HEBER CITY CORPORATION 75 North Main Street Heber City, Utah Planning Commission Meeting March 8, 2018 6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting The Planning Commission of Heber City, Wasatch County, Utah, met in Regular Meeting on March 8, 2018, in the City Council Chambers in Heber City, Utah. I. Call to Order Kieth Rawlings welcomed everyone and convened the meeting with a quorum present at 6:04 p.m. II. Roll Call Present: Excused: Kieth Rawlings David Richards Ryan Stack Darek Slagowski Oscar Covarrubias Stacie Ferguson Dennis Gunn Staff Present: Anthony Kohler, Jamie Baron, Bart Mumford, Karen Tozier. Others Present: Jordan O'Toole, Tom Stuart, Stacy Earnshaw, Rodney Earnshaw, Quinn Davis, Brian Henrie, Jered Plouzek, Fred Barth, Spencer Young, John L. Paul, Heath Johnston, Susan Palmer, Joe Coombs, Stephen Henderson, Lynette Berg, and others whose names were not legible. III. Pledge of Allegiance: Kieth Rawlings 1. Public Hearing to consider Ridgepoint Management Group s request for Subdivision Preliminary Approval for Sawmill Community Phase 4 Subdivision located at approximately 1930 South Mill Road 3.8.18 PC PH Staff Report - Sawmill 4 Prelim Sawmill Community Ph 4&5 Prelim Review 2.27.18 Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 1 of 10
Jamie Baron presented information on the request from his staff report. Staff noted that the road stub to the Earnshaw property needs to be figured out and that the developer has submitted plans for the 30 foot wide trail on Mill Road. Kieth Rawlings opened the public hearing at 6:09 p.m. John Paul asked the Commission to please protect us from a dry unusable weed field because this would decrease the value of their property, their water shares, and create a fire hazard. Mr. Paul explained how he had come to this conclusion which had to do with Timpanogos shares of water which need to be converted to year round water and in his words there is no way to do that. He spoke at length and gave many statistics on water shares. There are no full year water shares that will satisfy the city outdoor requirement for year round use. His deep concern as expressed was that if the developers are allowed to start and they make a business decision to stop because there is not enough water that the north and south ends of the project are the first phases proposed to develop and the center of the project, the commercial project, will not develop. This would leave the situation as he stated earlier and with no road connection between Highway 40 and 1200 South. Rod Earnshaw indicated he was working with Heath Johnston of Ridgepoint Management and he had given them a number of options for them to make a decision on. Joe Coombs indicated John Paul covered most of what he was concerned about. He asked that before projects ask for a subdivision they make sure the water is in order. He reiterated City Council discussion on following the ordinance and a moratorium on the Planned Community Mixed Use Zone (Planned Community Mixed Use Zone). Lynette Berg had two concerns; greenspace and water. She asked that the city offer a variance to not require those back alleyways, which would save the developer money and save greenspace / open space. Regarding her second concern; water used for the first phases and not having enough for future phases she pointed out that Wasatch County requires all water shares to be turned in up front and she thought this was a good policy. She also suggested they keep one water share per phase so there is water left for remaining acreage and to save for agriculture. There were no further comments and Chairman Rawlings closed the public hearing. City Engineer, Bart Mumford, addressed water. He expressed that it is evolving; they are discussing this with the Council. In reference to the Sawmill project he indicated they don t have all the water in the city for the areas served by Timpanogos water planned out right now. They don't have this all wrapped up. Kieth Rawlings and the Commissioners asked Bart Mumford numerous questions on water which he answered. The city's procedure of turning over water shares (timing) was explained by Bart Mumford. The City usually requires water after approval and it is deeded by approved phase. The City is not at risk until the plat records but they want to collect it before they start construction. The real guarantee the city has is when that is deeded over to them. Kieth Rawlings Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 2 of 10
asked if there is a way to get water. Bart Mumford replied, yes if Timpanogos changes their bylaws to make it available. Kieth Rawlings asked about the water sales contract from when Jordanelle was built and whether that water was available to the city to use. Mumford expressed his understanding was M and I water and Ag water is committed. Mumford thought the best option is Timpanogos irrigation so they can convert theirs. The question was asked whether irrigation water is a requirement of development. The reply was yes if landscaping is required. Xeriscaping was thrown out as a potential option. Anthony Kohler spoke to this and indicated the city does not permit xeriscaping because the climate here grows weeds. Heath Johnston of Ridgepoint Management, the Development Company, explained their stance on the water situation. He explained that by state statute they can t progress without having the water; they could never record without the water. He stated It is already understood that any approval assessed isn t approval until final approval and final approval is with conditions and you never record without the water. So even with final approval we re not really final approved until we record and for that to happen we have to post the water. So I know this is a hotbed but everyone is protected. And then the other comment I wanted, because the gentleman in the back was on the microphone, but we do have a City Councilman who is controlling things by doing things outside of a vote within a City Council and then running around telling everyone how he is stopping development. I ve heard it three times today where he is running around telling people and we have another one back here and I want that on the record. So he wasn t using a microphone and I want that on the record because he wasn t speaking during the public time. Because that is what I m up against is was the decision not to vote the best for the City? Or was it a rogue City Councilperson trying to control things through an action that could be viewed as not good for the Timp Water Shares people and the City? I m not going to give the answer what that is but I want that on the record because that is the kind of stuff that I am dealing with in this city, which does not follow the pattern of most cities and I have never in 30 years seen anything like it. Lynette Berg stated that she did think that was fair when he was not there to defend himself. Kieth Rawlings expressed that he would not comment on that. He pointed out that part of his statement he said that he would need to provide water per the recordation of each phase. So if you use whatever number of phases that you have, if you only use half of your phases that you have enough water for then what happens to the other phases? Heath Johnston answered there is actually plenty of water, the question is will people sell what they have. And there is other means with water which we could get into a whole water discussion on how it is obtained and who sells what, but there is actually plenty of water the discussion is; are there plenty of sellers of water I can obtain water so it comes down to a willing seller and a willing buyer at a price. But I can't proceed without it. He expressed how complex Heber Valley is when it comes to water. Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 3 of 10
David Richards referenced Millhaven s request at the last meeting and City Council Member Wayne Hardman saying they were working on that, and the Commission had granted precedence. Bart Mumford indicated there has to be a solution or these will keep piling up. The only solution seems to be to work with Timp and change the bylaws that they have. This is what the Council is working through. There are varying opinions on that. How many are you going to take backing up until we come up with a solution? This would create bigger issues long term through the whole valley. He thought there would be a solution or possibly short solutions with long (term) solutions coming. It was noted that without Timp there were no other options. There was further discussion on water being outside the Commission s control and Ryan Stack asked the applicant; would you rather be stuck here or stuck there? It is not an issue of if it is of when. He thought there was no legal basis to deny at this point, we can continue and see what happens with the water. That is not our role as the Planning Commission. For now there is no good answer. There was brief discussion on what to do with staff's recommendation relating to the Earnshaw property. David Richards moved to approve the Sawmill Phase 4 Preliminary Plat with the findings and conditions in the staff report. I want to add in the conditions under 6 that I want to specifically call out that the Petitioner needs to have satisfactory water shares for the culinary as well as the irrigation water must be met by the City s requirement so they can have plat recordation. Darek Slagowski seconded the motion. Mr. Earnshaw wanted to confirm that the motion included that his issue be resolved. David Richards answered that he was condition number 2. Ryan Stack asked about the engineering report and David Richards indicated that was number 1; he explained he wanted that to be inclusive so that was condition 1. Ryan Stack indicated he understood and also pointed out his other thought was Heath Johnston had some very carefully worded language for the conditions for water that he couldn t remember what it was that he thought should be included here but that it is conditioned upon the presentation of water that is deemed acceptable by the City Council. Kieth Rawlings replied that this is basically what he had said with Number 6 with the conditions of the culinary and irrigation water that is acceptable to the City. Ryan Stack added it has to be Council buy-off before. David Richards stated it has to be to a point where it is approved for a plat recordation as according to what we are talking to with Bart here. Darek Slagowski asked what the given condition was. David Richards answered the engineer s report is three pages long and I don t want to go back and there are so many things on there. The Petitioner answered that he had received the engineer s report and understood what was on there in answer to Kieth Rawlings question. Kieth Rawlings called for a vote on the motion at this time. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Abstaining: Oscar Covarrubias. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. 2. Public Hearing to consider Ridgepoint Management Group s request for Subdivision Preliminary Approval for Sawmill Community Phase 5 Subdivision located at approximately 1930 South 930 East Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 4 of 10
3.8.18 PC PH Staff Report - Sawmill 5 Prelim Sawmill Community Ph 4&5 Prelim Review 2.27.18 Kieth Rawlings noted that there probably was not anything different between Phase 4 and Phase 5. Jamie Baron addressed the block perimeter requirement. The block perimeter is limited to 2,000 feet or code does allow them to exceed this if they do a pedestrian path every 300 feet. He indicated there needed to be discussion at this point as the petitioners do not have plans showing what they intend to do with that. Chairman Rawlings asked Heath Johnston if he was aware of this issue. Heath Johnston expressed that he was aware of this issue and they had met and discussed it this morning. He explained that they were looking at what s best considering what was next to them, in other words he thought it might not be common sense to put a pedestrian path to a field but then again they don t know what the future is so he indicated they are taking advice and counsel from staff and they are going to come back. He conveyed that it was his thought at this point is it is either going to be a road or pedestrian path and if you choose to approve us he suggested they make this a condition that we can resolve in the next little bit. Chairman Rawlings opened the public hearing and asked that anything not stated previously with the public hearing on Phase 4 could be commented on at this time. There were no comments and the public hearing was closed. The time was 7:19 p.m. David Richards motioned to approve the Sawmill Phase 5 Preliminary Plat with the findings and conditions in the staff report; highlight Condition Number 2 referencing the road stub or pedestrian connection(s) every 300 feet which shall meet (shall be shown) in the final plans to meet the block (perimeter) permitted requirements, continue with Condition Number 6 which would mean that the Petitioner has sufficient water for City plat recordation for culinary and irrigation uses. Darek Slagowski seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: Oscar Covarrubias. The motion carried. 3. The Young Standard requests Commercial Development Approval of Heber Culvers located at 1260 South Highway 189 in the Valley Station pc-03-08-18-culvers-alk Culvers Commercial Review 2.27.18 Valley Station Plat 2018-02-22 Heber Culver's Arch Site 2018-02-22 Heber Culvers landscape Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 5 of 10
A101 - Site Details dsx0-led 18048_E003 - Site Photometric-E003 L111 planting plan Anthony Kohler reviewed information on the request and noted that at the next meeting the Commission will see a plat amendment that combines Lot 7 and Lot 8. He indicated that the only thing he would probably amend on his staff report would be that we confirm at building permit the lumens per acre on the lighting plan because we do not have the lighting fixtures for the building to do those calculations. He indicated his request would be to tie that to finalizing the lighting at the time of the building permit. There was a technical difficulty in getting the landscaping plan to load and Kohler explained that they have submitted the revised plans that they ve asked for as far as conditions on his staff report. Kieth Rawlings asked questions about Finding Number 2, the Petitioner may need to return to the Planning Commission for final approval if a light dimming plan is needed. Kohler addressed this; they had submitted more lighting information and he felt they were comfortable with that, they had indicated they would have a switch that will turn off the lighting after hours. If the Commission wanted them to come back in a couple of weeks with the subdivision plat amendment and bring in more detail on lighting perhaps they could do that. Anthony Kohler spoke about the lighting ordinance when asked by David Richards how it differed to existing businesses in the Valley Station and surrounding businesses. The Architect, Jared Plouzek, showed the materials board for the proposed commercial building and indicated the board was a little darker. He also explained the architectural details of the building. Elevations very similar to the proposed building were viewed of the Culver s in Orem, it was noted this was the same color palette. The stone enclosure for the trash was discussed. The proposed sign was a freestanding monument sign with a reader board. The sign plans were shown as well as the location on the site for the sign. The reader board is permitted to be 25% of the sign. There was discussion on whether this was permitted in the Mixed Use Residential Commercial Zone and how it compared to the lighting on existing businesses; the lighting ordinance adopted last year is near dark sky compliant. It was noted they would want them to work with their sign company to put in an automatic dimmer or to make sure the reader board doesn t blink all night. Spencer Young, who is the owner and owns the Culvers in Orem also explained that their signs are programmed to switch off at the close of business and the street lights close half an hour later to allow their employees to go to their cars in the light. The business hours are 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. depending on demand. Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 6 of 10
Anthony Kohler reviewed the conditions from the staff report and explained which conditions the Petitioner had met. Staff was recommending final approval, it was noted the building meets the requirements of the ordinance and again pointed out to have staff verify on the final plans of building permit that the lighting meets the new darker sky lighting ordinance. David Richards moved to approve the item with the Findings and Conditions in the Staff Report for Culver s Restaurant with the findings and conditions as stated and I d like to add one condition, Condition Number 7 which would be that the final elevations meet staff approval since we haven t had a chance to view that at this time. Oscar Covarrubias seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. 4. CQD Properties, LLC requests Small Subdivision Approval of the Davis Subdivision located at 400 West 200 North pc-03-08-18-davis subdivision-alk Davis Subdivision Review 2.27.18 DAVIS SUB -SITEPLAN-SITE PLAN C18-011 Plat rev02 - Address Anthony Kohler reviewed the request from the staff report and the engineering report. There was no further discussion. David Richards moved to approve the item with the findings and conditions of staff report of the CQD Subdivision with the findings and conditions as stated in the staff report and the engineer s letter. Ryan Stack seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. 5. Daniel Monzello requests Commercial Development Approval for the Nelson Office Building located at 2237 South 390 West 3.8.18 PC Staff Report - Nelson Office Building Nelson Office Building Commercial Review 2.27.18 2237 S 390 W, HEBER Nelson Lighting Submittals Nelson Office Building - Colored Rendering PRJ-NOH-SIGNED Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 7 of 10
LW3_SLW3 2237 S 390 W Exterior_Gaunlet Gray & Mindful Gray Jamie Baron presented information on the requested development. He indicated the main thing we didn't have at the time of submittal was the lighting standards. Initially he d recommended that they grant concept because they hadn t received all the plans however seeing the Planning Commission s decision on Culver s he expressed if you want to make that so that staff reviews it at building permit the Commission could grant final and that would be your prerogative to do that if that is what you choose. The elevation drawings were shown and the building materials were in natural tones. The lighting would be in wall packs; this came in after the staff report was written. Baron spoke about the fencing requirement and indicated that if the Planning Commission found that the rear of the building provided adequate security then they may not be required to build a fence. In this situation where they don t have outdoor storage and they don t have typical warehousing, it is more of office warehouse, and they are using parking back there this is a situation where the Commission could find that fencing is not required as well. Kieth Rawlings asked a question about this in relation to other businesses. Jamie Baron answered the Probst building has a fence around their storage yard and they have things out in the open they are trying to protect. The Petitioner s intent is for all business storage to be contained in the unit. The berming on the landscape should be a condition should they decide to grant final approval. David Richards asked about the landscape plan. The landscaping requirements for the Industrial Zone were explained by Mr. Baron. Ryan Stack moved that we grant Commercial Final Approval for the Nelson Office Building located at 2237 South 390 West subject to all terms and conditions of the staff report. David Richards asked if the fence was part of that or not. Jamie Baron answered that they would just indicate whether they wanted this or not; if they don t then they can leave it out but that they would want to address the lighting and the berm. Ryan Stack continued with his motion stating, further that the applicant not be required to install the fence that would otherwise be required by code but that they do have to develop the berm and advance a lighting plan that meets staff s satisfaction. Oscar Covarrubias seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. 6. Sunroc Building Materials Inc requests Commercial Development Approval for Sunroc Heber Storage /Commercial Development Approval for an accessory building located at 700 West 100 South pc-03-08-18-sunroc-alk Sunroc Development Plans Anthony Kohler had nothing to add to the staff report. The Petitioner Scott Folsom had a question on the photo metrics plan as to where they developed the store front out on 100 South last year would that area be grandfathered or do we need to do photo metrics of just the back Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 8 of 10
area. Anthony Kohler answered just the rear. Mr. Folsom wanted that to be noted so there was clarity. There was discussion on where the lighting in the rear currently was in relationship to the buildings. Kieth Rawlings asked Anthony Kohler if they needed to submit a photometric plan in this situation. Anthony Kohler answered that there are new buildings replacing the existing building. As this is a different scenario he explained that they at least want to follow the spirit of what we are trying to do. When they spoke at DRC Mr. Folsom had indicated the lights could be moved up and down. If they felt it was just a remodel and they don t need to go with the full photometric then they could make that call. He thought that they at least want to make sure we can adjust the lighting and wattage a little bit if they need to. Kohler did not think they could go retroactive on the front building only on the one in the back. Anthony Kohler asked if their security lights stay on all night. Mr. Folsom answered he thought the lights go off at night. They start building loads at 5:00 a.m. in the morning. David Richards moved to approve the item with the findings and conditions in the staff report; I want to clarify Condition Number 1 that the photometric lighting plan be only addressed to the building which is being erected and modified. Ryan Stack seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. 7. Administrative Items: There were no administrative items to discuss. IV. Minutes October 12, 2017 Regular Meeting October 12, 2017 Regular Meeting Ryan Stack moved to approve the October 12, 2017 Regular Meeting minutes. Oscar Covarrubias seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. ii. January 25, 2018 Regular Meeting January 25, 2018 Regular Meeting Ryan Stack moved to approve the January 25, 2018 Regular Meeting minutes. Oscar Covarrubias seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. iii. February 22, 2018 Regular Meeting February 22, 2018 Regular Meeting Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 9 of 10
Oscar Covarrubias moved to approve the February 22, 2018 Regular Meeting minutes. Ryan Stack seconded the motion. Voting Aye: Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Kieth Rawlings, Darek Slagowski, David Richards. Voting Nay: none. The motion carried. V. Adjournment David Richards moved to adjourn the meeting. Ryan Stack made the second. Voting Aye: Kieth Rawlings, David Richards, Ryan Stack, Darek Slagowski, Oscar Covarrubias. Voting Nay: None. The motion carried and the meeting adjourned. Karen Tozier Karen Tozier, Planning Commission Secretary Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 8, 2018 Page 10 of 10