Notice is hereby given that the Draper City Planning Commission

Transcription

PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Notice is hereby given that the Draper City Planning Commission will hold a Regular
Meeting at 5:30 pm on Thursday, April 23, 2015, in the City Council Chambers at 1020 East Pioneer Road, Draper, Utah.
The Agenda will be as follows: (Times listed on the agenda are approximate and
may be accelerated or subject to change.)
5:30 p.m. Dinner
Study Meeting: 6:00 p.m., City Council Chambers on the 1st floor
Study Business Items
Business Meeting: 6:30 pm, City Council Chambers on the 1st floor
Citizen Comments: To be considerate of everyone attending the meeting, public hearing
comments will be limited to three minutes per person per item. A spokesperson who has been asked by a group to summarize their concerns will be allowed five minutes to speak. Comments which cannot be made within these limits should be submitted in writing to the
City Recorder prior to noon the day before the meeting.
1. Action Item: Amend 02/26/2015 PC Minutes
Approval to paragraph 2.1 of the February 26, 2015 Planning Commission meeting minutes.
Documents:
02.26.2015 pc minutes amendment pg 2, 2.1.pdf
2. Public Hearing: Palmer Estates Rezone From RA1 To R4 With Develpment
Agreement
On the request of Mindy Dansie, representing DAI/Candlelight Homes and Troy
Dana, representing Madison Creek, LLC. for approval of a rezone from RA1
(Residential Agricultural, 40,000 square foot lots) to R4 (Single-Family
Residential, 10,000 square foot lots) with a Development Agreement for a
specific layout. This application is otherwise known as the Palmer Estates
Rezone from RA1 to R4 with Development Agreement Request,
Application #150304-1266E. Staff contact is Jennifer Jastremsky (801) 5766328 or email [email protected].
Documents:
palmer estates rezone and da.pdf
3. Public Hearing: Snow Crest Minor Subdivision
On the request of Matt Lepire for approval of a preliminary plat for a five-lot
subdivision in the RA2 (Residential Agriculture, 20,000/sf Lots) Zone on 2.98 acres located at 13000 S. 1300 E. This application is otherwise know as the Snow Crest Minor Subdivision, Application #150109-13000S. Staff contact is Dennis Workman at (801) 576-6522 or email
[email protected].
Documents:
snow crest preliminary plat.pdf
4. Public Hearing: South Mountain Phases 1 And 2F Plat Amendment (Aka:
the Snow Crest Minor Subdivision, Application #150109-13000S. Staff contact is Dennis Workman at (801) 576-6522 or email
[email protected].
Documents:
snow crest preliminary plat.pdf
4. Public Hearing: South Mountain Phases 1 And 2F Plat Amendment (Aka:
Deer Run Preserve)
On the request of Ryan Button, representing Draper Highland, LLC., for approval to amend a portion of South Mountain Phases 1 and 2F plat into a 79 lot single family subdivision. This application is otherwise known as the Deer Run Preserve Plat Amendment, Application #141030-962E1. Staff contact is Dan Boles at (801) 576-6335 or [email protected].
Documents:
deer run preserve plat amendment.pdf
5. Public Hearing: Brown Subdivision Zone Change
On the request of Bruce Brown for approval of a Zoning Map Amendment on
1.05 acres at 12370 South 800 East from O-R (Office Residential) to RM1 (Residential Multi-Family, up to 8 dwelling units per acre). This application is otherwise known as the Brown Subdivision Zone Change, Application
#150403-12370S. Staff contact is Dennis Workman at (801) 576-6522 or
email [email protected].
Documents:
brown zone change.pdf
6. Staff Reports
a) Discussion Items
b) Administrative Reviews
c) Other items 7. Adjournment
Any person adversely affected by a decision of the Planning Commission regarding
the transfer, issuance or denial of a conditional use permit may appeal such decision
to the City Council by filing written notice of appeal stating the grounds therefore
within fourteen (14) days from the date of such final determination.
SALT LAKE COUNTY / UTAH COUNTY, STATE OF UTAH
I, the City Recorder of Draper City, certify that copies of the agenda for the
Planning Commission meeting to be held the Thursday, April 23, 2015, were posted on the Draper City Bulletin Board, Draper City website www.draper.ut.us, the Utah Public Meeting Notice website at www.utah.gov/pmn, and sent by facsimile to the Salt Lake Tribune, and the Deseret News.
City Seal: Rachelle Conner, MMC, City Recorder
Draper City, State of Utah
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE AND ORDER OF BUSINESS . In compliance with the American
with Disabilities Act, any individuals needing special accommodations including auxiliary
communicative aides and services during this meeting shall notify Rachelle Conner, MMC,
PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE AND ORDER OF BUSINESS . In compliance with the American
with Disabilities Act, any individuals needing special accommodations including auxiliary
communicative aides and services during this meeting shall notify Rachelle Conner, MMC,
City Recorder at (801) 576-6502 or [email protected] , at least 24 hours prior
to the meeting.
MINUTES OF THE DRAPER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD
ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2015 IN THE DRAPER CITY COUNCIL
CHAMBERS
“This document, along with the digital recording, shall constitute the complete minutes for
this Planning Commission meeting.”
PRESENT:
Chairperson Drew Gilliland, Planning Commissioners, Andrew
Adams, Traci Gundersen, Craig Hawker, Scott McDonald, and Kent
Player
ABSENT:
Commissioner Leslie Johnson and Jeff Head
STAFF PRESENT:
Keith Morey, Dan Boles, Dennis Workman, Jennifer Jastremsky,
Brien Maxfield, Angie Olsen, and Legal Counsel Mike Baker
ALSO PRESENT:
Roll on File
Study Meeting:
6:12:21 PM
Study Business Items: The commissioners reviewed the applications for the business
meeting and addressed questions to staff members.
Business Meeting:
Chairperson Gilliland explained the rules of public hearings and called the meeting to order
at 6:37:29 PM .
6:37:51 PM
1.0
Action Item: Approval of minutes from the January 22, 2015 Planning
Commission meeting.
6:37:58 PM
1.1
Motion: Commissioner McDonald moved to approve the minutes as submitted.
Commissioner Hawker seconded the motion.
6:38:11 PM
1.2
Vote: A roll vote was taken with Commissioners McDonald, Hawker, Player,
Adams, and Gundersen voting in favor of approving the minutes as submitted.
Draper City Planning Commission Meeting
February 26, 2015
Page 2
6:38:25 PM
2.0
Public Hearing: On the request of Kelli Lundgren, representing Lapis
Development, LLC. for approval to rezone 2.51 acres at approximately 965
East 12200 South from CS (Commercial Services) to RM2 (Residential Multifamily, up to 12 dwelling units per acre). The application is otherwise known
as the 965 Residential Rezone Request, Application #150107-965E.
6:38:52 PM
2.1
Staff Report: Using the aid of a PowerPoint presentation and her staff report dated
February 18, 2015, Planner Jennifer Jastremsky reviewed the details of the
proposed application. She explained the application is a request for approval of a
Zoning Map Amendment Request for approximately 2.51 acres located on the west
side of 1000 East, at approximately 965 East 12200 South. She identified the
location of the subject property on an aerial photograph of the area. She noted the
property is currently vacant and the land use designation on the property is
Neighborhood Commercial; while this use is designed to provide locally targeting
commercial uses, the designation does support medium and high density residential
uses as a secondary use. She noted the existing zoning designation of CS
(Commercial Services) allows for limited commercial uses as a buffer next to
residential zones. She indicated there was a small clerical error in the notification
for this public hearing; the access road for the property comes from 1000 East at
122 South and curves to 980 East; a section of 980 East is part of the subject
property, but is also located in the CR-1 CO-1 Zone and the notice did not reference
that zoning designation. She stated staff does not believe this error is problematic
as the notice did include the property address, land serial number, and was clearly
identified on a map sent with the notice. Chairperson Gilliland conferred with legal
counsel to ensure the noticing error is not problematic; legal counsel indicated that
the most important piece of information to be included in this type of notice is the
proposal for how the property will be rezoned and the notice did include that
information as well as an accurate address and parcel description. Ms. Jastremsky
then stated she received a letter from one resident regarding this application and that
letter was forwarded to the entire Commission. She then noted the applicant is
requesting the property be rezoned RM2 (Residential Multi-Family), which allows
up to 12 dwelling units per acre; since the property is 2.51 acres in size, that would
equate to a possible 30 dwelling units. She indicated the height restriction in the
RM2 zone is 35 feet and that is the same height restriction that is found in the
neighborhood to the north, which is zoned R3. She noted staff feels the proposed
RM2 zoning district is appropriate for this property; the location of the property
means it is not conducive to commercial zones due to being off the main roads and
behind other office and commercial uses. She added, however, that this means that
the site can provide privacy for residential uses. She noted the site is located 0.31
miles from the nearest TRAX station providing a convenient location for residents
who want to commute via transit. She reviewed the concept plan for the
development that has been provided by the applicant, but noted the plan is not part
of the application being considered by the Commission this evening. She
February 26, 2015
Page 3
concluded by reviewing photographs of the property in its current condition and
noted staff recommends approval of the application based on the findings listed in
the staff report.
6:44:21 PM
2.2
Commissioner Hawker inquired as to the distance from the subject property to the
TRAX station. Ms. Jastremsky highlighted the location of the station in proximity
to the subject property and noted there is a proposal to install a trail in the area that
would connect to the Porter Rockwell trail, though she is not sure of the timeline for
that project.
6:45:03 PM
2.3
Commissioner McDonald referenced the land immediately north of the subject
property and asked if it is located within Sandy City boundaries. Ms. Jastremsky
answered no, but stated an interlocal agreement with Sandy City would provide for
the trail connection. Commissioner McDonald then inquired as to the height of a
structure that could be built on the property under the current zoning. Planner Boles
stated that the height limit in the commercial zone would be 25 feet. Commissioner
McDonald concluded the building height under the current zoning designation
would be shorter than what will be allowed in the proposed zone. Ms. Jastremsky
stated that is correct, but noted that the zoning of adjacent residential properties also
allows buildings with a maximum height of 35 feet.
6:46:32 PM
2.4
Applicant’s Presentation: Kelli Lundgren, Lapis Development, stated she is the
owner of the property and applicant for the rezone. She is seeking the rezone based
on current needs and her ability to better develop the property now that the
recession has come to a close. She reviewed the history of different development
options for the property and noted that one problem she has discovered with the CS
zone is that the property is too far from a main road to allow for appropriate
commercial advertising. She noted that with the addition of the TRAX station and
the nearby trail system, the property can accommodate higher density housing uses.
She referenced her design concept and noted it includes an easement that would
provide trail access and appropriate separation between the property and the nearby
power station. She added she feels condominiums or apartments are ideal for the
property because of the TRAX station and the need for such housing options in east
Draper. She concluded she feels her request is reasonable and the zoning she is
seeking is a reasonable use of the land.
6:50:10 PM
2.5
Chairperson Gilliland opened the public hearing.
6:50:28 PM
2.6
Linda Kruger asked if Ms. Jastremsky’s presentation can be made available to the
public.
February 26, 2015
Page 4
6:51:47 PM
2.7
Chairperson Gilliland asked if there were any others desiring to comment on this
item; there were none and the public hearing was closed.
6:52:02 PM
2.8
Commissioner Player stated the subject property is an interesting piece of property;
there are access issues for any commercial venture and the current proposal seems
to have its benefits.
6:52:24 PM
2.9
Commissioner McDonald asked what the zoning designation for the property was
before 2007. Ms. Lundgren stated prior to 2007 it was zoned residential and in
2007 it was changed to CS.
6:53:20 PM
2.10 Motion: Commissioner Player moved to forward a positive recommendation to the
City Council for the 965 Residential Rezone Request by Kelli Lundgren,
representing the Lapis Development, LLC for the purpose of rezoning the property
at 965 East 12200 South from CS (Commercial Services) to RM2 (Residential
Multi-family, up to 12 dwelling units per acre), application #150107-965E, based
on the findings listed in the Staff Report dated February 18, 2015. Commissioner
Adams seconded the motion.
Findings:
1. The proposed development plans meet the intent, goals, and objectives of the
Draper City General Plan.
a. The Neighborhood Commercial land use designation supports medium
and high density residential as a secondary use.
b. Encourage infill development in close proximity to existing facilities to
promote orderly growth while reducing the cost and extent of public
services.
c. Recognize Draper’s role as a community having an assortment of
commerce and housing opportunities.
d. Provide a balance of live, work and play land uses and development
intensities that enable convenient non-automotive trips (pedestrian,
cycling and transit) where environmentally and physically feasible.
e. Encourage that land uses with the highest intensity be located in areas
conducive to alternative modes of transportation.
f. Allow for a diversity of residential uses and supporting services that
provide for the needs of the community.
g. Ensure that neighborhoods transition to one another by considering
appropriate land uses, development patterns, character elements, and
access to mobility networks.
Findings continued to the next page.
February 26, 2015
Page 5
Findings Continued:
2. The proposed development plans meet the requirements and provisions of the
Draper City Municipal Code.
3. The proposed development plans will not be deleterious to the health, safety,
and general welfare of the general public nor the residents of adjacent
properties.
4. The proposed development conforms to the general aesthetic and physical
development of the area.
5. While some engineering challenges may be present when servicing the property,
the public services in the area are adequate to support the subject development.
6:54:02 PM
2.11 Commissioner Hawker stated that in reviewing the approval standards, he likes
standards two, which asks “whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with
the overall character of the existing development in the vicinity of the subject
property”. He asked why multi-family residential is harmonious with the other uses
in this vicinity. Commissioner Adams stated there is R3 zoning nearby and the
property owner has considered several different uses for the property that would
have been permitted in the CS zone; the proposed use provides a buffer between R3
zoning and nearby commercial uses. He added there has been no public clamor
regarding the application and the proposal is the highest and best use of the property
in his opinion. Commissioner Player added the use of the property is restricted due
to the lack of sufficient access. He stated he feels the proposal will add value to the
community. Commissioner Adams agreed. Commissioner McDonald stated that
he feels the highest and best use of the property is to serve as a buffer between the
residential development to the north and nearby commercial uses.
6:56:32 PM
2.12 Vote: A roll call vote was taken with Commissioners Player, Adam, Gundersen,
and McDonald voting in favor of forwarding a positive recommendation.
Commissioner Hawker voted in opposition.
Planning Commission Application Summary
Project Name:
Address:
Current Zoning:
Hearing Date:
Palmer Estates Rezone Request
1266 East 13400 South
RA1 (Residential Agricultural)
April 23, 2015
Summary of Request
This application is a request for approval of a Rezone for approximately 5.16 acres located at
1266 East 13400 South. The applicant would like to rezone the property to R4 (Single-family
Residential, 10,000 square foot lots) with a Development Agreement for a specific maintenance
free layout.
Background
The property has been used as the Corner Canyon Equestrian Center for several years. The
home on the property dates back to the 1960s.
General Plan and Zoning
The Land Use Map of the General Plan calls for Residential Low Medium Density designation.
This designation is designed for very large lot single-family neighborhoods, but does allow for
increased densities when specific performance and mitigation standards are taken. The
property is currently zoned RA1 (Residential Agricultural). This zone allows for one dwelling unit
per acre. The proposed zoning district R4 allows for up to four units per acre. The applicant is
proposing a density of 4.12 dwelling units per acre, or more specifically 19 single-family
detached homes.
Analysis
The applicant has outlined design and buffer standards within the Development Agreement
which would protect the existing low density neighborhood to the west and south. The
maintenance free layout proposed by the Development Agreement would provide a valuable
alternative housing option for the City, allowing residents to remain in Draper who do not want
yard maintenance but want the convenience of Draper trail access and single-family home.
Several letters have been obtained from nearby residents and can be found in Exhibit F.
Deviations (If applicable)
None
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation to the City
Council for this request.
Development Review Committee
1020 East Pioneer Road
Draper, UT 84020
(801) 576-6539
STAFF REPORT
April 14, 2015
To:
Draper City Planning Commission
Business Date: April 23, 2015
From:
Prepared By: Jennifer Jastremsky, AICP, Planner II
Planning Division
Community Development Department
Re:
Palmer Estates – Rezone Request
Application No.:
150304-1266E
Applicant:
Mindy Dansie, representing DAI/Candlelight Homes and Troy Dana,
representing Madison Creek, LLC
Project Location:
Approximately 1266 East 13400 South
Zoning:
RA1 (Residential Agricultural, 40,000 square foot lot minimums) Zone
Acreage:
Approximately 5.16 Acres (Approximately 224,769.6 ft2 )
Request:
Request for approval of a Rezone from the RA1 (Residential Agricultural,
40,000 square foot lot minimums) to the R4 (Single-family Residential,
10,000 square foot lot minimums) zone. A Development Agreement is
requested to allow a specific layout.
SUMMARY
This application is a request for approval of a Rezone for approximately 5.16 acres located on the south
side of 13400 South, at approximately 1266 East 13400 South. The property is currently zoned RA1
(Residential Agricultural). The applicant is requesting that a Rezone be approved to allow the property to
be developed with four dwelling units per acre.
BACKGROUND
The property has been used as a private equestrian center, Corner Canyon Equestrian Center, for some
time now. The residential home on the property dates to the 1960s and the various barns date from the
1970s and 1980s.
ANALYSIS
General Plan and Zoning. The Land Use Map of the General Plan calls for the Residential Low Medium
Density land use designation for the subject property. This category “includes areas of very large lot
Palmer Estates
Rezone Request
App. # 150304-1266E
1
single-family neighborhoods and ranchettes.” It also states that “increased densities within these areas
would be allowed only with compliance to specific performance standards and impact mitigation
measures.” The property has been assigned the RA1 (Residential Agricultural, 40,000 square foot lots)
zoning classification, supporting approximately one dwelling unit per acre. The purpose of the RA1 zone
is to “foster low density development with little impact on its surroundings and municipal services; to
generally preserve the character of the City’s semi-rural areas; and to promote and preserve conditions
favorable to large-lot family life, including the keeping of limited numbers of animals and fowl.” The A5,
A2, RA1 and RA2 zoning designations are identified by the General Plan as a preferred zoning
classification for the Residential Low Medium land use designation. The RA1 zone abuts the subject
property on the north and west, the R3 and RA1 zones abut on the east and the RA2 and RA1 zones abuts
on the south.
Development Agreement: The applicant has applied for a Development Agreement. This agreement will
set the maximum allowed number of dwelling units at 19. This equates to 4.12 dwelling units per acre.
The applicant is proposing 19 detached single-family homes. The arrangement of the development would
provide a maintenance free community, wherein each home is surrounded by common open space rather
than an individual lot. An HOA would be set up to maintain all common space. A Concept Site Plan can
be found in Exhibit D. The applicant has also provided images of possible elevations, as found in Exhibit
E. The Agreement would prohibit the same floor plans from being built next to each other and require at
least three different models between the floor plans.
The applicant is proposing to dedicate 0.137 acres, or 5,967.72 square feet, of property along 1300 East to
the City. The City would need to acquire this property sometime in the future for roadway improvements.
This dedication will negate future acquisition. The property is also located along the Draper Canal Trail.
This will allow the City an option of installing improvements such benches along the trail at a future date.
The Development Agreement will look at buffering for adjacent properties. It includes provisions that
certain homes on the west side of the development would be limited to rambler style units. Several trees
along Judy Gainer’s property, to the west, are slated to remain and will not be demolished as part of site
development. A 6-foot tall privacy fence would be built along the west and south property lines. Wrought
iron fencing would be utilized along 13400 South.
Request Analysis: The General Plan supports higher density developments in the lower density areas
when performance standards and mitigation measures are taken. The applicant is proposing mitigation
measures with the buffer standards and elevation standards outlined within the Development Agreement.
The adjacent road, 1300 East, will be widened to accommodate additional traffic in the area and will
support the traffic from this development. The maintenance free style of the design would meet the needs
of long-standing Draper residents who need to downsize, but wish to remain in the City in a single-family
home. It also caters to others, such as Millennials, who want the enjoyment of a single-family home
without the yard maintenance.
Criteria For Approval. The criteria for review and potential approval of a Rezone request is found in
Sections 9-5-060(e)(1) of the Draper City Municipal Code. This section depicts the standard of review for
such requests as:
(1) Map Amendments:
(i) Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with goals, objectives and policies of
the City’s General Plan;
(ii) Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of
existing development in the vicinity of the subject property;
Palmer Estates
Rezone Request
App. # 150304-1266E
2
(iii) Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the standards of any applicable
overlay zone.
(iv) The extent to which the proposed amendment may adversely affect adjacent
property; and
(v) The adequacy of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property,
including but not limited to roadways, parks and recreation facilities, police and fire
protection, schools, stormwater drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse
collection.
REVIEWS
Planning Division Review. The Draper City Planning Division has completed their review of the Rezone
submission and has issued a recommendation for approval for the request with the following proposed
comments:
1.
2.
The proposed maintenance free style of development will provide for a much needed
housing option within the city. This includes options for an aging population and a
younger generation who prefers maintenance free lifestyles.
The General Plan contemplates higher densities in low density areas with strict standards
in place to mitigate negative effects.
Engineering and Public Works Divisions Review. The Draper City Engineering and Public Works
Divisions have completed their reviews of the Rezone submission and have issued a recommendation for
approval for the request with the following proposed comments:
1.
The adequacy of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including
but not limited to roadways, parks and recreation facilities, police and fire protection,
schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse
collection;
Other than noted below, we are not aware of any inadequacies of the facilities intended to
serve this property.
a. Connectivity with this parcel does not appear to be an issue, as it appears to have
adequate access to 13400 South and 1300 East.
b. There are not any storm drainage facilities fronting the property in 13400 South to
provide a drainage discharge point. Provisions for onsite storm drainage will need to
be addressed with any subdivision application, and shall comply with the provisions
of the site plan requirements within the Draper City Municipal Code. Development
Agreement provides an indication that a discharge to Corner Canyon Creek may be
obtained from the adjacent property owner, that would satisfy the drainage discharge
requirements.
c. Sanitary sewer facilities will be provided by South Valley Sewer District. Any
subdivision application will require a commitment to serve from the Sewer District
that facilities are adequate to provide service for the proposed uses.
d. Drinking water facilities will be provided by WaterPro. Any subdivision application
will require a commitment to serve from the water provider that facilities are
adequate to provide service for the proposed uses.
Unified Fire Authority Review. The Unified Fire Authority has completed their review of the Rezone
submission and has issued a recommendation for approval for the request with the following proposed
comments that need to be kept in mind for future site plan development:
Palmer Estates
Rezone Request
App. # 150304-1266E
3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Fire Department Access is required. An unobstructed minimum road width of twenty-six
(26) feet exclusive of the shoulders and a minimum height of thirteen (13) feet six (6)
inches shall be required. The road must be designed and maintained to support the
imposed loads of emergency apparatus. The surface shall be able to provide all weather
driving capabilities. The road shall have an inside turning radius of twenty – eight (28)
feet. There shall be a maximum grade of 10%. Grades may be checked prior to building
permits being issued. (D103.1 Access road width with a hydrant. Where a fire hydrant is
located on a fire apparatus access road, the minimum road width shall be 26 feet
exclusive of the shoulders.) Also see 2012 International Fire Code Appendix D
requirements on street widths.
Fire Department Approved Turn Around Required. Access roads over 150 feet long shall
require an approved turn around. B
Fire Hydrants are required. There shall be a total of 5 hydrants required spaced at 500ft.
increments. The required fire flow for this project is 2000GPM for full 2 hour duration.
This will allow up to a 6200sqft home. Anything larger will require additional fire flow
test to determine if sprinklers are needed.
Hydrants and Site Access. All hydrants and a form of acceptable temporary Fire
Department Access to the site shall be installed and APPROVED by the Fire Department
prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. If at any time during the building phase any
of the hydrants or temporary Fire Department Access becomes non-compliant any and all
permits could be revoked.
No combustible construction shall be allowed prior to hydrant installation and testing by
water purveyor. All hydrants must be operational prior to any combustible elements
being received or delivered on building site.
Visible Addressing Required. New and existing buildings shall have approved address
numbers plainly legible and visible from the street fronting the property. These numbers
shall contrast with their background.
Street Signs required and are to be posted and legible prior to building permits being
issued. All lots to have lot number or address posted and legible.
Legal Division Review. The Draper City Legal Division has completed their review of the Rezone
submission and has issued a recommendation for approval for the request without further comment.
Noticing. The applicant(s) have expressed their desire to rezone the subject property and do so in a
manner which is compliant with the City Code. As such, notice has been properly issued in the manner
outlined in the City and State Codes.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the request for a Rezone Request by Mindy Dansie, representing
DAI/Candlelight Homes and Troy Dana, representing Madison Creek, LLC, application #15034-1266E.
This recommendation is based on the following findings:
1.
Palmer Estates
Rezone Request
The proposed development plans meet the intent, goals, and objectives of the Draper City
General Plan.
a. The General Plan supports higher densities within the Residential Low Medium Land
Use Designation when there are specified performance standards and impact
mitigation measures.
App. # 150304-1266E
4
2.
3.
4.
5.
b. Maintain a balance of land uses that support a high quality of life, a diverse economic
base, and a rich mixture of housing and leisure opportunities.
c. Provide a variety of housing type and innovative development patterns and building
methods that will result in greater housing affordability.
d. Guide growth to locations contiguous to existing development to provide city
services in a cost effective and efficient manner.
e. Ensure that neighborhoods transition to one another by considering appropriate land
uses, development patterns, character elements, and access to mobility networks.
The proposed development plans meet the requirements and provisions of the Draper
City Municipal Code.
The proposed development plans will not be deleterious to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the general public nor the residents of adjacent properties.
The proposed development conforms to the general aesthetic and physical development
of the area with the buffer mitigations proposed within the Development Agreement.
The public services in the area are adequate to support the subject development.
MODEL MOTIONS
Sample Motion for a Positive Recommendation – “I move we forward a positive recommendation to the
City Council for the Palmer Estates Rezone Request by Mindy Dansie, representing DAI/Candlelight
Homes and Troy Dana, representing Madison Creek, LLC for the purpose of rezoning the property from
RA1 to R4, application #150304-1266E, based on the findings listed in the Staff Report dated April 14,
2015 and as modified by the findings below:”
1.
List any additional findings …
Sample Motion for a Negative Recommendation – “I move we forward a negative recommendation to the
City Council for the Palmer Estates Rezone Request by Mindy Dansie, representing DAI/Candlelight
Homes and Troy Dana, representing Madison Creek, LLC for the purpose of rezoning the property from
RA1 to R4, application #150304-1266E, based on the following findings:”
1.
Palmer Estates
Rezone Request
List any additional findings…
App. # 150304-1266E
5
EXHIBIT A
AERIAL MAP
Ln
er
o
B e rr y
ch
A k ag i Ln
D
sh
i Ln
r
Cub Creek Cir
Ran
Na
Li
nd
say
P ea
G ro v e C t
ch O
r c hard
Ct
13400 S
Lone Peak Ln
ders L n
1300 E
R
an
1400 E
13430 S
e
B ent Pi n
C
v
dle
Br i
0
150
300
Feet
600
Rd
T r ai l
Palmer Estates Rezone and Development Agreement
Aerial Map
Legend
City Limits r
dD
Parcels
an
l
h
Hig
N
W
E
S
EXHIBIT B
LAND USE MAP
Ln
Ln
Lone Peak Ln
Rand e rs
13430 S
Feet
1,180
Highland Dr
ag
Ak
Ct
R
ed
T r ee Ct
Open Space/Parks
Ben t Pi
ne
Cv
d
R
l
i
ra
eT
l
d
Br i
590
c h O rc
rd
ha
13400 S
1100 E
Roberts Bro
ok Ln
P ea
u ntry Ln
295
Be
rr y
Residential Low/MediumDensity
iL
n
Na
s hi
R anchero Dr
adow
l a nd s
Sh
13200 S
Ln
E
1 3 230 S
1162
Trail R ider Cir
13200 S
1400 E
0
Boulter St
1300 E
1185 E
Conrads View Ln
13200 S
Co
Ln
13110 S
Legend
City Limits
Residential Hillside Low Density
Land Use Map
Parcels
N
W
E
S
EXHIBIT C
ZONING MAP
Boulter St
13200 S
Lone Peak Ln
1100 E
Rand e rs
Ln
13400 S
RA1
590
Feet
13430 S
1,180
iL
n
Highland Dr
R
ed
T r ee Ct
OS
South Mountain Agreement
Ben t Pi
ne
Cv
d
R
l
i
ra
eT
l
d
Br i
u ntry Ln
295
R3
c h O rc
Ct
1400 E
Roberts Bro
ok Ln
P ea
rd
ha
ag
Be
rr y
Na
R anchero Dr
Ak
Ln
s
hi
13200 S
Ln
1162
Trail R ider Cir
E
R4
1300 E
Sh
1185 E
13200 S
0
adow
l a nd s
Conrads View Ln
RA2
Co
Ln
13110 S
Legend
City Limits
Parcels
RM
Zoning Map
N
W
E
S
EXHIBIT D
CONCEPT PLAN
EXHIBIT B
CONCEPT PLAN
0
0.5
1
LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 5
TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 1 EAST
SALT LAKE BASE AND MERIDIAN
WROUGHT IRON FENCING
EX.GRAVEL DRIVE
EX.EDGE OF ASPHALT
13400 SOUTH STREET
(PUBLIC STREET)
184.4'
152.8'
15.0'
8'
50.0'
N 001
VID 228A
D
G, 4-05
G
I
3
GR ID#
EL
RC
A
P
15.0'
15.0'
62.0'
EX.EDGE OF ASPHALT
15.0'
50.0'
6'
INTEREST QUIT CLAIMED TO DRAPER CITY
0'
.
12
15.0'
28.
15.6'
0'
.0'
62.0'
EX. CONCRETE WALL
R=
R=100
36.0'
142.3'
50.0'
.0'
20.0'
12
PALMER, JUNE E
PARCEL ID# 34-05-227-001
PARCEL 3
R=136.0'
18.0'
55.0'
OPEN SPACE/
DETENTION AREA
EB
RIN
E
TH 02
KA 28-0
&
B
5-2
RD 34-0
A
5
ICH #
, R EL ID LOT
E
T
I
C
WH PAR
15.0'
62.0'
PROPERTY LINE
18.0'
55.0'
62.0'
EX. WOOD FENCE
36.0'
10.0'
PARCELS 3 & 4 TO BE CONVEYED
TO DRAPER CITY BY WARRANTY DEED
62.0'
SPHA
55.0'
'
18.0'
62.0'
8.0
=2
20.0'
R
34.
20.0'
8'
20.0'
7.5'
18.0'
50.0'
OPEN SPACE/
DETENTION AREA
'
8.0
R2
55.0'
20.0'
LOT AREA
4.630 AC.
MORE OR LESS
UNIT 10
YB
50.0'
4
R=
D
JU 3
&
B
-00
PH -228
L
DO -05
AN # 34 4
R
ID OT
R,
L
INE CEL
A
G PAR
UNIT 10
EX. CHAIN
LINK FENCE
15.0'
62.0'
NOTE:
UNITS 9, 10, 12 & 13
SHALL BE RAMBLERS
PARCEL 4
AREA CONTAINS:
0.115 ACRES
MORE OR LESS
(TO BE DEDICATED TO DRAPER CITY)
R
PA
03
LC 27-0
L
,
5-2
RR
XA 34-0
A
J #
L ID
E
C
UNIT 6
0.0
EX. TREES
(TO REMAIN)
EXISTING TREE EXHIBIT
SCALE: 1"=20'
18.0'
'
1300 EAST STREET
(PUBLIC STREET)
.0
'
106.7'
TH
R=
LT PA
18.0'
28
15.0'
PAR PALM
ER
CEL
ID# , JUNE
PAR 34-05-2 E
CEL
27-0
02
4
18.0'
.0'
EX. TREES
(TO REMAIN)
PARCEL 3
AREA CONTAINS:
0.021 ACRES
MORE OR LESS
(TO BE DEDICATED TO DRAPER CITY)
EX. A
TAN VINYL FENCING
20.0'
20.0'
15
18.0'
55.0'
18.0'
55.0'
62.0'
18.0'
HA
A
R
TAN VINYL FENCING
O
EB 004
D
& 27D K 05-2
L
NA 34RO ID#
,
ON EL
DS ARC
L
O
P
UNIT 9
17.8'
62.0'
EX. EDGE OF ASPHALT
16.2'
20.0'
55.0'
EX. CHAIN LINK FENCE
TAN VINYL FENCING
POSSIBLE FUTURE 15'
ACCESS EASEMENT
C
IE
SS 006
E
& J 8M 5-22
A
I
ILL 4-0
, W D# 3
Y
HB L I
AS RCE
PA
EX.BUILDING
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT E
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
Exhibit C
Architectural Renderings
Exhibit D
Entrance Feature
EXHIBIT F
RESIDENT LETTERS
Jennifer Jastremsky
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tamara Gaffney [[email protected]]
Wednesday, April 15, 2015 10:40 PM
Jennifer Jastremsky
Rezone App 150304-1266E Comments
April 15, 2015
Jennifer Jastremsky
AICP Planner II
Draper City Community Development Department
Draper, UT 84020
Re: Rezone App 150304-1266E
Dear Ms. Jastremsky,
I only received notice of public hearing on Saturday with a deadline of tomorrow to submit my thoughts about
this development in writing. It was unclear if email constituted "writing" so if this is not sufficient, please let
me know.
I was not given any other literature about it until a neighborhood meeting this evening and am shocked by the
density proposed in this particular location put 19 homes into a little over 5 acre plot.
I’m writing with my strong opposition to this rezone on the basis that it is not in keeping with the neighborhood
density and safety.
Existing Neighborhood Density: My home at 13454 Lone Peak Lane is in an area of 1 acre lots and within the
surrounding area there are only acre and half acre subdivisions. The developer has raised the point that other
developments along 1300 E have been approved with large homes on small lots and that half acre lots along
1
1300 E have not sold due to pricing. I would like to point out that this development is not on 1300 E and other
developments along 1300 E are not relevant as comparisons. The neighborhood we need to be comparing this
project to is Bear Hollow, Lone Peak and Agaki Farms area. In these areas we have all low density custom
homes. This development will be track homes (of a few different designs) and that is also not keeping with the
neighborhood design and feeling. This is one of the last horse property areas in Draper and I strongly urge the
city to keep this area as it was originally designed. I’m sure that the master plan does not include moving the
city toward all high density housing and you have already approved two such high density developments
recently. We have paid a premium in our house values to have low density surroundings. I understand from
tonight’s meeting that the developer is willing to pay the home owner more if they get this rezone which
includes a plan to have lot sizes in some parts of the property with less than 8000 sq foot lots and 5000 sq foot
homes. This will certainly be vastly different configurations than all the surrounding area.
Safety: I’m sure that every neighborhood wishes to reduce density and this argument may not be compelling to
a city looking for increased tax basis to enable more public works initiatives. There is another factor which
concerns me even more, safety. This particular location is situated in an area with very little ingress and
egress. We only have two points, an unprotected and narrow turn off of 1300 E onto 13400 (which is not a
through street) and is an intersection of a trail crossing and stake center in addition to being the main point of
entry for a potential of 56+ more cars or 13200 off of Trailrider or Bear Hollow which is now nearly impossible
to turn off of given the two schools, high school traffic and upcoming high density construction project traffic
that has not been factored into any existing problems we already have. You may think I am concerned about
traffic but I’m actually much more concerned about traffic accidents with pedestrians, bicyclists, cars, etc. I’m
very concerned that 1300 E is already going to be a nightmare with the developments you’ve approved and that
also impacts the dangerous intersection at 13800 and 1300 E where making a left turn has become treacherous
and where traffic will back up if you have to put in a stop light at 13400 as well as the one you just put in at
13200.
I am in favor of beautiful new homes in Draper and welcome the idea of more families into this city and my
neighborhood. My question is why is the city planning commission in such a rush? There has already been a
very large amount of building, rezoning and there are several nearby projects which are about to dramatically
impact the number of homes available and we have yet to carefully study the infrastructure impact of the
existing approved developments. I have moved to Draper from the San Francisco area of California and I can
attest to the impact of high density years down the road were much more dramatic than the original studies
projected. Cities up and down that area are faced with water rationing, sewage management and waste
management challenges, school overcrowding, traffic and safety issues that they never foresaw when the plots
were created and houses built. Your development plans today are very likely to result in traffic fatalities within
the next 5 years. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to delay rezoning decisions until our other projects have been
completed. We can still rezone this plot of land later if we find our fears were unfounded. Wouldn’t you rather
be more thoughtful about these decisions which will impact the city for hundreds of years to come than see
white crosses on 1300 E demarking the place where a child or expectant mother was killed?
I urge you to slow down and delay this rezone request until we have adjusted to the existing growth in Draper.
Once you have put 19 homes into 5 acres at this location it can never be undone.
2
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my concerns and objections.
Best regards,
Tamara Gaffney
13454 Lone Peak Lane
(801) 361-5821
3
Jennifer Jastremsky
Joy Johnson [[email protected]]
Thursday, April 16, 2015 9:31 AM
Jennifer Jastremsky
Rezoning and Development of the Equestrian Center
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To:
Draper City Council
Re:
Rezoning/Development of the Equestrian Center
Please note that we are vehemently opposed to rezoning the Equestrian Center located at 13400 South and 1300
East from RA1 to R4. Stuffing 19 homes on 5 acres of land is extremely high density for this area. The traffic
is already a problem in this area and this will just exacerbate the problem. We moved to Draper for a lifestyle
in a beautiful community of low density housing. If some prefer high density living then they should form a
community of this nature in a different area. We paid a premium for our 1 acre lot for the privilege of living in
a community of 1 acre properties. We contribute a generous property tax to the community as well. We have
loved our quiet community where our children can play outside safely and ride their bikes around without fear
of heavy traffic, although this seems to be changing fast. Our children cannot even cross 1300 E safely
anymore. We want to keep our R1 zoning to preserve the lifestyle that we have worked so hard to have. Even a
R2 zoning would be much more palatable than R4.
We hope that you will listen to the involved Draper Citizens that reside in this area. We will be attending the
hearing on April 23rd at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.
Mike and Joy Johnson
1078 E 13590 S.
Draper, UT 84020
1
Jennifer Jastremsky
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kathrine White [[email protected]]
Thursday, April 16, 2015 1:24 PM
Jennifer Jastremsky
Rezoning of the Equestrian Center
To the Zoning Committee members (or Planning Commission):
We own property adjacent to the Equestrian Center. Because of the density of the homes that are being planned
for this
development, we are concerned about the traffic issues it will create.
Thirteenth east is becoming a very congested street. 13400 currently does not go through to Fort Street. There
are currently two other developments in progress along this street.The existing schools bring alot of traffic.
Another new subdivision along 13th is going to add to the already overloaded traffic problem. For this reason
we feel the city needs to do a traffic study before this subdivision is approved. There is an LDS church across
from the Equestrian Center. That also adds to the traffic problem.
Half acre plots would be in better keeping with the area that surrounds this development. It would also mean
less cars.
Thanks for your consideration,
Rich and Kathrine White
13441 South Lone Peak Lane
Draper, Utah
1
Greg & Sarah Smith
1052 Country Lane
Draper, Utah 84020
801-671-6403
[email protected]
April 16, 2015
Draper City
Planning Commission / City Council
Attn: Jennifer Jastremsky
Draper City Hall
1020 E. Pioneer Road
Draper, UT 84020
Re: Proposed Rezoning of the Equestrian Center Property
Dear Ms. Jastremsky, Planning Commission & City Council
This letter is sent to express my concerns and comments about the proposed rezoning of the
Palmer Estates - Draper Equestrian Center located at 13400 South and 1300 East.
I (we) understand that all of the proposal requirements have been met and that the developers
(Troy Dana, Brian Flam) have done what they could to appease the adjacent property owners.
However, as a neighborhood, many of us - including the adjacent property owners - sincerely do
not feel that the rezoning and proposed development meet the requirements to justify the
development.
In accordance to section 9-5-060(E)(2) of the Draper City Code, we do not feel that the proposed
rezoning is appropriate - it is not "harmonious with the overall character of the existing
development(s) in the vicinity of the subject property". With even a quick review of the current
zoning, roadways, trails, easements, traffic master and future use plans, etc you will see that
everything surrounding the subject property is RA1 or RA2, and to change that to R4, as was
done with the area adjacent Summit Academy on 132nd, would be like having a sore thumb with
19 warts on it.
I understand that the Palmers would like to do other things and that the property can and should
be developed. As a real estate professional myself, I appreciate this and understand where Troy
and Brian are coming from. However, as stated, zoning from RA1 to R4 is not the highest and
best use of this land (highest, but definitely not best). As you are seeing from others in the
neighborhood, we do not oppose the sale and development of that land. Many of us would like
to see it remain RA1 but would accept, and believe that a zoning of RA2 would meet the
requirements of the City Code - and the financial win fall of the developing parties.
Simply put, rezoning to R4 and building 19 homes is too dense and is not in harmony with the
area.
I hope you will take my concerns, as well as those of my neighbors into consideration.
Thank you.
Greg Smith
Jennifer Jastremsky
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
James Rasmussen [[email protected]]
Jennifer Jastremsky
Zoning Change
Hello Jennifer, my name is James Rasmussen and I live on Lone Peak Lane in Draper. Last night we had a
neighborhood meeting to discuss the proposed zoning change from 40,000 sq ft to 10,000 sq ft (I can't
remember which is R4 or R1) for a piece of land near 13400 South 1300 East currently occupied by an
equestrian business. I would like to voice my opinion.
In a nutshell, I am supportive of the development if the project contained fewer than 15 single homes.
Currently 19 homes are proposed. Third acre lots would be acceptable over the current proposal of less than
quarter acre lots.
Troy Dana, the developer, was at the neighborhood meeting and did a very nice job describing the project and
how he was sensitive and accommodating to the adjacent property owners, and I really appreciate his approach.
I realize that change is inevitable but we need to be wise in making changes. Lone Peak Lane has acre lots and
has that old-time Draper feel of country living. Having a large development of high density housing so close
will really change that for all the people in the area. I'm not concerned about property values but rather more
concerned about how this development will really change what we love about our area of Draper.
Traffic will also be a real concern. We have people now who drive down 13400 from 1300 east and cut through
the subdivision behind the church ball field to drop children off at Summit. Having 19 more families driving in
the area will contribute to congestion.
Troy Dana will argue that for this project to "pencil" he needs this many houses. I would argue that is not true.
I'm sure his "penciling" includes a profit, which it should, but having 5 fewer homes he may make less profit
but will still be able to make it pencil and the development will fit better into the existing area. My wife was
controller for a large home builder/developer in Salt Lake and they had a 20% margin! I believe there is plenty
of room for Troy Dana to make a profit and make the neighbors happy.
I respectfully ask you to consider this request to reduce the number of homes to less than 15.
Thank you,
James Rasmussen
1147 Lone Peak Lane
Draper, UT 84020
801-455-3700
1
Jennifer Jastremsky
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Amanda Peeler [[email protected]]
Jennifer Jastremsky
Equestrian Center Development
April 16, 2015
Dear Ms. Jastremsky,
I am writing as a concerned citizen and neighbor in regards to the proposed development on the land currently
occupied by Michelle Palmer's Equestrian Center located on the corner of 1300 East 13400 South.
The proposed development would convert the 5 acres from R1 to R4. I feel that this change will intrinsically
change the nature and feel of this area of Draper. Currently, the parcel is surrounded predominantly by R1
properties with animal rights. A previous request in the vicinity to rezone a single R1 lot into R2 was denied by
the Council because it would remove old growth trees, increase traffic and change the character of the area.
Now approval is pending to add 19 houses with a total of 58 garages on lots that are less than 1/4 acre when
open space is taken into consideration as not being part of the home lots. That seems contradictory to the goals
of neighborhood preservation, traffic congestion, school walking safety, and the original intention to maintain
our area of Draper as animal property.
I have no issue with development that reflects the characteristics and nature of the surrounding area. Although I
would love to see lots that reflected the sizes of surrounding lots, I would appreciate at least a compromise with
the developer to bring lot size up to 1/2 acre which would serve to lower traffic and preserve character. Few
developments in Draper have this level of density - single family houses on individual lots that are 1/4 acre or
less. This level of density would fit in Eagle Mountain, not Draper.
I plan to attend the meeting next Thursday and hope the council will consider my concerns, and the concerns of
others in the neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Amanda Peeler
1074 Lone Peak Lane
Draper, UT 84020
1
Sterling and Amanda Oaks
1081 Ranchero Drive
Draper, UT 84020
April 16, 2015
Draper City Planning Commission and Draper City Council
Draper, UT 84020
Re: Rezoning of Corner Canyon Equestrian Center on 1266 East 13400 South
To Draper City Planning Commission and Draper City Council members:
This week we were informed about the proposed development for the property at
1266 East 13400 South, the Corner Canyon Equestrian Center. Last night we
attended a meeting where Troy Dana and Candlelight Homes presented their plan
and a proposed layout of the property. It our understanding that they are requesting
the land be rezoned from RA1 to R4. However, we are asking that this rezoning
request be denied.
The two of us have been Draper residents for 10 years, and currently live at 1081
Ranchero Drive. We initially built a home in South Mountain a decade ago, and then
later decided to move down to lower Draper to benefit from the flat land, larger lots,
and abundance of trees in this area. We paid significantly more money to do so, but
felt that the tradeoff was worth the cost, as we wanted to enjoy more open space
and less dangerous traffic for our young children.
Learning about the proposed zoning change and development for the Equestrian
Center concerns us for a variety of reasons. First, adding 19 single family homes, (all
with 3-car garages), on such a small space and with only one traffic outlet, is going
to significantly add to the traffic congestion in the area. Not only does it raise an
eyebrow with regard to whether or not it meets appropriate safety requirements for
emergency personnel support, (i.e. fire trucks and ambulances), but it will
complicate the traffic flow on 13400 South, and inevitably our street (Ranchero
Drive) as well.
Already, residents between neighborhoods north of 13200 S and south of 13400 S
use our street as a through street for traffic, because traffic on 1300 East is already
congested—particularly in the mornings. Since the junior high and high schools
were completed, we have seen a significant increase in traffic on our street, and
often these additional drivers disregard the street signs (“Deaf Child”) for our deaf
neighbor children next to us. It is inevitable that adding 19 homes as mentioned
above will contribute to this problem. Has a traffic study been conducted for this
area? If not, we request that the city pay for one and report its results to all
concerned residents of this area.
Secondly, though we understand that development in a city is necessary to some
extent, we feel that paring these homes down to 10,000 square feet lots is extreme,
particularly adjacent to a neighborhood that is primarily full acre lots, and where
there is not a manmade or natural boundary between the property in question on
the surrounding established neighborhood. We feel that this significantly decreases
the appeal to live here. One of us grew up in the Holladay, Utah, which over has long
boasted some of the highest property values in the state, and yet has also been
incrementally carved up into smaller and smaller pieces of property. The problem
has become so extreme that even though we could easily afford to live in that area
close to friends and family, we have chosen not to, primarily because the city of
Holladay has failed to preserve what made that area attractive in the first place—its
natural beauty and open feel.
As we watch the Fairbourn property (across from Summit Academy) carved up into
tiny lots, (about which we were not informed until the decision was already made
by the city council), and large open spaces built upon without thought to traffic,
preservation of trees, or setting aside space for neighborhood parks, we fear that
not enough thought or consideration is being given to preserving the strengths that
Draper has typically offered its residents in the past.
In conclusion, we maintain that the current plan to rezone the Corner Canyon
Equestrian Center property from RA1 to R4 when adjacent to RA1 neighborhoods is
not responsible development, and that appropriate adjustments be made to that
plan. We ask that the Planning Commission and City Council respectfully consider
our concerns on this matter, and look forward to attending your meeting next
Thursday, April 23, 2015.
Sincerely,
Sterling & Amanda Oaks
Jennifer Jastremsky
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Judy G. [[email protected]]
Jennifer Jastremsky
Zone change for the Palmer Estates
Dear Jennifer, I am one of the property owners that is adjacent to this proposed developement of the Palmer Estates. The zone change is not in keeping with the rest of the properties surrounding this developement. The neighborhood that I live in consists of one acre lots. To the South of us is a subdivision with half acre lots. It cannot be compared to any other neighborhoods, or any other zone changes that have taken place in Draper. This development/zone change also causes great concern with the traffic that is already a nightmare on 13th East. Getting onto 13th East, from 134th South, is almost impossible. Turning onto 134th South, from 13th East, is impossible. Especially if a left turn is being attempted. Please consider doing a traffic study before approving this zone change. The development will bring in nineteen homes with three car garages. That is, potentially, another 57 cars that will be added to the traffic problem. Please conside the impact on our schools as well. Our schools are already over crowded. I know they are planning on using the Corner Canyon stream for their drainage. Please consider studying this as well. You may want to review the hundred year flood plain and how this will be impacted with the extra water coming from this subdivision. I, along with many other residents in this area, ask that this zone change be denied until futher studies can be done. I am not opposed to this property being developed. I am opposed to the number of houses that are being proposed. I would approve of half acres, if that is a possibility. Thank you! Judy Gainer 13477 S. Lone Peak Lane Draper, Utah 1
April 16, 2015
Jason and Rachel Neeley
1068 E. 13590 S.
Draper Ut 84020
Draper Planning and Zoning Commission,
My family bought a home in this neighborhood a number of years ago. The biggest reason we bought
here is because of the size of the lots. We were pleased that there would be no more building as all the
lots were full and there were rules in place to inhibit sub diving current lots. We love the fact that
everyone here is of the same mindset. Keeping the “old draper” feel.
You currently have a proposal to change the zoning for the Equestrian Center on 13400 S. before you
that would change all of that and would also put more changes in motion.
Please consider a few things:
Some of us moved to Draper for land and the open feel. It was the last place in the valley that had land
and trees. And we don’t want to see it over built.
The proposed development on 13400 S. does not fit the standard of living that this neighborhood
possesses. While the homes will be beautiful and new, they do not promote the feeling we have here.
Our neighborhood is comprised of homes, large or small, sitting on 1 acre parcels. If you change this
portion then if opens the door for greed. Yes! Greed. Almost everyone is swayed by money. Soon my
neighbors will want to sub divide their 1 acre lots for proposed flag lots. THIS IS NOT GOOD!
Also, have you considered the traffic this proposed development on 13400 S. will bring? We do not the
infrastructure to accommodate more traffic. Because of the already poor planning, we have 2 large
schools adjacent to each other on 1300 East which are causing major traffic delays. There are no turning
lanes or even sidewalks to keep students safe.
Please consider that moving forward with this development means you are putting the cart before the
horse. It sounds like Draper is famous for this problem. If Draper had put in the horse trails that were
once promised this would not be an issue. Stop the madness now! Change and plan accordingly with
resident’s approval. We live here. We pay the taxes. We elect you. Doesn’t our opinions matter?
Whether you think moving forward with this proposal is a good idea or bad idea, consider changing it a
bit. First of all put it off! Then widen 1300 east and put in sidewalks. You have already built the schools
and we need make everyone safe. And secondly, don’t let them change our neighborhood. Keep the lots
at least at a ½ acre minimum.
Rachel Neeley
Jennifer Jastremsky
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[email protected]
Jennifer Jastremsky
Palmer Project (equestrian center at 13400 S. 1300 E.
Kelly and Kathryn Myers
1119 Lone Peak Ln.
Draper, UT 84020
Attn: Jennifer Jastremski Draper City Hall
Draper, UT 84020
Re: Proposed Rezoning of the Equestrian Center Property located near 13400 South and 1300 East.
I have been made aware of a proposal to re-zone the property from R1 to R4. I am writing this letter
as a resident of the neighborhood, in opposition to the proposal. The current neighborhood is
comprised of one acre lots, which has been the reason that many of my neighbors and I purchased
lots and built homes here. There is a character to the current development which would be
substantially altered by the development of 19 homes in approximately five acres. Section 95060(E)(2) of the Draper City Code, requires the City Council evaluate, when faced with a request to
amend zoning restrictions: “Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall
character of existing development in the vicinity of the subject property.” There is not much doubt that
this proposal will not continue the harmony of our current development, and therefore should not be
approved.
An additional factor is this decision includes how this will alter the traffic patterns that are already
stressed due to the difficulty turning onto the very busy 1300 East. The more denser development
would also add a greater burden to the already overcrowded schools. When city planners in the past
have viewed this property, they zoned it as R1. Everyone who would be affected by this change now,
had the understanding that is was zoned R1 when they purchased their land and built their homes.
To change the zoning for the developer now goes against the residents who were compliant with the
current zoning.
I am absolutely in favor of the property owner's right to develop the land that they own. If they
develop the land under the current zoning it will be a welcome addition, as we have all known that the
land would eventually be developed, but expected it to be within the current R1 designation.
I am planning on attending the Planning meeting next week and look forward to meeting you and
discussing the proposal. Thank you for your time and energy working for Draper's future.
Sincerely,
Kelly and Kathryn Myers
1
Project Name:
Address:
Current Zoning:
Hearing Date:
Snow Crest Preliminary Plat
13000 S. 1300 E.
RA2
April 23, 2015
Summary of Request
The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for a five-lot subdivision.
Background
On November 18, 2014, the City Council approved Ordinance 1122 which rezoned the subject property
from RA1 to RA2. This application is a request to subdivide the property into five single-family lots with
an average lot size of over 23,000 square feet. Subdivisions of ten lots and fewer are considered minor
subdivisions and may be approved at staff level providing they are routine and uncontested. Because of a
disputation pertaining to the legal right to access the subject property as proposed, staff has elected to take
this application through the formal review process where it will have a public hearing at both the Planning
Commission and City Council.
Zoning
The property is zoned RA2, which requires each building lot to contain a minimum 20,000 square feet
and to maintain a front setback of 30 feet, side setback of 12 feet, and rear setback of 20 feet.
Analysis
Access to the subdivision will be from a 20 foot private lane that will dogleg south and terminate in a culde-sac. All five lots will front onto the cul-de-sac. Staff has verified that the area and configuration
standards for the RA2 zone are met with each of the five lots. The access for the subdivision has been a
point of contention. Included herewith is a quit-claim deed filed in 1990 by a Jack Kerbs which granted
ownership of the subject property to Mr. Cozzens, “subject to a right-of-way over the entirety of the said
property in favor of John L. (Jack) Kerbs, their personal representatives, successors and assigns, and
LaVerne Rogers Havelone, and Johanna Louise Havelone, their successors and assigns, and Wesley C.
Anderson, his successors and assigns.” The applicant for the Snow Crest subdivision contends that this
language in the quit-claim deed from Jack Kerbs to Don Cozzens makes current property owner Michael
Ford one of these “successors and assigns.” Mr. Ford’s interests are being represented by the applicant
for the Snow Crest subdivision.
Not applicable
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation on to the City
Council.
Draper, UT 84020
(801) 576-6539
STAFF REPORT
April 10, 2015
To:
Planning Commission
From: Development Review Committee
Prepared by Dennis Workman, Planner II
Re:
Snow Crest Preliminary Plat
Application No.: 150109-13000S
Applicant:
Matt Lepire
Project Location: 13000 S. 1300 E.
Zoning:
RA2
Acreage:
2.98 acres
Request:
Preliminary plat approval for a five-lot subdivision
BACKGROUND
On November 18, 2014, the City Council approved Ordinance 1122 which rezoned the subject property
from RA1 to RA2. This application is a request to subdivide the property into five single-family lots with
an average lot size of over 23,000 square feet. Subdivisions of ten lots and fewer are considered minor
subdivisions and may be approved at staff level providing they are routine and uncontested. Because of a
disputation pertaining to the legal right to access the subject property as proposed, staff has elected to take
this application through the formal review process where it will have a public hearing at both the Planning
Commission and City Council.
ANALYSIS
Subdivision Layout. Chapter 17-5 of the DCMC identifies general requirements for all subdivisions. It
describes the goals that each lot shall be developable, and that all portions of a parcel from which a
subdivision is being proposed must be included in the plat with no remnants allowed. There are also
standards regarding infrastructure that must be installed as a condition of subdividing a parcel into lots for
future housing. The current request pertains to approximately three acres on the west side of 1300 East
just north of Summit Academy Charter School. Access to the subdivision will be from a 20 foot private
lane that will dogleg south and terminate in a cul-de-sac. All five lots will front onto the cul-de-sac.
Planning Review. Staff has verified that all five lots meet the development standards of the RA2 zone.
These standards include lot area minimum, building envelope setbacks, public utility easements and lot
configuration. The required width for the private lane is 20 feet. From 1300 East to the subdivision’s
east property line, the width of the private lane is 20 feet. From the east property line to the cul-de-sac,
the private lane is 26 feet in width, which is the fire code’s requirement for a single access to a hydrant.
Disposition of Access. The portion of the private lane between 1300 East and Havelone’s east property
line is and has been the subject of some disputation. It is the single reason that staff has elected to send
Snow Crest
Preliminary Plat
App. 150109-13000S
1
this application through the full review process rather than the much quicker staff approval process. The
property in question is approximately 25’x150’ feet and is owned by Don Cozzens who lives in the home
on the south-adjacent parcel. No one disputes that Mr. Cozzens owns the property; the dispute has to do
with who has the legal right to use the access and for what purpose. Included with this staff report is a
quit-claim deed filed in 1990 by a Jack Kerbs which granted ownership of the subject property to Mr.
Cozzens, “subject to a right-of-way over the entirety of the said property in favor of John L. (Jack) Kerbs,
their personal representatives, successors and assigns, and LaVerne Rogers Havelone, and Johanna
Louise Havelone, their successors and assigns, and Wesley C. Anderson, his successors and assigns.”
The applicant for the Snow Crest subdivision contends that this language in the quit-claim deed from Jack
Kerbs to Don Cozzens makes current property owner Michael Ford one of these “successors and assigns.”
Mr. Ford’s interests are being represented by the applicant for the Snow Crest subdivision. The attached
recorded deed from Wallace Jeffs and Joann Jeffs to Michael Ford, recorded on May 30, 2002, supports
the applicant’s claim that Mr. Ford may enjoy use of the right of way without restriction other than those
imposed by zoning.
Engineering Review. In a memo dated April 9, 2015, Brien Maxfield recommends approval subject to the
following conditions:
Plat
1. Retention basins on each lot are to be noted as required and to be maintained by the individual lot
owners. Add required storage volume on each lot.
2. Add note to street retention basin that no structures shall be constructed within the retention basin
that will affect the operation of the facility.
3. Note berm constructed on Lot 2 is required to be maintained by lot owner.
4. Swales will be required to be shown on plat and an owner acknowledgement indicating that they
shall be required to be maintained.
5. Access easement shall be recorded in favor of the subdivision lot owners across adjacent private
property to access 1300 East. Exhibits were provided showing access easement but shall be
recorded and referenced on plat.
Utility Improvements
6. Application shall include a commitment to serve letter from South Valley Sewer District. The
application shall include letters from the providers, addressing the feasibility and their requirements to
serve the project in accordance with Section 9-5-090(d)(1)(iv)(C)(5) of the DCMC.
Grading & Drainage
7. Detail retention requirements, such as size, depth, etc., for each lot. Construction information,
such as a standard detail, is required and will be verified at completion of each house.
8. Grading plan identifies swales will be located on property lines to prevent runoff from crossing
lots. Provide locations and extents where swales are required.
9. Detail retention pond overflow and how berm is to be connected to retention area directing
overflow. Information should reflect width, depth of channel (or flow area).
Snow Crest
Preliminary Plat
App. 150109-13000S
2
Street Improvements
10. Plans shall indicate private street cut in private lane south of subdivision to connect utilities.
Include restoration details, or refer to and provide Draper City Standard Detail ST-15 & 19.
Dimension cuts.
Fire Department. In a memo dated April 9, 2015, Don Buckley with the Unified Fire Authority
recommends approval with the following comments and conditions:
1. Fire Department Access is required. An unobstructed minimum road width of twenty-six (26) feet
exclusive of the shoulders and a minimum height of thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches shall be required.
The road must be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of emergency apparatus. The
surface shall be able to provide all weather driving capabilities. The road shall have an inside turning
radius of twenty – eight (28) feet. There shall be a maximum grade of 10%. Grades may be checked
prior to building permits being issued. This requirement is needed from the point of this project’s
property line to their project only. The remainder of the lane from this projects property line to1300
East may remain the existing width and does not need to be widened at this time to meet this
requirement.
2. Fire Hydrants are required there shall be a total of 1 hydrants required spaced at 400ft.
increments. The required fire flow for this project is 2000GPM for full 2 hour duration. This will
allow up to a 6200sqft home. Anything larger will require additional fire flow test to determine if
sprinklers are needed.
3. Hydrants and Site Access. All hydrants and a form of acceptable temporary Fire Department
Access to the site shall be installed and APPROVED by the Fire Department prior to the issuance
of any Building Permits. If at any time during the building phase any of the hydrants or temporary
Fire Department Access becomes non-compliant any and all permits could be revoked.
4. No combustible construction shall be allowed prior to hydrant installation and testing by water
purveyor. All hydrants must be operational prior to any combustible elements being received or
delivered on building site.
5. Visible Addressing Required. New and existing buildings shall have approved address numbers
plainly legible and visible from the street fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with
their background.
Geotechnical Investigation. In a report dated January 29, 2015, Alan Taylor with Taylor Geotechnical
states: “Based upon the information presented in the referenced report, it is TG’s opinion that Wilding
Engineering has adequately addressed the geotechnical engineering parameters for the proposed project.”
Building Review. Building Official Keith Collier has no comment at this stage of development.
Addressing. In a memo dated March 26, 2015, Bart LeCheminant states that the address of the Hevelone
property will need to change to 1264 E. Snow Crest Cove.
Staff recommends approval of the preliminary subdivision plat application by Matt Lepire, application
150109-13000S, subject to the following conditions:
Snow Crest
Preliminary Plat
App. 150109-13000S
3
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
That all city standards, requirements, and ordinances are met.
That all requirements of the City Engineer are met.
That all requirements of the Fire Department are met.
That final plat submittal shall include all requirements outlined in Chapters 17-3 and 17-4.
That the public improvement bond and inspection fees are paid prior to city engineer signing the
final mylar.
1. That the proposed preliminary plat meets the requirements of the general plan and zoning
ordinance.
2. That the proposed preliminary plat will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare
of persons or property in the area.
3. That the proposed residential use would not be out of character with the surrounding area, nor
would it adversely impact adjacent properties.
4. That Michael Ford, who is represented by the applicants, is one of the “successors and assigns”
inferred in the 1990 quit-claim deed, and that he and his successors and assigns have full right to
utilize the right-of-way, and can do so without restriction other than those imposed by zoning.
MODEL MOTION
Sample Motion for a Positive Recommendation. “I move we forward a positive recommendation to the
City Council on the Snow Crest preliminary subdivision plat, as requested by Matt Lepire, application
150109-13000S, based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report dated April
10, 2015 and as modified by the conditions below:”
1.
List any additional conditions and findings.
Sample Motion for a Negative Recommendation. “I move we forward a negative recommendation to the
City Council on the Snow Crest preliminary subdivision plat, as requested by Matt Lepire, application
150109-13000S, based on the following findings:”
Snow Crest
Preliminary Plat
App. 150109-13000S
4
Project Name:
Address:
Current Zoning:
Hearing Date:
Deer Run Preserve Plat Amendment
962 East Roundhouse Road
RM1 (with Development Agreement)
April 23, 2015
Background
The request was heard by the Planning Commission on January 22, 2015 and was subsequently
approved by the City Council. However, the request was taken through the process as a
preliminary plat and needs now to be taken through as a Plat Amendment as the lots are part
of the South Mountain Phases 1 and 2F Amended plat. Proper notice has been given for a plat
amendment request and the application will follow proper noticing and procedure
requirements for a plat amendment. No changes have been made to the project as part of this
request.
When the idea for the South Mountain development was originally conceived, this property
was slated as a commercial or “town center” hub. After years of marketing and attempted
development approvals, in July of 2014, a zoning map amendment was approved. This changed
zoning on the subject property from A5 to RM1. The rezone request was accompanied by a
development agreement which was approved along with the rezone request.
The property is zoned RM1 and has a recorded development agreement.
Analysis
The applicant is requesting approval of a plat amendment resulting in a 79 lot subdivision. The
general layout of the development consists of the circular portion of the property and two arms
that extend generally east and west adjacent to Highland Drive. The developer is proposing to
break the plat into four phases which could be recorded independent of one another. The first
phase is the row of homes adjacent to the existing circle of townhomes with the second phase
being the next row of homes in the circle including the park. Each arm of homes is also a phase.
The development will be served by four existing public roads: Town Center Drive (renamed
Deer Preserve Lane), Molasses Mill Drive, Candy Pull Drive and Roundhouse Road. There is an
existing private road that serves as access to the existing townhome’s garages. This road will
remain. A new private road (Deer Arch Lane) will service all lots in phases one and two. Finally,
each arm will be accessed by its own private road (Deer Heights Court and Deer Vista Court).
The smallest lots will be adjacent to the existing townhomes. These lots will range in size from
4,111 ft² to 4,738 ft². The next sets of lots in the circle are proposed to be a little larger and
range from 5,176 ft² to 5,595 ft². Finally, between the two arms, the lots range from 8,108 ft²
to 16,431 ft².
No deviations are being requested.
Staff is recommending approval of the request with conditions (see staff report).
Draper, UT 84020
(801) 576-6539
STAFF REPORT
April 14, 2015
To:
From:
Prepared by: Dan Boles, AICP, Senior Planner
Planning Division
Community Development Department
Re:
Deer Run Preserve – Plat Amendment Request
Application No.:
141030-962E-1
Applicant:
Ryan Button, representing Draper Highland LLC
Project Location:
Approximately 962 East Roundhouse Rd.
Zoning:
RM1 Residential Zone
Acreage:
Approximately 16.659 Acres (Approximately 725,666 ft2)
Request:
Request for approval of a Plat Amendment amending portions of South
Mountain phases 1 and 2F, in the RM1 Residential zone. Approval of this
request would allow 79 new residential single family lots.
SUMMARY
The request was heard by the Planning Commission on January 22, 2015 and was subsequently approved
by the City Council. However, the request was taken through the process as a preliminary plat and should
have been taken through as a Plat Amendment as the lots are part of the South Mountain Phases 1 and 2F
Amended plat. In an effort to correct this error, proper notice has been given for a plat amendment
request and the application will follow proper noticing and procedure requirements for a plat amendment.
This application is a request for approval of a Plat Amendment for approximately 16.659 acres located on
the south side of Highland Drive at approximately 962 East Roundhouse Rd. The property is currently
zoned RM1 Residential and has an associated development agreement. The applicant is requesting that a
Plat Amendment be approved in order to construct a 79 lot residential development on the site. Amenities
will include a park and connecting trails.
BACKGROUND
When the idea for the South Mountain development was originally conceived, this property was slated as
a commercial or “town center” hub. After years of marketing and attempted development approvals, in
July of 2014, a zoning map amendment was approved. This changed zoning on the subject property from
A5 to RM1. The rezone request was accompanied by a development agreement which was approved
along with the rezone request.
Deer Run Preserve
Plat Amendment Request
App. # 141030-962E-1
1
ANALYSIS
General Plan and Zoning. The Land Use Map of the General Plan calls for the Neighborhood
Commercial land use designation for the subject property. Additionally, the property has been assigned
the RM1 Residential zoning classification though this category may be a little misleading due to a
development agreement on the subject parcel which restricts the development to single family lots.
It should be noted here that due to a nearby detention basin that the applicant is proposing to utilize, the
requirement for onsite detention has been eliminated allowing the applicant to design two more lots into
the design of the property. In order for this to occur, an amendment of the development agreement
needed to be approved by the City Council. The applicant took that amendment to the City Council and
the amendment was approved allowing for two more lots.
Development Agreement Highlights. As previously stated, the zoning on the property is tied to a
development agreement. In order to approve the proposed Plat Amendment, the terms of the
development agreement must be satisfied. In short, the development agreement states:
• The project will be limited to single family homes.
• Homes on lots1-3 and 27-29 will not exceed 27 feet in height.
• There will be no more than 77 lots (the amendment by the City Council will allow up to 79).
• Density will not exceed 5 homes per acre.
• Each lot will have a minimum area of 4,100 ft² and average lot size of 6,900 ft².
• The required setbacks.
• 50% of a home’s front elevation shall be masonry (ie. stone or brick) with the balance being an
aesthetic mix of concrete fiber board or stucco.
• Developer agrees to provide, via dedication, a public park and multiple trails for the use and
enjoyment of all Draper City residents. Developer agrees to install park and trail infrastructure
including landscaping, irrigation system, and play equipment. Construction of park must be
started by the time 50% of building permits are issued and completed by the time 75% of all
building permits are issued.
Layout, Circulation and Phasing. The general layout of the development consists of the circular portion
of the property and two arms that extend generally east and west adjacent to Highland Drive. The
developer is proposing
to break the Plat
Amendment into four
phases which could be
recorded independent of
one another. The first
phase is the row of
homes adjacent to the
existing
circle
of
townhomes with the
second phase being the
next row of homes in
the circle including the
park.
Each arm of
homes is also a phase.
The development will be served by four existing public roads: Town Center Drive (renamed Deer
Preserve Lane), Molasses Mill Drive, Candy Pull Drive and Roundhouse Road. There is an existing
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
2
private road that serves as access to the existing townhome’s garages. This road will remain. A new
private road (Deer Arch Lane) will service all lots in phases one and two. Finally, each arm will be
accessed by its own private road (Deer Heights Court and Deer Vista Court).
Town Center Drive which connects the potential development to Highland Drive comes terminates in to
Candy Pull and Molasses Mill Drives. As part of the requirements for this development, a change in that
intersection would need to occur. After a traffic study was conducted, it was determined that the
intersection needed to be straightened to create a more standard “Tee” intersection (see Engineering
Department review). The attached plats have been revised to reflect that requirement.
The smallest lots will be adjacent to the existing townhomes. These lots will range in size from 4,111 ft²
to 4,738 ft². The next sets of lots in the circle are proposed to be a little larger and range from 5,176 ft² to
5,595 ft². Finally, between the two arms, the lots range from 8,108 ft² to 16,431 ft².
Required Park and Trails. Included in the development agreement was a requirement for a park (see
attached plan). The park will be just over an acre and will include such amenities as a grassy play area,
playground with equipment, benches and picnic tables. Additionally, the developer will provide trails
from each arm and through the homes in the circle to an existing trail in the center of the existing
townhomes giving connectivity from the project to Highland Drive and South Mountain.
The park, per the development agreement, will be dedicated to the City. The maintenance of fencing,
snow removal and landscaping will be maintained by the Deer Run Preserve HOA while the City will
maintain park equipment and trails.
Architecture. The development agreement required the following:
“All front elevations shall be a minimum of 50% masonry, (ie. stone and/or brick) with the
balance being an aesthetic mix of concrete fiber board, stucco, and may also include other
architectural character elements such as porches, window trims, cornices, timber elements,
masonry and /or other detailing elements and materials. Other elevations may consist of brick,
stone, stucco and/or concrete fiber board. Staff to verify compliance at time of each building
permit.”
As stated in the preceding exhibit, staff will verify that each home is in compliance with these standards
as part of the building permit review.
Lighting. The developer will have street lights interspersed throughout the subdivision. They are
proposing a 14 foot pole with a gooseneck style fixture. Approximately 14 street lights are proposed
throughout the subdivision.
Street Trees. A landscape plan showing the landscaping for the park, trails and street trees has been
submitted with the application. The plan shows smaller trees (Canada Red Chokecherry) lining the innercircle street. The two arms are lined with Skyline Honeylocust trees and the entry way leading off of
Highland Drive is lined with London Planes. Spring Snow Crabapples will line Candy Pull and Molasses
Mill Drive. Zelkovas, Cherry, Spruce, and Maple trees will be placed in the park and throughout the
remaining property to be landscaped. See attached landscape plan.
Fencing. The development will utilize both vinyl fencing, “Rhino Rock” and wrought iron fencing
throughout the site. Fencing between the existing townhomes and the proposed development will be a six
foot tall vinyl fence. Rhino Rock fencing will separate the new homes and the park as well as separate
Molasses Mill and Candy Pull Drives from the lots on the north of those streets. A wrought iron fence
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
3
will separate the new lots from Highland Drive.
Criteria For Approval. The grounds for review and potential approval of a Subdivision Plat Amendment
request is found in Section 17-9-040(b) of the Draper City Municipal Code. This section depicts the
standard of review for such requests as:
(b)
If the City Council is satisfied that neither the public nor any person will be materially
injured by the proposed vacation, alteration, or amendment, and that there is good cause
for the vacation, alteration, or amendment, the City Council may vacate, alter, or amend
the plat, any portion of the plat, or any street or lot within the plat.
REVIEWS
Planning Division Review. The Draper City Planning Division has completed their review of the Plat
Amendment submission and has issued a recommendation for approval for the request with the following
proposed conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
That the required alterations to the Plat Amendments affected by the change in the
intersection are completed before Final Plat is approved by City Council.
That a final plat is submitted in accordance with title 17 of the Draper City Municipal
code prior to recordation of the final plat at Salt Lake County.
That the developer forms an HOA which will be responsible for the maintenance of
improvements outlined in the development agreement.
That street trees are bonded for by the developer.
Engineering and Public Works Divisions Review. The Draper City Engineering and Public Works
Divisions have completed their reviews of the Plat Amendment submission and have issued a
recommendation for approval for the request with the following proposed conditions:
General Items
1. Retaining walls will require a building permit in accordance with the Draper City Municipal Code
Section 9-27-085. Walls were not reviewed as part of these comments.
2. Provide trail construction standards and details, including slopes on plans. Comment response is
requested information, add to construction drawings.
3. Item 4 on C-200 reflects incorrect thickness / standard detail for public right-of-ways. All
sidewalks within the public right-of-way shall be 5” thick and 5’ wide, per ST-12.
4. Item 5 on C-200 reflects incorrect standard. Refer to ST-10 for standard 30” gutter.
5. Site fencing shall not be constructed in site triangles of each street at intersections.
Plat
6. Phase 2 reflects two Parcel A’s. Change one reference to Parcel “B” to differentiate parcels and
update dedication note to reflect dedication of both parcels.
7. To clarify ownership and maintenance responsibilities, update plat to indicate which storm drain
catch basins and pipelines are private versus public. For example, SD collection and conveyance
from Deer Arch Lane and Deer Trail Lane are private until connection at Molasses Mill Drive
and Candy Pull Drive. Identify the location where public SD begins and private SD ends.
Typically, all SD under private roads are private, including inlets and pipelines. This may require
an agreement or exhibit to be referenced on plat.
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
4
8. Show existing and proposed easements on the plat. Indicate that storm drain easements, where
not dedicated to the city, are cross lot drainages. Provide to whom each easement in favor, such
as HOA, etc.
9. At least one side yard easement of at least 7 feet in accordance with Section 17-5-050(g) of the
Draper City Municipal Code is required.
10. Plat shall indicate that fire lanes (to Deer Arch Lane and Deer Trail Lane) are to be maintained by
HOA.
Grading & Drainage
11. Catch basins, cleanouts, etc., shall be constructed to Draper City standard detail drawings, such as
SD-04, SD-10, etc., within public ROWs.
12. Public SD to be installed per SD-01.
Utilities
13. Indicate ownership of any proposed street lights – to clarify maintenance responsibilities and
payment of power costs.
14. Street light proposed at intersection of Deer Height Court and Deer Preserve Lane appears to be
in the public ROW. Relocate proposed street light to private street or change to Draper City
Standard Street Light.
15. Two proposed street lights in park shall be standard Draper City street lights, unless added to
HOA responsibilities.
16. It appears there is no water / irrigation stub to park area. Note to protect existing stub, if it exists,
or add to be included in construction.
17. Provide commitment to serve letters from both WaterPro and South Valley Sewer District.
Traffic & Street Improvements
18. Realign the intersection to a standard tee of Molasses Mill, Candy Pull, & Deer Preserve per
recommendation of Hales Engineering dated January 13, 2015. Attached to comments is
intersection concept.
19. Add street cut dimensioning, per Draper City standard detail ST-08 & ST-15, for all street
excavation for utility connections.
Building Division Review. The Draper City Building Division has completed their review of the Plat
Amendment submission and has issued a recommendation for approval for the request without further
comment.
Geotechnical and Geologic Hazards Review. Taylor Geo-Engineering, LLC and Simon Bymaster, Inc.,
in working with the Draper City Building and Engineering Divisions, have completed their reviews of the
geotechnical and geologic hazards report submitted as a part of the Plat Amendment submission. Simon
Bymaster has issued a statement of completion for the reports submitted. Taylor Geo-Engineering has
also issued a recommendation of approval for the application.
Unified Fire Authority Review. The Unified Fire Authority has completed their review of the Plat
Amendment submission and has issued a recommendation for approval for the request with the following
proposed conditions:
1.
Fire Department Access is required. An unobstructed minimum road width of twentysix (26) feet and a minimum height of thirteen (13) feet six (6) inches shall be required.
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
5
The road must be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of emergency
apparatus. The surface shall be able to provide all weather driving capabilities. The road
shall have an inside turning radius of twenty – eight (28) feet. There shall be a maximum
grade of 10%. Grades may be checked prior to building permits being issued.
a. 2012 International Fire Code Appendix D requirements on street widths:
D103.6 Signs. Where required by the fire code official, fire apparatus access roads shall
be marked with permanent NO PARKING—FIRE LANE signs complying with Figure
D103.6. Signs shall have a minimum dimension of 12 inches (305mm) wide by 18 inches
(457mm) high and have red letters on a white reflective background. Signs shall be
posted on one or both sides of the fire apparatus road as required by Section D103.6.1 or
D103.6.2.
12
18
Signs are 12 X 18 inches, metal, and/or made of all weather resistant materials.
(D103.6)
D103.6.1 Roads 20 to 26 feet in width. Fire apparatus access roads 20 to 26 feet wide
(6096 to 7925 mm) shall be posted on both sides as a fire lane.
D103.6.2 Roads more than 26 feet in width. Fire apparatus access roads more than 26
feet wide (7925 mm) to 32 feet wide (9754 mm) shall be posted on one side of the road
as a fire lane.
2.
Fire Department Approved Turn Around Required. Access roads over 150 feet long
shall require an approved turn around. Below is a diagram of approved fire department
turn arounds.
3.
Fire Hydrants are required there shall be a total of 7 hydrants required spaced at 500ft.
increments. The required fire flow for this project is 2000GPM for full 2 hour duration.
This will allow up to a 6200sqft home. Anything larger will require additional fire flow
test to determine if sprinklers are needed.
4.
No combustible construction shall be allowed prior to hydrant installation and testing
by water purveyor. All hydrants must be operational prior to any combustible elements
being received or delivered on building site.
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
6
5.
Hydrants and Site Access. All hydrants and a form of acceptable temporary Fire
Department Access to the site shall be installed and approved by the Fire Department
prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. If at any time during the building phase any
of the hydrants or temporary Fire Department Access becomes non-compliant any and all
permits could be revoked.
6.
Visible Addressing Required. New and existing buildings shall have approved address
numbers plainly legible and visible from the street fronting the property. These numbers
shall contrast with their background.
Noticing. The applicant has expressed their desire to subdivide the subject property and to do so in a
manner which is compliant with the City Code. As such, notice has been properly issued in the manner
outlined in the City and State Codes.
Staff recommends approval of the request for a Plat Amendment by Ryan Button, representing Draper
Highland LLC, application 141030-962E-1, subject to the following conditions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
That all requirements of the Draper City Engineering and Public Works Divisions are
satisfied throughout the development of the site and the construction of all buildings on
the site, including permitting.
That all requirements of the Draper City Building Division are satisfied throughout the
development of the site and the construction of all buildings on the site, including
permitting.
That all requirements of the Unified Fire Authority are satisfied throughout the
development of the site and the construction of all buildings on the site.
That all requirements of the geotechnical report are satisfied throughout the development
of the site and the construction of all buildings on the site.
That the required alterations to the Plat Amendments affected by the change in the
intersection are completed before Final Plat is approved by City Council.
That a final plat is submitted in accordance with title 17 of the Draper City Municipal
code prior to recordation of the final plat at Salt Lake County.
That street trees are bonded for by the developer.
That the developer forms an HOA which will be responsible for the maintenance of
improvements outlined in the development agreement.
That the changes to the plat regarding the “T” intersection are reflected on the final plat.
1.
2.
That all of the requirements of the recorded and amended development agreement are
satisfied.
The proposed development plans meet the intent, goals, and objectives of the Draper City
General Plan such as:
a. Create a balanced community where residents can live, work and play, and have their
essential needs met.
b. Provide a wide range of housing opportunities while protecting property values
and promoting quality development.
c. Achieve orderly land development patterns which provide for compatible, functional,
cost-effective development.
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
7
3.
4.
5.
d. Protect property values while providing opportunities for development which meets
the health, safety and welfare needs of City residents.
That the requirements for Plat Amendment listed in Title 17-3 have been satisfied.
The proposed development plans will not be deleterious to the health, safety, and general
welfare of the general public nor the residents of adjacent properties.
The public services in the area are adequate to support the subject development.
MODEL MOTIONS
Sample Motion for a Positive Recommendation – “I move we forward a positive recommendation to the
City Council for the Deer Run Preserve Plat Amendment Request by Ryan Button, representing Draper
Highland LLC, application 141030-962E-1, based on the findings and subject to the conditions listed in
the Staff Report dated January 13, 2015 and as modified by the conditions below:”
1.
List any additional findings and conditions…
Sample Motion for a Negative Recommendation – “I move we forward a negative recommendation to the
City Council for the Deer Run Preserve Plat Amendment Request by Ryan Button, representing Draper
Highland LLC, application 141030-962E-1, based on the following findings:”
1.
List any findings…
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
8
Deer Run Preserve
App. # 141030-962E-1
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED AMENDED PLATS FOR PHASES 1, 2, 3 & 4
EXHIBIT B
PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AND STREET TREE PLAN
blu line designs
planning landscape architecture design
45 w 10000 s, suite 500
Sandy UT 84070
p 801.913.7994
OWNER:
DRAPER HIGHLAND, LLC
6150 S. REDWOOD ROAD, SUITE 150
TAYLORSVILLE, UT 84123
X
X
X
X
X
X
CONTACT:
X
x
X
RYAN BUTTON
PH: 801-910-6206
X
X
X
S
S
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
S
X
S
S
S
X
X
D
D
X
S
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
S
X
X
S
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
x
x
X
x
REVISIONS
N0.
x
yy/mm/day
DESCRIPTION
x
X
X
X
x
x
x
X
CORY A.
SHUPE
x
x
Stamp
x
X
X
D
No. 5410044-5301
Designed By:
RBD
Drawn By:
RBD/TSS
Date:
12/18/14
Checked By:
CAS
Project No:
14-131
Drawing Title
Drawing number
n
0
30
60
120
180
Project Name:
Address:
Current Zoning:
Hearing Date:
Brown Subdivision Zone Change
12370 S. 800 E.
O-R
April 23, 2015
Summary of Request
The applicant is requesting to rezone the property from O-R to RM1.
Background
The O-R zone is appropriate for the existing four-plex, but is not conducive to the single-family
subdivision that the applicant wishes to put on the back half of the property. RM1 zoning, on the other
hand, accommodates both the existing four-plex and the intended single-family subdivision. The latter,
however, requires a conditional use permit. When/if the rezone to RM1 succeeds, the applicant will bring
in two separate applications, one for a minor subdivision and another for a conditional use permit.
The land use map of the general plan calls out Town Center for the subject property. The text of the
Town Center land use plan states that this category “supports the mix of four uses: single and
multi-family residential, office, commercial and institutional.” It further states that “the intent of this
category is to break up underutilized, marginal or blighted areas that, with inducement, could be
rejuvenated or upgraded, or simply be replaced with quality development.”
Analysis
Staff finds that none of the five factors to be considered in zone change requests, as contained in Section
9-5-060(e), would be compromised. In addition, the proposed development supports the goals, objectives
and policies of the city’s General Plan, as stated above. Other goals of the General Plan that are
supported by this rezone request are:
a. Promote development patterns and standards that are consistent with the surrounding uses and
reinforce an area’s character.
b. Encourage land uses that create a sense of community among those who work, live, and play
within local neighborhoods.
c. Protect and revitalize established areas/neighborhoods by promoting new development and the
adaptive reuse of existing community resources that reenergize an area.
Not applicable
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward a positive recommendation on to the City
Council.
Draper, UT 84020
(801) 576-6539
STAFF REPORT
April 10, 2015
To:
Planning Commission
From: Development Review Committee
Prepared by Dennis Workman, Planner II
Re:
Brown Subdivision Zone Change
Application No.:
150403-12370S
Applicant:
Bruce Brown
Project Location:
12370 S. 800 E.
Zoning:
O-R
Acreage:
1.05 acre
Request:
To rezone the property from O-R to RM1
BACKGROUND
This application is a request for approval of a zoning map amendment for an acre of ground on 800 East
that is currently zoned Office Residential (O-R), which is intended to be a transitional zone between
office/commercial and residential. There is very little O-R zoning in the city, and staff is unsure how and
why it got zoned to this designation. There is an existing four-plex on the property on the east side of the
parcel fronting 800 East. The O-R zone is appropriate for the four-plex, but is not conducive to the
single-family subdivision that the applicant wishes to put on the back half of the property. The only type
of residential contemplated by the O-R zone is multi-family. O-R has no flexibility to accommodate
single-family, even though, curiously, the residential use table lists “Dwelling, Single-Family” as a “P” in
the O-R zone. RM1 zoning, on the other hand, accommodates both the existing four-plex and the
intended single-family subdivision. The latter, however, requires a conditional use permit. When/if the
rezone to RM1 succeeds, the applicant will bring in two separate applications, one for a minor subdivision
and another for a conditional use permit.
ANALYSIS
General Plan. The land use map of the general plan calls out Town Center for the subject property. The
text of the Town Center land use plan states that this category “supports the mix of four uses: single and
multi-family residential, office, commercial and institutional.” It further states that “the intent of this
category is to break up underutilized, marginal or blighted areas that, with inducement, could be
rejuvenated or upgraded, or simply be replaced with quality development.” Staff’s opinion is that these
goals are conducive to what the applicant wishes to achieve with RM1 zoning. With only the four-plex
on the property currently, the space is underutilized. The back half of the property is prone to weed
growth and even undesirable activity, given that it is obscured from public view by the four-plex. The
concept plan for the four lot subdivision (three new home lots in addition to the four-plex lot) expresses a
desire to achieve a first rate development.
Brown Subdivision
Zoning Map Amendment
App. # 150403-12370S
1
Criteria For Approval. The criteria for review and potential approval of a zoning map amendment
request is found in Sections 9-5-060(e) of the Draper City Municipal Code. This section sets forth the
standard of review as follows:
(e)
Approval Standards. A decision to amend the text of this Title or the zoning map is a
matter committed to the legislative discretion of the City Council and is not controlled by
any one standard. However, in making an amendment, the City Council should consider
the following factors:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with goals, objectives and
policies of the City’s General Plan;
Whether the proposed amendment is harmonious with the overall character of
existing development in the vicinity of the subject property;
Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the standards of any
applicable overlay zone.
The extent to which the proposed amendment may adversely affect adjacent
property; and
The adequacy of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property,
including but not limited to roadways, parks and recreation facilities, police and
fire protection, schools, storm water drainage systems, water supplies, and waste
water and refuse collection.
Planning Review. The planning staff has completed its review of the zoning map amendment request and
issues a recommendation for approval. Staff finds that none of the five factors listed above would be
compromised. In addition, the proposed development supports the goals, objectives and policies of the
city’s General Plan. Some of these goals which staff feels are pertinent to this application are:
a. Promote development patterns and standards that are consistent with the surrounding uses and
reinforce an area’s character.
b. Encourage land uses that create a sense of community among those who work, live, and play
within local neighborhoods.
c. Protect and revitalize established areas/neighborhoods by promoting new development and the
adaptive reuse of existing community resources that reenergize an area.
Engineering Review. In a memo dated April 9, 2015, Brien Maxfield states:
We have reviewed the subject zone map amendment application and recommend approval. In accordance
with the provisions of Section 9-5-060(e) of the Draper City Municipal Code (DCMC), we speak primarily
to the adequacy of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property. In making an amendment,
the City Council should consider the following factors. Accordingly, the following comments are
recommended for your consideration:
1. The adequacy of facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including but not limited
to roadways, parks and recreation facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water drainage
systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse collection;
Other than noted below, we are not aware of any inadequacies of the facilities intended to serve this
property.
a. Connectivity with this parcel does not appear to be an issue, as it appears to have adequate
access to 800 East.
Brown Subdivision
App. # 150403-12370S
2
b. Drainage may be an issue as there are no storm drainage facilities in the fronting street, 800
East. There are storm drainage facilities in the area, along 12400 South that may provide an
adequate drainage discharge point. Provisions for onsite storm drainage will need to be
addressed with any subdivision application, and shall comply with the provisions of the site
plan requirements within the Draper City Municipal Code.
c. Sanitary sewer facilities will be provided by South Valley Sewer District. Any subdivision
application will require a commitment to serve from the Sewer District that facilities are
adequate to provide service for the proposed uses.
d. Drinking water is provided by WaterPro. Any site application will require a commitment to
serve from WaterPro that facilities are adequate to provide service for the proposed uses.
Noticing. Noticing has been properly issued in the manner outlined in the city and state codes.
Staff recommends approval of the Brown Subdivision rezone request by Bruce Brown, application
150403-12370S, based on the following findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
That Section 9-5-060 of the DCMC allows for the amendment of the city’s zoning map.
That the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City’s
General Plan, such as:
a. Promote development patterns and standards that are consistent with the surrounding
uses and reinforce an area’s character.
b. Encourage land uses that create a sense of community among those who work, live, and
play within local neighborhoods.
c. Protect and revitalize established areas/neighborhoods by promoting new development
and the adaptive reuse of existing community resources that reenergize an area.
That all five findings for a zone change, as contained in 9-5-060(e), are satisfied.
That adequate facilities and services exist to serve the subject property, including but not limited
to roadways, parks and recreation facilities, police and fire protection, schools, storm water
drainage systems, water supplies, and waste water and refuse collection.
That the proposed zone change is harmonious with the overall character of existing development
in the vicinity of the subject property.
That the proposed amendment would not adversely affect adjacent property or the character of the
neighborhood.
That RM1 zoning allows a density of up to eight units per acre, and the applicant’s plan will take
the density up to seven units per acre (a four-plex and three single-family homes).
That RM1 zoning allows, pursuant to a conditional use permit, single family homes with lot sizes
as small as 6000 s.f. Lot sizes on the applicant’s concept plan are considerably larger than that.
MODEL MOTION
Sample Motion for a Positive Recommendation. “I move we forward a positive recommendation to the
City Council regarding the Brown Subdivision zoning map amendment, as requested by Bruce Brown,
application 150403-12370S, based on the findings listed in the staff report dated April 10, 2015 and as
modified by the following:”
1.
List any additional findings.
Sample Motion for a Negative Recommendation. “I move we forward a negative recommendation to the
City Council regarding the Brown Subdivision zoning map amendment, as requested by Bruce Brown,
application 150403-12370S, based on the following findings:”
Brown Subdivision
App. # 150403-12370S
3

Notice is hereby given that the Draper City Planning Commission

Transcription

Similar documents

Sorry, guys: The pop world belongs to Lady GaGa and Róisín Murphy.

Case Study

Meeting Agenda Preview

Berewick

MLK - Landcroc

Peterloon Brochure Lot 5.pub

StageScreens and Cool Cars

Minor Development Permit Detached Garage