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

April 24, 2025 07:00 PM

Event End Date & Time

April 24, 2025 09:00 PM

Event Deadline Date & Time

04/24/25 07:00 PM

Description/Agenda

Kaysville City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 24, 2025 The Planning Commission meeting was held on Thursday, April 24, 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 Debora Shepard, Paul Allred, and Paul Toller Planning Commissioners Absent: Commissioners Wilf Sommerkorn, Megan Sevy, Katie Ellis, and Erin Young Staff Present: Melinda Greenwood, Anne McNamara and Mindi Edstrom Public Attendees: City Councilmember Abbi Hunt, Amy Birt, Brady Birt, Bart Peterson, Phil Holland, Cash Knight, Spencer Brown, Andrew Marsh, Brand and Melanie Christensen, Michael Baker, Kristin Baker, Conner Ridenour, David Jensen, Cindy Kerr, Tom Kerr, Kim Anderson, Rick Moore, Shelley Moore, Jackie Knight, David Stringfellow, Marvin Hill, and Liz Child 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 A MAJOR B HOME OCCUPATION LOCATED AT 135 SOUTH 500 EAST FOR GREEN PEAK LANDSCAPING FOR JAROM JORGENSEN Ms. Edstrom introduced the Conditional Use Permit application submitted by Jarom Jorgensen, residing at 133 South 500 East. It was noted that the residence is part of a duplex, which initially caused confusion regarding the address, but the correct location of 133 South was confirmed. This agenda item came before the Commission following a resident's inquiry in September 2024 about whether Mr. Jorgensen's business, Green Peak Landscaping, was licensed with the city. Upon investigation, it was found that while the business was registered with the Utah Department of Commerce, it lacked both a Contractor's License from the Utah Division of Occupational and Professional Licensing (DOPL) and a business license with the city, and a Conditional Use Permit which all are required. Despite multiple attempts to contact Mr. Jorgensen via voicemail and email, city staff did not initially receive a response. Follow-up code enforcement efforts resumed in February 2025, and contact was made on March 6. Mr. Jorgensen was given two weeks to bring his business into compliance by obtaining both a City Business License and the required Conditional Use Permit. When that deadline passed without resolution, the city contacted DOPL for further guidance. DOPL confirmed that they were working with Mr. Jorgensen, and that the city could not issue a business license until he obtained the proper contractor's license and a Conditional Use Permit. Green Peak Landscaping is a residential and commercial landscaping business that offers services such as HOA maintenance, excavation, seasonal cleanup, sprinkler system installation, and snow removal, all of which require a contractor's license. According to his application, Mr. Jorgensen operates with one work truck and possibly a trailer, though it is unclear whether the trailer is used for business purposes. There are no employees or customers visiting the home, and city staff confirmed there are currently no outstanding code enforcement complaints on the property. Two neighboring residents called city staff to inquire about the meeting, and the Mayor received a message from a resident referencing potential illegal parking and previous dirt piles on the sidewalk-though the latter issue has since been resolved. City staff recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit for a Major B Home Occupation at 133 South 500 East, contingent upon any additional conditions the Planning Commission may find appropriate in accordance with city code section 17-30-3. Mr. Jorgensen was present and available to respond to questions from the Commission. Planning Commission members invited Mr. Jorgensen to answer questions regarding prior code enforcement concerns. Commissioner Paul Toller inquired about the source of the March 2025 complaint. Mr. Jorgensen explained that it likely stemmed from his work truck being parked in front of his residence, which displays company badging. He speculated that neighbors may have been irritated by the appearance of his front yard, which was in the process of being renovated. Commissioner Toller then asked whether the dirt piles observed near the property were related to landscaping business operations. Mr. Jorgensen clarified that the piles resulted from digging trenches to install sprinklers for his personal yard project. Ms. Edstrom corrected the record to note that the dirt was not on the road, but on the sidewalk, which still violates city code. Commissioner Toller emphasized that approval of the Conditional Use Permit would increase, not reduce, the city's ability to enforce ordinances, especially concerning trailer and vehicle storage. He reminded Mr. Jorgensen that work-related equipment, such as trailers, must not be left on the street long-term and should be properly stored on the property. Mr. Jorgensen confirmed that he does not dispatch employees from his home and instead meets them directly at job sites. Mr. Jorgensen asked for clarification on trailer parking regulations. Ms. Edstrom confirmed that trailers may be parked on the street for up to 48 hours, including utility or recreational trailers, and must be relocated afterward. She noted that the side of Mr. Jorgensen's property appears to be a suitable long-term storage location for his trailer. Ms. Greenwood addressed concerns that had been forwarded to the Mayor by a resident regarding Mr. Jorgensen's property and business operations. The Mayor shared these concerns with the City Manager, the Police Chief, and Ms. Greenwood. The concerns included photos showing Mr. Jorgensen's truck parked against oncoming traffic, which is a violation as vehicles must be parked in the direction of traffic flow. Additional photos showed the truck and possibly a trailer parked on the street during the winter months, which may also be subject to seasonal parking restrictions. There were also complaints about the condition of the yard and dirt being left out. However, Ms. Greenwood clarified that issues such as these need to be reported when they occur, as the city is unable to enforce or retroactively address complaints long after the fact. Commissioner Deborah Shepard asked Mr. Jorgensen about the status of his sprinkler installation project. He responded that the project was completed and now covered with grass. Commissioner Shepard acknowledged the improved appearance of the property, noting that it looked more finished. Mr. Jorgensen added that he had recently installed new concrete steps and a walkway. With no further questions from the commission, Mr. Jorgensen was thanked and invited to sit down. Commissioner Mike Packer concluded that no additional conditions beyond what is already required by city code were necessary for the approval of the Conditional Use Permit. Other commissioners appeared to agree. Commissioner Allred made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit for 133 West 500 East with no additional conditions. Commissioner Shepard seconded the motion, and the vote was unanimous in favor of the motion (4-0). Commissioner Packer: Yay Commissioner Toller: Yay Commissioner Shepard: Yay Commissioner Allred: Yay 4- PUBLIC HEARING FOR A REZONE FOR 13 WEST 950 NORTH (PARCEL #08-065-0079) FROM R-A TO LI Anne McNamara introduced the rezone application of approximately 3.77 acres located at roughly 13 West 950 North. The parcel, formerly owned by UDOT, is situated on the south side of 950 North and is currently zoned R-A. The proposed zoning is Light Industrial (LI). Ms. McNamara explained that all rezone applications must be evaluated in terms of their alignment with the city's Future Land Use Map and General Plan. According to the Future Land Use Map, the parcel is designated for General Commercial use. However, the applicant has requested Light Industrial zoning. Ms. McNamara clarified that the General Commercial designation is distinct from Light Industrial, though both are non-residential. The General Plan itself is neutral regarding Commercial Development outside the city center, but certain goals and objectives were highlighted in support of the application. Specifically, from Chapter 1 on Land Use and Placemaking: Goal 3 promotes enhancing the commercial profile along community and regional corridors, especially near highway exits, like those along the West Davis Corridor and Shepherd Lane expansion. Objective 3.1 supports leveraging the corridor by establishing small-scale commercial developments at interchanges, a factor supporting the proposal due to the parcel's proximity to the West Davis Corridor. Goal 7 emphasizes land use compatibility and buffering between differing uses. The adjacent parcel proposed for RM zoning could serve as a transitional buffer between this light industrial zone and the existing residential area across 950 North, including properties within Farmington City. Objective 7.1 supports development buffers to reduce incompatibility between land uses. From Chapter 5 on Economic Development Goal 3 encourages mixed-use development to generate additional rooftops and prevent retail sales leakage. Although this proposal is not a mixed-use development, the overall land use strategy-balancing nearby residential (RM) and commercial/light industrial uses-would support that goal. For public noticing, 94 notices were sent to property owners within an 800-foot radius (expanded from the standard 500 feet due to the location's unique context), and a sign was posted on-site on April 18. As of the report's publication, one comment had been received; by the time of the meeting, six comments were submitted, all in opposition. Primary concerns included increased traffic and pedestrian safety, especially given the nearby elementary schools. One additional phone inquiry asked whether the rezone had already been approved or if it would be discussed during the meeting. While the General Plan does not provide specific guidance on the placement of Light Industrial zoning across the city, it frequently references the importance of the West Davis Corridor as a major regional commercial route. The applicant's preference for Light Industrial zoning is attributed to the broader range of permitted uses in the Light Industrial zone compared to General Commercial. Staff acknowledged the limited alignment with the Future Land Use Map, but recommended approval based on the strategic commercial intent of the General Plan, the parcel's location relative to major infrastructure corridors, and the flexibility offered by the Light Industrial zone. The Planning Commission was advised that it may make a recommendation to the City Council to either approve or deny the rezone request. Phil Holland, representing the Holland Group and applicant for the rezone request, addressed the Planning Commission to provide context and support for the proposal. He expressed appreciation for working with Kaysville City and stated he felt fortunate to own the subject parcel. Referring to the Land Use Map displayed during the meeting, Mr. Holland explained that he had been involved in a similar public hearing about a decade prior regarding nearby property now known as Parkwood. At that time, the area lacked a defined development vision, and it was unclear whether the adjacent freeway off-ramp would materialize. Despite the uncertainty, the Holland Group chose to invest in the area, confident in its long-term appeal. The parcel in question, which was formerly a mink farm and later used by UDOT as a construction staging site, was eventually surplused and sold at auction, at which point it was acquired by Mr. Holland's group. He described the site as a 'crucial piece' of property in Kaysville due to its strategic location next to the West Davis Corridor exit, which he frequently uses and believes is a key access point for residents of west Kaysville. Mr. Holland stated that he has already received multiple offers for gas station development on the parcel, with such a use likely occupying one to two acres. While he has not yet accepted any of those offers, he is waiting for the right proposal. The remaining portion of the property, he explained, is intended for flexible commercial developmentsimilar to a project he previously completed near Boondocks, which combined residential and LI-zoned uses. He noted that while the property is designated for General Commercial on the Future Land Use Map, the requested Light Industrial zoning is more adaptive to modern market demands. He clarified that General Commercial zoning tends to favor traditional retail uses, which he views as less suited to this location. Instead, he envisions 'flex space' that accommodates combined retail, office, and warehouse functions. He cited a previous example where a tech company utilized such a space for a showroom, administrative offices, and warehousing under one roof. Addressing community concerns about traffic, Mr. Holland confirmed that a traffic study had been conducted and submitted to city staff. The study concluded that 950 North, an arterial road, has the capacity to support the anticipated traffic. He emphasized that the freeway exit adjacent to the parcel represents a vital opportunity for future development in Kaysville and reiterated his commitment to pursuing uses that align with the city's needs and infrastructure. At this point in the meeting, Chair Packer formally opened the public hearing and invited members of the public to step forward and provide comments. Chair Packer explained the standard procedure for public hearings, individuals wishing to speak must state their name and are given three minutes to present their comments. He clarified that the Commission would not engage in direct dialogue during this portion of the meeting to preserve the speaker's allotted time. However, questions posed by the public could be addressed later by staff, the applicant, or the Commission after the public comment period concluded. The floor was then opened for public statements. Marvin Hill, a resident who lives near the proposed rezone site, spoke in opposition to the application. He introduced himself as a retired, licensed plumber with over 50 years of experience in the building industry and stated that he has a strong understanding of development processes. While acknowledging that property owners seek a return on investment, he expressed serious concerns about the appropriateness and impact of the proposed development in a residential area. Mr. Hill's primary concern centered on traffic and safety, particularly due to the high number of children in the surrounding neighborhoods. He warned that introducing a high-density development-such as the 56 proposed condos or townhomes-would overwhelm the area's infrastructure and result in inadequate parking. Drawing comparisons to development near Station Park in Farmington, he noted similar issues with excessive on-street parking and congestion. Mr. Hill recommended that if the development were to proceed, the city should require a minimum of 130 parking spaces not including garages, to prevent traffic problems. Ultimately, he described the proposal as too dense for the location and warned it would harm the neighborhood by creating traffic and congestion issues. Brad Christensen, a resident of 2250 South in the Parkwood subdivision, spoke during the public hearing to request clarification regarding the proposed Light Industrial zoning. He referenced the applicant's earlier remarks about a previous development near Boondocks but stated that he was unclear on what types of businesses or uses fall under the Light Industrial designation. Mr. Christensen asked for examples of permitted uses within the Light Industrial zone that could potentially be developed on the subject property. He concluded by noting that he would reserve his broader comments for another agenda item later in the meeting. Jackie Knight, a resident of Monarch Drive, voiced strong opposition to the proposed rezone, stating that her property directly borders the subject parcel. She emphasized that her neighborhood would be the most significantly affected by the development, particularly if the proposed 56 high-density residential units are approved. Ms. Knight expressed concerns over increased noise pollution from numerous vehicles starting and idling in the mornings, as well as the frequent movement of trash containers-comparing it to the noise disturbance she already experiences once a week from trash collection at a nearby LDS church. She also discussed her decision to purchase her home two years ago, citing the surrounding agricultural and low-density zoning as a key factor in her choice. Ms. Knight contrasted the character of her neighborhood-described as 'warm and fuzzy'-with that of high-density developments like those near Station Park in Farmington, which she characterized as commercial and impersonal in appearance. In addition to aesthetic and noise concerns, she highlighted a traffic safety issue at the top of the nearby highway off-ramp. According to her, when stopping properly at the stop sign, it is difficult to see oncoming traffic coming from the west due to the slope of the road and the bridge configuration. She warned that placing a commercial use such as a gas station at that location would further exacerbate the safety hazard. Lastly, she noted that a pedestrian path runs near the property and that the increase in traffic from an industrial or commercial development would compromise pedestrian safety and the peaceful environment she and her neighbors currently enjoy. Her concerns focused on environmental, traffic, and quality-of-life impacts. David Stringfellow, a resident living in the Farmington area east of the proposed development site acknowledged the broader need for expanded land use and housing in the region, he also expressed concern over the requested Light Industrial zoning designation for this parcel. He Stringfellow cautioned against transitioning directly from Agricultural Zoning to a highly flexible entitlement such as Light Industrial, emphasizing that while flexibility may increase land value, it can also introduce uncertainty for surrounding residents. He noted that the undefined nature of Light Industrial zoning can make it difficult for the community to anticipate what types of uses might ultimately be constructed. He recommended that the city consider a Mixed-Use zoning designation instead, which could better control development outcomes and offer residents more clarity and assurance. Mr. Stringfellow encouraged a more cautious and collaborative approach, where developers work with the community to create a project that better integrates with the surrounding residential areas and complements the important West Davis Corridor intersection. He ultimately advised against approving the rezone in its current form. Shelley Moore, a Farmington resident and school crossing guard, spoke during the public hearing to share her concerns regarding traffic and pedestrian safety near the proposed rezone site. She explained that she regularly assists children crossing at the intersection near the park, where students from the Hunter's Creek subdivision walk toward Endeavor Elementary School. Ms. Moore expressed concern that additional traffic resulting from the proposed development would worsen existing congestion in the area, which already causes cars to back up at peak times. She highlighted issues with the current traffic signal at the intersection, describing it as confusing for both drivers and pedestrians. The signal cycles between flashing yellow, solid yellow, and flashing red, which she said often leads to uncertainty among drivers about when and how they are allowed to proceed. Ms. Moore noted that some drivers continue turning during a solid red light despite her presence in the crosswalk, creating safety risks for the children. She recommended that, should traffic increase due to new development, a more conventional traffic light-with green, yellow, and red phases-should be installed to improve clarity and safety for both drivers and pedestrians. Spencer Brown addressed the Planning Commission with a combination of professional insight and personal perspective. As a developer and builder of multifamily housing, Mr. Brown noted that he understands the challenges faced by applicants like Mr. Holland and has been on the opposite side of similar public hearings. While he did not voice direct opposition to the project, he expressed several questions and reservations, particularly concerning the division of the 3.77acre parcel between the proposed Light Industrial zone and residential uses. Mr. Brown acknowledged that development of the property is likely and potentially workable but emphasized that specific details would be critical to the success and community integration of the project. He agreed with the traffic study's assessment that 950 North can handle additional volume but cautioned that the placement of the site entrance must be carefully considered due to high-speed traffic exiting the nearby highway. He specifically mentioned concerns about the 'sight triangle,' noting that vehicles often come off the exit ramp quickly, which could present a hazard depending on the design of the project's access point. Parking emerged as Mr. Brown's most significant concern. He noted that there are already occasional issues with vehicles parking along 950 North, and it is unclear whether those instances are restricted. Given the parcel size and density of the proposed development, he questioned whether the townhomes would have sufficient parking capacity, especially if they lack two-car garages or driveways. He expressed skepticism that adequate parking could be accommodated within the site layout and suggested that incorporating a compromise to address parking deficiencies would help alleviate his concerns. Cash Knight, a Kaysville resident from Philly Court, shared concerns regarding the proposed zone and development, particularly focusing on long-term traffic impacts and environmental risks. He began by stating that, while he shares similar views with many speakers, his focus centered on the broader implications of the project as the surrounding region continues to develop. Mr. Knight requested a comprehensive traffic study that extends beyond the current scope. He emphasized that the nearby 30-acre parcel to the north is slated for future residential development, which will add hundreds of homes using the same 950 North exit. Combined with continued expansion of Farmington Station and future development to the east and west including the Shepherd Lane exit connecting to I-15 he projected a dramatic increase in traffic volume. He stressed that the current analysis may not adequately reflect what traffic conditions will look like four to five years into the future and urged the Commission to demand a study that projects long-term traffic patterns, not just short-term impacts. On environmental concerns, Mr. Knight pointed to a nearby creek that drains into a federally protected bird refuge. He warned that placing a gas station near this drainage corridor presents a risk of contamination particularly in the event of a fuel leak that could escalate into a federal environmental issue. He recommended that the city conduct a full environmental impact study in partnership with federal agencies to ensure protection of the nearby refuge. In closing, Mr. Knight praised Kaysville's existing zoning strategy, highlighting its clear separation of commercial and residential areas and the positive effect it has had on property values in neighborhoods like Sunset Equestrian. He cautioned that the proposed development could reverse that trend, especially for properties located to the south of the site and urged the Commission to consider the long-term consequences before deciding. Liz Child addressed the Planning Commission to express her concerns about traffic related to the proposed development. She explained that turning left from Devi Drive onto 950 North is already difficult due to the high volume of traffic, and she suggested that a traffic signal may already be warranted at that intersection even without additional development. While Ms. Child stated that she supports growth and development in general, she expressed reservations about the proposed residential density, describing it as too high for the area. She indicated she would be more comfortable with homes or apartments at a lower density that better fits the surrounding neighborhood. Her primary concern remained the traffic generated by vehicles exiting the West Davis Corridor, which she acknowledged is a valuable addition to the area but has significantly increased traffic volume on local roads. She concluded by reiterating her hope that the area could be developed thoughtfully, with attention given to existing traffic challenges and neighborhood compatibility. Kim Anderson, a resident of Farmington, spoke briefly during the public hearing to express her opposition to the proposed development. She acknowledged that her reasons were more personal and emotional than technical, emphasizing her desire to preserve the quiet character of her neighborhood. Ms. Anderson noted that she had not originally planned to speak but felt compelled to voice her concerns, particularly regarding the impact of the project on nearby families and children. Echoing earlier comments, she referenced the school crossing used by children attending Endeavor Elementary and stated that the increased traffic from the proposed development made her nervous about safety in that area. She concluded by simply asking that her opinion be heard and considered. Michael Baker, a resident of Farmington and a retired law enforcement officer, shared multiple concerns about the proposed rezone and associated development. Having lived in his home east of the nearby Latter-day Saint chapel for 16 years, Mr. Baker described noticeable changes in traffic patterns since the completion of the West Davis Corridor. He explained that the area around Fox Hunter has experienced a dramatic increase in vehicle traffic, which he believes is being used as an unofficial off-ramp or shortcut, further congesting local roads. He expressed particular concern for pedestrian safety, especially for children in the area, and referenced earlier commitments from planning authorities to ensure safe school crossings. Mr. Baker stated that the crossing near Endeavor Elementary is already barely sufficient and warned that additional traffic from the proposed development would render it unsafe. He echoed earlier public comments about the inadequacy of the current traffic control measures, particularly in areas heavily used by families and schoolchildren. In addition to safety issues, Mr. Baker emphasized the potential environmental and quality-of-life impacts of increased traffic and development. He cited the importance of preserving Kaysville's and Farmington's environmental character, including walking trails, quiet spaces, and low noise levels, which he believes would be compromised by the proposed project. He referenced earlier comments regarding the need for a thorough environmental impact study and expressed disappointment that such a study did not appear to have been conducted in this case. Mr. Baker concluded by urging the Commission not to 'rubber stamp' the rezone request, warning that both Kaysville and Farmington could face long-term regret if the proposal proceeds without sufficient consideration of safety, environmental, and quality-of-life impacts. Noting no other commentors from the public, Chair Packer concluded the public hearing portion of the agenda item regarding the proposed rezone at approximately 13 West 950 North. Commissioner Allred expressed several concerns regarding the proposed rezone. He noted that the proposed gas station use had shifted from a previously discussed location on 200 North to 950 North, and while he acknowledged the need for such a use due to increasing traffic, he emphasized it must be carefully designed to avoid creating significant negative impacts on nearby residential areas. Commissioner Allred voiced reservations about the Light Industrial zoning designation, particularly because it allows light manufacturing, which may not align with the area's character and offers limited tax benefits compared to retail uses. He noted that while Light Industrial zoning provides flexibility, that flexibility can also introduce uncertainty about future site uses. He also raised procedural concerns about the lack of a Development Agreement for the Light Industrial portion of the site. While one was prepared for the Residential Multi Family portion due to anticipated opposition, none had been created for the Commercial area. He suggested the Planning Commission or City Council could use a Development Agreement to restrict certain undesirable uses otherwise permitted in the Light Industrial zone, providing a safeguard for adjacent neighborhoods. Commissioner Allred emphasized the need for a detailed site plan before making a recommendation on the rezone. Without a visual layout showing how the proposed gas station and commercial elements would be integrated with the residential portion, he found it difficult to evaluate compatibility. He underscored that key design elements-such as buffers, lighting, landscaping, and site circulation-should be considered before making any zoning decision. He urged the Commission to delay action until a complete site plan is submitted and to explore a Development Agreement to address use limitations. Phil Holland, the applicant, responded to the Planning Commission's concerns by clarifying his intentions and explaining why a site plan was not provided with the rezone application. He acknowledged that terms like 'Light Industrial' often raise concerns, particularly regarding manufacturing, but emphasized that he does not intend to introduce heavy manufacturing to the site. Instead, he explained that the requested Light Industrial zoning reflects the kind of modern, flexible commercial uses that are currently in demand-such as light retail, office, recreation, and warehouse hybrids-not traditional industrial operations. Mr. Holland explained that every Commercial zone in Kaysville is quite similar in terms of use allowances, and that convenience stores, for example, could fit within either Light Industrial or General Commercial zoning. While a gas station is a possibility for a portion of the site, he has not committed to that use and therefore cannot provide a definitive layout. He explained that specifying a detailed plan at this stage would prematurely lock in a use that may not materialize, which could hinder flexibility as the market evolves-particularly with the recent opening of the West Davis Corridor, which is still shaping demand in the area. Referring to another property he owns behind Taco Bell, Mr. Holland said he had experienced delays when zoning had been secured in advance of clear market demand, and he hopes to avoid a similar situation with the current parcel. He reiterated that the market, not speculative planning, will ultimately determine the most appropriate use for the site. He also noted that potential tenants like Walmart have looked at the site, further indicating a wide range of commercial interest. Commissioner Allred responded by expressing understanding of the applicant's position, having worked with developers for decades. However, from the perspective of both a planner and a resident, he emphasized the need for a conceptual layout-even a generic site diagram-that could help the Commission and the public better visualize how the proposed Light Industrial and Residential areas would integrate. He noted that while the Commission isn't expecting a finalized plan or named tenants, seeing general building placements, traffic flow, and buffering strategies would provide greater confidence in evaluating the project's suitability. Mr. Holland concluded by stating that the commercial real estate market has shifted significantly in recent years. Many modern businesses that fall under Light Industrial-such as fitness centers, sports training facilities, office-retail hybrids, and recreational uses like pickleball or children's play spaces-are becoming standard commercial tenants. He clarified that while Light Industrial zoning may sound industrial, it more accurately accommodates this new category of mixed-use, flexible tenants that are increasingly common and appropriate for the area. Commissioner Allred shared several concerns about the proposed rezone, focusing mainly on traffic, safety, and the lack of a clear site plan. He said that while a gas station at the site might make sense due to traffic levels, it must be carefully designed to avoid causing problems for nearby neighborhoods. He also noted that Light Industrial zoning allows for flexible uses, but that flexibility creates uncertainty for residents who want to know what might be built. Commissioner Allred emphasized the importance of having at least a basic site plan to understand how the commercial and residential areas would fit together. He stressed that key details-like lighting, buffers, and landscaping-make a big difference in how the development affects neighbors, especially over time. Commissioner Allred raised concerns about increased traffic on 950 North, which he expects to become much worse with surrounding developments. He asked who owns and manages the road and traffic signals, and staff confirmed that much of it falls under Farmington City's control. This includes the traffic signal and crossing signal mentioned during public comments. Commissioner Allred was especially worried about kids walking to school from nearby neighborhoods. He said 950 North already feels unsafe and that new development will only make things worse. He also noted that a new traffic light at Devi Drive probably isn't possible due to how close it is to the freeway. Phil Holland responded to Commissioner Allred's traffic concerns by emphasizing that traffic was a key consideration from the outset of the project. He stated that upon purchasing the property, he immediately involved a traffic engineer to conduct a thorough analysis. The study, which was submitted to city staff, includes projections for current, 5-year, and 10-year traffic patterns based on development of the site. Holland acknowledged that traffic is a mental and emotional concern for many residents but emphasized the importance of relying on data and scientific traffic modeling. Mr. Holland confirmed that the traffic study had been reviewed by Kaysville's Public Works and Engineering departments, who asked detailed questions and received clear responses from the traffic engineer, Jason Watson of Focus Engineering. Holland clarified that the analysis concluded that the development would not cause the road to fail or exceed its designed capacity, as 950 North is an arterial road meant to handle high traffic volumes. Commissioner Allred acknowledged the value of the traffic study but stressed that the real concern is not whether the road can technically support more vehicles, but how people will safely and effectively interact with that road, especially with new development nearby. He emphasized the importance of human impacts, including pedestrian safety and traffic flow, and thanked Holland for his responses. Ms. Greenwood confirmed that both Kaysville's Public Works Director and City Engineer, though not traffic engineers-had reviewed the traffic study and then forwarded it to Hales Engineering, a third-party traffic engineering firm, for specialized analysis. The applicant had submitted a second version of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) addressing earlier questions and Hales is currently reviewing that updated version. While their final review is still pending, Ms. Greenwood stated that no mitigation measures were identified in the original report, and staff does not anticipate significant changes in the updated review. If any mitigation is ultimately recommended, it would be addressed in the Development Agreement before going to City Council. Ms. Greenwood also explained the complexity of coordinating traffic planning in an area involving three jurisdictions: Kaysville City, Farmington City, and UDOT. She noted that UDOT has restricted ingress and egress near the Sunset Drive alignment due to its proximity to the West Davis Corridor interchange, which limits where entrances can be placed. As a result, access to the site would be aligned with Devi Drive for safety and traffic flow. She added that Hales Engineering would also be evaluating the possibility of too many conflicting left turns if multiple access points are placed close together. It's possible that traffic flow might be restricted to right-in, right-out movements at certain entrances, depending on their final analysis. Ms. Greenwood concluded by stating that while the final review was not complete at the time of the Planning Commission meeting, it would be finalized before the City Council considers the

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 governin

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

May 08, 2025 12:55 PM

Notice Last Edited On

May 08, 2025 12:55 PM

Deadline Date

April 24, 2025 07:00 PM

Subscribe by Email

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