Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Jacob will lead us in the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Are there any conflicts of interest? All right. Um, approval of minutes for the November 5th and November 19th, 2025 commission meeting.

I'll make a motion to approve item 3.4. Second. So, we have a motion by Heather and a second by Forest. All in favor?

I. And then item 4.1, review and consider a conditional use permit amendment to allow the placement of a temporary building um on Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District property. Sorry to keep you waiting. Um while this is being pulled up, this is a uh we looked at this issue just last in last October. Um so the Jordan Valley Water Conservation District has uh they got approval to construct several buildings on their site. As part of that approval, um well, at after that approval, upon the construction of the uh of the buildings, the contractor placed a large temporary uh canvas building on the on the property to um accommodate the construction of the buildings on the Jordan Valley Water site. Um and that is what we're here to discuss. Um as it does require that temporary building also does require a conditional use. Flicker is not working but oh now it is. So uh Jordan Valley this is where it's at down along Mountain View corridor just across from Bluffdale there. Uh this is the site that that uh the tent has been constructed on uh just to the west of where the buildings are being constructed. Um to our understanding, there's also been a concrete slab uh built underneath the the uh tent. So the uh regulations we're looking at are zoning and engineering. Of course, uh engineering doesn't have any concerns with the building. In [clears throat] terms of compliance with current ordinance, um as per 1016, any temporary structure needs to be uh

removed upon the completion or abandonment of the construction of work. and we would recommend that the applicant also remediate the site back to its um vegetated state. So, that being said, um we do recommend approval of the of the temporary building and I'm I'm open to answer any questions. The applicant is also here if you questions for them.

Thanks, Clint. All right. Does the applicant have anything they want to add? Thank you. All right. Discussion or a motion? Pretty simple to me. I'm ready to make a motion unless somebody has Oh, go ahead. I'm ready to second it. I I recommend approval of this item 4.1 with staff's three recommendations. And I'll second it. Okay. Brody, yes. Jackson, yes. Heather, yes. Adam, yes. Daryl, yes. Inforest, yes.

Okay, so that was um a motion by Adam, a second by Daryl, and a unanimous vote. Item 5.1, review and consider a recommendation to amend chapter 10-27 signs of city code to permit and regulate commercial signs in the CF commercial flex zone and update development standards for illuminated signs.

All right. Well, so here's the signs. [clears throat] Um, so this amendment came up for two reasons. Uh, first off, the CF zone was adopted a few months back as well. And with that, uh, was, uh, there was no sign regulations implemented at the time. So, this will provide sign regulations for that zone. Uh, we've also had an incident where, uh, some commercial signage has encroached and been problematic for some of the adjacent neighbors. So to help minimize that going uh forward, this uh there have been some changes to the ordinance to restrict and and regulate when those lights or when those uh when those signs can be visible and and facing towards the residential property. Um so this is Johnny's window here looking outside and he sees this bright light. This is the situation we're trying to prevent. Um, there are conditions where somebody could come in and say, "Hey, we want to put a a sign that's facing a residential neighborhood." There are some requirements they would need to detail and show for us. It would need we need sign details, a lighting plan, uh, and also some renderings showing what the sign is going to look like and how bright it's going to be. Um we bring bring that before the commission and it would be your final say to approve or not approve um any sign that uh is facing that is lit facing a residential property. Uh and again uh updating the CF zone. So the CF zone standards for signs is very similar to the CO C2 zone uh signage requirements. Uh in terms of considerations, the things we look at consistency with the general plan um and then just making sure that we're not what we're doing is not harmful to any we don't have a lot of adverse um effects from the ordinance

we're proposing. So um where this does help promote signage in those flex commercial flex areas and promotes uh harmony between existing development and residential development. We do recommend approval of the ordinance as it is uh as it's been stated. If there are any questions I can answer be glad to answer them. The uh particular sign in question was it just a matter of orientation? Was it built correctly or was it twisted to

No, it was built correctly. There was another feature to the sign that I don't think the neighbors were also anticipating. There was a bright light within a building that was that was also spilling out into the neighborhood and I think that that was uh added to the frustration of the the sign going into the neighborhood and then the bright light as well coming from the building. So, there are a couple of issues, but it was it was built as was permitted. Um, I just don't think that that we anticipated the brightness of the sign to be uh to have the effect that it did. It's a little brighter than we probably expected, but uh to the developers credit, they have worked with the city and uh I think that they've resolved the situation. So,

we appreciate that from them. Could we go back a couple slides? Okay. under under conditional use required. Um would it be possible or advantageous to add a phototric plan as a requirement? Uh yeah. So that would be let's see that would be another I I so the lighting plan would also well I think that that was also another requirement in the conditional use that I did not include in the slide but yes that would be if it's not in there it should be it should be so we'd have a photometric and how many c foot candles we have it at whatever

right and I think for all signs uh moving forward I think for all signs we're going to try to get that phototric plan so so that we know the impact with the signage and the lights being proposed on the property to residential neighborhoods. Okay. And that's already part of the design effort and review, right? Right. Okay. So, we don't need to add that as far as I don't think you need to add that, but we'll make sure that it's in there.

Okay. There's no other comments. will um go ahead and um this item has a public hearing, so I'll read that policy. The purpose of the public comment policy is to allow citizens to address items on the agenda. Citizens requesting to address the commission will be asked to complete a written comment form and present it to the deputy city recorder. In general, the chair will allow an individual three minutes to address the commission, and a spokesperson recognized as representing a group may be allowed up to five minutes. Um, so we'll go ahead and open that now. Come forward and state your name, please.

My name is Clint Underwood, president of Paramin. Um, first of all, thank you for letting me speak before you. Uh, Andrea, I might just say that it's a little tough to hear you in the back of the room. Oh, okay. Thank you.

It's But I don't have a whole lot to say. I just want to I want to say that um you know if you look at the uh electronic billboards along Mountain View corridor, I would hate to be buying an apartment or a condo or whatever they're going to be in that huge development right there. They are not going to get a good night's sleep with those lights on flashing in their rooms. I mean that's like what is it an eight or 10 story building seems to be. It's just inconsistent with quality of life. Um, I think that there's an opportunity here to to create some conformity, to tone down the possibility of another monstrosity sign like that going up. This is our opportunity to make the town um have a better quality of life because right now those whoever buys those places will be suffering. Uh, you know, I've lived in a lot of places in the United States and light pollution of that nature is destructive to sleep. So, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Seeing no more comments, a motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. Okay. A motion by Adam, a second by Heather Brody. Yes. Jackson. That's just a real call. Not all in favor. Okay. Hi. Hi. Hi. Thank you. Sorry. Okay. All right. Um discussion or a motion.

Um my comment is I am worried about some of these in the CF zone just considering where some of those are located, where they could be located. Um just putting signs super close to those residential areas. I'm kind of worried about is it a 200 foot because we did like some really small setbacks too. Yeah, but the sign has to be 200 feet away. Is that what was written in there? I think so. From residential. From residential. Yeah. Yeah. We we currently only have one CF zone, correct?

Yep. And only one lot that's associated with that CF zone. No, none. None are zoned. I don't think we have any lots that are zoned. CF, we're just making it. So CF just made the zone, right? But we made the zone for one particular property. It hasn't been applied yet. That's correct. It hasn't been applied yet. So we don't have a bunch of different zones or different areas that this is going to be. This this ordinance would it would uh apply to all zones uh commercial C2, CF, M1, M2, anything that's adjacent or have an effect on residential properties would have to comply with the ordinance.

Uh just an additional statement in our current ordinance uh we have that flat signs facing dwellings on adjacent properties may not be illuminated. Um so we do have a couple of things in here already that are looking after that. So this is kind of creating an additional buffer um not meant to supplement everything al together makes sense to just have it follow C2 and MU. I don't know if I heard an answer for Heather's question. What is our setbacks

those larger signs from a residential property? Yes. Um, so for an electronic signing, it's 500 feet. 500 feet.

This would be So for a flat or wall sign, it would be 200 feet or um If the sign is across the street from a residential development, that would also uh we would allow it go in that area as well. Any other discussion? I don't know.

I know. Are we Are we done or are we ready for a motion? I'm ready to make a motion. Okay. I'll make a motion to um I guess request approval of item 5.1. Was there any? Okay, a second. Okay, so motion by Brody, a second by Forest. Brody, yes. Jackson, yes. Heather, yes. Adam, yes. Daryl, yes. And Forest, yes. Okay, so that passed. Uh, future Oh, do we have any commission comments?

No. Okay. Um, future meetings. The next city council meeting will be January 14th and the next planning commission meeting will be January 22nd. We have a motion to adjurnn. So moved. Second. Forest and Heather. All in favor? I tough. My neighbor keeps