At the Planning Commission of Richfield City, Sevier County, Utah, on Wednesday, April 3, 2024, at the Richfield City Center, Richfield, Utah, commencing at 6:00 p.m.
- Roll Call
- Conditional Use Permits/Home Occupation Permits
a. Anne Valae to request conditional use permits for two short-term rentals at 270 W. 600 S. and 70 E. 500 N. A C-1 use in an RM-11 Zone (#13 of 39) and a C-1 in a CS Zone (#12 of 38), respectively.
b. Austin Somers to request a conditional use permit to operate an indoor recreation business called “The Yard” at 2120 South Mulberry Lane. A C-1 use in an MD zone.
c. Tim Ramey to request a conditional use of adding two bedrooms and a driveway to a home at 361 S. 100 E. C-1 use in a Downtown Zone. - Public hearings –
a. AMENDMENT – Receive comments on the adoption of an amendment to the city’s zoning code defining limitations for RM-11 zones, specifically table 31-3.
b. REZONE – Receive comments concerning the proposed amendment to the city’s general plan as well as a rezone of property located between 200 E and 320 E and 1000 S and approximately 700 South (1-8-99, 1-8-98, 1-8-102); and property between 100 E and 200 E and approximately 690 South and 750 South (1-8-101). It is proposed to change 22.15 acres from the current RR-1 to RM-11. - Action on Public hearings –
a. AMENDMENT – Recommend the adoption of an amendment to the city’s zoning code defining limitations for RM-11 zones, specifically table 31-3.
b. REZONE – Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the city’s general plan as well as a rezone of property located between 200 E and 320 E and 1000 S and approximately 700 South (1-8-99, 1-8-98, 1-8-102); and property between 100 E and 200 E and approximately 690 South and 750 South (1-8-101). It is proposed to change 22.15 acres from the current RR-1 to RM-11. - Annexations –
a. Consider recommending approval of an annexation petition filed by Natalie Call/Gordon Anderson located at approximately 1149 North 500 East.
b. Consider recommending approval of an annexation petition filed by Jeff Albrecht located at approximately 1950 South 1100 West. - Discussion Items –
a. Attorney update on Nights Inn.
b. Possible amendment to Mixed-use definition to include a set density requirement rather than tying it to nearest residential density zones. - Minutes Approval –
a. Minutes of Feb. 7 Planning Commission Meeting
b. Minutes of March 6 Planning Commission Meeting - Other Business
- Adjournment.
- Roll Call.
Present: Josh Peterson, Branden Anderson, Lisa White, Wes Kirshner, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Zach Leavitt. Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirschner
Also present, Deputy Clerk David Anderson, Marnee Winn, Troy Poulsen, Brent Poulsen, Jeff Albrecht, Tim Ramey, Anne Valae and Kendrick Thomas. - Conditional use permits
a. Anne Valae requested a conditional use permit for two short term rentals at the following locations –
i. 270 West 600 South – Deputy Clerk Anderson pulled up the address on Google Maps. He said it appears to be apartments, which are not allowed to be short term rentals by ordinance.
Anne Valae said they are a four-plex. She asked if there was a variance for it, which there isn’t.
However, Commissioner White asked what the definition of an apartment is? The big question is whether a four-plex counts as an apartment or not. If it does, then it doesn’t qualify.
Commissioner White said a multi-family development is five or more. Deputy Clerk Anderson asked if it would be ok to revisit it in a month while the commission determines the definition. Commissioner White motioned to table the 270 West 600 address pending finding the definition of an apartment. Commissioner Cowley seconded the motion. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
ii. 70 E. 500 North – Valae asked about who to speak to about covering a ditch in front of the home, which could add some potential parking for the home. She would have to speak to Public Works Director Keith Mogan on the possible of piping it or putting it in a culvert. There are five bedrooms in the home, which would require five parking spots. Parking options include two spots in the garage, and four on the lot in the drive way. Valea said there is also an option for parking on the yard of the home. The garage would be open for parking, making a total of six available spots.
Commissioner White asked if spots can be counted if there are cars parked behind each other. Parking visibility of address. Commissioner White asked if the zoning code was amended to remove the 3-bedroom limit, which it was.
Commissioner White motioned to approved the conditional use permit for 70 E. 500 N. to be used as a short-term rental. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
b. Austin Somers to request a conditional use permit to operate an indoor recreation business called “The Yard” at 2120 South Mulberry Lane. A C-1 use in an MD zone. Mr. Somers was not in attendance at the meeting.
Deputy Clerk Anderson said he told Mr. Somers the commission meeting was basically a formality in this situation as the facility appears to had adequate parking for the number of clients it will service at one time and won’t have a large impact on garbage.
Commissioner White said it is a baseball training facility with an electronic batting cage and a small work out area. Members pay a fee and schedule half hour slots. There would not be a lot more than 4-5 players at a time. There will be requirements for adults to be with children under 16 years of age. Security camera and a key code are used. Commissioner White said she is ok tabling it, but sees no issues with it being located in an industrial zone. Commissioner Anderson makes the motion to approve the conditional use permit for The Yard. Lisa seconds the motion. The motion passes with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
c. Tim Ramey to request a conditional use of adding two bedrooms and a driveway to a home at 361 S. 100 E. C-1 use in a Downtown Zone.
Ramey said he purchased the property with the goal of upgrading it. He said he wants to add a couple of bedrooms to it, or possibly knock down the 1902 structure. Also, he separated the lot to the south. The problem is that the property is technically in the downtown zone, so it is a conditional use. Ramey said it would upgrade the property. Ramey actually resides in the home immediately to the north. Ramey said he took out 40 trees in an effort to clean up the lot. Commissioner White motioned to approve. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. Yes: Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
- Public Hearings
a. RM-11 amendment – Receive comments on the adoption of an amendment to the city’s zoning code defining limitations for RM-11 zones, specifically table 31-3.
Chairman Peterson opened the hearing at 6:26 p.m. asked what was changed. The changes include adding a maximum number of units per development, and adding a minimum distance between property boundaries, both similar to what is done in the RM-24 zone already, according to Deputy Clerk Anderson. He said applying the same formula used in RM-24 to RM-11, the maximum units would be 27 in a maximum three-acre development.
Commissioner White said the reduced number of units in RM-24 was due to open space requirements. She asked if open space requirements were discussed in the last meeting. She also explained the proposed spacing requirements – developments that are 1 acre or less would have no distance requirement, those that are one to two acres would have to be ¼ mile apart, and those that are three acres or more would have a distance of ½ mile apart. Deputy Clerk Anderson clarified the city council has not voted on this yet.
Jeff Albrecht asked for clarification on the spacing requirements in the proposal, which White provided. Chairman Peterson closed the hearing at 6:29 p.m.
b. REZONE – Consider recommending approval of a proposed amendment to the city’s general plan as well as a rezone of property located between 200 E and 320 E and 1000 S and approximately 700 South (1-8-99, 1-8-98, 1-8-102); and property between 100 E and 200 E and approximately 690 South and 750 South (1-8-101). It is proposed to change 22.15 acres owned by the Utah Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) from the current RR-1 to RM-11.
Chairman Peterson opened the hearing at 6:30 p.m.
Alexa Wilson spoke on behalf of SITLA. She showed on the map where the SITLA lands are that were annexed. Wilson said the plan at this point is not very defined. The intention with the rezone is to have some entitlement and flexibility when the property goes to market. The original plan was to enter into a development lease with a developer, which would allow SITLA to be compensated at the back end of the development. One of the original intents was to have some RM-24 included in the rezone. However, she was told by staff that RM-24 is no longer a favored zone in Richfield City. She said she liked RM-24 as it has an open space requirement. Wilson asked the commission to zone in such a way that allows some flexibility in where what goes where – perhaps some mix of higher density and medium density. The one reason SITLA wanted high density in the corner of the land in question was it was the only place it could go due to spacing requirements. However, Wilson said SITLA is not married to that plan. Wilson said her vision is to have it be a nice place to live that works for the city. She would encourage putting in an open space requirement in as part of the RM-11 because it enhances living spaces. In other places, there are PUDs that would allow for the changes. She said with the RM-11 changes on the table would affect this development.
Chairman Peterson closed the hearing at 6:36 p.m.
- Action on public hearings
a. RM-11 recommendation – Action – Chairman Peterson said he felt like there needs to be more in the ordinance. He said he would like to see something more specific about open space and amenities. If it’s a certain size development, there should be something provided for kids to play on. Deputy Clerk Anderson said in the past there was a push for developers to have to provide some type of community green space. Commissioner White said that’s part of why the city landed on the 25 percent open space for RM-24, which includes parking. She said she didn’t remember seeing a specific requirement for types of amenities.
Commissioner Anderson asked if the commission should look at it now, or table it. Commissioner Cowley said they need to have something more concrete before moving forward.
Commissioner White said it would be better to get it in the zoning code as soon as possible. She said the 25 percent open space requirement should be required for RM-11. She said she is not as concerned about the amenities, as much as requiring the open space.
Chairman Peterson said he would like to see what is written about amenities. Also, it depends on size of the development. Commissioner White said the RM-11 should have more of a single-family feel, which is why she is not as concerned about specific amenities provided by the developer. She said the one change she’s firm on is the open space requirement, but specific amenities are not as important.
Commissioner Peterson said conceivably there could be apartments in the RM-11, and there should be an open area for communal use – such as a barbecue area and a place for children to recreate without crossing Main Street.
Commissioner White said if it’s a duplex, there will already be a yard required. Peterson said it should be tied to the size of the development.
Commissioner Cowley said perhaps one solution would to require amenities for anything above 10 or 15 units.
The ordinance could include a requirement for open space and amenities for anything over one acre, Commissioner White said.
Chairman Peterson asked Kendrick Thomas about what he’s seen across the state.
Kendrick Thomas said he agrees there should be a threshold where you are required to provide amenities. There are probably conditions that are more in need of amenities, but units that have fenced backyards would make the amenities redundant. In a development on a larger scale with private streets, it would be nice to have some more open space requirements as well as driveway and street requirements.
The Duplexes and triplexes all function well without required outdoor amenities. Chairman Peterson recommended setting a limit at 10.
Commissioner White said it may need to be set lower, using Eagle View as an example.
Commissioner Peterson said there is a question of shared use space vs. communal space. In the definition, if there is individual fenced open space for each unit it’s not required, but if there is shared use of the open space then there needs to be some amenities.
Kendrick Thomas raised the question as to whether or not large-scale developments would fall under a Planned Unit Development. However, the city doesn’t have a PUD stipulation in its ordinance. The proposal SITLA is forwarding would be better served by a PUD with a mix of high and medium density.
Commission White said in theory they shouldn’t be any more large-scale multifamily developments due to changes in the general plan.
Commissioner Anderson asked how it could be worded in a way to capture the big developments, but makes it so the ones that are less than five units are not required to provide the amenities.
Chairman Peterson said it could have a section that says, “open space,” and to the side have it say “private space.” Those developments with private space, amenities would not be required.
Chairman Peterson said as far as open space goes, the condos built by Larry Pearson (located at the corner of 100 W and 500 S) are an example of what 25 percent open space looks like. Commissioner White said the 25 percent number was reached after a lot of discussion and recommending sticking with it for the RM-11 zone. Chairman Peterson said RM-11 should have a larger open space requirement and suggested 30 percent. Open space will be its own thing in the code, but there will also be a section for amenities. The city should define private use, shared use, and any development with more than 10 units is required to provide amenities.
Commissioner Cowley said he has family that lives in a home that has about half the amount of the council room as a back yard, but the subdivision they are in has no amenities.
Commissioner White said while she appreciates the need for amenities, there are other issues such as the life span of it, who maintains it, who has liability for its use?
If it’s a shared use, the development would be required to have a Home Owners Association, which would maintain amenities.
Commissioner Cowley said there could be a 30 percent open space requirement with the option of an amenity.
Commissioner White said she favors just adding open space requirement of 30 percent open space. Chairman Peterson said he’s amenable to it as it would give people room to provide their own amenities and developers would be able figure it out.
Commissioner White makes motion for approve of the changes with the addition of 30 percent open space to be added to the RM-11 amendment. Commissioner Cowley seconded the motion. Yes: Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
b. Rezone recommendation – Consider recommending the rezone from RR-1 to RM-11.
Commissioner White said the commission can either table it or deny it given the RM-11 zone amendment. The amendment would explicitly disallow a 22-acre rezone to RM-11.
Alexa Wilson said perhaps if it were tabled, SITLA could develop a plan that would pass muster under the new RM-11 specifications. It could be a good test case. Wilson asked what the next most dense zone, which would be R1-6, which is the trailer park zoning. R1-8 would be another option to look at.
Chairman Peterson said the city is not interested in more RM-24 as it has created problems without addressing the city’s housing needs.
Commissioner White said one of the biggest issues cause by the RM-24 is that it is coming in such large chunks. The city also set a maximum size for RM-24 developments to prevent future projects that are on as large of scale as the Sandstone complex.
Chairman Peterson said a small family of two kids and parents need places to live, and that is what the city is trying to provide. The problem with the higher density housing is it often becomes subsidized and it is marketed to people from out of the area.
Wilson said it may be advantageous to hold off on the rezone request until the city has resolved its RM-11 regulations. The new regulations could be a problem for the proposal, as Eagle View is right next door to it and not outside the ½ mile distance requirement.
Wilson said there are a lot of nice things that can be done with four-plex type developments. Commissioner White said while the aesthetic can be addressed, there is also the issue of the concentration of people being located amongst areas that are used for cattle and other agricultural uses.
Wilson suggested the commission table the issue it and revisit it next month, have sometime for next month to help rearrange it. Commissioner White motioned to table this until a decision is made on RM-11 limitations. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
- Annexations
a. Consider recommending approval of an annexation petition filed by Natalie Call/Gordon Anderson located at approximately 1149 North 500 East.
Deputy Clerk Anderson pulled up the property on question on Google Earth, and explained the Andersons would like to subdivide their property with their daughter. The daughter’s portion would be annexed into the city to connect to services. It does have contiguous property in the city to the east across from 500 East, as well as the ability to connect to water and sewer.
The Andersons are not included in the annexation.
Commissioner White said she has no problems with it, she is worried it may create an island of farmland in the county to the south and the city can’t do that. There is a 72-foot swath that keeps it from becoming an island.
There is enough acreage for the Andersons to remain in the county. Commissioner White said connecting to the city utilities would make more sense in this case. The property would be annexed in as an RR-1.
Commissioner White motioned to accept the annexation petition. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
b. Consider recommending approval of an annexation petition filed by Jeff Albrecht located at approximately 1950 South 1100 West.
Chairman Peterson asked which zone Jeff Albrecht would like to be annexed in at. Albrecht said he would like to build a barn as well, so RR-1 would be fine unless there was another zone that would favor his plans more. He just wants the portion of his property annexed that will include his home and barn, he owns other property in the area that will remain in the county.
Commissioner White motioned to approve the annexation petition as RR-1. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
- Discussion items
a. Nights inn attorney update –
Deputy Clerk Anderson said the summary of the attorney’s opinion is that the Night’s Inn development would be subject to the current mixed-use definition that includes the 33 percent commercial and density restrictions. Commissioner Cowley asked if they would have to start all over again on the process, which wouldn’t necessarily be true, but they would be obligated to follow the current law.
b. Mixed-use amendment discussion.
Brent Poulson asked to speak to the mixed-use law. Chairman Peterson said he could.
Brent said they were asked to provide a site plan of that development and then take it to the city council. He said that was when they were informed the ordinance had changed. He said they had a mixed-use approved, and would like to still proceed under the terms of the original approval. He said the plan they currently have would only put 20-22 units on the property with a complete demo and replacement of the front building, and a complete refurbishment of the L-shaped building behind. The new plan has a smaller footprint for the front building with no residential units on the ground floor and between five and six residential units on the top floor.
Commissioner White asked what the square footage of the 20 units is compared with what’s on the ground floor of the main building. Brent said they didn’t know at this point.
Brent said he purchased the motels – Nights and Royal Inn – as long-term investments several years ago. The city then started to enforce that motels can’t be run as apartments. He said there should be a provision to the ordinance that allows for the renovation of old hotels. He said the new ordinance requires 33 percent commercial, everything around the Royal Inn is going in to as residential. The Poulsen’s have a plan with Royal Inn that includes 33 percent commercial, and trying to fit commercial in the space. It’s difficult to do. Brent said the remainder would be 12 one-bedroom units.
Chairman Peterson asked why they would want to pursue a mixed-use with the Royal Inn. Why not change that one to RM-11 to maximize the units? Brent said they are open to whatever is functional to the city that allows them to improve some of the older buildings.
The properties surrounding it are RM-24. Brent said the old hotels are unique enough that the city could provide a provision that allows for them to be approached on a case-by-case basis. In the case of the Royal Inn, Brent said if the 33 percent were eliminated, they’d wind up with the same number of units, just some of them would turn into two-bedroom facilities.
Chairman Peterson said the better approach would be to ask for a rezone to RM-11.
Kendrick Thomas, representing the Poulsen group, said the Royal Inn parcel is one acre, which would limit it to just 11 units.
The original agreement for the Night’s Inn was to not reduce the amount of commercial. Brent said its unclear as to where that line is drawn in the original approval for a mixed-use, and filling the commercial space would be a burden.
Commissioner White said there is a difference between what is commercially used and what’s available.
Brent said they had committed to making sure there was an element of commercial in it. There would be 15 or so units in the L-shaped building.
Brent said the downstairs of the new main building would include storage space for the units, a community room (possibly with a full kitchen), office space for the onsite manger, New Horizons Crisis Center office space.
Kendrick said it would also include a recreation area.
Commissioner White said the commercial spaces would have to be generally available, so if it’s aimed at the residents, it doesn’t count toward the commercial. Even if it is developed under the original terms, there is still the question of how much commercial space was available.
Troy Poulsen said even the upper level could have been considered commercial at one time, which would be 22,000 square feet
Brent said the bigger issue isn’t the commercial space, but the density requirement because the nearest zone is RM-11, which would limit the development to 13 units.
Kendrick said if they are sticking with the current ordinance per the attorney’s opinion, it would force them to leave the current building as available commercial space and the city would be left with a blighted property. Kendrick said he feels there is an opportunity to finding a solution that would benefit the city with the property. Maybe that’s a separate issue the city could address specifically for the old hotels that are no longer feasible to run commercially. What does the city want to see happen with them?
Commissioner Anderson said he’d rather see something done with the properties than just have them sit in disrepair as they have done for a long time.
Commissioner White said the problem is every decision made has ramifications for everyone in the future who comes in with a plan. It needs to make sense long term with every situation.
The reason the city addressed the mixed-use definition in the first place was because it was being used as a backdoor to put in high density, low income subsidized housing in these buildings, said Deputy Clerk Anderson. He said the city is not culpable for the buildings becoming blighted, that is the responsibility of the owners.
Chairman Peterson said what the Poulsens are doing is a benefit to the city. What is being described as commercial really isn’t, commercial. What they’re wanting to do is not a mixed-use zone, it’s a multi-family development with amenities on site. If it’s in the Downtown Zone, are they allowed to have multiple family residential?
The Downtown Zone does not allow it, said Kendrick.
Commissioner Anderson said he likes the residential part of the proposal, but questions what is being considered commercial.
Troy said New Horizons Crisis Center could take up more of the space on the main floor. He said the crisis center and the property manager could be considered commercial.
Commissioner White said one of the reasons is to keep to multi-use in downtown is to keep it viable. There is an interest in rehabbing old buildings, but at what expense? Eliminating commercial property to add residential units doesn’t build or feed the economy.
Blighted property is a passive problem, but income-based housing becomes an active problem for emergency responders and other services, Deputy Clerk Anderson said.
Brent said he understands that concept, but they are also trying to grow the community. Businesses are going to be checking on the availability of housing. If there were an amendment to the ordinance, there’s only six or seven old hotels in town. Handle each one on an individual basis.
Chairman Peterson asked if what is planned meets the 33 percent?
Brent said the front building will be smaller by 15 to 20 percent to make room for parking.
Commissioner White said the percentage of commercial is based on the building.
Kendrick said approximately 15 percent of the building would fall under the commercial status. He said there is a desire to improve what’s there. He said he does have a conflict as the designer, but in this situation maybe the city wants to do something to address these properties. Do the city force them back into hotels? Something probably ought to be done to address this. Does the city want to take advantage of funds that’s available from the state? The city needs to decide what to do as it’s a situation what shouldn’t be allowed to continue.
There are times that the city had modified the code for something that made sense at the time and later became an animal that wasn’t anticipated, Commissioner White said. It’s happened multiple times and should be avoided. Also, White is not in favor of converting things downtown to residential, which is why the mixed use is good. If developers are not bringing in things that create more jobs and economic opportunity, it just becomes more of what the commission has been talking about. Commissioner White feels it should stay a mixed use in the downtown zone. While she is not opposed to changing some of the stipulations, it needs to remain a true mixed-use.
Kendrick asked about changing the 33 percent.
The original proposal was 50 percent, which was too limiting according to Commissioner White. She said she would be open to lower the percentage some, but not down to 15 percent. The commission needs to consider all the implications of what it changes.
Brent said they are trying to convince the city council to allow them to proceed with original plan. If there were some variation of that ordinance to make it better, it wouldn’t open it up to the whole world. Only a couple would come in, and hopefully with a plan that would be good.
Chairman Peterson said the intent is to improve downtown. He said he likes the concept, and the hope is the residents there will provide foot traffic to go up and down Main Street and spend money.
Commissioner White said it will be easier to work through the new ordinance than the old one, because under the old one the entire facility was commercial. She said the recreation space, if it was available to rent out, may help meet the commercial requirement.
Commissioner Anderson said he likes the idea of improvements. What do can be done with the building to provide for commercial opportunity? If it is allowed to be residential, and if its helping the community and providing some commercial opportunity, then it’s good.
Commissioner Cowley said whatever what we can do to improve the plan downtown. There is a need to create the balance for them and the city. Never going to make it all work 100 percent. There has to be a way to make it work for both the businessmen and the city. However, it’s difficult to know how to get to that point.
Commissioner Anderson said it’s a valid point that there are not that many of the old hotels that would fall under the type of concept being discussed.
Deputy Clerk Anderson said the old tire shop property on south Main is being rebuilt into a commercial plaza. There are not clients lined up for it, it’s just being built for commercial interests to lease. The Poulsens don’t have to fill the commercial.
Brent said the Nights Inn building is of zero value to the community right how. It’s a negative. The Main Street level would be used mostly for the tenants. There will be more people there that will be able to access the other businesses downtown. It will make everything look better.
Troy said the money they are applying for requires that the remodel has to be done to a 50-year spec with a 20-year remodel both interior and exterior. It’ll look good.
Kendrick pointed out that St. George has new apartments right on the Boulevard. That’s a good thing to have people living down there in nice, new renovated spaces.
Commissioner Anderson said St. George is going for the walking type community, with housing close to amenities. It is not allowing all residential.
Kendrick said its important not to let the residential let it sprawl out all over town and take over downtown. He said the Apple Tree once drew tour buses to the area. Maybe made a provision for those who want to convert to allow them to do so, knowing it would be limited to just four or five properties in town. It would be good for the city to bring clarity to the situation.
Commissioner White asked if it were allowed to just be residential, what would it do the change the plans for the lower level.
Troy and Brent said they wouldn’t want residential on the main level, but would still have the laundry, office and New Horizons in it to help serve the residential.
Commissioner Cowley asked if the laundromat would be available to the public. Brent said it would likely be used exclusively by the residents.
Kendrick said the laundry could be used by the public.
Chairman Peterson said there are some hang-ups on the definition of mixed-use. First- the definition of commercial. Commissioner White said it was specifically defined as generally publicly available. Second – Zoning they are still stuck due to zoning and being beholden to the nearest residential zone.
Kendrick said the current definition doesn’t make sense because someone could find a commercial space next to an RM-24 and still sneak it in. What was intended was to not have them clumped together.
Commissioner White said the intention was so that people applying for a mixed use didn’t just get to put in RM-24 wherever. Chairman Peterson said the spacing for RM-24 would still apply.
Deputy Clerk Anderson pointed out that when they are doing these mixed-use developments, there is zero requirement for open space as required in the RM-24 specifications. Any children who wind up living in them literally have no outdoor space to use.
Commissioner White said a downtown apartment isn’t the same expectation as a family apartment.
Chairman Peterson said the final hang up is with the 33 percent. He said he wants to add a definition for remodels of old hotels taken on a case-by-case basis. He said it would only apply to old hotels. The New West, the Apple Tree, basically eliminate everyone but a handful of properties.
Commissioner White said they are unique, but are they so unique they need their own set of rules?
Deputy Clerk Anderson said the driving reason why the mixed-use definition was addressed in the first place was specifically because of old hotels being converted into low income housing, and segmenting them into their own category would go back on that.
Commissioner White said the restrictions were put in place as a result of previous projects when various things were presented to the city as having a positive impact, which turned out not to be the case in implementation.
Kendrick said one of the old hotels was changed to an RM-24 zone, and at the time the council was relieved with what they were trying to do, but the fire changed everything.
Brent said they are mid-conversation at Nights. However, at the Royal it would have 12 units regardless of whether commercial is required or not.
Chairman Peterson said this has been a good discussion. He asked each member of the commission what they’re thoughts are on it.
Commissioner Anderson said there should be a stipulation that allows for a case-by-case basis with some defined standards. Need to define generally what needs to be improved. There are only have a few in town. Set a standard, and if they can’t meet it, they have to remain a hotel. He said it should not be allowed to creep over to everything else.
Commissioner White said she can’t say either way, but she doesn’t love it. It depends on how its written. The salient qualities would have to be defined and it couldn’t be aimed at specific properties.
Chairman Peterson said a new definition would have to be such that only hotels can fall into exemption. However, he would like to maintain the 33 percent commercial to all the other buildings along Main Street.
Commissioner White said she would be interested to see how the Night’s Inn issue develops with the City Council as it pertains to the recommendation and the lawyer’s advice.
Brent said the planning for the Night’s Inn is way downstream at this point, and they didn’t find out the ordinance changed until recently, which is the crux of what the Poulsens are discussing with the City Council. He also ask if a building is empty does that count as being available for use?
Yes, by definition it does count as being available, Commissioner White said. It doesn’t say it has to be used. Under the old ordinance the amount of commercial space couldn’t be reduced.
Troy said that could conceivably be the entire 22,000-square feet.
Commissioner Cowley said in the downtown specific if he was going to buy Apple Tree Inn, he doesn’t see a way to make it a hotel again. The outlying motels (or the ones near the I-70 interchanges) will get filled up first. He said he doesn’t know if there is a way to make them 100 percent commercial – maybe reduce the amount of commercial so it can work for them. It would be unlikely they could be made back into sustainable motels. Perhaps case by case would work.
Commissioner White said she’s been jaded by the times the city has been burned by the case-by-case approach in the past. One never knows how that would be exploited.
Chairman Peterson asked if the Nights gets sold down the road, would it be maintained to the same standard?
Kendrick said an ordinance would have to be specific as to IDC compliance, interior/exterior finishes, fire code and other items that need to be addressed so no matter who owns it, the community will get the same result. In concept, it looks good, but it’s the execution that matters, Commissioner White said. The commission needs to make sure it is looking to the long-term. If it is bringing people to the area who don’t contribute to the community, what has been accomplished?
Deputy Clerk Anderson asked if the grant funding is coming from the Utah Department of Homeless Services, the office of Wayne Niederhauser.
Brent said he wasn’t sure what the name of it was, but that it is state grant money. The Poulsens will have to own it for 50 years.
When dealing with zoning, maybe the Poulsens will do exactly what they say and maintain it to a high standard, Commissioner White said. However, if Joe Blow purchases five or six properties, complies to the standards, but then ruins the character of the properties, the community is going to go back and wondering why the commission and the council changed it for the one case that made sense. The commission has to think of the cases where it will be bastardized.
Brent said the exception is in the fact they had a pre-existing approval for a mixed-use from the city council. There is only a couple of properties that would be open to the individual, personalized “this is what we want to do with our old hotel.”
Commissioner White said that’s not how zoning code works. It lays out the stipulation to the code, and everyone has to follow it.
No one gets special rules, said Chairman Peterson. So, when an amendment is made, it’s updating the code. This issue would fall under variations, exemptions and waivers.
Chairman Peterson said he would like to see some kind of definition specific to hotels and motels that are 45 years old or older.
- Minutes approval
a. The minutes of the February 7 – Commissioner Anderson motions to approve the minutes. Commissioner Cowley seconds the motion. The motion passed with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
b. March 6 – Commissioner White had a couple of corrections for the March 6, 2024, minutes. Commissioner White motioned to accept the minutes with the noted changes. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. The motion passed with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.
- Other Business –
Deputy Clerk Anderson talked about the Regional Growth Summit, which is an opportunity to get all the required training for the year for planning commissioners.
Deputy Clerk Anderson also said the agenda item for an amendment to the mixed-use definition was actually intended to discuss an option brought up in City Council. The idea was to have a specific density attached to mixed-use developments, rather than having them tied to the nearest residential zone. He said it is something to consider and he would have something written up on it for next month.
Also, in the interest of clarifying the earlier discussion, Deputy Clerk Anderson pointed out that the original Mixed-Use approval for Night’s Inn was 29 units. What was presented to the planning commission on March 6 included 36 units, which accounts for the apparent reduction in commercial space. Another issue is that the agreement with the city was that no one would live in the Night’s Inn until after the improvements had been made, and there are people living there and have been for some time. There also has been no technical review concerning water, sewer, drainage, traffic and other technical information. - Adjournment – Commissioner White makes motion to adjourn. Commissioner Anderson seconds. The motion passed with aye votes from Josh Peterson, Lisa White, Branden Anderson, Wayne Cowley. Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Wes Kirshner, Zach Leavitt.