Thursday, February 9, 2006 7:00 p.m.

Public Safety Building

3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah

Present:           Alan Petersen, Chair, Presiding

Commission Members: Donald Steele, Gary Maxwell, Paul Hammer, Steve Kroes, Cliff Chandler

Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager

Kim Holindrake, City Recorder

Rodney Despain, City Planner (7:36 p.m.)

Eric Richardson, City Council Representative

Others: Guss Hoffman, James Ferry, Lauren Ferry, Charelle Bowman, Jim Perry (7:14 p.m.), Rachelle Stubbs (7:21 p.m.)


1.         This Public Hearing 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 7:05 p.m. by C. Petersen.


2.         Proposed Amendment to the Zone Map to Change a Portion of Area in the H-1 Hillside Development Zone to the Public Facilities Zone. The Property is Located at Approximately 10300 North Between Canyon Road and Bayhill Drive


Konrad Hildebrandt reported that the City owns property north of the Questar building on Canyon Road and would like to rezone the property from the H-1 Hillside Development Zone to the Public Facilities Zone. The Planning Commission is being asked to act on the rezoning. The issue is not necessarily whether it will be a public works facility, park, or recreation center. That is not up to the Planning Commission. The City has owned the property since about 2001. It is not designated “open space.”


James Ferry lives on 3900 West (Red Oaks Subdivision) and the property is behind his home (across Canyon Road). He learned about this issue today about 2:00 this afternoon on the way home from work and that the excavation had already begun. He spoke to the earth mover who stated that the area will be lowered 20 to 30 feet and the grade changed. He feels adequate time has not been given for residents to respond. It has been rushed too quickly. The City ordinance requires that notice be given and he only found the agenda on the web site. Kim Holindrake stated that proper notice has been given according to state code. A public hearing notice was published in the newspaper, posted at the City office and three posting boards in the City and put on the City’s web site. Mr. Ferry stated that this directly impacts him and other residents. The change may be for good or bad and the matter should be delayed. Excavating has already begun and it is illegal to do so as defined by City ordinances, Section 10-4D-10. (Section read) A grading permit is required from the City Engineer. A public works building is not allowed the H-1 Hillside Development Zone. Excavation needs to stop. The City needs to pull things back and take a more careful look.


Guss Hoffman lives on Bayhill Drive. His back yard is near the area. He read the notice in the paper the other day and talked with Jim Perry. He is not opposed to the open land for parks or whatever. His concern is the public works building being up there. There was another site for that building. There is a water conduit there and power lines. He is here to find out and express his concern of how the land will be used.


3.         Adjourn

            This Public Hearing was adjourned at 7:12 p.m. by C. Petersen.


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 7:13 p.m. by C. Petersen.


See handouts. C. Petersen stated that he is concerned as the residents are that this seems like it has been pushed hard and fast. That the Planning Commission is meeting in special session. Why is this such an important issue? Konrad Hildebrandt stated that there have been multiple times when the Planning Commission and Council have held special sessions. The City is not trying to hide the fact that this will be a public works building. The Planning Commission needs to discuss the zoning change. The public works building has been in the Capital Improvements Plan for 5 - 6 years and scheduled to be built at this time period. The building has actually been budgeted for the last two years, as Mr. Hoffman mentioned, but at a location by the golf course. That has been the preferred site. The City has tried for two years to use that site, which is west of the American Fork water tanks. The City currently has a golf maintenance area there. Obviously this site is ideal for a public works and golf facility. It is located down away from everyone. The issue is it is owned by Cedar Hills but located in Highland City. Cedar Hills worked with Highland City and hired the exact same architect as the Highland Public Works building. Highland City said not just no but absolutely no. Cedar Hills tried to boundary adjust the property and Highland City refused. Cedar Hills tried to get it legislatively and change the laws. The issue was stalled in the regular legislative session but Cedar Hills got it the special session where it died. Cedar Hills does not have a lot of vacant area or money to pay $150,000 for $200,000 per acre to buy property. This is an area that after an exhaustive search of looking for areas the City felt could fit the need with the least amount of impact to the residents. Back to the original question thinking this is rushed. Currently there is a pump house on this site. Staff thought the zone allowed for the building. Staff researched and found that to be legitimate and fair to everyone, the property needed to be rezoned to the public facility zone. The pump house is legal. There is a metro water line going through the property on the upper area with a 50’ easement. Transmission lines go through the area also. The City will do a lot of beautification along with a trail head and trails. It will be a nice facility. We as a staff didn’t feel we were jamming it through. A lot of extensive work has been done and the project has been in the Capital Improvements Plan and budget. This will go to the City Council.


C. Petersen noticed in the newsletter it talks about the public works building but not this public hearing. This article describes the building. There is not notice to the public in this newsletter. He is not opposed to building the building but the Commission needs to have a viable, useful public hearing. He would feel better if this waited two more weeks and additional advertising was done. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that the Planning Commission is not discussing a public works building. If this had been bought to the Planning Commission six month ago, the Commission may not have felt the same. The issue is now mixed with the zone change and the building. C. Petersen stated that site development construction has started. C. Kroes asked if the city building is exempt of site plan and concept approval. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that he believes approval only has to go through the City Council. Charelle Bowman stated that she made 20 calls today to residents to let them know of the public hearing. As residents, we tend to not be aware in our city. The majority of people weren’t overly concerned and those who were came. C. Petersen mentioned that for a week there has been a sign in front of the city building about Family First week. Why hasn’t there been a sign about this hearing? Kim Holindrake explained that the state code requirements have been followed. If the City does additional noticing above and beyond the state code, then it has to be done with other issues as well. It can’t be done for one item and not another. The issue was legally noticed. C. Kroes mentioned that there seems to be a different requirement like the council vacancy is on the front page of the web site and a subdivision preliminary has a sign on the property. Kim Holindrake stated that those are also done per state requirements.


Konrad Hildebrandt stated that excavation started today. The contractor put up some fence along Canyon Road and began moving dirt. The Commission is still mixing the two issues a little bit. If the location was in a different part of the City, the southwest part, would there still be an issue. C. Petersen stated that he didn’t say anything before in prior instances because he didn’t feel it was necessary. He doesn’t think it’s fair to call an emergency meeting and not give more notice. He doesn’t want the perception that the City is ram-rodding this through. Konrad Hildebrandt clarified that this is not an emergency meeting but a special meeting. He hopes that everyone understands that the City wants a great project. It is a note-worthy project and looks nice. C. Hammer asked what other parcels are available that could be used for the pubic works building and what analysis has been done. Konrad Hildebrandt explained that the primary location was near the American Fork water tanks and off the golf course. The property south of the city office has been looked at but it is long and narrow and not large enough. The property at the southern end of the Cottages was looked at but it was also too small and the only access is through the Cottages. The City has a fleet of four trucks, a backhoe and future equipment. There was a concern driving through a neighborhood. The City owns the orchard site on 4800 West but this wasn’t really considered because the property has better uses. The property to the east of this building is owned by PRI and they haven’t been interested in selling. The City has felt it has been falling behind and needed to provide this service to the residents. The bays are the exact size as this building. C. Petersen stated that he would like to deal with whether to change the zone from H-1 Hillside Development to Public Facility. There are requirements as to grade. If the property is steeper than 30%, it is not to be touched or built on. He would like to know the grade and have the City present a plan. He would like to maintain the intent of the original zone and to protect us as citizens. There are a lot of fault zones there and he doesn’t want to move the dirt if it will cause problems. C. Hammer stated that is a different issue. He believes that was never the issue as to why the property was zoned in the H-1 Hillside Development. The property was lumped into that zone with the rest of the area. C. Kroes questioned why the grading has already started and why this didn’t come to the Commission before grading. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that the City is trying to get the project completed during this fiscal year. Working back from a completion date, this is when work needs to begin. Jim Perry stated that he recognizes that over the years Cedar Hills has had this issue with Highland City. Mayor McGee, he and another council member met with Highland City’s mayor and two council members last November and asked again if Cedar Hills could build a building on the property by the AF water tanks. They said yes. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that staff has obtained Highland City’s ordinance. It states, “Prohibited Uses. In the P-U Zone, any use not expressly listed as a conditional use shall be deemed prohibited, including but not limited to; above ground high power transmission lines, storage yards, repair shops and storm sewer retention facilities. Staff also has an ordinance stating that any public facility not providing services to Highland City is not allowed. This was passed in April, 2004. Jim Perry stated that we owe it to ourselves to do our due diligence. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that the Highland City Council has said no twice. Cedar Hills needs a public works facility to service its residents. Are we willing to stop and play the game with Highland City? And that is exactly what it is, playing the game. Services may get pinched a bit by delaying this project. The impact of pushing the project back another year is that it makes it more difficult to provide the needed services. Services will be delayed services, etc. This project is not a rush. The City has been trying and trying to get it done. Let’s get it done. This site works and the City can beautify the site with landscaping, trees, trails and a trail head. We can make what we have as a community extremely beautiful. Charelle Bowman stated that the Commission seems to feel this project was dropped out of no where. It has been talked about many times in council meetings. The refinance of the Pressurized Irrigation Bond has pushed this along because interest rates have gone up. Time is of the essence because of interest rates. Konrad Hildebrandt showed the site plan location and explained the layout of the power lines, aqueduct, etc. Further review of the building layout. Rodney Despain explained that the Planning Commission or City Council may require the submittal of a site plan as per Section 10-4J-3B. The Council could also send it to the Planning Commission for review. The zone change and a site plan review could be linked together. C. Maxwell clarified that basically anything on Bayhill Drive would just be parking and all the access is from Canyon Road. C. Steele stated that he viewed the site plan earlier because he had concerns. He walked the area today. He feels that the City has a right to ask for a rezone; the City owns the property. He believes it was noticed properly. This City is not any different from any other city. People just don’t pay attention. He believes that there is not a question that the City should be able to use their property. One concern in changing the zone is that the facility begins to grow and move up the hillside, which is fragile. He asked if the City would consider being more specific with the rezone to just the building area. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that there is not any intention for any facility up at Bayhill Drive. This building is designed for build-out of the City. Rodney Despain stated that there is no problem in rezoning just the building site. Konrad Hildebrandt stated that there really isn’t any other area to put anything else. The City fully intents to make a quality project.

MOTION: C. Hammer - To withhold a favorable recommendation to the City Council. Seconded by C. Maxwell.


Further discussion - The motion could be more direct in making a recommendation to deny the rezoning. The Planning Commission may require a site plan. This could be added to the motion. The Commission would like to create less impact on residents. Eric Richardson would rather the Commission table it and look at it again. C. Petersen would like a topography of the current property as well as the proposed topography.


                                    Aye     -          C. Hammer

C. Maxwell

                                    Nay     -          C. Kroes

C. Petersen

                                                            C. Steele                                 Motion fails.


C. Kroes would like more information on the parcel. He would also like the City to go back to the first choice in Highland and exhaust that and also the PRI property. Eric Richardson questioned whether the Planning Commission was empowered to instruct the City Council as to where to look elsewhere. C. Maxwell clarified that the Commission would like the Council to look at all the sites again. C. Petersen stated that the Commission can look at whether the zoning is appropriate and they can suggest that the City look into the other sites again. C. Hammer doesn’t want to recommend changing the zone at this time. The City Council can do what they want. C. Maxwell stated that the Commission wants to give a strong message to the Council and staff to look at the other sites again. C. Petersen stated that by tabling this they are not taking away the ability of it going to the City Council. The Commission wants information to evaluate. Rodney Despain stated that additional public comment can be heard because the Commission has held the initial hearing. The Commission’s consensus is to have another hearing in two weeks.

MOTION: C. Hammer – To 1) table action, 2) encourage staff to revisit prior efforts of other sites and report back, 3) if another site is not deemed suitable, provide a site plan for the next best site with a current topography map and proposed topography map and 4) schedule a public hearing for the next meeting. Seconded by C. Kroes.


                                    Aye     -          C. Hammer

C. Kroes

C. Maxwell

C. Petersen

                                                            C. Steele                                 Motion passes.


3.         Adjourn


This meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m. on a motion by C. Hammer, seconded by C. Petersen and unanimously approved.


/s/ Kim E. Holindrake

Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder

Approved by Planning Commission:

   February 23, 2006