[Call to Order]
[00:00:07]
TUESDAY, AUGUST 18TH, 2026. NEAR MISSING COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AND COMMISSIONER ALLEN.
SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. NO, NO NO NO. JUST KIDDING. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GET STARTED WITH THE CONSENT CALENDAR. AND WE'VE GOT TWO THINGS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR.
ONE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION FOR THE MEETING MINUTES AND THE OTHER ONE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THOSE? OKAY. NEXT WE'VE GOT THE ENCLAVE. 3222 WEST 8750 SOUTH. TAYLOR. YEAH. THIS IS A ENCLAVE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE JORDAN VALLEY. TOD WITH ITS 56 TOWNHOME UNITS. IT'S A PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN ALONG WITH THE 56 UNITS. THERE'S TWO ADDITIONAL PARKS WHICH ARE BEING CREATED FOR OPEN SPACE AND ONES FOR THE ROAD. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S ACTUALLY GOT FULL APPROVAL BEFORE IN THE PAST, BUT BECAUSE OF THE DOWNTURN OF THE ECONOMY, THEY DIDN'T BUILD IT WITHIN TIME. AND SO IF YOU DON'T BUILD A PROJECT WITHIN TWO, YOUR APPROVAL EXPIRES. SO THE APPROVAL HAS EXPIRED AND THEY'RE COMING BACK FOR APPROVAL OF THAT NOW. CAN WE ASK ABOUT THE OR. YEAH, THAT'S THIS ONE RIGHT. NO. OH, SORRY. NEVER MIND. THAT'S ALL. YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANY EMAILS I KNOW OF.
WE WON'T ASK YOU. YEAH. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN ABOUT THE EMAIL THAT YOU DON'T KNOW NOTHING ABOUT. MY, MY GUESS IS THEY NEED TO HAVE IT SURVEYED. THAT'S USUALLY THE RESPONSE.
ALRIGHT, NEXT IS THE OLD BINGHAM. SUBDIVISION, I GUESS HOW YOU SAY IT. YEAH. SO YEAH, THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, FIVE LOTS GOING IN IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD JUST EAST OF BANGERTER HIGHWAY. SO IT'S BETWEEN BAKER HIGHWAY AND OLD BINGHAM HIGHWAY AND THEN JUST NORTH OF TERRA LINDA ELEMENTARY. SO IT'S ONE AND A HALF ACRE PIECE. ONE OF THE LARGER PIECES ON THE WEST SIDE OF OLD BINGHAM HIGHWAY THAT THEY'RE LOOKING TO DEVELOP. IT'S JUST KIND OF IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME FOR MANY YEARS WITH A LARGE BACKYARD.
AND SO WE WANT TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT. BUT YEAH, LIKE I SAID, IT'S FIVE ACRE OR FIVE LOTS FOR THOSE LOTS WILL BE BUILDABLE LOTS. THE FIFTH LOT ON THE EAST END CONTAINS EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. SO THEY'RE LOOKING TO KEEP THAT. AND THEN ALL OF THESE LOTS WILL BE FRONTING A PRIVATE LANE, WHICH IS REALLY KIND OF THE MAIN PURPOSE OF WHY IT'S COMING UP. PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT. NORMALLY, WE'RE JUST VOTING ON THE PRIVATE LANE AT THIS POINT, RIGHT? YEAH. NORMALLY THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN JUST AN AMENDED SUBDIVISION BECAUSE IT'S PART OF THE SUBDIVISION THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2019. BUT BECAUSE OF THAT PRIVATE LANE, WE HAVE TO. SO CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT EMAIL THEN WHERE DO YOU WANT ME TO START? WELL, I JUST WAS I WHEN AFTER I GOT DONE READING ALL THAT I WAS CONFUSED. YEAH. SO THERE'S, THERE'S QUITE A FEW THINGS, SO I'LL TRY TO REMEMBER AS MUCH AS I CAN. BUT THE BIGGEST ONE THEY'RE SAYING IS THE ACCEPTED MARKERS THAT THEY HAD. YEAH. SO THE, THEY DID HAVE THIS SURVEYED. SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE SURVEYOR HAD BASICALLY FOUND SOME EXTRA MARKERS THAT THEY, FROM WHAT I COULD TELL, WEREN'T QUITE LINING UP WITH THE ORIGINAL MARKERS OF THE 2019 SUBDIVISION. SO THEY WEREN'T RECOGNIZING THOSE. BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER IS DISPUTING THAT. BUT I DO WANT TO CLARIFY, AS FAR AS THE CITY'S CONCERNED, WE DON'T GET INVOLVED IN THOSE PROPERTY LINE DISPUTES. THAT'S PURELY BETWEEN THE APPLICANT. AND THAT'S IN FACT, BOUNDARY.
YEAH. IN FACT, BOUNDARY DISPUTES BY STATE LAW, WE CAN'T EVEN REVIEW ON THIS. AS FAR AS THE WATER INCURSION, I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT BERM THAT THEY'RE PUTTING ON THE WHAT IS IT, THE WEST SIDE OR ON THE SOUTH SIDE? YEAH, IT'S GOING TO MITIGATE THAT ISSUE. I SO THE
[00:05:01]
NEIGHBOR WHO'S COMPLAINING ABOUT THIS OWNS THE LOT TO THE WEST AND TO KIND OF THE OR THE NORTHWEST. SO. SO IF THERE ARE COMPLAINTS, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY FROM THOSE LOTS DIRECTLY SOUTH. BUT YEAH, THAT'S THAT VERBAL DIRECT STORMWATER IN A NORTH EASTERLY DIRECTION AND THEN REQUESTING A TEMPORARY FENCING. IS THAT SOMETHING WE EVEN GET. YEAH. TEMPORARY FENCING. SO I'LL TRY TO ANSWER THIS AS BEST I CAN. BUT SO THEY PROVIDED AN EROSION CONTROL PLAN, WHICH WILL BE REVIEWED BY OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND OUR ENGINEERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S A LOT OF THAT DEALS WITH THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND HOW THINGS ARE SET UP AND HOW EVERYTHING'S DRAINING. SO, SO OUR ENGINEERS WILL REVIEW THAT IN A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL IN THE COMING. WHEN THE TEMPORARY FENCING BE REQUIRED. I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SILT FENCE, WHICH IS FOR CONSTRUCTION. THEY'RE ASKING FOR A CHAIN LINK CONSTRUCTION, BUT THEN THEY'RE ASKING FOR, OH YEAH, JUST TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT OF THE CONSTRUCTION AREA, WELL OFF OF THEIR VACANT LAND SO IT DOESN'T GET SPILLED OVER INTO THEIR. HOME. RIGHT. SO WHEN WOULD THE CITY REQUIRE SUCH A THING? OR DOES THE CITY NEVER REQUIRE SUCH? OKAY, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY CODE. CITY DOES REQUIRE THAT ONLY IF IT'S A. MOST DEVELOPMENT SITES DO IT FOR THEIR OWN PROTECTION, RIGHT. THE ONLY TIME YOU CAN REQUIRE FENCING IS IF IT'S ALONG A CANAL, SOME KIND OF SAFETY, IMMINENT SAFETY HAZARD TO THE FUTURE RESIDENTS. BUT I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT REQUIRING CONSTRUCTION, FENCING, AND I. IS THERE ANYTHING IN YOUR STANDARDS ABOUT THAT? I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANYTHING IN THE STANDARDS, BUT BEST PRACTICES ARE, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S WORK GOING ON OVERHEAD. YOU GOT TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT FALLING OBJECTS OR. LIKE A TEMPORARY CLOSED SIDEWALK AND CREATE A NEW ROUTE OR SIDEWALK, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. JUST TO HAVE THOSE SWIFT FENCES, RIGHT? THE SHORT ONES. YEAH. STORMWATER. YEAH. THAT'S THE STORMWATER COMMITTEE. IS THAT GOING TO BE REQUIRED? IS THIS FENCE GOING TO BE REQUIRED? THEY'LL PRODUCE THEIR OWN STORMWATER PLAN. AND IT COULD, COULD, COULD INCLUDE SILT FENCE OR SOME OTHER MEANS. SOMETIMES THEY USE BERMS. AND DETERMINE IT'S NOT REALLY NECESSARY. SO JUST SPECIFIC TO THE SITE. BUT IT'S UP TO THE CONTRACTOR TO KIND OF PROPOSE THAT. RIGHT? YOU CAN'T JUST MANDATE WHAT YOU MUST PUT A FENCE HERE. CORRECT. OKAY. WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THEY PROVIDE US WITH A PLAN AND WE REVIEW IT AND MAKE SURE IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.AND THEN I GUESS I SENT TO EMAIL, SORRY TO TAKE UP TIME, BUT THE MASONRY AND BRICK BOUNDARY WALL, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FENCING ALL THE TIME. SO YEAH, SO THIS IS A, A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION SURROUNDED BY OTHER SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
SO PER OUR ZONING ORDINANCES, WE CAN'T REQUIRE A MASONRY WALL OR ANYTHING FOR THAT MATTER.
OKAY. IF THEY WANT TO PUT UP A FENCE OR A WALL, THEY CAN, BUT THAT'S ENTIRELY OKAY. IF THIS WERE HYPOTHETICALLY AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OR A GAS STATION OR SOMETHING MORE INTENSE, WE COULD REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL. AND I'M ASSUMING THE SETBACKS. THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THE ADHERING TO SETBACKS, I'M ASSUMING. YEAH, THAT WAS A LITTLE ODD. RIGHT NOW, THE LOT, THE WAY IT'S SITUATED, THE HOUSE IS FACING OLD BINGHAM HIGHWAY, SO THEY HAVE A PRETTY LARGE BACKYARD RIGHT NOW. I'M GUESSING THEY WANT TO PRESERVE THAT SETBACK, WHICH WE WON'T BE ABLE TO DO, BECAUSE NOW THESE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE FACING OR GOING TO BE ORIENTED NORTHWARD.
AND SO THAT REAR YARD NOW BECOMES AN INTERIOR SIDE YARD. SO BASICALLY GOT INTERIOR LOT NEXT TO INTERIOR LOT. SO EIGHT FEET BETWEEN THEM. AND THAT'S. HE WANTS 25FT. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT. YEAH. SO IT'S GOING TO BE A SIDE YARD NOT A REAR YARD. NOW THE LOTS ON THE SOUTH DIRECTLY SOUTH THOSE WILL HAVE SETBACKS. SO WE GOT BACKYARD. BACKYARD. SO ARE WE OKAY IF WE ASK YOU THAT QUESTION JUST FOR CLARIFICATION OF SETBACKS. OKAY. OKAY. SO JUST ONE MORE. SO WAS THERE ANYTHING FROM THOSE EMAILS THAT WE ACTUALLY CAN GIVE THEM? BECAUSE AS I WAS READING THROUGH IT, I DIDN'T REALLY SEE ANYTHING THAT THEY COULD GET. NOT NOTHING THAT WE
[00:10:02]
CAN REQUIRE. IT ALL SOUNDS LIKE IT'S MOSTLY REQUESTS. SO IF, IF THE DEVELOPER CHOOSES TO, THEY CAN. BUT ISN'T IT SOMETIMES JUST HELPING THEM UNDERSTAND THEY CAN'T REQUEST IT, BUT THEIR VOICE WAS HEARD, RIGHT? COULD BE. IT COULD BE JUST WE COULD ASK REDIRECT A QUESTION THAT SAYS, CAN WE DO ANYTHING WITH SETBACKS? AND THEN CITY CAN SAY WHAT THEY DID. AND THEN THEIR VOICE WAS AT LEAST HEARD, RIGHT? A LOT OF PEOPLE. HAVE DEVELOPED NEXT TO THE THINGS THAT THE CITY. IS WHY. WHY CONTROL OVER. YEAH. RIGHT. BUT I THINK SOMETIMES WHEN YOU GUYS ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M LEARNING TOO, IS WHEN YOU SAY BY THIS RULE, THAT RULE, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE. AND THEN IT'S LIKE, OKAY, WHAT, WHAT CAN WE DO? SO THESE PEOPLE, FROM WHAT I READ, THEY DON'T EVEN WANT TO GIVE APPROVAL UNTIL THE CITY AFTER. ALL.RIGHT. ALL RIGHT, RIGHT. YOU DON'T NEED THEIR APPROVAL ANYWAY. THAT'S RIGHT. WELL, THEY ALSO WANT PROBABLY THAT LOT TO STAY A VACANT LOT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, CHANGE IS DIFFICULT. YEAH, IT'S ALL GOOD RUNNING FOR COUNCIL. WITHOUT WATER, WE DON'T PAY TOO MUCH.
SHOT. ANY CHANCE I'VE GOT FOR. I LIKE THE POINT THOUGH, BECAUSE WE COULD GET UP THERE AND JUST SAY, THIS MEETS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF CODE. WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING BUT BEING ABLE TO LET THEM AT LEAST AIR IT HERE. A DIRECT RESPONSE BACK AND FORTH. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL BE HERE TONIGHT OR IF WE JUST ADDRESS, OR MAYBE THEY'LL BE ONLINE. ONLINE? I GUESS SO, BUT YEAH, THEY HAD QUITE THE LETTERS TO, TO, YOU KNOW, SO I'M GLAD WE BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE I GOT REALLY CONFUSED WHEN I STARTED GOING THROUGH ALL EVERYTHING. I'M THINKING, ALL RIGHT. YEAH, I WASN'T REALLY SURE WHAT THEY WERE ASKING. SO BUT AGAIN, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. RIGHT. SO, SO THAT IS WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF LIMITED THERE. SO THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE A GOOD THING TO JUST KIND OF CAP ON THIS BECAUSE THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE OTHER STUFF DOWN THE ROAD. EVERYTHING ELSE IS OUTSIDE OF JURISDICTION. NO, IT GOES TO THEM. THEY JUST YEAH. EVERYTHING ELSE OTHERWISE STAFF LEVEL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. AND LAST IS THE MASTER AUTO TECH. YEAH. MASTER AUTO TECH IS RIGHT OVER HERE ON 78 SOUTH RIGHT BY THE WALGREENS ON REDWOOD. THEY'RE APPLYING FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP, WHICH IS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE CITY CENTER FRAME ZONE. IT IS CURRENTLY A VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP. IT WAS BUILDING WAS BUILT IN 1977 AS A VEHICLE FOR SHOP, AND IT'S JUST BEEN OPERATING THAT WAY EVER SINCE. MASTER TECH JUST CAME IN AND TOOK OVER AND THEY'RE TRYING TO GET THEIR BUSINESS LICENSE. AND SO WE REQUIRED THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THEM. THEY ARE PROPOSED HOURS ARE 10 A.M. TO 6 P.M. AND THEY'RE CLOSED ON THE WEEKENDS. AND THEN OTHER THAN THAT, THEY ARE NON-CONFORMING TO PARKING. HOWEVER, WE CAN'T REQUIRE THEM TO BUILD ANY MORE PARKING SPOTS BECAUSE IT'S NOT A SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND IT'S NOT HAVING A VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP. THERE IS NOT INCREASING ANY NONCONFORMITY BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN A VEHICLE REPAIR SHOP. SO IT'S NOT REALLY A CONDITION THAT WE CAN REQUIRE.
IN THIS CASE, IT'S NOT A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON ANYBODY. IS THIS AN ADDITION TO THEIR CURRENT LOCATION OR ARE THEY REPLACING THEIR CURRENT LOCATION? HE HAD TOLD ME THAT THEY HAD MOVED TO THIS LOCATION. DID THEY BUY IT OR ARE THEY JUST RENT IT? DID YOU KNOW OR DOES IT MATTER? I'M NOT 100% SURE. I JUST WONDERING, I DO KNOW THEY ARE RENTING ONE BAY TO EMISSIONS PLUS. SO EMISSIONS PLUS IS STILL THERE WITH THEM. SO MAYBE THEY BOUGHT THE BUILDING AND OKAY, COOL. ANYBODY WANTS A HISTORY LESSON? THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL BIG O TIRE IN WEST JORDAN. THERE. THERE YOU GO. BACK WHEN THERE WAS DIRT ROAD. TIRES GO TO THE TIRE STORE, STONE TIRES. WHEN STONE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST THE BUILDING.
MEET ALL THE OTHER REQUIREMENTS. OIL. WATER SEPARATOR. THOSE KINDS OF THINGS. I SHOULD I SPOKE WITH THE SOUTH WATER VALLEY RECLAMATION. SO WHEN MASTER AUTO TECH MOVED IN THERE,
[00:15:02]
THEY DID AN INTERIOR REMODEL, A LETTER FROM SOUTH VALLEY WASN'T REQUIRED AT THAT TIME. THAT'S ABOUT ALL THE INFORMATION I HAVE. I'LL GET TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. THAT'S WHY I'M KIND OF DEBATING. IT'S LIKE, WELL, IF WE SAY GO AND THEN THEY START GOING AND THEN THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO. YEAH, BUT WE'RE DOING OUR PART AT THE AT THE TIME OF THE PROCESS. SO. OKAY.[Training (as needed)]
DUNCAN. OKAY. WE GOT SOME TRAINING. SO TRAINING TODAY. YOU GOT A HAND OUT THERE. WE'LL ACTUALLY START ON THE SECOND PAGE, BUT IT'S ON INVESTING. INVESTING IS ONE OF THOSE WORDS THAT APPEARS MYSTICAL AND HARD TO UNDERSTAND, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY VERY SIMPLE. IF I WERE TO DEFINE IT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, I WOULD JUST SAY INVESTING IS THE RIGHT TO DO STUFF THAT THE RULES SAY YOU CAN DO, RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHAT IT IS, RIGHT? SO IF I'M IN A R ONE EIGHT ZONE, I CAN DO ALL THE STUFF THAT. I OWN PROPERTY IN AN M ONE ZONE, I CAN DO ALL THE STUFF ON THE LAND USE CHART, ALL THE USES THAT ARE THERE THAT SAYS I CAN DO AND THE M1 ZONE, WHETHER THEY'RE COMMITTEE OR COMMISSION, IT'S REALLY THAT SIMPLE. YOU'RE VESTED IF YOUR CURRENT ZONE HAS, AS ONE OF THE POSSIBLE USES, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU WANT TO DO IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING WITH YOUR PROPERTY THAT'S NOT LISTED AS ONE OF THE USES FOR THIS AREA, AND THEN YOU CAN GET EXEMPTION. AND ONCE YOU GET THE ZONE CHANGED, THAT ALLOWS FOR THE USE YOU WANT TO DO. AND AT THAT POINT YOU'RE INVESTED, RIGHT? BUT UNTIL YOU GET THE ZONE CHANGE, YOU'RE NOT VESTED.SO SO THERE'S A TIMING COMPONENT TO IT AS WELL. SO IF THERE'S SOMEBODY IN SAY R 191 THAT WANTS TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS ALLOWED, BUT THEN THERE'S A CODE CHANGE. NOW IT'S NOT ALLOWED. THEY HAD TO HAVE THEIR APPLICATION IN FOR THE CHANGE. YEAH. THERE'S SOME THERE'S SOME NUANCES THERE. YEAH. IF THEY, IF THEY AND THAT'S WHERE WE GET THE GRANDFATHERING OR THE, YOU KNOW, THE NON-CONFORMING USE, RIGHT. IS IF YOU HAD ALREADY APPLIED FOR IT OR ESPECIALLY IF IT ALREADY EXISTED WHEN THIS ALL CHANGED, YOU CAN OBVIOUSLY KEEP DOING IT RIGHT WITH SOME EXCEPTIONS. BUT YEAH, SO THAT'S REALLY THE THING IS, WHAT'S THE ZONE AT THE TIME YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING AND IT'S ALLOWED. YOU CAN DO IT. IT JUST MEANS YOU CAN DO IT. AND IT'S REALLY QUITE LOGICAL, RIGHT? THAT BUT IT'S NOT WHAT PEOPLE THINK. AND WE WERE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT ONE OF THE APPLICATIONS ON THE AGENDA EARLIER. SOMEHOW PEOPLE HAVE THIS NOTION THAT A PLANNING COMMISSION IS A DECISION MAKING BODY THAT HAS ALL THIS UNFETTERED DISCRETION, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT IT IS, RIGHT? THEY'RE USED TO COMMITTEES AND BOARDS AND CITY COUNCIL OR WHATEVER, HAVING A LOT OF DISCRETION. BUT REALLY, IT'S NOT THAT IT'S VERY SIMPLE.
IT'S CAN IF YOU CAN DO A USE THAT'S IN THE ZONE, YOU CAN DO IT, PERIOD. RIGHT? WHICH IS GREAT IF YOU'RE THE GUY THAT OWNS THE LAND, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE THE GUY THAT LIVES NEXT DOOR TO THE GUY THAT OWNS THE LAND, THIS MAY NOT BE THE RULE THAT YOU LIKE BEST, BUT BUT IT IS THE RULE IN THE STATE OF UTAH, RIGHT? AND IN FACT, THE SECTION ON IT IS THAT TEN DASH 20-902.
AND IT REALLY GOES ON AND ON FOR LIKE TWO AND A HALF PAGES. I ALWAYS LIKE THE FIRST PAGE.
AND REALLY IT'S ONLY THOSE FIRST FEW LINES, ESPECIALLY THE ONES THAT UNDERLINE, BUT IT BASICALLY JUST SAYS, HEY, IF I SHOW UP AND I FILE AN APPLICATION WITH THE CITY TO DO SOMETHING WITH MY LAND, AND IF IT'S COMPLETE, AND THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING IN LAND USE LAW TO A COMPLETE APPLICATION IS IN MY MIND, I THINK OF IT AS THREE THINGS. WHATEVER FORMS THAT WE HAVE, YOU'VE COMPLETELY FILLED THEM OUT AND ON THE LIST OF STUFF THAT YOU NEED TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTS OR WHATEVER. HAVE I PROVIDED ALL THE DOCUMENTS AND OTHER INFORMATION? THEN THIRDLY, IF I PAID THE FEE RIGHT, AND IF I'VE DONE THOSE THREE SETS OF THINGS, I'M ENTITLED. ONCE THAT DETERMINATION IS MADE BY THE CITY, THAT IT'S COMPLETE TO HAVE THEM REVIEWED, RIGHT. AND ONCE THEY'VE REVIEWED IT AND IT GOES THROUGH, WHETHER IT'S STAFF OR PLANNING COMMISSION, THEY'RE ENTITLED TO APPROVAL IF THEY MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF OUR LAND USE REGULATIONS THAT WERE IN EFFECT AT THE TIME THEY FILED THE APPLICATION. RIGHT. SO IF WE GO THROUGH ALL THE BOXES, YEP, YOU'RE DOING THAT RIGHT. YOU'RE DOING THAT RIGHT. YEP. YOUR APPLICATION SHOWS THAT YOUR CONCEPT DRAWING SHOWS THIS. AND IF THEY DON'T, THEY HAVE TO COMPLY. AND IF THEY DO COMPLY, THEY APPROVE IT. IF ULTIMATELY THEY REFUSE TO CHANGE IT. AND THERE'S THINGS
[00:20:04]
THAT AREN'T CONFORMING, YOU COULD DENY IT, RIGHT? MOST PEOPLE JUST FIX IT SO THEY CAN BE APPROVED. BUT BUT THEN THE CONVERSE IS TRUE WHERE WE CAN'T JUST MAKE STUFF UP, RIGHT? BUT PEOPLE THINK WE CAN MAKE STUFF UP, BUT WE CAN'T MAKE STUFF UP, RIGHT? AND THEY GET CONFUSED WHEN WE'RE NOT MAKING UP STUFF THAT THEY WANT US TO READ UP. AND YOU DO IT JUST FOR ME. BUT I GUARANTEE YOU, IF THEY OWN THE PROPERTY, THEY WOULDN'T WANT PEOPLE MAKING STUFF UP, RIGHT? SO. SO THERE ARE TWO EXCEPTIONS TO THIS VESTING RULE. AND THAT'S WHAT'S MENTIONED THERE. AND IT'S ALSO MENTIONED IN CRAIG'S CALLS BOOK. I THINK MOST OF YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT, RIGHT. THERE'S TWO EXCEPTIONS WHERE YOU EVEN THOUGH YOU WOULD NORMALLY VEST, YOU DON'T VEST.AND ONE OF THEM IS THE O. AND THIS ONLY APPLIES TO ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICATIONS, RIGHT. SITE PLAN SUBDIVISIONS DOES NOT APPLY. SO A ZONE CHANGE OR ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE A ZONE CHANGE IS WHEN YOU'RE CHANGING OR MAKING UP THINGS, RIGHT. ANY OF THESE ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICATIONS ARE WHEN THE RULES ARE ALREADY IN PLACE, WE'RE JUST APPLYING THEM.
SITE PLAN CONDITIONS FOR SUBDIVISION. YOU'RE ONLY VESTED WITH THE ZONING YOU HAVE. IF YOU'RE ASKING FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING, YOU'RE NOT VESTED IN THE ZONE UNTIL CITY COUNCIL APPROVES THE ZONE. RIGHT. BUT THE FIRST EXCEPTION TO VESTING IS THE. COMPELLING COUNTERVAILING PUBLIC INTEREST. AND THAT'S BASICALLY JUST SOMETHING TOTALLY BEYOND THE SCOPE OF WHATEVER ANYBODY THOUGHT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. RIGHT. IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS SOME GEOGRAPHICAL GEOLOGICAL PROBLEM THAT COULD HAVE THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS SITTING RIGHT ON TOP OF THAT EARTHQUAKE FAULT LINE OR WHATEVER. OR IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT MAKES IT JUST OR, YOU KNOW, MOTHER NATURE PROVIDED SOME OTHER EQUALLY OR WORSE THING THAT MAKES THAT NOT POSSIBLE FOR THEIR LOT, OR THE BIG ONE THAT COMES UP SOMETIMES NOWADAYS IS A REFERENDUM. SOMEBODY THROWS THIS, THE ITEM ON THE BALLOT, RIGHT TO BE CONSIDERED, AND THEN ALL BETS ARE OFF UNTIL THE VOTERS VOTE ON IT. BUT IT'S GOT TO BE SOMETHING JUST SO COMPLETELY HUGE LIKE THAT. IT CAN'T JUST BE THAT YOU DON'T LIKE SOMETHING. IN FACT, I'VE, IN MY ENTIRE EXPERIENCE. AS A LAND USE ATTORNEY, THERE'S ONLY BEEN ONE TIME WHERE I'VE EVER SEEN THAT EFFECT PATTERN GOOD ENOUGH TO MEET THIS. AND IT WASN'T EVEN IN MY JURISDICTION. IT WAS EXISTING. SO THAT'S A RARE ONE. BUT IT CAN, IT COULD, COULD BE APPLICABLE. RIGHT. AND THEN THE SECOND ONE THAT I'VE SEEN OCCASIONALLY COME UP HERE AND THERE THROUGH THE YEARS IS THE PENDING ORDINANCE RULE, RIGHT WHERE WE'VE FORMALLY ADOPTED A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE CODE. AND REALLY THE WAY WHERE YOU FOR SURE MET THE PENDING ORDINANCE IS IF YOU'VE PUT SOMETHING ON AN AGENDA AND WE HAVE AN ACTUAL PRINTED OUT OR, YOU KNOW, DIGITAL VERSION OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE, RIGHT? AT THAT POINT, WE'RE FORMALLY CONSIDERING IT ON AN AGENDA, ACTUALLY HAVE THE ORDINANCE WE'RE LOOKING AT AND IT'S BEING DISCUSSED. BUT IF NOT THAT FOR SURE, THERE MIGHT BE WAYS SOMETIMES TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT SHORT OF THAT, BUT THAT'S THE BEST PRACTICE GUARANTEED THING. ONCE YOU'VE ONCE IT'S BEEN ON AGENDA AND YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT AN ACTUAL DRAFT, THEN YOU CAN APPLY IT.
AND THAT'S THE FIRST IN TIME RULE, RIGHT? ONCE WE FORMALLY LOOK AT IT, ANY APPLICATIONS FILED AFTERWARDS WE CAN APPLY THE RULE TO REVERSE ISN'T TRUE, RIGHT? WE CAN'T START A PENDING ORDINANCE AFTER AN APPLICATION. EXPECT IT TO APPLY. AND WE GET UP TO 180 DAYS TO POTENTIALLY TO PASS THAT ORDINANCE. WE DON'T HAVE TO PASS IT. BUT IF THE CITY DID PASS IT, IT COULD BE APPLIED TO THE APPLICATION. OKAY. AND A LOT OF THESE THINGS WERE INITIALLY THE UTAH SUPREME COURT TRYING TO INTERPRET EXISTING STATUTES AT THE TIME TO MAKE SENSE OF IT. AND THEY DID SUCH A GOOD JOB WITH THE STATE LEGISLATURE, SAID, OH, YEAH, THAT THAT IS WHAT WE MEANT. AND THEN THEY CODIFIED IT, STATE LAW AND THAT THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THIS CODE SECTION RIGHT HERE THAT GETS LONGER AND LONGER. THERE WAS A PAGE PAGE AND A HALF, TWO AND A HALF, PROBABLY FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. BUT BUT REALLY THE MOST IMPORTANT PART IS JUST THE SQUID. SO I GOT THREE FACT PATTERNS, HYPOTHETICALS. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THEM RATHER THAN READ THEM COMPLETELY. YOU CAN JUST KIND OF READ THEM IN YOUR MIND. WHAT SO SHE'S DOING MPM1 AND MEETS THE CRITERIA FOR HIS OWN CHANGE. THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT
[00:25:07]
THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE COUNCIL. AND THE THING THAT HE WANTS TO DO IS NOT ALLOWED IN THE CURRENT ZONING IN. IT IS ALLOWED IN THE NEW ZONE IS GOING TO BE IN. SO BEFORE HE GOES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE ZONING CHANGES APPROVED, THAT FIRST QUESTION IS, IS THE APPLICANT VESTED IN HAVING THIS CONSTRUCTION, SALES AND GROUND USE FOR THIS INDICATION? NO. WHY? YOU'RE ON THE WRONG ZONE. YEAH. CURRENT ZONE DOESN'T ALLOW HIM. AND THAT'S THE QUESTION, RIGHT? VESTING IS ARE YOU VESTED. SAYS DOES THE CURRENT ZONE YOU'RE IN RIGHT NOW ALLOWED. RIGHT. THAT'S ANOTHER WAY TO ASK THE SAME QUESTION ANSWERED NO. SO THEN THE NEXT QUESTION, UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES COULD THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROVIDE A NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL IN THIS SITUATION? SO LET'S SAY PLANNING COMMISSION LOOKS AT IT. THEY DON'T WANT TO RECOMMEND A ZONE CHANGE. WHAT WOULD THEY HAVE TO DO? AND THIS IS A MORE NOT STATE LAW, BUT WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT IN THE PAST YEAR, RULES HERE HAVE TO FIND A CRITERIA THAT DOESN'T MEET WITH RIGHT. SO ONE OF THOSE 4 OR 5 CRITERIA, IF YOU HAVE A FINDING ON AT LEAST ONE OF THEM, THEN YOU COULD RECOMMEND DENIAL, RIGHT? AND THEN ONCE IF THE COUNCIL DID APPROVE THE ZONE CHANGE, IS THE APPLICANT VESTED AT THAT POINT FOR THAT USE? YES, YES, IT WOULD BE RIGHT. BECAUSE THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF CAN I NOW DO WHAT IT'S CURRENTLY ZONED TO DO? YES. SO THEN THE SECOND FACT PATTERN 80 LOT SUBDIVISION RESIDENTIAL R ONE EIGHT. AND THERE'S THIS FLOOD THAT COMES AND THERE'S A RIVER THAT USED TO BE ON THE EDGE OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION. NOW IT KIND OF MEANDERS PARTIALLY THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION, COVERS UP A COUPLE LOTS. AND SO IS THE APPLICANT VESTED IN THE R ONE EIGHT ZONING. SO AND I'LL PROBABLY HAVE TO END WITH THIS ONE. WE DON'T HAVE TIME FOR ONE. AND SO R ONE EIGHT SO EUCLIDEAN ZONE. SO ARE YOU VESTED TO DO RESIDENTIAL. YES YES. YEAH. BUT DOES AN EXCEPTION APPLY IS REALLY THE QUESTION. THERE'S TWO EXCEPTIONS. DOES ONE APPLY. IT WOULD BE. NUMBER ONE RIGHT. WHERE IT WOULD BE. YES. BECAUSE IT'S CHANGED TO CHANGING IT. YEAH. IT COMPELLING THAT IT'S SOMETHING SO RANDOM AND WEIRD THAT IT AFFECTS. IN FACT, YOU MIGHT SAY, WITHOUT HAVING TO GO AS FAR AS TO SAY THE COUNTERVAILING PUBLIC INTEREST, YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO SAY, WELL, IT DOESN'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OF THE CITY CODE BECAUSE FOR AN 80 LOT SUBDIVISION, EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE 80 LOTS HAS TO HAVE THE AREA REQUIREMENTS. AND NOW SOME OF THE LOTS HAVE HARDLY ANY AREA THAT THEY CAN BUILD ON BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF THE RIVER, SO THAT MAYBE JUST THE EASIER THING MIGHT BE TO SAY IT DOESN'T COMPLY, BUT THE BETTER THAN A DENIAL SOMETIMES IS IF YOU CAN KIND OF HELP SOMEBODY OUT, PUT THEM ON HOLD, THAT MIGHT BE A CASE WHERE YOU DO THE WELL, NOT TABLE IT, BUT YOU JUST DO THE COMPELLING COUNTERVAILING PUBLIC INTEREST, KIND OF PUT IT ON HOLD, GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO SEE IF THINGS CHANGE. THAT HAPPENED IN SAINT GEORGE. THE RIVER DID THIS WEIRD THING AND THEN THEY GOT IT ALL SORTED OUT AND RIPPED UP THE RIVER. AND THEN SOMEBODY NOW COULD. SINCE THE RIVER'S NOT A PROBLEM ANYMORE, NOW THEY CAN COME BACK AND FINISH THEIR SUBDIVISIONS. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE IT. BUT IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU GO THROUGH, FEEL FREE TO. ALL RIGHT.* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.