Cottonwood Heights planners hear Old Mill study with no vote and approve two home-occupation permits

Decisions at a glance

Agenda, item by item

1. Item 3.2 · Other

   Conditional use permit CUP-26-016: home child care for up to 12 children

   Approved with conditions · 7-0

   The commission unanimously approved a conditional use permit for a home child care in an R-1-8 neighborhood, serving up to 12 children under age five, Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., with outdoor play only after 8 a.m. The motion changed the parking condition to allow no more than two client vehicles on the property at once unless the curb cut is extended to fit a third. Commissioners said traffic at drop-off and pick-up was the main concern.

   • Staff: up to 12 children allowed under city code; one nonresident employee at a time; fenced backyard play area; no street parking; no signs except a nameplate
   • The parking plan, approved by the community development director after three revisions, had three short-term driveway spaces; the applicant first asked for six simultaneous drop-offs and was limited to three
   • Conditions: substantial compliance with the application and parking plan; maximum 12 children and one nonresident employee; stated hours; no parking or waiting on the street; compliant fence and gate before outdoor use; licensing and noise compliance
   • The permit can be modified or revoked by the commission if violations are substantiated

   Commissioner Smith moved; Commissioner Shelton seconded.. Vote: Unanimous; seven commissioners present

2. Item 3.3 · Other

   Conditional use permit CUP-26-015: home massage practice

   Approved with conditions · 7-0

   The commission unanimously approved a conditional use permit for a home massage practice in an R-1-8 neighborhood. The business is owner-operated, by appointment, with two to three clients a day and one client at a time. The commission extended the hours staff proposed (Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.) to 7:30 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Saturday.

   • Staff conditions: valid business license; operate only inside the existing residence; no employees; no signs, outdoor activity or exterior changes; any addition needs separate city review
   • One public comment asked that all client parking stay on the property; no one spoke at the hearing

   Commissioner Shelton moved; Commissioner Smith seconded.. Vote: Unanimous; seven commissioners present

3. Item 3.4 · Development

   Old Mill demolition request (CUP-25-005): structural analysis

   Discussed · The Old Mill (historic paper mill), Cottonwood Heights

   The commission heard a consultant's structural study of the Old Mill, a designated historic structure whose owner has applied to demolish it. The study estimated $7.5 million to $8.3 million to stabilize the ruin in place, $42.8 million to repair and restore it and $46.3 million to rebuild it in its historic form. The commission took no vote. State law bars a decision until January 2027, and staff said the next public hearing will be in January or February 2027. If the commission acts, the owner would then apply to the City Council for a Certificate of Appropriateness.

   • ContractAmount not given to Dunn Associates, Inc. Structural analysis of the Old Mill and cost estimates, hired by the city in spring 2026
   • Presenters: Tyler Wright of Dunn Associates and Sean Flynn of Aegis Consulting
   • Findings: the roof has largely collapsed; the walls are tall and slender; anchorage and vertical support are inadequate; the foundation type is unverified and is more likely stone than concrete
   • Option 1, stabilize in place with steel bracing: $7.5 million to $8.3 million, no public use or rental income
   • Option 2, repair and restore: $42.8 million
   • Option 3, rebuild in historic form using the granite as veneer: $46.3 million
   • Restoring only the structure as dining or event space would lose about $11 million for the owner; as part of a master development, about $6 million after about $5 million in income; breaking even would need costs near $42 million and lease rates of $38 per square foot
   • Half the structure is in a special study zone for a mapped fault; the site is in the Sensitive Lands Overlay and would need a geotechnical hazards study before development
   • The consultants did not study residential uses. Community and Economic Development Director Jim Spung said no one has offered to fund preservation and that grants may exist
   • The January 21, 2026 public hearing was the first; the commission may not decide until one year after it

   Follow Old Mill demolition request in the development tracker →

4. Item 3.1 · Appointment

   Election of Planning Commission chair and vice-chair

   Approved

   Commissioners voted by written ballot. Sean Steinman was elected chair and Mike Smith vice-chair, each for a one-year term.

What residents said

Preserving the Old MillFuture housing type at the Old Mill siteEmergency accessDrop-off traffic at a home child careClient parking

Seven people spoke about the Old Mill at general comment. Evan Chan, working with a preservation group, urged the state, a religious organization or a foundation to help preserve it and said a petition had about 300 signatures. Kevin Witzenman said the demolition application rests on a claim that the building lacks a foundation, which he said has not been verified by digging or testing, and on a claim that the city condemned it in 2005, which he said was not documented; he offered to pay for an independent engineering assessment. Jesse Allen, an architect, hoped the owners would reconsider demolition and described options from rebuilding to stabilizing the ruin. Several residents said they wanted single-family homes rather than townhomes or condominiums on the property and raised emergency access, with one saying a memorial or partial preservation could be a middle ground. Dan Hammer of Walker Development said the family would like to preserve the Old Mill but cannot afford to, considers it a hazard, offered it to the city, and offered to preserve elements of it in a new city center; he said the application concerns demolition, not future development. At the child care hearing, one resident said drop-off times and driveway use should not be a problem and questioned the employee limit; another raised traffic and safety. No one spoke on the massage practice.