REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, March 25, 2004 7:00 p.m.
Public Safety Building
3925 W Cedar Hills Drive, Cedar Hills, Utah
Present: Alan Petersen, Chair, Presiding
Commission Members: Eric Richardson, Paul Hammer, Brendon Dayton, Carl Volden (8:43 p.m.)
Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager
Kim Holindrake, City Recorder
David Bunker, City Engineer (7:15 p.m.)
Gretchen Gordon, Deputy City Recorder (8:10 p.m.)
Others: Karissa Neely - New Utah, D.J. Gould (8:43 p.m.)
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 by C. Petersen at 7:05 p.m.
Eric Richardson and Paul Hammer recognized as voting members.
2. Approval of Minutes from the February 26, 2004, Regular Planning Commission Meeting (7:06 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Dayton - To approve the minutes from the February 26, 2004, Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Seconded by C. Hammer.
Aye - C. Dayton
C. Hammer
C. Petersen
C. Richardson Motion passes.
3. Review the Guidelines for the Design and Review of Planned Commercial Development Projects - Review of Section 4 (7:07 p.m.)
See handouts. Items of discussion and proposed modifications to Section 4 from the handout:
• C. Petersen would like to see new renderings included that reflect the “Jamestown” look that has been discussed. C. Richardson found some additional graphics that could be used and felt that some of the existing buildings could be used.
• C. Petersen liked the use of the quoining at the corners.
• C. Hammer wanted to see the general theme to be consistent throughout the development.
• Discussion of putting together a committee of citizens to assist in identifying buildings and styles that would be consistent with the City’s expectations. Suggestion of some buildings types: Jamestown Square in Provo and Zions Bank on Main Street in Pleasant Grove.
• Renderings on Page 7 - This is close to what is wanted. C. Hammer felt that it looks very tall. The height could be adjusted, but the general style may be what the City is looking for. Also, the renderings on pages 6, 13, 29, 30 and 31 may be similar to what is wanted.
• Remove rendering on Page 11.
• Add new wording in 4.1.1 Architecture, Paragraph #2: “The particular theme that has been selected for this project is American Colonial. The American Colonial motif is a symmetrical design (ABA, ABCBA, etc.) style. High-pitched tile or slate roofs, either side gabled or hipped, overhang the front facade and are often capped with a cupola. A central door, often a French door, is sided by large windows on the sides. Buildings may use the classic temple front, or contain pillars, pilasters and the Palladian window. Exterior construction is normally of brick in traditional colors like red and brown, and makes use of substantial exterior moldings. Wrought iron or copper accents are also used.” Further discussion of new wording.
• Delete rendering on Page 26 and on Page 28.
• C. Richardson would be willing to take some pictures of some existing buildings that could be incorporated into this document.
• David Bunker stated that architects will understand the verbiage and renderings and should be able to incorporate those into future designs.
• Page 12 - 4.1.1G Discussion of this issue. The consensus was that what was written would cover the intent.
• Discussion of residential component - Allow residential use on the second level only. Make sure that this is consistent to what is included in Section 3.
• Remove graphic on Page 6; it will be replaced with something more suitable.
• Page 10 - Modify footnotes to state that residential is permitted only on the second level of the structures. Delete Footnote 5 completely and change C5 above to C4.
• 4.1.2 Landscaping, Paragraph A - Modify and include the following text: “Additionally, hard-surfaced areas such as fountains, plazas, seating areas or recreational facilities shall be included in the site design and will qualify toward the landscaping requirement. Appropriate art features are encouraged.”
• Discussion of stamped concrete walkways and whether the City wants to encourage those to be installed. Maintenance issues, consistent with what the City installs, future replacement, etc. were all discussed. No change to the existing text in 4.1.2A regarding sidewalks.
• 4.1.2 Landscaping F - Remove this item.
• 4.1.3 Streetscapes, Paragraph A - Add at the end of the existing text, “Streetscapes shall be varied between grass and planter areas and be appropriately maintained year-round.”
• 4.1.3 Streetscapes, Paragraph C - Delete the following sentence in paragraph 4: “Planters shall not be less than 1,000 square feet in size.”
• 4.1.4 Streetlighting - Discussion about what lighting has been installed in Lexington Heights. C. Hammer felt that they were too bright and would like to see some of them dimmed after certain hours. David Bunker was asked to get more information on the street lights, including wattage, color, and the possibility of dimming some of the lights after hours. There are different lights in the parking lot areas and by the road/sidewalk.
MOTION: C. Petersen - To stop at this point and gather further information and begin work on this at the next meeting beginning on Section 4.1.5. Seconded by C. Richardson.
Aye - C. Dayton
C. Hammer
C. Petersen
C. Richardson Motion passes.
4. Review/Recommendation Commercial Hours of Operation (8:30 p.m.)
C. Dayton was given this assignment. He submitted the information to the City Recorder, but it was after the deadline for agenda packets.
MOTION: C. Dayton - To table Item #4 until the next meeting. No second. Motion dies.
C. Richardson stated that he did do some further research on this issue. He spoke with Highland City to gather information because they are the only city within Utah that is trying to operate under the Sunday closure principle. Highland City does not have an ordinance regarding this policy, but includes this in their conditional use permit. During the last meeting, the Planning Commission spent a great deal of time discussing any exceptions that should be given and to whom. C. Richardson would prefer to see the conditional use given to allow the decision to be dictated by the City Council with each approval instead of trying to decide on all of the exceptions.
Suggested verbiage on this issue: “The City of Cedar Hills values the tranquil environment that currently exists within the community and would like to preserve the small town atmosphere that exists. Design and planning of and operation within the commercial district shall be primarily for the benefit of the residents of Cedar Hills. Culturally accepted restrictions may be placed on development within the community to protect the citizens from noise, light, air, traffic and other forms of pollution while fostering a viable mixed-used, walkable commercial zone. Considerations shall include density, diversity and design.”
C. Richardson stated that he contacted a number of cities where he had pulled prior information from the last meeting and these cities are not enforcing this issue. This fact makes him wonder if this is even an issue that can be handled. C. Petersen stated that he feels that this issue does not seem to be a land-use issue and does not fall under the role and responsibility of the Planning Commission. His opinion is that the City Council should be dealing with this issue because it is an operational issue. C. Dayton stated that he disagrees with that opinion because Councilmember Parker stated that it would be helpful to the City Council to have the Planning Commission put together some of their thoughts on this topic. The Planning Commission could recommend that the City Council review the Highland City conditional use permit and their uses. C. Petersen feels that whatever is addressed in the commercial zone should allow proper use of the land without causing anyone harm and should not create an adverse environment for the residents and the land owner. The requirements should not be so restrictive that it precludes development. Review of the requirement for developing 10 acres as a minimum. In light of the fact that there is an 18-acre piece and a 16-acre piece, it seems that there should be something more logical and reasonable. There are already two 4-acre parcels that have been developed.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To include the following information in the Commercial Design Guidelines, to Section 1.1.1 creating a third paragraph that says, “The City of Cedar Hills values the tranquil environment that currently exists within the community and would like to preserve the small town atmosphere that exists. Design and planning of and operation within the commercial district shall be primarily for the benefits of the residents of Cedar Hills. Culturally accepted restrictions may be placed on development within the community to protect the citizens from noise, light, air, traffic and other forms of pollution while fostering a viable mixed-used, walkable commercial zone. Considerations shall include density, diversity and design.” Also, to change all the uses from permitted uses to conditional uses, as advised by the City Planner. Seconded by C. Volden.
C. Richardson stated that by making all of the uses conditional, it allows the City Council the maximum flexibility to determine the hours of operation. C. Volden stated that this allows the City Council to make the policy decisions that they were elected to do. C. Petersen wanted to make sure that the motion did not move the Planning Commission away from the published agenda.
AMEND MOTION: C. Richardson - To recommend that items regarding commercial hours of operation do not fall within the scope of the Planning Commission and belong with the City Council and to consider revising Section 3 of the Commercial Design Guidelines dealing with Conditional/Permitted Uses at the next meeting and to table the issue at this time. Accepted and seconded by C. Volden.
Aye - C. Dayton
C. Richardson
C. Volden
Nay - C. Hammer
C. Petersen Motion passes.
Further discussion about how the Planning Commission should proceed on the issue of hours of operation. C. Richardson stated that he would like to see everything conditional to allow for maximum flexibility without creating undo restrictions. C. Hammer felt that making everything conditional may make it more difficult for future developers in that nothing is permitted.
5. Committee Assignments and Reports (9:06 p.m.)
Signs - C. Volden sent out an e-mail draft for the Planning Commission to review. He will get a copy to Kim Holindrake to put on the next agenda once she has had a chance to put it in ordinance format. C. Volden stated that he used a lot of information from the Sandy City ordinance. Parks/Trails Committee - C. Richardson stated that the Committee will be adding a skateboard park to the Parks/Trails Master Plan. No location determined yet, but they do have a few sites in mind. The City will be breaking ground on the Bonneville Shoreline Trail next week. A ribbon-cutting for this project as well as the Forest Creek Trail extension is planned for mid-May.
6. This meeting was adjourned at 9:10 on a motion by C. Hammer, seconded by C. Richardson and unanimously approved.
/s/ Kim E. Holindrake
Approved by Commission: Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
April 29, 2004