Transcript — Eagle Mountain Planning Commission, 22 September 2026

Speaker A: Small project. Hey, we're good.

Speaker C: Okay, welcome everybody. It is 5:31.

Speaker A: Okay, going on. Meaning special effects.

Speaker B: Okay, two on there. Make sure there's problem.

Speaker C: This is when I get my kids' attention at home. Enter echo mode. Thanks. Okay, echo, echo, echo. Okay, uh, it's 5:31. Um, welcome to, uh, this evening's Planning Commission. Today, right now, we'll start our work session at 5:30. We have a few discussion items, and our policy session will begin at 6:30. Okay, so with that, our first discussion item under this work session is our sports and recreation planning. And Jason, is it Jason? Jason, are you presenting this or who's—

Speaker D: Yes, sir.

Speaker C: Okay, Jason Hall, would you come up and share your expertise and experience with us? Legacy of coordinating sports and recreation programming in Eagle Mountain.

Speaker A: All right, all right. Well, thanks for having me over, guys. I was just asked to come and talk about kind of our programs and what we have going on and stuff along those lines. So we'll just get started. So this is just a quick look at programs that we currently run through the city. These are programs our staff handles from start to finish. You can see the youth programs and adult programs that we run currently with the staff that we have. And these are our programs by season. So this shows our programs spread throughout the year. We pretty much have something going on during every season. And we have a lot of programs that do overlap and so forth on that end. And these are programs that either we support through partnerships or outsourcing. Field rentals. Even though we don't run the programs, our staff is still involved in this with scheduling fields and communications and different things along those lines. We do like baseball, stuff like that. Baseball, girls fastpitch softball, we prep all the fields and stuff for them. So we make sure that those are prepped and ready to go for them. That's pretty much what we do.

Speaker E: we spend.

Speaker A: Oh, okay.

Speaker E: Can I ask you a question since I'm seeing it?

Speaker A: What's Snapology? So Snapology, it's a STEM class is what it is.

Speaker B: Okay.

Speaker A: So that one we, that one we partnership with Snapology. I think they're called Snapology of Lehi. They're, they're all over the county and Salt Lake County as well. But yeah, it's kind of cool. It's Legos and stuff. They build them and they actually They get to— they build robots out of them and stuff, get to drive them. It's pretty good. We have a— during the summer, we run a camp. We run like 3 or 4 camps with them, so they're a week long. We actually hold them here in the council chamber. So, and right now we have one. We have—

Speaker E: we had—

Speaker A: we just started fall one with them, but it's just one night a week. It's every Thursday that we do that with them.

Speaker C: Very cool.

Speaker A: It's a pretty good turnout for those. And so these are some of the programs, activities that we'd like to add. Obviously, this depends completely on space and staff, really. With the staff we have right now, we're pretty much to max on what we're able to accomplish with the hours that we have and so forth. But we do have a couple positions that are open. They're just part-time, but they will help alleviate some of the staff, and we'll be able to add a few more programs and stuff.

Speaker E: Can I ask a question on those other recreation activities? So would the city ever get involved in like astronomy type things? I know we have a lot of that money committed to do that.

Speaker A: Yeah, we've adopted stuff like that.

Speaker E: And I know UVU's involved with that too, but I didn't know if the city— Yeah, we want—

Speaker A: there's like, you know, science and STEM programs, chess club, and different stuff like that that we would love to do, different classes and stuff along those lines that we would love to do. So again, that depends. We obviously— you guys know we don't have rec center, we don't have, we don't have a building period that we can actually hold something in. So it's either we rent from the schools, and that's hard because they're busy, especially right now, right? And so trying to rent that, and then Once you figure in those fees, you've got to add those in. And so it gets a little pricey when it comes to that end. So these are our youth programs. This shows kind of the growth that we've had for junior jazz, soccer, baseball, all those— all the other programs that we've had. Obviously basketball and soccer. And now soccer— soccer we used to run, then we outsourced it, and we just brought it back. for this fall season. So, and we had about 800, a little over 800 kids sign up this year for fall soccer. So it's been, it's been busy. It's been real busy for us. So that's on top of trying to keep fields prepped and, and everything else. So we did have track and field, cross country, and youth pickleball. Those have been good numbers. We added those a couple years ago, or about, yeah, 2024, I think.

Speaker E: 2024.

Speaker A: And they've slowly been increasing on our numbers on those as well. Adult programs. Adult programs have grown too as well. As you can see those— and they fluctuate just depending on which program. Like usually our co-ed softball has always been the highest number of teams to sign up. But this year was actually a lot lower and our men's league was— had a lot more teams sign up than our co-ed did, which is— it's weird, but it is this, right? It's always up and down. And this is just obviously a chart that gives a look of, you know, back from 2008 up to this year, kind of where our numbers are growing just for a couple of our bigger programs. So as you can tell, we've grown quite a lot.

Speaker C: So.

Speaker A: So this is kind of where we're stuck with our restraints, limited gym space. So that's, it seems funny 'cause you say that, 'cause like we rent all the schools and you say, well, we've added elementary schools and stuff like that, but we've been behind, right, on gym spaces as it is. So, and you keep adding more kids and it takes away the gym space, plus you have other programs that— You know, your competitive programs and stuff that also rent gym space from them. So it does take away some of our gym space use on that. And so we're— but we're still getting there.

Speaker E: We had to—

Speaker A: when we first started programs for like Junior Jazz, we used to be able to give the younger kids practice times. We had to shift that because we ran out. We're getting slower. We're being getting less gym time. So the younger kids, we had to move their practices to before the games. And so that's— it's worked out pretty good. I mean, that's what a lot of cities do anyways. So it's just a matter of adapting and getting what we can do.

Speaker C: Jason, in that— in the context of school gyms, as the indoor sports season approaches, do you reach out to the Alpine School District and say, hey, What's available and then you reserve times based on what's available, or do you tell them what you'd like?

Speaker A: So we basically— we don't tell them, we ask them.

Speaker C: We ask them with a paycheck?

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker C: With a check in mind, right?

Speaker A: Paycheck, upfront money.

Speaker E: No.

Speaker A: So what we do is we submit. You have to go in and submit for what you need.

Speaker D: Okay.

Speaker A: And then they'll look at it and they'll either— they'll call me and say, okay, we have this going on or this going on, so we can't do this night or this night or whatever, you know, we have different activities. So there's, there's a lot of back and forth a little bit. So—

Speaker C: Okay.

Speaker A: But usually I have an idea of what they have going on from the year before because we keep notes and all that stuff. So I'm able to just plug those in and get them over. And so far— and I submitted these usually, you know, summertime they're usually off. It's hit and miss. And we try to get it done before July, but We submit them and I've still got 3 or 4 schools that haven't even reached out to me on that, which is worrisome.

Speaker C: Are you dealing with each school separately versus—

Speaker B: Yes, each school is separate.

Speaker C: Oh, okay.

Speaker A: Yep, yep, each one of them has their own person who's over their rentals.

Speaker H: Okay.

Speaker A: And they're the ones that tell us yes or no, or this is what we have going on.

Speaker C: Are charter schools part of that or is it just Alpine School District?

Speaker A: Ranches Academy, we tried to rent them before and they told us no.

Speaker C: They just—

Speaker H: no.

Speaker A: We haven't— I think when John Hancock first opened, we reached out to them and they told us no.

Speaker C: Okay.

Speaker A: But I have heard since they said, yeah, we can probably rent to you. So just a matter of reaching out.

Speaker C: Just depends.

Speaker E: Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks.

Speaker A: So, and the high school's hard because they have so many clubs, programs, and different stuff that theirs is hard because They do give us some times, but it's all over the place every week. So it's hard to run a program when you're not consistent on days. So right now, this is kind of what we have for staffing. We've got 3 full-time employees. Seasonal staff is actually a little bit higher than that now, just with our site supervisors, soccer referees. Junior Jazz referees and so forth. And like I said, we do have 2 positions, part-time positions open for recreation coordinators and 2 for athletic maintenance employees, which will help a lot because right now we prep fields in the morning and then a lot of— we prep in the morning and then we'll go home for a few hours and come back at night. So getting these extra staff will definitely help us out on that end.

Speaker C: Are your field prep staff different than the parks? Well, I know the park has been maintained by contract, right? So the mowing and irrigation repair, that's all being done separately. That's not your staff that's dealing with that.

Speaker A: It was ours for a while, but we just couldn't keep up, and the parks department took over the soccer fields and on the irrigation side. They took over the soccer fields and all that stuff and they've done an amazing job. So they've definitely brought it up. They've had to pull resources from other places to help, especially with soccer coming in because there's a lot of wear and tear on that end.

Speaker E: So— Got a question for you, just going backwards a little bit.

Speaker F: You're good.

Speaker E: But I know there's a lot of constraint with youth sports and field space and all this stuff. Are there similar constraints with adult sports like softball or pickleball or anything of those nature?

Speaker A: Yeah, so that's why for adult softball, we only run in the fall because we can't run anything in the spring because youth baseball is there Monday through Saturday. We don't have any— we don't have any open time to run anything. And we've been asked a lot to To do spring adult softball, but right now it's just not possible.

Speaker E: Yeah, and if they had more fields and space, then you'd probably need more staff to help maintain all that too at the same time.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, yeah, we definitely need more fields, but like you said, we do need more staff for that. I think if that's a possibility, if you're looking to build more, if we build another quadplex, if it's there at Cory-Ride would be ideal, 'Cause that would be best for not having to travel or whatever. We can have one person that's just there and then just moves over to another quadplex and stuff instead of having to pack up equipment.

Speaker E: I don't know if you know, but on the city side of it, is there— outside of just like coaches, I guess, is there any room for like volunteers to help with some of that stuff?

Speaker A: Yeah, there's been some people who volunteered to help. We actually had a group, a youth baseball group that was actually— they actually just started doing it. They started working on the rodeo grounds over there. Those fields because we don't. We didn't have time to get to it. Parks didn't have time to get to it, so they were actually out there working on it. They did a good job keeping it up. But those are things we we have four fields that we use constantly for games, and then we just have the fields at Nolan and the one at the rodeo grounds. And the problem with problem with ones at Nolan: you've got soccer teams that want to practice there, tackle football teams that practice there. Flag football teams that go and practice there. So it's hard to play baseball and soccer and everything all at the same time because you got balls going flying past everyone's head. So, so that makes it pretty difficult out there.

Speaker C: Are you— I'm guessing the city is also renting field space during the outdoor, whether it's soccer, baseball, from the school districts, or are you not?

Speaker A: Okay, no, no. And, and we can definitely look at that, but Well, there are a lot of the club soccer programs, they rent from the schools.

Speaker C: Oh, okay.

Speaker A: On that end.

Speaker C: So schools exclude that?

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker G: Gotcha.

Speaker A: And we do have— we've gotten quite a high demand ever since we took back soccer for competitive for the soccer groups. There's a lot of them that have requested it for field rentals. So it's a matter of if we can. It's hard. We've looked at moving some Some of our fields to different areas within the city. But it's hard, it's nice to have everything at Corey Ride because when you have a kindergartner playing and then a second grader and you're here, but if you got one here and then you got one over at Smith Ranch, that's hard to get them around. So if we keep it the same area, it's great.

Speaker E: Good.

Speaker A: We had, so we did, We purchased a field painter this year to paint the fields. And the guy that came out and helped us set it up and everything, he was talking about how good of a complex it is and if we can add more to it, we can get a lot of field rentals. But that's really—

Speaker E: we can't really.

Speaker A: This is taken up by all our stuff. But yeah.

Speaker E: Good.

Speaker A: So this is just a kind of breakdown of just one of our staff guys that preps the fields pretty much full-time. I mean, that's a lot of what they do. He's a rec coordinator, but he spends the majority of his time out there just prepping fields in the morning. Gets out there at 7:00 and he's there until 12:30 or so and then goes home and then comes back. And that's Monday through Friday.

Speaker F: Okay.

Speaker H: We even—

Speaker A: we have one of our other staff that comes in actually on Friday nights to prep fields for Saturday morning. Otherwise, we'd have to be out there around 4 o'clock in the morning trying to get them ready before games start on Saturday. So they come in after all the games are over on Friday nights and go prep and get them ready. So a lot of hours just on baseball fields alone. So—

Speaker D: oops.

Speaker A: So I— and I don't know, you know, help from Planning Commission. I think I think that really what— from our standpoint, if you guys just— anything that's brought up, buildings, different things, planning and stuff, just keep us in mind for different stuff that's out there. You know, if we add different fields or parks we're looking to add, if we can make them big enough. Obviously parking.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: Corey Wright, as much parking as there, we're adding on to the west side, adding parking there. It's still very tight when you have 4 programs going on Saturday alone.

Speaker C: Parking where the dust plumes kick up in the afternoon?

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker C: From the— They're out there doing—

Speaker A: they're doing the parking lot now.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: And still, we even moved— we moved 4 fields over to what we call the Field of Dreams, which is Mid-Valley.

Speaker C: Mid-Valley.

Speaker A: We moved 4 of them over there. to try and help, but it still gets— when you've got baseball going and you got—

Speaker E: Yeah.

Speaker A: Soccer going, there's a lot of just little kids alone, little kid fields. We have 10 of those. And I think we have 6 almost full-size fields out there. So there's a lot of fields and all that's all at once.

Speaker I: And that's—

Speaker A: and right now we've rented to one group, but that's it just because we don't have— that's the other thing is is they need somewhere to play too, because a lot of these are kids that live here, right?

Speaker E: Yeah.

Speaker A: And so they need somewhere to play too, but the wear and tear on the fields is hard. So you got to be able to maintain and be able to shift and tweak the fields as much as you can. So that was all I had.

Speaker B: You guys got—

Speaker E: Yeah, so there's a— I don't know if it's for FTEC, but there's a group looking at different use, um, recreation, um, projects in our city. And I think some of them are like redoing some of the parks and different things. I don't know if that's— I didn't see the details on it, but I know they're like relooking at a redesign for Nolan Park as an example and some other stuff. And I don't know if any of that's going to help with the recreation side of things or just more other stuff. But—

Speaker A: Yeah, I, I don't know much on that end of it, but yeah, it has been talked And there's different things. I know there's like futsal, it's getting big. There's a demand for futsal stuff. And our hockey program, youth hockey, is actually getting pretty big too. And so we're trying to figure out— because right now we actually take— because we've got 4 tennis courts out there and we take 2 of them and set up on Tuesdays, set up our rinks. And we leave them there till Thursday night. So we take away 2 of those. So if we can figure out a way to build something just for that, yeah, I mean, it could be multipurpose just like we have with tennis, you know, and stuff. So—

Speaker C: Yeah, combine basketball/hockey court. You could modify the size to meet your needs.

Speaker A: It would be nice if we had something permanent that we could actually just leave the rings up.

Speaker I: Goals.

Speaker A: And right now they're just playing tennis shoes, but now there's adults that want to play, but they want to play on rollerblades. They want to— so that way you'd have to get more permanent rinks so they don't take those out when they're out there running around.

Speaker C: So what would you say from an administrative standpoint, what do you— what have you learned, or what does the city learn in the process between Initially having soccer and running it and then sending it out to a third party to run and then having it come back. What was, what was learned? What was improved? Or what, what do you think as you've been along that for that ride the entire time? Is it better when it's city-run?

Speaker A: Um, I think right now yes and no, because right now it's hard because our staff is So our attention to detail is not where it needs to be because we don't have the staff to help with all that stuff. But we're getting there. Like I say, that's why we're hiring more people. We got that approved and we're able to hire more people so we can.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: I think rec, that way when it's ours, we have control over it. Before we didn't. So whenever there's issues, it's like, oh, sorry, you got to talk to them about it. Not much we can do about it. I mean, we obviously, because we outsource to them, They'll have some say, but they're gonna run it how they were gonna run it.

Speaker C: Yeah, as a nonprofit's interested, vested to a certain point.

Speaker A: Yes.

Speaker C: Versus the city rec program, right?

Speaker A: There was always complaints that they were more worried about their competitive side of it than their rec side. I didn't see that as much as it was talked about, but still.

Speaker C: Yeah, well, I think it's a good, obviously as the city goes through its development and growing and deciding what priorities are an important budget item. Recreation programs, of course, are part of that. Not just the programs, but the staffing to be able to— one, you're limited by staff, you're limited by budget, or you're limited by facilities, which of course, you know, as a Parks and Recreation Department, you have really no control there, right? And so hopefully the You know, the decision makers will see that and continue to provide more support. Or maybe the conclusion is, hey, we're going to use nonprofits and we're going to do field rentals and do a pretty bare-bones staff to do so. But, you know, again, those are decisions hopefully they're taking into account the value of a good program versus just having something available.

Speaker A: Right.

Speaker C: Whether it's city-run or a nonprofit.

Speaker A: I think too, you look at— so we don't run flag football.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: And it's ran by— they just rent space from us, but the price that—

Speaker C: It's pretty costly.

Speaker A: Yes.

Speaker C: As a nonprofit, right?

Speaker H: Yeah.

Speaker A: Yeah. I don't know if they are or not.

Speaker C: Oh, okay.

Speaker A: But still, even at that, it's still a little pricey. But we could definitely, you know, price-wise we can— but they, you know, they got to pay for the rental. to pay for all that stuff. So we can definitely, but again, if we have the staff, if we don't, it's hard to take that on.

Speaker H: Yeah.

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker E: So good.

Speaker C: Any other questions?

Speaker H: I'm just going to say, yeah, thank you for this. This is good. We've had Shawna Ellis come in a few times and talk about, as we're focusing on planning, focus on the health of the public, right? In many different aspects. And this is a major part of it as well. I think part of our brand is an active community. So as we're really planning it out, we need to have this in mind. Hey, is this going to work well for sports, for tournaments, and make sure again destination place, we're active, we're outside, we're interacting with each other. So this was awesome. Thank you.

Speaker A: Yeah, you bet.

Speaker C: Thank you, Jason. Appreciate it.

Speaker A: Okay, thank you guys.

Speaker E: Okay.

Speaker C: All right.

Speaker E: I was going to say that this prompts some discussion on our part though, a little bit from the planning side, right? Like how, how can we help out with that and that kind of thing? And I think it's a— I think a lot of times when developments come in, we're looking at their required open space the zoning requires, but not necessarily how could that maybe incorporate into the larger recreation for the—

Speaker C: The open space plan.

Speaker E: The community as a whole. Especially some of these larger groups like Overland or Firefly, you know, where they've got more space available where they could potentially open that up. I mean, if it's an HOA, they could even rent it out, honestly, and then, you know, make some money there, keep the HOA fees down and, and help provide recreation for the people who live right in their community as well as the, the larger community. I know Firefly is very open to anybody come over and enjoy what we have because we want to be— we all kids getting outside, not just those that live in Firefly, right? And I think that's really cool. So, so there's a lot of good partnerships there as we see those donors come in and say, hey, how does your open space help, you know, recreation, you know, within the community, you know, that you're developing? And that— and maybe in some cases beyond that even. So, think about—

Speaker H: Yeah, we were working on the general plan, then had to pause for a little bit. The general plan update, we had to pause as other things are falling into place first. As we revisit the general plan, that's definitely something we could focus on as well, right? How are we planning ahead for sports and things like that? Again, maybe we need another regional park similar to Cory Ride, maybe on the north-northwest side of the city, something like that. So as we're— just something to keep in mind as we do that.

Speaker C: Yeah, and of course, the ever-changing needs and purposes of parks change over the decades. As you know, the city has incorporated neighborhood parks, obviously successfully, but would those serve as being even smaller with different types of open space for larger regional parks that provide play space Playing fields. Those are all things that the city, we should consider as reviewing the open space plan. Of course, the city's probably doing all that already to some extent. And of course, our ordinances or the codes, you know, include the open space requirements for applications. So any other discussion?

Speaker E: Yeah, I think it's cool too. I mean, you guys might have seen what Provo's done on their west side. I don't know if you've been out there. It's huge. big sports park, and it, and it's a regional draw, um, for people all over. Just like we have a regional draw for, uh, well, you may not know archery is one thing we have a regional draw for, but mountain biking for sure is the big— is the biggest one.

Speaker F: Yeah.

Speaker E: And as they, you know, as they build Mid-Valley Road and all that, it's going to create some really cool trails because they're probably going to be going under freeways and maybe over freeway. Who knows how they're going to design that all through, through there, because it's going to go right through some of those trails and they're going to keep that open, I'm sure. So, but, but it's, you know, we look at those kind of things and make sure that as developments come in, they're not squeezing out that kind of space and, and, and taking away that focus that our city has on outdoor recreation and making sure it's still viable and, and, you know, developed in a way that really works good. Which I think so far, in my opinion, I think the city's done really good. They've acquired some land where there's bike trails, so that's never going to go away. And then they've, of course, they've really built it out with You know, a lot of facilities there, so you can see the markers of where to go and all the stuff and parking lot areas and all that kind of stuff. It's getting more developed in that regard, and so I think it's a good start. But as all that starts to develop out, because that's a lot of that's private landowners that just allow us to use it, we have to make sure that we we're able to preserve that going forward and in our planning and our master planning, and also in you know kind of how we do things, what we allow to be. to come in and be developed there and making sure that they're still helping preserve that, which I think most developers want to, but it still kind of shrinks the footprint a little bit. And if that happens too much, we're gonna lose that regional draw and that tax dollar money that comes in with it. And the huge, I mean, if you go to the high school mountain biking team, it just gets bigger every year. And I see them all the time out, if you're out at dusk, right before you start, they're just everywhere and on the streets driving back from the bike park and everything. And it's really cool to see people off their devices and out being active.

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker E: And so anything we can do is to just really focus on that as we go forward, just knowing that's part of why some of us moved here. And also the big focus of our city's— I mean, look at our new logos and stuff. Someone complained that it looks like an outdoor company's logo. And they're like, that's exactly what we're going for. It's working, right? Hit it spot on. So we wanna make sure that we're definitely not letting that get lost in the, you know, is your lot size, you know, correct? And, you know, your garage not too big, you know, that kind of thing to make sure that everything else is kind of falling in line too. So the quality of life for us and for our kids and everybody else who moves here, you know, stays high too. So just some thoughts.

Speaker F: Yeah.

Speaker C: OK, thank you. That's our first agenda item. Our second agenda item for our— during our work session is just a brief review of tonight's policy agenda.

Speaker G: And so we'll—

Speaker C: we just typically will go over the policy agenda to see if there's any major questions or concerns. Everybody OK doing that today? We have some time here, so these will not be— we'll have to keep in mind that some of these are obviously your public hearing later in the policy session. So we're just going to turn to our presenters. Elizabeth, on your first, is there any particular thing that you wanted to mention for your agenda item that you'd be presenting as far as part of 7A?

Speaker J: I think it's pretty straightforward. Did you have any questions from the packet materials, or do you think we're good to wait?

Speaker C: No, I, I'll have questions to make during the policy session, you know, but for the most part, I think it's, it's pretty clear what, what the city is intending to do with that, which is, you know, amending that code to allow for some landscape removal. You did have me at general landscape provisions changes. I was, I was ready. I was, I was ready. And then I was like, oh yeah, true landscape removal in the urban, the wildlife urban interface. So. Next time when we get landscape provisions. Okay, the next item that would be on the 7B, Natalie, I don't know if there's anything that you want to just preemptively let us know about what you'll be presenting at the policy session.

Speaker I: I don't have anything further than that was already on the agenda.

Speaker C: Okay, all right. Any technical questions or anything like that? Okay. Seems— it seems like a reasonable thing to modify that code to allow archery.

Speaker J: Mm-hmm.

Speaker C: You know, so of course that will be discussed and put through a public hearing for that agenda.

Speaker G: Thank you.

Speaker J: Appreciate it.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker C: Appreciate it.

Speaker K: David Stroud, for any particular recommendation or suggestions for 7C that will Yeah, just a request to rezone 40 acres, almost 41 acres, to the RTI. It is surrounded on 3 sides by existing RTI overlay, and so the applicant would like to pursue similar—

Speaker C: okay, just a rezone of a particular parcel to the RTI overlay zone. Okay, any questions for David on that?

Speaker H: No, I would just say maybe during the policy session, maybe you already planning on this, David, but just reiterating what the RTI is, because I'm sure a lot of public have misconceptions. So it might be good to refresh that.

Speaker E: Thank you.

Speaker C: And then, I don't know, Marcus, if you had anything you wanted us to be aware of for 7D, or just wait until the policy session?

Speaker B: No, I mean, I think it's pretty straightforward, you know, governing kind of what the needs are of the of the proposed development. So I think it's something that will be probably discussed honestly on 7— during 7C.

Speaker H: Okay.

Speaker B: All those things, to the extent that there are, you know, questions specific to the agreement, and I'm obviously happy to answer any of those.

Speaker E: Okay. All right.

Speaker F: Okay.

Speaker C: All right. Any particular questions on the agenda from commission, the commissioners? Okay. All right. That concludes our working session. So it is 6:02 PM. We'll go ahead and end that for a break until 6:30 when our policy session begins.

Speaker A: Thank you.

Speaker B: OK.

Speaker C: OK, welcome to this evening's Planning Commission meeting. This is our policy session. It is now 6:30, and we'll bring the meeting to order. If you will join— stand and join with me for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Speaker B: Thank you.

Speaker C: Just a note for those who might be attempting to watch or view this meeting online, the video is— is the video still not working? OK, so you will not see us, but the audio is still working. Again, that's just for announcement for anybody who might be attempting to view or participate.

Speaker G: Thank you.

Speaker C: OK, thank you. We'll start with our declaration of conflict of interest. We'll start with Commissioner Allen.

Speaker F: None.

Speaker C: Commissioner Freeh.

Speaker E: None.

Speaker C: Commissioner DiCorsi.

Speaker G: None.

Speaker C: And Commissioner Hess has no conflict. Also, another note I failed to mention, we'll excuse Commissioner Strong and Commissioner Jensen are both excused from tonight's meeting. That leaves us with a quorum of 4 commissioners. And we'll proceed as such. Our next agenda item is the review and approval of the meeting minutes from our September 8th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Any comments from the commission on any changes or anything that needs to be corrected? Okay, I'll entertain a motion.

Speaker H: Chair, I move that we approve the September 8th, 2026 Planning Commission minutes as presented.

Speaker G: Second.

Speaker C: Okay, we have a motion made by Commissioner Allen followed by a second by Commissioner DiCorsi to approve the September 8th Planning Commission meeting minutes. Um, we'll go ahead for our vote. We'll start with Commissioner Freeh.

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner DiCorsi.

Speaker G: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner Hess is yes. And Commissioner Allen.

Speaker F: Yes.

Speaker C: OK, that vote passes with 4 votes. Next on our agenda, normally Brandon Larson, our city planning manager, provides us a status update. He is home celebrating his birthday, so he's excused. So we will skip that agenda item and we'll proceed straight with our action and advisory items on the agenda. We'll start with 7A, and that is an ordinance amending Municipal Code 162540 and some definitions regarding general landscape as it relates to wildland urban interface. This will be presented by Beth Fuchs.

Speaker J: Thank you and good evening, Commissioners. And just a quick explanation for those in the audience who may not be familiar with the WUI, those are areas where development is adjacent to wildlands that are undeveloped, and they have a higher wildfire risk because of their location. So that— talking about areas that are— have certain standards because of that heightened fire risk. And tonight, this item has kind of 2 parts to it. One of it is by the direction of the They passed some legislation recently that we need to adopt, and the other part is at the direction of the city council. And I had previously bought brought an item forward to the commission for discussion that had proposed some setback standards at the recommendation of fire officials. But when I took that to the city council and they were reviewing it, they had some concerns, especially with being able to fully utilize their property. So they gave direction, different direction. And so that's what we're bringing forward tonight. So that first part, those, the state changes, they just want it to be so that if someone lives next to wildlands and wants to remove landscaping in order to provide better fire protection for their home, that we don't have any standards that would prohibit them from doing so. So just need to put that in. And then the city council, they decided instead of putting blanket standards for everywhere, they wanted to be able to evaluate it on a case-by-case basis. And so in order to do that, we need to make sure that they're aware when something is in the WUI. And they also want to try to have residents know that they're going to be in the WUI, especially because the state will be coming out and assessing those properties to help them better protect. Protect them and have no strategies and things they can do to better protect their homes. And so some of the ways we're going to do that is one, we're going to add notations to final plats. And then also we on a staff level have changed in our processes where every development application that comes through, we're going to check and see if it's in a WUI location. And if it is, you and the city council will be informed of that when you're reviewing the application so you know whether or not to me. That should be a consideration. And then I also added some definitions just to support those changes. And so the first one's pretty straightforward, just on final plats. When they go forward, they just need to note that it's in the WUI. Any questions on this one? Okay. And then the next one is the vegetation removal.

Speaker F: Yes.

Speaker J: Added to 176040. Any comments or questions? Any questions on this change?

Speaker C: I do have some comments, but I can— they're more kind of language specific, you know, but I don't know if I— we can probably wait until after the public hearing for those.

Speaker J: Okay.

Speaker F: All right.

Speaker J: And then any questions before the public hearing on the definitions?

Speaker C: Okay, my one brief technical question is, who produces the wildland urban face map itself? Is it the city that manages it?

Speaker J: Yes, and I included the map on here. And so this came before you. I'm trying to remember when we did this, but yeah, it's been a while. It's been a few months ago.

Speaker C: Yeah, so the city is managing this map and it could change? You know, as it's managed over the years?

Speaker J: Yes, we can change it. Now, the state does have areas where they identify kind of wildfire risks, and they have said we can't be more strict than their standards, but we can be less strict because they had— especially with the state coming in and assessing all those properties, they want to make sure they're really areas that are going to be impacted. So we do have some guidance from the state, but it is mostly up to us.

Speaker C: Okay, thank you.

Speaker J: And then staff recommends that you forward a positive recommendation to City Council.

Speaker C: Any other technical questions for Beth at this time? Okay, this is a public hearing. And so at this time it is 6:37 and we'll open the public hearing for any interested parties who might want to make a public hearing comment. Anybody in the audience wishing to make a comment? Okay, hearing no in-person comments. Has the city received any comments online about this agenda item?

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker C: All right, hearing no public hearing comments, it is— we'll go ahead and end our public hearing at 6:30. 6:38 PM. Um, and, uh, have it— just any discussion, uh, amongst the commission on this agenda item?

Speaker G: Commissioner Allen?

Speaker H: Yeah, I would say it makes sense. I mean, when the state makes us make changes anyway, right? So something we have to do. But I like what you put here, Beth, and I think, yeah, we're all for property rights. Allowing them to operate more on their property is a good thing, and putting some suggestions in there and how they should do it. Also, it's kind of nice because they also get to help protect the city a little bit on the boundary of the city. So allowing them to do some of that is a good thing. So I like it. I just— every time I hear WUI, I just keep thinking of Mater from Cars.

Speaker B: WUI!

Speaker H: When he gets excited. I love our acronyms in city government, right?

Speaker E: Thank you. Thank you.

Speaker C: I had a couple of comments on the definitions. And this is probably just a technical, and staff can decide what to do with it. But under WUI lot, it says means a lot located within WUI subject to state inspection. Would it make sense for that to be read refers to a lot located wholly or partially within the WUI? Like, what if— does the entire lot have to be within the boundary of the wildland urban interface, or any portion of the lot? Is it— does this— is it affected to the entire lot, or just that portion of a lot overlapping the map? That would be a question I'd have.

Speaker B: I mean, we can adjust the language to clarify that. I don't know that we would be allowing subdivisions with partially in the WUI and partially not. But yeah, we can certainly make that change to clarify that if any portion of the lot's in the WUI, then it's subject to the code.

Speaker C: Okay, just a suggestion. That's not necessarily a point of— that would be included in the recommendation. I'm trying to think if there was anything else that I had. Oh, okay. So this is a technical question. Okay, and you guys, the staff and Marcus, can correct me here. In the code, there's a reference to a particular subparagraph. For example, there's a reference in the WUI lot definition that it says at the end, as adopted by the State of Utah, incorporated by reference under Eagle Mountain Municipal Code 1595.10. Would it be more appropriate to end the reference at 1595 so that when you have subparagraphs that get added, that you don't have to go track? Like if there's— I was looking at the code and there's several subparagraphs, you know, 50, 30, 60. If you enter—

Speaker B: I think it's fine the way it is, to be honest, because that's the section of code that incorporates all those different, you know, like building codes, residential codes, et cetera, into the city code. And so I think it's pretty clear that when we're talking about the WUI code, that in this definition, that we're specifically referencing the WUI code being incorporated by reference I don't know that anybody's going to be confused that we're talking about some other code.

Speaker C: Yeah, it's not, it's not really confusion. It's for future changes to this particular 1595.

Speaker B: I'm not concerned about that. We'll address that at the time if that becomes an issue.

Speaker J: Okay.

Speaker F: All right. Perfect.

Speaker C: Thank you. Those are the minor technical questions I had. Any other discussion from the Commission? OK, I will entertain a motion on this agenda item. I'll make that motion.

Speaker A: Let me get to— oh, that's the wrong one.

Speaker C: I propose or make a recommendation— make a motion to forward a positive recommendation for agenda item 7A as presented.

Speaker E: I'll second that.

Speaker C: Okay, we have a positive recommendation by Commissioner Hess followed by a second by Commissioner Freeh to forward a positive recommendation to City Council for this agenda item. Any final questions?

Speaker H: Did you want to maybe include the change in language to partially or fully located within the WUI? Or if not, Marcus can address it later too.

Speaker C: So I don't think— no, I think I'll exclude it, just, you know, I won't include that, but thanks, Commissioner Allen, for making that recommendation. With that said, any other questions besides that? Okay, we'll begin our vote. We'll start with Commissioner DiCorsi.

Speaker G: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner Hess votes yes. Commissioner Fried, or sorry, Allen.

Speaker J: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner Fried.

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker C: Okay, that motion passes with 4 votes with a positive recommendation to City Council. Thank you, Beth, for that presentation. Next on our agenda item is 7B, a public hearing for, uh, amending municipal code regarding, um, archery. This will be presented by Natalie Winterton. Thank you.

Speaker I: Good evening, and thank you for hearing this item tonight. I'm just getting this loaded up. So a little bit of background on this code is that the city council had requested that code be drafted to allow archery ranges within the city. But of course, when we want to allow that, we want to do it in the safest way possible. So the most streamlined way we found to incorporate it into the code was to incorporate it into our already existing, um, shooting overlay zone, you know, like for gun ranges. We just have some specific standards for archery that may differ a little bit, but a lot of them are the same as we have relatively same safety standards. Something important to note is that we relied heavily on USA Archery, which is the governing body for archery in the United States. We relied on their safety standards and applied them in the code. And then I'm willing to take any questions that you may have.

Speaker C: Any questions from the commission for Natalie?

Speaker H: Yeah, Natalie, are there any places you foresee this already applying in the outdoor shooting? I'm guessing like over like Wasatch Wing and Clay and those. Are there any other places around the city where this would apply?

Speaker I: I don't know off the— I know one of the places that the council was interested interested in was like near the rodeo grounds. Um, of course, I think— I'm not sure if that area would actually apply given the standards. I mean, if it were an indoor shooting range, of course that would be different. Um, yeah, I don't have anything off the top of my head. Sorry.

Speaker H: No, I was just curious because, yeah, I drive by there and I see people shooting by the rodeo grounds, shooting archery. So I was curious if this would apply there or not.

Speaker E: Thanks.

Speaker C: Any other questions for staff?

Speaker A: Okay, here we go.

Speaker C: Okay, thank you, Natalie, for your presentation, your work on this. This is a public hearing, so before the public today is, is amendment to the code. It is now 6:46 PM. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Any individuals here in attendance wishing to make a comment on this agenda item during the public hearing? OK, any particular comments made online, received through email?

Speaker E: OK.

Speaker C: Seeing no public comments wishing to be made, we'll go ahead and end the public hearing at 6:46 PM for agenda item 7B. Discussion? Any discussion? amongst the commission?

Speaker E: Okay.

Speaker C: All right, hearing no discussion, I'll enter— oh, sorry, Commissioner Carsi.

Speaker B: Yeah, no worries.

Speaker C: I was a little slow to the game. It's okay.

Speaker G: I mean, I'm personally in favor of encouraging safe archery in the city. I think it kind of goes back to our pre-public, or I guess our work session where we talked about encouraging active, like, engagement in the community and different programs. I'm all for this kind of proposal that could help implement it in safe ways. I think Wasatch Wing and Clay is outside city limits currently, probably.

Speaker D: I don't know.

Speaker G: I've shot there. They have a 3D archery range. It's awesome. So anyway, I just— I'm all in favor of this.

Speaker C: Any other discussion? Okay, I will entertain a motion on agenda item 7B.

Speaker H: Chair, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to City Council for Item 7B as presented.

Speaker G: Second.

Speaker C: Okay, we have a positive recommendation made by Commissioner Allen with a second by Commissioner DiCorsi to forward a positive recommendation to City Council. Any final discussion or clarifications? Okay, seeing none, we'll go ahead and proceed with our voting. Commissioner Hess. Votes yes, Commissioner Allen.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner Freeh.

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker C: And Commissioner DiCorsi.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker C: Okay, that vote passes with 4 votes. Okay, next on our item, our agenda, is 7C. This is a public hearing, an agenda item for a rezone of certain lands known as Corrigan This will be presented by our senior planner, David Stroud.

Speaker K: Yes. Lacey, could you please switch us over? There we go again. I got to remember that. Carson, it's not dragging over.

Speaker H: Can you—

Speaker K: Help me out here, please.

Speaker A: Sorry, I keep having to sneeze. Thank you. Thank you.

Speaker K: Okay, apologize for that little delay there. Planning Commission, those in the public here tonight, Corgan Farms is requesting a rezone. There's going to be 2 parts to this. I will take care of the first part, which is the actual rezone request. The legal department will then follow up after this item on 7D as the development agreement. So the applicant's property, you see here in the red, out here just southwest of the existing QTS development under construction. They've come to the city to request that that parcel be rezoned to the RTI overlay zone. The underlying zone would be agriculture. Just a brief of what that means is, in a sense, there's 2 zones on the property: the agriculture zone, which is the base zone; the RTI is the overlay. Whatever development then comes in— say the property is developed or rezoned to the RTI overlay— they would then follow the code for the RTI overlay, what they could do. If it's not addressed in the Overlay, and it's not addressed in the subsequent development agreement. It then defaults to whatever the agriculture zone says. So, for instance, say there's a setback; it's not listed. They would follow whatever setback zone would apply, or setback from the zone that would apply. And so, what we're looking at—they have approximately well. First off, the Eagle Mountain Code defines the purpose of the. RTI as development and operation of large-scale technological clean industrial and high-tech manufacturing uses that will increase the tax base and/or provide jobs for the city's residents. And so the applicant has requested that the RTI— they own 41 acres. The RTI overlay currently exists on the north, the east, and the south side of the subject property. To the west is Utah County jurisdiction governed by their standards. At this time there is no development proposal. It's strictly they want to get the zone in place because that will then be the next step would then be to follow whatever the standards are for RTI development, whatever it may be, to then pursue a particular development on the property. So again, with this there would be a follow-up which again the legal department will take care of. as far as that, but within the proposed agreement, it does enumerate some accessory uses, which are listed here on the screen as well. Again, those are accessory. You'd have to have primary uses that use the accessory uses. The accessory uses cannot just come in on their own. And it's difficult to show on the map, but it does show the zoning map. There's the arrow pointing to the subject property.

Speaker E: Thank you.

Speaker K: And then again on the northeast and the south of that 41-acre square, the current RTI overlay, if you can see the cross-hatching, does exist on those parcels there. So staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City Council.

Speaker C: Thank you, David. Any, any technical questions for David at this point? Okay. All right, this is also a public hearing. Oh, sorry, yes, thank you, Commissioner. Is the applicant here and wish to make a comment? Thank you.

Speaker D: So my name's Reagan Beck. Myself and Corey Sosa right here, we are the landowners there, but I'm also a resident here at Eagle Mountain. I'm a school counselor at Cedar Valley High School. My mom and dad live here. brothers and sisters live here. We've all been here for years. We bought the property many, many years ago. We own our own water with our own well. We farmed it for a while. And as other data centers have been built around it, we've noticed there really is one option to be put in there. And that doesn't mean it's going to be a data center. It just means we wanted to control how we went forward with the process because we're— the landowners. Right now, obviously, there's a lot of negative attention to this type of genre of— what would you call it— commercial development. And because I live here, because I work at the high school, and because I plan on being here for the long term, we didn't want to throw something up into this property that would affect the residents. And so I'm up here speaking as a resident more so than a developer. We don't have An end user, to clarify for everybody. We don't have a buyer right now. We don't have a builder. We want to make sure that we have this development agreement, this zoning in place, so that when we were to advertise it to something, we could somewhat control how we did it. And other applicants, you know, and I understand how it goes, but for others, they may own this land and they live in five states away, and they just send somebody to. develop it and give them, you know, hey, go do this. And it's actually the end user going through this process. I am a living human being here in the city that lives here across the street and works at the local high school. And anybody that comes in, we're trying to vet as best as possible. We've hired a fantastic consulting firm that has helped us with this. The city has been fantastic. If you guys remember, we came in May. And brought this to your attention and asked for advice on if we were to move forward with something, what would you like to see in it and how, so that we don't create something in the city that is not beneficial for the residents. You'll hear a lot of people talk and complain about, well, they didn't disclose taxes and tax credits. There is not— we don't have a buyer yet. That will come, but that's not for me right now for getting the rezone and the development agreement.

Speaker F: Thank you.

Speaker D: That allows us, in my opinion, to pursue companies that we may want here that would provide something great for the city. They'll talk about water. You're going to use up our— we own our own water. Now, I can't say if we'll need more or less, but we have quite a bit of water at our own well. And so we're trying to design a site that, in the development agreement, that would utilize what we have instead of burdening anybody else. And that water right is long before half the residents in the city. So even if they're kind of scared about water usage, they'd lose their water long before we'd lose ours or this site because we've owned it longer than a lot of the residents in the city. You know, we've tried to do a lot to where we can protect not only the city and make it beneficial for them, but also for ourselves because we plan on being here forever. So anyway, we appreciate you guys' patience and work with us. You know, grateful that you've been great with feedback. And, you know, Mr. Stroud on helping us present this, and, you know, Marcus for helping with the development agreement. We feel comfortable as a resident, as living here, working here, that it's good for the city given where we're at. You know, this isn't— we're not going to build a house there. You know, and the underlying thing of agriculture, we still have cows and horses and pigs sitting on the property. And that could be for who knows how long until we found what might be most beneficial for the city. So anyway, hopefully you see and we're conveying the message that it's not just us trying to run. We're trying to take as much control of this and get it the best— in the best place possible. Do you have any questions for me or even the consulting firm we've hired that's done a lot of legwork?

Speaker C: Yeah, Commissioner DiCorsi.

Speaker G: Yeah, I just have a quick question. Is there anything kind of unique about this property that would would differentiate it or make it somehow different than the properties around it that you could kind of, like, kind of force through?

Speaker D: Like, that we would do something specific that they couldn't?

Speaker G: Potentially that. I guess I'm just looking for, you know, I can see the overlay all around. Is there anything unique about this property that in your mind makes it different or should be treated differently?

Speaker D: No, because it's— if you drove out there, you would see it's data center or mass industry like that or power generation. It literally is in the middle of it right now. In fact, Layton Construction is using some of the land for laydown yards and trailers and whatnot for the adjacent QTS building. Um, the land behind us will be the same thing. They've all— you've worked with these landowners before, you've talked to them, or at least the companies that come and represent them. But we've been the last ones out there with animals on the land for years, and we always knew it would probably come to this, but we didn't want to just throw it out to anybody. We wanted to do it right, and these consultants have done a fantastic job in steering us in that direction with your help as well.

Speaker G: Thank you.

Speaker C: Any other comments or questions for the applicant? Okay, thank you for coming, presenting, and being part of our city as the process that goes through Yeah. Every piece of property, you know?

Speaker G: Yeah.

Speaker C: So—

Speaker D: Because I'm an applicant, a first-time applicant, as there will be a subsequent thing with our property, do I need to sell myself on that as well, or does that kind of work with both sides of that?

Speaker C: No, I think this is the process by which the city governs its—

Speaker A: and how it grows.

Speaker L: Perfect.

Speaker C: And so I think you're— a lot of our properties are probably managed by outsiders.

Speaker G: Right.

Speaker C: that are purchasing property and developing. In this case, you're the owner, your family's the owner, and you're looking to make the most of what you can do with the property.

Speaker D: And truthfully, as humble as I can say, I'm an open book. I would go to everybody for advice, and we have. Like I said, it's working at the high school as a counselor. I'm in the community, and I don't— I mean, I would go to everybody and say, how else could we do this the right way? Because Fortunately, or unfortunately, however you want to look at it, there's no other option in my mind of— we're not going to build a house. You're not putting a warehouse out there.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker D: It's lucrative even to the city for this little portion of the property. But that doesn't mean I'm turning my back on the residents. I live here. I am a resident. And I want to— I can't sit and counsel students at the high school and then be the hypocrite that tries to run with this. And so we've tried to design the development agreement and the rezone with honestly the city in mind. And I'm here, I would gladly talk with anybody anytime. I'm not here to hide anything, and neither are these gentlemen that have helped me.

Speaker C: Great. So thank you. Appreciate it. Okay, we've heard from this staff and our applicant, and we'll now proceed with our public hearing. It is 7 PM. We'll open our public hearing. Are there any individuals in the Room that would wish to make a public comment during the hearing time. Okay. Do we? Sorry, did you guys submit submit a comment or a comment for a paper for a comment to make a comment? Okay. Yeah, if you if if if if you want to come forward and make your comment. The comment will be made for 3 minutes. After, if you'll just add— there's a piece of paper at the back. If you'll just add your information and then provide it up to Megan afterwards. Does that— is that the correct procedure? Did I— okay. So if you don't have— you haven't filled out a paper currently, you can still make a comment. You'll get 3 minutes, 5 minutes if you're representing a group. And then we just ask that after you would fill out the comment form and provide it to Megan. So, If you want to come forward and make a comment, just give us your name.

Speaker B: We're not differentiating on groups anymore.

Speaker A: It's just 3 minutes.

Speaker C: Oh, sorry. Thank you, Marcus. Okay, you have 3 minutes to make your comment.

Speaker F: Where do I turn it on?

Speaker C: Yep, that button right there. Yeah. Yeah. If you'll state your name.

Speaker F: Yes. My name is Elba Maria Perez.

Speaker C: Okay.

Speaker F: I live in Spring Run. I've been here for about 6 years or so. And the proposal that is like 25 pages in the website.

Speaker L: Mm-hmm.

Speaker F: I feel that the language is in there a little. I did not read the whole thing. Let me just say that. I did not read the whole thing. I just read a couple of things. And it feels a little— sneaky, if nothing else. I don't know how I can say it, you know, but like in this part in here where it says the business projection, not public financial information and operating data related to the company, including but not limited to water utilization rates by the deemed confidential business information. Confidential business information. That's the part that is like, he's saying that he has water, no problem, you know, and that's good, you know. So why does it have to be confidential? And then a little bit of other things that, you know, they're confidential, that it seems like for a normal citizen like me, It feels a little, okay, wait a minute. If it wasn't because I came to this meeting and hear the owner say, you know, we have water, we have plenty of water, so the residents shouldn't worry about that. That is great. I'm here, I'm involved. You know, many of you know that I get involved because I'm interested on living. Like I told somebody the other day, you know, I'm already old, probably another 20 years and I'm done. But my kids are not. My grandkids are not. And that's what I'm fighting for. That's what I'm worried about. Why do we have to say confidential if there is no need? And those are the language that sometimes we need to take— okay, we have one day to figure out what's going on. I'm going to take it to a lawyer to figure it out and tell me what is going on because I don't understand all your little Words?

Speaker I: 30 seconds remaining.

Speaker F: So that's a concern, a concern from a concerned citizen. You know, if there is no need, don't do it. You know, we really need to figure it out what's going on in the city that we are living in and we hope our children will live in for a long time. Thank you.

Speaker A: Thank you.

Speaker C: Any other comments? Yeah, and just, just to clarify, this is a comment about the overlay rezone. We have another agenda item that's going to be specific to the development agreement, and of course you can make comments on either one. Would you like to come forward and make a comment? Or is your— no, sorry, the—

Speaker K: Sure. Yeah.

Speaker C: Go ahead and state your name. You'll have 3 minutes, and then afterwards, if you'll fill out a comment form.

Speaker L: Sure. My name is Theresa Edwards, and I've lived out in the city for decades, a couple decades at least, more than that. And I've seen our city— people come in and they're— I feel like it's almost being whored out. Like, whatever— they come in, they see something beautiful, they want to take it and turn it into a profit. We've been promised lower taxes and jobs and money and all of that. I had an energy company come to me because I, I'm right next to Camp Williams, and they said they wanted to buy up my land for the right price and offered me a decent amount of money. I find out it's a Chinese company wanting to be next to Camp Williams. I feel like we shouldn't be for sale, and I'm sure the owners are very good people and have good intentions with this overlay. But you can't control things. Once you rezone it, it kind of gets away from you and it opens the opportunity for someone with the right check. I mean, we can say, oh, I plan on staying here, but honestly, if somebody comes in and times are hard enough, they give you the right amount of money, all of a sudden it becomes the people's problem who are still staying here and you can't get that back. And so once you rezone that, you're opening that up to, to be a problem for everyone living here. Please, please consider— yeah, consider carefully what you're opening up or what you're, what you're making possible when you do this. Thank you.

Speaker G: Thank you.

Speaker C: Any other comments that wish to be made on agenda item 7C? Okay, seeing no more comments here in the meeting. Any, any particular comments that, that you might have received or need to mention from an email or online submittal?

Speaker I: Um, yes, I had, um, a comment from, um, Claire. Is there a Claire here?

Speaker C: No. Um, and she was opposed to the rezone And then a Catherine.

Speaker I: I don't know if there's a Catherine here.

Speaker C: And she was also opposed. OK. Thank you. OK. Seeing no more comments to be made, we'll go ahead and it is 7:07 PM. We'll close the public hearing and have—

Speaker I: 30 seconds remaining.

Speaker C: Perfect timing. Yeah. Okay, um, discussion, commissioners? Any, any, any discussion item on this agenda item 7C, the rezone?

Speaker H: Yeah, uh, the RTI overlay zone is actually very interesting to me, and so I was reviewing the code before the meeting as well. In Chapter 17 point— I guess Section 17.48.020, like David was mentioning, the purpose of this overlay zone is also to It applies if they're going to have projects which will include a minimum of 100 or more permanent jobs at an average hourly rate that is equal to or greater than Utah County's average hourly wage. And there's some parentheses in there as well. So designed for jobs, which is good. So it's not just going to be an empty data center, right? Correct me if I'm wrong. That's what our code says here. And the RTI overlay zone, as David mentioned, and the applicant, it already surrounds this Parcel. So if this was like an orphan parcel out in the middle of nowhere where the RTI, it's already surrounded, okay, great. That's it. To me, it's a different discussion. But this part of our city has already been set apart for this purpose, right? Like, as we can see on the map, it's very clear QTS is there, Meta is there. And like the applicant mentioned, he's just getting himself cleaned up before he goes out and starts dating, right, is what he said essentially, right? He doesn't He's not courting anybody yet, doesn't have any rings bought to put on fingers. Excuse my terrible analogy, but he's just getting his ducks in a row. Now, is it gonna be sold? Sure, because we've set aside that part of our city for this, and I think it fits. Again, like I mentioned previously, if this was out in the middle of nowhere by residents, something like that, different discussion. But for me, it makes sense. It's already surrounded there by RTA.

Speaker E: Thank you.

Speaker C: Any other comments or discussion? Commissioner DiCorsi.

Speaker G: Yes, thank you, Chair. I echo Commissioner Allen's comments. I think that there are lots of reasons to look for safeguarding our city's resources, the land, and making sure that the uses are in line with what we want to live in, like what we want to be surrounded with here in our city. But I do have to look at the map and think if we were to require this to be residential or something else, it just doesn't make sense. Like, it's surrounded by this RTI zone. It's a small piece completing sort of the puzzle that's already been put in around them. You can certainly— I mean, I don't know, I wasn't probably part of the commission for most of these decisions. We could argue whether that was a good use of the RTI zone. But I think we also have to balance the property owners' rights here, and it's hard for me to see a good justification for saying no, this little piece surrounded by RTI doesn't get the same treatment. So that's kind of my thought.

Speaker C: Other comments?

Speaker H: Yeah, sorry, I forgot something. Um, our Evan Barrett sent us an email with some stuff about this to prepare as well, which was very helpful. So there was a House Bill 76 2026 legislative session that created a new state code that mandates public disclosure of annual water use for data center projects. So to our residents' concern, are we going to have water? Is this going to be confidential? The state has said that no, it cannot be. So it should— which is good because we're very much concerned about water out here. So we will know if they're going to have water, and the, the DRC is going to make sure that they have water rights before anything is approved because we can't allow it if they don't have the water. So there's— just to kind of help address that concern the public has, is the state is mandating data centers have to disclose water usage. And also the, the city is going to make sure they have water rights before they begin construction. So we're not going to go without. We're going to make sure that water is there before they build.

Speaker A: Okay. All right. Any other comments?

Speaker E: Just to address the concern of certain land users getting hold of the land, because they write the right check. I think that's a good, valid concern. And, you know, I would advise to our landowners to just be careful who you sell to. Like, if I ever sell my house, I'm not selling it to a rental company, not 'cause I can't, but 'cause I want to leave my neighborhood a certain way. And that's just kind of how I feel. We can't control who they sell to by any means, but definitely encourage you to look at those who you feel would be the best fit for our community and our city, which I think those we bought in so far have done— have been good partners and, um, American-loving partners, if you want to go that way.

Speaker J: Right.

Speaker E: At least kind of reading between the lines. But, um, anyways, that's, that's just a kind of a side note. But, uh, as far as the RTTI zone goes, you know, that's not going to affect who buys it or who doesn't purchase it or ends up eventually, um, developing the property. But, uh, to Definitely we want to encourage good partners here in the community. I know you guys are the same way, so I don't think that's going to be a concern in my mind.

Speaker C: Okay. Thank you. Well, with that discussion, I will entertain a motion on this agenda item.

Speaker H: Chair, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to City Council for item 7C.

Speaker C: I'll second that. We have a motion by Commissioner Allen and a second by Commissioner Hess to forward a positive recommendation on the rezone presented as far as this Agenda Item 7C. Any need to clarify or questions from the commission? Okay. Hearing none, we'll go ahead and start our vote. We'll begin with Commissioner Allen.

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner Fried?

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner DiCorsi?

Speaker D: Yes.

Speaker C: And Commissioner Hess votes yes. That agenda item votes with— passes with 4 votes, recommending a positive recommendation to City Council. Okay, next on our agenda item is 7D. This is Corgan Farms development agreement, which is related to item 7C, and this will be presented by Yes.

Speaker B: So this would be— so the RTI is zoned in order to take advantage of the administrative approval process. There must be a development agreement that's in place. Otherwise, it's subject to our normal standard procedures for any other development of that nature. So there is a proposed development agreement for your review. As was noted in the prior presentation, there's still some unknowns about what specifically the project will entail, and this agreement reflects that, uh, those unknowns. However, there are certain things that we know are going to be needed infrastructure-wise to support, uh, a data center use, which was ultimately what's being contemplated consistent with the neighborhood. Um, and so those— you can look through Article 5 of the agreement, and that governs the various types of infrastructure that would be implicated Uh, by the development that would be anticipated, uh, coming out of this agreement. So, uh, other than that, it follows kind of our standard form for other— all our other data center agreements that you've seen previously in relation. Um, uh, I will say that there are no, you know, tax incentives that are associated with this. Um, for some of the older agreements, there were. That's what was was necessary to get companies to come. Under the current landscape, that's just not a thing. And so there are no incentives that are associated with this. It's just a straight— these are the needs of the development that are going to take place. The uses would be data center with power generation as an accessory use to support the data centers. Additionally, it contemplates plates, infrastructure going in related to those uses, sewer, water, roads, natural gas infrastructure, and I think, yes, and, you know, and just power distribution. So with that, the rest of it is again just taken from our standard template for data center development agreements. I will say in relation to the comment in the prior Public hearing. I believe she's referencing Section 10.14 of the agreement regarding confidential information that relates to things like trade secrets, so you're not giving your competitors a business advantage, and other types similar types of confidential business information. It would still be subject to Grandma, and so there would be an independent person that would ultimately be the final decider as to whether or not something. Qualifies as confidential business information. It just puts an obligation on the city to, when we get a grandma request, to allow the, um, owner of the property to make— to, to see the grandma request and determine whether or not they want to make a confidential business information claim. And then, then the onus would be on them to defend that in any future proceedings, whether it would be, um, an appeal, uh, to the Chief Administrative Officer, an appeal to the Government Records Office, an appeal to the District Court, and so on. So that they would be bearing those costs if they're making that claim. So that's kind of just to clarify what that's about: is to avoid giving competitors an unfair advantage by manipulating open records laws to get secrets of the industry that other that their competitors may have and want to keep secret. So that's the nature of that clause.

Speaker C: Okay. Questions for Marcus at this time? Okay. Commissioner Ricorsi.

Speaker G: Yeah. I just have one question, and maybe it's answered by— did I hear correctly that this is our standard template form for RTI?

Speaker B: Yeah. So this is, you know, most of the clauses in this agreement you will see in every one we have, whether whether it's with Meta or with QTS and, you know, Tract or whatever, most of the clauses are identical. So the things that are mostly specific to this agreement are in Article 5 regarding the infrastructure.

Speaker G: I guess one question I had, it looks like developer can withdraw maybe for any reason or at any time for any reason?

Speaker H: Yeah.

Speaker B: So they're not obligated to develop.

Speaker G: Right, to build a—

Speaker B: If they do develop, then they're bound by this agreement. So we can clarify that. If you're talking about Article VII, we can clarify that language that, you know, prior to development they can terminate it, not subsequent to starting development. So I'll make those changes. To clarify, that's the intent.

Speaker G: That's a small one. And then I wasn't sure, I guess, on the 20-year timeframe. Yeah, um, feels like a long time to kind of handcuff the city.

Speaker B: So most of our agreements with data centers involve larger parcels and are actually 40-year agreements.

Speaker E: Okay.

Speaker B: This was cut to 20 because it's a much smaller parcel, uh, just to give time to market the property, get a, get a buyer in mind. And I, I don't anticipate It actually taking that long, but it's to— it actually protects the city because those are the uses. It limits what they can do with the property notwithstanding the RTI zoning.

Speaker G: Okay. I guess, is there any thought or benefit maybe to like a 10-year term with extensions for certain milestones or like, I don't know, do we ever do that?

Speaker B: We haven't done that in the past with data centers, to be honest. We've put in sort of certain things that they need to— certain dates that they need to accomplish certain items now. And it's been— and that has varied development to development, you know. So with the QTS agreement, there was a certain milestone that they were supposed to reach within, I think, 3 years. They've done that. I think we barely executed that agreement. I think just barely 3 years ago. So, and they're obviously well on their way to constructing those buildings. It was just to begin construction, I believe.

Speaker G: Yeah.

Speaker B: With Tract, it was a little bit different. It was because of the nature of their business model. It was more about getting the horizontal infrastructure in place by a certain date. So we're talking about, again, like things like the wastewater, you know, sewer pipes, water lines, things like that, that before you go vertical. And so this one, Where we're at, I think it's— You know, where things are— I mean, well, obviously there are certain— it's not like they don't know at all what they're going to do with the property, but things are still in flux. It's a little bit trickier to put those types of milestones in place. And we can add milestones to the agreement and kind of discuss with the other party what those might look like. But yeah. It's a little bit trickier under the current circumstances.

Speaker G: Yeah, understood. I guess I was just kind of trying to get the lay of the land.

Speaker A: I'm still new here. Thank you.

Speaker C: Yeah, I think in, as far as timing goes on this agenda, I have it highlighted here if I can find it. It's 3, so this is a little bit unique because this is a draft agreement and there's not a—

Speaker B: It's not a draft agreement. It's a final draft.

Speaker C: Oh, sorry.

Speaker B: I mean, we don't have the exhibits attached with what was presented, but it is what it is. I mean, it's a final draft. And what it does is it's more flexible in saying, all right, here's what needs to take place that determines the specifics of the various types of infrastructure that are gonna go in. And then, you know, saying, you know, how we determine, you know, like, all right, so if you're gonna connect to a lift station or if you're gonna gravity flow to the sewer treatment plant, you know, how you're— what route you're gonna take. Like, there's some basic guidelines in there and talking about doing the modeling as to what makes the most sense, but ultimately giving the city the final say as to what route we're gonna go.

Speaker C: And those phases that will happen Or multiple phases that happen over a period of years. When those elements come into play, they're incorporated by default in the agreement, but are those reviewed, future phases, by staff as far as, hey, the next item we're gonna do, we're looking to—

Speaker B: Right, so every time a land use application comes before the city, that's being reviewed by staff. So if somebody's doing a site plan application, a plat application, those things are always going through the normal process. Now, the difference with the RTI zone is that it doesn't go to a public meeting or a public hearing. It is an administrative approval.

Speaker F: Okay.

Speaker B: Which is consistent with the way a lot of cities do it, inconsistent with the way other cities do it.

Speaker G: Okay.

Speaker B: It's not anything abnormal to do it administratively. That would still happen normally. And again, you're getting a building permit application. That's going to go through the normal process. The inspections are going to be going through the normal process. The certificate of occupancy is going to go through the normal process. All that's just going through the standard processes.

Speaker E: OK. Oh, I got a question.

Speaker C: Yeah, for sure.

Speaker E: Just more out of just curiosity how this works. But there's a provision in there for road maintenance reimbursements during the project.

Speaker B: Yeah. learned through experience with these data centers is that the construction traffic can do damage to our roads. And so that's what that's about, is them reimbursing us for the costs that the city incurs through that damage to the roads during the construction process.

Speaker E: I guess my question was, how do we determine what that is?

Speaker B: And, um, you know, that's something that, uh, when we determine, you know, so when you, when you build a road, right, there's sort of a standard for the useful life of that road.

Speaker E: Right.

Speaker B: And so when that thing— when the road has to be repaired early, then we're like, we can look at, okay, what construction traffic's going through there, is it, you know, who's it coming from, and being able to say, all right, well, we need to repair this road, you know, 3 years early. That's gonna exact, you know, you know, it's a 15-year road or whatever. I don't know what the standards are. I'm just throwing out hypotheticals. But so that's 20% early. And so now we have to, you know, so that's essentially a 20% increase in cost to the city.

Speaker E: Sure.

Speaker B: And seeking reimbursement based on allocation of who's responsible for what. You know, what— because we know, like, we know how much, like, you know, for example, you know, QTS, how much construction traffic is related to them, or Metta for their ongoing construction, Williams. Right. So, you know, we look at that, we see these trucks going down, we know what's going down there. Our business— or our building inspectors are down there daily. You know, I feel like they live there during the business hours. And so, you know, so we're able to— we haven't had any issues with that, to be honest. We've had good partners with— partnerships with the data center companies. And And making sure that we're made whole based on that.

Speaker E: Perfect.

Speaker C: Let's see. So a couple of questions, like on 3.2, new taxes. I mean, the agreement— so there's a— the development agreement would define in this 3.2, the city shall not, during the term of the agreement, recommend or support any new taxes.

Speaker B: Yeah, I mean, we're in government.

Speaker C: Specifically to the project.

Speaker B: Yeah, so—

Speaker C: Okay.

Speaker B: Yeah, so this language is applicable solely and exclusively to the project, the property, or the data center industry, right? So we're already bound by that language in other data center agreements. So the only thing that would be different here is specific to the project, and we're not targeting any one project with taxes anyways. I don't see that as an actual give on the city's part. Saying that we're not going to advocate for taxing the data center industry, again, we're already constrained Contractually bound by that through other agreements anyways that we made in years past. But I mean, again, we're partnering with these companies to come in, and so it would be obviously not a great show of good faith to then say, all right, now hike up their taxes, you know, specifically targeted at them. Again, general tax increases that are going to affect them are still going to— those are things we feel free if we're going to go through, you know, in taxation and raise property taxes hypothetically, then that obviously is going to affect the data center just like everyone else.

Speaker C: Okay. Thank you for that clarification. I had a couple questions. Like, if you think about like the impact fees under 3.3, if the project is phased, and right now there's— based on what I see, there's not specific phases, but Are the impact fees for this development agreement based on the impact fees at the time of the agreement?

Speaker B: So that's not the way impact fees work. Impact fees are imposed at the time of the building permit application. Okay. Okay. So that's the controlling date. And we— so whenever we go through the process to alter or modify our impact fees, For any particular type of impact fee, say, you know, again, transportation impact fees. We're gonna go through the process. It's a very long process that the state mandates. And then even after we've gone through all that, there's a 90-day period between when we impose a new impact fee and when it actually takes effect. And so that is sort of like the equivalent of like a vesting that you would see in other land use aspects. Is that all right? We've changed it. You know, if there's anything that you have that's like imminent, you have 90 days essentially to get it under the old fee. And then, because, yeah. So there's no such thing as vesting with impact fees outside of that context.

Speaker C: Okay. Under 4.1, there's an entitlement to development, and there's some mention to mining activities. And the way I read this, and I probably, I could be misreading this, but it seems like it's the applicable rule permits mining activities to be conducted under or within the property, and mining activities are prohibited under the existing zoning pursuant to the zoning ordinance. So is this, 'cause like I looked in the zoning for under agriculture and RTI doesn't, It doesn't mention mining.

Speaker B: Yeah, so I mean, it's pretty typical with any development, residential development, commercial development, industrial development, whatever, that when they're going through, they're clearing the land, they're pulling out the nice topsoil, and then they're filtering it and reselling it. They're pulling out any useful materials, and that's what that's a reference to.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker H: Perfect.

Speaker C: Perfect. One last comment is the changes in applicable rules under 4.1, obviously not just for this particular agreement, but if this is the template by which we use, like, so in this section, it talks about generally, like, there can't be— I'm going to misread this— no addition to or modification of applicable Rules, including zoning. I'm trying to find the correct citywide basis. So there's citywide changes that could be enacted after the agreement that wouldn't be applicable, right?

Speaker B: Right. So again, so this relates to vesting, and this would be typical of any development, residential, commercial, industrial. When you're entering into a development agreement, they want to know what rules they're playing by. And so what they're saying is we're going to freeze the rules at this point in time.

Speaker H: Sure.

Speaker B: So unless you're going to, you know, invoke the compelling countervailing public interest doctrine, we're going to play by the rules that are in effect at the time we enter into the agreement.

Speaker C: Does that— how does that apply to state and federal standards that could change that are beyond city, you know, because if there's, like, I'm trying to think of if there's— is there a regulatory, a federal regulatory agency or state agency Is there an agency that regulates data centers, for example? A governing agency that says, here's the procedures?

Speaker B: I'm not aware of anything specifically to data centers. Certainly for power—

Speaker C: Power plants, right?

Speaker B: That's obviously— there's state and federal regulations. So nothing that the city can do affects that.

Speaker C: Yeah, okay.

Speaker B: So we're a political subdivision of the state, and they can tell us what they want, and then we have to do that.

Speaker E: Yeah.

Speaker B: The federal government, by virtue of this the states and everybody else anything within their jurisdiction, which is most everything these days. You know, they can essentially, they can change the law and the states and cities are bound by it.

Speaker C: Okay. All right. Those were my questions. Sorry for taking that little extra time there, but any other questions? Thank you, Marcus, for taking our questions, specifically majority of my questions. Okay, this is a public hearing, Item 7D. This is a public hearing for the development agreement.

Speaker G: It is—

Speaker C: sorry, applicant, would you like to— is there anything that you would like to— okay. Yeah.

Speaker H: Thank you to Marcus.

Speaker D: As you know, way over my head, but we sat with him and I hired the consultants to make sure there was nothing in there that was playing by any special rules different than what's already out there. If anything, trying to make it better for the city off of stuff we've learned. And to your comment about the time, I wanted like 100 years because—

Speaker C: Okay.

Speaker D: I don't know if we'd sell it next year or in 20 years, and I don't want to have to do this again. It's stressful to try to make decisions not only for ourselves but For the residents, and I mean that. We're here to try to help the residents too. So I'm hoping that the 20 was fine, but we— like I said, we have no intent right now. We don't have a buyer or anything. We just want to be prepared. But everything else is Chinese to me, and they made sure that the city and you guys did a fantastic job in making sure it was in compliance with what you've already sat and talked about.

Speaker C: Thanks. Thanks for coming and discussing Thank you for doing that. Okay. We'll proceed with our public hearing. It is 7:32 p.m. Anybody in the audience wishing to make a public comment during the public hearing? Okay. Any online comments received that need to be addressed? Okay. Great. Thank you. Okay. Commission— oh, sorry. Seeing no public comments to be made, we'll go ahead and end the public hearing at 7:32 PM. Discussion, Commission? Any, any points of discussion, questions or concerns or anything? Commissioner Allen?

Speaker H: Yeah, like was stated, I'll just say it again, this is very like typical, our standard contract with a lot of these data centers. There's nothing abnormal that I saw out of there, and Marcus mentioned that as well. And like he said, there are no tax incentives, tax breaks, anything there right now. I know a lot of the public is worried about about that, and rightly so, I think. But there's nothing in there right now. So just again stating that clearly for the public, there's none of that tax break, anything like that yet.

Speaker E: I don't know, just a thought, but just generally thinking about this, I don't know if it's appropriate to do this or not, but it might be nice to have like a, maybe a, like you have the vested rights doctrine, it's kind of just vested for indefinitely essentially, you know, on those rights. Which is good, but in some ways, but it might be good to have like maybe a review period, you know, within 10 years or 20 years or whatever, whatever the period the council wants to set for these agreements so that we can review them and make sure that the best interests of the city and of the applicant, you know, are all being still being met. And if there's anything that we, we would want to look at revising within that document, I don't know if there's to just have a— a standard review period every so many years just to kind of go back over the document, make sure everything looks good, is still— the intentions are still in place and that kind of thing. 'Cause things change in the city and suddenly the, you know, the landowner may have a whole different idea of what they wanna do or the city may want them to consider looking at some things a little differently. And I think it'd be really smart to have something like that written in there, just kind of a review period every so— Thank you. So many years, like maybe 10 years or something like that. Just a thought.

Speaker C: Okay, any other, any other comments? Okay, thank you for all those who presented and have come and listened to the, the discussion. I will entertain a motion on item 7D.

Speaker H: Chair, I move that we forward a positive recommendation to City Council for Item 7D as presented.

Speaker E: I'll second that.

Speaker C: Okay, before us we have a motion by Commissioner Allen and a second by Commissioner Fried to forward a positive recommendation for Agenda Item 7D. Any desire to comment or make a clarification? Any questions from the commission? Okay. With that, we'll proceed with our vote. We'll start with Commissioner Freeh.

Speaker E: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner DiCorsi?

Speaker D: Yes.

Speaker C: Commissioner Hess votes yes. Commissioner Allen?

Speaker H: Yes.

Speaker C: Okay. Item— agenda item 7D passes with 4 votes recommending a positive recommendation to City Council. Okay. Thank you. That concludes our action and advisory item agenda item. Any discussion items? Is next on the agenda any discussion items for the Commission? Hearing none, our next scheduled meeting would be October 13th. Is any of the Commissioners available today, or do you know if you will be gone on October 13th? Tuesday, October 13th.

Speaker H: We've got a baby coming around that time, so we'll play it by ear. Yeah, I'll let you know.

Speaker C: All right, well, we might let you off that day, Jason. Okay, anybody else? If, if you're not— as always, if something comes up, let me know. Um, make sure you let me know ahead of time so we can ensure that we have a quorum, but we support you 100%. Okay, uh, with that, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

Speaker E: I'll make a motion to adjourn.

Speaker C: OK. Motion. All those in favor? All those— do we need a second? OK.

Speaker G: I'll second that.

Speaker C: OK, second. We'll do a voice vote. All those in favor? Aye. OK, meeting is adjourned at 7:36.