REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, November 30, 2006 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Building
3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah
Present: Alan Petersen, Chair, Presiding
Commission Members: Cliff Chandler, Carl Volden, Steve Kroes, H.R. Brown
Kim Holindrake, City Recorder
Courtney Hammond, City Meeting Transcriber
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 7:02 p.m. by C. Petersen.
H.R. Brown recognized as a voting member.
2. Approval of Minutes from the October 26, 2006, Regular Planning Commission Meeting (7:03 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Chandler - To approve the minutes from the October 26, 2006, Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Seconded by C. Volden.
Aye-C. Brown
C. Chandler
C. Kroes
C. Volden
Abstain - C. Petersen Motion passes.
3. Review/Recommendation on Sensitive Lands Ordinance (7:05 p.m.)
Staff Presentation:
See handouts. Kim Holindrake stated that this issue was originally brought up because of a resident’s concern over vehicles on the hillside. Konrad Hildebrandt wanted the Planning Commission to look at this information, particularly the twelve general provisions. The hillside ordinance might be enough to cover the issue.
Commission Discussion:
• C. Kroes said he feels this is a serious issue. He would like the City attorney to give the Planning Commission a recommendation on the issue, particularly regarding shifting liability from the City onto property owners. He would like to see a provision in the ordinance that requires developers to disclose geologic hazards to potential buyers in order to meet the purpose stated in 3c: “To prevent fraud in land sales relating to the geological condition of real property.” He said he wants to understand the politics behind this proposed ordinance. Until now, the City has been pro-development and now seems to be moving in a more restrictive direction.
• C. Volden said he would not like to see the ordinance limit access to families using the hillside for recreation. He stated that the City cannot stop property owners from developing as long as they meet all the requirements, even if it is in geologically hazardous areas.
• C. Petersen said that he feels the ordinance should limit building on the hillside that has landslide or earthquake potential. He would like this ordinance to address geologic data that is in the General Plan. He suggested that there are sensitive lands that are not in the hillside zone, for example land in the 100-year flood zone.
• C. Brown said he’s worried about increasing development costs on current developers. He wondered whether it might open the City to lawsuits about property rights. Rodney Despain stated that the City can change the rules at any time, and generally speaking, a sensitive lands ordinance does not prohibit development, just increases the cost.
• Rodney Despain stated that a 30% slope is not the only determining factor involved in sensitive lands, as evidenced by the landslide. A sensitive lands ordinance would allow the City to deal with all factors. He emphasized that the purpose of such an ordinance would be to keep the City out of trouble rather than get itself out of trouble. That means that if one engineer says it is not developable, a second conflicting opinion should not be accepted. He continued by saying that if a sensitive land ordinance strengthens the City’s resolve to keep development off the steeper parts of the hillside, it is the right thing to do. The sensitive lands ordinance would apply wherever sensitive lands occur. He said that this ordinance is not appropriate for addressing vehicles on sensitive lands. Another ordinance can address that.
The Planning Commission would like this ordinance to include a list of conditions that define sensitive land and reference maps in the General Plan. If the land in the development site exhibits these conditions, it is a sensitive land:
• slope of 30% or greater
• 2 - within 100-year storm flood inundation area as shown in General Plan
• contains wetlands
• within debris flow maps in General Plan
• natural drainage ways (define with the help of City Engineer)
• within fault buffer areas as shown on an earthquake potential map
• land near a scarp as shown on a geology map
Under the “General Provisions,” the Planning Commission would like to see a provision that states that a 30% slope cannot be created with fill. The Planning Commission believes this ordinance would be of value to the City. The purpose of the ordinance is to enhance and maintain quality of life and safety with some aspects dealing with City risk management, but risk management is not the primary purpose.
MOTION: C. Volden - To table this item until the next meeting, and have Staff work on it. Seconded by C. Chandler.
Aye-C. Brown
C. Chandler
C. Kroes
C. Petersen
C. Volden Motion passes.
MOTION: C. Petersen - To move Item #5 before Item #4. Seconded by C. Chandler.
Aye-C. Brown
C. Chandler
C. Kroes
C. Petersen
C. Volden Motion passes.
5. Approve Meeting Schedule for the Year 2007 (9:05 p.m.)
See handout.
MOTION: C. Kroes - To adopt the calendar as presented. Seconded by C. Volden.
Aye-C. Brown
C. Chandler
C. Kroes
C. Petersen
C. Volden Motion passes.
4. Review General Plan (9:20 p.m.)
Staff Presentation:
See handouts. Kim Holindrake gave the Planning Commission a new zone map to help them begin creating a new General Plan Map.
MOTION: C. Kroes - To table this item. Seconded by C. Chandler.
Aye-C. Brown
C. Chandler
C. Kroes
C. Petersen
C. Volden Motion passes.
6. Committee Assignments and Reports (9:24 p.m.)
No reports.
7. This meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. on a motion by C. Volden, seconded by C. Kroes, and unanimously approved.
/s Kim E. Holindrake
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Approved by Commission:
January 25, 2007