a
BLUFFDALE
~~
EST . 1848
~~
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING AGENDA
February 15, 2017
Notice is hereby given that the Bluffdale City Planning Commission will hold a public meeting
Wednesday, February 15, 2017, at the Bluffdale City Fire Station, 14350 South 2200 West, Bluffdale,
Utah. Notice is further given that access to this meeting by Planning Commissioners may be by
electronic means by telephonic conference call. The Agenda will be as follows. Please note that all
times listed on the Agenda are provided as a courtesy and are approximate and subject to change.
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS MEETING 7:00 PM
1.
Invocation and Pledge.*
2.
Public comment (for non-public hearing items).
3.
Approval of minutes from February 1, 2017 meetings of the Planning Commission.
4.
PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDERATION AND VOTE on proposed amendments to Title 11 (Zoning
Ordinance) of the Bluffdale City Land Use Code regarding definitions and requirements for the
location and placement of portable buildings, Bluffdale City, Applicant.
5. Continued CONSIDERATION AND VOTE for the proposed amendments to Title 12
(Subd ivision Regulations) of the Bluffdale City Land Use Code regarding requirements for
subdivision processing, completion, approvals, acceptance, warranty, and other related
administrative provisions, Bluffdale City, Applicant.
6.
City Council Report.
7.
Planning Commission Business (planning session for upcoming items, follow up, etc.).
8.
Adjournment.
Dated: February 10, 2017
Grant Crowell, AICP
City Planner/Economic Development Director
In compliance with the American Disabilities Act, individuals needing assistance or other services or
accommodation for this meeting should contact Bluffdale City at least 24 hours in advance of this
meeting at (801)254-2200. TTY 7-1-1. *Contact Gai Herbert if you desire to give the Invocation.
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Present:
Members:
Brad Peterson, Chair
Connie Pavlakis
Johnny Loomis, Jr.
Nick Berry
Kory Luker
Von Brockbank, Alternate
Others:
Grant Crowell, City Planner/Economic Development Director
Courtney Lemperle, Development Coordinator
Excused:
Jennifer Robison, Senior Planner
Caitlyn Miller, Associate Planner
Gai Herbert, Community Development Secretary
BUSINESS MEETING
Chair Brad Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
1.
Invocation and Pledge.
Von Brockbank offered the invocation. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
2.
Public Comment.
Commissioner Loumis revisited the idea of starting the meeting at 6:30 p.m. rather than 7:00 p.m.
Discussion ensued after which it was determined that 7:00 p.m. was a better start time.
3.
Approval of Minutes from the February 12 Meeting of the Planning Commission.
Kory Luker moved to approve the minutes from the February 1, 2017 Meeting, as presented.
Nick Berry seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Kory Luker-Aye; Johnny Loomis, Jr.Aye; Von Brockbank-Aye; Nick Berry-Aye; Connie Pavlakis-Aye. Brad Peterson abstained,
as he was not in attendance at the February 1, 2017 Meeting. The motion passed
unanimously.
4.
PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDERATION, AND VOTE on Proposed Amendments to
Title 11 {Zoning Ordinance) of the Bluffdale City Land Use Code Regarding
Definitions and Requirements for the Location and Placement of Portable Buildings,
Bluffdale City Applicant.
City Planner/Economic Development Director, Grant Crowell, presented the staff report and
reviewed the incident that precipitated the proposal. He explained that the Board of Adjustment
denied a variance for a shed location that was not in compliance with City Code, so the issue was
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
going to District Court. The applicant conducted a study through Google imagery and informed the
City Council that there are many sheds in Bluffdale that are out of compliance. Enforcement of this
type of Code violation is through public complaint only. Since another resident in The Falls of
Boulden Ridge filed a complaint, the variance applicant felt singled out for doing the same thing
that many other Bluffdale residents do without penalty.
Mr. Crowell reported that the City Code requires a 10-foot setback and public utility easement. The
applicant' s shed is out of compliance with that requirement. After the Board of Adjustment denied
the variance because it did not meet the State' s five criteria for granting variances, those in
attendance, all of whom were present to show support for the applicant, reacted in a hostile manner
toward the Board Members. There was no uniformed officer present. Fortunately, there were no
physical threats or harm committed; just verbal invectives. The Mayor was present at the Board of
Adjustment Meeting and subsequently visited with the City Council about this issue. As a result,
the City Council directed staff to draft text amendments to address portable structures.
Mr. Crowell reviewed the definition of "portable buildings," and noted that if it is portable, it can be
closer to the property boundary. The Zoning Administrator will ultimately make the determination
as to whether the structure is portable. In response to Commissioner Pavlakis' question as to
whether a cement slab would render a structure portable, Mr. Crowell stated that the slab would
remain in place.
Mr. Crowell next reviewed the characteristics of a portable building, as enumerated in the staff
report. He explained that the Bluffdale City Code already contains verbiage pertaining to how
people can construct within easements. That text amendment was the result of a swimming pool
variance that was denied because it would encroach on an easement. Therefore, the Code was
revised to specify criteria by which structures can be constructed within easements. A member of
the City Council, who is also a Civil Engineer by profession, noted that in modem construction, no
one uses the side or rear yard easements to get utilities in and out of subdivisions. Instead,
developers are using the front easement.
Mr. Crowell stated that the City has to follow adopted building codes. One requirement is that a
building permit be obtained for buildings over 200 square feet in size. The applicant variance did
not obtain a building permit as he should have. Had he done so, he would have been apprised of the
setback requirements and would likely have placed his shed in a different location.
Mr. Crowell next addressed the easement section of the text amendments and indicated that the
height limitation is 18 feet to the roof for buildings that are close to the property line. The portable
structure must also be behind the home.
Commissioner Pavlakis' noted that the verbiage states that the structure shall be used for storage
only. She asked if animal sheds/stalls can be located near the property line because they will
assume it is permitted. Mr. Crowell stated that it is questionable whether people would check the
City Land Use Ordinance because the City also has rules regarding animal location. He
acknowledged Commissioner Pavlakis' concerns, adding that the main point is that people are not
supposed to live in the portable structure. Commissioner Pavlakis suggested the addition of the
2
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
statement "shall not be used for dwelling purposes." Discussion took place regarding the
regulations for animal corrals and animal accessory buildings. Chair Peterson stated that the
"storage" requirement should be adequate; however, sometimes sheds become workshops.
Mr. Crowell noted that the proposed text amendments will also apply to commercial property, so
the portable structure will be part of any required site plan.
Mr. Crowell noted that the variance request was postponed in his District Court case to await the
outcome of the proposed text amendment through the City Council. Chair Peterson stated that since
there are approximately 300 lots in Bluffdale that are out of compliance with the current setback
and easement requirements, it makes sense to amend the City Code.
It was Chair Peterson's understanding that the setback requirements were originally created to
ensure fire safety for neighboring lots and provide adequate space for fire fighters to extinguish
fires. Mr. Crowell stated that those are valid reasons, but the desire for space was also a factor in
the setback requirements. Chair Peterson stated that if he had a 10,000-square-foot lot, he would
want his shed to be tucked in the back corner as far from his home as possible.
In response to Commissioner Brockbank' s question about how the height requirements were
determined, Mr. Crowell stated that it was a suggestion. If those requirements don't work, he
suggested that alternate requirements be recommended to the City Council. Commissioner
Brockbank noted that the City Code allows for an eight-foot fence in residential areas, so a 10-foot
wall with a window would compromise the privacy of the neighbors. Mr. Crowell stated that the
height allowance for one-acre lots is more generous than what is proposed for smaller lots.
However, if a shed has a loft, he could see how the privacy of the next-door neighbors could be
compromised. Commissioner Brockbank stated that the typical move-on shed has an eight-foot
wall. Commissioner Loumis stated that most people will not put a high-pitched roof on a shed.
Commissioner Pavlakis stated that the largest allowable shed would be 20' x 20', which would
make it difficult to accommodate a high-pitched roof. Mr. Crowell clarified that the proposed text
amendments seek to balance out the property rights of how homeowners use their yard with the
subsequent impact on the neighbor and others. Chair Peterson added that most people put in sixfoot fences, so a 10-foot wall with a flat roof could still compromise the privacy of the neighbor.
Commissioner Pavlakis pointed out that most sheds have eight-foot walls. Commissioner
Brockbank found it strange to deem an 18-foot high building as portable. Commissioner Pavlakis
agreed. Discussion ensued on the options for proposing height requirements.
In response to Commissioner Brockbank' s question regarding the role of the Zoning Administrator
to administer the City Code, Mr. Crowell stated that the most labor-intensive part would be ensuring
that all the easement letters have been submitted. Discussion ensued on the height limitations that
will be recommended to the City Council. Mr. Crowell noted that if people want a taller shed, the
need to meet the setback requirement.
Chair Peterson opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. Chair Peterson closed
the public hearing.
3
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Connie Pavlakis moved to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the
Land Use Text Amendment for Portable Buildings, Application 2017-06, subject to the
following:
Condition:
1.
That 11-16-28.A.4 shall be modified as follows: 4. Shall have a maximum wall
height of 10 feet, excluding end gables, and a maximum eYerall roof line
building height of 18 li_feet, measured to the top of roof.
Findings:
1.
That the proposed ordinance allows property owners additional options for the
use of their property.
2.
That development compatibility concerns are addressed by the proposed
ordinance language.
3.
That the proposed ordinance will reduce resources required for City Code
enforcement actions and address existing conditions throughout the community.
Kory Luker seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Connie Pavlakis-Aye; Kory LukerAye; Nick Berry-Aye; Johnny Loomis, Jr.-Nay; Brad Peterson-Aye. Von Brockbank did not
vote. The motion passed 4-to-1.
5.
Continued CONSIDERATION AND VOTE for the Proposed Amendment to Title 12
(Subdivision Regulations) of the Bluffdale City Land Use Code Regarding
Requirements for Subdivision Processing, Completion, Approvals, Acceptance,
Warranty, and Other Related Administrative Provisions, Bluffdale City, Applicant.
City Planner/Economic Development Director, Grant Crowell, presented the staff report and
Crowell indicated that the document included in the meeting packet was the same document that
was provided in the February 1 packet. The City Engineer reviewed the document and submitted
minor changes, which were reviewed. The first change was to 12-4-7, Section D. The City
Engineer added "curb and gutter" to the list of items to be included. Mr. Crowell noted that none of
the changes submitted by the City Engineer pertained to policy.
The next section addressed by the City Engineer was 12-5-4, where clarification was provided
through simple punctuation. Chair Peterson opined that the statement in Paragraph A, "The City
shall not recommend .. ." is much too vague. Be believes the statement needs to be more specific.
Discussion then took place on which Land Use Authority would be involved in different scenarios.
Chair Peterson emphasized that the Code needs to specify who will approve the final plats.
Mr. Crowell stated that he removed " Planning Commission" from the current document because in
4
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
the future there will be changes on how processing takes place in the land use review of
subdivisions. It was determined that the word "staff' would be added to the sentence.
The last items addressed by City Engineer related to storm water drainage and shortening the
section on "inlets." Finally, the City Engineer clarified that the statement on the diameter of water
mains needs to refer specifically to water mains that provide fire suppression flow. In response to
Chair Peterson's question regarding the diameter requirements for water lines, Mr. Crowell clarified
that all water lines that provide pressurized irrigation must be eight inches in diameter. Discussion
ensued on the viability of that diameter requirement for pressurized irrigation. The consensus was
that the word "main" should be included with the water lines that must be eight inches in diameter.
Chair Peterson noted that the diameter of a water line affects volume, not pressure. The water pump
is what determines the water pressure. Additional discussion took place regarding water volume
and pressure. Mr. Crowell stated that if the verbiage dealing with water lines is changed, additional
input would be needed from the Public Works and Engineering Departments. Mr. Crowell
informed the council that there are no plans to implement a City-wide secondary water system.
However, when there are opportunities to install trunk lines, the City will put in larger pipes.
Options were being explored to enhance water flow for secondary water. In response to
Commissioner Pavlakis' question regarding the purple hydrants, Mr. Crowell stated that purple
water lines or hydrants designate non-potable water.
In response to Commissioner Pavlakis' question regarding how the Planning Commission's
recommended changes would be incorporated into the document for the City Council's review,
Mr. Crowell stated that he would make the desired changes. Specific items could be included in a
motion.
Commissioner Pavlakis next reviewed her list of suggested changes. She first referenced Section
12-2-3, new B, and stated that it did not make sense to her. It was determined that striking the
"and" between "City Council" and "applicant" would clarify the intent of the sentence.
Commissioner Pavlakis next referenced the old E in the same section, and then asked if public
hearings are being completely removed at the Planning Commission level. Mr. Crowell replied in
the negative and explained that this it is an amendment to the Land Use Ordinance, yet the City still
requires Planning Commission review, as specified in the new paragraph C. The Planning
Commission will still conduct public hearings. Commissioner Pavlakis then discussed the old
paragraph H. Mr. Crowell reiterated that it was removed because it is redundant verbiage.
Commissioner Brockbank commented that he believes the definite article, "the," should be added
before "Planning Commission" and "City Council" in the new paragraphs C and D.
Commissioner Pavlakis next referenced Section 12-4-1 C, paragraphs 1 and 2. She again asked
about the public hearings that will take place. Mr. Crowell stated that this section relates to concept
plats, which are not reviewed by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Pavlakis had observed
that the City Council is trying to reduce the number of public hearings that take place. She,
however, considered public hearings to be very helpful to the Planning Commission. She also
5
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
believes that public hearings before the Planning Commission help prepare applicants for their
public hearing before the City Council. She did not want to see the elimination of double public
hearings. Mr. Crowell explained that when items are administrative in nature, the public hearing
doesn' t have a place. In the future, it is likely that public hearings for many administrative items
will be eliminated. Legislative items include those issues where the public can have an effect on the
outcome, however, that is not the case with administrative decisions.
Commissioner Pavlakis then addressed the last line of the first paragraph of Section 12-4-2. In
response to what "or concerning the project" means, Mr. Crowell said that it' s a bad sentence.
Striking "or" would clarify the sentence.
With respect to the change to the first sentence of the second paragraph, Mr. Crowell stated that the
revised sentence means that there will not be public hearings before the Planning Commission for
subdivision plats. He explained that that is the direction staff received from the City Council.
In paragraph B regarding noticing, Commissioner Pavlakis asked if it would be possible to
eliminate all of the changes to noticing in the document so that noticing can be dealt with all in one
place. Mr. Crowell believed that could be the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City
Council. There was discussion on how noticing takes place when a large parcel is proposed for a
subdivision. Commissioner Pavlakis noted that at the previous Planning Commission Meeting, the
suggestion was made to determine the noticing radius by the zone in which a project is proposed.
Mr. Crowell discussed the concept with the City Council at their February 8 meeting. No definite
response was provided but the City Council will be changing the noticing and public hearing
requirements. He commented that it would be nice to update the noticing section to ensure that the
City is aligned with State Law.
Commissioner Pavlakis next commented on 12-4-7.A. l. She suggested that "application" not be
used so redundantly. She then referenced paragraph C.1.(c) of the same section and stated that the
sentence states that "it should come to the Planning Commission before it comes to the Planning
Commission." Mr. Crowell stated that the sentence should be revised. Discussion ensued on the
context of the statement.
Commissioner Pavlakis next referred to paragraph U on page 10, which deals with noticing.
Mr. Crowell stated that the Planning Commission will recommend that no changes to noticing
distances be made so that the City's noticing requirements can be addressed together with all land
use application types.
Commissioner Pavlakis next observed that she had not noticed any requirements that address snow
removal. She noted that snow removal is regularly addressed, so she would like to see it addressed
in the City Code. Discussion ensued on where that verbiage would be placed in the City Code.
Mr. Crowell noted that there is a difference between snow removal on public streets and private
streets. He then stated that snow removal plans should be included in the preliminary plat
submittal.
6
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
Commissioner Pavlakis referenced several sentences needing minor changes to clarify the meaning
and to be grammatically correct. She sought and received clarification on why some items had been
removed. Chair Peterson noted that paragraph Q. l on page 22 needed to be clarified to read that the
developer shall be responsible for half of the width of the street, plus 10 feet.
There was discussion on 12-5-7.C regarding the requirements for trail construction. In that same
paragraph on line 3 of page 25, Commissioner Pavlakis asked if the word "denied" should be
"delayed" instead. Mr. Crowell stated that it should read "delayed" and not "denied."
Commissioner Pavlakis next requested an explanation for the language added at the end of 12-59.B. l. Discussion ensued on whether "lesser" should be used to modify " easements." Chair
Peterson suggested that the sentence be modified to state that "easements may be adjusted by the
City Council in smaller lot developments." Additional discussion took place on how this sentence
might be crafted.
Commissioner Pavlakis next referenced 12-5-11 and asked about the City's preservation standards.
Mr. Crowell stated that the City has no ridge line and it is not allowed to be a reason to deny a
subdivision.
Commissioner Pavlakis referred to 12-5-12.B.1 and asked why the language has changed from City
Council to City Manager. Mr. Crowell stated that the City Council has to put acceptance into
warranty and release from warranty on the City Council agenda. Every time the City Engineer has
inspections and makes recommendations, the City Council goes with the recommendation. The
guarantee document is an administrative item that is kept in the offices of the City Attorney, City
Manager, and City Engineer. The City Council never actually sees the document. Consequently,
the City Council requested that all of the bonding and release of bonding be placed in administrative
purview.
Commissioner Pavlakis next referenced Section 12-5-13 . Mr. Crowell acknowledged that the last
items, which deal with the processing of the end improvements, don't flow very well in spite of the
proposed text amendments.
Commissioner Pavlakis referred to Section 12-5-15.A. Extensive discussion ensued on how to
improve and clarify this run-on sentence. Commissioner Pavlakis noted that paragraph B has been
removed and asked what happens if people don't take care of their obligation within six months.
Mr. Crowell stated that the City will take the bond money and resolve the issues. In response to
Commissioner Pavlakis' question regarding who determines the amount of money to be placed in
escrow, Mr. Crowell explained that the master developer is first invited to provide an estimate. If
the developer doesn't provide the estimate, City staff gives an estimate based on linear feet, lump
sums, or cost of construction. If the developer provides an estimate that is significantly different
from the City's, then the amount has to be negotiated.
Commissioner Pavlakis suggested that it would be beneficial to require the master developer to
provide an estimate with the design plan, and that it is a guaranteed estimate that lasts for a predetermined period of time. Mr. Crowell clarified that the City's main concern is street lights rather
7
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
than landscaping. Chair Peterson asked if some of the provisions of the paragraph are redundant
because the requirements are already elsewhere in the Code. Mr. Crowell stated that this is an
exception to the old rule because of valid weather-related delays. The Fire Code doesn't always
require paved roads, but staff does. Thus, the redundancy that may exist in this section is
intentional. Discussion ensued on the differences between the bonding and timing requirements for
the installation of landscaping and the construction of roads.
When Commissioner Pavlakis sought to confirm that the changes in Section 12-5-16.B were
consistent with what the City Council requested in terms of the role of the City Manager and the
City Engineer in verifying the warranty and completion requirements, Mr. Crowell replied in the
affirmative. He further explained that the changes are consistent with what is in State Code.
Mr. Crowell stated that the zoning details of subdivisions are the easy part. Administering all of the
technical details doesn't fall under the purview of the Planning Commission.
Chair Peterson next discussed the pending motion on this matter. He indicated that the text changes
identified were incorporated during the discussion. The only item to be included in the motion
pertains to the noticing distances. With regard to the public hearings that are to take place,
Commissioner Pavlakis believed it was important for the citizens to have a voice in the decisionmaking process on proposals that are considered. Discussion ensued on the differences between the
public hearing requirements for administrative and legislative decisions. Mr. Crowell added that if
the Planning Commission makes a recommendation on the Subdivision Ordinance at this meeting, it
will go before the City Council at their February 22 meeting.
With regard to leaving the noticing distances alone for now, Mr. Crowell stated that he would
inform the City Council that it is the Planning Commission' s recommendation. The City Council
could then choose whether to accept the recommendation. Mr. Crowell noted that Mayor Timothy
reads the Planning Commission Meeting minutes. Commissioner Pavlakis commented that the
minutes are not very thorough.
Connie Pavlakis moved to forward a positive recommendation to the City Council for the
Land Use Text Amendment for Subdivision Ordinance Administrative Provisions,
Application 2017-03, based on the following:
Condition:
1.
The Planning Commission recommends that the City not address any required
noticing distances (to leave at 1000') so that the City's noticing requirements
can be addressed together with all land use application types.
Findings:
1.
That the proposed ordinance facilitates objective, adopted standards for
subdivision administration in accordance with Utah State Law.
8
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
2.
That subdivision development will be adequately addressed by adopted
construction and land use codes.
3.
That obsolete references and code language have been removed from the
subdivision ordinance.
4.
That the proposed changes are supported by the City's General Plan.
Nick Berry seconded the motion. Vote on the motion: Connie Pavlakis-Aye; Nick Berry-Aye;
Kory Luker-Aye; Johnny Loomis, Jr.-Aye; Brad Peterson-Aye. The motion passed
unanimously. Von Brockbank did not participate in the vote.
6.
City Council Report.
Chair Peterson informed Mr. Crowell that the Planning Commission' s meeting packet contained
only the agenda from the last City Council Meeting. City Recorder, Wendy Deppe, prepares an
annotated agenda for the meeting transcriptionist. That document summarizes the issues discussed
and the voting record of the City Council Members. It was noted that the Planning Commission
sometimes receives a copy of the annotated agenda. Chair Peterson observed that it would be
beneficial to the Planning Commissioners to receive a copy of the annotated agenda.
In response to Chair Peterson's question regarding the outcome of the storage unit request,
Mr. Crowell stated that the Planning Commission was the land use authority on that request, so it
did not go before the City Council.
The lot line adjustment was approved by the City Council.
The request by Verizon was continued. Mr. Crowell praised for the outstanding job Associate
Planner, Caitlyn Miller, did on the Verizon application. She was at the podium for about one hour
before the City Council. She was currently working through ministerial details. Commissioner
Loumis commented that she was very thorough in her presentation. Because the request was
continued, Ms. Miller was working on other changes to the proposal. Mr. Crowell anticipated there
will be more limitations added for residential areas. He indicated that the Planning Commissioners
could get a copy of Ms. Miller's revisions. Discussion ensued on the quality of cell service in
Bluffdale.
Mr. Crowell noted that the Independence plats were approved by the City Council.
7.
Planning Commission Business (Planning Session for Upcoming Items, Follow Up,
Etc.).
Mr. Crowell reported that Community Development Secretary, Gai Herbert, has announced her
retirement, effective June 16, 2017.
8.
Adjournment.
9
BLUFFDALE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
The Planning Commission Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Gai Herbert
Community Development Secretary
Approved:
March 1, 2017
10