|
|
|
 |
 |
Printer friendly page 
|
November 16, 2010Minutes of the Centerville City Council meeting held Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. in the Centerville City Council Chambers, 250 North Main, Centerville, Utah.
MEMBERS PRESENT Members Absent: Sherri Lyn Lindstrom
STAFF OR OTHER CITY VISITORS Interested citizens (see attached sign-in sheet) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INVOCATION Councilman Justin Y. Allen OPEN SESSION
No one present wished to comment. The minutes of the City Council meeting held November 3, 2010 were reviewed. Councilman Wright made a motion to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by Councilman Averett and passed by unanimous vote (4-0). REPORT ON SUMMERFEST BY EMMA DUGAL AND PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION Ms. Dugal expressed appreciation to Centerville and the City Council for their support of Summerfest. She presented the Mayor with a plaque and letter of appreciation. CUTLER SUBDIVISION PHASE 5 Councilman Cutler explained the applicant on this agenda item is his brother and he, therefore, will not participate in discussion or voting on this matter. Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, explained the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the final plat for the Cutler Subdivision Phase 5, subject to certain conditions. The Council was provided with the findings and conditions from the Planning Commission. The Council viewed a drawing of the final plat. Mr. Snyder responded to questions from the Council. a. Public Hearing At 7:15 p.m. Mayor Russell opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to comment, he closed the public hearing. b. Final Plat Councilman Allen made a motion to approve the final plat for the Cutler Subdivision Phase 5, located at 235 West 2150 North. The motion was seconded by Councilman Wright and passed by unanimous roll-call vote (3-0). This motion was subject to the following conditions:
1. All professional service fees and bonding shall be paid. and based on the following findings:
a. The applicant has submitted a completed application for preliminary and final subdivision review [Chapters 15-3 & 15-4]. SOUTH MAIN STREET CORRIDOR PLAN – AMENDMENTS TO CENTERVILLE GENERAL PLAN, SECTION 12-480-7, SOUTH MAIN STREET CORRIDOR PLAN AND ZONING CODE TEXT – CHAPTER 12-48, SOUTH MAIN STREET CORRIDOR ZONE BETWEEN PARRISH LANE AND PAGES LANE a. Continue Public Hearing At 7:20 p.m. Mayor Russell re-opened the public hearing. Rebecca Suzuki – Expressed concern for public schools and overcrowding with added density along Main Street. She would like to see a plan for helping the school children cross Main Street. It is already very busy now and added density will only make it worse. Tamilyn Fillmore – Ms. Fillmore asked the Council to keep the basic principles in mind from the original Main Street Plan that was passed in 2008. She feels some of the compromises suggested previously are good and will address citizen concerns. She asked the Council to consider stating 35 feet be set as the maximum height (measured from street level) for any building on Main Street. Ms. Fillmore showed examples of existing buildings along Main Street and how they compare to other buildings along Main Street as well as private homes and typical allowed building heights. She believes it is important to support this plan and help develop and improve the Main Street area. She also explained that while the Main Street Plan was being discussed, the overall feeling was to preserve the integrity of the businesses that exist along Main Street and create new development to complement the area. Jim Dean - Mr. Dean asked the Council to consider including owner occupation in the Main Street Plan. Brian Espensheid – Mr. Espensheid does not like all the vacant buildings that exist on Main Street. He does not think the 15-foot set-back is appropriate and would like the Council to reconsider this. Robyn Mecham - Expressed concern about a three-story height building being allowed along Main Street. She recently attended a transportation summit in Salt Lake City where UTA was discussing regional transportation issues. She shared an article out of a newspaper from Texas that expressed problems with filling business space in a mixed use development that was designed for businesses and residential living. She thinks this could be a problem if a mixed-use development is planned for Main Street. Nancy Smith – Shared an article written in July of 2010 from a former Salt Lake City Planner. She shared some question and answer sections from the article. Some points the articles discussed were mass transit going in before or with new development, allowing for public areas within the development and using and preserving natural resources. Ms. Smith would like to hear from the Council about their thoughts on what will give Centerville an identity and preserve and protect our community. She feels the identity and vibrancy of Centerville is locally-owned businesses operated by local residents who are our friends and neighbors. She is concerned that if a lot of new businesses locate on Main Street, it will drive out small business owners. She does not want to see this happen. At 8:00 p.m. with no others wishing to comment, Mayor Russell closed the public hearing. Mayor Russell reviewed some of the main points favoring the Main Street Plan in detail and provided the Council with a copy of the items he discussed. He supports some of the previously suggested revisions such as limiting building heights and lower density allowances, etc. He feels this would help protect private residences that would be impacted by new development but it would be a mistake to throw out what has been done and start from scratch. He stated that the current plan Is far superior to the lack of the plan that existed before they got to where they are now. Councilman Allen said there is a lot of good in this plan. He felt that those on both sides of the Main Street discussion were trying to determine how to make Main Street better. Some of the things that may seem threatening are the kind of things that the City hope would make people want to go on Main Street and patronize local businesses and feel more comfortable walking around Main Street. Supporters of the plan were trying to enhance that Main Street corridor and make it a more inviting place. He said he also supports some of the suggested revisions to limit building height and density but didn’t consider anything being proposed to be high density. He doesn’t believe there will be significant impact to traffic from residential units that may be built as part of mixed-use buildings in that corridor. Councilman Allen stated that he sits on the UTA Board of Trustees and he does not believe UTA has any intention of purchasing land along Main Street for the purpose of TOD. Also, based on the study that came out this year, he said he felt it was hard to see any set of circumstances where there’s going to be $400 million to build a transit line anytime in the near future. He said he had some concern on the negative comments regarding people who rent apartments. He didn’t feel it was a fair assessment of the majority of people who do rent. Councilman Cutler asked Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, whether the plan addressed landscape issues between the street and a building for a setback of 15 feet or in other areas to the other setbacks. Cory responded that it does require the landscaping in the table in the Zoning Ordinance, there’s a landscape type and it reduces the overall requirement. In the corridor prior to this plan they had to have 10% landscaping and depending on whether it was residential use, a public civic use or commercial use, it defines the requirement of that landscaping, which is a percentage proportion of that original 10%, so landscaping is still required. It is also still required as a buffer adjacent to residential. Hard surface can, however, also be used. They could actually set the building back further if they provide public space that is useable to the entrance or a corner of a building as a plaza area, so there are some allowances for some hard surface as part of that landscaping. A certain percentage still has to be landscaped but not as much as prior to 2008. It doesn’t eliminate the landscaping but does provide some incentives for some design. Mayor Russell suggested that a next step in the process might be to discuss the public space plan and what kind of amenities the City wants--i.e., bus shelters or bus stops, add planters—things that the public would pay for. Councilman Cutler stated from the last meeting the concerns and comments from the public were to allow single-family residences in some of these areas, which are currently strictly commercial, referring to the Traditional Main Street Zone and City Center Zone. He said he would be in favor of that but he didn’t see a significant demand for that but it would be a good permitted use to allow which could be positive change. He said the purpose of the plan is to increase the viability of the Main Street area. If there is not a lot of demand for retail, how else can the property be used? Councilman Cutler thinks the proposed Main Street Plan increases the viability of the properties on Main Street. However, there has been a shift in the city where the demand for retail has shifted from Main Street and Pages Lane area over to the Parrish Lane area where retail tends to go together and part of the challenge of that is how do property owners have options to make their properties viable. If there is not a huge demand for retail on Main Street, how do we still make their properties viable? Residents have indicated that they don’t want apartment-only complexes on Main Street, yet there’s not a demand for retail. There is currently a good mix of medical/office buildings. He said he wasn’t sure how much more of a demand there would be for these types of offices, but he felt the plan and the amendments being discussed give more options to make properties viable for commercial property owners instead of having them sit vacant. Councilman Cutler said he shared the concern that was brought up before that because the plan allows for residential apartment units on top of a business, or as part of a mixed-use or by conditional use permit, is that enabling the residential portion to stand on its own economically and therefore, commercial space is simply here because it is required to in order to get a building permit. Overall, Councilman Cutler said he is in favor of doing something. His recommendation would be to approve the suggested amendments and then continue to study it and continue to try and make improvements. Councilman Averett asked Cory Snyder to comment on owner-occupied units versus apartments and adding it in the ordinance. Mr. Snyder responded that would be a difficult process, they are usually associated with accessory apartments. He said he felt it would be difficult to enter into an owner-occupancy situation. There might be legal risk to it. City Attorney Lisa Romney responded that there are some communities that have drafted owner-occupancy requirements. They are certainly subject to potential legal challenge. It is a marketplace issue, involves policy issues, constitutional and private ownership issues. Provo and Orem have drafted these types of ordinances. If that is the direction the City wants to go, she said she would like to look at it in more detail. Councilman Averett stated as he is in the real estate business, he sees a trend where HOAs and PUDs are enacting limitations on rental units. He said because of the economy people are not able to sell their units so they rent them out, so now apartment complexes or subdivisions are having a high percentage of rental versus owner-occupied properties, and that is creating some issues with trends in seeing crime and such. There is a trend to go that direction. He stated that back in 2008, when he was voted to the City Council, he voted in favor of the plan, which he thought was very forward thinking and progressive. He still likes certain portions of the plan because it does eliminate some conflict. It makes our Main Street more aesthetically pleasing because it puts parking behind the buildings instead of out on Main Street. He said there are parts of the plan that he doesn’t like. He would like to see the City impose some changes to the ordinance that would limit height—35 feet from street level. He doesn’t want to see any building higher than the Jones building—actually shorter would be preferable. He felt the density should not be more than 4 units per project. That would give us a project that would be more in line with the charm and feel of a suburban, small town. He would like to see stories limited to 2 rather than 3. He felt it was too overbearing to have a building taller than 2 stories. He said the City needs to be careful to not create a situation or economic opportunity for a developer to utilize residential to make his project more viable and not have to have the commercial component of the project be viable in order to build the project. Councilman Wright expressed his concerns about the identity and clarification of what Centerville is. He said one of the reasons they entered into the Main Street corridor planning process was to look 20 years down the road and really have a nice Main Street area that reflected who Centerville was. The intent of this plan was to guide future development, but he felt they had gotten off that track. He presented an ordinance that he had written with the intent to not stop the process but to put it on hold for a while to let everyone figure out how who we are is going to imprint on the good work that Cory and staff and everyone involved in this process has done over the last few years. He suggested maybe they needed to implement a temporary zoning regulation and suspend everything for 6 months and look at this or do we move forward with changes that Ken and others have suggested on reducing the height and density and then move forward with the intent as a people to imprint who we are on this Main Street plan. This is basically a framework that provides an outline and it can be changed. He said in the past two years citizens want to be more involved in the government process, which he feels is a positive. That is one reason why he recommends a temporary zoning regulation to give citizens the opportunity to be more involved and imprint our identity on what has been done. He said he also supports the height—35 feet from street base. He doesn’t want to see 5-8 units but would rather have 1-4 units. He said obviously the mixed use does lend itself to positive economic development but does want to encourage City staff and City Council to pause and give the public an opportunity to imprint their identity of who Centerville is—if it means including space between buildings, making it look the way we envision it and make it the Centerville we want it to be. Cory Snyder explained to the Council that the height measurement is already from grade in this plan as shown on page 5, 2nd column. In the current plan it measures to the mid-point of the roof. If the Council wants to cap it at 35 feet at the tallest point, that is what would need to be changed. Mayor Russell asked if they chose 35 feet top of building from grade, how that would translate into the number of floors that you could have in a building. Cory explained a 3-story building would most likely have flat roof, there would be a decorative feature and a parapet wall that would probably approach 32 feet on an average design. The 35 feet gives that cushion to make sure the decorative features can be managed and that’s why the mid-point of the roof is identified in the plan. By decreasing the height i.e., from 35 – 30, the design features of the roof is impacted—that 1 or 2 feet is important in that design. The minimum for a 3-story building would be 32 feet, 25-28 feet for a 2-story building.
Mayor Russell reviewed a list of “Possible Amendments to the Main Street Ordinance (submitted at the meeting and attached to these minutes) that he and Cory had discussed to include in the final document that address some of the height concerns, permitted uses, density and setback issues that relate to the proposed Ordinance. Councilman Cuter said he felt there was some value in having a conditional use that is more than the permitted use that allows the city to have more control over that type of development. He said he was in favor of the two-tier permitted use and then have a more intense use if they met certain conditions, as he has seen this to be successful in other areas of the city. Councilman Wright shared his concern of having a developer come in and not using a mixed use but just wanting to put in apartments. Councilman Cutler responded that would not be allowed. Cory Snyder explained that under the current parameters the first floor would be required to be commercial, but there is an option to use the backside of a building—50% of the depth to drop the residential behind it in the back for an entrance, but the front floor (50%) on the first floor has to be commercial. Councilman Wright said if the Council decides to keep the conditional use component then he would like to see the density lowered to 4-6 on the west side rather than 5-8. Councilman Averett agreed. There was further discussion of not wanting a “nightmare” on Main Street such as on the JC Penny property. Councilman Allen commented that no one wanted to have a “nightmare” on Main Street, but by limiting the height would help to eliminate that scenario. He said he did have some concern about changing the rules after a property owner has spent time and resources to have the rules changed right at the end. He said he would feel better about having a motion to allow 6 months for an application to be submitted under the current requirements. There was further discussion on what the effective date would be for the recommended changes. Lisa Romney said that typically it is either upon posting of the ordinance or within 30 days, whichever comes first. However, she said you can always set an effective date. Councilman Wright was not in favor of delaying the effective date. He would like it effective as soon as possible. b. Ordinance No. 2010-16 amending Centerville General Plan Councilman Cutler made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2010-16 amending Section 12-480-7 of the Centerville City General Plan regarding the South Main Street Corridor Plan with the recommended revisions and edits discussed by the City Council and recommended by the Main Street Oversight Committee as attached in the October 13 staff report. The motion was seconded by Councilman Allen and passed by unanimous roll-call vote (4-0). This motion was based on the following findings:
a. The Council finds that Section 12-21-080(c) authorizes the "legislative" body to initiate a zone text amendment. c. Ordinance No. 2010-17 amending Zoning Ordinance Mayor Russell explained the proposed Ordinance No. 2010-17 contains the changes that were recommended by the Main Street Oversight Committee and then passed by the Planning Commission. Mayor Russell suggested that Lisa Romney explain how the motion should read to make clear the changes that are being recommended for whoever makes the motion. Ms. Romney explained each suggested amendment ( “Possible Amendments to the Main Street Zoning Ordinance”) as presented by the Mayor and attached to the minutes. She explained the changes to consider from the handout. The Council discussed in detail the proposed revisions to the ordinance. They considered limiting density on the east side of Main Street and allowing a slightly higher density on the west side of Main Street. The Mayor allowed Nancy Smith to make a comment – Ms. Smith believes the east side of Main Street is inherently different from the west side of Main Street in terms of density and multiple vs. single-family homes. She expressed concern that a potential developer may not be able to move forward with a project if density is lowered on the west side of Main Street.
The property owner in question was present at the meeting and stated the recommended height and density limits are not a concern for him. Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, explained the density allowance should not affect any current development application.
Councilman Cutler made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2010-17 amending Title 12, Chapter 48, of the Centerville City Planning and Zoning Ordinance regarding the South Main Street Corridor Overlay District Zone with the following edits: Conditional Uses:
• East Side of Street – Dwelling, Town House, Two-Family, or Multiple (Density 4-6 units per building), as part of a mixed-use development 3. Additional Edits to Section 12-48-1 – Traditional Main Street and City Center Main Street
Edit to Building Envelope Specifications as follows:
Edit to Building Height Diagrams as follows: The motion was seconded by Councilman Allen Councilman Wright made a motion to amend the conditional use on the West side on the density from 4-6 instead of 5-8. There was no second on the motion. After further discussion on whether the height should be 25 feet or 30 feet in Councilman Cutler’s original motion (see above), Councilman Cutler amended his motion to change the height from 30 feet to 25 feet in both the Building Envelope Specifications and Building Height Diagrams. Councilman Allen seconded the amendment to the motion and the motion passed by a (3-2) roll-call vote with Councilmen Averett and Wright voting in opposition to the motion and Councilmen Cutler, Allen and Mayor Russell voting in favor of the motion. The motion was based on the following findings:
a. The Council finds that Section 12-21-080(c) authorizes the "legislative" body to initiate a zone text amendment. Councilman Cutler said this will be an ongoing process and supports the Planning Commission to look at refinements of the Zoning Code and if they can come to a consensus on improvements they believe are positive that would be a good thing. Mayor Russell thanked the members of the public who had labored through this process with City Council, staff and others this past year. It has resulted in significant changes that have improved what we had. The Mayor also expressed appreciation to Cory Snyder, Lisa Romney and others involved who put in much time and effort. Councilman Wright encouraged citizens to stay involved in the City government process. At 9:45 p.m. the Council took a fifteen-minute break MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Russell reported on recent Fire District and Recreation District meetings he attended. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT The City Manager used this item on the agenda to report on various matters, some of which included an upcoming code enforcement report, update on the Whitaker Home restoration project and related budget and fund raising efforts and project timeline. He also discussed dates for future work sessions. Blaine Lutz, Finance Director, and Councilman Cutler updated the Council on the latest UTOPIA financing issues. MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS a. Commence Warranty Period for In-N-Out Burger site plan
Councilman Wright made a motion to commence the warranty period for In-N-Out Burger. The motion was seconded by Councilman Allen and passed by unanimous vote (4-0). Blaine Lutz, Finance Director, reviewed some of the sales tax revenue figures and expenditures and responded to questions from the Council. Councilman Wright made a motion to re-appoint Steve Markham to a three-year term on the Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Councilman Averett and passed by unanimous vote (4-0). At 10:30 p.m. the meeting was adjourned.
01-04-2011
|
|
| [ HOME | GOVERNMENT | DEPARTMENTS | ONLINE SERVICES | CALENDAR
] Powered by StarGov, an Infobytes Technology |