SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING

February 7, 2008 7:00 p.m.

Public Safety Building

3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah



Present:           Cliff Chandler, Chair, Presiding

Commission Members: Donald Steele, Craig Clement, Scott Jackman, HR Brown (7:05 p.m.)

Greg Robinson, Assistant to the City Manager - Planning

Gretchen Gordon, Public Works Assistant

Michael McGee, Mayor (7:10 p.m.)

Eric Johnson, City Attorney (7:13 p.m.)

Others: Gary Smith, Roland Brown, Ken Kirk



PLANNING COMMISSION

1.         This meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cedar Hills, having been posted throughout the City and the press notified, was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by C. Chandler.

 

2.         Appoint Chair and Vice Chair (7:04 p.m.)


MOTION: C. Steele - To appoint HR Brown as Chair. Seconded by C. Clement.

 

Nay-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion fails.


MOTION: C. Jackman - To nominate Cliff Chandler as Chair. Seconded by C. Brown.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.


MOTION: C. Brown - To nominate Scott Jackman as Vice Chair. Seconded by C. Clement.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.


SCHEDULED ITEMS

3.         Approval of Minutes from the January 9, 2008, Special Planning Commission Meeting (7:08 p.m.)

 

C. Clement stated that his name is spelled incorrectly, no “s” on the end. C. Jackman stated that on page 4 his statement should read “the Commission is saying that for land use, traffic and safety concerns, commercial is not appropriate in the H-1 Hillside Zone in this location.”


MOTION: C. Jackman - To approve the minutes from the January 9, 2008, Planning Commission meeting, as amended. Seconded by C. Clement.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.

 

4.         Review/Action/Recommendation on the Final Plat for the Debra Kay Subdivision (7:10 p.m.)

 

See handouts.

 

          C. Chandler stated that under backgrounds and finding everything has been met subject to 1, 2, 3, and 4. There is property dedication to the City and the City is satisfied. The building envelopes are small but do meet the City Code. The drainage calculations still need to be received and water rights also need to be submitted.

          C. Jackman stated that he is concerned that drainage calcs and water rights have not been submitted. This has been on the list since October. He is uncomfortable with this still being outstanding. There is a disconnect between the findings and “subject to’s” on the preliminary. What’s missing is staff review to show the lot meets the lot width requirements. The lot width is measured on the northern setback and can be no less than 80 feet. The Code does clarify what this means. The northern setback was going to be angled and it is not shown on this submission. Staff may want to check this because it is difficult to verify that from the submission.

          Greg Robinson stated that when he last spoke to David Bunker, he had not received the drainage calcs. Water rights have not been received either. The Commission can give approval subject to specific items that will have to be fulfilled before it can be recorded at the County.


MOTION: C. Jackman - To recommend approval of the Debra Kay Subdivision subject to, water rights must be submitted prior to final approval, drainage calculations must be submitted, staff review to show the northern boundary is no less than 80 feet on both parcels, if required, and that Council not review this until these conditions are met. Seconded by C. Brown.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.

 

          C. Steele stated that typically the Commission should not see submittals until all of the conditions are met.

          Council member Richardson wants to see the draft minutes from Planning Commission when this comes before Council

 

5.         Review/Action/Recommendation on Preliminary Subdivision Plat for St. Andrews Estates, PRD Located Between 10950 North and 10570 North along the East Side of Canyon Road (Golf Course Hole 15) (7:22 p.m.)

 

See handouts. C. Brown stated that after reading the General Plan, to him commercial would mean more at that intersection instead of on the hillside, away from the intersection. C. Jackman reviewed General Plan provisions on the commercial zone and the intent of a commercial zone. The provisions reference the intersection at SR-92 and Canyon Road. It also references low commercial intensity. The intent is closer perhaps to the mouth of the Canyon and not where it is being designated. The intent is also a higher intensity commercial than a reception center. C. Brown stated that this allows rezoning in a less specific zone. Greg Robinson clarified that a subdivision needs to be approved before the rezoning occurs. Mayor McGee stated that he is in attendance as the chair of the Community Development and Renewal Agency, not as the mayor. The property needs to be subdivided before it can be considered for a commercial zoning change. He disagrees with the proximity issue.

Discussion about proposed changes to SR-92 to road alignment and traffic. SR-146 will also become a county road instead of a state road. This project is vested in the current zoning requirements although the H-1 development is currently under review. With regards to building envelopes, they should be required to ensure that the steep slopes are not built upon. This should be addressed but shouldn’t hold up a preliminary. The H-1 Zone interpretation on the slope area has been liberal in the past, and the City cannot be more stringent or more liberal than submissions in the past. There is no conflict of interest between the Community Development and Renewal Agency and being a member of the approving body. Many cities have RDAs and the approving people are on the board. This is done as a standard practice and the state statute is clear on a conflict of interest. The underground detention area will be owned and maintained by the owner of lot 20. The detention area would be required in order to contain the subdivision’s drainage on site, but drainage could also be handled under the parking area. Wal-Mart in American Fork used this system under their parking lot. The site plan to lot 20 will include such items as a hard surface entrance. This is not part of The Cedars Subdivision. This subdivision will be standalone, and there is enough room for the development/density and open space. This is an amendment to The Cedars, Plat H. The City is working with potential developer to get a letter of intent. They have stated that after preliminary, they will put down earnest money. The City is the applicant, not the developer. A concern is that the City goes through this process, rezone the area and then the developer backs out. The City is then left with a rezoned commercial area where someone else could come in and use for something other than what this potential developer has planned. All of those concerns are legitimate and will be reviewed when with receipt of a firm submission. The Commission has had difficulty because of the way this project was submitted. At this point, it needs to be looked at as “is this legal within the City’s current zone.”

Issues: Traffic movement on and off Canyon Road, change of width of right-of-way, driveway for lot 20, dedication of open space in PRDs, and almost invariably the open space is unusable land. A clubhouse/pool area could be installed on one of the lots.


MOTION: C. Clement - To approve the St. Andrews Estates, PRD, subject to the adding of buildable building envelopes to the lots. Seconded by C. Jackman.


Discussion:

          C. Clement stated that there is a mapped fault line through this area. The fault trenching has been done but has not been seen at this time. He still has some concerns on that issue. He recommends that the City continue to look at geologic hazards in the area. This is part of the H-1 Hillside Zone, so he is not sure that it needs to be explicitly added.

          C. Steele stated that the Commission needs to send a recommendation to the Council, not through the motion but as part of the minutes.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.


            The geotechnical maps were added to the presented information.

 

6.         Review/Recommendation on a Canyon Commercial Zone Located at Approximately 10900 North Canyon Road (8:19 p.m.)

 

See handouts. Greg Robinson stated that lot 20 of St. Andrews Estates is to be a commercial zone. This zone is recommended by the City Council to be low impact and residential in nature. It takes into consideration the hillside area and the ability to fit within the City’s regulations for this area. Staff is starting the process of trying to put this together and he is here to gather recommendations. A general outline has been put together including input from Council members. He is using the information to put together a more finalized proposal.


MOTION: C. Jackman - To recess for five minutes. Seconded by C. Clement. (8:24 p.m.)

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.


Reconvene 8:28 p.m.


Commission Discussion:

          C. Clement stated that there are two places to review requirements, Design Guidelines and City Code.

          C. Jackman stated that it is appropriate to create a new article, Chapter 4, Article K. The intent of the H-1 Hillside Zone needs to be preserved incorporating commercial requirements. He proposes changing the legislative intent of 10-4-K to say that the development within the zone shall be characterized by a residential atmosphere with light commercial use. All the requirements in the H-1 Zone should apply in this commercial zone. It needs to meet the needs of the community and a commercial venture only for the use to the owner is not appropriate. The non-conforming lot definition needs to be adjusted. A CC-1 Zone could be added in addition to the SC-1 zone.

          Discussion of permitted, conditional, and non-permitted uses. Create a different paragraph for the SC-1 and CC-1. The Commission should not try to duplicate all of the text, which could make it more difficult to change in the future.

          Greg Robinson will send out information to the Commission so that they can review and make recommendations on the proposed changes to the City Code and Design Guidelines.

          C. Brown wants to consider what would be permitted. He has concerns about this proposed developer possibly backing out, and then having something put there that the City never intended. He feels that it is wise to get rid of the debt and this could be an option to do that. He would suggest a professional office building, community services, catering, or reception center. He needs more detail about what would be included in the reception center.

          Greg Robinson stated that there are items called ancillary uses that may be included in the reception center. Many of the items could fall under this category and signage and lighting could be a factor as well. He will work on the proposal and gather input prior to the next meeting. He needs all submissions by February 18, and a public hearing will be noticed.


MOTION: C. Brown - To recommend that the staff make a draft within one week of tonight to have a semi-final draft available to the public per the legal noticing requirement. Seconded by C. Steele.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.

 

7.         Review Fencing Ordinance (9:33 p.m.)

 

See handouts. C. Jackman doesn’t like changing this ordinance for one person who has not even attended. C. Chandler stated that the fencing ordinance was revised many times and it has been a painstaking process to get the ordinance where it is now. Personally, he went to this project site and walked around. He understands wanting to segregate his property, but he does not want to see the fencing ordinance changed. According to the code, this abuts a City trail. Bayhill Drive is a major collector and also part of the trail system.


MOTION: C. Jackman - To table this item until Mr. Fry or a representative is here. Seconded by C. Clement.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.

 

8.         Committee Assignments and Reports (9:46 p.m.)

 

            a.         Traffic Safety and Liability Oversight Committee

C. Chandler will fill this position

            b.         Parks and Trails Committee

C. Clement will fill this position

 

There will be a site plan review on February 14, at 9:00 a.m. for Chase Bank, Amsource. C. Jackman and C. Clement will plan to attend. This will deal primarily with the building elevations, etc. Amsource will deal more with landscaping, etc.


MOTION: C. Jackman - To accept the committee assignments with C. Chandler on the Traffic Safety and Livability Oversight Committee and C. Clement on the Parks & Trails Committee. Seconded by C. Steele.

 

Aye-C. Brown

C. Chandler

C. Clement

C. Jackman

                                                                        C. Steele                                 Motion passes.


ADJOURNMENT

9.         Adjourn

 

This meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. on a motion by C. Brown, seconded by C. Clement, and unanimously approved.



 

/s/ Kim E. Holindrake

Approved by Commission:                                         Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder

   February 28, 2008