REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Thursday, October 28, 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, Carl Volden
Konrad Hildebrandt, City Manager (8:30 p.m.)
Gretchen Gordon, Deputy City Recorder
Rodney Despain, City Planner
David Bunker, City Engineer
Mayor Mike McGee (8:45 p.m.)
Courtney Hammond, City Meeting Transcriber
Others: Robyn Ellis, Doug Ellis, Jeff Buyers-Carpenter Stringham, Tony Christofferson, Roger Dudley, James Parker, Brent Uibel, Jeff Lindstrom, Karissa Neeley (8:10 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 7:14 p.m.
2. Excuse Planning Commission Members for an Extended Period of Time (7:14 p.m.)
Paul Hammer was excused from the Planning Commission for three months by C. Petersen.
3. Approval of Minutes from the September 30, 2004, Regular Planning Commission Meeting (7:15 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Richardson - To approve the minutes from the September 30, 2004, Regular Planning Commission Meeting, as amended. Seconded by C. Volden.
Aye - C. Petersen
C. Richardson
C. Volden Motion passes.
4. Review/Recommendation on Revised Final for The Cedars, Plat I (7:16 p.m.)
See handouts. This plat was not approved previously because of the removal of a mid block sidewalk access. These easements have been included in this revision. All other previous issues have been addressed.
MOTION: C. Volden - To recommend final plat approval for The Cedars, Plat I, subject to final engineering, water rights, etc. Seconded by C. Richardson.
Aye - C. Petersen
C. Richardson
C. Volden Motion passes.
5. Review/Recommendation on Preliminary for Juniper Heights, Plats C and D (7:20 p.m.)
See handouts. Last month the Planning Commission recommended approval of these plats. The City Council would like the Planning Commission to look at this again, specifically considering a connector road between North Oak Road and Sandalwood Drive. The concern is that the pedestrian pathway is not sufficient for connecting the neighborhoods.
Some discussion items:
• The road would be at a 15 percent grade.
• The “k” factor would have to be at 30. Currently, it would be at five.
• Taking the road down 4 feet would improve the situation somewhat, but would still not meet the appropriate “k” factor.
• The road would have to be taken down 7-3/4 feet and would send all water and sewage down Oak Road, which would require further mining.
• In past meetings, the Planning Commission looked at Codes for Safe Roads and decided it would be better to have a safe pedestrian path than an unsafe road.
• Resident Brent Uibel expressed concern that the original master plan showed a connector road that would ease traffic on all of the roads. C. Petersen pointed out that there are other access roads, specifically Cottonwood Drive.
• Rodney Despain remembered that the original mining plan for plats C and D anticipated taking more gravel out. The City and developer subsequently decided to not mine as much as initially intended.
• David Bunker reported that taking the road down almost 8 feet to make it safe would put a serious strain on the storm drainage. An estimated cost of getting storm drainage from Oak Road to Cedar Hills Drive would cost about $90,000.
• Sanitary sewage would have adequate capacity to absorb the additional 20 lots that would feed into it.
MOTION: C. Richardson - Cedar Hills values an interconnected community that promotes traditional social values and encourages neighborly communication. Local transportation planning should protect property values, and should provide adequate ways and means as incentives for non-automobile-based trips. I move that we recommend that the connector road between Oak Road and Sandalwood Drive not be built based on the following findings: 1) The connector road would cause Oak Road to exceed the level of service standards for storm drainage, and would negatively affect property values of existing residents in Cedar Hills, Plats I and M; 2) The connector road is deemed unsafe based on the findings of excessively low “k” factors, excessively high-road slopes over a limited distance, and the inability to adequately control traffic during adverse weather conditions that will negatively impact the existing residents of Lots 19 and 20 of Cedar Hills, Plat I. I further move that we recommend the preliminary approval of Juniper Heights, Plats C and D subject to the following conditions: 1) A paved 10’ wide pedestrian connector trail shall be included by the developer between Oak Road and Sandalwood Drive to facilitate access between Oak Road and Sandalwood Drive and promote an interconnected community. The 10’ wide paved strip shall not be at a grade over 12 degrees, and shall include appropriate curb cuts and slope retention. Bollards shall be placed at the ends limiting access to pedestrians. Developer shall install a 6’ privacy fence along the trail corridor. 2) The renaming of Ironwood Cove, Cyprus Cove and Mesquite Cove to names that do not have a duplicate base of other roads in Cedar Hills, 3) To include a note that construction access be limited to Canyon Road to Bayhill Drive to Cottonwood Drive, and 4) In addition to the 10’ access, a 10’ easement be maintained on Lots 6 and 7. Seconded by C. Volden
AMEND MOTION: C. Richardson - The privacy fence shall be constructed of white vinyl or stamped concrete. Accepted and seconded by C. Volden
Aye - C. Petersen
C. Richardson
C. Volden Motion passes.
6. Review/Recommendation on Lexington Heights Assisted Living Center Site Plan an Exterior Elevations (7:46 p.m.)
See handouts. The architects have submitted a new drawing for the assisted living center. The developers are proposing a phased construction with the two east wings being expandable. It is also proposed that the exterior be half brick, half stucco and that the roofing would be asphalt shingles. Approving new elevations for the building requires approval from both the Planning Commission and the City Council. The exterior changes were made to take away the institutional feel of an all brick building. The owners do not want a building that looks like their competitors, such as the assisted living in Jamestown in Provo, which is all brick. The owners are looking for a facility that feels like a home.
Items of Discussion:
• The Commission expressed concerns about consistency in the development and the precedence it might set for future developers.
• The Commission would like to see more brick, especially on the front facade.
• C. Petersen was concerned with a 10' setback that is proposed in Phase 2. He would like to see the setback at 25 feet. The Fire Chief approved a 10-foot setback.
• The Commission would like to see the assisted living center in Salt Lake.
• The developer has proposed a roof change to bring a mixture of roofing materials to the area. The developer also stated that the roof will not be seen on a two-story building.
• In past approvals, the City Council has required that the facility be all brick with a tile roof.
• Rodney Despain suggested that the Commission address all three issues in their recommendation to the City Council. Councilman Parker will take this issue to the City Council to decide whether there needs to be a hearing.
MOTION: C. Petersen - To table this matter and take it up again next month. Seconded by C. Richardson.
The Planning Commission would like to plan a Work Session to tour the assisted living facility in Salt Lake. The developers will plan the work session with Kim Holindrake, City Recorder.
AMEND MOTION: C. Petersen - To schedule a work session for the 10th of November. Accepted and seconded by C. Richardson.
Aye - C. Petersen
C. Richardson
C. Volden Motion passes.
MOTION: C. Petersen - To move Item #8 above Item #7. No second. Motion dies.
7. Review/Recommendation on Proposed Ordinance Regarding Bed and Breakfast Facilities (8:30 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Richardson - To table Item #7. Seconded by C. Volden.
Aye - C. Petersen
C. Richardson
C. Volden Motion passes.
8. Review/Recommendation Regarding Proposed Amendment to the Zone Map from H-1 Hillside to SC-1 Commercial for Property Located at Approximately 10100 N Canyon Road (8:31 p.m.)
See handout. The Mayor brought this item to City Council to see if there was interest in making a change to the zoning from H-1 Hillside to SC-1 Commercial for the property across Canyon Road from the Public Safety Building. The City Council felt that Planning Commission was the best place for this discussion to start. To change to SC-1, the overall site plan must be at least 10 acres. C. Richardson would be more inclined to change it to a CC-1 zone, a Corridor Commercial Zone. C. Volden and C. Petersen felt that there is no compelling reason to put any commercial in that area. Any development would be small and would not be very beneficial. This issue has been brought up at least three times before. It is on the way to American Fork Canyon and could drive business for a convenience store or other similar commercial development. Brent Uibel commented that creating a commercial zone would create more traffic problems. Jeff Lindstrom sat on the Planning Commission when this issue was brought up before. There were concerns about the zone being at the entrance to the City. When the current commercial zone was designated, the Planning Commission decided to focus commercial on the other end of town. Splitting the commercial zone to both ends of the City would not make a lot of sense. The Mayor thought of this commercial area as one with two-story buildings with ground floor access on both levels, which could look more like residential development.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To recommend to the Council to take the issue of additional commercial land under advisement. No Second. Motion dies.
C. Volden felt there is the possibility that, if done right, commercial development could work.
MOTION: C. Richardson - To direct staff to come back with a more specific proposal, taking into account the feedback that has been provided tonight. Seconded by C. Volden.
Aye - C. Petersen
C. Richardson
C. Volden Motion passes.
9. Review/Recommendation on Sign Ordinance (9:04 p.m.)
MOTION: C. Richardson. - To table Item #9. Seconded by C. Volden.
10. Committee Assignments and Reports (9:04 p.m.)
No reports.
11. This meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. on a motion by C. Petersen, seconded by C. Volden and unanimously approved.
/s/ Kim E. Holindrake
Kim E. Holindrake, City Recorder
Approved by Commission:
November 18, 2004