Regular Session

Approved Meeting Minutes Fairfield Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 5, 2024 Minutes Date: Wednesday, March 5, 2024 Location: Fairfield Town Office 103 East Main Street Fairfield, Utah Time: 7:00 P.M. Minutes By: Recorder: Stephanie Shelley Agenda Item #1- Open the Planning Commission Regular Session and Roll Call. Commissioner Taylor opened the meeting at 7:06 pm Heather Strong, David Riet, Jane Lancaster, Wayne Taylor, Kyler Fisher Staff Present: Recorder: Stephanie Shelley; Mayor Hollie McKinney; Attorney Todd Sheeran (via Zoom) Others Present: Brent Ault, Julie Smith (Orem), Brent Tuttle (Payson), Shawn Hill (GSBS) Via Zoom: Jami Mascaro, Jim, Tal Adair The power did go off during the meeting. Call to Order 1)​ Roll Call Consent Items The Commissioners may approve these items without discussion or public comment and may remove an item to the Business Items for discussion and consideration. 1)​ Minutes: February 5, 2025, and February 18, 2025. Commissioner Lancaster motioned to approve the February 5, 2025, and February 18, 2025, minutes. Commissioner Strong seconded the motion. Unanimously approved Commissioner Taylor - Yes Commissioner Strong - Yes Commissioner Riet - Yes Commissioner Lancaster - Yes Commissioner Fisher - Yes Business Items The Commissioners will discuss (without public comment) and may approve the following items: 1)​ Review and approve Comcast Site Plan The commissioners reviewed the Comcast site plan. Members noted that some numbers on the plan were blurry and difficult to read. They discussed the lot size, which was determined to be 1.36 acres, exceeding the minimum 1-acre requirement for the light industrial West zone. 1 of 5  Approved Meeting Minutes Fairfield Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 5, 2024 The commissioners had questions about the exact purpose of the building, which was described as a small hub or junction point for Comcast. The building size was noted to be approximately 20 feet by an unspecified length. There was extensive discussion about the power supply for the facility. The site plan did not clearly show power lines or a meter location. Members expressed concern about this omission, as it is a required element on the site plan checklist. They speculated that power may come from across Allen's Ranch Road or potentially from a generator but felt this needed to be clarified. The commissioners also discussed water and septic requirements. It was noted that the plan showed an HVAC unit, implying power would be needed. A generator and concrete pad were mentioned in the plan notes, but the commission felt this was likely for backup power rather than primary power. Kent Withers (McNiel Engineering), who was on the phone, could not provide additional clarity on the power situation but agreed it was an important question to resolve. After discussion, the commissioners decided they could not approve the plan without more information about the power supply. They opted to table the item and requested Comcast to provide details on power lines and meter location before reconsidering the application. 2)​ Review and approve Scott Jenson ECO Point Site Plan The commissioners reviewed the Scott Jensen ECO Point site plan. There were concerns raised about several missing or unclear elements: 1.​ The distance to the nearest fire hydrant was not clearly stated, though it was noted to be at the cemetery. 2.​ The location of wells and springs were not shown on the plan. 3.​ Verification of water shares was missing. 4.​ An arsenic report was not provided, though an existing report from when the EPA previously tested might suffice. 5.​ A description of the deed or property was not included. 6.​ A grading plan showing existing contours was missing. Mayor McKinney mentioned that the fire marshal had reviewed the plan and was satisfied with the hydrant location and access to the greenhouse. She also noted that the applicants were aware of the meeting but were not present to address questions. The commissioners decided to table the item due to the missing information. They requested that the applicants provide verification of water shares, well locations, deeds, an arsenic report, and a grading plan before reconsidering the application. 2 of 5  Approved Meeting Minutes Fairfield Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 5, 2024 3)​ Review and approve the Shawn & Heather Strong Storage building site plan Commissioner Heather Strong recused herself from voting on this item as she is the applicant. The commissioners reviewed the updated site plan for the Shawn & Heather Strong storage building. It was noted that some previously required elements, such as paving the road, had already been approved and completed. Heather Strong clarified that they are not currently planning to install a septic, power, or water. The project will consist of a concrete pad with a metal building. They acknowledged that they would need to return with approved engineered drawings when they decide to add utilities. The commissioners discussed the zoning (AR-10) and confirmed that the project meets the requirements. They also verified that arsenic testing had been completed when the Strongs built their house. Commissioner Lancaster moved to approve the Heather and Shawn Strong building site plan. Commissioner Fisher seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, with Heather Strong abstaining. Commissioner Taylor - Yes Commissioner Strong - abstaining Commissioner Riet - Yes Commissioner Lancaster - Yes Commissioner Fisher - Yes Commissioner Lancaster disclosed that they had done some work with the Strongs. 4)​ Brant Tuttle's discussion on the Text Amendment for the Bradshaw property Brant Tuttle presented a proposal for a text amendment to allow for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) on the Bradshaw property. The commission had several concerns and reservations about the proposal: 1.​ Members felt the town was still too rural for PUDs and that it didn't align with the general plan or desire to stay rural. 2.​ The proposal lacked open space requirements typical in PUDs, even in other small towns. 3.​ There were concerns about the legality of the existing septic system, which is reportedly paved over. 4.​ Water issues were raised, noting that the property only has one acre-foot of water shares for eight buildings. 3 of 5  Approved Meeting Minutes Fairfield Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 5, 2024 5.​ The existing zoning (grandfathered at 5 acres in a 10-acre zone) presents further challenges for further dividing the property. The commissioners explained that the town's commercial ordinance is not currently strong enough to handle this type of development. While they expressed a willingness to work with the applicant in the future, they felt the town needs to strengthen its ordinances first. The commissioners decided not to move forward with the text amendment at this time. They advised Mr. Tuttle that the applicant needs to address water and septic issues, as well as setback requirements before the town would be ready to consider such a change. 5)​ General Plan update by GSBS Consulting Sean Hill from GSBS Consulting provided an update on the general plan process. Key points included: 1.​ The existing conditions report (60 pages) has been sent to the mayor for review. 2.​ They are beginning work on the vision document, which will elaborate on big ideas from public engagement and existing conditions study. 3.​ The timeline aims for a public release of the vision document by March 24, with the planning commission review the week of April 4. 4.​ The goal is to have the town council consider the general plan in May. Mr. Hill suggested holding a special meeting over Zoom after the initial review to allow for additional discussion if needed. After reviewing the draft in April, the commissioners agreed to consider a special meeting if necessary. 6)​ Review the Fairfield Town Sign Ordinance The commissioners reviewed and discussed proposed changes to the town's sign ordinance. Key points of discussion included: 1.​ Clarifying where different types of signs are allowed in various zones. 2.​ Adding definitions for barrier fences and shielding fences. 3.​ Discussing height restrictions for directional signs, with suggestions to increase the maximum height from 4 feet to 6 or 8 feet. 4.​ Consider the addition of a square footage restriction for directional signs. 5.​ Discussing the need for visual examples or diagrams of sign types in the ordinance. 4 of 5  Approved Meeting Minutes Fairfield Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 5, 2024 The commissioners decided to table this item and move it to the next planning and zoning meeting for further review. They requested that staff incorporate the discussed changes and bring back an updated draft for consideration. 7)​ Review and approve the Light Industrial West Zone. The commissioners conducted a detailed review of the proposed Light Industrial West Zone ordinance. They discussed and made adjustments to various sections, including: 1.​ Use table: Added and refined uses, including discussions on accessory uses, car washes, flagpoles, and schools. 2.​ Setbacks: Incorporated fire marshal recommendations and added language to allow for more significant setbacks when necessary. 3.​ Building height: Reviewed and approved maximum height requirements. 4.​ Outdoor storage: Refined language regarding screening requirements. 5.​ Utilities: Added requirements for underground electrical service drops and other utility lines. After extensive discussion and refinement, the commission felt comfortable with the revised ordinance. Commissioner Lancaster motioned to approve the Light Industrial West Zone and recommend to the Town Council with a positive review. Commissioner Strong seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Taylor - Yes Commissioner Strong - Yes Commissioner Riet - Yes Commissioner Lancaster - Yes Commissioner Fisher - Yes Commissioner Lancaster thanked the commissioners for their work and encouraged future members to improve upon their efforts. Adjournment Agenda Item #18- Adjourn the Planning Commission Regular Session. Commissioner Lancaster made a motion to end the meeting. Commissioner Riet seconded the motion. The meeting's end time was 9:59 pm. April 9, 2025​​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Stephanie Shelley Minutes Approval Date Stephanie Shelley Recorder/Clerk 5 of 5