minutes - summit county

MINUTES

SNYDERVILLE BASIN PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 9, 2017

Sheldon Richins Building 1885 West Ute Boulevard,

Park City, UT

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:

Bea Peck- Chair Thomas Cooke Mike Franklin

Regrets: Colin DeFord

STAFF PRESENT:

Peter Barnes– Planning and Zoning Administrator Jennifer Strader- Senior Planner

Canice Harte Chuck Klingenstein Malena Stevens

Dave Thomas– Deputy County Attorney Kathy Lewis– Commission Secretary

The meeting was called to order at 4:30 PM.

REGULAR SESSION 1. General Public Input

The general public input session was opened.

Lisa Grablin is on the Hidden Creek HOA architectural committee. At the April 18th

Commission meeting, it was brought up that TCFC and Replay are planning a couple of

amendments to their master plan. Chair Peck said she is discussing a pending

application, which the Commission cannot hear at this time. She suggested that her

concerns are put in writing and sent to the Summit County Planning Staff. She should

keep checking on the website for the date of the public hearing and agenda. She would

be welcome to address her concerns at that time.

Snyderville Basin Planning Commission

May 9, 2017

of 16

WORK SESSION

1. Discussion regarding a proposed rezone for a property located at 2400 West Rasmussen

Road; Parcel PP-52; Peter Coroon, Applicant – Jennifer Strader, Senior Planner

Planner Jennifer Strader introduced Peter Coroon, who is the applicant. She showed on

an aerial map where the property is located. East Canyon Creek runs through the

property. It is currently zoned Rural Residential (RR) and Hillside Stewardship (HS).

The RR zone allows one unit per 20 acres; the HS zone 1 unit per 30 acres. The

applicant is requesting to rezone the property to community commercial.

The rezone would allow the construction of 168 multi-family units, a retail/commercial

component, and a transit stop. At least 70% of the units would be deed-restricted

affordable housing for a total of 117. The applicant would use the Federal Low Income

Tax Credit program to fund the affordable housing component.

Under the current zoning, the property is eligible for one unit of density. The

community commercial (CC) zone doesn’t contain specific density. The amount of

development is restricted based on setbacks, parking, height restrictions, and open

space restrictions. For this type of development, a rezone would be necessary. In the

CC zone, the proposed uses are allowed through a conditional use permit.

Planner Strader said the current Code contains a provision that a new housing

development must provide affordable housing in the amount of 20% of the market rate

units. Based on the number of market units proposed in the development, the required

affordable housing would be 10 units.

A detailed analysis of the site plan has not yet taken place. Staff would like to receive

direction on the rezone first. Preliminary discussions have taken place with the

applicant on the setbacks and height restrictions. The setback from East Canyon Creek

has been highlighted in the Staff Report.


May 9, 2017

of 16

Planner Strader said preliminary discussions have also taken place with the

Engineering Department. The Engineering Department has informed the Planning

Department that a park-and-ride lot will be built at the existing I-80 rest stop which is

directly across from this property.

Planner Strader showed a slide of the conceptual site plan for the park and ride. It

would be located in an existing rest stop on I-80. This plan includes an underpass,

which would have an impact on the subject property. If this takes place, an amendment

to the site plan would be needed.

The location of the proposed roundabout was indicated. The property is owned by

UDOT; however, Summit County would be building it. The areas where construction

would occur were pointed out. If the roundabout and underpass is constructed, two

areas of the parcel would be impacted. The applicant is aware of this scenario.

Planner Strader said this is where General Plan Policy 2.3 comes into play. It says that

Summit County will not approve any new entitlements unless there is a compelling

countervailing public interest which is being satisfied.

Planner Strader said the goal of Chapter 6 is to “Provide equal housing opportunities for

all residents of the Basin by facilitating reasonable opportunities for a variety of housing,

including low and moderate income housing.” She added that the General Plan also has a

future land use map as well as an existing Rasmussen Road neighborhood plan. This

plan states that the County should look at the rezoning of this area. The land use plan

identifies it as a mixed-use area. The proposed uses are not consistent with the current

zoning. The current zoning is rural residential; however, most of the uses along the

road are commercial.

Planner Strader said the question before the Commission is whether or not there is a

compelling countervailing public interest. The applicant and Staff are requesting


May 9, 2017

of 16

direction in order to proceed with a more detailed site plan. Chair Peck asked how

they can move forward with site planning without knowing what UDOT and the County

are going to do in this area. How will the Commission determine if the applicant

answers a compelling countervailing need?

County Engineer Gary Horton said it is on UDOT’s long range plan for an interchange to

take be built at this location. There will be on and off freeway ramps. This has not yet

been funded. It is within the 20-year timeframe.

Engineer Horton said an underpass could take a lot of congestion off this area. If

someone wants to go from one side of the road to another, they wouldn’t have to go

through an interchange. This is one of the first elements before they build an entire

interchange.

Engineer Horton said construction on the park and ride lot should begin this year.

Many conversations have been held with UDOT. They are finalizing the agreement with

UDOT. A conceptual drawing was shown. Engineer Horton said the property will

remain under one ownership. The location of the roundabout was shown on an aerial

map. They are meeting next week.

Commissioner Klingenstein asked about the funding. Is it in the capital

improvements plan? Engineer Horton said the park and ride was part of the tax

initiative that was passed last November. The project will probably be built in phases.

They want to make this a smart technology parking lot. They will implement a variable

message sign.

Chair Peck asked what impact the roundabout will have on the application. Mr. Coroon

said one option would be for the County to purchase the land the roundabout is on. If

the County chooses not to do this, he hopes they may be agreeable to looking at higher


May 9, 2017

of 16

density to compensate for loss of land value. The more expensive the land, the more

difficult it is to create affordable housing. The surrounding property was discussed.

Commissioner Stevens said she thinks that affordable housing would be a plus for the

community, but she would like more information on the roundabout. Commissioner

Franklin said he agrees affordable housing would be an attribute if all of the setbacks

can be met. There are wetlands, East Canyon Creek, and two other streams.

Mr. Coroon said their goal would be to build on the plateaus. They would stay away

from the riverbanks and the wetlands. He pointed out on the map the most likely places

they would build the housing. The development would probably be built in phases.

They would start on the large oval shown on the map. He described the different tax

credit programs available. The tax credit programs requires a minimum of 60%-70% of

the units to be affordable housing.

Commissioner Cooke said he asked Director Putt what kind of data is available for

affordable or workforce housing. What is scheduled to be built? There is a substantial

demand at this time, but will it increase with time? Mr. Coroon said they will be

conducting a market study.

Commissioner Klingenstein asked if the units will be for-sale or for-rent. Mr. Coroon

said they will be for-rent. He pointed out a neighborhood commercial area.

Commissioner Klingenstein said one of the things he would find compelling is to have

a tiered approach for teachers and firefighters who currently live and work in Summit

County. He suggested they work with Scott Loomis of Mountainlands Community

Housing. The County would like to avoid having people commute. They are trying to

avoid traffic generators.

Attorney Thomas said they put in a “waterfall provision” with the Whole Foods

Development Agreement. There were concentric circles, which were prioritized. There


May 9, 2017

of 16

were 60 days allotted for the first priority. After that time, it was opened up to the next

larger group. Eventually it was opened up to anybody. That allowed for prioritization

of those who lived and worked in the community. He thinks this would be acceptable in

terms of the federal program.

Commissioner Klingenstein said he appreciates the commercial-retail pad, but would

that be enough to qualify as a mixed-use community? He added that the Commission is

contemplating the creation of a neighborhood mixed use (NMU1) zone. He thinks if the

NMU1 zone becomes available some of the tools this zone may have would achieve the

density they want even with the roundabout. The waterfall provision would help those

who work here, but can’t find affordable housing. He thinks the NMU1 zone would also

allow more density in exchange for greater setbacks.

Commissioner Klingenstein said he understands that the parking lot has been funded,

but the other changes have not. That makes the underpass and the roundabouts more

of a long range project. It is difficult to know how to plan. This needs to be worked out.

Commissioner Klingenstein reported that the County Council is also concerned with

who the affordable housing would actually house. Would it be for Summit County

residents and/or employees?

Commissioner Harte said his comments are similar to what Commissioner

Klingenstein said about the mixed uses. He believes the NMU1 zone would require a

certain amount of property be given as open space. To him the point of Policy 2.3(a) is

to create the opportunity for affordable housing. He would like more information about

if this refers to affordable housing as rentals or ownership. He wants to ensure that the

Summit County people who need this are being served. They need to explore how to

provide the amenities to serve those who would live there. It seems this is going the

right direction.


May 9, 2017

of 16

Chair Peck said it will be hard to get an idea of what the timing will be for the other

projects of this area. Mr. Coroon said they are happy to work with the Planning Staff

and Engineering. Attorney Thomas told the Commission that unless the County

purchases the property, they should assume that the County is not going to. They can’t

hold up a decision on the rezone for something that might happen.

Engineer Horton said the plans for the roundabout by the school and the park and ride

are moving ahead. They hope to start construction by the end of the year. Because of

the cost, the underpass and the elements connected to it are largely dependent on

UDOT. This will be a joint effort.

Planner Strader asked if the Commission is generally in favor of a rezone. Chair Peck

said the Commission likes the idea of affordable housing; they have talked about mixed-

use in the area. If all of the dominos fall into place, it is likely the applicant would get a

positive reaction. The Commission may want to let this play out a little more to see if it

remains as an enticement to change the zoning.

Commissioner Klingenstein added that mixed use should include pedestrian

circulation and other elements. It would not just be a group of condos. Commissioner

Harte said if they meet the threshold of 2.3(a) of the General Plan there will be benefits

to the community. This would qualify it for consideration. Chair Peck said without the

underpass or interchange they would be making Rasmussen Road similar to Kilby Road.

They need to have some solutions for traffic circulation.

Attorney Thomas said the rezone would come with an application for the conditional

use permit. Because a rezone is part of this application, there is some flexibility in some

of the dynamic things that are going to happen. These could be looked at in terms of the

Conditional Use permit. The Commission could make sure they have the needed traffic

circulation, but they may not have any information about the underpass. Chair Peck


May 9, 2017

of 16

added that she would appreciate having some kind of idea what projects might be

coming to Rasmussen Road.

Commissioner Cooke said he would like to understand what the demand is for

housing for those that live and work in Summit County. He would like to know what

kind of conditions can be placed on the affordable units to ensure they are getting

people out of cars; that people who work here can afford to live here. Mr. Coroon said

they could apply the waterfall provision and try to get locals to rent first.

2. Discussion regarding a Low Impact Permit for two commercial buildings located on lots

6 and 10 of the Quarry Junction at Pinebrook Subdivision; 8200 Gorgoza Pine Road;

Richard Brighton, Applicant – Jennifer Strader, Senior Planner

Commissioner Harte recused himself for this agenda item. He has had business

dealings with this company. Representing the applicant were Richard Brighton and Jodi

Hoffman.

Planner Jennifer Strader said this work session is for Lots 6 and 10 in the Quarry Village

Junction subdivision. It is better known as Quarry Village. This is where Fresh Market

is located. This development was approved in 1997 as a result of a vested right suit. It

has a consent agreement. The requirements for development have been outlined for

each of the lots.

When the subdivision was approved in 2004, it allowed approximately 170,000 square

feet of commercial density. There are only a few lots that have not been built on. On

the subdivision plat is a note that indicates Lot 6 is allowed 11,144 square feet of gross

building area. They are proposing approximately 7,200 square feet. Lot 10 is allowed

16,780 square feet. They are proposing 16,500 square feet.

The applicant has stated that the uses will be consistent with the specified uses of the

agreement. The uses include commercial, retail, and office space. Staff has reviewed


May 9, 2017

of 16

the consent agreement and the plans the applicant has submitted. Staff determined the

application is in compliance with the density, uses, and the setbacks. Things such as

landscaping, lighting, and signage will be reviewed by Staff prior to obtaining a

development permit.

Planner Strader suggested the first area of discussion is on the architecture. The

consent agreement has a section on architecture with its own design guidelines. It talks

about the materials that are consistent with the mountain environment, such as stucco,

wood, and native stone. An industrial look of the buildings should be avoided.

Planner Strader indicated she brought some of the materials for the Commission to

view. These were on display. It is not yet clear what all of the materials will be. She

referred to a slide that showed the use of metal shipping containers. She said there is a

shipping container on the exterior of the building that is located by the primary access.

A slide was shown with an example of what the shipping containers look like.

Planner Strader said one of the questions for the Commission is if the shipping

containers are appropriate for the function and use of the structure. She showed a slide

of a shipping container about five feet above the sidewalk.

Chair Peck asked for an explanation of what the shipping containers are being used for.

Mr. Brighton said these are being used as architectural elements. Chair Peck asked if

the shipping containers have usable space. Mr. Brighton referred to the picture on the

slide. That particular container was being used as an office. He said one of the

containers will be used as a retail space to display products.

Planner Strader showed a slide with the elevation of the building. She indicated an area

with a large wall. By the wall are three roofs that will cover a pedestrian walkway. This

area of the building will not have an entrance. The applicant stated that when a


May 9, 2017

of 16

building is constructed on Lot 5, this area will be shielded from view. It will be seen

from the main road until that time.

Planner Strader said another design guideline found in the consent agreement states

that the building scale should be consistent with the pedestrian scale normally found in

traditional Utah towns. She said that Main Street of Park City has steep sloping areas.

The buildings step with the slope of the hill.

Planner Strader said that Building 10 doesn’t step with the slope of the lot. She added

there is a service area proposed at the end of Building 10. It will have a 6-foot fence

with a gate. There will be two garage doors that provide access to that end of the

building.

Planner Strader said that Staff has two areas of concern. The Engineering Department

preliminarily reviewed the site plan. They indicated concern about the safety with the

loading/unloading area. It would be better if the access for the service area were to be

placed where the parking lot is currently planned.

Planner Strader said the road that comes in off of Pinebrook Boulevard provides the

primary access into the development. The proposed service area access is off Santa Fe

Road. The Engineering Office stated a better design would be if the service area came

out of the parking lot by Pinebrook Boulevard.

Planner Strader highlighted items that the applicant would like direction on.

The building design with the shipping containers

The overall building design, including the massing and pedestrian scale

The lack of pedestrian access on the west side of Building 6

The location of the proposed service area

Chair Peck asked for further explanation of the shipping containers. Mr. Brighton

explained the containers in the building will be used as an office. Currently, the


May 9, 2017

of 16

containers are being used in a building at another location. The shipping containers are

part of the branding of the anchor tenant.

Mr. Brighton showed some examples of how the shipping containers are being used in

other buildings. There were pictures of containers of an office. Another picture showed

containers that are stacked and connected with decks. The upper containers are

reached by stairways. This is a different type of contemporary architecture.

A picture was shown of a container that was used as a break room for employees. Other

pictures were of a showroom, a conference room, and an office. These are visible

through the tall windows on the outside of the building. It should be visually exciting.

Mr. Brighton said there is one tenant for Building 6. The use will be retail and office.

Mr. Brighton showed where the plaza and main entry is located on the site plan.

Planner Strader said that Exhibit C of the Staff Report shows the floor plan. Chair Peck

said the quality of the exhibit in the packets makes it difficult to see what is being

described.

COMMISSION QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

Commissioner Klingenstein said the Commission seems to be struggling to

understand how the project integrates with the existing structures of Quarry Village.

He is trying to understand the intent language. He asked Attorney Thomas to explain

the language to the Commission.

Attorney Thomas said the uniqueness of this project is that it was planned by himself

and the attorney for the plaintiff. Primarily, it was to service the local Pinebrook

community. Before this was built, there were no services for this location.

Commissioner Klingenstein asked what type of goods will be sold at this location. Ms.

Hoffman said it would be for t-shirts, soft goods, and other things that men would enjoy.


May 9, 2017

of 16

Commissioner Klingenstein said he likes the look of the inside, but he is having a hard

time with the exterior. Does the shipping container integrate with the current

ambience of Quarry Village? Mr. Brighton said the materials are reflective of what is

already there. He added there will be glass on three sides. As someone drives around

the round-about, there will be a view of the inside. It is intended to draw people in.

Ms. Hoffman said in addition to the consent agreement restrictions, there are CC&Rs.

She said that retail space is limited, but office space is not. They brought pictures of

other projects that used similar guidelines.

Commissioner Cooke said he likes shipping containers as a modular unit. His question

is if these would be considered a sign. Or would it be product branding? Could it be

considered as an accessory building? He has the same question that Staff had in the

Staff Report about the free-standing units outside.

Commissioner Stevens said she is concerned about the layout of the building. Most of

the buildings in the area have entrances on both sides. If a side doesn’t have an

entrance, it should not look like the back of a building. She said the inside of the

building is driving the architecture of the exterior.

Commissioner Klingenstein asked if there are windows in the containers so that

people can see out. Mr. Brighton said some of the containers are facing the inside.

Their windows are not visible in the renderings. Commissioner Stevens suggested

they come back at the next meeting with additional renderings to give a more complete

view of what is planned.

Commissioner Klingenstein said he would like to have a better idea of how this all

functions together. Mr. Brighton used the site plan to explain the neighboring

properties and how they will connect. Chair Peck requested to have physical copies of


May 9, 2017

of 16

the proposed site plan and floor plans. Mr. Brighton said he has the layout of the entire

subdivision. He will bring this to the next meeting.

Commissioner Franklin asked what the square footage allotment for Building 6 is.

Planner Strader said it is 11,144 square feet. The consent agreement states that a third

story is allowed if it is in a pitched roof. This reads as a two-story building because of

the slope of the property. That would be something the Planning Commission may

want to discuss. The third story was pointed out. Mr. Brighton said the third story is

two levels above grade. Basically, there is a basement level. He said the building is

within the height limit. It terraces up the lot.

The service yard was shown. The dumpster and delivery area will be screened. The

screen will be made of welded wire mesh.

A discussion ensued on how future buildings will block the view of the proposed

buildings. The view from different roads was discussed. Slides were shown to help the

Commission visualize the planned layout. Chair Peck expressed concern that the view

of Building 10 will not be blocked. Additionally, there will be no entrances visible from

Pinebrook Road.

Ms. Hoffman pointed out the windows on Building 10. Each set of two windows

represent a separate tenant. The current plan is for a corporate tenant to use the space.

She said that 50% of Building 10 will be one tenant. Commissioner Klingenstein

asked why the elevated connection between the two buildings. He also asked about the

impacts of losing 11 parking spaces. Planner Strader said this is shared parking. Ms.

Hoffman added that according to the consent agreement, there is currently an excess of

parking. The most likely space to displace parking is where Engineer Horton was

discussing.


May 9, 2017

of 16

Chair Peck said there is an existing condominium and an office building that will be

looking down on the service area. How will that be addressed? Ms. Hoffman said it will

be fully screened.

Nathan McIntyre, representing the owner, said there will be a UPS truck two times a

week. A semi-truck will make deliveries about five times a year. Chair Peck asked why

Engineer Horton doesn’t like the proposed location of the service area. Planner Strader

said this is for safety issues. This is a primary access into the development. The

primary road will be blocked off by a semi-truck backing in.

Commissioner Klingenstein said that Engineer Horton has to think beyond this

tenant. With another tenant, trucks could be backing in and out every day. He thinks

they should look for a better suited location.

Ms. Hoffman said there couldn’t be a loading dock where Engineer Horton has

suggested. She said they wouldn’t be opposed to limiting the number of deliveries. The

deliveries could be during off-hours. Mr. Brighton said they took the least optimal part

of the street and turned that into a delivery area. They felt that this was the most

pedestrian friendly answer. She said the delivery area is more of a bay than a dock.

Chair Peck asked if a truck coming to the service area would have to make a three-

point turn. Mr. Brighton said a semi-truck would fit from the curb back, but getting in

and out would require multiple turns. The complexity would be compounded if there

are cars on the road.

Commissioner Franklin said he would like to see the snow removal plan for the

service area. The Commission looked at the aerial map to see which developments may

be looking down on the service area of the project.


May 9, 2017

of 16

DRC UPDATES

Commissioner Cooke said one meeting for the Silver Creek DRC was held. Approval

was given for the neighborhood park, the community trail, and two or three subdivision

plats. A method has been worked out to get information before the meeting occurs.

Commissioner Stephens will join the Kimball Junction Blue Ribbon committee. She will

be the second Commissioner on the committee. Commissioner Harte is the other.

COMMISSION ITEMS

Commissioner Klingenstein asked that the pointer, which can be seen on the

projected screens, be brought to each of the meetings as a standard procedure.

DIRECTOR ITEMS

Planning and Zoning Administrator Peter Barnes filled in for Director Putt. He reported

that the first Kimball Junction Blue Ribbon Committee meeting was held. The next

meeting will be on May 19. Administrator Barnes said an outline was made for the

upcoming meetings. If the Commission have comments on any of the items, these could

be relayed to Commissioner Cooke or Commissioner Stevens.

Commissioner Stevens asked if the County is more interested in affordable housing

that is for rent or for sale. Administrator Barnes said they are interested in both, but

the greater shortage is rental accommodations. Commissioner Klingenstein asked

that a presentation is given in a work session on the housing needs analysis.

Administrator Barnes said the next meeting will be dedicated to the Canyons. It will

start at 4:30 with a site visit to the Canyons.


May 9, 2017

of 16

ADJOURN

At 6:34 p.m., the meeting was adjourned.

_____________________________ Approval Signature

minutes - summit county

Documents