We think you're ready.

We think you're ready.

I mean, I've done it once, so was it once?

Just once.

Okay.

Just so excellent.

It's so memorable.

Oh, right.

Stands out in our minds.

Alright, we'll we'll we'll give Cam his seconds.

All right.

Seven.

Let's do it.

Welcome to the Lehigh Planning Commission, August 14th, 2025.

We'll call this to order and go ahead and get into our regular agenda.

So item 2.1, the one and only Katie.

Item 2.1 is public hearing and recommendation of Edge Homes request for review of the Auburn Springs grading permit on approximately 34 acres, located at 400 south, 2500 west.

The grading permit covers the entirety of the Auburn Springs subdivision.

The changes are to raise the site to make gravity sewer and storm drain feasible.

It is also to help provide buffering from the groundwater.

The applicant has stated that there will be about 25 to 30 trucks, um truckloads delivered daily and it's expected to take over a period of six months.

Grading permits over 10 acres require planning commission and city council approval.

This is a public hearing.

However, there were no online comments for this, so with that turn back to the commission for any questions.

Very good.

Questions for staff?

I do.

There was a third potential proposed hall road that said it was dependent upon getting my approval to cross city property.

Is there a hold up there?

Because you know what that would take to get that approval.

I don't know if they'd talk to you.

It would be through we own the parcel to the north.

Yes.

Yeah, which would put it out onto Main Street.

So I don't know.

I don't know if we haven't talked to them about that.

They haven't at least proposed to us about that option.

So I'm guessing that might set a precedent for actually putting a road there, so probably not be like it.

Okay.

Uh Jed Stewart with Edge Homes.

One recent change that Kim doesn't even know about that he'll be really excited about.

Is on the on the west side of this piece, the Yates property, we we've got it back under contract.

So we'll be submitting application on that.

I've talked to the land seller on that.

We he's we proposed a quick hold on that, so like 60 days.

So I think that I don't know if you can see it, but the the green portion there that's to the west, that's probably gonna be a better haul route than what we've already recommended, but um we haven't proposed that yet.

It I think it would just be less impactful to the other neighborhoods.

Where would it be then?

Okay.

Uh it's that one.

Okay.

So you come off Main Street and then come in there?

Rather than coming down 700 south.

Yeah.

Where does the road stub?

The road stubs right on the ver on the that parcel that's highlighted on the south end of that.

So it'll stub right out and uh directly butt into Gray's code.

If I remember correctly, if you were to acquire that parcel, wouldn't do you have the road going through the road.

Yeah, there'll be a road going through there.

Yep.

Okay.

Yep.

So is that your if that is under contract, you say?

It's under contract.

So I'm hesitant to say like that's gonna be our whole route, but I'm I'm feeling really good about it.

If that's not something you acquire what what are you saying are your two routes are to the south, and then you would go to the city for the north route?

Correct.

Okay.

Yeah.

And you have not gone to the city for that route yet?

You just put it on the map here.

Uh from what Spen I Spencer told me this morning that they made it made application on that.

I don't know how long ago that was though.

But I think our I think our plan is is to go through the south now.

This uh west entrance is just barely, we barely put it on a contract late last week.

When will you start in the mornings and when will you end in the evenings?

Uh we'll run normal hours between eight and five.

Okay, so no six, five a.m.'s no.

And are you gonna be spraying down?

Yeah, we'll be spraying.

Yeah, if it's media and dusty, yeah, just one.

No chemicals, we're just gonna be spraying water for gas mitigation.

Yeah.

Are they double double trailer?

Yeah, we'll be holding 30 yards, big big trailers, yeah.

Side dumps.

Where are you taking the dirt?

Yeah, where's your borrow pit?

Uh this is coming from our project in Saratoga Springs.

Okay.

Is that north of Main Street?

It is, isn't it?

Or is it the south?

Um it is basically it's directly to the west of Westlake High School.

Okay.

Are are the homes on your uh in your development gonna be low or higher the same as the homes to the west?

This will bring it up to about the same.

Okay.

Yeah.

So would you be coming from Saratoga up 2300 West and then turning if you use 700 south, you'll be turning west on 700 south, and either coming in either directly off of 2300 west.

I think that's 2300 west, isn't it, where the parcel uh butts up?

Yeah, right there.

Yeah, correct.

Okay.

Yeah.

So it's gonna be 2300 west from south to north, and then either 700 south or the direct uh access from the west side.

Yeah, yeah, and we're hoping for this direct access.

I think it'll just be less impactful to everybody.

Absolutely.

Okay.

Can you remind me how many um units you're gonna have it without the additional parcel and then with the parcel?

I think it's 84.

Okay, and then it's and then the additional parcel is just 10 lots.

Okay.

Yeah.

Closest questions for good.

All right.

Any other questions for me?

I'm just wondering about the city approval because that would be a second hall that I'd love to answer.

Go ahead and take take see if the time being a little correct.

Thank you.

Any other questions for staff?

I just have a question about um the traffic study that was done to the the 84 units on impacting the surrounding neighborhoods.

If they acquire and get that additional 10 units, does it change the traffic study and possibly the density given, or is it negligible?

Of course it would impact it, but I think it would be pretty minimal, actually.

I don't I haven't obviously haven't done the study, but uh in my best guess would be it would be a minimal for 10 extra months.

Would there be another study done then in the event?

That I can't really speak to you on that.

I know that like the residents were really concerned and the number of units has been a very strongly debated topic, and so I'm I'm just curious if their additional acquisition changes the agreement, or would they have to come in and do an amendment to their plans?

Yeah, as far as the development agreement that wouldn't affect they can move forward independent, and then this if anything, I think this other property would alleviate a lot of the traffic because right now there's only you know the limited outlets to the south and you know into those existing neighborhoods.

So this would actually provide a uh and there will be a signal right there at Grays Drive and 2300.

So if anything it would dramatically improve the because it gives that whole another option to a signalized intersection to get out onto 2300.

But I guess Luke would make that call if it warrants like the 10 units would bump a new traffic study or maybe an addendum.

They may want to do it because it you know they they could reproject how many trips you're gonna go out each exit.

So yeah, just looking for process so that residents know like what would happen if they're they were to require that.

Yeah.

Anything else for staff?

Um I I think this might be for staff.

Um how do you police this?

I can't think of a better word.

For the grading.

Yeah, so so if if you um if they say they're only gonna use a certain route, um does the city like if it ends up being a problem in those neighborhoods, um what recourse do they have?

Do they yeah, our public works, we have a grading inspector, or there's actually several inspectors in public works, they're part of the streets and you know the they're involved on the construction side of things and they would monitor that.

I would think, you know, they'll they'll they actually have a pre-construction meeting, so they'll meet with the contractor and and our inspectors and they'll make sure everybody knows what the rules are, what was approved, and then yeah, if they're violating it, then they could shut them down.

They would just go put a stop work order on the project and say you're not following the plan that we approved, and until you follow that, we're gonna shut you down.

So when it when they've got a primary and a secondary, does that mean they can use both?

I would think again, you know, if the secondary becomes the primary and it wasn't supposed to be, I think you know, we'd either say, okay, time out until it, you know, is is this gonna become the primary?

Are we okay with that?

But yeah, I um I think that would be something that those grading inspectors would work with them on through the process.

But we'd want them to follow the plan that they presented, so everybody knows what's expected, and that would be what's followed.

Okay, and this would be primarily bringing dirt, right?

Because it's lower.

Yep.

Yeah, we're not taking dirt from the split.

Yeah, I if I remember it's some of it's not up to import seven feet.

I mean, it's a pretty substantial amount of fill.

Yeah.

Anything else for staff?

All right.

And Mr.

Stewart, we appreciate your enthusiasm.

Now's the time we actually usually invite you up.

So do you have anything else you'd like to add?

No, nothing else.

Very good.

Uh then with that, this being a public hearing, we will go ahead and open it up to the public for comment.

All right.

Uh seeing none, we'll go ahead and bring that back to the commission.

Do you have a question for the applicant?

This has no bearing on this.

This is more curiosity than anything.

Has there been any conversation with I believe it's Mr.

Chu who owns the property to the south?

That little tiny corner right there where the arrow is.

The has there been any conversation there about that corner?

Several.

Uh we just can't he as you know his piece is challenging just because it's wet.

And we're just apart on value.

So we'd love to buy it, but we can't willing.

And you but if it's a value, yeah.

Okay.

All right.

I was just curious, because that could create another opportunity for better traffic flow.

Yeah.

If you could get that little piece right there.

But anyway.

Unfortunately, it's all or nothing too.

So we can't just buy that piece.

Okay.

Deliberation or a motion.

Well, I just I want to deliberate a little bit out loud.

Let's do it.

I'm not real fond of the ones going through the neighborhood, and especially where that road narrows going from east to west on the south end.

And I would I'm heartened that they have property under contract, but I'd really like to see the hall road avoid neighborhood, especially those big double deli belly dumpers.

That one, the primary hall route, that seems a little tight to make that right turn and another right turn, two houses down or whatever.

I'd love to see it come in off of 2300 on that parcel that they have under contract, or if we could somehow evaluate Main Street's probably not the best for pulling in and pulling out of because they're gonna want to go west out of there.

But I think coming from west to east to pull in from the north side and crossing the city property, if there was an opportunity to facilitate that, we keep it out of the neighborhoods entirely.

And the I mean, we're only doing I calculated you got a full truck coming in three per hour, and an empty truck leaving three per hour.

So you got six truck traffic going past homes or on streets for a duration of six months.

And I mean that's probably pretty efficient in the construction world, but in a neighborhood, it just invites ill will.

So anyway, we could maybe make those hall routes different than what's proposed as primary and secondary.

I'd be supportive of that more than what's proposed tonight.

On that point, if the um applicant were to change the route due to a potential acquisition of land or an agreement with the city, would it require them to come back through planning commission for approval of the routes, or is it more so we're approving the grading and it's staff that approves the routes.

Um the hall routes actually would need to be approved by city council, so they would have to come back through for that.

That's in our code.

Yeah.

Yeah, I would I I agree.

I would love to see the routes um staying out of the neighborhoods, but yeah, Maine is hard.

But yeah, Maine is hard.

Because it um Main Street's gonna be hard.

But it's just a lot of traffic on those neighborhood streets.

Of just big trucks.

Yeah.

But I think it's two Maine is two lanes there.

So it's probably easier to if you're coming from west to east, turning off of Main Street into this parcel across the city, would not be such a bad deal for delivery, and then going out the other way to go back to uh the borrow pit west of Westlake.

I mean it'd be a circle, right?

And I think that would probably be if it were my project, that's probably what I'd be looking at.

But there may be a reason why the city doesn't want egress across there.

But I don't know.

I think the ride in would be great, but then if they had to left out, that could create some conflicts.

Yeah.

You could go out through and on the 2300 and oh I see.

Or they could go.

Oh, I see.

And then just write in, right out.

They don't have to backtrack.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, it's expensive the haul materials.

Even empty.

Sure.

Those are my thoughts for the submissions.

Uh benefit.

Uh I like those thoughts.

Um even if it's just on the way in, that's half the traffic.

Um even if they exit on what is currently, you know, the one of these other routes.

That um apparent in one of those neighborhoods.

These massive trucks are rolling through.

I got little ones.

Absolutely.

I'm I'm terrified about that.

Um even a reduction of that rate.

I'm sure it would be greatly appreciated.

Other uh thoughts.

Were we wanting to suggest a different route or suggest something different from yeah, I think so.

I I mean I don't have a problem with the grading.

That needs to be done in order to build the proposed development.

Um, but I I don't really want to accept the primary and secondary hall routes.

So it sounds like you got a motion there.

Okay.

Would you entertain a motion?

Oh, so very much.

All right.

Uh for item 2.1 public hearing and recommendation of edge homes request for review of the Auburn Springs grading permit on approximately 34 acres located at 400 south and 2500 west.

I propose that we provide a positive recommendation to the city council for the grading plan with the exception of the proposed um primary and secondary hall routes that we have before us tonight and recommend that the hall routes be revisited to access through the property that's on the east side of the development coming off of 2300 west if required.

If acquired, yeah.

And or working with the city for a ride-in, ride out to be able to come in off of Main Street, accessing from the north, but would require approval from the city to cross city property.

With the findings that if we can alter those hall routes, it's less injurious and detrimental to the property and those in the vicinity.

And that the proposed use of grading is in compliance if conducted within code with the uh goals and policies of the Lehigh City General Plan and the purposes of the code.

Include all the DRC comments.

Second.

Motion has second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Right.

Stewart City Council.

Yep.

Uh yeah, it'll go to City Council the end of this month.

Let's see, or maybe September.

We'll double check.

Okay.

Sounds great.

It will go to City Council.

There you go.

Good night.

Item 2.2.

Item 2.2 is public hearing and consideration of Steve Atkinson's requests for preliminary subdivision approval of the Shelley Atkinson subdivision, a three-lot residential subdivision located at 498 north, 900 east in the R1 Flex zone.

The proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the R1 Flex zone, except for lot one.

Lot one includes the existing home and does not conform to the current front yard setbacks.

It was constructed before the current code requirements, so it is allowed as a legal non-conforming structure.

If lot one were to be torn down, the new home would have to meet the current setbacks.

The DRC had 19 red line comments, but many of these were related to final subdivision and plat um details.

But please consider all DRC comments in your motion.

This is an administrative item and this is a public hearing item, but there were no online comments.

So I thought I'd turn it back to the commission for any questions.

Very good.

Questions for staff.

I I do have a question just for understanding that that existing home is already legal non-conforming based on code currently, right?

So it doesn't change the fact if we grant the subdivision.

Yeah.

Okay.

That's what I that's what I had thought.

Very good.

Anything else for staff?

Very good.

Is the applicant present?

Go ahead and state your name and fire away.

Steve Atkinson just proposed Shelley Atkinson subdivision at that address, 498 North 900 East.

Um I think it's pretty straightforward.

Did you have any questions for us?

Please.

Are you planning on um tearing down that home and rebuilding or keeping it?

Not in the near future.

Okay.

Not tearing it down in the there we go.

Okay.

And major response.

No, yeah, we plan to leave it there for very good.

Anything else?

All right.

Well, Mr.

Atkinson, you're getting off the hook.

Easy.

That is.

That's easy.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yep.

All right.

This is a public hearing.

Does anyone from the public like to speak of this item?

Awkward eye contact is not induced anyone to come up, so I will go ahead and close the public.

It wasn't awkward.

I feel like we bonded actually.

I thought it was a it was a good moment.

No?

Okay, it was awkward.

So back to the commission for deliberation or motion.

I'll make a motion.

Item 2.2 public hearing in consideration of Steve Atkinson's request for preliminary subdivision approval of the Shelley Atkinson subdivision as three lot residential subdivision located at 498 North, 900 East in the R1 Flex zone.

I move that we approve this action.

And with the findings that the proposed subdivision includes a legal non-conforming home and all the other aspects of the proposed subdivision meet the requirements of the R1 Flex zone.

The proposed subdivision meets the requirements of the Lehigh City Development Code in regards to subdivision approvals.

And I will include all DRC comments, please.

Second.

Motion is second.

All those in favor.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

Thank you.

Hi Shelly.

Amazing.

You happen to find an architect with the same last name.

That's yeah.

Have a great night.

Thank you.

Item 2.3.

Item 2.3 is public hearing and consideration of Andreas and Carrie Horlacker's request for approval of the Horror Lacquer eight-foot privacy fence located at 1222 West, 3060 North.

This is being requested to help block noise from 1200 West and the light from the Bellevue commercial pro uh project.

The applicant is requesting the additional height to enjoy their backyard to a similar level, other people are able to.

The applicant expressed their intent to put up a simulated rock fence.

There were seven comments from the DRC, including to preserve the full width of the public utility easement, and to clarify what will happen to the existing stone columns there today.

This is an exception to the development code.

The planning commission can approve or deny this exception, but it should be based on findings.

Without it turned back to the commission for any questions.

Very good.

Questions for staff.

All right.

Applicant present.

If you'd like to.

If you'd like to speak to this item, now is the time.

And if you don't want to, that's also okay.

No, I think there was one question.

I'm sorry, coming up, state your name.

So I think when I was looking at the initial um name, sorry.

Oh, sorry, Andrea Sorlocker.

I I figured, but you know, we gotta go through the whole thing.

So I think there would when we had that initial meeting, there was a question on why we're doing it, and primarily it's for noise, but we didn't mention the grade part.

So 1200 West, as you know, does have a slight grade.

And so where the house is and the top part of the yard is there is a natural grade.

So when you're an eight-foot fence would add that additional level so that when you're down at the bottom part part of the road or uh the yard, that does block that dominoes pizza sign, you know.

So that that that's another benefit because of that grade.

So in addition to what she'd mentioned.

Okay.

And there's a sample of the fence right there.

You saw the one the one in the picture is six foot, and um this would be similar to that, just eight foot.

I had a question for the um I think one of the DRC comments mentioned uh have you done a noise study and is it is it gonna have the effect that you want before you spend all the money?

I did talk we did get a consult.

He said the primary reason that noise can't doesn't get blocked is something called uh a diffraction.

It's where not necessarily the penetration through the wall, it's up over the wall.

Um he said there's a lot of people that'll spend a lot of money on solid concrete walls that are six feet tall where they need to if they can concentrate.

There's there's a formula he gave me there's you know a lot of standards, but he said if you can get that extra two feet, it blocks, especially with 1200 west.

You get a lot of I mentioned it, tall trucks and fire trucks, especially with that grade, garbage trucks, things like that.

So if if that's approved, he said that would significantly add to the noise reduction.

Thank you.

Oh question as well, if I may.

Sure.

Just trying to clarify is is the elevation of your backyard lower than the road and the commercial property across the street or higher.

We are level with 1200 west.

The house uh you you I don't know if you can see the when we built our house, it's uh we're kind of down at the corner of the lot.

We we've been here since 2015 or 2005, sorry.

So you see the house down there.

So up to that corner, up to that point, there is a grade.

So when you're down at that point at the house, there's enough of a grade where you're going up where you know, or or rather down where I think you lose a little bit of effectiveness of the fence, you know, being shorter.

Okay.

Maybe I'm backwards coming down, but imagine that.

But I also have another question.

There's something about an HOA possibly.

Is there do you have to worry about getting approval there?

I did.

That was one of the things they asked me to do.

I did reach out.

Um we are exempt.

We don't pay HOA fees.

The one of the concerns is we do have a hedge there.

Um a few years ago, they decided that um that was all our responsibility.

We may been maintaining that, and I found out they no longer water that.

I didn't know that, which is why they look so scraggly.

But he he had no qu no qualms telling me that you know, do whatever you want with those edges.

He didn't want to get involved.

You got all this in writing from him, right?

In an email, yes.

Good man.

So it's it's just that iron fence to the on the right.

Yeah, but it's got the the shrub covering it up.

So for several years that offers offer nice privacy.

But now well, you know, 1200 West, it's just it's not the 1200 west of 2005.

Yeah, yeah.

That was like a dirt road back in the day when we moved.

Did you say 2005?

Yeah.

Please.

Oh, okay.

We should debate.

I missed that one, sorry.

You're only requesting for this stretch of fence along 1200 west, not between neighbors to the south and to the northwest.

Right.

There's an addition there is an existing six-foot fence, which is great.

We got good neighbors.

We don't need that.

Is the current fence on the back of the curb, or is there a the plantation?

It looks I mean there's hedges there.

Where are those hedges?

How far how far is the fence from the back of the sidewalk?

So you see that pillar right there.

That is in set I approximately 14 inches from the edge of the sidewalk.

That pillar is probably two feet wide, and then that iron wrought iron fence goes right in the middle all the way up.

There was some question about leaving that that uh uh those massive pillars because it'd be quite a chore to dig those out.

He said that because of the the the fence actually isn't that thick that we're gonna put in.

He said they could just go in front of the existing, as long as we don't impede any of the you know power lines because there is an un there's a I'm not sure all those boxes in that back corner, there are power uh underground power uh lines and things like that.

Is that the HOA?

No, that's us.

I'm assuming that's us.

You own the property that the hedge is planted in.

So on the other side of your fence, you own that property.

Um yes.

HOA doesn't have anything to do with that.

There was actually a mistake when they built our house, our whole subdivision.

We were supposed to be part of the HOA, but they forgot to add us, and so there's been over the years who takes care of it and this and that and the other, and we we just finally we just take care of it.

Personally, I'd call that a victory.

But you know, yeah.

So I'm not a fan of HOAs.

Yeah, it got a little sticky there for a while because there's the grass on the other side, and there's the fence and the hedge and the water line.

We didn't want to go cut the water line until we got all got the okay, but we're we're just gonna cap it the dry water lane.

Okay.

Well, I mean, you're showing here what we were looking at here as well.

Is that heads owned by Lehigh City or is it owned by how accurate.

Yeah.

I mean, it's no, I mean, the it looks like the pillar is on you know his property.

So it looks it looks to be owned by them.

We when there was a debate with the HOA, we didn't know who was supposed to maintain those.

We did get a stern letter saying, hey, those hedges are getting big, it's blocking the sidewalk, you need to take care of them.

And that's how we we reached out to the whoever sent us that letter says who's supposed to take care of this, so that's yours, that's on your property.

And I we were trying to find out if the HOA or the city and the Gal told me.

In fact, I still have that email.

I went back with uh I think the the attorney the city attorney on that, but yeah, so we were told, yeah, that's your responsibility, and you take care of those.

So if you if I heard correctly, correct me if I broke, because I hear things incorrect all the time.

But if I hear correctly, you would remove the existing fence, keep the call or keep the pillars, and just build the new fence to the I guess that would be the what direction south.

No, east, east.

We would take those hedges out too.

They're not being watered any longer.

They're gonna die.

So it would look pretty much like that picture I showed you.

It would just be right along that fence.

In fact, if you go along 1200 west, there's a lot of sections of of uh of neighborhoods that have fenced similar to that, all the way up at the top of the corner before you get to Timothy or Timburgas Highway, there's a long stretch, it's very similar.

And then down in the new subdivision, so it would look very much like that exactly.

Um, just taller, and you wouldn't see the hedges, we'd have to take those out.

I don't think we'd have enough room anyway if we didn't take the hedges out.

So if you took the hedges out, then you're then you have those pillars as a feature in your backyard.

Is that correct?

Pretty much.

It's a feature now.

Maybe he has a dog.

I just again I just want to be clear.

If you have the room to do it, I don't see a problem with it.

I'm just worried that technically that property might be Lehigh City, not Craig.

It really does something.

I mean it's it comes down to what the parcel map says.

I don't think the city's yeah, yeah.

Honestly, even if it is the cities, it would be in the city's best interest to give up a three-inch 120-foot strip uh of land.

But we want to just make sure that Mr.

Horlocker's taken care of appropriately the right way the first time.

You don't get some stupid ladder for having taken, you know, a hundred square inches from the city of the leon.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

I appreciate that.

Um we have had some cases of encroachment recently.

That's a that's why I call out Craig.

We talked about that extensively.

Mr.

Chair, can I chime in?

Please.

Um it looks like I went south, and it looks like there are homes that have taken out the fence and replaced it with other material types that are not the bushes.

Yeah.

So I don't think you're the first one to attempt.

Great.

And If because Craig isn't aware of like an issue, I'm assuming it's been fine.

Sounds like precedence set.

Yeah, the only the only difference between theirs and ours is that extra noise blocking two feet.

You're coming for the two feet, which these um they just it looks six foot.

So yeah, that kind that makes sense.

Yeah.

Anything else, Mr.

Horlock.

Horlacker.

I'm sorry, did I say your last name correctly there?

Close enough.

Yeah.

Close enough.

Um but we had great eye cut contact.

So there's that.

Even if I mispronounced the name.

I'm still one of the things.

All right.

Oh for the city's interest, I think we probably want to just if there's a survey or if you can find your stakes.

I think maybe the city's right of way goes a foot behind the walk, but I'm not a hundred percent just going off of memory of, you know, our old standard used to be four foot planner, four foot walk, one foot behind the walk was our right of way.

But we probably just want to put it on the property line so there's no question in the future.

Why did you know if it's right up against the what would actually happen?

Because like you said, those are in set like 14 inches, and we probably put that fence right against that, so you still have a foot give or take, like you said, maybe a inch a couple of inches.

And there would still be that little bit of it'd just be dirt, I guess.

Or knowing my wife, I'd have to go out and put some nice decorative rocks or something.

Yeah, something like that.

Uh anything else?

All right.

Go ahead and take a seat.

Thank you.

Uh this is a public hearing.

If anyone from the public would like to speak to this item, now's the time.

You usually comment on fences.

No, it's it's wonderful.

It's it's great.

All right.

Seeing none who care to comment, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing.

Bring it back to the commission.

Deliberation or motion.

Just the findings is the new thing, right?

Yep.

So I think uh the I I mean, I would I would have no problem with neighbors up and down 1200 East uh making similar applications.

The that street continues to get busier.

And I actually think beyond the the sound, uh, which it I love that you did have a consult.

Um the uh potential uh light does strengthen the argument.

Well as long as an applicant isn't looking for a Charlie Crocker style spite wall, you know.

I'm generally 25 feet.

Rah.

An extra an extra two feet in a fairly you know arguable scenario.

I'm pretty on board with that.

But that's me.

Rejoinders?

Agreements.

What do we got?

I'll make a motion if you'll take one.

Oh, I will.

I will very much take one.

For item 2.3, public hearing and consideration of Andreas and Carrie.

I want to say it right.

What it how do you say it?

It's Horlocker.

Horlacher.

Horlacher.

Okay.

Horlock, or locker, like a locker.

Uh request for approval of the eight-foot privacy fence located at twenty twelve twenty-two west, thirty-sixty north.

Um I move that we approve uh the fence with the finding or the eight-foot privacy fence with the findings that the proposed fence will allow the applicant added enjoyment of their backyard, similar to what a person not next to an arterial road may enjoy.

Um, and that the applicant um provided adequate justification for why they want or need the eight-foot fence, including noise and light um nuisances that they currently are experiencing.

And I will include all DRC comments.

Motion has second, all those in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Mr.

Horlocker.

We congratulate you on the fence to come.

Yes.

Begs the question, if I may, Mr.

Chairman.

Do we need to worry about where we have businesses and lights and things like that?

Uh you know, this also applies to like neighborhood gas stations put in neighborhoods, and maybe we need to revisit when lights should be turned down and just so that it doesn't become the new state.

Does it become right a assumed need that everyone needs to upgrade their fences?

I agree.

Anyway, just a thought.

Let's pass on to staff.

Okay.

Very good.

All right.

Let's go.

All right.

So I was asked to give a training on deed restrictions.

I do have bad news though.

Um this will be a general overview of deed restrictions, how it applies to a certain item that might or might not potentially come before you.

We can't discuss that because that would technically be a violation of the open meetings act.

But if something comes up, I will do my best to answer it in the right.

Craig, you're just loyaling lawyering so hard right now, and I restract that.

I am trying.

Yeah.

Gotta do every once in a while.

Alright, so what is a deed restriction?

So deeds are a gift.

Pretty much a deed is a deed is what you get, a title to your property.

What deed restrictions are is it's a terms and conditions attached to the transfer of that property.

It restricts the use, future sale, potential improvements.

Who here lives in an HOA?

Did you notice that you there are C C and Rs as part of your HOA?

Those are considered deed restrictions.

So I ask a question.

Yes.

Do D they only restrict, right?

They wouldn't grant like additional.

Yeah.

So if you have an deed restrictions, I guess.

Yeah.

Just clarifying.

So as Kim said, the easiest way to describe it is that you have a bundle of sticks, and that that's what they use in law school.

So that's why I go back to that.

Fee, you know what, in defeasible fee is you own every stick possible.

That's just not really practical in our society where there's utility easements, you know, different type of easements running through properties.

Those are things that restrict the bundle of sticks which you own for your home.

And deed restrictions are just one of those.

So in order for a deed restriction to actually matter, um, one of the parties imposing the restriction must own the property.

So as a planning commission, you can you can say, hey, we want to put deed restrictions on this property, but it's not you as the planning commission putting those deed restrictions on the property.

It's the developer or it's the person who owns the property who's willing to do that as a contract between the city and them, and then they the developer will then transfer that to the buyer of the property.

So technically, as the city, we are not the ones imposing the restriction.

It's the property owner.

And the reason why they want to do that is because as part of the contract or something, they get a benefit.

They get more density, they're able to not build a fence.

They're able to do a myriad of things that they don't have to do.

And so, as part of that, the city's not forcing anyone to enter into a deed restriction.

Um it's always the developer or landowner's choice whether or not they want the benefit associated with the deed restriction.

Um they must be in writing, uh, they have to be recorded, and it's a contract, however, it's composed, and courts will look at it.

It is very strictly uh read.

So they need to be detailed and understood.

Um I appreciate what you just said about the party wanting it, not it's not imposed by the local government.

Yes.

But can you give maybe a couple of examples of where the party would want it in lieu of it gives them something, right?

It's restricting something, but it allows something else in lieu of that.

Yeah.

So with regards to let's say there was a an overlay zone coming through a council, and it's part of that overlay zone.

The individual wanted to make it so that they could that let's say that zone only allows for 10 homes.

But if they come in and say, hey, we want to put a deed restriction, X, Y, and Z on this.

If we do that, can we build 20 homes?

You know, can we put a price?

Can we cap the the price or something like that?

That would be the benefit that they'd get because they'd be able to build 20 homes as opposed to 10.

So in that instance, the city's giving up the zoning rate for that.

Which is another way to do it.

But the thing, the difference between a deed restriction is that it it travels with the property.

Right, it runs with the land.

Yes.

So, and we're just gonna talk about that, which is the next slide.

So it runs with the land or touches and concerns the property.

I don't know if any of you have ever been to Europe, but especially Germany, they have these beautiful little homes, but by laws and by restrictions, they can't change the look of those homes.

Um that's just one example.

Um the covenant or restriction are inseparable from the property itself.

So it becomes part of the property.

So I own a home for say, let's say if there's an overlay district where there will be a deed restriction where you have to cap the the price at a certain, you know, market level equation or whatever.

That I own my home with that restriction.

So and that is an agreement between you and the developer, and the city gave up its rights, it's zoning rights in order to allow for that lower income housing or whatever.

The benefits, I mean, ultimately it's up to the landowner whether or not they want to accept that benefit.

So they have to be strictly construed, ambiguous.

Utah courts have upheld the enforceability of restrictions when they are clear, unambiguous, and serve a legitimate purpose.

So that's one of the key things that the courts look at.

And so they attach typically they often they attach to subdivisions.

So a developer's trying to get more density or they're trying to whatever they're trying to do to make it pencil.

And so as part of that, they'll put in, you know, with the city when they're dealing with the municipality, it's we'll do this density for X, Y, or Z.

But when it's them just doing a subdivision, that would be the C C and Rs and other things that they're requiring.

And the reason for that is they want you know to may that people have to maintain their home in a certain manner because that will maintain its value, and it reduces risk of future owners that something will change.

So if in your HOA think of the rules that you have to follow with regards to cutting your lawns or painting your house, those types of things make it so there's consistency.

Um the purchaser must agree to the restrictions, and then through a proper title search, restrictions shouldn't they shouldn't come as a surprise.

Um we've ran into some issues on some other things where sometimes people don't understand a title search or don't do their due diligence, but ultimately that's you know the the caveat of buyer beware.

Um how much responsibility in the disclosure laws that there are restrictions already existing?

Yeah, and that's and that's that's really what it would come down to, and whether or not there was a proper title search, and that gets into real estate law and all that stuff.

That ultimately the city's not really in that game.

We just say, hey, developer, we will let you do X if we get Z.

So the potential purchaser must agree to restrictions, rubs me wrong, because they have no choice.

No, they do, they can go somewhere else.

Right, but then they're not the purchaser.

Yeah, right.

Yeah, so the purchaser must agree.

Yeah.

Right.

So it's not that they potential to agree or uh I'm right there with you, yes, up to the landowner.

But you're saying yes, it is up to the landowner, which is the developer who then turns around and sells it to your average Joe who's never gonna have the chance to make this sort of assessment.

You can say, well, it's on the free market, but as you just said, if these are out left, right, and center.

What if I just want to buy a house that doesn't have all the HOAs are all all over the place today?

I mean, I just said a few minutes ago, I'm not a fan of HOAs.

Yeah.

So uh anyhow, yeah, carry on.

Carry on.

Whether you like them or not.

I mean, they're they're part of the legal landscape in our the idea that the landowner is giving up this is giving up this right to the city to get some in exchange.

That I'm not saying this about you, but that constant to me feels disingenuous when we know that it's really the landowner's doing it to turn around and sell it a minute later.

Yeah.

And ultimately, I you know, looking at it, the city's position is we're trying to further an end, right?

Whether that's affordable housing, whether that's more amenities, whether that's whatever the city's trying to do.

That's the goal that the city is trying to achieve.

The landowner, most of them are trying to make a pencil.

Now some are not, and trying to help the housing situation, but that's neither here nor there.

Okay.

I like it.

It's like a ray of the router, and so if we do anything to like turn the screening off the state.

Is there any chance that ends, or we just have to power through that?

I think we just got to power through it.

Carry on, Craig.

There we go.

So there are restrictions on certain deed restrictions.

They can't be immoral or illegal.

They can't be contrary to public policy.

That for example of that would be forbidding future sales based on race, religion.

There's a whole slew of case law associated with that.

Can they be contrary to to city code?

Could the developer that really insist they don't want to put sidewalks in their community?

Just throwing that out there as an example, right?

Could they put a deed restriction that gives them something, the city gets something, and they say we don't have to build sidewalks.

I mean, it's just like a with regards to a development code.

The city can contract to do that.

I don't know why the city would, but I just gave a weird example.

I don't know.

No, we're just running with the hypothetical.

So I mean ultimately the city has the ability to contract and to go to make into these deals based on, you know.

So it could be against code.

Sure.

Could go against our code.

But yeah, it just can't be immoral, illegal or against public policy.

And Nate, what is your definition of public policy?

Can't be unconstitutional or there's set laws.

I gave them an assignment.

Common law, uh constitutional law, statutory law, stuff like that, that says you cannot do something that you cannot buy up with that, and that can't be can't make somebody illegal.

Yeah.

Is there a legal definition for immoral?

I was just thinking.

Well, as the Supreme Court justice once said, it's uh you know it when you see it.

Um the interesting thing about these deed restrictions is they're outside of common law.

So typically in common law, you couldn't do this.

But over time this has been accepted into our site society.

Um because in common law, once you own the property, you own the property.

You have the full bundle of sticks.

So this is just kind of the polling back on that to help further the greater good or whatever.

Similar to already having if you buy property within a city, you're subject to the code.

Yes.

Yeah, zoning, those types of things.

I mean, ultimately anything we do here affects somebody's property rights.

Um when I say here, I mean in planning commission.

Right.

Um so you can't you really you can't forbid any you can't have deed restrictions that you know forbid sale based on age, family size, race, religion, those types of things.

So I mean it's pretty pretty straightforward.

You can't the early 20th century is no more.

We can't do that, which probably a good good thing.

No, it is a good thing.

Um not probably, it is.

You're on the record.

Yes.

Can I ask a question on that though?

Yes.

Because an earlier iteration of an item that we're not discussing that came up.

There was a pre I mean they propose that the first people that have a chance to buy them are of a certain economic status.

Would that be a economic status is a little bit different uh with regards to that?

Um ultimately the only way that it's illegal is if it's forbidden based on race or religion or one of the protected um civil rights.

And I don't believe that the thing I'm trying not to talk about it without talking about it.

But I believe that you're talking about something that we might talk about in the future, didn't have any that same language.

Yeah.

Um but I was just curious on that.

So sorry, go ahead.

No, and that's fine.

The only way to terminate a deed restriction is upon written agreement by all the parties involved.

So that's or if there is an expiration date.

So is the developer involved in this property forever?

Unless there's some term limit on the deed, right?

Yeah, so it would need to be all the parties involved.

Which would who are the who's involved?

It's not the city.

Yeah.

It's the developer.

Well, it would be a recorded deed, so it would have to go through the city as well because it's a city would be an interested party.

Probably the county, right?

Yeah, or the county.

So but the city could go in and say, hey.

Now, is the developer involved?

No, because they've transferred their rights to the the person who purchased it.

So if if they were to terminate a deed restriction, it would be the owner of the property in the city or county.

So like if you put an expiration date, let's say ten years.

You know, after ten years, then the deed restriction, let's say you want to put a limit on how much you could sell the home for.

Who enforces deed restrictions?

That is a great question.

Um it would be it would be the city would be required to to look at that.

Or if there's an HOA, it would be the HOA that's so here's the thing.

Okay.

It would mainly most of the the enforcement comes through the HOA through C C and Rs and those types of things.

Cities do not get involved in C C and Rs.

Um with regards to a percentage, I believe that would be the HOA that would be they would be the ones enforcing that as well.

If they failed to enforce it, then the city could step in if they needed to, but we do not want to get into that.

But if it's an overlay created within the city, yeah, hypothetically.

Then it would be the city that would be on that enforcement side, right?

Sure, but it would it would still start with the HOA if we required that they but what if there is no HOA?

Let's run with that hypothesis.

If there is no HOA, then it probably would fall on the city to catch something like that if it didn't.

However, it should be caught in a title search and should never be sold without the restrictions.

Sure.

So we were we I was talking about when we talked about deed restrictions, like jokingly threw out potential of a deed restriction that had ifs and thens, right?

Parameters to it.

Is that really a thing?

Could that like if you're with triggering events?

Yeah, if somebody owns the property for 10 years, then the deed restriction could suspend.

But then if there's a transfer of property, it gets re within that ten ten year period.

After the 10 year period, let's say somebody sells the property, there's a transfer.

Can that deed restriction reset for the new owner if it's of a time duration?

That's what we're doing.

Well, yeah, like again, that goes back to the very beginning.

Did all the did the parties agree as part of a contract?

So the person the purchaser, if they wanted to enter into that deed restriction, would have to accept that.

So that's that's really what it comes down to.

So hypothetically, the land on the city.

After which it would end, but in the event that it did sell, say 13 years later, that clock would restart with uh with any new owner, because that would be the nature of the restrictions.

The problem is you can't run into the rule of perpetuities.

Um did some research on that too.

Nate, let's hear about the rule of perpetuities.

Yeah, so in contract law, you so back in the olden times, we'll go back to the 1980s.

So I'm just kidding.

I love it.

No, this is even for fancy free.

I'm just trying.

Um the problem is is back in the 1900s and that you had large landowners, very wealthy individuals that wanted to control their money even after they were gone.

So the rule of perpetuities was put in place to prohibit that, you know, kind of the rule of perpetuities.

If you were to visualize it, it would be a dead person reaching their hand out from the grave trying to continue their monopolies.

Um the rule what the rule of perpetuities says is once you get past 21 years, um, there's certain now there's certain exceptions and those types of things, but typically um with regards to certain agreements after 21 years they're they're void.

Now, with regards to land use and C C and Rs with HOAs, there there is some statutory rules and other things.

So in answer to your question, maybe that would be that would be allowed.

But probably why would this run afoul of the law of perpetuities but a deed restriction doesn't because you are describing my concern and problem with deed restrictions is exactly this.

It's because there are dead reaching out telling people what they're gonna do with their land.

Yeah, the the whole reason the whole point of a deed restriction, so your if and then type of things, it has to be let me go back to the language.

When they are clear, unambiguous, and serve a legitimate purpose.

Um they can't be kind of ambiguous.

If this happens, then this happens.

If this happens, then this happens.

They they need to be clear as to what the triggering events are.

Instead of if could it be when?

Yeah.

When this happens.

Yeah.

So when this land sells, it cannot be.

If it's within 10 years, you know, as long as it's there's a clear date.

If within 10 years, if this is sold within 10 years, that has to be sold.

That would just say we're not used in F.

Yes.

But there's an expiration.

It can't expire and then restart.

Because that would be a new I have a question.

Relative to takings.

Yes.

I think the difference is the owner agrees to the deed restriction at the time of purchase, then it wouldn't be considered a taking right?

I mean, no.

Because we we do deed restrictions in my world.

And we have to be very careful.

It has to be with the owner's acknowledgement and agreement.

And it restricts them from certain things, but also then frees them to do other things.

Yes.

Or at least the perception that it frees them to do other things.

Allegedly.

But if we were to put what we would consider an environmental covenant or a certificate of completion on a property without the owner's knowledge, then we would be subject to a potential takings lawsuit, because there would be the perceived devaluing of the property based on uh the pro the problem with that though is there wouldn't be a deed restriction because it wouldn't have been properly entered into and the courts would find that that was null and void.

Okay.

Right.

So Mr.

Chair, I have a question.

Um different zones.

Let me go back to the picture.

There you go.

Different zones generally will add or take away from the value of a parcel.

Because it's the table of use is associated to it and what you can do, things like that.

Um deed restrictions.

Does that add or take away from the value of a property?

Um it can.

It all depends on the restriction and what the what the benefit, what the bargain for benefit was that the property owner was trying to gain or get from it.

It might limit your potential pool of buyers.

Yeah.

Like Greg doesn't ever want to buy an HOA.

So if you have a home in an HOA, he's now not a potential buyer.

But if you're the property owner and you own 20 acres and you want to put in 40 houses instead of 20, you might be interested in putting some restrictions on it, such as, you know what, I'm gonna put four parks in this area and amenities and other things and make it so only, you know, for the first ten years, it can only be sold at this percent of market value because I know that I'm getting these extra ten homes as opposed to so that's why a developer would want to do that.

Why would you need a deed restriction to accomplish that when you could have a development agreement do the same thing?

It sounds like we're s uh going around the process of amending the general plan and or changing zoning.

Yeah, and the and the difference is is a development agreement is a contract with the and that kind of just that doesn't always run with the land.

Right.

Runs with the it runs with the developer, hey, the developer's gonna promise to do X, Y, and Z.

The city's gonna get X, you know, A, B, and C, whereas a deed restriction is, hey, you know, for example, if we want affordable housing, we want to make sure that homes are sold with you know at a certain percentage of market value.

A deed restriction runs with that for as long as it's in there and it will go with the deed.

If it's a time-limited deed restriction, like 10 years.

Sure.

Okay.

Or you could even have it be a full forever.

It could run with the land, but that's effectively it wouldn't because it doesn't reset after if we're talking about sales to certain economic groups, it doesn't reset after so many years.

What's the most popular deed restriction?

Probably C C and Rs.

Like HOAs.

Yeah.

And then what's the least popular?

I'm gonna turn to the expert Gary.

Popular or at least common?

Or maybe the least common.

I don't think any of them are popular.

Probably easements.

Well, easements happen all the time.

Yeah.

Yeah, but no one is excitedly is like, yes, this piece of my land, I can't use this on it.

Yeah.

I would I would say a lot of deed restrictions are probably in areas where there's some sort of natural or human-made hazard or something that's causes them to say, hey, I own this property, I can't build unless the city is very you know particular with me and or my HOA or those types of things, so I need to make sure that would be the probably the least restrictive common.

If it's a deed restriction, it's got to be done with the acknowledgement and consent of the property owner.

So there may not be from their perspective, it might be liberating for them to restrict it under certain using my role, for example, uh contaminated property, and they clean it up, they get a uh certificate of completion, which then allows certain land uses but bars other land uses.

Absent that there's the potential perceived liability that nobody would ever want to use it for a certain land use.

And we're providing them a green light for that.

Yeah.

Not saying that that's what they have to do with it, but which limits them from certain liabilities and other things.

But it restricts their ability to maybe access groundwater, which really in uh development, you don't need to worry about that because you're not going to put in a private well.

But it does allow that they could then build residential.

So if you're the owner and you're allowing a deed restriction, I don't know that there is a least favorable one.

I think there's you look at some of the you know 55 and older communities.

You know, those are those are CCNRs in there that a certain percentage of the individuals in the community need to be over 55.

But that goes directly against what you are talking about with policy.

You can't discriminate based on age.

Well, and that's why they have to have a certain percentage that are not over that uh age.

Wait a minute.

Yeah.

Now we're getting into case law and other things.

Uh yeah.

I mean, so what if it was uh, you know, X percentage can't or can't or have to be right?

Yeah.

So that's based on is that based on demographics of within a five mile radius, a ten mile radius?

Well, it's it's based on on case law and those types of things.

But the benefit of that is if I'm an older individual and I don't like children, moving into a community like that gives me that opportunity.

I on this line of thought.

We like if if Kim correct me if I'm wrong, but if my memory serves me correct, um Thanksgiving point, the a certain percentage of them have to be homeowner occupied.

But that's not through a deed restriction, that's through a development agreement.

Oh, you're talking in the TOD.

Yeah.

Yeah, we did say I think it's 25%.

Uh but it's it's not deed restricted that way.

It's just a part of the agreement.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And so why do we have to place restrictions on parcels when we could just do it in the agreement?

Well, and ultimately it's not the city putting them in there, it's the developer.

It's a line that's a good thing.

So why not just accomplish the goal through a development agreement that is less permanent?

Yeah, it feels like in one instance we're gonna tie a hand behind someone's back for some event, and the other we're gonna just gonna hack it off.

Like there's no getting that limb back.

Well, the benefit of a deed restriction is well, you hate HOAs.

There are people that like them because it gives them a lot of people.

I I understand and appreciate their value in a condominium situation.

I totally get that.

I personally am glad that I live in an HOA that is not very restrictive.

But the the thing is is everyone, you know, deed what a deed restriction does is when you purchase a property, it should be on the title search and you should sign an acknowledgement that you understand that's part of the 50 million documents that you sign that you acknowledge their C C and Rs that there's a deed restriction that you can't, you know, do X, Y, or Z.

But for some of the purchasers, if it's a you know, I'm gonna buy this home for 75% of market value because even though I understand I can't sell it for X amount of years because of that deed restriction.

For some people that might be a benefit to that.

A lot of HOAs in the past have put restrictions on basement apartments, they put restrictions on that, but the state code has come in and blown that up.

Yeah.

Have those become null and void?

Yeah.

Well, if a deed restriction contracts, I've I've lived in an HOA that says you cannot put in on a basement apartment, you cannot sublease your house, you cannot, you know, do all these things, right?

Yeah, so you can contract away certain rights when you when it comes to property.

So that would be an argument between you and your HOA.

But did the But if someone complains to the state and says, hey, they've got a basement apartment, the state's gonna say okay.

And they're gonna say, well, our HOA says this, and we're like, well, that's a private, that's a civil matter between you and your HOA.

I mean, for example, we you know, look at parking up in Trevor's Mountain, where they have parking enforcement and part of their CCNR says that their individuals uh their members can't park on the the road at night.

Well, we've had complaints to the city and what the the city's position is those are public roads.

If you've got an issue with them writing evil letters to you or angry letters to you and those not evil angry letters to you, or citing you or giving you fines, that's between you and them because you have a private contractual agreement with your homeowners association.

Now if they're starting to cite people that aren't part of the homeowners association, the city can go, hold up, this is our street, you can't do that.

So I I think what Tyson perhaps was getting at is let's say running with his scenario that the state then passes a law saying HOAs cannot restrict renting out basements or subleasing their homes.

Does this then given that a municipality is a subset of the state, regardless of what's on the deed, would the new state law supersede and effectively rend null and void the deed restriction.

You're gonna hate this answer.

Maybe it all depends on how it's written.

It all depends on how it's written and how it came out in the courts because people value their right to contract with one another.

And a private contract between two people when someone buys a home in an HOA or in an area, people have the right to enter into an agreement in a contract.

So it all comes back to contract law.

So now could the state effectively write a law that says we're saying that contract is no good.

Potentially, yes.

And then it would get challenged in court.

Yes.

Yeah, okay.

I actually don't hate that answer.

I found it quite intriguing.

Yeah.

I mean that's just one example of the answer, it depends.

Yeah.

No, he's he's lawyering what Craig, we know why you have your job, sir.

You are bravo.

So sorry.

You're doing a great job here tonight.

Nate, you want to do that.

These are a lot of great non-answers.

We appreciate it.

I'm trying.

I hope you guys know.

I'm trying to I mean ultimately you know I'm teasing, right?

You're doing a great job, and I appreciate everything.

But I mean the benefits of of deed restrictions, there are some benefits.

Um if that's the school of thought that you you know we think we do.

Development agreements is another way um to to regulate land as well as general plan and zoning, which we feel is probably the I mean, I'll speak for Kim.

He probably likes that way better.

Um because if you're just doing development agreements and deed restrictions, you know, that's not a full general plan and going through what zoning was what it is.

So I have a Kim jump in any time.

I have a general question, Craig, relative to deed restrictions specifically in terms of um transparency notice.

I mean, there's a zone change, it's noticed.

But there's a deed restriction, it's not necessarily noticed, right?

There's no state law that requires a notice of a deed restriction, because that's between the purchaser and the seller.

And the things that we're not talking about tonight, I think we ought to look at somehow in providing some level of transparency for those kinds of deed restrictions because I think it impacts more than just the buyer.

And it all comes down to the title search and the information you get when you purchase a property and the documents that you go through.

Um but I'm talking about neighborhoods that bought in a certain neighborhood with the understanding it was gonna be zoned a certain way.

Now we're talking about a possible deed restriction on uh vacant parcel, large or small, that would change the feel of that particular neighborhood that someone did their due diligence that's already living there, and there's no say in the process of allowing that deed restriction.

Yeah.

So you know what I'm saying?

Yeah.

I mean, we we'd notice on a zone change from R 122 to an R18, then come out and be heard and the elected officials make that decision based on public input.

What we're hearing, what I'm taking away from this is that with a deed restriction, there isn't necessarily that transparency in a property transaction, which I think is detrimental to the community as a whole.

Yeah, and Kim, it's my under go ahead.

Oh, I was gonna say if the deed restriction is part of a development agreement that we're that the city is entering into, there is a public notice requirement for that.

So if we're gonna entertain deed restrictions as part of a development agreement, we would send out notification.

So there would be some public notice.

Now it wouldn't maybe be as explicit as saying, you know, this includes deed restrictions.

It would probably just say, hey, there's a development proposal, it's it's asking for whatever tool we're you know, invoking, whether it's a PRD PUD, come to the meeting at this night and then they'd have an opportunity, they'd have to look in there and say, Oh, as part of this proposal, there's deed restrictions.

Yeah.

And and Kim brought something up that's interesting.

You can have deed restrictions as part of development agreements.

But you don't have to do that.

So that'll really have to have it.

Yeah, you can do a deed restriction without a development agreement.

Sure.

Yeah.

That happens all the time.

Yeah.

Yeah.

If a builder just chooses they don't want any houses below 1,500 square feet is a very common one, or you have to have brick on your home, or you can only have certain colors or we kind of talking about creating a tool within code that allows for deed restrictions under certain development agreements or within certain areas that are pre-identified that's subject to public comment.

I'm trying to think of the practical application of the discussion tonight.

Since I wasn't here last week.

I was told to talk about deed restrictions.

Yeah, that is part of the SHAR proposal that you'll see in two weeks.

Yep.

The um sorry, were you done?

Yeah.

Okay.

You took a big breath there.

I wasn't sure if you were done.

Um to tack on to what Commissioner Everett was talking about as far as noticing the public.

I see the deed restriction way very much as the general plan change that we did, the overhaul, where it was a long process, very public.

There was a lot of opportunities for that input.

There was a lot of public meetings, but then it was set.

And so then when somebody's property changes next door to them, they come in and say, I did I had no idea about this, but they had a very public long meeting, right?

There was a long opportunity a year that we had that open, right?

Um for visibility for going through the transparency process.

Deed restrictions seem to be in that same vein.

There is a public, we're talking about it publicly.

People should understand or know this.

It's not necessarily going to be an ongoing notification.

But a development agreement is the opposite.

It would be a one-off.

Every time a development agreement was being made, it would be publicly notified.

Yeah, and that's why the legislature made it.

So now development agreements have to go through the full process of planning commission and city council.

And I mean, obviously we can't take this discussion on deed restrictions and make it fully isolated from what's coming in front of you in two weeks.

But I mean, but the issue is is deed restrictions are happening every day in this city.

Typically, the city um isn't involved a ton with regards to deed restrictions.

We have other tools and methods that we use, such as development agreements, such as we have our general plan and the planning commission and these types of things that we go through.

Deed restrictions are typically used with developers, builders, and the people they sell to.

So and even with regards to anything going forward, the city would never it and correct me if I'm wrong, we would never force anyone to say, hey, you have to do a deed restriction.

What we would say is there here's a here's the menu of things you can do on your property based on the general plan based on an overlay zone based on whatever.

If you pick item B, that item will require an a deed restriction if you want to do that.

That doesn't prohibit you from doing everything anything else on your property.

It's just if you want that one thing.

It just prohibits any future landowner from doing that thing.

I mean, maybe they're gonna live in all 20 homes.

Maybe you're gonna occupy all of them at the same time.

But that's the thing is we're trying to ultimately, as the city, we don't own the property.

We're just trying to make it fit within the plan that we're trying to establish and make.

I get it, I don't have any complaints about the city, but I see this as kind of a I won't use the word backdoor, but I use side door way of increasing density for a developer.

Yeah.

That's a little iffy.

Yeah, without the standard process of uh no well, and I haven't seen it, and I don't I'm not familiar with what's coming from.

I'm just speaking generally because we've all been talking generally.

And I'm not talking about anything, I'm just I'm making some assumptions.

I'm just I'm making some assumptions.

I don't have any dog.

But I just think this is a slippery slope that we're gonna really have to I appreciate the better understanding of uh deed restrictions, but you know me long enough, you know my sarcasm, right?

Okay.

Um I'm very grateful for uh for this training now.

And this counts as your part of your annual training that you get with regards to land use.

So education units to be here tonight.

About point five.

Yeah.

And also just wanted you guys to know if there are issues like this that you just don't understand.

Nate would love to give a training to you guys.

Oh no, I'm just kidding.

Nate, we use that.

That's what that's what we're here for.

We would like a two-hour training on perpetual uh law of perpetuity.

Yeah, on the law of perpetuity.

Well, it's like the law holes.

Once you realize joking aside, Nate's gonna be more our rep rep here, right?

Who knows?

So what?

Oh, we can't talk about that either.

No, we can't.

As of right now, it's me.

But I will be out of town for ic in the upcoming on September 11th as well as October 8th or 9th.

So Nate will be covering.

All right, all right.

Yeah.

It'll be she came on her birthday.

Yeah.

But I want I want you as the commission to know that we're not.

So do Gary's wife.

Actually, so if your wife truly loves you.

She would dumb.

With your five years.

Yeah.

Yeah, but you should say that to her that way as well.

I think it'll go over really well.

So this is the this is the day before, it's not the actual anniversary.

But like it was regarded to your question that you had.

Hopefully, my email helped.

Yeah, and I thank you.

Yeah.

That was very helpful.

And that and that's what we're here for.

If you guys have questions with regards to what's going on or basic things.

If they're simple, I can do an email, I'll do that.

If it's something more complicated, we have no problem.

I mean, the last thing you want to do is see a PowerPoint from me after a 14-item meeting.

But on these shorter meetings, I'm more than willing to come in and train and do whatever.

You turned our 25-minute meeting into an hour and a half, though.

So I I wasn't asking questions.

I'm just kidding.

I'm kidding.

Sponge of the night.

No, that was no.

Do you have any basic answers?

Yeah.

Well, we only have questions because you didn't explain that.

He's only proving why he is good at his job.

No, that was that was good though.

Hey, I gave Emily a very straightforward answer.

Can you share it with the rest of you?

I thought it was sent to the rest of you.

It was solid navy.

Yeah.

No, it was a no getting email.

Yeah, I saw it.

Yeah, no, thank you.

I do appreciate that.

That was helpful.

But that's the thing is we're here to help you guys.

So if you do have any questions, I would rather, you know, sitting over there for two hours than then say, Craig, what do you think about this legal issue?

It's great.

90% of the time I can give you an answer or a non-answer, as Greg likes to say.

But if you think of it beforehand, I'd be more than willing to prepare and put something together for you guys.

So don't be afraid to shoot me an email or remember correctly.

I think the chair requested that you be present in two weeks during that item.

Yeah.

Okay.

And by the way, uh I just am remembering it won't be until September 11th.

It's not on the 28th.

We might have to push it off.

Or we must push it off.

We might have Ryan here.

Okay.

We might actually use our bylaws and let you push something off.

We didn't visit John.

Did we?

I did it last year.

You don't remember that?

I don't remember that.

Because I was gonna be out of town and I knew how dicey it was, and I wasn't gonna I think I was gonna be gone too.

Yeah.

And we we weren't gonna um leave our poor brand spinking new alternates to take one of the you know hottest ticket items.

Well because we love you, King.

Gotcha, brother.

That's right.

Well, and the nice thing is is that you know the city council listens and they understand your guys' concerns, and I've been in meetings where they said, hey, the planning commissioner said this.

How do we change it?

So they do listen.

So I listen to we most of the time.

Sometimes.

Yeah.

Thank you, Craig.

Uh shall we adjourn?

Motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn.

Motion and second, all is in favor.

I need to name it.

So what did I miss last week?

Is it anybody?