Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

Good evening. Welcome to the May 7

Planning Commission meeting. We'll do a quick round of introductions of planning commissioners and then staff. Ron Mortimer.

David Hart.

Danny Schoenfeldt.

Steve Wrigley. Cameron Duncan.

Then James, do you want to

interview staff? I'm James Sorenson, Community Development Director. And tonight we have several of our staff members that you'll be hearing giving staff reports tonight. And I'll just ask them each to raise their hand. Mike Wilcox right here is the planning director. Brian McHouston, assistant community development director. Brittany Ward will be here in a minute. She's our public works assistant director. And Ivan Hooper, Transportation Engineer, will be here in a minute as well. Sarah Stringham is the Senior Planner in our office. Cash Hancey, Senior Planner in our office back here. And we have Ayesha as our Planning Secretary and takes some minutes for the Planning Commission.

Thank you. We'll do a quick pledge of allegiance and get into the agenda. Okay. Our first item on the agenda tonight is the Lekai II annexation. Are you introducing that, Mike? Brian is. Okay.

All right. Good evening, everybody. Brian McHouston, the assistant director. We have the annexations, two of them on the agenda tonight. The first one is the Lekai II annexation. Annexation. You can see on the map that we've got an area highlighted in yellow. And that's an area that you've already reviewed and have forwarded a positive recommendation to the council. They've actually approved that ordinance. So this is the second part of that, where we're taking the remaining property that the property owner owns.

All those are highlighted in red on the map dealing with three different addresses. And so the property owner did sign a consent to annex the remainder of these properties on April 2. The county zoning, just like the other portion, has a couple different zones. One is in the county, there's zone c two, and then another area c two with the zoning condition which deals with the alcohol cells and the remainder of the property is R 143 so insanity we're proposing to do those as R 140 and CC Community Commercial which is the closest zone that we have related to the C 2 Zone. Staff would recommend you forward a positive recommendation on this annexation to the city council.

Any questions for Bray? Okay. This item has been noticed to the public. Is there anybody here that would like to speak to this item? Anybody online, Mike?

If you are joining us via Zoom webinar and want to speak to this particular item, please use the raise your hand feature now, and we'll address you one at a time. I am seeing no hands.

We'll close that to public comment and bring that back to the commission for deliberation and action.

Okay. I'm ready for a motion.

Go ahead.

Okay. I'll make the motion that the Planning Commission send a positive recommendation to the city council that the Lacai II annexation be approved and zoned R140 and the community commercial in a CC zone based upon the following four findings. Is there a second?

I'll second.

You got it. Go

ahead. I'll second.

David Hart? Yes. Steve Wrigley? Yes. Cameron Duncan? Yes. Ron Mortimer?

Yes.

Danny Schoenfeld?

Yes. This motion carries. Okay, the next item on the agenda is the annexation of Rudulich annexation. I probably sold that wrong.

Yeah, think it's Rudulich. You're close. So this is located at 9521 South Cassell Drive. You can see on the map, typically these properties need to be contiguous in order for us to annex. And we've highlighted the property to the West side, which is the Van Lulen property. And that annexation has been approved by the city council. So this property will be adjacent to the Van Lleuens once that's recorded and completed. So they wanted to join in and so they signed a consent earlier this year. And this area is zoned R110 and so we'll match it to the R110 we have here in Sandy. Staff would recommend you forward a positive recommendation to the council on this one.

Any questions from the commission? Okay. This item has been noticed. Is there anybody here that would like to speak on this item? Anybody online, Mike?

If you are joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak to this particular item, please use the raise your hand feature now, and we'll address you one at a time. I'm seeing no hands raised.

We'll close that to public comment and bring that back to the commission.

I'm ready for a motion. Go ahead. Make the recommendation that the Planning Commission send a positive recommendation to the City Council that the Rudlich annexation be approved and zoned R110 based on the four conditions as outlined in the staff report.

Second.

Cameron Duncan.

Yes.

David Hart.

Yes.

Ron Mortimer

yes Steve Wrigley

yes

Danny Schoenfeld

yes

this motion carries.

Thank you next item is the E Yank accessory dwelling structure Mike I'm guessing you had that first.

Yep So this item is a request being submitted by our applicant. Oh, sorry. One second. Mr. Sam Tans who's representing the property owner Monte Ink they're requesting a conditional use permit for an increase in their allowable square footage for an accessory building This is a property located at 1779 East 10980 South as shown here on the map.

And I believe the applicant is online. Let me see if he's there. Mr. Tams you may go ahead and unmute yourself and present your item to the Planning Commission.

Yeah I'm here can you hear me?

Yes we can go ahead.

Okay yeah I think we're just like, a 100 or 200 square feet over that allowable square footage that you guys have. So we're just requesting that we can get that additional square footage. As far as the height restriction goes, we're well under the height restriction as well.

Any questions for the applicants? Okay.

I think

we're good. Sarah, do you have any additional?

Yeah. Just wanted to add, it's for, yeah, any individual structure. The max is 1,500 square feet and then you have to move to the conditional use permit. So this one's 1,600 square feet. And then also they do have, a detached garage. So that comes into just the total overall square footage, that they would be allowed. So in this zone with animal rights they can request up to 50% larger so they're just almost at that 50% cap for total square footage of accessory structures.

Any questions for the staff? Okay. This item has been noticed to the public. Is there anybody here would like to speak on this item? Anybody online, Mike?

If you are joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak on this particular item, please use the raise your hand feature now, and we'll address you one at a time. I'm seeing no other hands raised.

Okay, we'll go ahead and close that to public comment and bring that back to the commission for deliberation and action. I'll make a motion. Go for it.

Recommended the Planning Commission approve a conditional use permit for an increased square footage as a and as described in the staff report for the property located at 1779 East, 10980 South, based on the three findings and four conditions as outlined in the staff report.

Is there a second? Second. Steve.

Sorry, who was this?

Steve.

Steve. Thank you. Cameron Duncan? Yes. Steve Wrigley?

Yes.

Ron Mortimer?

Yes.

David Hart?

Yes.

Danny Schoenfeld?

Yes.

This motion carries.

Thank you.

This next item I have to recuse myself. All these reasons thank you

thank you. Okay next item on the agenda is the Mortimer. Accessories structure. Mike, do you have that first?

Yeah. So the next item on our agenda is a request submitted by Felix Guzman, who's representing the property owner, Ron Mortimer. They are requesting a conditional use permit for increased building height at the property located at 8383 South Mesa Drive. I believe the applicant is here and can present on behalf of Mr. Mortimer.

If you could just state your name and address for the record please.

Okay, so my name is Felix Guzman.

Sir, if you can

grab one of those microphones speak right into it.

Sorry. Thank you.

There you go. So my name is Felix Guzman and do you want my address, my telephone? Business address or The 342 North 200 West Spanish Fork, Utah.

Thank you.

The project is pretty straightforward. We're just proposing to replace an existing shed in the rear yard with a new detached accessory structure that will be used as the garage. The structure is approximately 747 square feet, and it's about 19 feet 19 foot seven tall. And one important thing is that I like to point out that this is not an attempt to overdevelop the property or anything like that. This is simply a functional accessory structure.

No one's gonna be living in it. It's not an accessory structure, an accessory dwelling unit, or anything like that. So we just made a strong effort to make sure that the structure fits within the existing site. The the site has a as you can see here, it has a slope that's pretty high, and it has been undisturbed. We were able to prove that it has been undisturbed. So we're just trying to work with what he has to make it safe for everyone. So I don't know if you have any questions. Any

questions from the commission?

So it looks like the 19 feet is to make it level with the house. Is that wider than 19?

It's to make it level with the house, but not only the house, but to make it high enough so that no one can step over the roof on the back of the slope.

How far from the property line is it?

So it is about seven feet from the property line

In the back. I can't really see. And then it's half and it's three feet on the other side?

And it's three feet on the other side. Correct.

So I'm assuming he'll rearrange this driveway as well, right?

Well, the driveway is going to stay the same. He already has access through there. And he could fit a single car or an ATV back there, which is the purpose of the accessory structure.

I see.

Any other questions? No. No. Thank you. Thank you. This item has been sir, did you have any additional color?

Nothing really. Just to mention that it's for the building height and then also asking for that three foot setback would generally be a little bit larger. So just waiting or doing a setback exception for to do three feet from that side property line.

Thank you. This item has been noticed in the public. Is there anybody here that would like to speak on it? Anybody online?

If you're joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak on this particular item, please use the raise your hand feature now, and we'll address you one at a time.

Seeing none, we'll close that public comment and bring it back to the commission for deliberation and action.

I will be happy to make a motion. Okay. I'd like to make a motion that the Planning Commission approve a conditional use permit for an increased height and reduced setbacks as described in the staff report for the property located at 8383 South Mesa Drive based on the following three findings and six conditions. Is there a second?

I'll second it.

Sorry was that Steve? Thank you. David Hart?

Yes.

Steve Wrigley?

Yes.

Cameron Duncan? Yes. Danny Schoenfeld? Yes. This motion carries.

Should we invite Ron back in?

Yeah. Could you? Yeah.

Jared, are

you just inviting

Thanks, Brian.

Hey, Ron, can you come back in? Probably not.

GREGORY This was the last time I was in

a minute, my mic said all kinds of stuff.

It is recorded, so All go with the job.

Right.

Next item in the agenda is the preschool at established dance for a conditional use permit. Mike, do want to start?

MICHAEL This next item is a conditional use request submitted by the applicant Lisa Glick representing the property owner Rim Faesta Village. They are requesting approval of a conditional use for a preschool to be established in that commercial center. This is a property that's located at 8695 South Highland Drive shown on the map. I believe the applicant is here and can present on her request.

If could just come down to the mic. Pick one of the two and just state your name and business address for the record, please.

LESLIE KELLY:

Good evening. My name's Lisa Glick. And our property address is 8695 South Highland Drive. It's established studios. And we use the studio in the evening. And we want to bring in a preschool during the day. Anything else?

Any questions for the applicant?

How many students would you typically have at one time?

Right now, have two rooms we want to use. And we're bringing in a gal that's already existing preschool. She has a morning class and an afternoon class. And she has up to 15 kids in each class.

Okay. Thank you. I'm assuming you have all the I don't see a plan. But I'm assuming you have all the required restroom facilities and first aid and everything else that you would need.

We've had the building commissioner come out, our inspector. And we've had the fire. We've had it inspected for both preschool and dance. And we're making one more change. And that is a light socket that goes away from the sink.

That's a good idea.

Okay. Any other questions?

Yeah, Steve, what's your plan on parking and drop off?

Okay. Well, have you been to the Rings Complex there? It's fairly large. So we have two options. They could park and bring their child in. We have two doors they can come through. Or we've asked the owner and the manager if we could do a drive up to the curb and drop off at one of the it's closer to Rich's Bagel. It's in between Rich's Bagel and our studio. And Rich's Bagel is fine because they feel like they can bring in customers that way. But that would be a drop off with teachers out there.

We've got three teachers that would go out and greet the children and bring them in at the curbside. So they could drop off and pick them up.

Thank you.

Any other questions for the applicant? Thank you. Sarah, did you have some additional info info?

I think everything was covered. You guys were discussing the parking and the drop off pickup pickup. Staff did mention that as a concern with other cars using the drive aisle or other customers. We didn't set any specific conditions on that, but we did list that as a possible concern.

So is the limit how many can she have in this building? Is there what 16 at a time or what's the limit for preschool?

Because it's a commercial property she doesn't necessarily

It's just based upon occupancy then?

Yes. Yeah.

I have a question. So this is a conditional use. Does it run with the entire building or just this tenant suite?

It would run with the entire parcel.

Parcel. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. This item has been noticed to the public. Is there anybody here that would like to speak on it? Mike, anybody online?

If you are joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak on this particular item, please use the raise your hand feature now, and we'll address you one at a time. I'm seeing no other hands.

Okay, we'll close that to public comment and bring that back to the commission. So would like to make a motion?

Yeah, I'll make a motion. Nobody else is. Move that the Planning Commission approve a conditional use permit for the preschool use in the CN zone as described in the staff report for the property located at 8695 South Highland Drive based upon the following two findings and three conditions. Is there a second?

I'll second that.

David Hart? Yes. Cameron Duncan? Yes. Ron Mortimer?

Yes.

Steve Wrigley?

Yes.

Danny Schoenfeld?

Yes.

This motion carries.

Thank you next is the Silver Sage Estate Subdivision special exception request and preliminary subdivision review. Mike do you have that first?

I do thank you Mr. Chair this item is for a property that's located off of 1000175 South Dimplevale Road this is two items that will present at the same time that will require two different motions one for a special exception and one for a subdivision motion. They are proposing a three lot subdivision on this parcel that has three existing parcels on it and they'll be proposing to reconfigure those into three buildable lots. This property is also located in the sensitive area overlay. This is being presented by Alyssa Holbrook who is representing the property owners James and Carol Bay. I believe she's in attendance and can present on her request.

If you could come down and

Is there any option to do it later since Paxton was going to present? Like to move it? Do you wanna

table it? Is that your request?

Not till a different date. Just till later in the agenda.

We have one other agenda item. That's it. We need to go.

K. Great. Okay. We've got this.

This is Silver you say

your name and address for the record or your business address for this?

Yeah. It's Alyssa Holbrook, 4595 South Holiday Farm Lane in Holiday. So this is our preliminary subdivision review for Silver State's Estates Subdivision. It was originally three lots and we're continuing to have it be three lots so it will be the same density. There's no change in that. What else would you like to know? Did

you read the staff report and then agree understand all of the conditions set forth in that?

Yes.

K.

And Bob has done that

as well. Yeah. And if you can speak into the mic and state your

name, please.

My name is Bob Elder with 45 West 10000 South, Suite 500 K. Just right across the way.

Yeah. Okay.

With Ensign Engineering. As I'm the engineer of record as in developing the project, we did meet with residents around the project, discussed with them concerns, and addressed items within the project to try to consider and appreciate what they were asking. I did recognize in the staff report they did discuss about, wildlife and, passing through the property. And there's made mention on the very north side of the property. We have a drainage that runs along the very north property. And so there's a a path that they historically could come down and go through deer Sorry.

Animals.

Mhmm. Deer and other animals could travel from the east side of the property down across Dimpledale and down into Dimpledale drainage. And so we could accommodate that. That's the natural path. And and then

So we've we've made some considerations saying that there won't be fences built by the future homeowners, that we're still allowing the deer access. We've also considered can I say some other things? We've also considered the concerns about the light pollution or anything like that and we've previously addressed those that those lights will be shining down. And we've talked about, I think, the owls were another concern with that. And so we've we've addressed that. We've met with the residents locally at the property, at the site, walked it together. Yes.

Yeah. So the street improvements along the frontage of the street have been designed to be in accordance with the city standards for a 45 foot roadway section within the 60 foot right of way. So any other questions or

Are there any other questions? Can

you go back to the previous? Right right there. So the. Is this a new roadway you're putting on a

private drive to the third?

Yeah, private drive up to that third lot.

That's that's correct. So we've given him a a an access alignment to get up to their property that's a the developable area of the property. There is a 30% slope on the property, and that's been designated. And then the buildable limits of those lots have been defined. So we've shown, the access points of the driveways to all three lots on this particular plan.

And we were originally seeking five lots, but based on everything that we understood and being working really closely with the planning commission and all of the members. We've been working on this for almost two years now. We we have come to the conclusion that three lots will be the best and that it will really raise the values of the neighborhood nearby. We have an exhibit. I don't know if did Paxton have you add the exhibit of the home that might be going in? No. K. That's fine.

So back to my question. Mhmm. The curve on the road that you're coming in

Yes.

Off of, from a safety stand standpoint, you've got cars coming through what is somewhat And like a hairpin then you've got other cars coming from the other side that are coming around. It's a little bit of a blind corner. And I'm just wondering about people accessing that road, stopping, turning left, right, etcetera.

Let me express that. That was one of the big considerations we made in identifying the roadway improvements as they relate to the right of way. If you follow that hill, which are very familiar, there's a very steep slope off the west side back down into Dimple Dale. And so what we did is we took the 45 foot roadway section, and we shifted it as far east as we could. They're starting along the south of the property and kept that.

And and the reason for that is to widen the view corridor for the traffic and improve the safety and then identify intersections where the driveways would come out to be at the safest locations and give us the best sight distance. And so we work with the within the existing right of way, but we built the roadway to improve those concerns that you're talking about, those attorney movements and giving them as much site visibility to protect the public.

And we worked very closely with staff. I don't know. Britney, do you wanna say anything about that, about the view corridor and the things that we talked about over the couple yeah. Come speak to

her Please. Over lost

your hand.

Brittany Ward, city engineer. Yeah. Bob was great to work with. He made the radius of the curve of Dimple Dell a little bit larger, so it just kinda pushed it out this way to improve the view corridor. The location of the driveway, I worked with him closely on it to push it as far north as possible because that's where this roadway starts to curve in the opposite direction.

It's always hard putting accesses on the inside of a horizontal curve because you have to look behind you to turn and make those movements. That will the vegetation will be impacted for those exiting and looking looking left for oncoming traffic. And so there will have to be some vegetation removed to improve the site visibility according to AASHTO site triangle standards. But because that because of Bob's realignment of the centerline of Dippel Dell and then moving the driveway as far north as possible, that this is the best scenario as far as protecting vegetation and improving safety for access.

Thank you. Any other

so much for

that make it in as a condition?

What? I'm sorry. What what was your question?

My question is is on the removal of the vegetation. I just don't want an accident there. So Right. So The removal of the vegetation, did that make it into this as a condition? I see that a revegetation.

Is. If you if you go back to that erosion control plan, you can see the grading and the it's a color right there.

Yep.

Okay. You can see a lot of the green in there. That's part of the roadway that we're actually cutting the the the vegetation back to help protect the public in there. And if you went back in a previous sheet, you could see where the existing road is, and then you can see how the widening of the road let's see. Right there. That's a very good one. So if you looked at the dark on the east edge or west edge, that's where the existing road goes. Right. And then if you come back, we're actually improving and widening the painting there. So you're gonna actually increase the sight distance through that area just by softening that radius and improving that.

I just wanna make sure somebody was planting a tree on that corner.

Well, one of the things that is an issue here is that they want us to restrict the improvements within the sensitive lands area. And the drainage corridor that runs along through this area here is right there in that sensitive lands corridor. So they're a little bit restricted within that area because of that.

Meaning planting trees is a little bit restricted in that area because we want to preserve the view and preserve the safety of

the public. No, I get that. I'm just worried about somebody buys it down the road and they want to put a tree there.

And I think as get with the building and the building permit process, they can help restrict that.

You can also, as you move forward, make sure that that's something in a condition you feel comfortable with. That they follow those like you're saying. I think that's well with you.

And we do have that at least in

It talks about revegetation.

No. Says lot will comply requirements of the wildlife interface requirements without removal of natural vegetation. Anyway, can add an eighth one in there. Would you like to add that one in?

We'll talk about that.

Okay. All right, I think we're good, Unless there's any other I

had one question.

Oh, go ahead.

What are you doing? I appreciate you keeping that open for the wildlife corridor. How will you guarantee that or preserve that so that somebody doesn't come in the future and add a fence?

Yeah. That's what we've designated is that there will be no fence added for where the wildlife are currently

Is that on the plat?

It's currently not shown on the plat but there we can identify a 10 foot perimeter through there that no fencing would be required to allow the animals to come

down? K.

Yeah. We've already discussed it. Maybe we just need to solidify it through the plat k. Which is totally fine. We're happy to do that. We want the wildlife to be there. That's like a huge asset to

the that's the beauty of

the wild.

Yeah, that's the beauty of this area, yeah, and the low density there too.

Thank you. Any other questions? Thank

you.

Mike, did you have anything else?

Yeah. So as I mentioned, this is both a subdivision review as well as a special exception request. The special exception request was touched on by the applicant in the road profile that they're seeking. They are seeking a waiver of the park strip along Dimplevale Road that is in compliance with the previously agreed upon plan with the county and the city for the future improvements of Dimplevale and future widening efforts along that So they are proposing to have a six foot adjacent sidewalk along that edge of the right of way with no park strip. So I just wanted to clarify that that's part of the proposed request that they are seeking.

They're no longer seeking a flag lot approval for this development as they reduced it from four lots down to three. Something that we can also touch on is that restriction on fencing. So within this area this map kind of shows well let's see let's go to this. So this area that's shown on this map that is that hatched area is a drainage channel, a natural drainage channel that is used for overflow water from some of the above development to the east of this that would flow into that channel as backup should the storm drains get overloaded that's where they would go into. So that area already would not allow for fencing.

One proposal that could be implemented is that the area to the north of that drainage channel also be restricted in fencing and extend that all the way to the property line such that that area could remain open for wildlife corridor. That's one way that I think that could be addressed. So everything north of that drainage channel be left fenceless and or west of that drainage channel. That could help address the concern that has been raised so long as that's something the Planning Commission wants to pursue. That would need to be added as another condition to the approval if that's something you want to entertain to address that wildlife corridor concern that was raised by the neighbors.

The 30% slope is shown in this map. These areas shown in gray would be areas that would be preserved and not allow for any development within those and then from those dotted lines any structure would have to be a minimum of 10 feet away from the property line or from that dotted line average of 20 feet away for any structures. So just to further iterate that those areas that are shown on that map would not allow for development or construction of a home And then the lines here are the proposed property lines they're kind of hard to see with all the line work on this plat but there are three distinct lots that are shown there. This property line goes along that edge of that proposed driveway. Part of the reason why they're showing that is they are seeking approval to disturb this area of 30% slope and cross the creek in a couple of points both for access to Lot 2 as well as access to Lot 3.

Though the disturbance that they're proposing for these areas would be required it would be fairly minimal. This grading plan shows the proposed improvements that they're wanting to do both on the south and north side of that proposed drive. There are some existing man made improvements in that drainage channel that create some diversion already that they're going to be removing and replacing with this. So portion of that area has already been disturbed. They will be expanding upon that slightly.

But a majority of the lot in that native 30% slope in that native drainage channel would be protected by the proposed improvements. Overall staff is in support of the proposed application and we would recommend that the Planning Commission entertain two motions. First on the special exception we recommend the Planning Commission approve the requested special exception for road improvements along Dimplevale Road based on the findings that are enclosed in our staff report as well as recommend that the Planning Commission determine that the preliminary subdivision review is substantially complete for the Silver Sage Estates subdivision located at 1000175 South Temple Dell Road based on the findings and conditions in the staff report.

When you're ready, I have a question

for Mike. Go for it.

Mike, could you talk about the median that is being removed and what the plan was? I just to understand what it is they're taking out.

I'm sorry, what?

I thought we talked about there was a median that was going to go in Dimple Dell or there was some kind of well, was the sidewalk displacement, right? Park strip? Park strip. Oh. That is going to I'm sorry. I got it all backwards.

That's Okay.

So the park strip is being removed, which is how is it going to tie in down the street, I guess is my question.

GREGORY So let me go to an aerial view. So currently along Dimplevale Road, it's just asphalt. There is no curb and gutter for most of the stretch of this roadway, neither on this side of the road, on the northern side, nor on the southern side. There isn't curb and gutter until you get further down the road. It's kind of hit and miss along Dimple Dell. So there are no current park strips or sidewalk in that area as I kind of zoom in on that map. You can kind of see on the West side with new development there is some curb and gutter. But on this side there's nothing tying into this. But it will tie into future improvements that the city county may do in the future as either development occurs or as a city project or county project is identified.

But this will set a precedent for how it's developed in the future, correct?

It does. But it does follow what the plan that the county and city have agreed upon for the proposed improvements along Jim Pellell Road. I can pull up that street profile if we need to see that but yes that would provide for a minimal impact as you can tell along Nippledale if you've driven through that area it has varying widths of both improvements and width of road and trying to get a full width improvement is very difficult without severe takings through the area and impact to those adjacent properties. So this was kind of found to be a good compromise position for that and so with this development they would be implementing that half width improvement along Nippledale Road. And as we talked about their proposal actually improved some of the safety along here by softening that curve that is quite tight existing and soften some of those site visibility triangles that would be required for it.

And it is a six foot wide sidewalk?

Yes, as a direct adjacent sidewalk. Six in width.

Thank you.

Any other questions? This item has been noticed to the public. Please come down and state your name and address for the record. You. Peak one of the two mics and speak into it directly, please.

My name's George Allen. I live at 10190 Majestic Canyon Road. My west property line borders this piece of property, and I have an issue with the drainage. And many years ago if you could blow that up, maybe I can explain it better. There where circle is on Dimple View Drive, over there where right at 10193, there's a detention pond.

And that detention pond, Radden was building that subdivision, it overflowed. That's before the whole thing was all approved. And I went back and we met with the city and the engineers met with me and along with with Radden and they came up with a solution. And that solution because if that detention pond overflows, my house became the catch basin. And so they came up with a way to resolve that.

And if you go at 1000190, that's my property, right on the Northeast Corner there is a catch basin right there. And it also has a pipe that comes out and water would flow down along my north property line. Now, this was 1999. And I realize we're going back a long way. But I have all of these letters from all of these Sandy City people.

And remember back then it was the county. And so all of those things were going on. So I have all of these documents, Department of Public Utilities memorandum, Jim McNulty, Dave Pulse, and all of these people. Anyway, one day they came out, they being your drainage people, and they were going to block off that pipe. And they had the plywood there, and they had the cement truck come.

And I go, woah, woah, woah, woah. This has a purpose because what it does, it protects my property. And so I was talking then, and I got ahold of them, and I sent them. I've talked to Tyler Shelley, Jeremy Shipper, Mason Clark, and they all agreed that something needed to be done with this subdivision and they called it a drainage swell channel. Because it's what they've done.

Now on the property 10174, they built a big garage. And down there, they've taken that pipe and they call it is it riprap that they put all of these rocks down? And it goes over there to the west property line of 1000174. Yeah, right in there. So talking with Tyler and Jeremy and Mason, they said they recommended that they come up with a drainage swelling channel, but it's not on the plans.

And so I talked to them today at 03:30, and they said their recommendation was that that be on the plans, but they haven't seen it yet. So I just wanna go on record as saying we need to do that. I just don't want to have that closed off and maybe affect my property. More than likely, it will probably never happen. Because when we first started back with Radden, they were going to build a twenty five year detention pond.

They made that bigger to a one hundred year detention pond. And I'm almost that age now, so it hasn't happened yet. But we've got a few years to go. So that's just my recommendation. I just like to go on record as saying that. And I did talk with like I talked with Tyler Shelley today. And he said, yep, it should be on the plans. And he said they were working with them, but it's not on the plans yet.

So can you go back to the address? So we're not draining water from 10174 to 10175.

Can you blow that up, please? We are possibly draining water along the north property line of 1000190 from the street.

Yeah. And where's that water going?

It just now would go right down into what we call 10175 down into that piece of property. It's been there. It's now been there for, well, since 1999 before you guys were even around. So Well, I know you were because I know who you are. Yeah. So I just wanted to express that. I think we just need to get it on the plans before they're approved take care of that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

Yeah. Is there anybody else that would like to speak to this item? Wait for just a second and then we'll get back to you. Is there anybody online, Mike?

If you're joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak to this particular item, please use the raise your hand feature now and we'll address you one at a time. I am seeing no hands raised.

Okay we'll close that to public comment and do you want to speak to that mic? Do we want to

Well, I believe their engineer wanted to speak to that. So I'll let him address that first. If there's anything that engineering or us can address, we'll pipe in.

Yeah, I appreciate that he's brought that up. We have worked with Tyler Shelley regarding the design of that, intercepting that drainage and carrying it along what we call our east property line. It will take it north and intercept that drainage channel we've talked about earlier to discharge it there. But that's not the that's a short term things can go long term, but that's a short term plan. The long term plan is the city's gonna upgrade the pipe that's in Cul De Sac Street that goes north, and then it also discharges some city water tanks and comes down on the north side of the property.

So they wanted to preserve this north drainage that we have along there to handle both the storm runoff and also the domestic water runoff.

So will you be including that in your future plans?

It it is. Yeah. It is. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So there's an easement along our east property line and then there's a drainage channel that we've designed to carry that water from where the water comes out and gets discharged onto our property. We'll intercept

it, take it north, and then dump it. So it'll go it'll go along your east

property line past your driveway?

No. It'll stay on the east property line.

Oh, it's over there. I see.

And stay yeah.

And then it goes down to your drainage and then it goes and then it meets up with the rest of the water water flows, Does

that answer your question, Dave? Yeah. Any other questions? Mike, did you want to fill in anything?

MICHAEL My understanding is most of that drainage that is being discussed on Majestic Canyon Road is intended and designed to empty out into that natural drainage channel that's on along that north side that runs all the way up to Majestic Canyon Road. There are two outlets. One is the one that was pointed out by the resident there right along the north side of 10190 South. The other is within 10156 along the north side of that lot that drains into and outlets into this drainage channel that's on that north side. But I believe the intent is to have that one eventually blocked off so that it does go and flow all the way up to the north and then drains into that drainage channel and avoiding any flooding of these proposed lots.

We've closed it to public comment I'm sorry. Sorry, did you have anything else?

No.

Okay. So I think we're back

to us unless there's other clarifying questions. I think there were discussion about two potential additions, one about vegetation. And do we need

I think the vegetation ones, just they need to maintain the site triangle, to way approaches to dimples out. And that's just a simple you can do a number eight or.

Do you want to do? I saw you writing down something.

Okay

and Mr. Chair while you guys are deliberating the applicant has requested a little bit more time to respond.

Oh okay yeah please.

Thank you members of the Planning Commission. My name is Paxton Guymon. I'm legal counsel for the applicant. I thought that as you were the second to last item on the agenda there's no way you would start before I got here but I apologize for being a little late to the meeting. You're here for really two reasons that are under consideration. One is the special exception asking to not have the park strip. That's an important thing because it allows us to honor the agreement with the county and the city on the width, but also it allows us to preserve that natural drainage channel, which is an important feature here. The natural drainage channel will also function as a wildlife corridor. So that's it's a good thing to preserve that that alignment. And then the other one is just for the preliminary subdivision review, and that has involved extensive work with staff on the sensitive lands overlay zone.

You might know the history here where we initially started off asking for five lots and now we've landed on three. And it's so that there are functional good sized building pads for three good lots here. I wanna thank staff for the time they've put into this. We've had several site meetings, several meetings, a lot of review of geotechnical analysis and slope data. I truly believe we've arrived at the least impactful way to develop three lots in this property. It complies with the zoning, and we would appreciate your approval. Last point, we've reviewed the seven conditions that have been recommended by staff, and we accept all seven. Those are good conditions. So we stand behind the staff report and are willing to follow it. Thank you. Thank you.

Am I okay to address? Yeah. So one of the things we talked about before you arrived was the wildlife corridor, which was important to some of the neighbors, and the applicants expressed that. So that was one of the conditions we were going to add. One of the things that Mike Wilcox presented was maybe everything north of that drainage. Is that something you guys would be okay

What what we're what you're really saying is that there would be no fencing at

all. Correct.

That's really all that means.

That's right. No fencing.

That's Okay. Yeah. We we could have fencing on our the home side of the Correct. Channel but not on the opposite side. Correct. And that's just fine. Okay. That makes

sense. Thank you.

Cameron, do wanna take a

B. You could have fencing, but it can only be six inches high or so. So I I don't just think you need to preserve the corridor. And it leaves it open to how you do that. Sometimes the fence in a certain location may be a good thing in there. You just need to maintain that corridor.

So I wouldn't get so specific. I'd just

say maintain the corridor for wildlife.

I agree. I don't think you need to mention that fence. I do think we ought to add that's eight on yours, right? So then we ought to add nine, which would be to preserve DELL: the view plane as they're

The site triangles for that.

Yeah, the site triangles. Not planting anything like a mulberry bush or a Above three feet. Whatever, above three feet, or above what they can see.

Okay, perfect. All right, then chair, I'm ready for a motion.

Okay. Mike, did you want to say something first?

So you're doing the first motion, right? Which is the

Yeah, there's no

Special exception.

Special exception.

Special exception and no changes there.

There's no changes there. Okay.

All right. So I make a recommendation that the Planning Commission approve the requested special exception for the Silver Sage Estates Subdivision located at 10001 And 75 South Dimpledale Road to omit the park strip along the frontage of Dimpledale Road based on the four findings as outlined in the staff report.

There's five.

Sorry five findings in the staff report.

Second.

Cameron Duncan? Yes. Steve Wrigley?

Yes.

Ron Mortimer?

Yes.

David Hart?

Yes.

Danny Schoenfeld?

Yes.

This motion carries.

On to the subdivision I make

the recommendation that the Planning Commission determine that preliminary subdivision review is substantially complete for the Silver Sage Estates subdivision located at 1000175 South Dimpledale Road based on the four findings and the seven conditions outlined in the staff report with the addition of condition number eight that a wildlife corridor will be preserved on the north side north and west side of the existing natural drainage and number nine that the site triangles of the drive approaches will be maintained.

Second.

Cameron Duncan.

Yes.

David Hart.

Yes. Ron Mortimer.

Yes.

Steve Wrigley.

Yes.

Danny Schoenfeld. Yes. This motion carries.

Thank you. Okay. On to our last item on the agenda which is the America First parking access management plan.

Thank you Mr. Chair. The next item is for being requested by Real Salt Lake who is the operator and manager of the America 1st Field. This is an annual update that we do for this particular site due to the fact that they do not meet their on-site parking requirement. So annually they come back to the city to present the development options that they have for providing for off-site parking locations surrounding the stadium and they're here to make their updates to you all tonight and we'll follow-up with any recommendations that we have for staff.

Anybody want to from your staff please come on up and present. Just state your name and business address for the record please.

Yeah, Justin Nelson, Real Salt Lake, 9256 South State Street, Sandy, Utah.

Josh Gibbons with Hales Engineering, 1220 North 500 West

in Lehi. And Germington, Sir Hales Engineering, same address.

Okay. And what however you want to present.

We do have some slides prepared. I don't know if you have this queued

up. Oh,

right here. Awesome. Commissioner, thanks for having us here tonight. We're happy to be back for another year. It's always fun to come back every year and be with you. So tonight, I'm here with Jeremy from our team who helped with this. There's been a few changes this year. More parking that has been made available. In a minute, we'll kind of go over the map and talk about a few specifics. First, I'm going have Jeremy kind of cover some of the broader numbers that we're looking at.

Yes. With this year's update we're seeing an increase of seven fifty seats in the stadium. And with that it requires just a slightly higher demand in the parking stalls. We'll see that with the stadium seating for soccer events, we need the 4,717 stalls. And for a concert, it's up to 5,560 69. And for that requirement, we have 4,455 stalls on-site, and surrounding locations provide well over 14,000. So while the site does not have sufficient stalls, it is just about to the capacity it needs in parking stalls.

And the additional seats were a grandstand that were added to the top of the stadium. That's seven fifty seats that were added there and those are accounted for here. As Jeremy mentioned, with 4,455 official stalls at the stadium, we're really close there. They nearly meet the 4,700 required there, which is closer than it has been in the past. There's a lot more close by that are more official secured stalls by RSL.

This is the map of the official and unofficial stalls. On the left side, the biggest change is Jordan Commons is now added as an official secured parking area, which has not been in the past. It has not been official. But now with the entities aligned, I guess, between the two, it is now part of the official stalls, which is a great benefit, I think, to this parking plan. So on the left side, those are the 4,455.

On the right is nearly 5,500 stalls. The one parking lot we leave out of that kind of fifteen minute radius you see on the outside is the Sandy Civic Center track slot, which people can still take to get down there pretty quickly. The shuttle is still shown as part of the larger picture, taking people down to the City Hall area. A couple more updates that were made with the Monroe Street extension. There were some lots.

There was a Canyons West lot that is now gone because of the road being there. So there were some decreases in some areas, but obviously the Jordan Commons having 2,500 stalls was a huge increase locally by the stadium. That's all we have for tonight, but happy to answer any questions. I

think we're good. Thank you. Mike, did you want to fill in?

Yeah. So just to also add, the intent is not for the stadium to provide their total number of parking on-site because we wanted to not require massive fields of parking around the stadium. So they've done a really good job of working with surrounding property owners over the years to provide the parking necessary and have managed that parking quite well over the years. So I wanted to add that. There were a couple of things that we wanted to see included with the extension of Monroe Plaza Way all the way up to 9400 South that a traffic study needs to be updated.

One has not been done since 2008 as that road does help change some of the traffic patterns and flows. We wanted to have an updated study done on that. So we're recommending that that be included in subsequent years update in 2027. There were a couple concerns about having neighborhood areas provided as a map area to show where parking is not allowed. Generally speaking that's not an issue for game nights but concerts can become an issue because we get a lot of people that have not been to the stadium before and are unfamiliar with the area.

So we want to make sure we're having that information made public as to where it's not acceptable to park for game nights and event nights. They are increasing the number of concerts and other things going on at the stadium, which is great. We love the activity being added. We just want to make sure the public's well informed of what is acceptable in the area. And then there are some outdated references in their plan that reference old code.

So just some minor things that need to be tweaked in their plan. But otherwise staff is recommending that the Planning Commission review and update the 2026 parking and access management plan for the America 1st Field located at 9256 South State Street based on the findings and conditions in the staff report.

Any questions for Mike?

Yeah I have one if that's okay. Mike this is not on any specific item here but from your standpoint from the city we discussed this probably three or four years ago comments from the public. Have you anything new or anything unusual in terms of complaints or issues relative to that come to your attention?

I have not received anything personally, nor am I aware of any large complaints that we've been getting.

Some of the ones previously had been solved. But I do like, Mike, just the reminder of what's appropriate and where it's supposed to be parked that protects those neighborhoods.

You. Yeah,

please come up.

Yeah, I'll just I wanted just to say one thing. One complaint we do get, we've gotten a few phone calls from the city are just that when we do especially with now we line cones down State Street. We've moved our traffic management back a little bit in the day just to make sure that flow everywhere is good throughout the day like normal. And we have gotten some phone calls lately about the neighborhood just being concerned that those signs saying no parking in these areas aren't out yet. So I just wanted to make sure to clarify that, you know, that's part of the plan.

We just kind of we we we just wait a little bit later in the day to keep traffic flow on State Street normal and things like that. And so I've noticed that. So I just wanted to throw that out there for you if if you catch wind of that. I think that's important to call out. And then the other thing I just wanted to mention, one of the first things that came up was the was the new traffic study, and we are working on that. We're a little later than we usually have come to you guys. We kinda were were working through that. What we decided to do was they're working really hard right now with LHM as a whole on a traffic study for the entire complex as far as Jordan Commons goes and the stadium upgrades that we're making. And so as that scope becomes more clear, we'll have that planned for next year for sure.

Thank you. Anything else Mike?

Nothing further.

Okay. This item has been noticed to the public. I don't see anybody here that would like to speak on that. Anybody online?

If you are joining us via Zoom webinar and would like to speak on this particular item please use the raise your hand feature now and we'll address you one at a time. It looks like we do have one hand raise. Ms. Christine Wheat you may unmute yourself please state your name and address for the record please.

My name is Christine Wheat, and I live at 9002 And 41 South Benson Way on the East Side Of State Street across from the stadium. And despite what I'm hearing about keeping sure that the roads are blocked in the neighborhoods, I would just like to say our neighborhood has not had the barricades up for pretty much all of the half of last year's season and so far this season. There have been no barricades up. And when they do put them up, if they do, it's put up under a street sign, not in the road. So it doesn't block anybody. It doesn't defer them from parking in the neighborhood. And frankly, I get kind of irritated with it.

Thank you. Does that complete your public comment?

Yeah. So I just want to know what you guys are going to do to Because fix I'm kind of bugged every time there's a game. It's not just the game, not the concerts. It's everything.

Thank you. Anybody else online?

I'm seeing no other hands raised.

Okay. We'll close that to public comment. Does anybody from RSL want to just respond to her question?

Yeah. I'll just say that personally that's the first I'm hearing of that. I'm looking at the address right now and that's something that I can personally make a commitment to. We will add a little bit we'll add more signage and more blocking there at Benson Way. That looks like a spot that could be a problem if it's being neglected by the traffic control.

Just a comment too, though. I wouldn't suggest putting things out

in the street unless the city approves of that.

I'm Okay with it on

the side. But until the city says, yeah, I would

not get too aggressive with those. Perfect.

And historically speaking, what that has constituted is a construction sign that says no parking is placed in the middle. So it allows for traffic in and out. But it provides a notice.

Yeah. Want the barricades across. Right.

Yeah. The intent is not to barricade off the streets. But I know in past we've had just a single bifold traffic device with a no parking sign or neighborhood parking only or something like that that was placed at the entrance of some of those neighbor streets, neighborhood streets I should say. So yeah we'll want to make sure that that's still being implemented and put into practice.

But there's already we don't need to make a motion item on that because that's already in the plan, right?

It is still in the plan. It's just a matter of execution.

That's fine.

Is that enforceable? I mean, if there are people, you put the signs up and somebody decides they're still going to park, is there anything that the homeowner can do?

So if there are issues of parking within the neighborhoods, they can contact our police department. And they will respond to the issue and complaint. I believe they can tick it and they can tow.

Great. Thank you. Okay.

Based off of that, any further deliberation or possible action?

I have a question. And it kind of does and doesn't have any impact on what we're going to do with you guys. So just bear with me for a minute. We now have Real Salt Lake. We have the Exhibition Center. That's not the right word. Exhibits. Expos. The expo. Listen, I was on an airplane ten minutes before this meeting so my brain is appreciate it.

I'm in a different time zone.

And we've just added two large facilities for the Smith Group south of there for basketball and hockey. And when everything's up and running and there's a Saturday and kids are going out there to play hockey and basketball and we've got a soccer game and the expo's showing boats, Have we thought about traffic for the whole city? Have we thought about doing some kind of a study not only to incorporate just RSO's needs, which I think you're doing a great job, But also, what's going to happen in the future? And I know they're like almost a mile apart, but parking tends to go for several miles when it gets clogged up. And I'm just trying to figure out how we do we or how we address all of that.

Can I mean go ahead if you have something specifically for your

Yeah? Just wanted to make a comment that we've been working with Sandy PD and we've been working with the Hale Center. We've been working with the Expo Center. We haven't quite engaged with Smith Group yet on their facility as it's kind of getting up and running right now. But the the plan right now as we're pushing for because because honestly, Hale Center is actually one of the bigger challenges for us just because of where the the egress tends to go to get to the freeway.

And what I'll say is we're trying to put together kind of a a centralized group that can work together to come up with one traffic plan rather than us establishing our own traffic plan with with the police. And then Hale Center's got their own and so on and so forth. We're trying to come up with one fluid plan that incorporates everything for when we have those conflicts. Just so from the RSL side.

I think that's great. I know that when when we were doing the Public Safety Building downtown, I had conversation with one of the members of the police department. He said when the church and the basketball gets rolling and they have a conflict where both are up, it's just total gridlock. And so I'm a little Jim slapping at me. I'm just thinking. So go ahead Jim.

No, I'm good.

Thought that was exactly what, but what I was doing is I know that our staff is looking at it as well. And that's something maybe it's a little longer than you want to address tonight. But it might be something that we come in, our staff, with transportation and so forth during one of your executive sessions if you're interested in Yeah,

would be great.

They can give you an update on what they're looking at and some of the things that we're seeing in the future that we're going to do with that. But I think it's a great topic and you want to know. But I think rather than just calling them up, let them prepare and come and do that with you executive session?

That be great.

And with that I'm ready for a motion. Please. I'd like to make the motion that the Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the 2026 parking and access management plan for America First Field located at 9256 South State Street based on the following two findings and

two conditions. Is there a second?

I'll second.

David Hart?

Yes.

Steve Wrigley?

Yes.

Cameron Duncan? Yes. Ron Mortimer?

Yes.

Danny Schoenfeld? Yes. This motion carries.

Thank you. Alright, that concludes our public hearing business administrative business. April 16 meeting minutes need to be approved.

I have a couple of corrections on that. If I could just note those. Please. So, the first one was on

Or is Ayesha ready for that?

GREGORY Yeah. The Building LLC Commercial Condo, that's the one that I recused myself. It has me under the yes for the votes. So probably need to tabulate that as a recused. And then the same thing for Mr. Mortimer when on the next minutes.

Yeah, I

wonder how you voted. Then

the next

one, and it's on the Hartman of States. Under the absence, it lists the same people that voted yes as the ones that were absent. Just to correct that for the three folks that were here. And with that, those two changes, I'm ready to make a motion that we approve.

All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

Okay. James, Mike?

And just note, we had some technical issues that happened on the back end that probably caused some of those issues because everything got screwed up as far as who was voting and who attended. So yeah, hopefully that won't happen in future ones. But we kind of had to recreate the wheel of that whole issue of attendance and voting. So we'll get that cleaned So

we basically felt pretty good. It only affected you.

Nothing personal.

DANIEL Six years,

and that's the first time I found

it. That's I pretty good. DANIEL

don't have anything specifically other than to thank you all for being here. And Dave, thank you for coming and helping out tonight. I know that was a rush for you. But it affected Ron the most. So we do appreciate that. I'm going to turn it over to Mike. He has some staffing and a couple of things he might want talk to you about.

I do. Thank you. I'll echo that. I was getting nervous as we were getting close to this and wondering if we were going to have a quorum. I appreciate you all for coming tonight. We do have some staffing news. Cash, Hansey, if you'll come down to the podium there. So as you're aware Thomas Urban departed the city last week. We also lost Brynn Bolander. She took a job with Snell and Wilmer and working as a planner for them.

And so we're in the process of hiring position, Brynn's position. So that position is open and we'll be beginning interviews hopefully here in the next coming weeks. But we were able to fill Thomas's role recently with Cash Hansey. And I'll allow him to introduce himself to you.

Sure. Thanks, Mike. Well, evening. I'm excited to be here and join the Sandy team here. I've enjoyed my first week. It's been drinking from a fire hose a little bit. Professionally, I've spent the last five and a half years with Vineyard City's senior planner. So I was overseeing kind of the Utah City development down there and the explosive growth that that city has experienced. So I'm excited to see the new challenges here in Sandy and be part of the team. You're welcome. You're welcome. Thank you.

We're excited to have Cash. He's going to be a great fit for our group. Cash actually interviewed for a development manager position a few months ago. We hired Clint out of that group and he's been great and so we feel very fortunate that he hadn't been taken by someone else and that he was still available and willing to come over and work with us in this capacity. It was kind of an unexpected thing that we lost Thomas but we wish him well in his future endeavors and we're grateful to have Cash join our team. And then we'll have one new planner that will hopefully be able to announce sometime in June.

Okay. Anything else? Okay. Take one last motion.

I have one question. Are we meeting in two weeks?

Yes, we will have a meeting on May 21.

One last motion.

We'll be discussing a couple things there that are I think very pertinent. ADUs will be discussed in our executive session. So we'll be seeking some input and feedback from you all on that topic in particular. As we're moving the council given us direction to move forward on adopting the code so we'll be testing some ideas out with you getting seeking some feedback as to the types of rules and regulations that we should implement as part of our process of crafting the code that will eventually bring back to you later this summer. We have to have something adopted by the council by October 1.

That's the state mandate that has been handed out that we have to allow for ADUs in certain situations and on certain lots throughout the city. Have some

What's the consequence if that deadline is not met?

We have to adopt the state's minimum standard.

Otherwise?

Otherwise default. So even if our code isn't updated the state code rules.

And the importance of that is they're giving us an opportunity to still do some things that we want in it And that might not happen if

we don't adopt it Yeah. By that

didn't know if they gave you a grace period or anything but it just

The grace period is usually these types of things go into effect in May. And they gave us a few more months until October to get that our heads So around we're grateful that we have a few more months to get our input and fine tune what we want to see in Sandy that fits our city.

So October 1

is when the state code goes into effect.

So we just have to beat October 1.

Correct. So our intent is to have something in place as soon as we can. We don't want to rush it. But we want to be smart about it and cover all of our bases as best we can.

That means that it has to go from us to the city council. And they have to approve it. Then it can be implemented. Correct.

So this is kind of the start of that. We've been working on some draft language and things like that. But we want to get feedback from you. We've gotten feedback from the council. They've given us some directive. And we'll be asking for further input and feedback and having that dialogue and discussion with you all at our next upcoming meeting. The other thing I can update you on is we are doing interviews this month with our consultant on the land development code. So we'll be asking you all to participate in those interviews. We're hoping to do small group interviews of three at a time type of a thing so that we get your input and feedback. We're worried if we just brought you all in we might hear from one or two of you but not all of you.

So we'll try to do those small group meetings and schedule some time with you all coming up here soon. Hopefully we'll have something out next week with some dates and times that you'll be able to sign up. Those emails came out. GREGORY Today. GREGORY DELL: Oh, they already came out. Yeah. Perfect. I hadn't seen that yet. But I know Melissa has been working on that diligently. We're trying to get all of that, the one on one interviews and things like that done this month so we can keep that project moving ahead. But we're really excited about that and how that's moving ahead. So we appreciate your time and efforts in that aspect in advance. And I think that's all the updates I have.

Okay. I'll remake the motion

to adjourn. All in favor? Aye. Here are adjourned. Thank you.

Thank you all. Thank you. Have a good evening.

Oh,

I got a

note