Riverton Planning Commission Meeting - November 14, 2024
Riverton Planning Commission Meeting – November 14, 2024
The Riverton Planning Commission met on November 14, 2024, at 6:30 PM at Riverton City Hall, 12830 S. Redwood Road. The meeting addressed a minor subdivision, two commercial site plan amendments, and approval of past meeting minutes. Several public hearing items listed on the agenda (Roberts Rezone, Pelaez Rezone, Purple Duck Store.com, and Utah Collective) were not discussed and appear to have been deferred or postponed.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public comments were made during the public hearing for the Skibidi Rizz subdivision.
Discussion Items
- Skibidi Rizz Subdivision (PLZ-24-1007): The applicant, Kelly Checketts, sought approval of a minor 2-lot subdivision at 13441 South Trestle Lane. Discussion centered on the city code requiring a solid masonry fence along adjacent canals. Several commissioners expressed reservations about the requirement for a residential lot, noting that a variance had been submitted to the Board of Adjustment. Staff explained the ordinance had been in place for about 12–15 years, established by city council to protect residents from waterways. The commission approved the subdivision with conditions 1–13; the vote was in favor with one commissioner opposed (no exact roll call tally recorded).
- Village at South Mountain West, Pad A Amended (PLZ-24-8022): Staff reported that the building was constructed 10 feet south of its approved location, encroaching on a power line easement but without hitting any lines. The amendment shifted parking stalls and added landscaping to meet code, with approvals from SLR and Rocky Mountain Power. The commission unanimously approved the amended site plan (motion by Commissioner Clough, second by Commissioner Rushton).
- Burger King (PLZ-24-8019): The applicant proposed changes to the previously approved site plan for a Burger King at 1870 West 12600 South, including an accent brick wall with soldier coursing and elimination of two windows on the drive-through side. The architect noted the change aimed to enhance the building’s appearance and was within the existing red brick palette of the shopping center. The commission unanimously approved the amendment (motion by Commissioner Clough, second by Commissioner Beck).
Key Outcomes
- Skibidi Rizz Subdivision: Approved with conditions; one opposing vote.
- Village at South Mountain West Pad A Amended: Approved unanimously.
- Burger King Amendment: Approved unanimously.
- Minutes Approval: Approved minutes from October 10, 2024 (motion by Commissioner Beck, second by Commissioner Keel; unanimous) and October 24, 2024 (motion by Commissioner Clough, second by Commissioner Keough; unanimous).
The meeting adjourned after minutes approval.
Meeting Transcript
But protect people from the canal. So that's my hope. And uh let's throw that back to staff. Is there options here? Because this is the code. Um we do have his application for a variance, and that is heard by the appeal authority. Um and that decision whatever decision he makes is separate from the decision that the commission makes. So if that if his variance is approved or denied, it doesn't affect what you guys decide. Okay, thank you. I know personally I agree with you, but there was another two lot subdivision about two years ago that was able in a similar circumstance against the canal. Different canal, but similar sentiment. Yeah, he's the canal. A better canal, yeah. For the record, a much better canal. I did I know I was riding my bicycle along the Jordan River Trail and number of houses that back to there, some that have masonry fences and nice little ways out, and others with uh metal railing that I thought if it kept up looks a lot nicer, but so we don't have a in say on that. Okay, thank you. Thank you. So this being a public meeting, we open it for public comment. Is there any public comment? Seeing none, we will close the public comment section, turn it back to uh staff for discussion or uh uh motion, uh Commissioner Cannon. Yeah, I uh I I was a little amused by the applicants referral to of Harriman and it's a disaster. We have we we can thank Herriman for taking about 90 percent of the town home market into their city and not leaving it in Riverton. So I don't know if the disaster was the right order not, and we get to benefit a lot from the property taxes from the money they spent in Riverton. But variants on a fence. Uh I've got a lot of experience on canals, and um you can create you know who maintains getting kind of loud. Um, who maintains the area from the top of the bank to the to your fence, and the the more limitations you put on that, trust me, it it'll come back to haunt you. Uh if there's ever a fire and it's a vinyl fence, and uh last experience I had with fire and vinyl wasn't a good one. Uh you know, those are those are put in place for a reason. Uh if there's if there's a way to circumvent an ordinance and and you go through the proper processes, obviously that's that's it's up for you to do. I just can tell you that the the best fence is along the 24 miles of canal are the masonry ones, and they're not uh the vinyl, the vinyl gets tagged just as just as much or more. That's it. You're the unique part is they have to cross here on the side of the canal where there isn't a road, so six months of the year you get water, and then people are lazy and they're not gonna swim across there to tag your fence. That's all I have. Okay. Further discussion, we're ready for a motion, Commissioner Park. Um I just have a quick question for Steph. What's the history on the the fence and the canals and the I I know we dealt with canals and the the masonry fence requirement previously. Um and we haven't seen uh a request for variants or or anything like that. So the history behind the requirement for a masonry fence on a canal, and I'm just wondering if we if whoever makes the motion if we decide maybe to encourage the the variance. Um but give me give us the history and why that's there, and um it's been in place for I say almost 15 years, maybe maybe 12 years. Um there's the decided by city council that the residents need to be protected from waterways, and the mace solid masonry fence was the best way to do that. Uh I think they talked at the time about um uh the hollow foam core masonry fence, but decide with the solid masonry fence, and there's there's no room in the ordinance for an exception there. So the variance request is literally asking for an exception to the code because the code in uh strict and first uh application of the code is uh preventing the homeowner from having a property right that other people in the neighborhood are already enjoying. So outside of you all, if in this case, because you it's come up here, we'll make sure you get the the results of that variance request, and you can read through and see how the the Board of Adjustment dude, the dude of adjustment, how he reasons through his decision making process. Was the ordinance change at the behest of the canal companies or um that was just something the city council decided was the appropriate action to take at the time? Yes. Okay, thank you. So this commissioner maths what I gather is that we do not include that in our motion. Commissioner Clough. Uh if there's no more discussion, I'm ready to make a motion.
openpublica.com