Heber City Corporation75 North Main Street

Heber City, Utah

Planning Commission MeetingNovember 13, 2018

6:00 p.m.REGULAR MEETING

The Planning Commission of Heber City, Wasatch County, Utah, met in Regular Meeting, on November 13, 2018, in the City Council Chambers in Heber City, Utah

I. CALL TO ORDER:

Planning Commission Chairman Kieth Rawlings called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.

II. ROLL CALL:

Present: Kieth Rawlings, ChairmanDarek Slagowski, Vice Chairman Dave Richards Commissioner (excused at 6:58 p.m.)Ryan Stack, Commissioner Oscar Covarrubias, Commissioner Stacie Ferguson, CommissionerDennis Gunn, Commissioner (excused at 7:30)

Staff Present: City Planner Jamie Baron, City Planner Tony Kohler, City Engineer Bart Mumford, Planning Administrative Assistant Meshelle Kijanen

Others Present: David L. Hutchinson, Stewart E. Smith, Jami Oram, Shawn Oram, Ray J Hutchinson, Mike Weilermann, Glen Lent, Brett Walker, Wendy Smith, Troy Johnson, Todd Anderson, Rachel Kohler, Kristen Bybee, Kent Bybee, Francis Stell, Laural North, Steve North, Rena Bucah, Peter Keyworth, D.G. Ottoson, Syndi Fitzgerald, Shelly Olsen, Heidi Franco, Cam Spruil, W. Kirby, Deberah Stenger, Richard Getz, Ben Fitzgerald, Stephanie Potempa; Brian Prince, Ryan Lobb

III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Dave Richards

IV. MINUTES:

Chairman Rawlings moved the minute’s approval to the end of the meeting.

1

12345678

910

111213

141516171819202122232425

262728293031

323334

35

36

37

38

Agenda items:

1. Public Hearing to consider a General Plan Map Amendment from Planned Community to Highway Commercial, High Density Residential/Clustered Open Space and Low Density Residential for property located between 1500 North to 2000 North Highway 40 and Highway 40 to 600 East, known as the VXC-Hutchinson Annexation.

Chairman Rawlings asked Mr. Kohler to present the Staff Reports and explain the Public Hearing General Plan Amendment consideration.

Mr. Kohler stated there were two agenda items regarding the VXC project. First the General Plan Amendment request and secondly a request for the Planning Commission to provide a recommendation on the proposed annexation. Mr. Kohler continued, earlier in the spring the City received a Petition from the Hutchison, Cummings and Kohler properties for an annexation to the west of the Cove in Valley Hills. The City Council had met with the Petitioner but zoning was the primary concern. The City’s Annexation Policy Plan required the Planning Commission to review all Annexation Petitions. Also, the Public Hearing was to analyze a possible different zoning option than what was identified in the General Plan. The current General Plan was adopted in September of this year and one of the big changes was to make a lower density of two units per acre next to the Cove of Valley Hills. The new request by the Petitioner was to propose a Commercial (C-2) Zoning along the highway to include the property which has been used as a nursery. The C-2 Zoning permits most retail service and office type buildings such as what was along Heber City Main Street. In addition, to use the Residential (R3) with a Clustered Open Space Zone (COSZ) which would permit twelve units per acre and permit townhomes and condominiums. The R-3 Zone was 6500 square foot lots approximately four to five units per acre and detached single dwelling homes. The R-1 Zone adjoining the Cove at Valley Hills was about three and one half units per acre, which was the same density as the Cove at Valley Hills.

Mr. Covarrubias asked if Residential was allowed on top of the Commercial, Mr. Kohler answered affirmative.

Mr. Kohler continued the idea was to have higher density near the highway and then taper down the density going towards the Cove at Valley Hills thereby matching the R-1 density to the Cove at Valley Hills.

Mr. Rawlings opened the Public Hearing asking all who speak to state their name and then their comments.

Stephanie Potempa stated she would like more understanding of the reason for the Public Hearing.

2

1

2345

67

89

101112131415161718192021222324

2526

272829

3031

3233

34

Mr. Kohler explained the Public Hearing was the Planning Commissions opportunity to hear from the public on their thoughts on changing the General Plan. The Planning Commission provides a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will then hold a Public Hearing and will accept or reject the Planning Commission’s recommendation. It would be anticipated the City Council may need to hold additional meetings to make a decision. As the Developers have already met with City Council, the concerns were regarding coming to a clear idea of how to zone the area and which would be the best solution. The City Council has engaged a Consultant to analyze the market and feasibility for Commercial and Residential land use in the area to what makes the most sense. Mr. Kohler continued the results of the study are not complete yet but after the Planning Commission hears from the public, they can make a recommendation, modify the recommendation or continue the hearing to a future meeting.

Mr. Kohler asked the Petitioner to join the table and explain the intent to the public. Mr. Brian Prince with Ivory Homes and Mr. Glen Lent with Alpine Development came forward to join the conversation.

Mr. Rawlings reminded the public the hearing was still open but they would first allow comments from the Petitioner. Mr. Prince stated the Annexation Proposal was based on working with the Planning Department Staff, with the Planning Commission and with the City Council over the last year. Mr. Prince continued stating an analysis had shown the growth rate over the next twenty years showed an additional 10,000 people in Heber City, which defines the need for additional housing. Additionally, the home ownership in Heber City was going down and the renter population was increasing, perhaps due to the lack of housing or housing not achievable with the average resident in Heber City. The median income in Heber City vs. Wasatch County as of 2016 was a little over $60,000.00 which gives a clear picture regarding the demands of the residence and what type of development was needed in the area.

Mr. Prince believed a single-family detached new home would be in the high $400,000.00 range according to the data he had seen, which would be very expensive to the median income in the Heber City market. The data had led the Petitioner to the current land use plan. Mr. Prince added implementing the C-2 Zone into the land use plan had been instructions from the City Council. Additionally the R-3 with COSZ option was not to build multi-family housing or apartments in this project, rather it would be homes and townhomes and to create space that is more open.

Mr. Prince surmised Ivory Homes believed they had found a balance with a product type viable in the market, what the area needs and this would not be low-income housing. Mr. Prince also stated he did not agree with the need for Commercial space in the proposal.

Richard Getz asked where the last slide was located in the area. Mr. Kohler answered it was the new London Development north of Smith’s and the plan was only being discussed, nothing approved at this time.

3

123456789

1011

121314

15161718192021222324

252627282930

313233

343536

Mr. Prince asked if he may have another opportunity to respond after the Public Hearing, Mr. Rawlings stated he would have an opportunity to address the public’s questions and concerns. Mr. Rawlings asked Ms. Potempa if she had any other comments she would like to add. Ms. Potempa asked what will happen with the C-2 area and what was the time frame for the project.

Mr. Prince answered offering a variety of types of homes will make the project go faster and may take around five years. Regarding the C-2 Zone, it would be viable for the same type of Commercial buildings currently seen in Heber City. Mr. Lent added the property was not big enough for a Costco or any big box development. Ms. Potempa asked about stoplights and new entrances to Coyote Lane.

Mr. Kohler responded the City would eventually have stoplights and Coyote Lane would eventually be one of the stop light areas. Sorenson properties do have enough traffic to warrant a stop light and one could be placed eventually. Ms. Potempa asked about the proposed area stating it was currently active farm fields and asked if the land had been sold or was a sale in process. Mr. Prince stated the Hutchinson family owned the property and they are under contract with the Hutchinson family now but do not yet own the land.

Todd Anderson addressed the Planning Commission and asked about the engineering report and had not seen any of the items being started in the report, this was concerning as it appeared the items should have already been completed before the hearing. Mr. Anderson also voiced his concern regarding the last agenda item for the evening to discuss the General Plan Amendment with a timeline set for next year and was concerned how the new General Plan Amendment may affect the decisions made now. Mr. Anderson ended his comments by asking why there was a Builder telling the City how to plan and build.

Rachel Kayler addressed the Planning Commission stating she believed they had been presented with a Zoning Plan from a Developer and not from the Community of Heber City. Ms. Kayler wanted to stress the original plan presented was not Heber City’s zoning, it was the County zoning. Ms. Kayler further stated comparing the Counties North Village Plan to the City’s proposed annexation plan, which had not been approved, was preliminary as it would be another year before we knew what Heber City’s Master Plan and Annexation would look like.

Ms. Kayler added more discussions with more information was needed before the decision was made as the public wants open space, trails, roads and connectivity and the public cares. Ms. Kayler also stated family farms had been working in the area for over seventy years and what would be decided would affect them and their generations. Additionally, Ms Kayler believed the biggest concern amongst the public was apartments being built in the proposed zoning and she knew affordable housing was needed but believed apartments would need to be closer to the City’s main street.

4

1234

56789

101112131415

16171819202122

232425262728

29303132333435

Kristen Bybee addressed the Planning Commission stating she would like to be on record; she agreed with Rachel Kayler and Ms. Bybee believed Ms. Kayler spoke for many of the public in the room but there was more than one opinion.

Rena Bucah addressed the Planning Commission stating she wanted to be on the record; she also supports Rachel Kayler’s comments but she was also concerned about the traffic. Ms. Bicaud added Coyote Lane was dangerous and very hard to make a left hand turn onto the highway and added this development in the area makes her very nervous.

Jami Oram addressed the Planning Commission and asked the Developers if they had values of the properties they would be building, as she was concerned with her homes value. Mr. Prince stated the goal would be for the R-3 with COSZ under $400,000 and in the R-3 it could be the $400,000 to $600,000 range and the R-1 Zone could be the $500,000 to $700,000 range.

Steve North addressed the Planning Commission and asked what will happen to the residents living on the south end of the proposed development. Mr. North stated they are all on septic and wells and wanted to know if they would be forced to change. Mr. Kohler answered if the residents already had working sewer and water they would not need to hook up to the City but if it fails they would then need to hook up to the City.

Mattie Kirby addressed the Planning Commission and stated her concern regarding the road coming in and out of Coyote Lane and wanted to know how big the road was proposed to be and also how the Road would go through Ridge Road. Mr. Kohler responded the North/South road would wrap down around the hill and connect to the City. The size of the roads would be a 72-foot right of way with 50 feet of asphalt. The road would be six feet wider than the road was currently in Valley Hills. Mattie wanted to go on record; she does not understand why there would be a C-2 Zone two or three minutes north of the current City Center.

Mr. Rawlings stated Mr. Richards and Mr. Gunn would be excused from the meeting.

Ryan Lobb addressed the Planning Commission and asked how the road would interface. Mr. Kohler stated the Eastern bypass would go north of Smith’s and north of the Cemetery, through Stone Creek and Red Ledges Development and then down to Center Street. The road would interface with the North and South road on the Developers plan. Mr. Lobb stated it sounded like there would need to be two lights. Mr. Kohler continued the road was not intended to be a bypass but a road to allow locals along the area to get into town.

Ben Fitzgerald addressed the Planning Commission and asked if the roads further to the north or further to the south were to be collector roads. Mr. Kohler answered the roads will be major collectors. The local road will be a 60-foot right of way and the minor collector will be a 66-foot right of way, which would be the same size as Valley Hills Boulevard. Also a major collector which would be a 72-foot right of way and Coyote Lane which would be a major collector and also the road running North to South would be a major collector. Mr. Kohler continued the

5

123

4567

89

1011

1213141516

17181920212223

24

252627282930

313233343536

agreement with Udot was for five collector roads and Coyote Lane would be one of those locations. Mr. Fitzgerald stated he understood the residents liked open space but the people living here needed to keep in mind, if they wanted open space it would need to be purchased and not expected. Mr. Fitzgerald concluded by asking the Commissioners to make sure the roads would be able to handle the development.

Laresa Polin addressed the Planning Commission and stated she was happy the Open Space Bond passed at the last election but understood growth will happen. Ms. Polin stated the C-2 Zoning was her biggest concern and believed it would ruin the feel of the neighborhood to have Commercial spread all along Highway 40 and she believed a gas station and a fast food restaurant would look out of place and disrupt the feeling of their Community. Ms. Polin believed Ivory Homes could build a nice area and didn’t have a problem with the Ivory Homes Development but did not like the Commercial and asked the C-2 Zone be eliminated from this plan.

Mattie Kirby addressed the Planning Commission and asked if the current project being discussed was a County plan, and was told by Mr. Rawlings the current project was the plan of the Developer. Ms. Kirby asked once the property was approved for the General Plan Amendment then could the City make any changes to an approval. Mr. Kohler stated the City had proposed to the Developer single-family low-density home be built next to the Cove and would enter into a Development Agreement to add an additional layer of certainty besides just zoning to make sure both parties stay to their word of what was decided upon. Ms. Kirby stated she understood it was unwise to put together Development Agreements but rather have a strong General Plan for the City and to work from the General Plan.

Mr. Kohler stated Development Agreements should not be used solely however, there were certain issues, which could not be anticipated. As Developers approach the Planning Department with different plans specific to their proposed property, different issues become known not listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Kirby continued Ivory Homes developed an area west of Highway 40 just before Exit 4 into Park City. Ms. Kirby stated these homes were very close together, tall and very unattractive and she would not want that type of design and believed it would devalue the current homes in the Cove and along Valley Hills Boulevard.

Mr. Rawlings asked to close the Public Hearing but said he would entertain comments if someone had not been addressed.

Mr. Rawlings invited Mr Prince to address questions and concerns made by the public. Mr. Prince stated he believed it was important for the public to understand a rezone was not what Ivory Homes was asking for and the property was not currently in the boundaries of the City. Heber City adopted an Annexation Policy Plan earlier in 2018, which identified the property within the Policy Plan. Ivory Homes was proposing the property be annexed into the City limits and through the annexation, an Annexation Agreement (Development Agreement) be signed

6

12345

6789

10111213

141516171819202122

23242526272829

3031

323334353637

designating land uses and zoning. Mr Prince wanted to clarify they were not proposing apartments but rather a low-density development with 3 and 1/2 to 4 units an acre which was somewhat comparable to Valley Hills. Mr. Kohler interjected this was a great example and the sole purpose of a Development Agreement to make sure these numbers stay accurate.

Mr. Prince continued Coyote Lane was a dangerous road and a safer road would be one of the benefits for the residence of this area. Mr. Prince continued he would like to defend the Elected Officials and Staff stating they had been very thoughtful of open space, trails, utility connectivity and encouraged the public to read the City’s General Plan. This project based off the Planning Department and City’s vision and ordinances could have up to four acres of parks and open space in this Development alone. Mr. Prince concluded the City’s Vision and Ordinances were valuable because it allows Developers to know what was required.

Ms. Ferguson asked what the decision was regarding the R-3 vs. the R-2 for the Transition Zone between the R-3 COSZ Zone and the R-1 Zone and why Ivory Homes chose the R-3 vs. R-2. Mr. Prince answered primarily because of the types of lots they wanted to build as they were looking to provide a good size home but not too large as not to overprice the market and the R-3 would allow a beautiful community in which residents could afford.

Ms. Ferguson followed up with asking if Ivory Homes had been working with Mr. Sorenson on the alignment for Coyote Lane. Mr. Lent answered they had been working with Mr. Bradshaw on the alignment and there was also a request made when the North Village overlay was annexed into the City and they had taken care of where the road was going to protect Valley Hills as well. Mr. Prince continued they would realign Coyote Lane on their property and would meet the City collector right of way width. As far as coordinating with Sorenson they had a sense of where their road would be and where Sorenson’s would be located but ultimately Ivory Homes does not control the property.

Mr. Covarrubias asked Mr. Prince if the C-2 was abandoned what would Ivory Homes build in the same location. Mr. Prince answered they would build more Residential (R-3). Ms. Ferguson asked if the current C-2 was eliminated would they be willing to build more R-1 where the R-3 was or change all of the R-3 to R-1 and keep R-3 COZY where the C-2 Zone was currently located. Mr. Prince answered they do not own or control all of the C-2 area but could make some adjustments if it were eliminated. The R-1 could end up being larger due to the topography but Mr. Prince was open to work with Staff once they had an Engineering Plan set to where Ivory Homes could adjust to make the R-3 bigger.

Mr. Covarrubias asked exactly what area Ivory Homes controls. Mr. Prince stated it was about 44 acres on the north side of the existing Coyote Lane and they would be building the higher percentage of the two collector roads and primarily the northern side of the annexation. Mr. Covarrubias asked if Ivory homes does or does not control R-1. Mr. Prince stated they do control the R-1 area. Mr. Kohler assisted in explaining and stated there was two property owners; one

7

1234

56789

1011

1213141516

1718192021222324

2526272829303132

3334353637

was the Cumming’s property. Ivory Homes was looking at the Hutchinson property and the C-2 property belongs to someone else. Mr. Prince clarified they and are not designing two different sub-divisions but were being very thoughtful about the subdivision and the way it was laid out including attention to roads, open space and trails.

Mr. Covarrubias asked who controls the C-2 area. Mr. Lent answered the south part of C-2 was owned by Raylyn Kohler and Scott Keele owns the C-2 up until it has been farmed and from there North was controlled by Ivory Homes. Mr. Covarrubias confirmed Ivory Homes does not have any say over the C-2 area. Mr. Prince confirmed Ivory Homes does not control the C-2 area and further explained Ivory Homes had proposed Residential in the entire area but was directed to add C-2 space.

Mr. Covarrubias asked why the C-2 was in the plans. Mr. Kohler explained because Commercial space brings revenue in higher property taxes as well as potential retail tax. The City Council works to find a balanced approach and to keep property taxes lower the City Council suggested if there was a market for Commercial in the area then Commercial space would need to be part of the proposal. Mr. Kohler continued as Ivory Homes preferred only Residential a compromise was discussed to have a study performed of the area. Mr. Prince explained the study further and stated the agreement between Ivory Homes and the City was to hire a consulting firm, Lewis and Young, to complete a third party analysis to research the Heber City market as a whole. The purpose of the analysis was to provide guidance to City Council and if more or less Commercial development should go in the proposed area.

Mr. Stack asked when the study was to be completed. Mr. Prince stated the study was to be complete by the December 18, 2018 City Council meeting. Mr. Stack continued a Costco, big box development or Gas Station was not wanted but suggested a juice store, bagel store or bookstore and asked was the intent to soften the Commercial or to have no Commercial. Mr. Rawlings asked public attending, by show of hands who wanted Commercial and unanimously the consensus was no Commercial.

Mr. Stack asked if plans had been discussed regarding any other parks inside of the Development besides the water basins. Mr. Lent answered they had discussed other parks and an inviting design. Mr. Covarrubias asked if they had enough water rights for the area, Mr. Lent and Mr. Prince confirmed they do have enough water rights.

Heber City Council Member Heidi Franco addressed the Planning Commission and stated she was from the Heber City Council and had been waiting to speak until she had heard the public comments. Ms. Franco stated she needed to make one correction which was according to the City Code, the City Council was required to follow the Zoning Maps. The maps had always shown the area was Planned Community (PC) with two units per acre. It did not show a Planned Community Mixed Use (PCMU) Zone, even though Staff had understood the area was PCMU.

8

1234

56789

10

11121314151617181920

212223242526

27282930

31

323334353637

Currently if there were two units per acre, in the County there would be one unit per acre yielding a potential of 88 units with the PC Zoning alone.

Ms. Franco stated she appreciated Mr. Prince coming to the Planning Department and continued Mr. Prince was asking for an annexation but with the annexation, he was asking for a rezone. Mr. Prince was asking for 3.7 maybe 4 units per acre, rather than the PC Zoning as the PCMU Zoning would have given him 10 units per acre but the City Council had eliminated the PCMU Zone. Ms. Franco asked how many townhomes could be attached to each other in the R-3 Zone that Ivory Homes was proposing in the COSZ. Mr. Kohler answered there would traditionally be five to six townhomes in a row. Ms. Franco asked Mr. Prince for clarity of the design of the before mentioned townhomes. Mr. Prince answered building townhomes could be an option but the decision had not been made if townhomes would be used. If townhomes would be built, they would only be two to four units long because the topography on site would make it very difficult to build townhomes and because of the topography townhomes may not make sense for the area.

Ms. Franco stated the townhomes may be considered as up to six townhomes in a row was allowable in the R-3 COSZ Zone compared to apartments or condominiums which had been stated were not wanted. Ms. Franco continued regarding the Public Parks which had been suggested and stated she had appreciated Developers implementing trails as there was a Master Trail Plan. Ms. Franco suggested pickle ball courts or other amenities to serve the potentially 170 units and suggested a higher level of amenities. Also to protect the springs Ms. Franco recommended an environmental analysis for the springs be performed, as the project cannot disrupt the neighboring properties and their Grandfathered water rights and asked if Mr. Prince would be willing to have an environmental analysis, Mr. Prince stated he would be willing.

Ms. Franco concluded by stating Ms. Kohler already holds Grandfathered Commercial rights next to US 40 on her property in the County. Ms. Kohler was part of the proposed annexation and she would control what she chooses to do with her Commercial property. Ms. Franco thanked Mr. Rawlings for the time allowed.

Mr. Covarrubias asked Mr. Kohler if the Development Agreement could be written after the Commission makes a recommendation. Mr. Kohler responded the Development Agreement is derived from the Commissioner’s recommendations and could be written with and after the Commission’s recommendations. The Development Agreement holds very specific information from the recommendations.

Shelly Olsen addressed the Planning Commission and stated the traffic was already very high on Coyote Lane. Ms. Olsen asked the Commission to take into consideration the amount of traffic due to a new project. Ms. Olsen also asked if Ivory Homes would be taking the road through existing properties and buildings if the City was not able to accommodate the traffic flow. Ms. Olsen continued Lloyd Lane traffic was a concern to her as she believed the project would be

9

12

3456789

10111213

141516171819202122

23242526

2728293031

3233343536

high density and certainly compared to what she was used to as she had lived in the area her entire life.

Mr. Stack asked if C-2 were eliminated would Ivory Homes be willing to add to the R-1 Zone. Mr. Prince answered Ivory Homes would take any input seriously and use the information to prepare for the City Council. Mr. Stack furthered his questioning about the Commercial Zone or absence of the Commercial Zone and what the project would look like without the Commercial Zone. Mr. Stack further stated this type of information was needed and would make a difference in the Commissioner’s recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Lent stated it was the current intent to meet the standard specifications of the R-1 Zone adding flexibility will continue as the project goes forward. Mr. Stack stated if they were to vote on the request for a map amendment the Commission needed a concrete map showing what the area would look like without the Commercial Zone.

Mr. Covarrubias asked if Ms. Kohler already has the Grandfathered rights to Commercial how can the City change her rights? Mr. Kohler answered the property had a limited Grandfathered Commercial right and was not zoned Commercial but zoned RA-1 with a very limited Grandfathered Commercial right to run a Nursery. Mr. Kohler remembered the property owner had commented the County would not allow any Commercial on the property and wanted to come into the City and have Commercial use. Mr. Kohler stated with the annexation the zone would change from the RA-1 with the Grandfathered Commercial right to the C-2 Zone.

Mr. Covarrubias stated he would like to see Ivory homes work with Ms. Kohler to see if she wanted to keep the Commercial Zoning and come back to Commissioners with a plan of what they both want and how they will work together. Mr. Lent stated they are working with Ms. RaeLyn Kohler and would continue conversations.

Mr. Slagowski asked what type of safety measures are put into place when Residential was close to the highway. Mr. Kohler answered there would be a landscape setback with a berm, landscaping and a trail before the beginning of the residential.

Mr. Stack stated even though Ivory Homes had provided good and informative information he believed the Commission would like to see the results of the study and with the results of the study, how Ivory Homes may or may not adjust their plans. Additionally a resolution to the C-2 area with the consideration of the landowner and taking a revised proposal and map if the C-2 were no longer needed.

Ms. Ferguson asked Bart Mumford if he were comfortable with the amount of density in the code and did he foresee the road needing to be widened at some point. Mr. Mumford responded unless a traffic study shows the road needs to be widened, it would not be widened with this project. Ms. Ferguson also asked when the North/South road was planned and how likely would it be that the road would be able to connect through the existing homes and are there homes in the way of the planned North/South road? Mr. Mumford answered there was currently a corridor

10

12

3456789

101112

13141516171819

20212223

242526

2728293031

323334353637

the road could go through with several pieces of property that may or may not be developed. The main idea was as properties developed over time, the connectivity would happen but if the properties do not develop the roads would stand alone. Ms. Ferguson wanted to make sure as time progresses there would not be a home needing to be knocked down. Mr. Mumford answered homes would not be demolished for a road, although a home might be in the vicinity of the road but ultimately there are many unknown variables which would need to fall into place for the connectivity.

Ben Fitzgerald addressed the Planning Commission and asked what would be happening going North and asked if the area would go from County to City how would the residence in the North be affected. Mr. Lent stated he had not spoken to any of the residence to the north but would be happy to get contact information and have those conversations. Mr. Fitzgerald was told his property would not be affected and the road would stub before his property line not affecting his property. Additionally, the road may be moved to the East or West thereby not affected his property.

Ms. Ferguson requested the Petitioner place all of R-1 to the East South side of the collector road with no R-3 as she believed a road was a much nicer boarder between zoning rather than a random back yard line. Additionally, Ms. Ferguson asked the Petitioner to talk to landowners on the north side to discuss viability of the road going through the north side and a time line of the road construction.

Mr. Stack agreed with Ms. Ferguson’s suggestions of perhaps everything east of North/South route be R-1 and perhaps R-3 turn to R-2. Mr. Stack stated he was making different suggestions because he would like to see different options for a proposal if the Commercial was gone. Additionally everything west of the North/South route be the R-3 with COSZ. Mr. Stack requested any proposals account for the existing view sheds of the prior homeowners up the hill to the East and that no development interferes with the views of the sheds across the valley. Also making sure if the COSZ overlay was requested there would be no multi-family multi-story housing.

Motion: Commissioner Stack motioned the agenda item be continued until November 27, 2018, with specific directions to the Applicant addressing the concerns Mr. Stack and Ms. Ferguson had recently mentioned. Including the viability of sole R-1 Zoning to the east of the North/South road displayed on Exhibit two or alternatively if not viable, what a proposal would look like if R-2 replaced R-3. Additionally, to have all units in lower right quadrant be R-1 and upper right quadrant be R-2 and also include eliminating all of C-2 with everything west of North/South road be R-3 with COZY. Specific with input from the Commission to include the preservation of all existing view sheds of the existing homeowners along the hillside. In addition, if the COSZ overlay was requested there not be any multi-family multi-story housing units. Additionally, to the best of the Applicant’s ability, with parts of the proposal being conceptual, the Applicant incorporate the Commissioner’s concerns regarding roads, trails and the plan for parks the City

11

1234567

89

1011121314

1516171819

2021222324252627

2829303132333435363738

has in place. Commissioner Ferguson added the Petitioner visit with landowners to the North and South regarding Ivory Homes proposal next to their land, Mr. Covarrubias made the second.

Chairman Rawlings asked if anyone else had any other questions or concerns, Commissioner Slagowski asked for clarity regarding multi-story homes and would these allow three or more floors. Commissioner Stack responded multi-family multi-story like Wasatch Commons style apartments as the City was trying to avoid this style of housing. Commissioner Slagowski asked if two story would be fine, Commissioner Stack confirmed and added a townhome type product would be fine. Mr. Kohler added not condominiums and not apartments, Commissioner Stack confirmed. Voting Aye: Commissioners Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Stacie Ferguson, Chairman Kieth Rawlings, Vice Chairman Darek Slagowski, motion passed unanimously.

2. Review and provide a recommendation for VXC Annexation.

Mr. Rawlings asked if Commissioners should provide a recommendation on the agenda item or if Commissioners should continue this related VXC Annexation agenda item as well. Mr. Kohler stated he would like to go over the agenda item and talk about the issues.

Mr. Rawlings stated the question was, “Should the North Village Special Service District (SSD) or Heber City Corporation provide water, sewer and irrigation services to the property? If the SSD serves the property, how will critical Master Planned facilities be built or modified to ensure adequate service to other areas of the city?” Mr. Rawlings asked Mr. Mumford for his opinion on which direction would be best for the City. Mr. Mumford stated as of now it was in the City’s Master Plan to serve the proposed area. However, because the Northern portion across from Coyote Lane was in the North Villages, conceptually the North Villages could also service the area. The City was leaning toward servicing the area but was open to exploring the pros and cons of services from the North Village. An analysis may need to be performed of the pros and cons from an economic perspective of the area being serviced through the City or through the North Village. As Red Ledges was currently serviced by Twin Creeks it was not unprecedented to explore other options. At this time there was not an absolute recommendation but Engineering had written the Staff Report from the Master Plan which shows the City servicing water, sewer and irrigation.

Mr. Rawlings stated the options would be to make a recommendation tonight or provide feedback to Petitioner and bring agenda item back with the other agenda item on the November 27, 2018 meeting and make a formal recommendation at that time. Mr. Rawlings continued he would prefer the City service the area if it were logistically possible. Mr. Slagowski asked if it would be a problem to have an annexation serviced part by the City and part by the Special Services Districct. The Petitioner responded the reality of this option was not possible as it would be too costly and they prefered to have the City service the area.

Mr. Stack asked if there would be any harm in continuing the this VXC Annexation agenda item with the previous agenda item. Mr. Prince agreed it would be better to keep the two agenda items together and to continue both to the same future date.

12

12

3456789

10

11

12

131415

16171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243

Motion: Commissioner Ferguson moved to continue the agenda item with the other related agenda item on November 27, 2018. Vice Chairman Slagowski made the second. Voting Aye: Commissioners Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Stacie Ferguson, Chairman Kieth Rawlings, Vice Chairman Darek Slagowski, motion passed unanimously.

3. Public Hearing for consideration of a Text Amendment to Section 18.68.210 Motor Vehicle Access, to amend the residential driveway standards.

Mr. Baron explained the Text Amendment stating the amendment was meant to provide better driveway access to the Residential R-3 lots as well as protecting the integrity of the higher speeds of the collector, principal and arterial streets and make sure they would continue to function at the higher speeds. Therefore the proposed amendment has the driveway setbacks at the approach rather than the driveway itself. The widest edge of the approach would be no closer than five feet to a property line and no closer than ten feet to the neighboring property.

Mr. Baron continued regarding collectors, the driveway approach would be set 50 feet from the neighboring driveway approach. Additionally, the driveway approach width had been changed from 20 feet to 30 feet to allow three car garages and a usable driveway pad. Mr. Baron continued corner lots for non-residential uses would remain at 50 feet and residential uses were proposed for 30 feet for local and 40 feet on a collector and for driveway widths the proposal went from 30 feet to 40 feet. Mr. Baron concluded the proposal was to assist in freeing up standards which had been difficult to meet and for residents to be able to use their properties more advantageously.

Chariman Rawlings opened the Public Hearing at 9:01.00 p.m. Chairman Rawlings closed the Public Hearing at 9:01.30 p.m. as there was no public present to speak.

Mr. Rawlings asked Mr. Mumford if he approved of the new wording for the Text Amendment. Mr. Munford stated he was good with the new Text Amendment wording.

MOTION: Vice Chairman Slagoski moved to forward a positive recommendation of the Motor Vehicle Access Amendment with the findings and conditions of the Staff report. Commissioner Covarrubias made the second. Voting Aye: Commissioners Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Stacie Ferguson, Chairman Kieth Rawlings, Vice Chairman Darek Slagowski, motion passed unanimously.

4. Adopt Resolution to City Council stating intent to initiate General Plan Amendment.

Mr. Kohler asked the Commissioners to adopt the resolution provided to them, he continued the resolution states Commissioners are ready to begin the General Plan Amendment. In addition, Mr. Kohler presented a list of twelve names for approval for a Sub-Committee for the General Plan Amendment launch. Mr. Kohler mentioned he had spoken with most of the individuals on the list and those he had not spoken to he had left a message. The names from the Planning Commission on the list include Kieth Rawlings, Ryan Stack and Stacie Ferguson.

13

1234

5

6789

1011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435

36

373839404142

43

Additional proposed Sub-Committee Members included, Jim Mortenson whom was willing to participate, Matt Parker whom had not yet responded, Don Taylor who was a Trails Advocate and had agreed to participate, Rachel Kahler who had yet to respond, also Brian Balls with Summit Engineering, Ryan Stark with the Chamber of Commerce Economic Development, also the Karl Malone group has been asked to provide an advocate, Layne Lithgoe whom was an Architect and Debra West who was a Realtor and had yet to respond and if she were unwilling another Realtor would be needed.

Mr. Rawlings asked how many Sub-Committee Members were needed. Mr. Kohler stated the list came from individuals with an expertise and the Mayor wanted around twelve individuals. Mr. Kohler apologized for those listening on the broadcast whose names he had read out but had not heard from yet.

MOTION: Commissioner Stack moved to adopt the Resolution provided on page three of the Staff Report packet. Vice Chairman Slagowski made the 2nd. Voting Aye: Commissioners Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Stacie Ferguson, Chairman Kieth Rawlings, Vice Chairman Darek Slagowski, motion passed unanimously.

IV. MINUTES:

MOTION: Commissioner Stack moved to approve October 10, 2018 and October 23, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes, Commissioner Ferguson made the second. Voting Aye: Commissioners Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Stacie Ferguson, Chairman Kieth Rawlings, Vice Chairman Darek Slagowski, motion passed unanimously.

V. AJOURNMENT:

MOTION: Commissioner Stack moved to adjourn, Commissioner Ferguson made the second. Voting Aye: Commissioners Ryan Stack, Oscar Covarrubias, Stacie Ferguson, Chairman Kieth Rawlings, Vice Chairman Darek Slagowski, motion passed unanimously.

____________________________________

Meshelle Kijanen

Planning Department Administrative Assistant

14

1234567

89

1011

12131415

16

17181920

21

222324

25

26

27

28

29

30