Planning Commission

Minutes of the Millcreek Planning Commission October 16, 2024 5:00 p.m. Regular Meeting The Planning Commission of Millcreek, Utah, met in a regular public meeting on Wednesday, October 16, 2024, at City Hall, located at 1330 E. Chambers Avenue, Millcreek, Utah 84106. The meeting was conducted electronically and live streamed via the City's website with an option for online public coinrnent. PRESENT: Commissioners City Staff Shawn LaMar, Chair Elyse Sullivan, City Recorder Victoria Reid, Vice Chair Kurt Hansen, Facilities Director Steven Anderson Jake Green, Development Review Specialist Christian Larsen Carlos Estudillo, Planner Nils Per Lofgren (excused) Sean Murray, Planner Jacob Richardson Brad Sanderson, Current Planning Manager Diane Soule Dwayne Vance Ian Wright Attendees: Joe Denker (electronic), Alecia Dittmore, Jutta Gellersen, Les Essig, Mario Ramos, James Lund, Jane Griffith, John & Ainy Garff, Mike Glauser, Greg Smith, Paul Ehlert, Eliza Ungricht, Ted & Leslie Zacharias, Todd Hauber, Chris Bick, Mike Ferguson, Shannon Langman, Leslie Blackham REGULAR MEETING - 5:00 p.m. TIME COMMENCED - 5:00 p.m. Chair LaMar called the meeting to order and read a statement describing the duties of the Planning Commission. 1. Commission Business 1.1 0ath of Office for Jacob Richardson The city recorder administered the oath of office to Corni'nissioner Richardson. 2. Public Hearings 2.1 Consideration of SDA-24-004, Request to Amend the Boundaries of the Primosic Subdivision to Increase the Yard Size Location: 3122 S 900 E Applicant: Dakota Janes Planner: Sean Murray Sean Murray said the existing subdivision was approved in 1995 by Salt Lake County. The application is to adjust the boundary lines to increase the yard area with no plans for development. The property is in a flag lot fori'nation, He showed the commission the existing Mfflcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 2 of 12 and proposed subdivision plats. He said staff recomi'nended the coi'ni'nission grant preliminary approval of the subdivision amendment. The applicant declined to coininent. ChairLaMar operted the public hearing. There were no corninents. Chair LaMar closed the public hearing. Commissioner Reid, based on the findings and conclusions in the staff report, moved that the Planning Commission grant preliminary approval of the subdivision amendment SDA- 24-004. Commissioner Larsen seconded. Chair LaMar called for the vote. Chair LaMar voted yes, Commissioner Reid voted yes, Commissioner Anderson voted yes, Commissioner Larsen voted yes, Commissioner Richardson voted yes, Commissioner Soule voted yes, Commissioner Vance voted yes, and Commissioner Wright voted yes. The motion passed unanimously Jutta Gellersen interjected that she did not understand what was being proposed. Murray said the applicant bought the property behind their existing lot to expand the yard space. There was no development being proposed. 2.2 Consideration of EX-24-002, Request for an Exception from the Standards in Title 14 of the Millcreek Code of Ordinance that Requires New Development to Install Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter Location: 3501 S 2700 E Applicant: Chris Bick Planner: Carlos Estudillo Carlos Estudillo said the applicant was acting on behalf of John Garff, the property owner. The subject property, 4.155 acres, has two frontages, on Brookburn Road and 2700 East. The applicant is looking to subdivide the property into two lots. Millcreek code requires certain improvements to be installed with any new development, liowever there is code that provides for an exception to these improvements. Estudillo read from code 14.12.150, "In cases where unusual topographical, aesthetic, or other exceptional conditions or circumstances exist, variations or exceptions to the requirements or this chapter may be approved by the mayor after receiving recommendations from the planning commission and the public works director; provided, that the variations or exceptions are not detrimental to the public safety or welfare." Millcreek's Transportation Master Plan (TMP) requires Brookburn Road to be built as a local roadway with a right-of-way (ROW) width of 50 feet which would include 25 feet of asphalt and 2.5 feet of curb and gutter, a 5 foot park strip, and a 4 foot sidewalk on both sides of Brookburn Road. This application would only be responsible for the improvements from the centerline of Brookburn to the north. Millcreek's TMP requires 2700 East to be built as a ininor collector with a ROW width of 50 feet which would include 41 feet of asphalt, 2.5 feet of curb and gutter, a 5 foot park strip, and a 4 foot sidewalk on both sides of 2700 East. This application would only be responsible for the improvements from the centerline of 2700 East to the proposed property line of the subject property. The elevated sidewalk located at 2700 East is part of the Upland Terrace School and Wasatch Jr. High Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program; therefore, it is critical to keep and maintain the currently established wall and its sidewalk. Brookburn Road is part of the Wasatch Jr. High Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 3 of 12 SRTS program; therefore, the installation of a sidewalk and other improvements to Brookburn Road would achieve the goal of improving safety in the areas surrounding schools. Estudillo reported on tlie current state of the property. According to the applicant, the wall on 2700 East was built approximately 70 years ago (south end), to matcli a nearly 100-year-old wall at the north end of the street. This winding portion of 2700 East is composed of two lanes (one in each direction). Given the current circumstances, the existing wall and landscaping has historically functioned as a barrier between vehicles and pedestrians Widening the road to meet the current adopted standards would also create a safe environi'nent for vehicles and pedestrians. The property frontage abutting 2700 East currently has an elevated park strip and sidewalk, which are retained by a rock wall, extending approximate 515 feet in length. There is no curb and gutter parallel to and abutting 2700 East. Millcreek's code would require removal of the retaining wall and widening of the public ROW to confori'n with the 66 foot (33 foot half width) Minor Collector cross section as recominended by the TMP. The wall currently sits anywhere between 18 and 8 feet within the TMP's required ROW. He showed the commission images of the 2700 E wall and sidewalk current conditions. Estudillo reported there is sidewalk on the north and south side of Brookburn Road which continues to the east and connects to Craig Dr. If the sidewalk is installed per the requirements of Millcreek code 19.76.210 there would be 500 feet between sidewalk connections, on the north side of Brookburn that would complete a continuous sidewalk from Craig Drive to 2700 E. There is a sidewalk along a portion of the south side of Brookburn Road, except for a 265-foot portion iinmediately east of 2700 East and an additional 465 feet further east of Tanner Garden Court. Other improvements, including possible ROW may also need to be considered. As it pertains to the portion of property abutting Brookburn Road, tliere are storm drain inlets, hydrants, power poles, and other existing infrastructure already within what would be the future ROW. The location of these would seem to indicate the north side of Brookburn Road is intended for a future curb/gutter, sidewalk and park strip improvements, if and when, the property ever develops or when the city has sufficient funds to install such improvements. The Salt Lake County parcel maps show a 50 foot public ROW on Brookburn, but the applicants survey shows the property line extending south over Brookburn Road. Staff finds that this is not a case where unusual topographical or aesthetic conditions or circumstances exist for an exception to be recommended, as improvements would be required to be installed in any other road located in Millcreek that may share the satne "aesthetics." Staff has not found a topographical condition, such as slopes over 30% or exceptional conditions/circumstances, such as drainage issues, which would impede the applicant from installing the required improvements. Therefore, curb, gutter, park strip, sidewalk, asphalt and property dedication will be required by the Public Works Department. Planning staff notes that the installation of curb and sidewalk may cause the removal of up to 11 mature trees along Brookburn. These trees may be an "other exceptional condition or circumstance" that warrants additional consideration. Estudillo showed pictures of the existing conditions of Brookburn Road. Estudillo noted widening the road and installing improvements on Brookburii per the TMP requirements could help clear up obstructions that are currently within the proposed ROW allowing for better line of sight where Brookburn curves. According to the provided ALTA Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 4 of 12 survey, the portion of Brookburn Road abutting the main parcel being proposed for development has a length of 577 feet (approx.) and an elevation change of 36 feet (approx.) which is an average slope of 6.5%. According to Millcreek's code (MKC 14.12.090) streets are allowed to have slopes up 10%. Brookburn Road does narrow further east beyond the portion of property being considered for development and does have a significant elevation change on the north side where slope may need to be addressed prior to the installation of the required improvements. Estudillo read the East Mill Creek Coiui'nunity Council's recoinmendation on the application from tlieir meeting on October 3, 2024. The council unanimously recommended to: a Not install improvements along the north side of Brookburn, but to work with the neighbors and staff to find an alternative means of instalIing sidewalk in areas along the south side which may include property acquisition and piping a ditch with additional discussion to install speed bumps and possibly consider making Brookburn a one-way street. a Grant the exception on 2700 East without the protective curb, contrary to the public works director's recoinmendation. Estudillo provided the Millcreek Public Works Director's recoi'nu'nendation for 2700 E and Brookburn Road. The existing narrow bend located along this particular section of 2700 East does create somewhat of an "unusual" circumstance or condition. The historic nature of the existing decorative rock retaining wall located along 2700 East also has an unusual aspect as both an aesthetic feature as well as a safety measure for botli pedestrians and vehicles by slowing down vehicles and creating an elevated separation for pedestrians. Staff recoinmend a 6 inch curb wall in lieu of the required 2.5 foot curb and gutter. The 6 inch curb wall would need to follow APWA standard 209 type P and be installed contiguously with the retaining wall to assist in the preservation and protection of the wall from being damaged from vehicles and/or through maintenance such as snow removal from snowplows. The Millcreek Public Works Director recoinmended to not grant an exception or deferral to install improvements (i.e. sidewalk, park strip, curb, gutter, etc.) on the north side of Brookburn Road, due to the lack of evidence from the applicant that there is any "unusual" topographical, aesthetic, or other exceptional conditions or circumstances which would warrant an exception. Staff are aware of the safety concerns that already exist in this area and are concerned that any exception or deferral of improvements could be detrimental to the public safety and welfare of the residents that use the ROW in this area. The improvements would need to be installed per the local street cross section, shown in the 2019 Transportation Master Plan. Millcreek Planning Staff notes that the existing mature trees along the applicant's property frontage on the north side of Brookburn may constitute as an "other exceptional condition" that may warrant additional review. Plarming staff believes that, in light of this condition, a defeml agreement may be warranted in this instance, to provide the certainty that Millcreek could accomplish a sidewalk along the frontage, if it chose to pursue a sidewalk project along the north side of Brookburn Road. A deferral agreement would allow the mature trees to remain in place now and could potentially give the city an opportunity to consider design alternatives that would preserve the existing vegetation along Brookburn Road. Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 5 of 12 Estudillo showed an image of a type P 6 inch curb wall. Jake Green said the 6 inch curb would help to protect the wall, particularly from snowplows. The city has an interest in protecting the historic wall. The curb would be directly placed against the wall on 2700 E. Commissioner Soule expressed concern over the narrow road of 2700 E and adding the 6 inch curb. Green stated multiple chapters in code required the improvement. Estudillo highlighted public safety. Green said code required sidewalk, curb, and gutter and highlighted tliat the usable sidewalk on 2700 E did not meet code. Coinmissioner Richardson asked if the city knew if snowplows had chipped the wall previously. Green was not aware of any. Commissioner Richardson asked who would be responsible for the damage if it happened. Green said property owners were responsible for improvements in front of their home. He noted Salt Lake County had previously attempted to get funding to install curb, gutter, and sidewalk and widen 2700 E to make it safer, but did not due to the public outcry about removing the wall. Coininissioner Reid asked if there was an inventory of the mature trees on Brookburn. Estudillo said no. Chair LaMar asked about the definition of a "side path." Estudillo said a side path was a recommendation from the community council, there was no code to back it. (3reen said a path of that nature would not be within the right-of-way, but on private property with an easement. Chair LaMar wondered if it could be considered as part of the parkstrip. Green reiterated the application was an exception for curb, gutter, and sidewalk. He was concerned that if the corninission deferred or exempted improvements, this may be the last chance to get sidewalk in this area. The TMP requires a sidewalk on both sides of Brookburn Road. The plan dictates streets for sidewalks, not whicli side of the street they should be on. Comt'nissioner Anderson asked how much asphalt was needed to meet standards. Green said it was minimal to none. Coinmissioner Anderson asked if the curb and gutter could be right next to the dirt path/sidewalk. Green said it could be explored but trees and utilities would need to be removed. Chris Bick, Kimley Horn, agreed with the East Mill Creek Corni'nunity Council's recoinmendation to put sidewalk on the south side of the street and leave the 2700 E wall alone. He said further north Brookbum Road narrows to 16 feet and has a 48% slope. He said Brookburn Road was a country lane, aiid the neighbors and owners did not want a sidewalk but would rather see the sidewalk on the south side of tlie street. He said the property owners liad expressed full intentions to make something the community wants, not just the standard section required by code. The topographic concerns and aesthetic nature of the road align with the reasoning to allow the exception with the coininunity council's conditions. Chair LaMar opened the public hearing. Mike Glauser, Brookburn Road, supported the variance to the sidewalk requirements. He noted he had many children (as a point of considering road safety). He felt adding curbing to the wall on 2700 E would create a hazard. He said the current property owners had always maintained the wall. He supported the community council's recommendation except for the one way road suggestion. He felt adding speed bumps, lowering the speed limit, and/or finishing the sidewalk on the south side of Brookburn made sense. He noted the end of the street was very steep. Mincreek Planning Comnnssion Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 6 of 12 Paul Ehlert, Brookburn Road, said there were five homes on the south side of Brookburn that did not have sidewalk, curb, or gutter. A sidewalk there made more sense for school access. When liis building permit was issued by the county in 2000, curb, gutter, and sidewalk was required. When it came time to install it, it was discovered that there was an irrigation and stori'n drain ditch just below the surface where the curb would have to go, so they were not required to install the improvements. In 2019 when they got a pen'nit from Millcreek to build a guesthouse, those improvements were still required but they were granted an exception. He said people choose to walk on Brookburn for the aesthetic nature. He did not want a one way street or speedbumps. A speed radar sign seems to be a better option to slow traffic, as it is used elsewhere in the neighborhood. He suggested Craig Drive be used as the SRTS. James Lund, Brookburn Road, supported the Garffs and their efforts. He did not feel the regulatory code fit the historic street being discussed. It would be a shame to widen Brookburn Road. The wider the streets, the faster the traffic. He felt the community council's recoini'nendations should be adopted. He did not want the 6 inch curb on the wall. Chair LaMar read online corninents from the city's website. Laurie Potter and Jay Leslie: 'My wife, Laurie Potter, and I are the neighbors directly rth of the Garfffamily on 2700 East. Wesupport their requestfor a variance to to requirements of adding curb and gutter to their properties. My wife's fctmily has owned our property for the last 130 years, beginning with her Grandfather James O. Smith. Weshare a propeMy line with the Garffs and their historic Roclc Wall on the east side of 2700 East was built at the same time as our Rock Wall. At the time of the wall's initial construction, both properties were owned by my wife's Grandfather, and his first wife Francine Neff Smith. This shared history and Roclc Wall are important to our fctmily's history and traditions, as well as the Garffs. Please approve their requestfor this variance, and allow both of our families to retain the historic nature of our properties." Matt Davis: "Hello, I understand the requestfor exception, but in gerteral Brookburrx is not a safe road for walking etc. it is very narrow in spots and there are not enough sidewalks or even one street light. Is there a way to preserve the GarfJfproperty, but add more sidewalks on the south side of the street?" Mike Fetguson said the Garffs were quality people and had concern for the community. He did not think the curb on the wall was a good idea. He liked the community council recoininendation. Ai'ny Garff, 3501 S 2300 E, thanked her neighbors for voicing their opinions at the community council meeting. She thanked the city for the system in how people could voice their opinion and staff for their discussions. She said she and her husband had crafted a proposal they felt would work for everyone and noted she had sent it to Brad Sanderson. She thanked the commission for their consideration. Chair LaMar closed the public hearing. Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 7 of 12 Brad Sanderson said there was a difference between an exception and a deferral. The application was for an exception, and that should be based on code. He wondered about property ownership changing and continued maintenance of the wall. The improvement exception is narrowly about the subject property and the portion to be subdivided, not the topography of the road elsewhere. The community council got caught up in designing the road instead of what the application was about. If something "unusual" is determined to exist, then that needs to be figured out. The Garffs are willing to help with a safe route on the south side of the street but there were unknowns about the south side of the road at that point in time. He asked the commission to focus their discussion on whether there were unusual circumstances that warranted an exception per code. The defenal of improvements would allow the city to revisit improvements at the property in the future but the opportunity to get sidewalk was with this application. Coinmissioner Reid asked about tlie exception granted on the south side of Brookburn. Ehlert said it was not a fori'nal written exception. Commissioner Anderson said the rock wall is historical and unusual. He did not know if the curb would undennine the wall. He noted the sidewalk on 2700 E was only accessible by Brookburn. He wondered if steps could be incorporated to get up onto the sidewalk from Hillside Lane. He did not want anything else to happen to 2700 E and thought the sidewalk should go on the south side of Brookburn. He wondered why the sidewalk exception could not be a deferral. Coinmissioner Richardson asked what the linear sidewalk comparison would be from the north to the south side. Green did not know. Corninissioner Richardson wondered how the agreement to install sidewalk on the south side would work in this process. Green said staff did not know what the south of the street looked like yet, staff had to assume it was being installed on the north side. Corni'nissioner Richardson asked how the Garffs would be held to the commitment of installing sidewalk on the south side of the street. Green did not recommend installing sidewalks on the south side of the street because it had not yet been vetted by staff. Corni'nissioner Wright felt a decision could not be made because of the unknowns about the south side of the street. Estudillo said the commission needed to make a recommendation to the mayor on code 14.12.150, to grant or not grant an exception. Coi'nmissioner Vance said 2700 E met all three conditions: topographical, aesthetic, or exceptional circumstances. He did not feel Brookburn Road met any of them. Whether or not the south side of Brookburn Road was a better option for improvements was irrelevant. Corni'nissioner Soule did not want to touch 2700 E and was in favor of a deferral instead of an exception on Brookburn. She wanted to encourage kids to walk on Craig Drive to and from school. Coi'nmissioner Wright said the cornrnission could not direct people where to walk. Commissioner Larsen commended the community for the respectful manner in which discussions had taken place. He said the subject property was unique in Millcreek. He echoed the sentiments of the other cornrnissioners. He felt community input could be considered an exceptional circumstance. Chair LaMar felt the mature trees on Brookburn could be an exceptional circumstance. Sanderson recommended the commission make a recommendation on the exception with suggestions, such as the planning staffs note on the trees on Brookburn or potential options for design on the south side of the street. Commissioner Reid pointed out the commission Mfflcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 8 of 12 needed to follow the TMP and represent the whole city. Corni'nissioner Anderson did not feel the curb would work against the wall functionally or aesthetically. Commissioner Vance moved, with respect to application file number EX-24-002, that the Planning Commission recommend the mayor grant the exception as it pertains to 2700 East, with the suggestion to leave that wall alone (no curb or anything else), and that the Planning Commission recommend that the mayor deny the exception with respect to Brookburn, but with the suggestion to not necessarily require sidewalk there, but to look at all of the options as far as the designs go, potential deferral, [or] sidewalk potentially up next to the curb. The recommendation is to deny the exception but take into account all of the input and conaboration to try and find the ultimate solution. Commissioner Larsen seconded. Chair LaMar called for the vote. Chair LaMar voted yes, Commissioner Reid voted yes, Commissioner Anderson voted yes, Commissioner Larsen voted yes, Commissioner Richardson voted yes, Commissioner Soule voted yes, Commissioner Vance voted yes, and Commissioner Wright voted yes. The motion passed unanimously The comi'nission took a break from 7:00-7:09pm 2.3 Consideration of SD-24-009, Request to Subdivide a Mixed-Use Development, Composed of 31 Townhome Residential Units and Approximately 1,500 Square Feet of Commercial Space, in the C-2/R-M Zone Location: 4350 S 900 E Applicant: Joseph Denker Planner: Carlos Estu Carlos Estudillo said the request for a major subdivision consisted of 31 townhome units. The primary purpose of the subdivision is to create coinmon and limited common space as well as private ownership areas. In December 2022 the Planning Coinmission approved the conditional use permit (CU-22-015). The project is currently under construction. If approved and upon recordation, the applicant would be required to record private governing documents such as bylaws and CC&Rs. There are three types of units, all two bedrooms. The property is zoned RM and C2. Estudillo reviewed is findings of the application. 1. The site layout, architecture, and landscaping have already been approved by the Planning Comi'nission on December 22, 2022. 2. There were no changes to the original plans and all conditions of approval are met per the teccal review conducted by city staff. 3. On April 10, 2024, the applicant received a final approval letter from the Planning and Zoning staff, finalizing the technical review process and initiating the building perinit process. 4. The applicant has successfully submitted building plans, and the project is currently under constnuction. 5. The property includes four buildings which were approved by the Planning Corni'nission in 2 . a a while the third and fourth building is composed of 7 units. A fifth building houses 2 units and the commercial aspect of the proposal for atotal of 31 units. 6. Property dedication and all public iinprovements were completed prior to, or at the time when the buildings were/are in construction. 7. The proposed plat shows all existing and proposed shared access, parking, and utility easements, which will be recorded as part of the subdivision plat; along with all other private governing documents commonly associated with condominium (i.e., bylaws, CC&R's, etc.). Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 9 of 12 He concluded the following: 1. The site plan and conditional use pen'nit were already approved by the Planning Comi'nission in 2022, and no changes are being made other than the subdividing of property into parcels or units, to provide the option for individual ownership. 2. The proposal complies with the requirements set forth in the subdivision code and the underlying Coinrnercial (C-2) and Multi-Family Residential (R-M) zones. 3. No detriments have been identified by staff pertaining to this specific application and therefore no conditions of approval are detern'iined as being necessary. 4. The plat will create shared access, parking, public utility, and other related easements necessary for the development to function as a subdivision. Governing bylaws will be private and are required to be recorded at the time the plat is recorded. 5. ThedevelopmentmeetsallrequirementsnecessaryforsubdivisionperMillcreek's subdivision code as listed within Title 18. 6. All necessary iinprovements were proposed and approved by staff through technical review and no new infrastructure or other improvements are being proposed as part of this application. Estudillo recommended approval of the subdivision. Cornrnissioner Vance confirmed that the project was not changing. Les Essig, partner on project, said they were working through the subdivision process due to market conditions; it is better to do a for sale than for rent product. ChairLaMar opened the public hearing. Mike Glauser supported the subdivision for the townhomes to be sold individually and not as a single rental unit because he felt the city needs more affordable, for sale housing. Shannon Langman, Rowley Street, expressed concern about increased traffic with new residents. Ted Zacharias said speed and parking on Rowley Street was of concern. Leslie Blackham expressed concern about parking. She did not oppose the development. Greg Smith, Rowley Street, enioyed the recent construction on 900 East slowing down traffic on Rowley. He expressed concerri with traffic. ChairLaMar closed the public hearing. Chair LaMar said the application to build the development took place two years ago and traffic and parking was viewed then. This application was just to change the status of renter to owner-occupancy. Estudillo said a traffic study was performed and a no parking lane on the south side of Rowley was included in the project approval in 2022. Any mitigation on Rowley now is not within the scope of this application. Smith said 785 E to the east had no sidewalks. He was concerned with street parking and walking on the street there. Commissioner Soule noted the city was working on a sidewalk master plan. She recoinmended Smith provide feedback on the plan for desired sidewalks in his neighborhood. Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 10 of 12 Commissioner Larsen moved that the Planning Commission approve the major subdivision application ffle number SD-24-009, based on the findings and conclusions as presented by staff. Commissioner Vance seconded. Chair LaMar called for the vote. Chair LaMar voted yes, Commissioner Reid voted yes, Commissioner Anderson voted yes, Commissioner Larsen voted yes, Commissioner Richardson voted yes, Commissioner Soule voted yes, Commissioner Vance voted yes, and Commissioner Wright voted yes. The motion passed unanimously. 2.4 Consideration of ZT-24-017, Request for a Zone Text Amendment to Modify the Millcreek Code of Ordinances Chapter 19.62A, Olympus Hills West -Village Special District (OHW-VSD) as it Pertains to Building Height, Setbacks, and Other Design Criteria Applicant: Chris Zarek Planner: Brad Sanderson Brad Sanderson said the applications (2.4 and 2.5) were published for the meeting agenda without Cowboy Partners providing a polished project, so he would provide a igh level overview of what was being proposed. He reviewed site plans for property at 3942 S Wasatch Boulevard. The applicants would be requesting a 17 foot setback instead of 20 feet on Wasatcli Boulevard and a 4 foot from 20 foot on the west side to move the building closer to the west property line to avoid installing a retaining wall. The applicants also want to change the corner (northeast to southeast) from which building height is to be measured to allow for greater height for building articulation. He recomi'nended a continuance of the applications. Chair LaMar questioned the height changes. Sanderson mentioned the final proposal had not yet been presented to staff. Chair LaMar noted the southeast corner was the highest part of the parcel, not the northeast as initially thought. Commissioner Vance wondered if the main building height could be set at a certain height with articulations spelled out so the whole building did not increase in height. Sanderson said something could be added to a development agreement. Chair LaMar opened thepublic hearing for ZM-24-001 and ZT-24-01 7. Elyse Sullivan noted an online coinrnent had been received from Craig Weir. "In 2023, after multiple public meetings our Mayor and City Council unanimously approved the re-zoning of the Olympus Hills West - Village Special District properties. On Jan. 9, 2024 ourMayor and City Council voted unanimously to give the Porsche Dealership located in the Olympus pills West - hllage SpecialDistrict a 20-year 90% property tax reduction and a 25% saies tax give back. Does the Mayor and City Council plan on giving the same 20-year deal to Cowboy Partners for their residential commercial development at 4074 South WasatchBlvd. in the Olympus Hills West - Village Special District?" Chair La%ar noted Francis Lilly had responded to the corni'nent via email. ChairLaMar closed the public hearing. Commissioner Reid asked why the caliper of trees would change from 3 to 2 inches and why there was a desire for more than only wall signs in the coinrnercial area. Sanderson said the standard is a 2 inch caliper, it is easier to transport, and it grows faster than a larger caliper tree. Sanderson said the intent of only allowing wall signs was to not clutter Wasatch Mfflcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 11 of 12 Boulevard with a proliferation of signs. He recoinmended the applicant discuss signs with the coinmission at the next meeting. Commissioner Soule asked how much space would be between the west side of the building and the I-215 bridge if the setback was reduced to 4 feet. Sanderson estimated 80-100 feet. Commissioner Vance wondered if 4 feet was enough to maintain the back of the building. Sanderson wondered if there would be a maintenance agreement with UDOT to be on their property. Commissioner Soule moved for continuation of ZT-24-017 and ZM-24-011. Commissioner Larsen seconded. Chair LaMar called for the vote. Chair LaMar voted yes, Commissioner Reid voted yes, Commissioner Anderson voted yes, Commissioner Larsen voted yes, Commissioner Richardson voted yes, Commissioner Soule voted yes, Commissioner Vance voted yes, and Commissioner Wright voted yes. The motion passed unanimously 2.5 Consideration of ZM-24-011, Request to Enter into a Subsidiary Development Agreement Through a Rezone Application as it Pertains to an Office, Restaurant, and Residential Mixed-Use Development being Proposed, as a Second Phase to the OHW- VSD Zone Location: 3942 S Wasatch Boulevard (immediately north of the approved Porche Dealership) Applicant: Chris Zarek with Cowboy Partners Planner: Brad Sanderson Item continued. 1. Commission Business Continued 1.2 Approval of September 18, 2024 Regular Meeting Minutes Chair LaMar moved to approve the September 18, 2024, minutes as presented in the packet. Commissioner Soule seconded. Chair LaMar called for the vote. Chair LaMar voted yes, Commissioner Reid voted yes, Commissioner Anderson voted yes, Commissioner Larsen voted yes, Commissioner Richardson abstained, Commissioner Soule voted yes, Commissioner Vance voted yes, and Commissioner Wright voted yes. The motion passed. 1.3 Updates from the Planning and Zoning Director Sanderson mentioned an upcoming conference. 3. Calendar of Upcoming Meetings * City Council Mtg. 10/28/24 7:00 p.m. @ Mt. Olyinpus Community Council Mtg., 1 1/4/24, 6:00 p.m. * Millcreek Community Council Mtg., I 1/5/24, 6:30 p.m. @ Canyon Rim Citizens Association Mtg., 1 1/6/24, 6:30 p.m. * East Mill Creek Coinmunity Council Mtg.,l 1/7/24, 7:00 p.m. * City Council Mtg. 1 1/12/24 (Tuesday), 7:00 p.m. @ Historic Preservation Commission Mtg., 1 1/14/24, 6:00 p.m. * Planning Coinmission Mtg. 1 1/20/24, 5:00 p.m. Commissioner Richardson introduced himself to the commission. ADJOURNED: Commissioner Larsen moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:58 p.m. Commissioner Wright seconded. Chair hair LaMar voted ycs, Millcreek Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 16 0ctober 2024 Page 12 of 12 Commissioner Reid voted yes, Commissioner Anderson voted yes, Commissioner Larsen voted yes, Commissioner Richardson voted yes, Commissioner Soule voted yes, Commissioner Vance voted yes, and Commissioner Wright voted yes. The motion passed unanimously. 4 / '¥'4" APPROVED: ShawnLaMar,Chair 2 Date /,Az lx-// Attest: !an, Recorder