At the Planning Commission of Richfield City, Sevier County, Utah, on Wednesday, May 1, 2024, at the Richfield City Center, Richfield, Utah, commencing at 6:00 p.m. Chairman Josh Peterson presiding.
- Roll Call Present: Josh Peterson, Branden Anderson, Wes Kirshner, Wayne Cowley.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zack Leavitt. - Conditional Use Permits/Home Occupation Permits
a. Tyson Hansen and Donavan Allen – To request a conditional use and to discuss conditions for building a new four-plex at approximately 150 South 100 East, including terms of a future development agreement. A C-1 use in a Downtown Zone.
Tyson Hansen addressed the commission. He said there is an empty .43-acre lot on 100 East where they are planning to build a four-plex. Each unit would be individually plated and be able to be sold individually. They are proposing following the RM-11 setbacks. Hoping to sell in the low to mid $300,000 range.
Chairman Peterson read through the DRC notes, which are as follows –
Note: The city attorney has advised the city any issuance of a zoning permit can be delayed if a developer has not met the conditions or completed improvements of any previous projects. Future zoning permits will not be issued until such a time as the requirements of previous developments are completed.
Tyson Hansen said there was a previous project his business partner constructed where a required fence hasn’t yet been installed. Also, asphalt is needed on the previous project that is located at 642 South 100 West. He said as far as he knows the new fence is in motion and the asphalt will be installed as soon as possible.
Performance bonds: Richfield City will require a performance bond for all site improvements, including required fencing, asphalt or concrete parking/approach and all repairs necessary for sidewalks, curb, gutter, shoulders and roads that are cut into or otherwise damaged during construction and installation of utility access. This will require the developer to calculate an estimated cost for time and materials. The city engineer will also calculate a total for all repairs and required improvements. The required performance bond will be required to cover 110 percent of calculated costs as provided by the city engineer. 13.16.100
Chairman Peterson said this means a performance bond will be required.
- Land Use: General Plan – This is a Conditional Use in a Downtown Commercial Zone and subject to all Land Use Ordinances and requirements, as applicable, can be imposed to mitigate the reasonably anticipated detrimental effects of the proposed Conditional Use. The Conditional Use shall be approved by the Commission or Council, as applicable. Following the approval of a Conditional C-1 Use or C-2 Use Application, the applicant may apply for other necessary approvals, licenses, or permits necessary to implement the Conditional Use Application approval.15.1510
Basically, this is saying this is step one of the process, said Deputy Clerk Anderson. - Future Streets: Transportation Plan – Any shared use (easement) will require an agreement that is notarized and filed against the property and with the city. There should be a mandatory disclosure noting the possible detrimental effect on future property value and use caused by such agreement.
It was a big cause of concern with the DRC, where the property line is and where the shared access would lie.
Hansen said the drive way for the house to the south needs to have an easement, which he didn’t anticipate being a problem because the four eventual owners of the four-plex would already be sharing the access.
Commissioner Anderson – asked if they would have enough property on their side to do what they are proposing, which Hansen affirmed that they did. Initially the proposal was to have a five-foot setback on the north, but that wouldn’t work, so it was changed to eight.
Chairman Peterson said anytime there is a shared access, there has to be a shared access agreement that spells out the terms of the access. It would protect Hansen and Allen as well as the neighbor with whom they are sharing the access. There is a shared access agreement on the Utah Department of Transportation website.
Deputy Clerk Anderson asked about the width of the lot, which Hansen clarified as being 87 feet. He said the DRC is requiring an asphalt, or other solid dust free surface, for the driveway and approach. Commissioner Kirshner said that is something that is required in the code.
- Quarter Mile Radius: Show existing future streets – NA
- Sewer Availability – There is sewer available across 100 East on the east side. Restoration of damage done to the street and sidewalk in accessing it will be repaired to city specifications by the developer.
- Sewer Extension – NA
- Water availability – There is water availability on the west side of 100 East. Restoration of damage done to sidewalks and roadway will be repaired to city specifications by the developer.
- Water extension – NA
- Fire hydrants – Hydrants are located at each corner of 100 South and 200 South.
- Knox Box – NA
- Street improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk) – Already in place, but developer is responsible to restore them to current condition if damage is done or they are cut into for utilities.
- Street paving – Street is already in place. Restoration of roadway to original condition is the responsibility of the developer.
- Street lights, location – NA
- Site drainage – Site will be required to retain all drainage. A drainage plan, meeting city development standards, will have to be submitted to and reviewed by and approved by the city engineer.
- Off-site drainage – No off-site drainage will be permitted.
- Irrigation ditches – Located on the east side of 100 East.
- French drains – NA
- Landscaping – A minimum of at least five percent of the property needs to be landscaped.
It has to be something that is not paved. It can include green space or xeriscaping, according to Deputy Clerk Anderson. Hansen said the drainage is preliminarily set to be in the front, but may be in the back, which may affect landscaping locations.
- Parking – Two spots per unit are required. Spaces that require a vehicle to be moved to be accessed are not counted. All parking and approaches have to be built out of asphalt, cement or other binder pavement and permanently maintained to provide a dustless surface – Zoning code 19.1914. Gravel or road base are not acceptable surfaces. Also, there needs to be a verification of where the property line on this project exists, what the terms are of the proposed shared use.
- Addresses – These need to be coordinated with Sevier County.
- Signage – streets – NA
- Signs – NA
- Trash Enclosure – This requirement is subject to the city’s agreement with White’s Sanitation, allowing up to four residences to each have their own garbage receptacle.
- Fencing – Fencing of at least six feet in height built of a durable, non-scalable, view obstructing material (NOT wood or chain-link) will be required on the North, West and South portions of the property as per code. 16.1620 5.1 and 5.2
One question is how to handle to fencing on the south side. Where there will be a shared driveway, it may not be practical to run the fence the entire length of the south end of the property. The purpose of the code is to separate higher density from single family, but in this case, they can’t fence off the access to the home to the south. The shared access would be the only vehicle access available on the property to the south, which has a carport located behind the home.
Commissioner Kirshner said the whole project hinges on the shared access agreement. Without it, the project would be shot in the foot.
- Building Elevations and finishes – These will need to be submitted.
- Site visit – NA
- UDOT/State/Fed permits – NA
- City installed connections to coordinate with building plans (locations) – A utility plan will need to be submitted to the city for review and approval.
- Airport manager approval: projects within ½ mile of airport (Form 7460-1 and avigation agreement) – NA
- Lot line adjustment – NA, unless the shared access requires it.
- Geotechnical report – NA
- CBU (mail box) – This will be required and has to be approved by the Postmaster prior to installation.
- Traffic Study – NA
- Traffic impact fee – NA
- Payback Agreements – NA
- Fees: Impact fees, engineer review fees, fees for materials testing. – Developer will pay all impact fees, engineering review costs and materials testing costs, including compaction tests on concrete and asphalt surfaces.
- SWPP – NA
- Geotechnical Report – NA
- Set-backs – Since this is essentially an RM-11 development, the DRC has recommended all RM-11 setbacks be followed on the property.
- Fiber optics/gas – Developer is responsible to consult with Bluestakes and avoid any disruption of utilities in the area.
Chairman Peterson asked what actions are available to the commission. Deputy Clerk Anderson said they can choose to approve the conditional use, table it or deny it tonight.
Chairman Peterson said he’d favor tabling it for one month until the access issue is addressed and the other project’s improvements are completed.
Hansen said he would really like to see it approved contingent on the shared access agreement being in place and the other development being completed.
Commissioner Kirshner said it may take more than 30 days for the shared access to be resolved. Surveyor would have to come out and mark the property, and surveyors are out a long way as well.
Commissioner Anderson motioned to approve the conditional use permit subject to a future development agreement, contingent on two items, signed and recorded shared access and other developments be finished to code before starting this one. Commissioner Kirshner seconded the motion. The motioned passed by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Branden Anderson, Josh Peterson, Wayne Cowley, Wes Kirshner.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zach Leavitt.
b. Ryan Shaddix to request a conditional use permit for a storage container to be temporarily located at 385 South Main Street. This is a C-1 use in a CS (Commercial Shopping) zone.
Shaddix said he is working with Jared Cephalia with the tire shop that is being remodeled into commercial space. He said the Refuge Thrift store has been using a storage area at UHAUL for clothing recycled through the thrift store. He said in an effort to cut expenses, Cephalia said if they could get a temporary storage container on the property located on the corner of 400 S and Main, the thrift store can use part of while the Cephalia could use the other half. There is a limit of 30 days, unless its tied to construction. If it’s tied to the construction permit, it would have a limit of 180 days.
Shaddix said White’s Sanitation offers storage containers, so it would be easy to remove once the term is done.
Shaddix said six months isn’t bad, and it may give him a chance to know where he will be with the thrift shop’s long-term plans by that point. The commission and Deputy Clerk checked the hard copy of the zoning book to make sure the 180-day limit was indeed what the city requires for storage units in commercial zones. The code book was the same as what was on the website.
Shaddix said even the six months are helpful in saving funds for the thrift shop.
Motion: Allow the temporary conditional use of a storage container at the address of 385 South Main, Action: Approve, Moved by Wes Kirshner, Seconded by Branden Anderson.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Branden Anderson, Josh Peterson, Wayne Cowley, Wes Kirshner.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zach Leavitt.
Commissioner Kirshner said one thing to be aware of is how the container is oriented on the property as to minimize places where swatters can hang out.
c. Troy Poulsen to request a mixed-use of the old Royal Inn property, 1170 South Cove View Road. A C-2 use in a CS zone. This item was removed at the request of the Poulsens.
d. Marlo Adams to request a conditional use permit for a short-term rental at a home located at 483 S. 500 W. A C-1 Use in an R1-10 zone. This item was removed at the request of Adams
e. Rylee Robinson to request a conditional use for installation of a security fence at Jorgensen Honda’s property. Robinson wasn’t in attendance. Commissioner Peterson said he doesn’t feel comfortable approving it without more information including some type of picture. Motion: Table this until more information becomes available. Action: Table, Moved by Branden Anderson, Seconded by Wes Kirshner. Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Branden Anderson, Josh Peterson, Wayne Cowley, Wes Kirshner.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zach Leavitt.
- Public hearings –
a. Plat amendment – Jim Holt to request split of Pepperbellies’ lot, 680 South Cove View Road, Parcel Number 1-56-30. Chairman Peterson opened the public hearing at 6:44 p.m. Hearing no comment, he closed the hearing. - Action on Public hearings –
Plat amendment – Recommend the split of the Pepperbellies’ lot, 680 South Cove View Road, Parcel Number 1-56-30.
Chairman Peterson asked how it would affect the parking. It would depend on the use of the property as to how much parking is required. Peterson said if it limits the property use, that’s Mr. Holt’s concern.
Commissioner Kirshner said it could very well limit the use of the property in the future. Commissioner Anderson said as long as Mr. Holt is aware of the potential for the property’s use to be limited in the future, he has no problem.
The property currently has two accesses, one each would be used for each lot created in the split. Also, there is an alley to the west and a lien to on the south of the former Pepperbellies building that could be developed into more parking in the future.
Motion: Recommend approval of the lot split of the former Pepperbellies lot at 680 South Cove View Road. Action: Approved. Moved by Wayne Cowley, Seconded by Branden Anderson.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Branden Anderson, Josh Peterson, Wayne Cowley, Wes Kirshner.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zach Leavitt. - Discussion Items –
a. Table of uses for Non-Residential Districts – Discuss request from Bre Roberts to change the Table of Uses for Non-Residential Zones to allow Tattoo Establishments in the Downtown Zone.
Commissioner Peterson said he would like to discuss allowing tattoo establishments in downtown at the next meeting. He said the last time one was located downtown, it caused problems. He said he would like to revisit the issue, especially in the downtown zone.
b. Possible amendment to Mixed-use – Discuss adding a set density requirement rather than tying it to nearest residential density zones on mixed use developments.
Chairman Peterson said the standard already requires no more than the RM-24. He asked if the city would like to set the standard to being limited to no more than RM-11. Peterson said the spacing requirement for RM-24 should already eliminate anyone using the current ordinance’s proximity clause for creation of high-density housing in a commercial zone under a mixed use. The city could be more direct in just stating that all mixed-use in commercial zones is limited strictly to RM-11 guidelines.
Deputy Clerk Anderson said he would prepare a draft ordinance and have it noticed for a public hearing and adoption in the June meeting.
c. Mixed use residential zone – Discuss the option of adding a mixed-use for residential zones that would provide a more flexibility in allowing a mixing lower and higher densities in residential zones.
Deputy Clerk Anderson said the issue at hand is a large piece of SITLA land that would be interested in mixing densities – some as high as RM-24 or RM-11 – and others at RM-8 or RM-10. Basically, they are looking for more flexibility in how to develop property. Or perhaps there isn’t a benefit to it at all, as RM-11 zoned property doesn’t have to be filled to that capacity. Large parcels could be subdivided and then zoned on an individual basis.
Commissioner Kirshner said he is not in favor of allowing RM-24 in any mixed-use residential.
Chairman Peterson said the city has to be careful. He said he has been on commission for three years, and the city has made non-stop changes in an effort to cater to developers’ wants, and every time something is changed it comes back to bite the city. The city should sit back and let what it has on the books ride and see if there is actually something broken. He said that is what got the city into the RM-24 mess. Peterson said developers should follow the ordinance the city currently has and do their best to make the development the best it can be. He said he wouldn’t be opposed to something that allows smaller scale businesses in some residential zones, but he’s opposed to creating an overlay zone for mixed residential densities.
Commissioner White noted in an email that she didn’t see the advantage to the idea.
Commissioner Cowley said it would become a sectional version of an RM-24.
Chairman Peterson said he is not interested in diving into planned unit developments at this time.
- Minutes Approval –
a. Minutes of April 3 Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner White submitted some clarifications and corrections via email. Motion: Approve the minutes with the changes noted by Commissioner White., Action: Approve, Moved by Branden Anderson, Seconded by Wayne Cowley.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Branden Anderson, Josh Peterson, Wayne Cowley, Wes Kirshner.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zach Leavitt. - Other Business – Ryan Shaddix asked about what the process is for an annexation. There is a parcel he is interested in for possibly building a church. Chairman Peterson gave Shaddix the contact number for Jeff Albrecht, who has been involved with several and can answer all the questions.
Shaddix said he appreciated the information and that he feels the planning commission is doing a great job.
Chairman Peterson said after last month’s meeting, he met with Mayor Bryan Burrows, Deputy Clerk Anderson and City Manager Michele Jolley. He said one of the things moving forward is developers are going to have to disclose if their projects are funded by tax credits or grants, which are red flags for low income housing.
He said it now appears that the Sandstone Apartments started who process with tax credits, and knew up front what they would become. We’re learning. One thing is they have to provide moving forward is if the projects are subject to tax credit funding. There is a way, we don’t have to allow it.
One way to control it is a project development agreement. We could allow a percentage, others would have to be fair market. Going to have some people come back to us, at that point in time, the commission should focus on fulfill the needs of Richfield City – the needs of Richfield City are single-family housing at fair market value. What has happened is that their income restrictions are low. For three people living in an apartment at Sandstone, the yearly limit is $48,000 a year.
Eagle View are even more strict than $48,000. Local families are working hard to take care of themselves and making more than $48,000 a year are not getting any help in the housing market. Instead these developments are bringing people from outside the area, brought with them their outside troubles. In just the past couple of weeks, there have been drug overdose deaths at both Sandstone and the Nights Inn.
Commissioner Anderson asked how is it controlled if there is 20 percent allowed. Commissioner Kirshner said someone is always who is going to game the system. There isn’t anyway for the city to know. Would the city have to go through the process of eviction in trying to enforce the percentages?
It’s an industry, maybe the largest in the county right now, said Commissioner Cowley. Low income people are getting subsidized, the owners are getting paid. It’s an industry of warehousing other communities’ low-income populations.
Commissioner Kirshner said he is aware of a situation where a person in the home was working, but the job put the household over the income restrictions, so he quit his job so they could keep their housing. Now there is a kid who should be working was convinced to quit his job. That is a problem.
Chairman Peterson asked if the city has the ability to just deny applications. Deputy Clerk Anderson said he would check.
Chairman Peterson asked if the city has the ability to just deny applications. Deputy Clerk Anderson said he would check. The commission need clarifications on whether it can say no or not.
Another issue is empty building fees in downtown. Properties in downtown that are not actively seeking leases or renters. One option would be a program that allows for them to be taxed at a higher rate if they are not being used. Some commercial property owners are demanding outrageous rent rates to use buildings, which makes it difficult for anyone to use them.
These downtown properties cost the city money, as it maintains Main Street with street sweeping, higher police presence and other items. Unused property is not contributing to the costs and hurts the vitality of the downtown district.
Commissioner Cowley said unfortunately every Main Street in America is struggling with physical stores losing market share to online retailers. It’s sickening to see.
Deputy Clerk Anderson said obviously the answer isn’t going to be bookstores and CD shops, but people still want places to go and things to do. The challenge is finding those types of businesses and populating downtown with them.
Commissioner Kirshner said Morgan Shaver has done a good job cleaning up part of downtown with his bistro.
Chairman Peterson said if there is a way to incentivize the use, it would help the city be reimbursed for the money it spends to maintain Main Street.
- Adjournment. Motion: Adjourn. Moved by Branden Anderson, Seconded by Wayne Cowley.
Vote: Motion carried by unanimous roll call vote (summary: Yes = 4).
Yes: Branden Anderson, Josh Peterson, Wayne Cowley, Wes Kirshner.
Excused: Blaine Breinholt, Lisa White, Zach Leavitt.