2002 Minutes & Agendas: Minutes - August 14, 2002
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Wednesday, August 14, 2002, 7:00
A quorum being present at Centerville City Hall, 250 North Main
Street, Centerville, Utah, the meeting of the Centerville City Planning Commission
was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Bruce Powell.
Bruce Powell, Chairman
Paul Allred, Community Development Director
Kem Weaver, Planning Intern
Kathleen Streadbeck, Recording Secretary
Renee Turner (Clipper) , Janalee Hansen, John Hansen,
Arleta Nielsen, Robert Chamberlain, Ward McDonald, Phillip Hudman, Neola McCall,
Phyllis Morgan, Virginia Hilber, Jeff Argyle, Karen Argyle, Sean Larsen, Claudia
Larsen, Scott Grieve, Joyce Curley-Grieve, Boe Lay, Becky Clay, Thomas Chapman,
Bob Eaton, Patylee Bodi, William L. Smith, Martin Steed, James Paul Damron,
Reed Merkley, Trent Knight, Katherine Andrian, Dane Turner, Marge Turner, Mark
Woods, Sherry Woods, Jim Harr, Kent Vallace, Drew Johnston, Randy Thane, William
Abbott, Richard Nielsen, Derek Trump, Paul Cutler, Sean Larsen, Ray Smith, Patrick
INVOCATION Diana Moesinger
Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting held July 10, 2002
were reviewed and amended. Paula Tew made a motion to approve the minutes
as amended. The motion was seconded by Scott Vaterlaus and passed by unanimous
vote (4-0). Bruce Powell abstained from voting as he was not present at the
PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONE) - Proposed
rezoning of 5.16 acres of land from HHSF (Health & Human Services Facilities)
to R-3 (heavy multi-family) located at the corner of Chase Lane and Frontage
Road - Johnson Land Enterprises LLC, property owner and Garrison Construction
Paul Allred, Community Development Director, stated that staff
recommends tabling this issue for the following reasons:
1. General Plan currently prohibits multiple-family homes
in this quadrant.
2. Gather more statistical data about raw land use in Northwest
Centerville, especially as it relates to overall housing densities in the
quadrant and in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location.
3. Evaluate how this housing proposal relates to the Affordable
Housing Plan recently adopted by the City.
4. Consider the City Council’s comments from 6/01 on a housing
study, the reduction of units allowed in the R-3 Zone, and the idea of prohibiting
large complexes and put together a sketch/summary.
5. Discuss equity in the community and put together a definitive
study of just how many units are in each area of the city.
6. Determine whether the rezone petition or the General Plan
should be considered first.
Bob Eaton, agent for the applicant, presented a site plan and
building elevations. He explained that the proposal is to build three 3-story
buildings near the center of the property with parking on the perimeter. He
stated that each building will contain a total of 30 units (10 units per level)
for a total of 90 units in the project. Each unit will be approximately 600
square feet, with one bedroom, kitchen, bath, and living room. Architecture
will include brick, stucco, asphalt shingle, and balconies. He explained that
these are senior apartments, which will be rented and a deed restriction will
be set at 55 years and older for residents of the project.
Chairman Powell opened the public hearing.
Drew Johnston, 468 West 950 North, stated that he would
like to see a more equitable community, with multiple-family zones in all quadrants
of the city. He stated that he is concerned with the amount of traffic this
type of project may generate. He is also concerned that if the project is not
filled to capacity with persons 55 and older that it will be opened to the public
and considering the small size of the units, he is afraid they will become low-income
Scott Grieve, 983 North 500 West, stated that most retirement
centers run at 60% occupancy. He too, is afraid the units will be opened to
the public if they are not filled with persons 55 and older. He also stated
that this proposed project will be back to back with another multiple-family
project within a block. Mr. Grieve said the multiple-family units in this area
are concentrated along Chase Lane. He said he was in favor of condos, but not
William Abbott, 480 West 950 North, stated he is concerned
with services (water, fire, power, gas) and traffic. He feels Centerville does
not need anymore people and does not want a metropolitan. He also feels that
a 3-story building is a poor design for the elderly. He said he would prefer
more single-family homes.
Randy Thane, 425 West Chase Lane, asked if it was legal
to rent an apartment to persons 55 and older, if it was discriminatory. He also
stated that he felt a 3-story building was not feasible for the elderly. The
Planning Commission stated that it is legal to place age restrictions on apartments
when certain requirements are met.
Richard Nielsen, Chase Lane, asked if the floodplain
would be taken into consideration with this project. He also stated that in
1973 he was told all development east of I-15 would be single-family only. Mr.
Allred stated that the floodplain would be taken into consideration and any
development to reduce this risk would be required as part of the project.
Becky Clay, 962 North 500 West, stated that she feels
a 3-story building would be too high for this area, considering that all surrounding
homes are only 2-story. She asked if studies have been done to determine how
many persons 55 and older still rent. She also asked what type of effect this
project would have on surrounding properties property value. She, too, would
like to see more equality, in terms of multiple-family housing, within the city.
John Paul Damron, 594 west 925 North, stated that he
is concerned with the project meeting its capacity. He feels in such a case
the units will be allowed to be rented to the public. Considering the size of
the units, he stated he is not too concerned, since they will only sustain one
or two people at most. He is concerned with traffic, fire, police, and ambulance
Derek Trump, 630 West Chase Lane, stated he is concerned
with the concentration of people and the impact on traffic. He stated that there
is already a speed problem on Chase Lane and feels this project will only compound
the problem. He stated he hopes the Planning Commission will consider the Master
Plan and not deviate from it.
Phyllis Morgan, 1188 North 575 West, stated that a 3-story
building would be a monstrosity and 90 units is too many for the proposed site.
Margo Turner, 75 West Chase Lane, stated that a PUD has
recently been approved just east of Pheasantbrook for persons 55 and older and
she doesn’t feel a second project is necessary.
Paul Cutler, 812 North Mountain View, stated he is not
opposed to well planned development, but is opposed to a 3-story apartment building.
Sean Larsen, 1049 North 500 West, stated that between
the developments on both the north and south sides of Chase Lane there is probably
about 90 single-family homes in all and that this proposal is for an additional
90 units in only five acres. He doesn’t feel this is economical. He also stated
that he has not heard one positive comment and would hope that the Planning
Commission would take this into consideration.
Ray Smith, 464 East Island View, stated that the Affordable
Housing Plan should be considered before development. He feels development is
inevitable and would help to improve this property; he just hopes it is responsible
Chairman Powell closed the public hearing.
Chairman Powell asked Mr. Eaton the height of the proposed buildings.
Mr. Eaton stated that the proposed building does meet the height restriction
of 35 feet.
Ken Averett mentioned the public concerns relative to occupancy.
He asked the applicant’s experience with these types of facilities. Mr. Eaton
stated that he could not speak for the developer in this regard, but stated
that the developer does have similar projects all over the country. Paula Tew
asked if the developer maintains ownership of these facilities. Mr. Eaton stated
he believes so.
Diana Moesinger asked if the 55 and older deed restriction would
remain in place if the project was sold. Mr. Eaton stated that he assumed so.
Planning Commission members stated that this could be set as a condition of
approval. Ms. Moesinger also asked if there have been any studies done to see
if there is enough need to support a facility this big. Mr. Eaton stated that
he knows the developer has done some market studies, but is not able to answer
Patrick Bodnar, Prime Commercial Real Estate, stated he has
worked with Gary Hasenflu on the acquisition of this ground. He explained that
this type of project allows for federal tax credits, which the Federal Government
mandates. He explained that if any part of those federal guidelines are violated
(i.e., age restrictions) the project will lose its tax credits. He stated that
Mr. Hasenflu holds these types of projects for the long term (30 to 40 years)
and, therefore, requires a quality project. He stated that Mr. Hasenflu feels
this would be a viable project, given the location, population base and demographics
of the area.
Paula Tew asked if any portion of this proposed project would
be considered affordable housing. Mr. Bodnar stated that, generally, the focus
for these tax credit housing projects is to meet the requirements of the particular
age group’s income bracket.
Chairman Powell made a motion to table this rezone petition
based on the following:
1. The rezone petition contradicts the General Plan, which
calls for low-density single-family homes.
2. Allow time to gather more statistical data about raw land
use in northwest Centerville.
3. Allow time to evaluate how this housing proposal relates
to the Affordable Housing Plan recently adopted by the City.
4. Allow time to consider the City Council’s comments from
6/01 on a housing study, the reduction of units allowed in the R-3 Zone and
the idea of prohibiting large complexes and put together a sketch/summary.
Paula Tew seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - TEMPORARY - Proposed Gear
4 Life, Inc. to sell outdoor camping equipment and sports gear on a temporary
basis located at Ray’s Muffler - 258 West Parrish Lane - C-2 Zone - Darin Newell,
Kem Weaver, Intern, reported that the applicant is requesting
to sell camping and sports gear from the Ray’s Muffler site, on a monthly basis.
The duration of time the site will be used each month is an average of four
days, most likely the days leading up to the weekend and including the weekend.
The applicant would like to park a 10 x 30 foot truck at the front of the site,
near Parrish Lane. The truck will be surrounded by merchandise that will be
set up on tables and hanging from display racks. A portable 10 x 10 foot canopy
tent may be set up next to the truck. The applicant would like to display a
hanging sign on the canopy tent. The size of the sign has not been determined,
but staff feels that it should not exceed 4 x 8 feet. The hours of operation
will be from 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., nothing will be left overnight.
The applicant has received permission from the manager of Ray’s
Muffler to sell merchandise from this location. The applicant has already conducted
one sale that took place in June 2002. The City made the applicant aware that
he needs to come before the Planning Commission for a temporary conditional
use permit before he can conduct another sale. The applicant has been very willing
to work with the City in following the process of possible approval.
Staff is concerned with the parking. Not knowing the amount
of business that Gear 4 Life receives and the fact that their set up takes away
parking stalls, will there be enough parking for customers of both Ray’s Muffler
and Gear 4 Life? The applicant stated that they can be flexible with their set
up in regard to using parking space.
Staff recommends approval of the temporary conditional use permit
based on the following conditions:
1. The Planning Commission may determine the months of operation
in relation to the applicant’s request.
2. The selling period not to exceed five days at a time and
only once a month.
3. The applicant must maintain and leave the site the way
they found it in terms of clean up.
4. Must provide efficient circulation and parking for all
5. Business hours will be between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
Thomas Chapman, representative for applicant, stated that Ray’s
Muffler’s manager stated that Gear 4 Life could use the whole parking lot, if
necessary. Mr. Chapman stated that they would only need four to eight parking
stalls to conduct business. He explained that there is plenty of parking in
both the front and the rear of the site.
Paula Tew asked the applicant their proposal for working the
rest of this year and, specifically, which days the selling period would include.
Mr. Chapman stated that they would like to conduct sales on Thursday, Friday
and Saturday and that they would like to hold a sale in August, September and
Scott Vaterlaus asked what type of sign is being proposed for
the canopy tent. Mr. Chapman stated that they would like to use small 4 x 3
foot fabric signs stating current discounts, i.e, 30% off backpacks, etc.
Planning Commission members asked staff and the applicant if
they encountered or foresaw any problems the last time a sale was held. Mr.
Chapman stated that they had no problems and that the owners of the site had
no complaints. Mr. Allred stated that he didn’t see any problems and that there
appeared to be ample parking during the last sale.
Paula Tew made a motion to approve the temporary conditional
use permit with the following conditions:
1. The months of operation are limited to once a month in
August, September and October.
2. The selling period shall not exceed three days at a time,
which are Thursday, Friday and Saturday.
3. The number of parking stalls use must be six or less.
4. The applicant must maintain and leave the site the way
they found it in terms of clean up.
5. Must provide efficient circulation and parking for all
6. Business hours will be between 10:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
7. No signs may be placed inside the park strip area.
Chairman Powell seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous
DISCUSSION - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE PLAN
- Review of compliance with the conditional use permit and site plan approvals
for Best Buy Auto, Inc. - 82 North Main Street - C-1 Zone - Kent Vallace, business
Diana Moesinger stated that she was contacted by Councilwoman
Smith to discuss this matter privately, and explained that she does not feel
that this conversation will affect her opinion or ability to be impartial. Paula
Tew explained that she had also been contacted prior to the meeting by Councilwoman
Paul Allred, Community Development Director, stated that a letter
was sent to Mr. Kent Vallace, property owner, regarding the overall operation
of his business following a complaint in July 2002. Staff requested that Mr.
Vallace appear before the Planning Commission to review the letter and other
matters with him. Mr. Vallace has written a response to staff’s letter. The
Planning Commission should conduct a general discussion with Mr. Vallace about
the current and future operation of this business as it relates to the issues
in the letters. Mr. Allred stated that, in his opinion, this site has been operated
in a better fashion than the previous owner. He stated that the site is, generally,
in compliance with the conditional use permit and the site plan. Mr. Allred
explained that if there is anything that Mr. Vallace would like to change about
the conditional use permit, he will need to formally apply and return to the
Planning Commission for proper approval.
Paula Tew voiced some concerns. She stated that she would like
to see the landscaping improved, i.e., weed control, watering, etc. She also
stated that she does not want any cars in the entrances, especially the Main
Street entrance. Mr. Vallace stated that he has no problem leaving the entrance
clear on 100 North, but that he would like to be able to display one car on
the north side of the Main Street entrance. Ms. Tew stated that she feels this
discourages Main Street access, which is what she would like to see encouraged.
The Planning Commission would like to keep as much business traffic as possible
off of 100 North, as it is a neighborhood street. Mr. Vallace stated that he
Paula Tew also stated that the sale and/or storing of boats
and/or R.V.’s is not allowed on Main Street and if Mr. Vallace would like to
sell these items he would need to get formal approval from the Planning Commission.
If this were to be approved in the future Ms. Tew would like to see those items
stored toward the rear of the site.
Ms. Tew was excused at 8:45 p.m.
Diana Moesinger stated that she called the State to ask the
legal definition of a motor vehicle, which is anything self propelled, made
for the highway. She explained that under this definition R.V.’s are within
the legal right to be sold on this site; however, boats are up for interpretation.
Ms. Moesinger asked Mr. Allred if the original conditional use permit approval
included R.V.’s. Mr. Allred stated that, to his knowledge, there was never any
discussion regarding R.V.’s with the original conditional use permit approval.
Chairman Powell stated that he is comfortable with the items
discussed in the response letter sent by Mr. Vallace. He explained that if Mr.
Vallace complies with those items, he cannot foresee any problems regarding
the general operation of the site. Chairman Powell also stated that he would
be willing to entertain those items needing additional, formal approval by the
Planning Commission at a later date.
Diana Moesinger explained that she observed some painting on
the site earlier in the week and asked if this was allowed. Mr. Allred stated
that painting is flammable and is not allowed. He explained that the Fire District
would need to be contacted and additional approval will need to be given for
this type of service. Mr. Vallace explained that this is a mobile service performing
light touch up on the vehicles he is selling.
Ken Averett stated that he, personally, does not have a problem
with the boats, but would like them to be stored toward the rear of the site
and until formal approval is granted they should be removed. He stated he understands
the need for rock chip repair and touch up painting, but feels these items need
to be formally addressed, as well.
The Planning Commission directed Mr. Vallace to work with staff
on securing formal approval for those items he may wish to move forward on.
They also informed Mr. Vallace that any change to the conditional use permit
could result in the loss of some privileges as part of the process. They encouraged
Mr. Vallace to consult with a real estate attorney to better understand this
process and its risks. Mr. Allred stated that he would speak with the City Attorney
regarding the risks, as well, and would report back to them and to Mr. Vallace.
Mr. Allred explained that Mr. Vallace could also come before the Planning Commission
and ask for their interpretation of the conditional use permit without formally
1. Next Planning Commission meeting will be held on Wednesday,
August 28, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
2. Potential Upcoming Agenda Items
- Balling Engineering Condominium Project - Rezone
- Questar - Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan
- Zions Bank - Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan
- Bamberger Station - Conditional Use Permit and Preliminary
- Duncan Hills Subdivision - Final Plat
3. Upcoming Training
- Utah League of Cities and Towns- September 11, 12, &
- URRMA Training - Thursday, August 22, 2002.
- Utah Planners Association - October 2002
- Mr. Allred informed the Planning Commission that Mr. Kem
Weaver has secured a full-time position with Layton City. Mr. Allred thanked
Mr. Weaver for his outstanding service over the past two years.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
Bruce Powell, Chairman
Kathleen Streadbeck, Recording Secretary