

Uh we built that little garden uh on the side, but it's really snowy and windy up there, not really conducive, and so we like to be able to have uh uh a greenhouse uh that we can plant more stuff inside.

So yeah, it's been a long it's we've been on this process about 18 months uh to go through all the different approvals, but uh we would love to use more of the land as you can see, and uh but we want to keep a lot of it as uh as is right now too.

There's there's uh really beautiful scenes up there too.

So anything you want to add?

Okay, all right.

Any questions for the applicants?

Torture M.

Yeah, no, no, I have no questions.

Well, when you when you bought the house, was it never specified that there was a non-development like area that you couldn't alter?

Yeah, there we we did know we could see it on the plaque.

Okay.

Uh quite frankly, if you looked at the satellite imagery, there are other people that have kind of disturbed that area.

We didn't I think we thought it was a non-disturbance from the HOA, not from the city of Draper.

That was our mistake.

Oh so we got we talked to the HOA when we built the um outdoor garden, but I don't think they knew that they shouldn't be granting any, they don't have permission to grant approval on that.

Uh so yeah, we've been working closely with Nick and Todd for a long time to try to um see what this could if we could use some more of the land, but yeah, we did know about the limit of disturbance.

Yeah, okay.

And were the retaining walls there already when you bought the house?

Or no, you built those.

Yeah, and we I'm sorry, I did thought I thought our builder had gotten approval because I I remembered having to get approval for all of the uh retaining walls.

They're not very high.

Uh but anyway, I I think maybe just snuck it through or something like that.

So I I wasn't aware that those retaining walls were kind of like not conforming.

But I think it's actually just that last one down there, but uh but it's pretty steep on that side, so I think that's why they put it there.

Any other questions?

Okay, thanks.

Thanks for coming up, you two.

All right.

Um this is this is not a public hearing, so we won't open it up to public comment, but um so commissioners, we've already had a little bit of discussion.

Any other thoughts that you wanna um discuss I think ideally in these cases what we'd like to see is a trade.

So we're looking at an a swap of like the land that gets taken out of the non-disturbance and then some added back ends somewhere else.

I'm I'm not sure I do have a question about the lines because there are a couple of sets on the far side.

Um the come near each other that are all kind of the same line, the red line.

Do you want to do that?

So does it will you just draw it with a cursor?

Does it parallel the old line over on the other side?

Yeah, so I'll go over this and I I apologize.

It's it's hard to see it on the the projector here.

So um I'll go uh right now I'll trace the um the existing line.

So starting the property line here.

The existing one I can tell because it's a different color, but there are three sets of red lines all that intersect over on the other side.

Yeah, yeah.

So I just want to make sure I'm seeing the new line.

So then I will I'll do the same then for the pro uh the proposed line uh starting here at the property line.

It goes down and around around that garden structure up through here, and then it follows the retaining wall.

Okay to include that in follows the retaining wall, continues, and then it goes out.

It jogs up here to the other retaining wall on the uh adjacent property goes into this into their property and oh, sorry, my mouse went away.

And then it follows that wall to this property line here.

So is there a reason maybe the applicant or maybe the the one who can speak a little more loudly could answer why we didn't follow that line, the old line past the retaining wall that would have retained some square footage of the non-disturbance.

No, on the other side.

So after the ending of the retaining wall on the other side, it could have cut back.

And and I'm it's a little nitpicky, but I am you know obviously this is something that we have to look at, not encroaching too much on that.

And I'm just curious why it didn't go back to the original line at that point.

Are you thinking wetlands more than more so than non-disturbance?

No.

No, I'm just curious why more land was added to the buildable area with the new line right there.

Um I I don't know why it was drawn this way, however, I uh we did make the recommendation to the applicant to include the uh the existing um retaining walls in there in their uh amendment here.

Um after the retaining wall though, is the area I'm talking about.

Why it why it includes this area here?

Correct.

That way I I don't have an answer to that.

Um but uh the geotechnical report did not call out any issues with um with with having that.

Okay.

And and I can add a little bit to that as well.

They did uh give us an earlier uh version that did not include this wall that the neighborhood kind of built across the line, and we did ask them to include that wall in there as well.

So this is the drawing that came after that.

So that retaining wall is the neighbors and was built on over the property line.

Yes.

Okay.

Got it.

Makes sense.

That makes sense.

Yeah.

And I did pull more sense.

I did pull the uh the historic building reports on or the building um permits.

Um there were uh wall uh retaining laws on this that were permitted that in into the um non-disturbance area.

So that was an error.

Okay.

Any other thoughts or comments?

Any any uh motions commissioners?

Are you thinking do you want to talk about it some more?

Or I don't have a problem with that, I'll make a motion unless someone else go ahead, Susan.

Okay.

I move that we approve the subdivision plat amendment as requested by John and Kristen LeBaron at for lot 539 of the Equal Crest number three at Suncrest subdivision plat amendment application 2025-0056-sUB based on the following findings for approval and subject to the requirements as listed in the staff report dated October 8th, 2025.

And there's just the one finding for approval.

Do we have a second?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Lara.

We'll put it to a vote.

Susan, yes, and Lara, yes, and Mary, yes, and Christine, yes.

And I'm Lisa, and I also vote yes.

So good luck with that.

Okay.

Um that concludes the um items on our agenda.

Is there any other business?

I don't have any other business, just to report a couple of things that uh did uh recently happen.

Uh Wall Satch Front Regional Council today.

We got our stationary plans, the last three certified, so we are good.

All right, nice be uh Vista Crescent and Kimball's and then uh just report from the council meeting on Tuesday that uh additional uh zoning map amendment land use map amendment for uh uh Kimball's junction.

Uh the council did approve.

Okay.

So that was the little addition for edge homes there.

Yeah, yeah.

Thank you.

Thanks for letting us out.

Anything else?

No, okay.

Um do we have a motion?

I move we adjourn.

Okay, we adjourned love the capital.