REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, February 22, 2007 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Building
3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah
Present: Steve Kroes, Chair, Presiding
Commissioner Members: Donald Steele, H.R. Brown, Tom Gleason, Craig Clement
Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Rodney Despain, City Planner
Mayor Michael C. McGee
Others: Roy Williams, Sam Lowder, Chad Nielsen, Richard Piggott, Terry Wieser, Mary Kell, Shell MacPherson, Preston Stinger, Kent Seamons, Robert Ogden, Mike Stuy, Jim Perry, Rosalie Westinskol, Nancy Steele, Pete McMullin, David Lawrence, Dave Winnie, Karissa Neeley
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 7:03 p.m. by C. Kroes, Chair.
Kim Holindrake swore in Tom Gleason and Craig Clement to the Planning Commission.
C. Kroes recognized Tom Gleason and Craig Clement as voting members.
2. Approval of Minutes from the January 25, 2007, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
MOTION: C. Brown - To approve the minutes from the January 25, 2007, Planning Commission meeting. Seconded by C. Steele.
Aye - C. Brown
C. Steele Motion passes.
3. Review/Approve the Revised Phasing Plan for Bridgestone, PUD (7:06 p.m.)
See handouts. Peter McMullin with McMullin Homes reported that the original phasing plan divided the quadrant in five different phases, which seemed redundant. They would like to change it to two phases. Final plans will be submitted at the next meeting.
MOTION: C. Steele - To approve the revised phasing plan for Bridgestone, PUD, as presented. Seconded by C. Gleason.
Aye - C. Brown
C. Steele Motion passes.
4. Review/Recommendation on Preliminary for Commercial Development – Wal-Mart (7:10 p.m.)
Shell MacPherson presented modifications from comments made by the Planning Commission and the public hearing. He is presenting what Wal-Mart is willing to accommodate.
• Landscaping – Shell MacPherson stated that the landscaping has been modified to pick up a combination of architectural concrete and hardscape both in front and along the garden center. The inner parking has been modified. The tree islands have been changed from the 7' by 7' diamond islands to 19' by 8' planters. This was approved by David Bunker. It adds to the overall landscaping and provides a better environment for the longevity of the trees. A 3” caliper tree is being proposed, which is a very mature landscaping at planting. These changes have increased the landscaping from 110 square feet to 150 square feet and the percentage to 25% coverage. This is the best they can do to accommodate the 30% landscaping. Typically developments are looking at 5 to 15 percent coverage. The center pedestrian parkway in the parking lot is of architectural quality and is counted toward the landscaping requirement. Shrubs, ground cover, and trees are used in the planters. The north side has dense, bermed landscaping and an 8’ screen wall. The residential area is on a higher elevation of about six feet. The wall becomes 12’ higher than the driveway on the Wal-Mart side. The retention basin is counted as part of the landscaping. The City has requested to own the retention basin and possibly use it as a park. Wal-Mart will landscape, design and construct the retention basin and then deed it to the City. The City will take over maintenance of the basin and the decorative wall will separate the basin from the Wal-Mart property. If the City doesn’t take over the basin, Wal-Mart will need to fence the area for security. The basin is about seven feet deep. C. Kroes stated that not requiring the 30% landscaping sets a precedence for that zone and asked where additional landscaping could be added. Shell MacPherson stated that he honestly doesn’t know. There is not much more they can do. They don’t want to be short on parking. This is a 14-acre portion of the property and there is over 4.2 acres of landscaping. He discussed reducing parking with Wal-Mart but they did not want to reduce parking. Wal-Mart designs to a 5 per 1,000 stall ratio. The parking is based on peak demand, not just everyday use. They don’t want to be short when there is a demand. The parking will more than likely be used by the high school students as well. The 30% landscaping requirement is a hefty toll. C. Kroes stated that he has experience growing in this region and the 200 Alpine furs have an 80% failure in this area. He suggested finding a different tree similar to the alpine fur will give a much better landscape in the long run. All the other trees are fine. The Commission reviewed the drawing simulations depicting trees at planting and at five-year maturity.
• Site lighting – Shell MacPherson stated that a photo metric plan has been submitted. The foot candles are at zero at the property line. All the lights on the north side of the building have a shield. The pole heights will remain at 20 feet. An analysis was conducted comparing the 12-foot poles and the 20-foot poles and they found that the 12-foot poles increased from 36 to 81 poles. Wal-Mart needs a safe level of lighting for customers and associates. The freeway stores run a 42-foot high fixture. Wal-Mart understands the desire to keep the light levels low. The light disburses down and a 400-watt bulb is used versus a 1,000 watt bulb. It is close to zero foot candles at Cedar Hills Drive. The analysis does not include the decorative light fixtures along the street like the current commercial area. There is a total of 10 light poles across the entire north side. Wall packs are located on the building and are 16 feet high. The wall packs are set low to just light the drive isle. Shell MacPherson will look into having the shorter poles along the north and check to make sure the hoods are not visible from the residential side of the fence.
• Noise analysis – Shell MacPherson reported that the original document was re-analyzed. Noise emanates from the generators, trucks, refrigeration equipment, and trash compactor. There is a 16' screen wall around the compactor and compressors, which matches the building. The analysis meets the 50 dba at the property line. This equipment is located on the north side because the grocery component is on that side of the building. There is not much flexibility to move the equipment and it can’t be on the roof because of snow loading. The ground allows a CMU structure. The screen wall is made from a sound block that is made from concrete with fiber cells. It is rated to deaden the sound. It is also textured to take the sound waves and disburse them. The compactor on the east side is shielded the same way but is open on the south side. The sound level is 70 dba at the unit. The compactor should not be run after hours. The store manager will be well aware of the situation and being close the residential. There is not a smoking or break area outside the building for associates. Associates are discouraged to be in the back of the building and to not loiter in the building. There is a break area inside the building at the southeast corner. There will be the noise of truck driving along back of the store. See Page 5. A diesel truck runs at 51 dba. LEQ means the ambient noise and is on the same scale as decibels. C. Kroes stated that he trusts the Council will impose hours of delivery. Shell MacPherson stated that Wal-Mart will restrict hours. Early morning deliveries are a critical element for groceries. They could delivery as early as 5 a.m. but those are smaller trucks. C. Brown stated that residents bought near a commercial zone and there is going to be some impact. The City just wants to mitigate as much of the concern and problems as possible. The only other remedy is moving the building to the west. Shell MacPherson stated that moving the building was discussed at a site plan meeting. They were asked to further enhance the buffer between the building and the residential area. Moving the building changes the dynamics with the outlots and you still have the same impacts.
• Building size - Shell MacPherson stated that the building size was discussed with Wal-Mart and it would be a deal breaker to reduce the size. For this market and economic equation, this is as far as they will go. This building has been reduced about 25,000 square feet from the 2003 proposal.
• Access points and traffic analysis – Preston Stinger gave a presentation on the traffic analysis. The peak period for high school occurs between 2:15 and 3:25 p.m. There is about 300 more cars than the original p.m. peak between 5 and 6 p.m. The high school peak would be the worst case scenario. The intersections are given a grade for level of performance. All areas in the study operate at a level of service C or higher. UDOT allows for a D level of service. The worst area is intersection 1, which is an unsignaled intersection at a level D with about an average of a 28-second wait to enter the intersection. There is also an exhibit showing the queue lengths and how many cars are queuing at a time. There was discussion in the last meeting about signaling the northwest access off of 4800 West. This will become a UDOT road and they have strict guidelines, such as spacing between signals of 1,325 feet. Currently it is 600 feet from the current signal to the northwest access. Discussion on the anticipated travel areas - traffic distribution (p.m. peak/high school peak) 45% from north, 30% from south, 10% from Redwood Drive north, 10% from Redwood Drive south, and 5% from East Cedar Hills Drive. There has not been a study to develop an accident rate along 4800 West. As an expert in the field, Preston Stinger is very comfortable with the level of service. The safest place to cross 4800 West is at 4800 West and Cedar Hills Drive.
• Building Design – Changes have been made since the last submittal. The color of the building is different. The colors have been softened and additional colors of quick-brick have been added. Sample board presented. It is a closer match to the dental offices and concrete quoining has been added. Cedar Hills Drive elevation – Roofing has been added over the overhead doors with synthetic slate tiles and a taller elevation over the garden center. Front elevation - A roof element has been added above the overhead doors and a canopy area next to the entrance. Signage - There is a total of four signs totaling 310 square feet for the entire building. They have made the building look more broken up by using additional colors and ornamental fencing. The highest point at the top peak on the main entrance is 40’. Decorative lights have been added to the main entrance and garden center. There is not enough room inside the store to create another entrance. Discussion about possibly making more changes to the elevations. Shell MacPherson indicated that Wal-Mart has an anticipated time frame for opening and may not be amenable to another major change to the elevations.
Planning Commission Discussion:
• C. Steel stated that this is much better than originally designed by Wal-Mart and this is a big departure from that. The Planning Commission’s responsibility is to see that the proposal matches the ordinances that are in place. Some of the aesthetics may be influenced, however. Shell MacPherson stated that the Guidelines do show a building elevation that was taken from the 2003 Wal-Mart proposal, with a main street store. The main street stores have been constructed and have been a “flop” because the architectural styling does not stand the test of time.
• C. Brown stated that Wal-Mart has done a good job and he is happy with the presentation that has been made. He feels shutters should be added.
• C. Gleason stated that a lot of care was taken at the main entrance but not as much with the rest of the facade. It may need to be similar to the main entrance.
• Question - Can the Planning Commission and Council sit down and go over some real-time suggestions and get a majority consensus?
Recess at 9:45 p.m.
Resume at 10:05 p.m.
• Shell MacPherson stated that they have worked through this design with the City, and they have had the expectation from Wal-Mart that this is what the City and Wal-Mart could agree on. The comments received tonight would have been better served earlier in the process, back in December, than now. If the City is willing to give preliminary approval, they are willing to take back to Wal-Mart that the Planning Commission wants to take another look at the 2-story feature. Wal-Mart may not give authorization to make further changes to the building. Having a session next week with the Council and Planning Commission to finalize the elevations is very reasonable. They are willing to look at the 2-story feature and the canopies, but Wal-Mart will most likely not be amenable to another revision.
• Review memo from David Bunker, City Engineer – The drainage design does not match the Phillips Edison design. They are working on the issue with Phillips Edison for runoff from 4800 West. The overall development is going to manage the entire 18 acres as well as the half of 4800 West, Cedar Hills Drive and Redwood Drive. Their updated engineering report should reflect that. Landscaping – Finding on size, caliber of trees, and the plaza feature to substantiate the 25% allowance. Noise Abatement – Include to work through the construction agreement to limit/define hours of operation for the cardboard crusher. Notice of a work session for the Council and Planning Commission meeting.
MOTION: C. Brown - To grant preliminary approval for the Wal-Mart retail subdivision project, conditioned upon: 1) Wal-Mart ensuring that the backyards along the north side, the homes along the north side, see no bulbs from the light standards, 2) That the quality of landscaping, size of trees and the commitment to good foliage makes up for the 5% difference from 25% to the standard of 30%, so approve a 25% landscape versus 30% because of quality, 3) Advise the Council to limit hours of operation of the compactor as they consider the trucks and see fit upon those hours, 4) To have a work session with the City Council and Planning Commission to work out different elevations regarding the left front side of the building and the front elevation canopies, 5) Final engineering on the drainage, site improvements, traffic, water rights, a subdivision plat is necessary to verify the proper dedication of right of way in regards to site improvements, 6) All utilities for complete site improvements shall be included as part of subdivision requirements, and 7) Subject to final engineering. Seconded by C. Steele.
Aye - C. Brown
C. Steele Motion passes.
5. Review/Recommendation on Concept/Preliminary for Phillips Edison – Commercial Outbuildings Located along 4800 West and Cedar Hills Drive (10:43 p.m.)
Roy Williams stated that Phillips Edison owns and manages 17 million square feet of shopping centers. They want to be a good neighbor that will be an asset to the community and provide service to the residents. They are proposing to develop two of their three outlots.
• Concept Site Plan – Site is 1.93 acres with a gross building area of 18,420 square feet. The parking ratio exceeds the City’s parking requirement. The building setbacks allow for future expansion of 4800 West.
• Outlot 3 is on the south/east corner of the property, although not in this concept proposal. They plan to sell the unimproved lot as part of their development plan and will not be developing it themselves.
• Landscaping - Retention ponds will be on both lots. Storm runoff from public streets will be shared with Wal-Mart. They have a 31.4% landscaping coverage.
• Utility Plan – Dry utilities come from 4800 West and wet utilities from Cedar Hills Drive.
• Lone Peak Village – The name of the entire subdivision will be Lone Peak Village. Phillips Edison is working with Wal-Mart to design a harmonious retail project. It will have a higher quality than a typical strip mall. They believe it exceeds and meets the commercial requirements and will provide convenience and a tax benefit to the City.
• Architectural Theme – They are pleased that the Design Guidelines are being viewed as flexible by the City. The desired theme is American Colonial. This theme is generally very difficult to incorporate into a retail environment, but it has been done tonight. Sometimes retail tenants cannot economically meet all of the requirements and need to be able to be recognized as commercial/retail.
• Terry Wiser, CLC reported that they incorporate a blend of building features from the existing office buildings at the roundabout and Wal-Mart such as dormers, brick color (not quick-brick), corners of buildings all the way up in brick, and synthetic slate on the roof to compliment Wal-Mart. They used landscaping and color variations on the back to break up the visual look of the buildings.
• Dave Winnie, NAI stated that he has spoken with potential tenants and their biggest concern with the original renderings was cost. It will most likely be less regional tenants and more “mom and pop” tenants. They didn’t feel that the original rendering looked like retail, but more office space. They don’t want to price themselves out of the marketing. There have been a lot of residents in the area that are looking at franchise locations and this would be a great opportunity close to home. There are some site constraints such as no east/west movement. This is not a “main and main” site and shouldn’t be portrayed as such. The biggest plus is that there is a signal light intersection and customers tend to gravitate toward that for easy access/exit.
Planning Commission Discussion:
• There will be approximately ten tenants in the large building with 1,500 square feet each. There is distance between the columns to shift the space to customize.
• Design elements from Wal-Mart need to be incorporated into these buildings to make it cohesive. C. Kroes liked the first elevations better. The arched top is not colonial in look. They could be flattened and a pitched roof could be added. Roy Williams stated that it is 29' to the top of the pitched roof, which is typically higher than Wal-Mart would allow on an outlot. C. Brown stated that the more colonial, the less retail in feel. Roy Williams stated that even with low rent, if it doesn’t give a retail look, it may not have the draw. It would be low to mid $20's on square footage rent. The Planning Commission would like to see what the peaked roof would look like.
• The Planning Commission will be considering concept only tonight. There are elements not submitted that are necessary for preliminary. A public hearing is required with the preliminary proposal.
• A concern is the large amount of stucco. Terri Wiser suggested making the light stucco the same color as the dark brick on the Wal-Mart.
• Garbage is located behind brick enclosures.
• Sidewalks – There are no colored walkways or stamped elements. They have already exceeded the 30% landscaping requirement and don’t need that element to increase their percentage.
MOTION: C. Brown - To grant concept approval for Phillips Edison’s retail buildings conditioned upon: 1) Engineering details necessary for preliminary approval, 2) A suggestion to add a triangle elevation to the current rounded elevations in the middle thirds of the building, and 3) Architectural stamped, colored sidewalks. Seconded by C. Clement.
• C. Clement stated that they have already met the landscaping requirement without using stamped concrete. Roy Williams stated that they will deed 90' of property to the City and there is an additional 6’ that needs to be deeded. They don’t see a requirement to do that. They are preparing the subdivision plat and would like direction on this. C. Kroes is not sure what direction would be necessary at this point.
Aye - C. Brown
C. Steele Motion passes.
6. Committee Assignments and Reports
7. This meeting was adjourned at 11:32 p.m. on a motion by C. Brown, seconded by C. Gleason, and unanimously approved.
/s/ Kim E. Holindrake
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Approved by Commission:
March 29, 2007