All right, good evening.

Welcome to our November 13th Draper City Planning Commission meeting.

We appreciate all the staff and their preparations throughout the week and working with the applicants, uh getting this nice agenda and all our uh reports and our packets together.

Uh thanks to the applicants for meeting with us tonight and thanks to the commissioners up here for volunteering their time.

So let's go ahead and kick things off.

Couple quick changes to the agenda, not changes, but they're posted.

So you'll notice that the last two agenda items have been withdrawn.

Uh while one's been withdrawn, and the next one, that's uh one.

What is that?

Uh one L.

All right.

So that is the public hearing for Donald Tate home occupation conditional use permit, and then one M is in Mary, and that is public hearing cities initiated geological hazard zoning text amendment.

So that those two have been changed.

So if you've come here for those, you can take the night off, and like I always say, go back and see if you can get to the bottom of Netflix and finish it all.

So uh, but uh otherwise uh we welcome that you're here.

So let's go ahead and start with our first two three simple action items.

Uh the first one is just approving the planning commission meeting minutes for October 9th, 2025.

Any changes or amendments need to be made to that, or can we put a motion in to approve those?

I'll move to approve the um planning commission meeting minutes for October 9th, 2025.

Perfect.

Thanks, Lisa.

Who will second?

I'll second.

All right, thanks, Kendra.

Let's put it to a vote.

Lisa.

Yes.

Kendra.

Yes.

Laura.

Yes.

And Shabom.

Yes.

Awesome.

Next one.

Uh same thing, approve the planning commission meeting minutes for October 23rd, 2025.

I'll make a motion to approve the meeting minutes for October 23rd.

October 23rd, 2025.

Thanks, Kendra.

And who will second that?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura.

Okay, let's put it to a vote.

So, Kendra.

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Shavam.

Yes.

And Lisa.

Yes.

All right.

And see what we've got here.

Okay, so next we've got uh 2026 Draper City Planning Commission meeting schedule recommendation of the Draper City Council.

Now let's go ahead and take a look at this.

Looks real similar to this last year, just the dates are different.

So as you can see, there's just a couple of things that are changed there, other than the uh second and fourth Thursdays uh in July, looking to move that one back to the fifth Thursday to the 30th just because of Pioneer Day, and then keeping things similar here doing the second and third Thursdays in both November and December.

The other potential alternative would be to do a first and third, but that is not included in the proposal for the November-December dates.

So we've got some sample motions there.

And if anyone wants to look at the uh proposal, looks good to me.

Any objections?

I like the proposal.

You guys, any any comments?

Should I make a motion?

Yep.

Okay.

Um I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the 2026 planning commission meeting schedule as presented.

Perfect.

Who will second that?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura.

Okay, Lisa, how do you vote?

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Shabom?

Yes.

And Kendra.

Yes.

Okay, we'll see what the city council does with that.

Hopefully they'll be merciful to our schedules there.

That looks like a good one.

All right.

The next thing we've got here is the Corner Canyon Vista Amendment number six, subdivision plat amendment request.

It's on the request of Brett and Elizabeth Lewis for a subdivision plat amendment located at 1952 East, Gray Fox Drive on.34 acres of property.

It's in the RSD-2 Corner Canyon Vista Residential Special District Zone.

The application is known as the Corner Canyon Vista Amendment number six subdivision plat amendment.

Application 2025-0099-SUB.

And Nick Whitaker is our staff contact.

So go ahead, Nick.

Thank you.

So yes, this is the Corner Canyon Vista Amendment number six subdivision plat amendment request.

The lot has not yet been developed.

Here's land use map.

The land use is residential, low medium density.

That's a residential special district.

So the project summary is uh proposed adjustment of the non-disturbance area located on the subject property.

The adjustment to the area of non-disturbance is to allow for the development of a single family home.

Geotechnical study was conducted at the subject property.

The report concludes that the non-disturbance area has adequate stability and suitable buildable area with regards to geological hazards for the proposed development.

As this is the the uh sixth amendment, uh there have been five other amendments since its creation.

Here is the subject property.

Here is the non uh the boundary or the uh area of non-disturbance on the property.

Um just some numbers on that.

The property is um 0.34 acres in size, the uh non-disturbance area is 0.10, so nearly a third of the property is taken up by the non-disturbance area.

Um the applicant is uh requesting to remove this.

And this is uh the um proposed amendment or the proposed plat.

And that is um that's my presentation.

I have a question, Nick.

Sure.

Um a couple weeks ago, I can't remember which which day it was, um, which meeting it was.

We looked at a non-disturbance area.

Can you show me on the site map?

Um, like the first um uh one of your first slides, it showed that whole area.

Can you show me where that other plot wasn't that wasn't it suncrest or where is it?

It wasn't in the same um the the one from the prior meeting was not in the same uh um development.

Okay.

So but it looks like the other houses have complied with the the non-developable area.

Well, actually, so the um in fact the amendment number four and five of this uh uh subdivision was for the same reason to remove the area of non-disturbance.

Um those were approved.

It was lots 27 and 36.

Um and in the past it's always just been we've looked at it to say I mean if you notice one has a tennis court on there, they didn't just build a you know a foundation and a three-story garage or something like that, right?

These are structures that if that hill fails, them forbidden it's yeah, it's not a dwelling or it's not anything, and and that is good to point out, right?

And this is now number six of uh homeowners requesting to do something like that with their property.

It just doesn't seem fair because everybody else is built, and then these people waited longer not longer.

This applicant waited longer, and now they're you know wanting to increase the size of their pro the usable size of their property um if if there were an applicant that that uh or if if there's a property owner, the property owner that has a non-disturbance area in their property, even if it is already developed, they they are still eligible to submit an application for an amendment.

Yeah, it does require a geotechnical report.

I think I think it would be unfair to not be able to use your property.

There's that point too.

Yeah.

With the geotech report and structural I'm sure Brian and engineering is gonna look at it.

Yeah, that's why I say I mean these are case by case, right?

So that's I mean, again, tennis courts.

I think what's what is unfair is when we've had cases up there.

I mean, this was a lot.

Somebody I I don't know if they had a pool or something that was off into land that wasn't theirs.

And they were kind of kind of encroaching out past their property line.

Obviously, that's not that's not cool, but yeah.

So what is non-disturbance for?

Is it ecological?

I mean, or is it you know to preserve just uh f flora, or are we do we have endangered species up there?

What's going on?

Or why is what is the purpose of the non-disturbance?

I believe that the non-disturbance area for this particular area um was geological in nature, um, but they've since uh um determined with it with the uh the backing of a geological or a geotechnical study that it can be developed, um, but I I won't speak to the the specifics of that as I'm I'm not an engineer.

So they did do a geotech study.

They did.

They did.

Brian may be able to answer a little bit better on this one, why it's different than the other one you saw a couple weeks ago.

Um my understanding is most of this was fill from the development of the subdivision that was pushed into that area, and then the slopes that were created because of that.

So the geotech report has been done.

Uh shows that they can safely uh build in the area.

Uh and again, sometimes we get uh different measurement capabilities over the years, and so that 30% slope.

Uh my recollection on this one looked larger when the subdivision was done.

Uh more accurate measurements uh with today's instruments show that that's not really the case for majority of that area.

So, Brian, what about fill?

Is fill an issue though?

Because isn't Phil more unstable?

It depends on how the fill is placed.

Um back to this, I think there was some vegetation that was protected in some of these areas on slopes.

Um but yeah, the geotech report.

Um I didn't review this one specifically.

I had another engineer review it, but he didn't bring up any issues to me.

So as far as we're aware, there's not any issues with removing the non-disturb area.

And you trust the engineer.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thanks, guys.

I appreciate it.

Perfect.

So is the applicant here?

I mean, this is just an action item here, right?

This is yeah.

So uh is the applicant here?

Yeah, do you want to come on down, tell us you can add anything you like?

You come on down, just uh state your name.

We've got this awesome microphone down here.

Yeah, sorry, you're the first one of the night, so you didn't get to see this demoed.

We just come on down here and then you're an applicant, so the uh timer doesn't even count.

You can go as long as you like.

But just tell us anything you'd like to add.

Yeah, full speech.

But you could add anything you like that Nick maybe you wanted to add to what Nick mentioned, or tell us what you're planning.

Yeah, no problem.

And my husband has been working very closely with the engineer and then had a last minute emergency business trip.

But so this neighborhood is up by the Draper Temple, was developed in 2006 or so, and so um has the home surrounding what I was told, but I could be wrong, was again it was a vegetation issue with the non-disturbance, but we obviously wanted to make sure that it was very safe to build on that lot.

Um, my husband is hoping to we're hoping to extend a yard so we actually have yard space for our twins.

Um, and potentially a pool, but not like foundation or heavy house foot pool.

And um we had heard that many of the surrounding properties had removed their non-disturbance or had actually built over their non-disturbance without going through the correct measures.

So I don't know.

We would love to use that full third acre.

We've looked at that property for like 10 years, hoping we could get it.

So that's all I really have to add.

But thank you.

Perfect, thank you.

Any we might have some questions for you.

Any questions?

Lisa.

Okay, all right, great.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

And your husband owes you now for ditching you at the last minute.

That's on the record, so you can you can use that.

All right, so what do you guys think about this?

Again, uh, it was a good point brought up.

Uh a lot of folks have uh not a lot, but I'm sure there's been some in the past that have just you know gone and landscaped and didn't care, so it's nice to see an applicant come in and try to do it the right way.

Um I'd like to know what the vegetation was.

Do you guys remember?

Any of you?

Sagolily, maybe I I don't know what the vegetation was exactly.

We're trying to save the sagebrush.

Typically, vegetation has just been when there's existing.

What was that?

A lot of other uh subdivisions with with uh non-disturbance areas are usually based on the tree canopy.

And I'm not really seeing that here as much.

And sometimes Lisa, I mean I I would think that the so the geotech is gonna look at the slope as well, correct?

And they're gonna say, hey, look, if you want to backfill this, you can, or you're gonna going to need to, or whatever that geotech will will show.

So whatever they're whatever that whatever they want to do.

Yeah, one of us should stand up for the vegetation.

Yes.

I think I'm ready to make a motion.

Go ahead, Shabam.

I move that we approve the subdivision plat amendment as requested by Brett and Elizabeth Lewis for the Corner Canyon Vista Amendment Number Six, subdivision plat application 2025-0099-SUB, based on the following findings for approval and subject to the requirements as listed in the staff report dated November 3rd, 2021.

Perfect, thanks, Shabam.

And who will second that motion?

I'll second that.

Kendra.

Okay.

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

This is for approval.

Shabam?

Yes.

Kendra?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

And Laura.

Yes.

Okay, congrats on that.

Good luck.

Thank you.

All right.

So next we've got um item one E as an echo.

So this is a public hearing.

It's the Ozzy Shepherd LLC home occupation conditional use permit.

It's on behalf of Kim.

Mazucelli representing the Ozzy Shepherd LLC, a home occupation conditional use permit request on approximately 0.34 acres.

It's located at 1303 South, Mountain Crest Circle, known as application 2025-0156-USE.

And Nick Whitaker again will take it away.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

Sorry, I had it at the bottom here.

Okay.

So yes, this is the Aussie Shepherd LLC home occupation conditional use permit request.

Here is a vicinity map of the property.

Land use is uh residential low medium density and a zoning map.

It is uh zoned RA2.

Um jump down here.

So the overview of the request is to manage an online business which sells uh novelty Australian items.

The items listed on the site are not stored at the property, as well as provide firearm transferance services provided at the property.

Um customers uh uh customers do come to the home uh to fill out required paperwork to obtain a firearm.

So here's a site plan provided by the applicant.

Um when uh uh customers come to the home to uh um do the uh firearm uh the the transfer service um they are provided a parking stall in front of the third car garage right here that is dedicated for the uh customer.

Um all of the um uh well actually I'll get to that in a moment here.

Uh here's a floor plan of the property.

Um the basement is where the majority of the uh um uh business is conducted, uh includes some storage areas, including in the in the garage.

So impact analysis and mitigation is um the identified impacts of course uh customers coming to the home, customer vehicles, parking, and related traffic.

The proposed mitigation is that all customer appointments are by appointment only.

Um they're limited to one customer at a time, and uh they're provided uh one designated off-street parking stall for customer vehicles, and there's an exterior photo of the property.

Oops, and that's my presentation.

Great, thanks, Nick.

Any questions for staff?

I have a question.

Um Nick, is it just paperwork or is there literal firearm transfer?

I believe there is a the transfer of the firearm that's purchased online.

Okay, it's it's through a service online.

You said yes.

Well, it's the only way you can buy a firearm online is to go through an FFL to do a background check.

So I just I'm not super familiar with it.

Well, I'll ask the applicant more questions.

Perfect.

Great.

Is the applicant here?

Oh, come on down and tell us uh what you've got going here, mate.

All right, um, thank you very much, Tom.

Today my name is Kim Ezekelly, and um this is the uh motion that we're looking at today.

Um any career use that uh can field.

Um yeah, so um what is the process to go through to become an FFL?

You said yes, so the process is um cost-stringent.

Um requires the ITF to um sign off, go through EPUB background check, um, go to your um place of residence, so that they they've been to my house, they've been in they've done a walkthrough, insured adequate security, um, and all um items the ITF require are met.

Um and also um additionally with um the city's um requirements um they're met as well.

So in terms of the process, um an FFL transfer, which is the customers that will come.

It'll be you know fairly infrequent, estimating about five to ten customers a week.

Um basically they can order a firearm from any any store.

Um and that's the process of that store having an FFL can only transfer to another FFL.

So that'll be the service that I'll be providing.

Okay.

What insurance do you guys carry?

Um f bus full business insurance liability, um yeah, so insured, fully insured.

And you have to have safe storage, I think you heard you said so like a safe and so that kind of thing.

Yes, so in in terms of um stock there'll be no um firearms kept as stock, so it's all drop ship.

So someone orders something, it gets sent from Louisiana to my house.

I have to have two separate storage.

So segregating personal firearms to you know, merchandise.

Um and yeah, so and that being you know, in safe storage in lockers.

Okay.

I think that was all my questions.

Thanks for explaining all that.

Perfect.

Do you is one requirement still that you need to have some storefront area at all to be an FFL or is that gone away?

That's really just sitting at my desk in front of the computer.

Yeah, got it.

So it's just really just a drop ship business, so instead of keeping inventory.

I think that sometimes creeps people out that you think he's got this big stockpile of stuff, but his his goal is just to get it in and out.

It's just like going down to Cabellos or Shields.

You wouldn't be able to I could order something from Bud's gun shop and ship it there, or I could ship it to this fellow's home, either way, and he'd make the thirty-five dollars woohoo, right?

The big transfer fee.

And then I'd uh walk out with my firearm.

So uh I have a question about your novelty stuff.

What do you have there?

What does that impact look like?

Uh Australian novelty.

Is that uh does that now have change the picture a little bit with stock there on hand?

No, not really.

It's that that's purely um uh s separate business under the same company, um that's purely online.

So there's no um no physical interaction with the customer and the stock that I order in, um the ki the warehouses based in California.

Um so and that's what I'm getting at.

So sometimes on these home occupations we just make sure that you know, is that one daily delivery of uh just like my wife and the Amazon truck, right?

Or is that is that gonna be uh a bigger shipment of a product?

A lot of product won't even come past my premises.

So it'll be going direct to customers.

Okay, cool.

So pretty low impact.

Uh number one, it's probably a naive question.

What qualifies you to do this?

And number two, have you talked to your neighbours?

Uh yes, I've oh, sorry, I jumped to number two.

Let me answer number one first.

Um qualifications for me to do this.

Um what's the process like?

I I just don't know.

Yeah, so it's about a well, four month process.

Um providing the ATF, um, all the required documentation, um, you know, business case, um, you know, them also determining, you know, is it a safe place of permanent like what you know, safe place of um operating a business?

Um and then a lot of background checks.

Um Bank Australian, you know, um there's a lot more background checks.

Um so you can be safe there.

Um and finally the the final process is the ATF come to your house, inspect the premises and you have a like face to face basically a profiling interview situation um where they you know are testing you and um you get to ask them some pretty good questions like you know, what is you know, what are the what are the red flags to look out for and that kind of stuff, you know, um dealing with firearms.

So very helpful ATF agent here actually.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Sorry, that's a question.

Uh did you neighbors?

Neighbors.

Oh neighbors.

Yeah, sorry, yeah.

Um Halloween night was the day that you guys put the sale out, so it was a great conversation starter.

So basically spoke to every single neighbor with my kids.

And no one said any issues?

No, no, they're very supportive.

Um you got some emails, right?

Was it on this?

We did, yeah.

Yeah.

Well, we can discuss those, but any other question for the applicant.

I have one question.

So how many in a week, how many customers come to your house?

Like what's the traffic impact?

Well, because I haven't started operating, I don't have actual figures, but um forecasted figures are around five to ten per week.

So not a high throughput.

Um it's not my main business focus.

Um my main business focus is actually you know um dealing with the Australian um federal government um for the military and and law enforcement.

Um so that's my main business.

This is just a secondary, so this you know not a not a high traffic.

Perfect.

So yeah, those are all good questions to ask.

So it's not as sinister as uh gun gun runner, right?

Uh living next door, that's not what it's like.

Kind of interesting with the with the law.

I'm actually surprised at that load.

I I mean I I wish you well at your business, but I actually think it'll be a little bit less than that.

I mean, there's so many.

If you do a search right now and just say, hey, I'm shipping a gun in, you you can see all these FFLs.

And what I've found is that some of these guys, I've I've called them and they're like, Oh, I don't even do transfers.

I they just do it to get guns cheaper, right?

So they get a like they're just they're just buying them for themselves.

But if you're doing this as a business, that that would be booming.

I mean, if you've got that many.

So uh, you know, we I I would almost guesstimate that a little bit less, but hey, why not shoot for hire?

So good.

All right.

Well, we don't have any more questions for you, so we'll let you go ahead and sit down and then we'll uh open it up for public comment and then we'll let you know.

So thank you.

We'll bring you back up if we need to.

Awesome, thank you.

All right, so this is a public hearing, it's our first one of the night.

The way this will work is we've got this awesome three-minute timer over here.

Uh anyone is welcome to come up and address this agenda item.

Uh we just ask that you don't go over the three minutes, you don't need to fill the whole time.

So if you're done, you're welcome to sit back down.

But we'll go ahead and open that up right now for public comment.

Who would like to address this agenda item?

All right, we don't see anyone.

So we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion of this agenda item.

All right.

What do you guys think?

Any questions?

I don't get a vote, but it sounds credible.

Umiligence and his homework.

But part of me do not want to approve this in a residential zone.

What uh what concerns you about it?

I don't know what the neighbors if I lived in that neighborhood and if my next door neighbor had some random people coming in and trading firearms.

Yeah, I don't know if I like that.

So one thing that uh and like I said, I don't get a vote, I'm not lobbying one way or the other.

But one thing that I don't think was as clear is the number one reason that this takes place this way is so that you can do a background check with the BCI or the whatever they call it, what is that, the Bureau of Criminal Investigation or whatever here in Utah.

So if I went down to Shields and wanted to buy a gun, they'd charge me eight dollars and make me wait about 30 minutes while they called my information in.

So social security number ID, and they'd say, Hey, is this guy you know uh a criminal?

Does he have you know did he beat his wife last night?

If the answer is all no, and I'm I'm not being facetious about that.

I mean, that's seriously, you know, is there a domestic call or anything to the property?

Then uh when that comes back clean from the BCI, only then is the um that this this individual uh allowed to give them the firearm.

And again, the ATF coming out and interviewing, I like that he brought that up because even though they get a yes on the background check, if you get some bad vibes, you know, you can there's you're well within your rights to say, yeah, I'm not giving this dude a gun.

Uh even though, but and then and then and he's paid for it, so there's not large sums of cash either.

So you know, like a bad drug deal, like you see in the movie.

That gun's paid for with a credit card.

This this guy's probably making 30 to 50 bucks on the code.

So how many bad drug deals have you been involved in the case?

I've only seen them on on Netflix.

Okay.

I think we uh this is on, right?

Yeah, only on Netflix.

I think we approved a conditional use permit for someone to do this very same thing recently.

Well, I and I get it, and I really respect that because it's a weird, it's weird, right?

It's just weird.

It's like, oh yeah, that got a good thing.

Unusual.

I look at it as if if I'm going to get new ski boots, it's gonna take me an hour to get fitted.

Okay, if you're gonna go get a new gun, okay, it's gonna take 30 minutes to stand in the line.

It's fine.

But that's my yeah.

No, yeah, it's it's it's really transactional.

I mean, it's like you just they don't, you know, they open the box, get the serial number out, and say, here you go.

They they don't really really care what it is because that's you've already paid for it.

So it's it's weird, it's a weird business.

But again, you know, there's this myth that you can just order a gun off Amazon, not so.

You know, I think maybe back my my the my grandpa in the 50s probably could have one shipped from the Sears catalog, but that's gone.

They don't do that anymore.

It's got to go through.

You have to do a background check.

You cannot get a gun without a background check if you're buying it new.

And I understand the concerns.

I I I feel exactly the same way you do, but one of the problems that I have is that uh, you know, we have the standards that are laid out in the statute.

There are the ordinance, there's no limitations or restrictions on particular types of businesses, so there is no specific restriction that's related to or would prohibit this.

Um it wouldn't be in front of us, right?

Right.

Right.

And we live in a state where access to guns and gun use is very oh, it's allowed.

So we have no way of controlling within our own neighborhoods who has guns in their homes, who's coming and going with guns.

I mean, we're um, so I feel like imposing some sort of restriction because we're concerned about gun use seems a little bit of seems arbitrary and not consistent with the standards in the ordinance.

So that's why we asked the questions.

That's why we asked the questions about traffic, and you know, it's a valid question on how many people are getting in there because that's really why the questions are about the neighbors, et cetera, with any home business, whether it's a kindergarten daycare, you know, uh FFL transfer uh uh barber salon, all of that stuff.

It's the impact and shipping is a big deal, right?

So we've had you know, when when there's just remember the one that had the garage and everything, three quarters of the garage is being used to store product, and they had returns and cardboard boxes being broken down.

That's total industry, you know, that's that's industrial zone stuff, so that's not meant for a neighborhood.

So it's the stuff that we can look at is the impact on the neighborhood as far as nuisance or or traffic and that nature.

Jen, what were you saying?

Yeah, so we have seen businesses like this in the past, obviously with conditional use permits, we're looking at them on a case by case basis.

Um, you know, one use somewhere may not be appropriate somewhere else, but this this is a use that we do see.

Um, to kind of Kendra's point, we we do live in a state where people like their guns.

Um, so when we're looking at the standards for our home occupations, one one of those standards that's kind of more looking at safety um is looking at you know, explosives, noise, um, odors, things like that.

So where it's a gun that doesn't have that impact.

Um, if if somebody was coming in and saying, I'm gonna sell ammunition and have ammunition stockpiled to sell, that won't be allowed because that is an explosive.

Um, so we look at it very differently.

Um, and and really the for this type of thing, the code's looking at the safety aspect um uh of it.

Somebody will come, they will buy their gun, they will drive away.

One thing that I that I do ask anybody who's we we have had um conditional use permits similar to this one come in before, and one thing that we ask, of course, make sure to of is you know, if if they're manufacturing ammunition, anything like that where there is I mean that that there is there are hazards in manufacturing ammunition.

Um so we do make sure that there aren't any types of uh uh you know um uh hazards involved um in the production of what the the or in the business production up side of things oh and we already closed the public hearing, but I didn't get to give you a chance to come back up.

Yeah, if you've got a if you got a quick another input, we'll give it to you and then we'll put it to a vote.

Uh yeah, just in terms of the ammunition.

Um Fedro flaw alarms lost and it's very specific in that I'm not actually allowed to manufacture any ammunition that's against the law, since uh that'd be yeah, a felony.

So perfect.

Yeah, so thanks for asking that, Nick.

I think that all the standards have been met, and so we have to approve this, but I'll so I'll make a motion for approval.

Okay, go ahead, Lisa.

I move that we approve the home occupation conditional use permit as requested by Kim Mazuccelli representing the Ozzy Shepherd LLC application 2025-0156-USE based on the following findings for approval and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated October 31, 2025.

And I think that the proposal complies with the standards for approval found in our uh Draper municipal code section 9-5-080E, and that negative impacts have been mitigated.

Who will second that motion?

I'll second that.

Thanks, Kendra.

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

Lisa?

Yes, Kendra?

Yes, Shabom?

No, Laura.

Yes.

Okay, so that'll go ahead and pass.

Good luck with that.

Be a good neighbor.

Thank you.

Okay, next we've got on our list another public hearing.

It's the Huber land use and zoning map amendment requests.

So on the request of Tom Spencer of Wright Homes representing the Huber family, a zoning map amendment from the RA1, which is residential agricultural zone, to the R3, which is single family residential zone, and a land use map amendment from the residential low medium density to residential medium density land use designation for approximately 1.38 acres.

This is all located at approximately 11730 south 700 west, known as application 2025-0222-MA, and 2025-0223-MA.

Mary Ann Pickering is our staff contact.

So go ahead, Mary Ann.

Thank you.

This is a vicinity map showing the location of the subject property.

It's highlighted in red.

This is on the western edge of the city, right off 700 West.

This is an aerial view of the property for consideration.

The current land use designation is residential low medium density, and the current zoning is RA1.

This is a request to change the land use category from residential low medium density to residential medium density, and then the corresponding zone change from RA1, which is the one acre minimum to R3, which is the one third acre minimum.

The change as you'll see in your exhibits is only to the back one third of the property, and that area that's proposed to be changed will eventually be added to the subdivision to the west.

And the remaining portion of the lot that's RA1 continues to meet the standards of the RA1 zone.

This is a recommendation for the city council for both items tonight.

And what we have with the legal description is approximately it'll line up with this, and so this portion will become R3.

This will stay RA1.

And then it will be added to the Fox Um landing uh subdivision over here.

I didn't receive any comments from the public on this one.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thanks, Mary Ann.

Isn't it nice just to see things line right up how they were meant to be?

It sure is.

It's nice.

Every once in a while you see just a nice perfect fit.

So all right, let's go ahead and invite the applicant up if they're here.

If you'd like to come on down, just state your name and then add anything you'd like.

Good evening.

I'm Tom Spencer.

I'm representing Bright Associates doing businesses right homes and the Huber's, unless they're here.

I don't see them here.

Umway to put it in simple terms, all we're doing is buying that uh western 19,000 square feet with the intent of adding one more lot to Fox Landing phase three, and that's the sum total of it.

Um the resulting lot will be, as I've already pointed out, just under a half acre at 19,000.

And as I think your staff would confirm, we've already spent considerable time addressing the engineering concerns that's in the uh department reviews, including access, compliant access, sewer and drainage, uh, which also is going to take into account uh irrigation wastewater runoff.

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

All right, we don't have any for you.

We'll go ahead and open up to public comment and invite you back up if we need to.

All right, this also is a public hearing.

So who would like to address this agenda item for up to three minutes?

I don't know.

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

So, commissioners, what are your thoughts?

This seems pretty straightforward.

So if everyone's on board, I'll go ahead and make a motion.

You got it.

Go ahead.

Starting with the land use map amendment.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the land use map amendment as requested by Tom Spencer of Right Homes representing the Huber family application 2025-0222-ma based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated November 4th, 2025.

And this would include the six itemized um findings in that report.

Thanks, Kendra.

Who will second that motion?

I'll second.

Thanks, Lisa.

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

Uh Kendra, how do you vote?

Yes.

Lisa, yes, Chavom?

Yes.

And Laura.

Yes.

Okay.

Congrats on that.

Thank you.

Oh, sorry.

Yes, we've got another one.

That's going to put the zoning map amendment.

Go ahead.

We'll make the motion for that.

Yeah, okay.

Can't miss that one.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the zoning map amendment as requested by Tom Spencer representing the Huber family.

Application 2025-02223-MA based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated November 4, 2025.

And um, with the findings that were listed in the report.

Thanks, Lisa.

Who will second that motion?

I'll second that.

All right, thanks again, Kendra.

So let's go ahead and put that one to a vote.

Lisa.

Yes.

Kendra.

Yes.

Shabam.

Yes.

And Laura.

Yes.

Okay.

That's it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Now congrats.

All right.

Let's move on to our next public hearing.

It's the Fetzer land use and zoning map amendment requests.

It's on the request of Robert Fetzer, land use map and zoning map amendments for approximately 0.89 acres of property located at 1394 East, 1290 South.

It's known as application 2025-0192-MA and 2025-0193-MA.

Nick Whitaker is our staff contact.

Go ahead, Nick.

Thank you.

So yes, this is the fencer, uh excuse me, Fetzer land use and zoning map amendment.

Here is a vicinity map.

There's the subject property here.

An aerial map of the property.

The current land use is residential low medium density.

And the current zoning is RA2.

The applicant is proposing a land use map amendment to change the low medium density to medium density.

The reason behind this is they also would like to change the uh zoning from RA2 to R3.

R3 is not a compatible zoning type for residential low medium density, however, it is compatible with residential medium density.

And now the proposed zoning map amendment is to change the property from RA2, which is residential agricultural 20,000 square foot minimum lot size to R3, which is single family residential, with a 13,000 square foot minimum lot size.

So an overview of the uh zoning um the zone change request.

Again, the lot size is uh there's less of a lot size requirement, going from 20,000 to 13,000 in the R3.

And then the definition for RA2 is to foster low density development with little impact on its surroundings and municipal services to generally preserve the character of the city's semi-rural areas and to promote and preserve conditions favorable to large lot family life, including the keeping of limited numbers of animals and fowl.

The predominant use in these zones is intended to be detached single family dwellings protected from encroachment by commercial and industrial uses.

The definition of the R3 is to permit medium density residential development without special mitigation requirements.

This zone is intended to provide incentives to foster residential development with little impact on its surrounding and on uh with its surround on its surroundings rather and on municipal services, and to generally preserve the semi-rural character called for in the density element of the general plan.

Um this is a picture of the uh subject property.

Um there were two comments sent in prior to the meeting.

They should have been forwarded on to the uh commission.

Um I would like to point out that one of those items or I'm sorry, not one of those uh comments was sent uh um back in uh October, October 17th, um, when the uh meeting was um or when their hearing was scheduled for a different date.

Um the I the uh one of the um items that they bring up that the sign was down was during the noticing period for the original commission date that uh was moved.

Um the commission date or this current commission date they have uh commission meeting date, they they kept the sign up the entire time.

And that's my presentation.

Thank you, Nick.

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

Is the applicant here?

Hi.

Come on down if you just state your name and as before add anything you like.

Thank you very much.

Um is Robert Fetzer.

My wife Debbie and I own the house and property at 1394 east at 129 south.

We've been there 20 years.

We love our home, we love our neighbors, and where we live.

Um we want to remain in our home as long as we can.

And as we've come to understand the term age in place.

We don't seem to be able to prevent the aging part.

In anticipation of the time uh when caring for the home and property, which includes an orchard, becomes too difficult for us.

We want to take steps now to secure our future.

To this end, we are requesting a map amendment and the rezoning of our property to give ourselves the best possible options going forward.

By options, is that um to sell the lot and be able to sell sell it, building a home for someone else to come and family member live on the property with you.

Do you have any specific plans?

That was the original idea that a family member or daughter would come and build a home uh where the orchard now stands, and would essentially take care of us as we aged.

Um it was a uh a wonderful generous offer, but we we concluded in the end not to do that in that manner.

So we don't have plans.

We do not have plans currently to subdivide for that purpose.

Okay, any other questions for the applicant?

All right, thank you for that.

We'll go ahead and let you be seated and then we'll uh invite you back up if we need to.

Thank you very much.

All right, thank you.

Yep.

Again, this is a public hearing, so who would like to address this agenda item?

If you'd like to, you can come up.

Uh we just ask that you state your name and stay under the three minutes.

Any takers on that?

Okay.

We'll go ahead and close the public hearing.

All right, commissioners, what are your thoughts on this?

Yeah, I have a question.

Um, if this um front lot, if we divide this and this front lot, well, they divide it in the front lot.

Um, could it exit out onto 129th south, or does it have to go onto the private lane?

Uh that would have to be determined during the the uh um the uh site plan review.

But it could go either way then.

Yeah, one of the potentially, but again, I I wouldn't be able to to comment on it until I had a an actual set of plans to review.

Of course.

One of the um commenters that sent in an email said that they were concerned about the the traffic on their private lane, but if the home could if there was a home built and it it could exit out on 129th instead of into the lane first.

Looks like it would be more ideal anyway, right?

Yeah.

Right, it'd be more of a rectangle facing north.

Sorry, is the lane is it a private lane or is it public?

It says it's private according according to the commenter, the email that came in, it's a private lane.

It says he the commenter lives the second house in from the Fetzers.

Typically, that's going to be the right of access is going to be tied to the property itself, and will not necessarily be tied to.

I mean, obviously, there's going to be issues with approval of the site plan and all of that, but typically private lanes are gonna run with the land, and that's going to be something that they'll essentially be purchasing with the property, depending on what happens.

So if it were to be subdivided, that second home would likely have rights of access to that private lane.

It does seem across the street um that there's homes on a lot that would be the size of this if this was subdivided on South Willow Drive.

There's some homes, some lots that would seem to match.

That is correct.

In fact, uh if we look across the street here, um the R3 zoning designation exists just right across the street.

What's the worst that can happen to this property?

I mean, it's a single the it's the that it would exit out onto the private lane, I suppose, if that's a detriment to someone, and then it's um it has to be a single family home.

It's not like they're gonna be a little apartment building or a duplex or something on that property.

It is a single family with the R3, you can develop a single family home on a lot that is a minimum of uh 13,000 square feet.

So uh the the size of the lot is 0.89 acres.

It's currently at 38,768 square feet.

So I mean and they'd still have to adhere to all the setbacks and everything on that side plan.

So yeah, to answer that, the worst would be two lots.

Um it doesn't quite have enough for three.

Yeah, I even the second lot will be tiny, I think, with the house.

I'm I don't see anything wrong with this.

I feel very comfortable with this.

Um is anybody else want to make any comments or discuss further?

Aren't we creating spot zoning with this?

How do you define spot zoning?

There's R2 everywhere.

Sure, I get there's R3 right across the street, but the south off the street, everything's RA2, and you have a random spot of RA3.

Um thinking from a neighbor's perspective and the letters we receive in the mail.

It's tricky, it's tricky.

I would agree.

Uh I mean it is tricky, but I think we're also going to be seeing more and more of this as Draper continues develop, not to mention we have increased pressure coming from the state legislature.

So I would rather make decisions where we have some control, um, where we are moving to higher density and creating these opportunities.

Um maybe the lot is smaller and that's a smaller house, and hence therefore more affordable.

Um, I think that is beneficial for our community as a whole as opposed to the potential risk of the state legislature dictating what our zoning looks like.

So from that that's just the flip side of your concern.

So I think they're both legitimate, but it's something I think we need to be taken to consideration when we're dealing with these requests.

Another another thought.

I played Tetris with this land use almost every day, a couple of times a day.

Can you go back to the other image?

Uh which one with the with uh house on it.

Yeah, that one.

Well, then to split that into two lots with the setbacks of a second home and this home.

It'll be a really tight second home if they want to build a second home on it.

So part of me is like if we approve this.

It'd be so random, but I think your point is also valid.

Well, you know what's interesting, Shabam is this.

Let's pretend it's two years down the road and they build a little 1900 square foot house on that because that's all that'll fit.

Uh it's exactly what we have everywhere in Draper, where we had the little 1900 square foot house from 1890.

And then you had the make mansion in the back that's 9,000 square feet.

It's just this was in reverse.

So we're just doing uh we're putting the pioneer house in afterwards, and then uh the McMansion's already there.

Look across the street, South Willow Drive.

Yeah, there's small, they got some small homes in there.

So yeah, the spot zoning is a concern.

Uh it is uh, but again, I'm you know, I don't get a vote, but I always like to see owners be able to do whatever they would like with their property as long as it's lawful and legal and correct, and even if it's small and uh you know, whatever it's not yeah, um I'd love to see them just do what they want with their property, but yeah, isn't it it puts in perspective for me?

Is like what are we creating here?

It's like well, we're just in reverse, we're just creating what we drive by every day, which is the pioneer house in the front and the bigger one in the back, and these darn private roads, right?

Where you've just got homes facing every which way, and and uh other than the street, you know, it's just not a brand new development, you know, where everybody faces the right way.

So agreed.

Nobody has any other comments.

I can go ahead and make a motion.

Okay, go ahead, Kendra.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the land use map amendment as requested by Robert Fetzer, application 2025 0193-MA based on the findings for approval listed in the staff report dated October 8th, 2025, and that includes the six findings listed there.

Perfect, thanks, Kendra.

Who will second that?

I'll second.

Okay, thank you.

That was Lisa, right?

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

Then Kendra.

Yes, Lisa.

Yeah, Shabom.

Yes, and Laura.

Yes.

Okay.

All right, and the next one.

I'll just give us a motion.

I'll do the zoning map amendment zoning.

Yeah, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for approval of the zoning map amendment as requested by Robert Fetzer application 2025-0192-ma based on the following findings of for approval listed in the um listed in the staff report dated October 8, 2025.

Thanks, Lisa.

Who will second that?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Laura.

Okay, put this one to a vote.

Lisa.

Yes.

Laura.

Yes.

Shabom.

Yeah.

And Kendra.

Yes.

All right.

Okay, congrats for tonight.

And then good luck with City Council.

So thank you.

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

We've got the uh it's another public hearing.

It's the water use and preservation element general plan amendment request.

This is on the request of Draper City.

Request to adopt the water use and preservation element as part of the general plan, known as application number 2025-0258-TA.

And Todd Taylors our contact on this.

So go ahead, Todd.

Thank you.

This is my year of saying the state's requiring us to do this.

So Senate Bill 110 in 2022 is requiring us to adopt this element into our general plan.

And it has to be adopted by December 31st, 2025.

So what we have is uh the proposed element would become our new chapter seven in our general plan, and then our existing chapter seven, which is the city goals and policies will become chapter eight.

And the it's sort of broken down by an introduction and talking about uh the two water systems that we have, which are the Draper City itself and then WaterPro, which has a culinary system and an irrigation system.

It goes through water use, water demands, water conservation, and then ends with some goals and strategies.

Um there's a really good data, you know.

I'm just gonna uh go through this really quickly, but uh looks at the total water use of the Draper City system and the water pro system and breaks down you know the irrigation and culinary systems there.

You can see that you know, over the past few years the trend is is heading downwards, which is good.

Uh when we look at uh the types of uh users of the water, you can see that residential really makes up the majority of the water uh users in the system and the water use in the system.

Um but then when you break it down by individual connection, it actually shifts where residential has sort of been a stable uh water user uh and a lower sort of level uh lower lower water use where you can see the commercial and institutional is a little uh higher water use and a little bit more variable.

So there gives potential for you know having uh strategies to reach you know both residential users to reduce their water use and also commercial use and industrial uh yeah and institutional water users to reaching out to both groups is would really be beneficial.

Um the plan looks at water demand, so our existing water demand of both systems and then projects to the future of 2050 and 2060, um, and then also looks at uh what our existing source capacity is compared to that future water demand there on the right.

Uh so for Draper City looking at that future water demand, uh Draper will need to look at increasing the contract with the Jordan Valley Water Conservation District, and then Water Pro is looking at developing some shallow wells to increase their irrigation uh supply.

Um looking at water conservation, the city is putting in advanced metering infrastructure, and then when this uh Senate bill actually came out, uh Todd Draper here uh moved forward with adopting the outdoor landscaping and water water efficiency standards sort of ahead of this general plan.

So we've already adopted that and have that those new landscaping standards in place to reduce our landscaping water use.

And then water pro is looking at uh water use pro uh program where they uh would take reclaimed water uh from the sort of sewage facility and once it's cleaned to a certain level, use it for irrigation to supplement their irrigation water supply.

Uh so then that leads to the goals and strategies.

Um, and I'm just gonna uh give sort of the reader's digest version of these rather than reading through all of them.

But uh the first goal is to uh have dedicated leadership, support and collaboration, and that would be implemented through having uh forming a water conservation team to support our water uh conservation coordinator, and then looking at uh potentially uh hiring uh water conservation intern or a similar position to sort of supplement the programming and and you know, coming up with ideas and and and such.

The second goal is uh looking at irrigation restrictions.

So the the first implementation would be looking at a time of day watering ordinance that would restrict uh outdoor watering between hours of 10 a.m.

and 6 p.m.

for uh all users.

Uh this is something that would obviously have to be drafted and come back again before the you know the planning commission, or maybe it wouldn't have been may not have to come before the planning commission, but would go to the city council for you know public hearings and and such before it was finalized.

And then the second implementation measure is to develop a water shortage plan that would you know enact uh certain measures in case of those periods of drought or water shortage, and I you know what that exactly is would again be developed over time and and adopted by the city council through a public hearing process.

Uh the third goal is to uh increase development density, and this is partially uh requirement of the state that we look into this as part of uh reducing water use.

So uh what the implementation is is really implementing our adopted station area plans, so you know, and that provides greater density in those areas, and then uh completing our update to our zoning ordinance, which we've had some work sessions with planning commission already, and we're you know still working through that process, but it you know it really is looking at ways to encourage infill and that sort of missing middle housing and and and incentivizing those those uh uses.

So again, that's something that will come back to your the planning commission as we you know continue through that process and and come up with the updated code.

The fourth goal is to uh have educational programming, so it would be implemented through you know expanding our existing local scapes uh classes uh that the tree committee does, um, having workshops, uh providing free water conserv conserving tools at public events, developing a beautiful yard award program for those yards that are uh have water wise landscaping, um, and then uh partnering with the Jordan Valley Water Conservation District to have workshops with businesses so they could learn about uh incentives and rebate programs.

Um the fifth goal is to increase our uh sort of website and digital presence uh by consolidating the two uh pay web pages that we have into one for water conservation, and then the second implementation is to uh make sure that we're promoting our the commercial reboot programs on that web page, um developing a social media calendar so we're you know have sort of schedule of messages throughout the year, and then the fourth implementation is to promote an app that lets you uh track your uh water usage in real time uh through that the new uh advanced metering that's going in.

And then the last uh goal is to lead by example.

So the implementation would be uh the city itself looking at any park strips that we have, uh reducing and converting those to water wise, reducing any turf in our parks or civic properties that don't have a recreational role, and then uh uh upgrading our irrigation systems as uh as possible.

Uh that concludes my presentation, and I'm available if you have any questions.

Did I hear the and the park strip?

That's only for Draper City owned and managed park strips, correct?

That's uh part of this is for us to look at our own first, you know, and do that.

I our code already sort of allows that and encourages it through our our water wise ordinance.

But this would be actually looking at what's existing and making that conversion on city property for the case.

Yes, yeah, yes, yeah.

You know, I'm I'm I'm on a rampage against the uh rip your strip done poorly uh but throughout the residential neighborhood, some of them look really bad, like really bad, and I'm glad we're saving water.

But you know, I think there needs to be some higher standards on what's actually getting put in there.

But great, that let the city lead by example, right?

Give us some good examples of how that can look.

Okay.

All right.

Any questions for staff on that one?

Nope.

Okay.

Well, this is a public hearing, right?

So let's go ahead and put it up for public comment.

Is there anyone here that came tonight to talk about the water wise uh agenda that we've got here tonight?

All right, we don't see oh, come on down.

Come on down.

Sweet, we welcome it.

Come on down, just state your name if you would before.

Yeah, I'm Chad Sumption.

I'm a citizen of Draper.

And uh didn't come to comment on this, but seeing the presentation, just saw it I'd either um add to or ask a question.

But so I saw in the presentation that it seemed like maybe making some places higher density housing saves water, and it would be great to see some of those statistics because over and over we keep hearing that landscape wastes water, and then I hear that high density waste or doesn't waste it, but uses more because of larger people count.

So it it would be neat to see some of that backed up with where to go to find actual data numbers being used, and then uh I couldn't agree more with you than on the park strip idea in Draper.

I love it where the few places that it's working.

We live on the corner of 13th and 132nd, and we have watched two road widenings built both direction at our neighborhood, and uh a lot of trees put in that have either been removed by the city because they blocked vision down the street for the side streets, and or died.

And um, I think there's gotta be a better way to have trees that last longer than what we're currently doing, and or the weeds that come through the rocks.

Um, personally, I like cement or brick work that allows them to be cleaned off easily, and uh, and then if people are dead eats and don't take care of their park strip, it still looks good, including those on 123rd South that are in front of businesses.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, anyone else?

Okay, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing portion on that one.

Thank you for that.

All right, commissioners.

You need to give a positive recommendation or negative recommendation to the council.

What are your what say you?

I just think it's interesting.

Uh, with um if you do the you know, flip your strip and fill it with rocks.

Weeds are more noticeable than if you've put in turf.

I know it is.

It's kind of a shame, right?

Because you've seen it, yeah.

And I'm not trying I'm not trying to be mean or anything.

I'm just like, wow, that you know, just watch the neighbors do it.

You're you have all these high hopes, and then it's just a weed patch or or worse.

Zero escape's not cheap.

No, and to do it well as rocks, the drought and trees.

Yeah, so I think it's just very you know, a lot of appeal because they all they're all bragging.

Oh, I the city gave me or the state gave me six hundred dollar rebate or something like that on this.

It's like, wow, it looks like we spent about 300 there.

So you know, but anyway, that's just I'm done.

I'm done ranting about that.

So, but thank you.

Um so what what do we say to the city council on this one?

Just uh just the the comment we had.

Do this does the city have any data on um if if it's uh oh higher density areas safe water we can look into that.

I will say what I heard at you know, uh a regional planning meeting with the state representative was you know, we can't tell people not to move here, so we are going to see growth.

We project our growth into the future.

I mean, if we could say no, people are gonna move into Draper, we could probably keep those levels steady.

So if we're gonna see growth, and we see it at the same lot size.

Well, we can't really because we only have a limited amount of land, but we're gonna see increased density as we see increased density that per capita water use goes down because those new lots uh don't use as much water for their landscaping as the current sort of lots that we see now, if that makes sense.

So one of your charts also showed that residential use is lowest compared to commercial and business use or current commercial and institutional use.

One of your earlier per user they use less than the commercial and institutional.

Yeah, so that could that could uh you know give information towards that.

Yeah, it's an interesting comment.

Maybe on the maybe um that's not gonna be multifamily residential, it's still gonna be in that residential category.

Yeah, right.

So I can see it's lowest though, it's the lowest use of all uses.

Yeah, yeah.

I understand a lot of our our state's water goes to alfalfa growth, actually, right?

So that's what all my landscapers have told me.

They're like, yeah, we're putting in this waterwise yard and just uh thank goodness for the alfalfa, right?

So that's where a lot of the red water goes.

All right, so um on this the some nice little key points in there to see what we're gonna change and what we're gonna be working towards you, right?

We are gonna have some growth.

So um any commentary on this, or do you guys want to put something forward to the city council?

I'm happy to make a motion on this.

Let's go positive or negative.

What's it gonna be, Kendra?

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the general plan amendment as requested by Draper City application number 2025-0258-TA based on the following findings for approval and the criteria for adoption as listed in the staff report dated October 29th, 2025, and that includes the two findings for approval listed in the report.

Awesome.

Thanks, Kendra.

Who will second her motion?

I'll second.

Thanks, Lisa.

Okay, let's put that one to a vote.

Then Kendra.

Yes, Lisa.

Yes, Laura.

Yes.

And Shabalm.

Yes.

Okay.

All right, thanks for presenting all that.

We appreciate you.

Uh let's move on to our next public hearing.

It's the Plumber Zoning Map Amendment.

It's on the request of benchmark engineering representing LRP T R and Home Ice LLC for a zoning map amendment on 1.31 acres of property located at 1360 east, 1320 south, and 0.97 acres of property located at 13239 south and 1300 east.

It's in the RA1 residential agricultural zone, and the application is 2025-0137-MA.

So Nick Whitaker's also again our contact.

So go ahead, Nick.

Thanks.

So yes, this is the uh plumber uh zoning map amendment.

The subject properties are uh here's the vicinity map.

The subject properties are red there in the center.

There are two properties as you can see here.

Uh one, of course, fronting a hundred and uh uh one three two zero zero south, and uh the other fronting thirteen hundred east the um land use is uh for both properties is residential low medium density, and the uh zoning for both properties is currently RA1.

The applicant is um desiring to change the uh um zoning from RA1 to RA2, of course.

RA1 is residential agricultural, uh 40,000 uh square foot minimum lot size, RA2 is uh single family residential 20,000 square foot minimum lot size.

Uh there's no need for a um change of uh land use designation.

Um RA2 is compatible with the current land use designation of residential low medium density.

The overview of the request, as I mentioned before, the uh the difference in uh minimum lot size is the current is 40,000 square feet.

Uh the proposed would be 20,000 square feet.

Interestingly, the definition for both RA1 and RA2, or not definition, but the purpose listed in um Draper City Municipal Code for both RA1 and RE2 is the same.

Um it's to foster low density development with little impact on its surroundings and municipal services to generally preserve the character of the city's semi-rural areas and to promote and preserve conditions favorable to large lot family life, including the keeping of uh limited numbers of animals and fowl, the predominant use in these zones is intended to be detached single family dwellings protected from encroachment by commercial and industrial uses.

Um so really the the change comes down to the lot size.

Um here is a site photo of the property that's at uh 1360 east, one three two zero zero south, and here is a photo of the property that is uh at 13239 south, one three zero zero east.

The applicant is um uh wanting to do the zone change to subdivide the property, and that is my presentation.

Thanks, Nick.

So Nick, can you show us how many homes could be built in that two more?

Is that what we're thinking?

Um so we're looking at the lot size on that.

Uh so uh between the two properties, uh it comes to 2.28 acres, which is approximately uh 99,316 square feet.

Uh 316.8 square feet.

So um by changing it to uh 20,000 square foot minimum you could get four almost five.

Almost okay.

Thank you.

Perfect.

All right.

No other questions for staff.

Is the applicant here?

Come on up.

And you can just like before, add anything you'd like.

All right.

And if you state your name too, thanks.

Hi, my name is Burke Plummer.

And uh yeah, I currently own and live close to this, just across the tracks, just across the so uh we refer this to the outback because it is outside our backyard.

So um our purpose in rezoning this is we actually want to build on the property, so we want to take this property and leave the two homes that are on it on there into the half acre lots, and then we would retain a acre in a third lot that we would build ourselves on mainly for uh our homes up and down, and we just want a flat uh more rambler style house.

So that's the motivation behind the um rezoning.

So in total, there'd be three homes on the entire property.

Yeah, right.

So what you they probably can't see is this there's one already that the there's the barn, right?

Yeah, and then the one to the west, that's the other home.

That's so that would be home number one, barn goes away, right?

Home number one, and then barns the barns go away, and the home number one and home number two is down the one that just faces on to 1300 east, right?

Okay, just currently a rental property, and we keep that the way it is for now.

It would give us the flexibility, I guess, in later time also if somebody wanted to build their also family or other stuff.

So that's our purpose.

Got it.

Love Draper, want to stay here.

That's how we futuristically planned it.

Any questions for the applicant?

Okay, pretty straightforward.

Thank you.

We'll invite you back up if we need to after the highly contested public hearing here with uh two people left in the building.

All right, let's go ahead and open this up to public comment.

Who would like to address this agenda item?

Come on down.

There's no limit.

Well, I guess per per agenda item there's one, but yeah, there's no limit on how many you'd like to address.

So go ahead.

Can you bring the zoning map back up?

Okay, Chad Sumption again, citizen.

And um, we happen to be the proud owners of that corner lot, and um, yeah, that one.

And as it turns out, uh, we're the only ones that face city streets.

There's this new thing in Draper where if possible, don't face the street because there's only three that go through the city, the rest are either gated or dead ends.

Anyway, not here to worry about that, but just so you know, um, we support uh the both the rezone and the things that they're trying to do.

We're thinking that um more and more people are gonna need to do this because properties becoming harder and harder to obtain and more and more expensive to own because if you happen to be older and have a large piece of property which go up and down 132nd, um there's very little way that you can afford to water them or keep them looking nice.

Uh so mowing them is one way of just letting them die and and be killed.

Um, but we are supportive of that.

And if you look, it is interesting.

The concept of spot zoning was at least mentioned earlier, and I appreciate your wanting to understand how that looks because when this goes through, uh, we're gonna hang out there zoned the same as the school, but the school doesn't care what its zoning is.

And uh it seems to me that at some point the city council and you guys should maybe think about just rezoning blocks of areas instead of doing up one-offs because then you'll you'll avoid a lot of trouble of people just trying to figure out how to make use of their properties.

Um, for instance, you'll see that the properties just below the one that's RA2 there on 13th East.

Those are pretty small, narrow lots and small homes, and my guess is eventually some of them will be bulldozed as property prices go up because the home will be worth less than the property itself.

Uh as for us, we just wanted to know that um I noticed that some of the engineering report talked about traffic, and um I'm guessing that no one here was probably part of the school approval process, but literally the school approval, the school district, the school, the city all agreed that there would be no queuing on the streets, and they had it so covered, they had everything figured out, and uh it's not quite working like we had hoped, maybe.

But literally the school approval, the school district, the school, the city all agreed that there would be no queuing on the streets.

And they had it so covered.

They had everything figured out and uh it's not quite working like we had hoped, maybe.

And in fact, we had special signs made for our side of the street that said no school uh queuing drop-off or pickup.

And the other side was posted no parking.

We thought that one could be enforced differently than the other because we were told it was way too dangerous, and now it's all a queuing zone for a couple hours a day.

Nothing that you could do on the properties adjacent will solve that.

But what would be nice is if you go there today west down 132nd east, the streets are the queuing zone as well as the cul-de-sac that are to the west, um, beyond summit.

And I would hope that whatever the plumbers are able to to build would not become a cute uh an extra queuing zone for parents who are just trying to get their kids.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I thank you.

No worries.

Hey, I figure if you're gonna stay late, I'll give you a little bit extra time.

We're pretty merciful up here.

All right, anyone else?

Hi.

Hi.

Just state your name.

My name is Alison Albert.

I'm with benchmark engineering.

Technically, I'm part of the applicant.

But uh, if you want to see what the three lots look like, sure.

Yeah, just just say everything you said right there again, into the mic.

Can you say can you say your name again as well?

Allison Albert with benchmark engineering.

So uh those are just uh the plat.

Um I did the site and utility plan and the grading plan.

But um we've we've uh been working on this with the plumbers for a while now, but um, that's what the lots look like for the three lots, um, in case you were curious.

But um, I just wanted to let you know that I was here in case you had questions on the design.

Um yeah, we'll count you as part of the applicant, so go ahead, just disregard actually.

Well, either way.

Yeah, I I I anything you want to add to that.

We are you know asking to make the zone similar to what the other uh zoning around it is, but um, but yeah, I I think Burke did a great job.

But um either way, if you have questions, I'm here to answer them.

We'll go ahead and close the public hearing, then we might have you come back up for questions if that's okay.

All right, is there anyone else that would like to address this agenda item?

Okay, we'll go ahead and close that.

Now, any questions for the applicant or the engineer that's here.

Nope.

So it is nice.

I mean, we get to see what they want to do, right, or what they intend to do, and then um it was good that you asked Lisa like what's the highest density they could put in there, right?

They could go with four if they really wanted to go rogue and bulldoze everything down, right?

They could probably put four, maybe five homes in there with 90,000 square feet, right?

With 20,000 lot minimums and 20,000.

So good.

Well, that's good to give us a little bit of insight into that.

All right.

But in the instance, if they resell it's zoned that way, and then the next guy can next guy can come and do it at four, and now the trap to the neighbors concerned.

Yeah.

It doubles.

I mean, I I take this show 20 times a day.

I during crazy school traffic.

Well, we see the neighbor's not the neighbor's not against the developer.

I understand.

Yeah.

So I'm not sure.

We see it a lot though that you have to choose, you know, you have a plan and you want to do a certain thing, and you have to choose a density that's higher than you need because it's not even.

Right.

So we see it all the time.

Somebody wants to go has to go to R3 when all they need is two laws.

And they they want to offset it so that one is a smaller lot, a lopsided bigger lot.

Why?

Because they didn't want to murder the row of you know hundred-year-old trees that are right in the middle of the two lots.

So we've had instances like that.

Same, it looks like the same thing here, right?

They have to go higher density.

And we had one just right before with the one with the small house, right?

That's a that's not an even cut.

So you get these higher densities, but you're right, you know, that that even cut could mean that he could have he could in the future rip down the small pioneer home, put the other one same thing here.

So that's why it's good that we asked the question, you know, what's the so the intention would be one, two, three, right?

Homes total, not including the neighbor that just spoke, but on this on these parcels here, three homes total, uh, but it could go to a total of four, maybe five there, not including the neighbor that just spoke on the properties.

But but again, it's cool.

Yep.

But it's straightforward.

So what do you suggest?

Uh we've got to give a recommendation to the city council.

What do you think?

Yeah, I'm ready to make a positive recommendation.

Any other comment though?

You guys all right?

Okay.

Okay.

Um, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for approval of the zoning map amendment as requested by benchmark engineering representing LRP TR and Home ICE LLC.

Application 2025-0137-MA based on the following findings for approval and those that are listed in the staff report dated October 31, 2025.

And we have um some listings, some things listed there.

So thank you, Lisa.

Good motion there.

Who will second that?

I'll second it.

All right, thanks, Laura.

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

This is for positive recommendation recommendations sent off to the city council.

So Lisa.

Yes.

Laura.

Yes.

Shabom.

Yes.

And Kendra.

Yes.

All right, congrats for tonight, and good luck with the city council.

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

We've got the uh public hearing, the amendment to the Draper front runner, which is Vista Kimballs Lane and Crescent View Station Area Plans General Plan Amendment.

On the request of Draper City, a request to adopt an amendment to the Draper Front Runner Vista, Kimball's Lane, and Crescent Views area plan to change several figures.

Known as application at 2025-0255-TA.

Todd Taylors our contacts.

Go ahead.

Thank you.

As you're aware, the state uh required us to adopt the stationary plans by the end of the year.

Um the Draper Front Runner Kimballs Lane and Crescent View stationary plan was adopted by the city council on September 2nd.

It was certified by WFRC on October 23rd.

Uh after adoption by city council.

Oh, sorry, the next step in the process is certification by UTA.

Following the approval by City Council, we received a request from UTA to change some figures in the Vista Station area to add a building.

So right here in the red is the subject property.

Uh it's surrounded by the bus turnaround south of the parking structure and just west of the front runner station.

So we had the consultant go through uh several of the figures here and add the building, which you can see here in the sort of orangey color, which represents proposed future development.

So figure 18, it was added.

Figure 19, it's been added.

Figure 20 is you can see a little bit more of a 3D representation of the building.

Figure 22 added, and then this is just a tiny tiny one in this key map on figure 24.

That's the only changes, and those will be inserted into the adopted station area plan.

Do you have any questions?

No, well done again.

Any any questions?

Okay, well, then let's put it up to a public hearing.

Ready for this?

We're gonna open this up for public hearing.

Who would like to address this agenda item?

All right, we don't see anybody, so I'll go ahead and close it.

Commissioners, what do you say?

I'm ready to make a motion for positive recommendation.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the general plan amendment as requested by Draper City application number 2025-0255-TA.

Um, based on the following findings for approval on the criteria for the adoption is listed in the staff report dated October 17th, 2025, and that includes the two findings for approval listed there.

Perfect.

Thanks, Kendra.

Who seconds that I'll second it?

Thanks, Laura.

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

Kendra.

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

Lisa?

Yes.

And Shabam.

Yes.

All right.

I don't have any others on that.

So now we've got our final public hearing for the evening, correct?

Since the other two have been uh moved.

So let's go ahead to a city initiated boundary adjustment update text amendment request is on the request of Draper City again for the approval of text amendments to portions of the tiles nine, titles nine and seventeen of the Draper City Municipal Code in order to address recent changes to Utah State Code relating to boundary adjustments, known as application 2025 0254-TA.

Todd Taylor, take it away.

Thank you.

As you've indicated, this is proposed text amendments in response to changes to Utah State Code in 2025.

They became effective on May 7th, and we've been following them.

Some other changes uh have also been added into this uh code amendment for clarity.

Um so we've added the new definitions for boundary adjustment.

So there is new now a new simple boundary adjustment and a full boundary adjustment.

And I will so a simple boundary adjustment is boundary adjustment between properties that does not affect a public right-of-way, municipal utility easement or other public property.

Affect an existing easement on-site water system or an internal lot restriction or result in a lot or parcel out of conformity with land use regulations.

So when the application comes in, we check for that, and if it doesn't comply with those generally, it would become a full boundary adjustment.

And the parcel boundary adjustment definition.

Then there was also a change to the subdivision amendment definition that says it does not include a simple boundary adjustment.

Then in titles, so this was in Title 9 in Title 17, which is our subdivision uh code.

Uh we referenced back to those definitions in in Title 9, just to make sure that it's clear.

Um so this is a clarification uh section.

So when we made our subdivision met uh amendment update, I think at the beginning of this year or the end of last year.

Um we didn't have uh notice requirements for public meetings, so uh we're adding those back in here.

Um basically that we will mail notice to uh a budding uh properties that will mail notice to affected entities and then uh we'll publish on the city's website and the Utah public notice website uh for public meetings uh as opposed to the public hearings which are in A.

Um and then the uh the section that really talks about the simple boundary adjustment uh standards, um what uh needs to be submitted and what we review for.

Uh they are approved by the zoning administrator or the zoning minute minute administrator provides consent um if they meet all those requirements of the meet the requirements, and then if they don't meet the requirements, they go to a full boundary adjustment.

Um, and then there's a list of again what is required, and part of that requirement is a plat amendment.

So then those would come to the planning commission for a consent.

Uh and that's basically it.

And then uh there was a lot of more text that I didn't include here that's basically just being deleted out of that section from the old law line adjustments and uh parcel uh uh law parcel boundary adjustments.

So uh that concludes my presentation.

I'm available if you have any questions.

I just want to ask our um city attorney if it's if you've reviewed it and you think it fits our it matches our um requirement from the state.

Yes, I have so all of the text amendments generally go through the legal department.

But thank you for confirming.

Gotta get it on the record.

Very thorough.

Thank you.

It is a public hearing.

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

All right, we don't see any, so we'll go ahead and close that.

Thank you.

Commissioners.

I like speed.

This is gonna be fast.

That's a good improvement.

Okay, I'll make a motion then.

Thanks, Lisa.

I move that we forward a positive recommendation to the city council for the city initiated boundary adjustment update text amendment as requested by Draper City.

Application number 2025 0254-TA based on the follow up best based on the findings and criteria for approval listed in the staff report dated October 17, 2025.

Thank you for that, Lisa.

Who'll second it?

I'll second it.

Thanks, Kendra.

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

This goes to the uh planning commission or to the city council with a positive recommendation.

So Lisa, how do you vote?

Yes, Kendra?

Yes.

Laura?

Yes.

All right, well done, everyone.

I don't see any other agenda items.

Uh anything, any other business before we close.

I just had uh a couple emails.

Some of you maybe have already seen them.

Uh just some of the trainings that we've gone through the year that you need to just uh if you weren't here, just review those and send me an email once you've uh viewed that uh segment.

If we don't have an email, that means we're current, is that correct?

Yeah, uh that's a good way of putting it.

Um some of you have uh far exceeded your training hours.

Thank you, Shabam.

Um and and so uh he doesn't have to view the one or two he might have missed.

Um but appreciate you take care of those.

We do expect we'll do one more training session here, probably at the next meeting on the 11th, uh, to conclude our required four hours.

Uh I think for the most in before the end of the calendar year.

Before the end of the calendar year, and for the most most part, everybody's gonna hit their 12 meetings.

Uh I included that were a few, I think were just one shy, and some of you've got that tonight, the 12th meeting.

So we should be in good shape.

Great.

Thank you for tracking all that.

Sorry.

I was just gonna say I have a plot for you to sign Andrew, so don't run away.

Oh, well that's on the record now, so I'm got it.

All right, seeing no other business.

Anyone have anything to propose?

Okay, I move that we adjourn.

All right, adjourned.

So dramatic.

Do you know what Lisa Minute's gonna know that's something?