Draper » It seemed so simple. All the five-member City Council had to do was say yea or nay to the Windsor Mill mixed-housing proposal just east of the Jordan River.
The plan, put forth by Olsen & Associates Construction Inc., called for 100 condominiums and 17 single-family dwellings on 18.5 acres west of 700 West near 11400 South. The Planning Commission said no, pushing the final decision to the council
After a spirited council debate Tuesday, the proposal stalled. But it's far from dead.
To go forward, Olsen Construction needed a modification of Draper's land-use code, plus a zone change.
But rather than voting on whether to uphold or reverse the Planning Commission's no vote, the council entertained what the developer called "a compromise" plan: 75 townhouses and 17 single-family homes.
That proposal has not been seen by the Draper staff or Planning Commission. Nor has it been subject to public hearing.
During the council's exchange, any number of options were tossed about: a third plan with less density, a motion to approve the original proposal and a substitute motion to subdivide the acreage.
The discussion became so convoluted that 90 minutes into it, Mayor Darrell Smith said he'd lost track of which plan was before the board.
"We've made this so confusing, nobody can understand what's happening."
Added Councilman Troy Walker: "If I were in the audience, I would feel there is a bait and switch going on."
Both Walker and Councilman Bill Colbert said they favored the current zoning for the parcel that allows one unit per half acre, rather than the proposed zone change that would allow eight units per acre.
"I still have concerns about the density," Colbert said. "With this much multifamily [housing], I'm uncomfortable."
But Councilwoman Stephanie Davis contended that higher-density housing was appropriate along 11400 South. That road is planned to become a major thoroughfare.
"The council has said they support multifamily along 11400 South," she said. "I don't think the developer would have come back with this [plan] if we didn't."
Councilman Jeff Stenquist suggested the council amend the land-use code to allow the higher density -- with specifics on density to be worked out later.
This, he said, was preferable to sending the developer back to the Planning Commission.
City Attorney Doug Ahlstrom advised the council that a development agreement could be tied to a new land-use ordinance. But, he added, such a mechanism would have to go to a public hearing before it could be approved.
By a split 3-2 vote, the council decided to do just that.
Walker and Colbert voted against the motion, saying they could not support increased density.
No date has yet been set for a public hearing.
