Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, we'll go ahead and get this Twilla City Planning Commission meeting to order this Wednesday, September 9th, 2026 at the hour 7 p.m. here in City Council Chambers. First item on our agenda is the Pledge of Allegiance. If you'll all please rise.

flag of the United States of America.

Just a public announcement here. There is a significant increase in fraudulent phishing requests using information from the public notices that are issued concerning the applications being heard during our Tooele City Planning Commission meetings. Tooele City collects fees only at the time of application submittal. Tooele City will never ask for funds to be sent over wire transfers. Legitimate Tooele City emails always end with TooeleCity.gov. If you receive a request requiring you to pay additional fees for an application in an email that does not end in twillacity.gov after your application has been submitted, this is fraud. If you receive such a request, please contact Twillacity Community Development Department immediately and protect yourself from everything that's going on. Number two on our agenda tonight is our roll call. Commissioner Hammer?

Here.

Commissioner Sloan? Here. Commissioner Proctor? Here. Commissioner Fairclough?

Here.

Commissioner Jensen?

Here.

Commissioner Anderson? Here. Please recognize Council Members Gossett and Mr. Hansen, staff members Ms. England, Mr. Agard, Ms. Young, Mr. Hansen, and Mr. Johnson are joining us here tonight. Before we dive into this agenda tonight, I'm going to let everybody know that number seven, our Perry Homes Compass Point Village subdivision proposal, number seven on our agenda tonight is not ready yet. Applicant has asked to remove that from the agenda, so we'll probably be hearing that at the next meeting. public meeting. Moves us on to number three on our agenda tonight is a public hearing and a recommendation on a request for a zoning map amendment to remove the sensitive area overlay from three parcels located at approximately 695 South Main Street and 598 South Canyon Road on a combined total of 2.02 acres located in the open space and MU 160 multiple use zones and the R17 residential zoning district. Ms. England.

Thank you. So this evening, the Planning Commission is considering a request to remove the sensitive area overlay from approximately 2.02 acres located at approximately 600 South Canyon Road and 695 South Main Street. The properties currently have a combination of R17MU-160 and open space zoning designations. The request before the Commission is specifically to remove the sensitive area overlay from the three parcels. The overlay establishes additional development standards related to conditions such as steep slopes, geologic conditions, and cut and fill and access. The applicant has indicated that removal of the overlay is necessary to facilitate a proposed subdivision on the Canyon Road property. It is important to understand that removing the overlay does not mean the property would be exempt from development standards. Issues such as geotechnical conditions, drainage grading, access foundations, and other site-specific requirements would continue to be evaluated through the subdivision and development review process. So the general planned land use map designates the subject properties for medium density residential or MDR land use. The MDR designation supports residential development at this location and the proposed single family residential use would generally be considered a relatively low intensity use consistent with that designation. At the same time, the general plan encourages development to be appropriately integrated with the site's physical and natural environment. There are some important physical conditions on these properties that will need to be considered as development moves forward. The Canyon Road properties are within the R1-7 zoning district, while the properties near Main Street is primarily zoned open space with a portion zoned MU-160. There are also areas with slopes greater than 30% on the Canyon Road's property, and the property near Main Street contains areas of floodplain. These conditions don't necessarily prevent development, but they do mean that future development will need to address the site-specific engineering environmental constraints. There are several factors for the Commission to consider when making its recommendation. Area overlay does not conflict with the medium density residential designation shown on the general plan. It also does not change the underlying zone. The applicant has indicated that removing the overlay would help facilitate the proposed subdivision. There are also site-specific concerns that should be recognized, such as portions of the property have slopes greater than 30%, and the larger Canyon Road parcel has undergone significant excavation without the required permits. The city engineer has indicated that these conditions will need to be evaluated as part of the future development. Staff is recommending that any geotechnical reports, slope analysis, or other engineering studies identified as necessary through the DRC review be completed prior to development. So while removal of the overlay would eliminate those specific overlay requirements, it would not eliminate the city's ability to require appropriate engineering and development measures. The approval criteria for a zoning map amendment are found in section 7187 of the Tooele City Code. The Commission should consider the effect of the amendment on the character of the surrounding area, consistency with the general plan, compatibility with the adjoining properties, the suitability of the property for the uses identified by the general plan, and the overall community benefit. Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission make a recommendation to the City Council based on specific findings addressing those criteria. If the Commission determines that a positive recommendation is appropriate, staff has provided potential findings addressing general plan consistency, the fact that the underlying zoning will remain unchanged in the continued application of engineering and development requirements. Ultimately the Commission's action tonight is a recommendation the City Council will make the final decision on the zoning map amendment With that staff is available to answer any questions and we can go ahead and go from there, okay? Thanks.

Let's bring this back to the Commission with, I would like to reiterate, this is a recommendation for the City Council, so we don't have to dive into the specifics too deeply. But I'd like to bring this back to the Commission. I know there might be some questions, comments, concerns.

Yes. Yes, Commissioner Proctor, go ahead. This is probably for Paul to answer. It has to do with the drainage, overall drainage in that area, because I know when it gets some storms, it'll either tend to run down to Main Street. or it'll funnel straight down Canyon Road, or it'll go into other properties. Correct.

Yeah, all of those issues would be considered at the time of an actual application for it. There is an existing FEMA channel that runs along the southern portion of this property, which is the overflow out of the Settlement Canyon Reservoir and other conditions, but those would all be looked at at the time of application.

So any changes to the FEMA channel, that would be approved by FEMA, correct?

If they developed within the floodplain, yes. That is correct. Okay.

Excellent question. Any more questions, comments, concerns from the commission? I'll give you guys a minute. This one does require a public hearing. So at the particular moment, I will go ahead and open the public hearing for this item. If you'd like to speak to it, please approach the podium, state your name for the record, and then write your name for the record, please. Seeing no one approach, I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing on this particular item and bring it back to the commission for any other further questions, comments, concerns.

The applicant's here. We're here if you want to hear from them.

Yes, is the applicant here tonight? Yeah, would you like to address the commission? You don't have to, but I'm giving you the freedom to do so if you will. Okay, no worries. All right. No other further questions, comments, or concerns? I'll entertain a motion.

Chair, I move we move for a positive recommendation. Chair, I move we move for a positive recommendation to the City Council for East Hall's Hollow Zoning Map Amendment request by Ronald Hall and Douglas Kinsman to remove the sensitive overlay on the subject properties application number 2026068 based on the findings listed in the staff report dated September 3rd, 2026.

And I'll have to mention that staff report was very detailed. Thank you. I appreciate that. The findings, the things we need to discuss were on point. So thank you for that information. I have a positive recommendation from Commissioner Anderson. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Second from Commissioner Jensen.

Mr. Chair, if I could ask the maker of the motion. Staff recommended some findings of fact in there. Anything that you want to... I don't think it's anything that you didn't see, but just making sure there's nothing.

No, I didn't. I'm good.

I think the site-specific engineering requirements really nailed it on the head for me. That's what drew it home for me. We all good with that, Commissioner Anderson? With the findings that are listed? Yeah. Perfect. All right. We still good with the second? Commissioner Jensen?

Yes, sir.

All right. Any other discussion before we take this to a vote? Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Sloan? Aye. Commissioner Proctor? Aye. Commissioner Faircloth?

Aye.

Commissioner Jensen? Aye. Commissioner Anderson?

Aye.

I am Chairman Hamilton. I also vote aye. Oh, sorry. This one passes with a positive recommendation up to the City Council. with the applicable findings of fact that are listed from the staff. Much appreciated on that one. Number four on our agenda tonight is a public hearing and a decision. This is to consider a conditional use permit request by Steve Laird, property owner, to allow construction of a detached garage that would cause the total lot coverage of accessory buildings to exceed the maximum 8% permitted by zoning ordinance. The subject property is located at 576 Park Hill, consists of approximately .45 acres, and is zoned R112 single family residential. Ms. Anglin.

All right, thank you. This application is a request from Stephen Laird for a conditional use permit. The applicant is proposing to construct a detached garage that is approximately 1,587 square feet. There is also an existing detached shed on the property that is approximately 100 square feet. Together those detached accessory structures would cover approximately eight point six percent of the lot The city code limits detached accessory structure coverage to eight percent so our conditional use permit is required for the additional coverage and The proposed garage will be located in the rear yard west of the existing residence. The plans indicate that it will meet the required setbacks, remain outside public utility easements, and maintain the required six foot separation from the primary dwelling. One important distinction is that although the accessory structures exceed the 8% accessory structure limitation, the property is still well within the overall lot coverage allowed in the R112 zone. The total building footprint would be approximately 4,687 square feet, or about 24% of the lot, compared to the 35% maximum allowed. Staff also reviewed the surrounding neighborhood and found that detached garages and accessory buildings of varying sizes are common in the area. Based on that review, staff does not anticipate significant adverse impacts to neighboring properties. The primary issue identified by staff is the increased slot coverage from the detached accessory structures. The proposed coverage is approximately 8.6%, which exceeds the normal 8% limitation. However, the code allows the Planning Commission to consider a conditional use permit when the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects can be substantially mitigated through reasonable conditions. In this case, staff finds that limiting the total detached accessory structure coverage to 9% provides an appropriate condition. The structure will also be required to go through the normal building permit and inspection process. Based on the location of the garage, its compliance with setbacks and separation requirements, the existing development pattern in the neighborhood, and the fact that overall lot coverage remains well below the 35% maximum, staff does not anticipate significant adverse impacts. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the two conditions outlined in the staff report. Any questions?

Let's bring this back to the commission for questions, comments, concerns.

Yes, Commissioner Sloan. I have a question, but anybody can read the bottom of the map and see that it's my next-door neighbor. I don't have a conflict, so I don't get any benefits on the other side of the hall.

Are you going to get a doorway?

We've run RC cars off of Mark down on his before, but other than that, there's no easement.

Perfect. Thank you for clarifying that for us, Commissioner Sloan. Any other questions, comments, concerns? All right. This one also does require a public hearing, and if the applicant is here tonight, I'll give you some time after the public hearing to address this if you'd like. No mandatory need, though. I will go ahead and open the public hearing for this particular item. If you'd like to speak to this item, please approach the podium. State your name for the record. Write your name for the record. Seeing no one approach, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing on this particular item. Is the applicant here tonight? Not here tonight? Okay. We won't invite him up then. I'll bring this back to the commission for further action or any questions that we've thought of in this time frame.

Mr.

Chair. Yes, Commissioner Proctor. I'll make a motion. Go ahead.

I move we approve conditional use permit request for Stephen Laird for the purpose of permitting a detached accessory structure to exceed the 8% total lock coverage restrictions. Application number 2026067 based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated September 1st, 2026.

I have a motion to approve this particular CUP from Commissioner Proctor. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

And a second from Commissioner Hammer. Any discussion before we take this to a vote? Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Sloan? Aye. Commissioner Proctor? Aye. Commissioner Faircloth?

Aye.

Commissioner Jensen? Aye. Commissioner Anderson? Aye. I'm Chairman Hamilton. I also vote aye. That one passes seven to zero. Moves us on to number five on our agenda is also a public hearing and a decision. This is to consider a conditional use permit request by Kevin Watson representing Chick-fil-A restaurants to authorize the use of accessory drive-through facility for property located at approximately 967 North Main Street on approximately 1.67 acres in the GC General Commercial Zoning District. My favorite chicken nuggets.

This application is a request for a conditional use permit for a proposed Chick-fil-A, a restaurant with an accessory drive-thru facility located at approximately 967 North Main Street. It is on an approximately 1.6-acre property, and it is currently vacant. Excuse me. and is located within the GC general commercial zone. The general plan designates the area for regional commercial development and the surrounding properties are also zoned general commercial. It is important to note that the conditional use permit being considered tonight is specifically for the drive-through facility. Approval of the request does not constitute approval of the final site plan, landscaping, engineering, or building plans. Those items will be reviewed through the city site plan review and permitting process. The proposed development will access the property through an existing shared driveway easement located south of the property. This shared access connects to both Main Street and 1000 North and no direct access to a public street is proposed. The preliminary site plan shows two access points into the site with circulation generally operating in a counterclockwise direction around the building. The drive-through will include two lanes with entrances located along the southern and western portion of the property. Because the site relies entirely on shared access, staff has recommended a condition requiring the applicant to provide an existing recorded maintenance agreement or record a new cross-access and maintenance agreement during the site plan review process. And they've already submitted their maintenance agreement. The final site layout circulation and traffic impacts will continue to be evaluated as part of the site plan review process. Based on the review completed to date, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit subject to the conditions identified in the staff report. The primary conditions address compliances with all applicable city requirements through the engineering, public works, building, and fire review processes, maintenance of the shared access easement, and the ability to require supplemental landscaping if necessary to mitigate the impacts associated with the drive-through. Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with the regional commercial designation of the general plan and the surrounding general commercial zoning. The proposed conditions are intended to mitigate the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects associated with the development as required for conditional use permit approval. Staff therefore recommends that the Planning Commission approves the conditional use permit subject to the findings and conditions contained in the staff report. With that, staff is available for any questions. And the applicant also would like to have an opportunity to, you know, share their ideas on their project, okay?

Perfect. All right, this brings us back to the Commission for questions for staff. Pretty simple, huh? I'm sure we've all been to Chick-fil-A.

Best drive-thru in the business.

All right, with no questions from the commission for staff, this item also requires a public hearing. I'll go ahead and open the public hearing, this particular item. If you'd like to speak to Chick-fil-A's drive-thru, go ahead and approach the podium, state your name for the record, write your name for the record. Seeing no one approach, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing for this item and invite the applicants up to address the commission.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Jeremiah Cover with 4G Development, also joined by Sabrina Wright from Chick-fil-A. We're excited about this project and here to answer any questions that any of you may have.

Does the commission have any questions for the applicant? I think it's pretty straightforward for us. If you wouldn't mind writing your name on the clipboard there for us. All right. We'll go ahead and bring this back to the commission. If there are no other further questions, comments, or concerns, I will entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion for you to share a move.

Commissioner Proctor.

I move we approve the conditional use permit request by Kevin Watson representing Chick-fil-A Incorporated to authorize an accessory drive-thru facility The commercial development located at 967 North Main Street, application number 2026063, based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated September 1st, 2026.

I've got a motion to approve from Commissioner Proctor. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

And a second from Commissioner Sloan. Any discussion before we take this to a vote? Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Sloan? Aye. Commissioner Proctor? Aye. Commissioner Faircloth? Aye. Commissioner Jensen? Aye. Commissioner Anderson?

Aye.

I'm Chairman Hamilton. I also vote aye. This one passes and is approved 7-0. MOVES US ON TO NUMBER SIX ON OUR AGENDA. THIS IS ALSO A PUBLIC HEARING AND A DECISION TO CONSIDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST BY STEVE MERROS REPRESENTING AWESOME AUTO REPAIR TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF AUTOMOBILE REPAIR TO OCCUR AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 310 EAST 2000 NORTH IN THE GC GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED ON .73 ACRES.

Okay, so under Section 716.3 of the Tooele City Code, automobile service and repair is permitted as a conditional use in the GC zone. This is an existing commercial property that has accommodated a variety of commercial uses over the years. The most recent use was a contractor's display in office for a cabinet installation business. Staff considers the proposed automobile repair use to be generally consistent with the existing commercial character and intensity of the property. From a land use perspective, the property is designated light industrial on the general plan, although it is currently zoned general commercial. The surrounding area is a mix of commercial and industrial uses. Properties to the north are zoned industrial services, while properties to the south and east are zoned light industrial. Automobile service and repair is also a permitted use in the light industrial districts. So staff finds that the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding zoning and general plan designation. Second. Excellent. This site already has parking areas on both the north and south sides of the building, as well as access from 2000 North and Progress Way. One important consideration with an automobile repair use is the storage of vehicles that are waiting for repair. The site has an existing fenced area toward the rear of the property, and staff recommends that vehicles awaiting repair be stored in that area to minimize their visibility from neighboring properties and the public street. Staff also identified the need for at least one accessible parking stall and recommends that any new lighting be designed to minimize glare and light pollution, particularly from traffic along SR 36. The conditional use permit approval standard requires that planning commission determine whether reasonably anticipated detrimental effects can be substantially mitigated through the reasonable conditions. Staff believes that impacts can be adequately addressed through the three proposed conditions. Vehicles awaiting repair will be required to remain behind the existing fence at the rear of the property. The applicant will also be required to provide adequate off-street parking, including at least one accessible parking stall. Finally, any new lighting will need to minimize glare and light pollution, particularly for traffic on SR 36. Based on the property's existing commercial use, the surrounding zoning, and development patterns, and the ability to address the identified impacts through these conditions, staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit. And that concludes staff's presentation.

All right, let's bring this back to the commission for any other further questions, comments, concerns.

Yes, when you mentioned accessible parking assume you mean ADA compliant?

Yes. Yeah, there wasn't an ADA at least from what I could see there wasn't one existing yet. Correct.

So Commissioner Anderson?

Actually, what part of this property would they be able to park cars on and they would be visible from the street?

So if you look at the front area that is not fenced in, that's all pretty open. So I'm just saying that when they're having vehicles that are waiting repair, not, you know, customers who are there waiting for their repairs, but for like long-term, you know, vehicles that are going to be there for a week waiting for a part or something would be behind the fence in the back. So...

pretty much on just that north side of the properties where they don't want storage. The south side, all fenced in. Does that answer your question, Commissioner Henderson?

Yeah. I drive by that building every day, and I've never seen anything that would stand out that... I can't see cars parked down there by that building at all.

It's set up pretty well as it is for an auto repair shop, so...

Great question. So is that condition that you're recommending redundant?

Not necessarily because there is a time where, you know, there's going to be a broke down vehicle that might need parts. That's going to be waiting there for a week or two. We're just seeing that in those scenarios that they should be, you know, screened and covered. Okay.

I think that's done naturally with the hill and everything there. I don't, like I said, I never see anything parked there.

Any other questions?

Any other questions or comments for staff? Awesome. All right, this one also does require public hearing. I see a great representation from Awesome Auto here tonight, so I'll give you guys some time at the end to address this if you'd like. If not, no need to. But we're going to open this up to the public right now, and we'll open the public hearing. If you'd like to speak to this particular item, please approach the podium, state your name for the record, and write your name for the record. Seeing no one approach, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing and invite the applicants up if you guys would like to.

I needed to. Say my name, right? Steve Morose. And yeah, if you guys have any questions for me, concerns, a lot of that, you know, I can address right off the bat if you guys would like me to or if you guys have any questions for me.

Perfect. Does anybody on the commission have any questions for Mr. Morose?

Just one.

Yes.

Just out of curiosity, is the expansion or moving to that location to be bigger or is it an addition? It's an addition. Okay.

Yeah. I was just curious. That's just curiosity. We've gotten a little too big, a little too fast, and we're like, uh-oh. And, yes. It's good.

Worst problems to have.

It's a good problem to have. It's good, but it also has created its fair share of problems. So we're like, yeah, we better get into something else. And as far as the lighting, we have, I mean, our security is pretty advanced. We don't need too much light at night, so we have no plans. And then with our signs, you know, that we're going to be putting up, it'll be just the drop-lit signs that just face the ground to show our sign-off. We want to show our business off, not the street, so... That's very easy. And again, the parking in the back. Any cars that are down, we don't want sitting out front anyways because that's just liability on us for getting broken into and stuff stolen. So that's also very easy to handle. I did have a question. The parking accessibility, I kind of wasn't understanding that part. Handicap spot. Thank you. That's what I figured it was, but I wanted to make sure. You've got to paint the lines and put a sign up, correct? Commissioner Sloan had that same question, so there you go. There's your answer.

Double check with ADA and make sure it's something not just, there may be a width requirement that I'm not familiar with, but generally speaking, paint and sign, just make sure it complies with whatever they're, I think that's what she's talking about.

Yeah, cool. Any other questions for the applicant?

Well, if you're growing that fast, then you must be doing some good quality work there. I'm trying. We're really trying right now, so thanks, guys. Right on. Thank you, Mr. Morales.

All right, let's bring this back to the commission. Any other questions, comments, and concerns? If not, I will entertain a motion.

Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion. Go ahead. Go ahead, Commissioner Jensen. I'll just second it. I move we approve the conditional use permit request by Steve Morales. to authorize the use of automobile service and repair to occur at the subject property application number 2026069 based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated September 1st, 2026.

I got a motion to approve from Commissioner Jensen and a second from Commissioner Sloan. Any discussion before we take this to a vote? Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Sloan? Aye. Commissioner Proctor? Aye. Commissioner Faircloth?

Aye.

Commissioner Jensen? Aye. Commissioner Anderson?

Aye.

I am Chairman Hamilton. I also vote aye. That one passes 7-0. Just to remind everybody, number 7 has been stricken from the agenda tonight. Waiting for the applicant to finish their work on that one. Brings us to number 8 on our agenda tonight. Councilman Gossett and our City Council reports.

That stage fright. There's a lot of people here tonight. It's wonderful. I love having this many people join us. I was going to say. Normally, it's just Richard back there. So last week at city council meeting, we had a couple of really fun things. One of them was something that you guys had heard about and made a lot of comments about and helped dial it in. But it was architectural standards for commercial development within the city. I think your guys' questions helped dial it in and make it so that once it hit city council, it passed and moved forward. I thought you guys would be interested to know that. The other thing was, I can't remember the amount of money for our wastewater facility, but we're putting some money into the wastewater facility, millions, to make it so you can flush your toilets. So that's always a good thing. And finally... The best news of the night.

The CSD. Which one? The Compass Point CSD.

Oh, yeah, the Compass Point CSD was approved. And the most important thing of the night was... I didn't like this one, guys. ...was voted to up your massive pay scale. Oh, nice. So everybody can go home tonight and say... You've doubled your income. Sweet. So thanks to Andrew and everybody pushing for that, that you guys are now making, I don't want to say it. $50 I'm meeting so Congratulations for that. That's all I've got for you.

It's gonna buy me some chick-fil-a. I know that Chick-fil-a you can supersize it. Yep. Thanks guys. Hey any questions or comments for councilman gossip? Awesome. Great. Thank you, sir That brings us to the number nine on our agenda tonight. This is a review and decision on our August 26, 2026 Planning Commission meeting minutes. If there are no corrections or additions, I know they were emailed for corrections. If there are no further corrections or additions to add, I'll entertain a motion for this one.

Chair, I'll make a motion. Commissioner Proctor. We adopt the minutes as the additions and corrections were made. for August 26th, 2026 meeting.

I got a motion to approve from Commissioner Proctor. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

And a second from Commissioner Hammer. Any discussion before we take this to a vote? Commissioner Hammer, how do you vote?

Aye.

Commissioner Proctor? Aye. Commissioner Sloan? Aye. Commissioner Faircloth?

Aye.

Commissioner Jensen? Aye. Commissioner Anderson?

Nay.

I am Chairman Hamilton. I also vote aye. Those pass six to one. Moves us on to number 10 on our agenda. I'll entertain a motion.