Minutes – 9.7.2022

COUNTY OF SEVIER

CITY OF RICHFIELD

                                                                                    At the Planning Commission

                                                                                    In and For Said City

                                                                                                                                                            September 7, 2022

         Minutes of the Richfield City Planning Commission meeting held on Wednesday, September 20, at 6:00 p.m., Chairman Kendrick Thomas, presiding.

1.      Roll Call

2.      General Plan Discussion

         A.   6:00 p.m   Public Hearing:  Receive comments concerning a proposed update to the

               Richfield City General Plan.

         B.   Discuss proposed update to Richfield City General Plan.

         C.  Discuss sign ordinance regulating signs on Main Street.

         D.    Landscaping requirements (i.e. water and landscape restrictions). 

3.       Public Hearing (6:30 p.m.)

         A.    Receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code as it

                 pertains to setbacks in single-family residential zones.  The proposal is to change

                 the front-yard setback to 20 feet, with the garage being set back a minimum of

                 25 feet, and a porch being allowed at 15 feet from the property line.  The

                 second street side of a corner lot would be required to have a set back of 30

                 feet. 

         B.    Receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and

                 zoning map affecting property located at 1310 West 1800 South.  The proposal

                 is to change the north lot from the CG (Commercial General) to R1-10 (Single

                 Family Residential).

         C.    Receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and

                 zoning map filed by Jacob Black and Bryan Nay affecting property located at

                 1000 North 300 West (parcels no. 1-1-10 and 1-1-11).  The proposal is to change

                 the zone from R1-10 (Single-Family Residential) to R1-8 (Single-Family

                 Residential).

         D.    Receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and

                 zoning map affecting the property located at approximately 1200 North Main

                 (parcel no. 1-2-20).  The proposal is to change the zone from CG (Commercial

                 General) to RM-24 (Multi-Family Residential).  The zone change affects

                 approximately 1.95 acres of the east portion of the parcel.   

         E.     Receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and

                 zoning map affecting property located at 647 South Main.  The proposal is to

                 change the zone from CS (Commercial Shopping) to RM-24 (Multi-Family

                 Residential). 

4.      Action on Public Hearings

         A.    Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the Zoning

                 Code as it pertains to setbacks in single-family residential zones.  The proposal is

                 to change the front-yard setback to 20 feet, with the garage being set back a

                 minimum of 25 feet, and a porch being allowed at 15 feet from the property

                 line.  The second street side of a corner lot would be required to have a set back

                 of 30 feet. 

         B.    Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General

                 Plan and zoning map affecting property located at 1310 West 1800 South.  The

                 proposal is to change the north lot from the CG (Commercial General) to R1-10

                 (Single Family Residential).

         C.    Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General Plan

                 and zoning map filed by Jacob Black and Bryan Nay affecting property located at

                 1000 North 300 West (parcels no. 1-1-10 and 1-1-11).  The proposal is to change

                 the zone from R1-10 (Single-Family Residential) to R1-8 (Single-Family

                 Residential).

         D.    Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General

                 Plan and zoning map affecting the property located at approximately 1200

             North Main (parcel no. 1-2-20).  The proposal is to change the zone from CG

                 (Commercial General) to RM-24 (Multi-Family Residential).  The zone change

                 affects approximately 1.95 acres of the east portion of the parcel.   

         E.     Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General

                 Plan and zoning map affecting property located at 647 South Main.  The

                 proposal is to change the zone from CS (Commercial Shopping) to RM-24 (Multi-

                 Family Residential). 

5.      Conditional Use Permits

         A.   Consider approving Ashley Gates’ application for a business license allowing her

               to conduct a business called Ashley’s Daycare to be located at 259 West Center,

               Richfield, Utah (R1-10 zone, C1 use).

         B.   Consider approving Brennon Atterton’s application for a business license

               allowing him to operate a short-term rental business at his property at 153

               West 800 South (CS zone, C-1 use).

         C.   Consider approving Matt Christensen’s application for a business license

               allowing him to operate a short-term rental business at his property at 700 East

               Center Street (RR-1 zone, C-1 use).

         D.   Paula Warner:

               i.      Consider approving Paula Warner’s application for a business license

                       allowing her to operate a short-term rental business at 93 West 1000 North

                       #89 (R1-6 zone, C-1 use).

               ii.     Consider approving Paula Warner’s application allowing her to operate a

                       business called Advanced Body Work and Massage at 93 West 1000 North

                       #89 (R1-6 zone, C-1 use). 

6.      Development Review

         A.   Consider recommending approval of two 8-plexes as the first phase of a

               development to be known as Cove Mountain Village Apartments located at 350

               West between Cove View Road and 1300 South.   (RM-24 zone, C-2 use

7.      Minutes Approval

         A.   Consider approving minutes of August 3, 2022.

8.      Other Business.  

9.       Adjournment.   

1.      Roll Call.  Roll call was answered by Kendrick Thomas, Greg Bean, Lisa White, and Josh Peterson. Wes Kirschner, Susan Jensen, and Blaine Breinholt were excused. 

City Staff Present:   Deputy City Recorder Michelle Curtis.     

Others present:  Kylee McClure, Ashley Gates, Matt Christensen, Sharie Christensen, Daryl Hodgson, Ryan Hodgson, George Steiger, Ryan Savage, Joe Betar, Brennon Atterton, Brianna Atterton, Jared Cefalia, Tim Wallace, Adam Albrecht, ShonTae Hatch, Mark Hatch. 

2.         General Plan Discussion      

          A.         Public Hearing:   A public hearing was held to receive comments concerning a proposed update to the Richfield City General Plan.

Planning consultant Bruce Parker and Delaney Sillman were present via Zoom. 

Bruce Parker explained that the General Plan is a community’s plan for the future.  The General Plan is required by State law.  It is a policy statement as to how the City of Richfield wants to see the City evolve and build a sense of community.  The City changes every day.  This prepares the City for future anticipated changes.  Some changes will be unanticipated and the Plan should be updated when those items come up.   It is a policy document that does not have the strength of law like the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision regulations.  But those ordinances and other standards should be based on the General Plan.  If anyone challenges an Ordinance, and it has a foundation in the General Plan, then it is usually very defensible. 

A city the size of Richfield is required to have a Land Use Element and Transportation Plan and those two should link together.  Transportation should follow land use..  The moderate income housing element has also been added.  The State Legislature is very interested that affordable, reasonable, safe housing is provided for people in the State of Utah.

The City’s civil engineers are working on the Transportation Plan.  Zoning and land use decisions should be based on General Plan.   Resource allocation should also be based on the General Plan.  It is a very important document, and it is critical that it works well. 

This is the first in a series of public hearings.  As the Planning Commission works through a recommendation, it will be forwarded to the City Council and they will also be required to have a public hearing on the Planning Commission’s recommendation.

Chairman Thomas advises that the Commission has gone through several drafts and edits.  It has been a lot of work to get it to this point and it looks like we’re in the closing stages. 

Mr. Parker said he will send the revised draft to Commissioners and then this will be on next month’s agenda to motion for a recommendation to the Council.  The proposal could also be posted on the City’s public website. 

6:18 p.m.  Chairman Thomas opened the hearing to public comments. 

There were no comments from the public.  Greg Bean asked if the changes that were recommended last month have been implemented.  Michelle Curtis stated that she corrected a few typos and grammar and sent that on to Planning Commission members.  Some of the members were not able to look at it in the format in which it was sent.  Mr. Parker will send revisions to the Commission.  Commissioner’s can go through it and make any other final comments.  The Planning Commission and Mr. Parker should make a presentation to the City Council regarding its recommendation. 

The public hearing closed at 6:22 p.m. 

            B.         Discuss proposed update to Richfield City General Plan.  This will be placed on the agenda for next month for a recommendation to the City Council.    

            C.         Discuss sign ordinance regulating signs on Main Street.  A business owner had asked if the City would consider changing its ordinance concerning blade signs on Main Street.  Because Main Street is a UDOT right-of-way, Josh Peterson researched this with UDOT.  State law says a person or business cannot use State property for advertising.  On Main Street, buildings sit on the property line, and so having a sign overhanging the right-of-way would be prohibited.  There are some old-style blade signs that stick out over the right-of-way, but they are likely grandfathered.

Chairman Thomas asked about buildings that do not sit on the property line and are not subject the State regulations.  They would be subject to City ordinances.  The Commission thinks it would be okay for these signs to be allowed in those cases.  The UDOT right-of-way is Main Street, east 300 North, west 1300 South.  The Commission feels like the Zoning Code does not need to be changed at the present time, but if a request came in, they would be willing to change the Code to allow as long as it doesn’t overhang a UDOT right-of-way.    

            D.         Landscaping requirements (i.e. water and landscape restrictions). 
Chairman Thomas said he has checked with City Engineer Carson DeMille as to the City’s water situation regarding source and water rights.  They are in the process of acquiring funding to do a water study.  It would be an update to the one done in 2012.  They will have more data and information when that is complete.  Mr. DeMille recommends that the Planning Commission doesn’t do anything too serious until that is done.  Chairman Thomas believes that will likely be 8 months to a year before that is complete. 

Mr. DeMille mentioned as far as water rights, the City is pretty fortunate in that the spring where water is drawn is rarely impacted by drought.  The rest of the City’s water comes from wells.  Storage for water is more than adequate.  He did note that it is interesting with the recent changes increasing water rates recently has resulted in people conserving and thus the City’s revenue is down significantly for the water budget.  That is something that needs to be considered and balanced.  The City is redoing that spring by the swimming pool because there is quite a bit of water that can captured there

Lisa White’s assignment was to research other communities’ water restrictions.  She looked at Eagle Mountain, Santa Clara, St. George, Las Vegas, and Washington County in general.  Also Bernalillo County, NM.    Some of those are in worse water situations than we are, but they do have various levels of restrictions on new construction from the percentage of grass per lot size to no turf allowed in planting strips or over slopes of 15%.  There are also interior things like water-saving fixtures and energy-saving fixtures that are required in new construction.  She has shared her information on the Google Sheet that was shared in the past.  Restrictions are basically for new construction although there are hefty fines for egregious water wasters.  It is something worth talking about even though the City is not in a dire situation.  It would be good to be proactive and consider measures that make sense to be reasonable and balanced. 

Because the City is currently doing a water study, this will be placed on the agenda a year from now.    

3.         6:30 p.m.  Public Hearings

            A.         6:37 p.m.  A public hearing was held to receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code as it pertains to setbacks in single-family residential zones.  The proposal is to change the front-yard setback to 20 feet, with the garage being set back a minimum of 25 feet, and a porch being allowed at 15 feet from the property line.  The second street side of a corner lot would be required to have a set back of 30 feet. 

Chairman Thomas explained that the proposal is to change the required setbacks in residential zones.  The proposal is to change the required front yard setback from 30 feet to 20 feet which is a significant change.  The public was invited to come to the lectern to make comments with a time limit of 3 minutes.  This is not a debate forum, but an opportunity to express their opinion.

Mark HatchMr. Hatch asked if this is in reference to anything proposed coming into Richfield.  Greg Bean said the Mayor asked that the Commission consider this because he would like to see smaller lots developed and maybe help young couples who are trying to get into a house.  This will not apply to the multi-family zones. 

There being no other public comments, the public hearing closed at 6:40 p.m.

            B.         6:40 p.m.   A public hearing was held to receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting property located at 1310 West 1800 South.  The proposal is to change the zone of the north lot from the CG (Commercial General) to R1-10 (Single Family Residential).

Michelle Curtis explained that a few months ago the Good Lutheran Church was granted a request for a lot split at their property.  The property was much larger than they need and so the lot was split so that they could sell one lot.  The zone for the second lot could been rezoned at that time, but it was overlooked. 

There being no public comments, the public hearing closed at 6:41 p.m. 

            C.         6:41 p.m.  A public hearing was held to receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map filed by Jacob Black and Bryan Nay affecting property located at 1000 North 300 West (parcels no. 1-1-10 and 1-1-11).  The proposal is to change the zone from R1-10 (Single-Family Residential) to R1-8 (Single-Family Residential).

Chairman Thomas explained that the proposal is to change the zone from R1-10, which requires a minimum of 10,000 square feet per lot, to R1-8 which requires a minimum of 8000 square feet per lot.

Joe Betar:  Members of the neighborhood and the developer were able to meet.  They spoke with everybody who was opposed to the two previous requested zone changes.  He is speaking for himself, but it is his opinion that all of the people who were opposed to this project are now fine with it being changed to the R1-8 zone.  He thinks this is a good compromise as to what the neighborhood wants and also meets the developer’s needs.  He recommends that we accept this request for rezone.

There being no other public comments, the public hearing closed at 6:44

            D.         6:44 p.m.  A public hearing was held to receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting the property located at approximately 1200 North Main (parcel no. 1-2-20).  The proposal is to change the zone from CG (Commercial General) to RM-24 (Multi-Family Residential).  The zone change affects

approximately 1.95 acres of the east portion of the parcel.   

Chairman Thomas explained that the east part of this property is being annexed.  A portion of the land is already in the City limits, but is part of a greater portion of the development.  If the property is annexed with zoning as proposed, then this small piece needs to be rezoned to match the rest of the development. 

Shontae Hatch:  Mrs. Hatch wondered why this doesn’t have to be annexed?  She was told that it is already within the City boundary.  They are in the process of annexing the balance of the property.  Usually a property is not annexed unless the property owner requests annexation. 

Mrs. Hatch said the proposed General Plan states that the City anticipates needing 275 additional units over the next 10 years.  It states that “Richfield City should be aware of the growth in the area and ensure that new housing projects prioritize affordable housing and workforce housing options so as to not further cost-burden existing and future city residents.” 

With all of the housing going south of Wal-mart and the ones behind Black Bear Diner, she wonders what is being done as far as work force jobs?  What jobs are coming in to justify changing the zone of this property to the RM-24.  We do need housing, but it looks like there is plenty being built right now.  What jobs are coming in?  Smith’s Meats was supposed to come in and she heard they have pulled out.  ACT built their new building but have decided not to come.    

She asked if this developer owns the property?  She was told that the property is under contract.  She points out that she lives here, established roots, bought homes, works in the community.  She believes these people should own the property and then submit the zone change.  They don’t have a vested interest when they are under contract. 

Mark Hatch:   Mr. Hatch said that there has been a track record in Richfield of big projects not using local contractors.  He knows that we have smaller contractors but, being in the construction field, usually the people who are hired end up going way over costs.  Local contractors would be slower but maybe less expensive in the long run.   

He also heard that Christensen Arms laid off 40 people.  When you build apartments, the goal is to fill them.  Affordable housing is a joke and it’s a national problem.  He doesn’t know how to resolve it in Richfield.  The people who build them will fill them in any way possible and that means welfare, government subsidized.  The City needs to keep that in mind before we stack a million of them in here and get them filled with government subsidized. 

There being no other public comments, the public hearing closed at 6:57 p.m.    

            E.         6:57 p.m.   A public hearing was held to receive comments concerning a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting property located at 647 South Main.  The proposal is to change the zone from CS (Commercial Shopping) to RM-24 (Multi-Family Residential).      

Shontae Hatch:   Mrs. Hatch said there will have to be some major renovations to make it apartment buildings.  These rooms maybe have a kitchenette but no kitchen inside.  Also, Main Street is prime real estate property.  Why would we put rentals on Main Street when it could be used for businesses.   As she pointed out above, 272 units are needed over a 10-year period.  There are 120 units being built by Wal-mart and then the units behind Black Bear Diner.  It seems like the City will reach the benchmark of 272 within 2 years but the City wants to change the zone to allow for more apartments.  What are we going to do for work in the area?  Where are the jobs?  She knows the situation here is a problem where people have moved in and have created a hazard by using the hotel as apartments, but she doesn’t know that the solution is to change the zone and allow it to become apartments. 

Kylee McClure:  Ms. McClure asked if this business has a business license?  She was told no.  They can’t get a business license because the property is not zoned to allow long-term rentals and has not been approved for this use.  In order to obtain a business license, the property will have to be rezoned and then the building brought up to current building code. 

Joe Betar: His business is across the street from two other places that want to repurpose hotels into long-term rentals.  Almost on a daily basis he sees the problems that have come with that.  If it is rezoned, that doesn’t mean it will be up to building code.  Josh Peterson said as part of the business license they would be required to meet building and fire codes.   

This could be viewed as a step to move forward.

Mark Hatch:  He wants to know if they are being fined and why they aren’t.  There will continue to be a problem with them if they aren’t fined.  And if they aren’t allowed at this location, will it just push them to the apartments by Wal-Mart?  Greg Bean said at the apartments by Wal-Mart will be legal residential buildings.  As he understands the Ordinance regulating long-term rentals, it would give the City power to make them cease operations. 

Joe Betar:  Mr. Betar commented that the City already has the power to make them cease operations.  Greg Bean advised they would need to take that up with the City Administrator.    

Chairman Thomas stated that the zone change would make them in conformance with the land use ordinance.  The building code requires that if the use or occupancy of a building is changed, then the building is required to be brought up to current building code for the new use and occupancy.   

If this zoning change is granted, they will still need to meet the requirements for the building code. 

There being no other public comments, the public hearing closed at 7:08 p.m.

4.         Action on Public Hearing

            A.         Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the Zoning Code as it pertains to setbacks in single-family residential zones.  The proposal is to change the front-yard setback to 20 feet, with the garage being set back a minimum of 25 feet ,and a porch being allowed at 15 feet from the property line.  The second street side of a corner lot would be required to have a set back of 30 feet.  This will apply to new construction and existing homes in all single-family zones. 

Josh Peterson motioned to recommend approval of setbacks as recommended above.  Greg Bean seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Lisa White, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean. Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously.

            B.         Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting property located at 1310 West 1800 South.  The proposal is to change the north lot from the CG (Commercial General) to R1-10 (Single Family Residential).

Lisa White motioned to recommend approval of a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting the property located at 1310 West 1800 South changing the zone from CG (Commercial General) to R1-10 (Single-family Residential).  Josh Peterson seconded the motion. Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Lisa White, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean. Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously.

            C.         Consider recommending approval of proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map filed by Jacob Black and Bryan Nay affecting property located at 1000 North 300 West (parcels no. 1-1-10 and 1-1-11).  The proposal is to change the zone from R1-10 (Single-Family Residential) to R1-8 (Single-Family Residential).

(Commissioner Blaine Breinholt arrived.)

Adam Albrecht was present.  Mr. Albrecht stated that the Planning Commission previously recommended that the City Council approve the R1-6 zone.  They are now requesting the R1-8 zone which is less dense. 

Lisa White motioned to recommend approval of the proposed zone change from R1-10 to R1-8 for the property located at 1000 North 300 West.  Josh Peterson seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Lisa White, Josh Peterson, Blaine Breinholt, and Greg Bean. Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously.

            D.         Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting the property located at approximately 1200 North Main (parcel no. 1-2-20).  The proposal is to change the zone from CG (Commercial General) to RM-24 (Multi-Family Residential).  The zone change  affects approximately 1.95 acres of the east portion of the parcel.   

Daryl Hodgson and Ryan Hodgson were present.  This is just a portion of the overall project as discussed in the public hearing.  A portion of the area is in the process of being annexed.  This small piece is already in the City limits and this is a formality to get the zone to match with the zone that is being requested upon annexation.  They have plans to leave the property along Main Street in the General Commercial zone.

Their early concept is that the RM-24 would be 3-story garden apartments and then going to the east the property would be zoned RM-11 which is less dense.  They are not considering low-income housing at this point.  One of their drivers is that Snow College at Ephraim is maxed out on housing and schooling.  They would like to bring 2500 new students to Richfield over the next 5 years.   The General Plan might say there is a need for 272 homes over the next ten years, but that is not considering all of the aspects of Richfield.   

The annexation is on the agenda for the next City Council meeting.  If the property is annexed with the zoning they have requested, this small piece will tie in with the RM-24 of the annexed piece. 

Greg Bean said it is his feeling that there is no basis to deny this.  Josh Peterson said he would like to table it in order to see the whole project and not piecemeal it.  This piece is 1.95 acres and the piece being annexed has more.  Daryl Hodgson said they have submitted all of that with their concept plan.  Josh Peterson wondered how much acreage is in the annexation piece that will be RM-24.  Their concept of the entire property was shown on the screen.

Chairman Thomas said that Richard Chamberlain had talked with David Church who is an attorney who deals with land use in the State.  He is fairly well known and respected.  The recommendation was that on zone changes like this, it can be made contingent on the development happening.  This could be approved by the Commission and the Council conditioned upon the development proceeding forward.  If the development doesn’t proceed forward, the zone change never happens. 

It is Greg Bean’s opinion that in order to be able to use that rationale, it needs to be made a part of our regulation so that it has legal standing.  He believes the City will need to have an ordinance saying that we would use that as a consideration.  He believes this was discussed a few months ago and various options for doing this and timelines but we never came to a conclusion or a recommendation to go ahead with it. 

Ryan Hodgson said with the other portion that is awaiting annexation, it would bring it to a total of 8.3 acres of RM-24.  They came to this from meeting with the Mayor and City officials.  The first thing the Mayor said is that the City has no housing and he listed off a number of housing shortages that the City is facing and said that he had spoken with numerous companies who would like to relocate to Richfield but they are unable to because there isn’t enough available housing for their workforce. 

They didn’t want to maximize the RM-24 across the whole project but thought it made sense with putting RM-11 along the canal.  Josh Peterson said that would allow for approximately 190 units.  The developers have slated less than that.  It will go down from that because of roads, open space, parking, drainage areas, etc. 

Josh Peterson said the question was asked where are the jobs to fill these.  Currently, with all of the hotels that are doing extended stay, it might be around 200.  If the Pearson apartments and the Wal-Mart apartments are built, then the people in the hotels could already fill that.  There are work-from-home jobs but we don’t have a number on how many there are.  He does know several people who work from home for $18/hour instead of $10/hour. 

Ryan Hodgson said their numbers are based on very conservative estimates.  This entire project they are looking would take a 9-year time-line for complete build out.  It will be built out slowly over time which helps with absorption rate. 

Greg Bean wondered why the zoning needs to be done right now.  The Hodgsons explained that this is an expensive site to develope with sewer and water infrastructure.  There is a lot of off-site sewer to put in. It makes sense to put all of the infrastructure in at the beginning.  None of the site is developable without the sewer which may be why it has sat for the last 30 years.  It is a challenging and expensive site to develop, and so the density needs to be there. 

Chairman Thomas said he appreciates the way they have approached the City about this development, talking with City officials as to what the needs are and what the City wants to see.  He appreciates the way they have incorporated the Master Transportation Plan and made it fit with their proposal.  He believes this would be an enhancement to the City and set us up for some nice growth, good quality development on a really important corner and spot in town. 

The Hodgsons feel like it will add to the City and won’t be detrimental.  The front portion will be Commercial property which will be places for people to work. 

Greg Bean feels like we need time to get our heads around this type of growth.  One of the justifications for deferring consideration is if we have discussions ongoing and we have a movement afoot to consider changing the ordinance that affects this.  He feels like we should wait on the zone change. 

Josh Peterson said they have provided the information that he was concerned with.   

Josh Peterson motioned to recommend approval of a zone change at approximately 1200 North Main affecting 1.95 acres of the east portion of parcel 1-2-20, contingent on the development proceeding and the property being zoned as requested in the annexation.  Blaine Breinholt seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Lisa White, Josh Peterson, and Blaine Breinholt.  Those voting nay:  Greg Bean.  The motion carried. 

Commissioner Lisa White was excused. 

            E.         Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the General Plan and zoning map affecting property located at 647 South Main.  The proposal is to change the zone from CS (Commercial Shopping) to RM-24 (Multi-Family Residential). 

Keith Warburton was not able to be present. 

Josh Peterson commented that the RM-24 zone has a requirement that there must be a minimum of 1000 feet between areas zoned RM-24.  This will be closer than 1000 feet to the Larry Pearson development on 600 North 100 West.  It is 625’ as the crow flies or 790 feet following roads. 

Greg Bean motioned to recommend that the zone change should not be approved because it is located within 1000 feet of another RM-24 zone.  Blaine Breinholt seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas Josh Petereson, Greg Bean, and Blaine Breinholt.  Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously.

5.         Conditional Use Permits

            A.         Consider approving Ashley Gates’ application for a business license allowing her to conduct a business called Ashley’s Daycare to be located at 259 West Center, Richfield, Utah (R1-10 zone, C1 use).   

(This matter was discussed at the top of the agenda.) 

Ashley Gates was present.  She has three children.  A daycare at her home is convenient because it is near the schools, two houses down from Ashman.  Some parents are able to drop their kids off at Ashman and then drop the other kids off at her home.  Some of the children walk to her home after school. 

She can tend eight children.  Her hours will be 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.  Parents are able to park in her driveway.    

She was advised that if complaints are received that this business causes a nuisance in the neighborhood, she could be called back in to review the conditional use permit where the City would work with her to solve any problems.   

Josh Peterson motioned to approve Ashley Gates’ application for a business license allowing her to conduct a business called Ashley’s Daycare to be located at 259 West Center.  Lisa White seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Lisa White, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean.  Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously. 

            B.         Consider approving Brennon Atterton’s application for a business license allowing him to operate a short-term rental business at his property at 153 West 800 South (CS zone, C-1 use). 

Mr. Atterton would like to use this property as a short-term rental.  This is a small cabin that is located on his property.  There is off-street parking.  This is a small unit with one queen bed.

They will have a fire inspection. 

Greg Bean motioned to approve Brennon Atterton’s application for a business license allowing him to operate a short-term rental business at his property at 153 West 800 South.  Josh Peterson seconded the motion.   Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Blaine Breinholt, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean.  Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously. 

            C.         Consider approving Matt Christensen’s application for a business license allowing him to operate a short-term rental business at his property at 700 East Center Street (RR-1 zone, C-1 use).

Matt Christensen would like to use this property as a short-term rental.  There are three beds, two baths.  There is plenty of off-street parking.  He has had a fire inspection.

Blaine Breinholt motioned to approve Matt Christensen’s application for a business license allowing him to operate a short-term rental business at his property at 700 East Center Street.  Josh Peterson seconded the motion. Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Blaine Breinholt, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean.  Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously. 

            D.         Paula Warner:

                        i.          Consider approving Paula Warner’s application for a business license allowing her to operate a short-term rental business at 93 West 1000 North #89 (R1-6 zone, C-1 use).

                        ii.         Consider approving Paula Warner’s application allowing her to operate a business called Advanced Body Work and Massage at 93 West 1000 North    #89      (R1-6 zone, C-1 use). 

Paula Warner was not present.  These items were tabled to be placed on next month’s agenda. 

6.         Development Review

            A.         Consider recommending approval of two 8-plexes as the first phase of a development to be known as Cove Mountain Village Apartments located at 350 West between Cove View Road and 1300 South.   (RM-24 zone, C-2 use) 

(It was noted that this is for two six-plexes that are townhouses.) 

Jared Cefalia and Ryan Savage were present.  They are doing the first phase of this project which will be comprised of two six-plexes.  Rather than do all of the infrastructure for the entire site, they will build 350 West and angle it going north to Cove View Road.  They have traded the property with the City that they need to for the street right-of-way. 

The entire project has about 60 units.  They are starting with 12 units.    

A Traffic Impact Study has been done and they will forward that to the City.    

There are no DRC comments because the City hasn’t received enough information for review.

Conceptually, Greg Bean thinks this is ok.  Josh Peterson said he is alright with it as  long as the motion is contingent upon the developer meeting all of the DRC requirements and engineer reviews. 

Mr. Savage said they have plans for the sewer line located along 350 West and being stubbed under 1300 South going south to 1500 South.   They will be doing a box culvert onto Cove View Road.  They do not plan for 1300 South to be used as an access to this property.   

The north extension of 350 West will be abandoned and will be angled to go to Cove View Road.  Mr. Savage said it is unknown what will happen with the south extension of 350 West because that will depend upon what Jorgensen’s do with their property on the east side of 350 West.   

Josh Peterson motioned to recommend approval of these two six-plexes with the condition that they come back to Planning Commission after the DRC has met.  

The motion was amended:  Because this will be finally approved by the City Council, and the Planning Commission meets only once a month, the motion was amended to recommend approval of this first phase of the Cove Mountain Village Apartments, contingent upon DRC comments and engineer review being met.  They will then go to City Council for final approval when those comments and reviews have been completed.  Greg Bean seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Blaine Breinholt, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean.  Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously. 

They were told that as far as the road, when they have complete plans that have been approved and reviewed by the City, they could start work on it.  They commented that they wouldn’t want to do that without the certainty of the project being approved because of the cost involved in that. 

7.     Minutes Approval:

            A.         Consider approving minutes of August 3, 2022.  Chairman Thomas said he felt like there was something in the General Plan portion of the meeting where there was an informal vote but that wasn’t reflected in the minutes.  It is thought that it was the setbacks and whether or not they should apply to new construction vs. existing construction.  It was decided that the new setbacks would apply to both new and existing.  Greg motioned to approve the minutes of August 3, 2022.  Blaine Breinholt seconded the motion.  Those voting aye:  Kendrick Thomas, Blaine Breinholt, Josh Peterson, and Greg Bean.  Those voting nay:  None.  The motion carried unanimously. 

8.      Other Business

9.     Adjournment.   The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. 

PASSED AND APPROVED on the 5th day of October, 2022.

/s/ Michelle Curtis

        Deputy City Recorder