General Information

Government Type

Municipality

Entity

Kaysville

Public Body

Kaysville Planning Commission

Notice Information

Add Notice to Calendar

Notice Title

Kaysville City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes

Notice Tags

Public Meetings

Notice Type(s)

Meeting

Event Start Date & Time

March 13, 2025 07:00 PM

Event End Date & Time

March 13, 2025 09:00 PM

Event Deadline Date & Time

03/13/25 07:00 PM

Description/Agenda

Kaysville City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 13, 2025 The Planning Commission meeting was held on Thursday, March 13, 2025, at 7:00 pm in the Kaysville City Hall located at 23 East Center Street. Planning Commission Members in Attendance: Chair Mike Packer, Commissioners Paul Toller, Wilf Sommerkorn, Erin Young, Megan Sevy, Katie Ellis and Rachel Lott Planning Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Paul Allred and Debora Shepard Staff Present: Anne McNamara and Melinda Greenwood Public Attendees: City Councilmember Abbi Hunt, Hannah Clark, and Cole Stephens 1- WELCOME AND MEETING ORDER Chair Packer welcomed all in attendance to the Kaysville City Planning Commission meeting. 2- DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST There were no conflicts of interest 3- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER SIGN FOR BARNES PARK LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 950 WEST 200 NORTH Anne McNamara presented the request from the Parks and Recreation Department to install a new electronic message sign at Barnes Park, replacing a previously demolished sign. The proposed sign has already been reviewed by the City Council through the Architectural Review Committee. It is planned for placement at the southeastern corner of Barnes Park, near the intersection of 200 North and Flint Drive. Since electronic message signs are a conditional use in the Public Utility zone, staff reviewed the request and determined that it meets all necessary requirements for EMC signs. No additional conditions were deemed necessary, and staff recommended approval of the request. Ms. McNamara shared her willingness to answer any questions from the commission. Commissioner Wilf Sommerkorn inquired about the type of sign being proposed. Ms.McNamara confirmed that it would be an electronic message sign, similar to an existing one in the city. Commissioner Sommerkorn then asked whether the previous sign at Barnes Park was also electronic. Ms. McNamara clarified that the demolished sign was static and not electronic. She also noted that the city had received one phone call regarding the notification for the new sign, but the caller had no concerns-only a general inquiry about the project. Chair Packer asked whether the new sign would be similar in size and style to the previous one, noting that the former sign was a monument-style structure set in rock. Cole Stephens, the Parks and Recreation Director, confirmed that the primary difference would be its orientation. The new sign would be positioned north-south to ensure visibility for eastbound and westbound traffic. He also mentioned that the electronic message center (EMC) portion of the sign would be identical to the one currently installed in front of City Hall on Main Street, manufactured by the same company. Commissioner Young asked whether the new sign would be illuminated on both sides. Parks and Recreation Director Cole Stephens confirmed that it would be, allowing visibility for both eastbound and westbound traffic. Commissioner Wilf Sommerkorn then remarked that the request appeared to be straightforward. Commissioner Young asked for clarification on whether the sign proposal had already been reviewed by the City Council. Ms. McNamara explained that since Barnes Park is technically located within the Kaysville City Business Park, the proposal first had to go through the Architectural Review Committee for approval. This review was required as part of the Business Park's regulations before the request could proceed to the Planning Commission for conditional use approval. Ms. Greenwood provided additional context regarding the approval process for the sign. She explained that approximately 20 years ago, the city purchased the property where the Kaysville City Business Park is now located and acted as its developer. As part of that process, the city established Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and an Owners Association. The City Council has since functioned as the Architectural Review Committee for all developments within the business park, including new buildings, additions, and signage. Ms. Greenwood noted that the Parks and Recreation Department is working on removing the park from the Business Park designation. She also confirmed that the sign proposal was reviewed and approved by the City Council during its last meeting. She remarked that this sign had undergone an extensive approval process, requiring multiple steps, including a revision to the Public Use zone to permit electronic message center (EMC) signs. Following that change, the proposal was reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee before reaching the Planning Commission for conditional use approval. Commissioner Lott inquired whether the RAMP tax was used to fund the new sign. Parks and Recreation Director Cole Stephens confirmed that the sign's construction is entirely funded by RAMP tax revenue. While the RAMP tax acknowledgment will not appear directly on the sign itself, it will be recognized within the surrounding landscaped area. Mr. Stephens also took the opportunity to highlight the historical significance of Barnes Memorial Park. He noted that many people are unaware of the story of Rulon and Emily Barnes and how the park was established in their memory. Currently, there is one interpretive sign on site, but given the park's 45-acre size, additional signage is planned. These will include small interpretive signs providing historical context about the Barnes family and the park's origins. Commissioner Young made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit for the electronic message center sign at Barnes Park, located at 950 West 200 North. The motion was based on the staff's findings and confirmation that the proposal met all necessary requirements. Commissioner Lott seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion (7-0). Commissioner Packer: Yay Commissioner Young: Yay Commissioner Ellis: Yay Commissioner Sommerkorn: Yay Commissioner Toller: Yay Commissioner Lott: Yay Commissioner Sevy: Yay 4- APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE FEBRUARY 13, 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Commissioner Toller made a motion to approve the minutes for the February 13, 2025, Planning Commission meeting and Commissioner Ellis seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously approved in favor of the motion. Commissioner Packer: Yay Commissioner Young: Yay Commissioner Ellis: Yay Commissioner Sommerkorn: Yay Commissioner Toller: Yay Commissioner Lott: Yay Commissioner Sevy: Yay 7- OTHER MATTERS THAT PROPERLY COME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ms. Greenwood provided an update on the Master Plan Community draft, which she had been working on and finally completed. She acknowledged that she had previously overextended herself and missed a deadline for a Public Hearing, but now the draft was ready for internal review. Ms. Greenwood suggested presenting the draft as a discussion item at the next meeting, with a public hearing potentially scheduled for the following meeting in April. She clarified that the document is only seven pages long, so it is not an extensive proposal. Greenwood described the purpose of the master plan community zone, which is intended to accommodate large development projects that do not fit within the city's current zoning options. Specifically, the proposal is for properties over 20 acres, including the Symphony property near Sunset Equestrian and the Hirschi property off Angel Street, both of which she had been working with the property owners on for about a year. The idea is to create a community with a mixture of lot sizes and home types, providing more flexibility than the city's current zoning allows, particularly for developments that do not want to follow traditional, smaller lot sizes like those in the third-acre zone. The new zone would function similarly to the modern composing zone, with a focus on simplicity and flexibility, and would require a development agreement. Traditional zoning regulations, such as minimum lot sizes and setbacks, would be negotiated and included in the Development Agreement. This approach would allow for a 'blended density' and 'blended community' that the current zoning options cannot accommodate. Ms. Greenwood emphasized that while the concept is straightforward, she wanted to gauge the Commission's comfort level with adopting an entirely new zone. The application process for projects in this zone would include a pre-application meeting and a set of required materials, including traffic analysis, landscape design, and a draft Development Agreement. Ms. Greenwood proposed that the Master Plan Community discussion and Public Hearing be placed on a single agenda, with the flexibility to table part of it if the discussion becomes too overwhelming. She also informed the Commission that April would have a unique meeting schedule due to spring break. The Commission's meeting will only be held on April 24, as the City Council traditionally cancels their first meeting in the month of April. Ms. Greenwood then discussed upcoming items for the April 24 meeting. One significant item is a rezone request from the Holland Group, who purchased property from UDOT near the 950 North and West Davis Corridor exit, previously known as the Mink Farm. The property, just under eight acres, is proposed for rezoning. The eastern half will be rezoned to Residential Medium (RM) for townhomes, with a Development Agreement specifying the number of units. The western half will be rezoned to Light Industrial (LI), providing more flexibility than the General Commercial zone. Public notices for this proposal will be sent to both Kaysville and Farmington residents within 500 feet of the property. Ms. Greenwood mentioned that a Farmington resident had already expressed concerns about the townhomes, which is a common reaction to such developments. Additionally, Ms. Greenwood outlined the approach for public notifications, explaining that they would be sending out extra notices to ensure that no one is left out, after previous issues with public notification for another project. She confirmed that the Master Plan Community discussion would be on the agenda for March 27, with the possibility of revisiting it on April 24 if additional time is needed. Ms. Greenwood also mentioned that a Conditional Use Permit for a farm stand would be on the next agenda, which had already passed the City Council. She expressed enthusiasm for these types of applications and praised the positive outcome and discussions in the previous meeting. Commissioner Sommerkorn discusses the challenges and updates surrounding the state's land use policies and the ongoing impact of new legislative changes. He highlights how legislative attention to land use processes has increased due to concerns over housing affordability. While this year did not see any major bills, many smaller changes have been made, which will add complexity to land use administration and require continued attention and adaptation from local governments. Commissioner Sommerkorn recalls his extensive experience, especially his involvement in the creation and revisions of the Land Use, Development, and Management Act (LUDMA). He explains that the act, which was once a few hundred lines long, now spans thousands of lines, becoming increasingly detailed. New legislative sessions continue to introduce amendments, making compliance more complicated. He notes that several new provisions added hundreds of lines to the LUDMA, with some being particularly intricate and difficult to interpret. Key update shared include: 1. Connectivity in General Plans: A provision mandates that by July 1, 2027, communities must consider street connectivity in their General Plans, specifically regarding incomplete streets and connections across obstacles like canals. This will require cost estimates, funding sources, and an evaluation of construction impediments-something new to general planning processes. 2. Energy Development Zones: The Utah Energy Council was established to support electrical energy development, including the creation of designated zones for energy facilities. Local communities are required to show consistency with local land use regulations when such zones are proposed, but they do not have a veto over these designations. 3. University Development: State Universities can designate areas for development without local coordination, though public hearings must be held, and the trustees of the university must address any concerns raised. 4. Moderate-Income Housing: There have been changes to moderate-income housing plans, introducing new options like 'Fizz' and 'Hops' zones, Transit Development zones, and density options. These changes are meant to simplify compliance, but the complexity of their implementation remains high, requiring extensive interpretation. 5. Gravel Pit Regulations: New provisions regarding gravel pits grant them more operational flexibility, including the right to expand their operations with minimal local regulation. While gravel pits are necessary for construction, this change could create conflicts with nearby residents. 6. Public Notice and Appeal Processes: Changes to public notice requirements now prevent overly burdensome individual notices for broad land use changes. Additionally, the State Code now prohibits public hearings for appeals and variances, which are now handled in a quasi-judicial manner without public hearings. 7. Property Line Adjustments: A new bill has streamlined the process for adjusting property lines, making it more consistent and clearer, particularly for parcels and lots within subdivisions. 8. Zoning and Use Variances: A new bill requires communities to create processes for determining whether new uses can be allowed in existing zones. This is essentially a use variance, which allows businesses to seek approval to operate outside the specific uses listed in a zone. This provision does not amend the zoning code but allows the City Council to decide on a case-by-case basis. Overall, Commissioner Sommerkorn stresses that the continued growth of legislation and its intricacies requires a specialized focus on interpreting and administering these laws. The changes, while not always easing the regulatory process, push communities toward more standardized, detailed planning and regulation. 9- ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Young motioned to adjourn the meeting at 8:04 pm.

Notice of Special Accommodations (ADA)

Kaysville City is dedicated to a policy of non-discrimination in admission to, access to, or operations of its programs, services or activities. If you need special assistance due to a disability, please contact the Kaysville City Offices at 801-546-1235.

Notice of Electronic or Telephone Participation

A member of the governing body may participate in meetings by telephone providing that at least three members of the commission are present in person at the meeting, no more than two members of the governing body participate by telephone, and the governing body.

Meeting Information

Meeting Location

23 East Center Street
Kaysville, UT 84037
Show in Apple Maps Show in Google Maps

Contact Name

Anne McNamara

Contact Email

amcnamara@kaysville.gov

Notice Posting Details

Notice Posted On

March 20, 2025 01:36 PM

Notice Last Edited On

March 20, 2025 01:36 PM

Deadline Date

March 13, 2025 07:00 PM

Subscribe by Email

Subscription options will send you alerts regarding future notices posted by this Body.