Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Aqua will go ahead and call the meeting to order. We start every meeting with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Are you under the weather, what are you under the weather? I'm getting over. Yeah. Thank you. We have three items on the agenda today. Uh but before we will uh anyone everyone have a chance to review the minutes? Let's have a roll call, should we?

Oh, should we roll call? That's a great idea. Make sure everyone's here first. Chair Edwards? Yes. President Vice Chair Leki here. Commissioner Tippets here. Commissioner Anderson here. Commissioner Ericson here. Commissioner Snow is excused. Commissioner Brocky here. Thank you. Did everyone have a chance to review the minutes? I did. It looked like there was good discussion. There was. We missed you. Thanks. And I wasn't down there. Um, were there any changes? I didn't see anything, but I wasn't here. So, no. A motion. I make a motion we approve the minutes of March 25th, 2026. I second it. All in favor? I.

Perfect. We'll move on to the public hearing portion. Um, the public hearing portion, we generally will hear from staff first. Um, afterwards, we will ask the applicant um if they're present to p to, you know, if they have anything to add. Uh afterwards we'll open it to public hearing um and then the commission will make a recommendation. Uh first item on the agenda public hearing is Dean Cardinal Cardinel requests a zoning code text amendment to table 17-7-12.10 of the regional commercial RC zone to increase the allowed percentage of changeable copy signs. Jonathan is presenting.

Thanks Chair Edwards. Yeah.

Um, so like you said, this is for this is a proposed amendment to increase the percentage from 25% to 85% um for changeable copy signs in the regional commercial zone. Um, currently those are permitted for wall and monument signs up to 25%. Um, as you have seen numerous times, um, these are the criteria, uh, in order to for the city council to approve a zoning code text amendment. Um, as staff, um, we don't believe that this meets any of those. Um, and therefore, our recommendation is for you to recommend denial to the city council. Um, I haven't had any public comments on this. If you have any questions for me while I'm up here, um, I can answer those. And Dean is here as well.

If you have questions for questions for John, I might later though. Okay. Um, we generally let legal opine uh at this point. Daniel, do you have anything to add? Yeah, this is a legislative decision. So ultimately uh your responsibility here will be to make a recommendation to the city council as to whether they you think they should approve or deny it with it being a legislative decision. You do have more discretion on and what you consider and and how you uh recommend for them. Thank you. Um I think someone told me the applicant is here. Is Dean Cardinell here?

Do you have anything to add that you would like to come on up? Uh state your name for the record and we're happy to hear you. My name is Dean Cardell. Uh I'm the owner of Worldwide Trekking. We're an adventure travel company that's based in Midvail over by Fort Union Boulevard on 7404 Union Park Avenue. And uh I'm requesting a text amendment to increase the allowable changeable copy on monument signs in the regional commercial zone from 25 to 85%. Right now, the 25% limit does not reflect what actually exists on the ground, either in Midvail or in uh along the Union Park corridor. Along the corridor, higher percentage changeable copy signs are already the norm. uh both here in Midvil and immediately into Sandy uh just south of us. Midvil itself has already approved a monument sign with substantial changeable copy right here at city hall. There's the double-sided sign right out here that's similar to what I refer to. The current code creates an uneven playing field between similar commercial areas and limited businesses ability to communicate effectively. The amendment does not increase the size of the sign or placement. It only adjusts how the allowed sign or area can be used. So won't increase visual clutter or uh you know impact just flexibility. It also meets the city's criteria for text amendments by promoting consistency, supporting activity, and aligning with existing development patterns. The amendment reflects what already

exists, improves consistency, and supports local businesses. So, I respectfully uh request your approval. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone have questions for the applicant? No. Thank you for putting together those photos um that we had in our packet. I do have a copy of that. I didn't know if there was a this afternoon. Yeah. Okay. And I have my statement as well if anybody would like it. I don't have any questions. Thank you. Thank you.

Uh at this portion, we'll open the meeting up to the public hearing for this item. If anyone has items that they'd like to add to this, you can go ahead and approach, state your name, and we'll gladly hear your public opinion. Seeing that there's no one commenting, I move that we close the public hearing portion. Second. All in favor? I I Anyone thoughts or things they'd like to discuss here? Probably. Yeah. Um, so my first question is when the sign was put in,

did you know that it wasn't applicable? Did you Can I Yep. Come on up. I mean, going past that sign was I would say conforming rather than applicable. Yes, conforming. So, um, it was quite alarming going past it and I had several complaints from the people around there. I mean, it's like 2 feet from the street and it's bright red glaring at you and it's dangerous. Well, we it's dangerous

there. There's a sign just north of us that's a a 40ft billboard and if you proceed south, I know you go into Sandy, but there's numerous signs just like it. if it's a matter of us adjusting our message on there or you know the color or something. Well, so close to the street.

Well, that was to code. It's 3 ft from the uh retaining wall or sidewalk was what I had come in when I when I was going to put the sign in and I saw a lot of changeable copy copy signs. It's very, you know, it's newer because of technology, but uh I had come in and drew a a photo or my own little sketch, I'd say, of the sign. And, uh, when I did, um, I spoke to them here and then, uh, I went back and, uh, there's there's a woman that works upstairs. I then had the engineers draw the sign up because mine was just a sketch. They drew the sign up and then when they drew the sign up, I um submitted their professional drawings and then I I I I brought that in and or I sent that in and then after I sent that in um I I got a response back from the office here and they said they needed it professionally engineered stamp. So then I went and got the engineers to put their stamp on it and then I sent it back in. And then after I uh did that, I came down again and the sign was uh approved with the Midvil City stamp. It did not say that it was an LED sign and and I didn't know that uh you know I I didn't really It's my first time doing that. I'm a small business owner. I tried to read the code. I did reszone that building. It took me a year. I worked with a gentleman that used to work here for quite a long time. I'm trying to run a

good business. I'm trying to, you know, just just be a hardworking businessman in the community. You know, we do a lot for the community. We also have our adventure travel company, but we also have a nonprofit that gives back to the local areas. We bring at risk kids from this community to Snowbird all summer for hiking. We're trying to be just just a good hardworking business. I remember when you came in, when you very first came in, I was weren't you with me, Candy? Yeah, we were here. So, city did he need a permit for this? And did he get a permit for this sign?

There was a permit issued um but nothing for the electronic sign portion that wasn't on the plans and it's wasn't permitted. So there was a permit. You were going to say something Vendeline. Um yeah really nothing in addition. So he the applicant did get a permit. Um but the electronic portion like like he stated wasn't part of the permit. Um and so and we we found out about it because we got complaints. It was pretty bad. Yeah, it's definitely bright. Yeah, it was pretty bad.

And I can adjust anything on it, you know. It's it's something that I just

Yeah. you know, put up there and things and and I'm happy to work together. I'm happy to adjust it and and uh make it right, but I have a substantial investment into it. Um the uh issue that Jonathan speaks about is after the engineering drawings go back and forth, I get a stamped plan and I think that it's good to go. And then after I had gotten the uh letter uh at the office, then they had said that the the building department approved it but not the planning department. And I I don't know the difference from that. I see a stamp on there that they returned that says Midvil City. I'm like, okay, build it. And then I I had it fabricated. I bought the sign. I had a contractor install it. electricians deal with it. I'm in it for a lot of money and um I then used the sign for four months and then when when I was notified I shut the sign off respectfully and immediately that day and it has not been on since. I've seen a fair amount of people, you know, in the four months we had it, we finally had people stopping in the office because they understand what we do and it was very positive impact for us. And I I would really um appreciate some consideration, you know, in that area. We're not in a I I know the the zoning and I've come to learn that the the lines of zoning across the street just next door. I'm right on the on the on the edge there of of I'm in a three different areas, you know, but they they if you go just south of me, there's a

shopping center that has a sign just like it. These are signs just like the sign here that are right on the street. There's a double-sided sign at the head of Midville Historic Main Street. It's the same sign. Yeah. I think what we have to wrinkle with on this commission is like the zoning, you know, is drafted in conformance with the general pan plan. Um, and like do we envision everything that's in the RC zone? uh if they all put up a sign that had 85% illumination or changeable, is that something that we see um as the vision of what the general plan supports? Um does it open a can of worms?

Exactly. Um I would say that uh I don't see in the historic Midvail uh zoning code where that sign says that that's fine to have at 85%. Yeah. And that's not before us. So I I keep keep getting that answer like it was put in before I was here and I don't understand how that works. The difference the key difference I think is that that's for public information whereas yours is for private gain and and really ultimately it's like it's a different different code and it's not

okay. So, if it would have come before you and it would have said had all the lighting, this is going to be LED this and this, if you had more information, would you have approved it? No, they couldn't. No, we we we wouldn't be able to because it doesn't comply with Yeah. So, you didn't have the information in front of you to approve it anyway.

Yeah. So, I want to address so the number one thing on my list that I wrote down was boundaries because you are in a very specific part of Midvale where we're bordering Sandy and Cottonwood Heights. Um, so saying that there are other signs similar near your place of business, I I understand how that can be confusing. Um, but that that's Midvail's view on it. Um, if you wanted to go to Cottonwood Heights, then use their sign. Um, how they how they want to use signs. Um, also, if there are other non-complying signs in Midvail, that's a city problem for not upholding that they're in compliance. It's it's I I I don't see that that's a valid reason to change our 25% to 85%. Um, just because something's out of compliance doesn't mean that everyone gets a free pass. Um, my third thing is you've mentioned several other remediary things you could do um, besides scrapping the whole fence because I know or the whole sign, sorry, cuz I know how expensive they can be.

Um, very very expensive and I know that marketing money is hard to come by. Um, but if there are other mitigating things that you would like applied to the sign code, um, I would investigate those rather than the percent of the 25 to 85%. If you're talking about, you know, how bright it can be, that might be something to consider proposing. If it could be um hours of operation, hours of operation, that sort of thing, that might be a a better thing to discuss here than just the the size because that size is huge. 85% Yeah.

of any sign e even if it's a billboard, I still find that egregious. Those poor birds. Uh they and there is one just down the street from us in Midvil. You know, that's a a massive billboard, you know, right at the red light there. Yeah. And it's just across the street where it does get confusing because that is Midvail, but it is on the opposite side of the street than where I am because it does a little zigzag right in front of my office.

Yeah. You know, I am in this for a sizable investment and you know uh not not being uh you know not being notified before four months of operation means that I have no option to return anything you know and and andor get anything back and and um it's a substantial investment of my time and all of the expenses from design, contractors, engineers, fabrication, the sign itself.

Sure. I I I believe that you would have a a more substantial cause for this if I'm not legal, but a more substantial cause if it was built to the drawings that were approved. But as there were details left off of what was actually built, I'm not sure that that's that's an argument that this the size was approved. Yeah. But not the details. As you can see in the code, it it mentions things like changeability and electronics.

To the extent possible, guys, I know that there's context and history here that isn't captured, but to the extent we can, I'd like to talk about the text amendment that's before us. Um, and like while those details might be relevant for other forums that aren't necessarily applicable here. So, um, I I think recommendations about what could possibly fit are are are probably sound. Um, yeah, but all that other context, I'm not sure. Yeah, there's there's much we can do and I don't I don't know that it is a decisioning factor either. So, and we're doing apples to oranges when we're bringing out billboards has nothing to do with this sign at all. I mean, not at all. Is it in compliance or is it not? It is. It's that simple. Is it in compliance or is it not?

And really, that's we're not even judging if it is in compliance or not. We're judging would we amend the text of the Would we change it? Yeah. Yeah. Uh or recommend changing it. Correct. Because we Yeah. We will. We are not the approving body. Does anyone else have questions for the applicant that they would like addressed at this time? No. Dean, I appreciate your time. Yeah, thank you guys for your time. Appreciate it. Thank you. Um I Is there more discussion we'd like to have on this or does someone have a motion they'd like to put forward?

I don't want to open a can of worms for sure. I'll make a motion. I move that we recommend denial of the zoning code text amendment as provided in the attachments with the finding noted in the staff report. I second. Roll call vote, please. Chair Edwards, yes. Vice Chair Lkey, yes. Commissioner Tippetsz, yes. Commissioner Anderson, yes. Commissioner Ericson, yes. The motion passes.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda, um Darren Nate requests conditional use permit approval for a 12-unit medium highdensity residential development located at 7689 South Center Square in the transit oriented development TOD zone. Jonathan is presenting.

Thanks, Chair Edwards. Um so this is for a conditional use permit. Um this property may look familiar. Um, there was a another text amendment and a actual is a property right vacation that was before you guys. I want to say February. Um, the city council approved both of those. Um, and those have run their course. Um, so this is before you for the development um of the site for 12 town homes. Um the property to the southeast um has been built. Um this is essentially a phase two of that project. Um staff has reviewed all of this. Um here's the proposed it would match the existing buildings that are already there nearby. Um staff has reviewed and we find that this meets the DoD zone for conditional use standards. Um, and this is our recommended motion. Any questions?

Have there been any comments? I have not received any before the meeting. No. Legal. Would you like to apply or give us some direction? Uh, so this one is actually an administrative decision that is for the commission to make. Uh, it is more stringent though. Uh, if it if you find that it meets the requirements of our city code, you are required to approve it. uh if you don't then you can also make findings that uh if it can be and now I just lost the word in my head uh yeah if if it can be mitigated then you can also approve it with mitigations that are required. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Should we open this up to public hearing?

If anyone has comments on this now is the time. We want to hear from Yeah, I guess we can hear from the applicant. is the applicant present and would like to discuss. Okay, that's great. Thanks, guys. That's kind of open. Yeah, it is.

Thanks for making time for this. My name is Darren Nate, the applicant. Um, you've seen this before. Uh, have you seen phase one? Don't know what to add. I guess um we tried to make it uh a good product that will be, you know, add to the city's um ownership um you know, responsible ownership instead of a rental property. uh didn't seek higher density which maybe you know the overlay is possible there in that area uh met the parking and then exceeded it. So uh I know that's an issue in that neighborhood. Um so I you know we're trying to uh add something to the neighborhood and hopefully that's what we've done. If you have any questions for me I'd be happy to answer any. No. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. How about now we continue with the public if anyone has comments on this. Seeing there is no one. I move that we close the public hearing. Second. All in favor? I I discussion thoughts. No, but I'll move that we approve the conditional use permit for a 12 unit town home project located at 7689 South Center Square in the TOD zone with the findings included in the staff report. I'll second. Roll call vote, please. Chair Edwards, yes. Vice Chair Lee, yes. Commissioner Tippetsz, yes. Commissioner Henderson, yes. And Commissioner Ericson, yes. The motion passes.

Thank you. Y uh last item on the public hearing portion of the agenda. Darren Nate requests preliminary subdivision approval for a 12-unit medium high density residential development located at 7689 South Center Square in the transit oriented development to zone. Jonathan is presenting. Uh this is yeah it's for the same excuse me

um same property um this is just a preliminary subdivision plat um that as required by title 16 you as the planning commission have to approve um staff has reviewed it against the preliminary subdivision requirements um and it meets those um so it is on to you for a decision perfect anyone questions for Johnny questions none legal Anything to add above and beyond what was already discussed for this? Nope. I wanted to hear you say opine again. Um uh does Darren Nate have anything additional he would he does not. Okay. Open this up for public hearing. Seeing there's no one here to comment. I move that we close the public hearing portion.

I second it. All in favor? I. Comments, discussion? I can make a motion if you'd like. Love it. I move that we approve the preliminary subdivision for a 12 lot subdivision located at 7689 South Center Square with the findings included in the staff report. I second. Roll call vote, please. Chair Edwards, yes. Vice Chair Ledkkey, yes. Commissioner Tibbitz, yes. Commissioner Anderson, yes. Commissioner Ericson, yes. The motion passes. Thank you. Thanks.

All right, we'll move on to the staff updates and other business portions of the agenda. Um looks like we're going to have a discussion around American Planning Association spring conference which which recently ended. Yes. Um, so for the benefit of everyone on the commission who didn't go, I just wanted to um ask those who went if there was something that you know stood out to you that maybe something we should look at as a city or there was just a good piece of information that you want to share with anyone. Can we can we uh recognize that uh Commissioner Tippets is uh excused

for the minutes. Thank you. Have fun. Thank you. I was there. I thought it was it was a little less for the commission this time than the one time that I went. So, I found it a little bit it still was interesting the fire part. I thought, "Wow, what an extra burden to put on our builders." And you know, it seemed so you got an idea more of the rural area, which they covered quite a bit down there. Fascinating with some of the things with uh, you know, code enforcement and met with guns and stuff. I went, "Oh, oh, how interesting." So, but it was I mean, the location was stellar.

Yeah. And they were really good to us down there. And was it in the park? Mhm. Well, just right outside Ruby and Ruby. Yeah, it was really fun actually. So, it was fun to get to know people and I I found it interesting um in the code enforcement class that I went to is that it's an extreme painful experience for every city. Yes. And if you're a smaller city, it's even more painful and less enforcable and and stuff. And so, um, it was, uh, the code enforcement guy had three jobs, didn't he? The one guy to wear so many hats. Yeah, it was really

Well, they talked about how one mayor was the code enforcer, too. And yeah, and stuff. And so, um, you know, it and and it was interesting to hear from West Valley City, their code enforcement, uh, person just, uh, hearing about the challenges that they face and they're they're pretty aggressive in their um, their code enforcement, but yet they even have challenges that, you know, how much they just don't have the resources to throw at Yeah.

a lot of these problems. And so they just kind of have to keep whittling away and and uh persevering and hopefully they'll be changed. But uh and then some ways they're very successful. And so I thought that was really interesting and and made me appreciate what Midbell does and um and you know it all comes down to money and how much do we want to spend our tax dollars on code enforcement. Yeah. to enforce and that's I mean there's some things that are vital that you have to take care of and then there's other things that you're like going they've got some vine growing there. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So it was I don't know how applicable

um this class is one of the last classes. Um but basically they're talking about short-term rentals and how they have softwares that monitor it. I don't know how applicable it would be for the

Yeah, that was interesting. area, but I was like I wanted to find out like how many Airbnbs there were in Midville, right? Like and what who was operating legally and stuff like that. Um, and in this class I talked about how much ROI actually the cities were obtaining from investing in the software because they were getting the, you know, interest fees and stuff like that paid for. effect. I mean, I'll give you like off the top of my head, I think they um Summit County invested $50,000 into the software because you can get like bells and whistles and stuff like that. And uh I think the ROI was like 1.6 million. Wow.

Yeah. It's even harder to determine how many short-term rentals can be like legally to find out how many are actually out there. But the rule conference is great for that because they have so many issues. Totally. The software is for free. you just like give, you know, it's you're not going to have all the bells and whistles and so it would probably be very cumbersome to to navigate, but could get the software for free. Yeah, I thought that Yeah, it sounds like the state paid for it um for the base. Um when I talked to the guy, he said that I think he said we had 140 um in Midbell. Most of them are in my neighborhood. I had I had one in mind for a minute and then we said you can't do that in this gated community doll. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. So interesting. Yeah. That's cool. That was your first time, right? Going down there. Yeah. Was it fun? Yeah, it was way cool. Yeah. You think it was interesting? I'm a workhorse, so I was just Yeah. Weren't there to work and take the classes? I didn't do anything fun other than classes, which I think this is fun. Obviously, I've been Yeah, we're bunch of nerds. A lot of a lot of great company. Yeah, it really was good.

Um, this there were a couple of classes that stuck out to me. So, I went to one that's sort of like a new format for APA. They were working on a position paper for um well really ebikes and how to deal with you know speed different differentials and um that was quite interesting I thought especially since we with the Jordan River Parkway we deal with some of that

and the other one um at first I thought well this there may not be much that really applies to us here But um it turned out differently. I I was in a session in which Park City explained how they deal with parking and um the the immediate need was that at Bonanza Flats, which is, you know, up Guardsman Pass,

um they have a lot more people that go there by car than they have parking. And since Guardsman is really, you know, very narrow on street parking there is really doesn't work or it's a safety issue. So they started um uh to enforce parking regulations on the parking lot

and they also started to charge for it, you know, in order to I guess discourage those who, you know, maybe don't care that much about going there. And it turned out at the same time they extended one of their transit routes um from the Park City Transit Center on Main Street up that way. And they were actually able to pay for the transit route uh through the parking fees on the parking lot. Oh wow. Wow.

Um they had a few things that need finetuning. For example, they found out that the buses um after so and so long burn out their engines on that route on that route. Yeah, now that I'm thinking of it. And some I guess some people which Park City really didn't mind um are using it almost like a ski lift for your mountain bike. So they they put and they the buses were specifically retrofitted that they could haul mountain bikes. So they start at the transit center, go up a bus, and then they find their way back down to the transit center and then do it again.

And they were surprised by that. They were like, "Oh, no, I don't think they would." Okay. I was like, "That sounds just like a Park City thing to do, isn't it?" And I thought the financial part really surprised me that they could, you know, bankroll the entire transit service through the parking fees. It's really cool. Interesting. Yeah. Cool. Cool. Lunch was good. Yeah. Yeah. You didn't get a commissioner lunch though, huh? That was fun. Me? Oh. Um or Yeah, cuz we went to a commissioner lunch at the last one where they just all the commissioners got a vent. It was a They served us. Yeah. It was lovely. Oh, wow. In Ebenezers.

I don't know what that is. I'm sorry. It was really fun.

I only know Scrooge. Okay. So then the the other part I just wanted to share with you real quick um that in this year's legislative session as usual there were some changes and I added um a little bit of that to the packet. Um and we'll we'll talk about that um more in the future with our training. But one of the changes in the state law really is that there's more of an emphasis on on ethics on when to recuse oneself if there ever were a conflict of interest. And so um all of you should have gotten one of these. Um and we'll probably discuss that uh a little more in in detail. I mean it's it's in in essence there's really nothing new,

right? Um it's just that the legislature decided to make this, you know, I guess put more emphasis on it. And so as part of that, we'll also have to review um the section in the city code that deals with planning commissions just to make sure we in compliance what the state law requires and also our bylaws. Mhm.

Um then uh you you probably saw that the training requirements changed slightly and it's basically they added a little more substance to it and you know increased what what should be the minimum training but it's you know really doesn't change much for us I think. So yeah perfect everything I had. Thank you. Anything additional from the planning department report? Planning department? No. Okay, that's the end of our agenda.

Wait. Oh, here we go. A motion that we close at 6:36. A second. All in.