PUBLIC HEARING AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, February 23, 2006 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Building
3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah
Present: Alan Petersen, Chair, Presiding
Commission Members: Carl Volden, Steve Kroes, Gary Maxwell (7:32 p.m.)
Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager
Kim Holindrake, City Recorder (8:55 p.m.)
David Bunker, City Engineer
Rodney Despain, City Planner
Courtney Hammond, City Meeting Transcriber
Eric Richardson, City Council Representative
Others: Brent Uibel, Jared Osmond, Jim Ferry, Becky Richards, Charelle Bowman, Eric Gibbs, H.R. Brown
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 Preliminary Plat for the Woodis Subdivision (7:05 p.m.)
3. This Public Hearing was adjourned at 7:06 p.m. by C. Petersen.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
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 7:06 p.m. by C. Petersen.
2. Approval of Minutes from the January 26, 2006, Public Hearing and Regular Planning Commission Meeting and the February 9, 2006, Special Planning Commission Meeting (7:06 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Volden - To approve the minutes from the January 26, 2006, Public Hearing and Regular Planning Commission Meeting and the February 9, 2006, Special Planning Commission Meeting, as amended. Seconded by C. Kroes.
C. Volden Motion passes.
3. Review/Recommendation on Final for Landon Court (7:13 p.m.)
See handouts. This is a six-lot subdivision, with an existing home on Lot 2. Concept plan approval was granted in December, preliminary approval was granted in January.
• The geotech report is currently being done. David Bunker recommends adding a note on the plat that says the geotech report needs to be completed before building permits are issued.
• There are power poles on 4000 West.
• The right-of-way on 4000 West switches between Pleasant Grove and Cedar Hills. The two cities have had to be careful that the alignment on the curb and gutters stays consistent. The curb and gutter could go three feet into the roadway. That would make Lots 1, 2, and 3 larger. Steve Kroes questioned why curb and gutter was never required for Bevro Heights Lot 1. David Bunker said that now would be a good time to go to the Council to request funding for curb and gutter at that site (Lot 1, Bevro Heights).
• The Fire Chief said that he would rather have the hydrant on the northeast corner of Lot 4. A hydrant line would still be placed down the bulb and capped for later use. He also wants to limit parking at the throat of the cul-de-sac to allow for access by fire trucks. A no parking sign would be required.
• The centerline alignment with Pleasant Grove still needs to be verified
MOTION: C. Kroes - To recommend final plat approval for Landon Court Subdivision, subject to: 1) Receiving a geotechnical report and 2) Final engineering items, including verifying centerline alignment from Pleasant Grove and submission of water rights. Seconded by C. Volden.
C. Petersen clarified that the geotech report needs to be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits.
AMEND MOTION: C. Kroes - Subject to 3) The geotechnical report being submitted prior to building permits. Accepted and seconded by C. Volden.
C. Volden Motion passes.
4. Review/Recommendation on Preliminary/Final for the Woodis Subdivision (7:31 p.m.)
See handouts. This is a two-lot subdivision on 4000 West with an existing home on Lot 1. Lot 1 was not included in Bevro Heights.
• Verification of centerline alignment needs to be completed with Pleasant Grove.
• There should be a note on the plat that states the geotech report is needed prior to building permits being issued.
• Lot addressing and subdivision zoning needs to be shown on the plat.
• There needs to be a disability ramp on 4000 West and Monson Place.
• The City will extend a Pressurized Irrigation main from the intersection of 4000 West and Monson Place.
• C. Kroes pointed out that the curb and gutter on Lot 1 of Bevro Heights is the way children ride their bikes to Deerfield Elementary. Currently the children need to go into the street to get past the gravel. David Bunker said he would propose asphalt to the curb and gutter and then sidewalk.
MOTION: C. Volden - To recommend preliminary/final approval for the Woodis Subdivision, subject to the following: 1) Lot addresses and subdivision zoning shall be shown on the plat, 2) Final engineering items, including verification of centerline alignment with Pleasant Grove, 3) Geotechnical report shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance, including a note on the plat, 4) Disability ramp needs to be included, 5) Water in the amount of 1 acre foot for Lot 2 to be remitted to the City. Seconded by C. Maxwell.
C. Volden Motion passes.
C. Maxwell said that in his work, he has always been required to give more detail on the drawings, including a full set of plans. David Bunker said that the City has a small lot ordinance (5 lots or less) and then a full scale development ordinance.
5. Review/Approve the Site Plan for the Public Works Building Located at 10246 N Canyon Road (7:43 p.m.)
See handouts. The geotech report has not been completed. It cannot be done until the site is excavated to the subgrade level. The zoning change from H-1 Hillside Development Zone to Public Facilities Zone was tabled by the City Council. If the Planning Commission were to approve this site plan tonight, it would need to be contingent on a zoning change. The City Council said they would like to address zoning along with the site plan.
• The access for the site will be on Canyon Road. There would be a 5 percent grade on the driveway with a vertical curve and a level pad before Canyon Road.
• Drainage has been planned for the 24-hour 100-year event. The site will drain into a retention area north of the parking area.
• David Bunker felt that the landscaping should extend further around the perimeter of the site than shown on the landscaping plan. C. Kroes suggested interspersing more evergreens to keep full foliage year round. Mayor McGee had suggested berming around the perimeter. C. Kroes recommended requiring a berm along the western side.
• Resident Brent Uibel expressed concern about water drainage along the access road onto Canyon Road. David Bunker said that there is curb and gutter along the access road that empties into an existing catch basin on Canyon Road. Additional catch basins may need to be added.
• Mr. Uibel said that the “Hoopsi” variety of the blue spruce is less dense. He also feels that there should be some landscaping on the east side of the site. David Bunker said that this backs up to the aqueduct and the City cannot plant trees within the easement. It would be better to plant trees above the easement where the trail will run. Jim Perry echoed Mr. Uibel’s concerns about beautifying the area looking down from above. Jim Ferry would also like to see trees along the eastern side, but not so large that they will block residents’ views.
• Mr. Uibel also asked the City to reevaluate the type of fence. Mr. Ferry also expressed concern about the chain link fence. He would prefer a wall or vinyl.
• The salt shed is 30 feet by 30 feet and about 12 feet tall. The peak of the roofline of the parking bay of the Public Works Building is 22 feet tall. The eastern side of the property along the easement will be graded and reseeded.
• Becky Richards recommended a stamped concrete wall along the west that switches to chainlink as it turns the corner. C. Kroes said the stamped concrete, though the most expensive option, would blend the best with the hillside. Brent Uibel recommended asking residents if they would rather have landscaping to make the site look residential or a fence to obscure the building.
• C. Petersen suggested appointing a citizens architectural review committee.
• C. Kroes said that the City wants the building finished before the next snowfall and wondered how much more time the City has for additional citizen input before it has to move ahead to have it finished on time. David Bunker would like everything completed by the end of September. That gives the City no more than one month to get the project to bid. C. Kroes said he is worried that empowering a citizen review board might be problematic. Eric Richardson and David Bunker recommended having an open house for public comment, which information would then be taken to the City Council. Konrad Hildebrandt suggested allowing residents a period of time to provide feedback, which will then be gathered and forwarded to the City Council. C. Volden said that the Planning Commission and City Council are the ones elected to make the decision. He felt the Commission should not impose stricter guidelines than those placed on other developers. C. Volden also said that he believes the Planning Commission’s role is to recommend or not recommend, and its responsibility ends there. Staff can hold an open house during the week before the next City Council meeting.
• C. Petersen expressed concern about detention area #2 being near the gate. David Bunker explained that the engineering for the detention area #2 would only allow water to stand for short periods of time.
MOTION: C. Kroes - To recommend site plan approval for the City of Cedar Hills Public Works Facility located at approximately 10246 North Canyon Road, subject to: 1) City Council approval of the zone change 2) Addition of the additional storm drain catch basins that the City Engineer suggested, 3) A landscape plan with a berm along the west and south sides of property with the understanding that staff will solicit citizen input to be submitted to the City Council with priorities in terms of beautification, or hiding of uglification, 4) The completion of a geotech report prior to a building permit being issued and 5) The placement of additional trees to complete the west side profile with trees that enhance the visual screening. Seconded by C. Maxwell.
C. Volden stated that he does not think the Planning Commission needs to direct staff on public comment.
C. Volden Motion passes.
6. Discussion Regarding Noticing Requirements (9:50 p.m.)
See handouts. Kim Holindrake walked the Commission through the noticing requirements. The City’s public hearing notices are published in the Lone Peak Press. C. Maxwell argued that in a rezone, the City should notify those owners whose property is rezoned. City staff has talked about having a marquee to announce Public Hearings. The Sign Ordinance prohibits marquee signs. The Commission felt that there needs to be signs to announce the Public Hearings. Staff is working on designing a permanent Public Hearing sign. C. Kroes recommended a courtesy notice – borrowed from Draper City. Draper City requires the developer to provide the addresses and postage for the affected persons for a courtesy notice. Kim Holindrake said that even with the burden being on the developer, there needs to be staff to ensure that the proper people were properly noticed. C. Kroes suggested choosing a more well read newspaper. The Commission asked staff to draft a proposal to add a temporary sign announcing a Public Hearing in three places. C. Maxwell would also like to require developers to notify affected residents of rezoning. C. Kroes asked the staff to draft a policy addressing noticing of a zone change, including mailing to nearby property owners, a sign on the affected property, and signs announcing Public Hearings.
7. Committee Assignments and Reports (10:46 p.m.)
8. This meeting was adjourned at 10:46 p.m. on a motion by C. Maxwell, seconded by C. Kroes and unanimously approved.
/s/ Kim E. Holindrake
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Approved by Commission:
March 30, 2006