museum emergency recreation construction maps calendar


          City News

Planning
2000 Minutes & Agendas: Minutes - March 1, 2000



CENTERVILLE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING

Wednesday, March 1, 2000 7:00 p.m.

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 7:05 p.m. by Acting Chairman Brian Hulse.

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Steven Bateman
Robert Chamberlain
Brian Hulse
Bruce Powell, Chairman
Grant Talbot
Scott Vaterlaus

MEMBERS ABSENT:

Paula Tew

STAFF PRESENT:

Paul Allred, Community Development Director
Mirinda Gibbons, Intern
Colleen Sessions, Recording Secretary
Marilyn Holje, City Recorder

VISITORS:

Graig A. Smith
Alvin Lundgreen
Brett Zaugg
Hiram Alba
Dale Anderson

INVOCATION: Grant Talbot

COMMISSION BUSINESS:

Since there was not a quorum present to approve the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held January 26, 2000, they were not reviewed. Minutes for the joint meeting with the City Council and Planning Commission on February 23, 2000 were amended and approved. Minutes for the Planning Commission meeting on February 23, 2000 were amended and approved.

Marilyn Holje, City Recorder, swore in Steven Bateman and Scott Vaterlaus as new Planning Commission members.

PUBLIC HEARING -- CONDITIONAL USE -- Motor Vehicle Sale and Service in Commercial C-2 Zone -- Smitty’s RV -- 240 North Frontage Road (formerly Garden Country site) -- 2.4 acres -- Craig Smith, applicant

Paul Allred, Community Development Director, reported the applicant wants to relocate to Centerville. Craig Smith sells travel trailers and fifth wheels and is applying for a conditional use permit to relocate his business from Bountiful to the former site of Garden Country. Mr. Smith was advised that this use is considered to be conditional under the "motor vehicle sales and service" heading in the Commercial C-2 Zone. The use, as proposed, will be somewhat similar to the prior use at the site, Garden Country, which sold various sorts of equipment such as snowmobiles and motorcycles. Parts and service are proposed as well as sales. Staff review of the proposal is that the building and site will easily handle the use and should not pose a problem for abutting properties if the site is well operated and maintained. The site in question has ample space for future expansion, if needed.

ANALYSIS:

1. Is the proposed use of this particular location necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will provide to the general well being of the community or neighborhood?

Staff opinion is the use is well suited for this area of the city in that it replaces a similar use; the property in question is in financial difficulty and Smitty’s occupying the site would decrease the chance of the property being left in a vacant and deteriorating condition for an indeterminate period of time.

2. Will this use, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity?

The use is more or less retail sales and service which is a basic allowed use in the Commercial C-2 Zone. Since there is no heavy repair, painting, etc, associated with this use, staff would opine that the use is more acceptable than other automotive uses found already in the community which do heavier type work such as engine repair and general automotive maintenance. The only concern staff has about this use is the proper storage and display of inventory, the correct and legal use of signs and other aesthetic considerations. This site is surrounded by the Marketplace project and its attractive appearance, or lack thereof, will say much about the community and could hurt or enhance the City’s ability to bring new business to the surrounding area.

3. Will the proposed use comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the ordinance for such use?

Staff review of the Commercial C-2 Zone reveals that the use will comply with the regulations. It is perhaps more important that Smitty’s RV try to improve upon the overall operation of this property over the previous users of the site.

4. Will the use conform to the intent of the Centerville General Plan?

Staff opinion is the use conforms to the objectives of the General Plan for this area of the city.

Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit upon the following conditions:

1. Display of merchandise, such as the trailers, or other motorized equipment be contained within property lines and only in approved display areas.

2. All illegal signs on the property be removed immediately upon occupancy.

3. Temporary signs be allowed only as outlined in the sign portion of the zoning ordinance.

4. Any expansion of the building or overall use be reviewed by the Planning Commission.

5. That the site be kept free of clutter, debris, weeds, and unsightly outside storage.

6. That the landscaping be kept in excellent condition and that any trees that die be replaced immediately with an equivalent sized tree.

7. That the use and operation of the site be reviewed upon legitimate complaint or allegation of noncompliance with the conditional use permit.

8. That, as with Land Rover Centerville, the bulk of sales be in new, not used, inventory.

Chairman Powell opened the public hearing for discussion. Seeing no one wishing to comment on the issue, he closed the public hearing.

Chairman Powell asked the Planning Commission for any concerns they might have with this issue.

Brian Hulse asked if there would be any screening of the back portion of the lot.

Mr. Allred indicated that if the weeds are kept down, the back will look better. The Planning Commission could recommend that Mr. Smith landscape the six feet along the property line or place a screening fence.

Steven Bateman asked the applicant about his financial security and strength. He asked if this would be leased or owned, if he were financing through a governmental agency or bank.

Mr. Smith indicated that he is purchasing the ground. He stated that there are two notes on the property that he would be assuming plus he would be paying cash for the rest of the price. The property will be going into bankruptcy March 20, 2000 unless this sale is consummated and the use approved rather quickly.

Steven Bateman asked the applicant if he had flexibility in regard to any improvements the Planning Commission might impose upon the site in regard to his finances.

Mr. Smith stated that they were prepared to landscape the front part of the site at this time along with additional improvements that needed to be done at this time, such as installation of sidewalk and drainage improvements along the Frontage Road.

Mr. Bateman asked what his sales growth had been in the past few years at his other location.

Mr. Smith reported that his first year of business they did $1.2 million. With the new line of trailers, the Kit line, they expect a $7 million year business in about two years.

Mr. Bateman asked what proportion of his sales are new versus used sales.

Mr. Smith indicated about 80% is new sales.

Mr. Bateman asked if it would be a sole proprietorship.

Mr. Smith stated it would be a corporation with himself and a partner owning the stock.

Mr. Bateman asked if Mr. Smith had any strategic plans that the Planning Commission should be aware of with regard to the growth of the business and what the biggest threat could be to his business.

Mr. Smith indicated that with the new product line he expected his growth to continue. He stated that with the baby boomers his business was up and coming. People who reach 45 to 50 years of age are targeted by a national campaign that will see an additional five-year growth before it tapers off. He also indicated that if a bad economy occurred, it would affect not only him but other businesses as well.

Brian Hulse asked Mr. Smith what the hours of operation would be.

Mr. Smith indicated that he would be open 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturday. Winter hours are normally 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Chairman Powell opened the meeting for public comment. Seeing that there were no public comments on the issue, he closed the public hearing.

Brian Hulse asked Mr. Allred if the conditional use permit would be attached to the site plan so there would be a clear record of what was approved. Mr. Allred responded in the affirmative.

Chairman Powell expressed concern about future expansion and how many trailers may be displayed. He indicated to Mr. Smith that previously, Centerville has not been in favor of large displays of vehicles for sale and he might find opposition in the future for a large scale expansion.

Robert Chamberlain expressed concern with the back lot being unkept and hoped that it would not be unsightly.

Grant Talbot and Scott Vaterlaus were in favor of the conditional use at this particular time.

Brian Hulse restated that he wanted the conditional use to be properly worded and that the concerns expressed will be addressed in the permit.

Steve Bateman made a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use for motor vehicle sale and service located at 240 North Frontage Road to the City Council with the following recommendations:

1. Display of merchandise, such as the trailers, or other motorized equipment be contained within property lines and only in approved display areas as shown on the site plan to be attached to the conditional use permit.

2. All illegal signs on the property be removed immediately upon occupancy.

3. Temporary signs be allowed only as outlined in the sign portion of the zoning ordinance.

4. Any expansion of the building or overall use be reviewed by the Planning Commission, particularly expansion beyond the existing asphalt paved area.

5. That the site be kept free of clutter, debris, weeds, and unsightly outside storage.

6. That the landscaping be kept in excellent condition and that any trees that die be replaced immediately with an equivalent sized tree.

7. That the use and operation of the site be reviewed upon legitimate complaint or allegation of noncompliance with the conditional use permit and that future paved areas be defined by phase.

8. That the bulk of sales be in new, not used, inventory.

9. Hours of operation be within the time frame of 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday only. No Sunday sales allowed.

10. Conditions of permit use are to be attached to the approval site plan.

It should be noted that the Planning Commission agreed with the findings for approval of conditional use that were presented by Mr. Allred.

Grant Talbot seconded the motion.

Voting was unanimous (6-0).

PUBLIC HEARING -- SITE PLAN -- AMENDED --Smitty’s RV -- 240 North Frontage Road (formerly Garden Country site) -- Commercial C-2 Zone -- Craig Smith, applicant.

Paul Allred, Community Development Director, reported Smitty’s RV would like to occupy the Garden Country site. They do not propose any major changes to the site except as follows:

1. They wish to display large trailers, etc, near the Frontage Road on a previously unapproved paved storage area. Within the last 18 months or so, Garden Country illegally paved a large storage area south of the building.

2. They may, in the future, add to the existing building a maintenance and service area of approximately 3,000 square feet.

3. A dumpster is planned to be added to the back (east) side of the building.

4. As per ordinance, the site needs additional landscaping to bring it up to the minimum standard of 10% of the entire site. More landscaping is shown on the site in the front and on the south side of the property.

Parking will remain the same. The site is being planned with a total of three phases, with only phases one and two being occupied at this time. Most utilities are in place and only secondary water needs to be added to the site to replace the use of culinary water, which has been used in the past. The applicant does not desire to hook up to secondary water since he believes this should have been required some time ago when a secondary waterline was extended to the site several years ago. However, City ordinance encourage the use of secondary water in commercial areas for irrigation purposes. While the cost is high to hook up, staff would recommend that the secondary water be required. Staff also recommends the Planning Commission consider the following as conditions of site plan approval:

1. Removal of the cargo storage containers from the rear or east side of the site or rearrange them so they are not so unsightly.

2. Install a piped storm drain system across the front of the site per the City Engineer.

3. Pay proper storm drain fees for the use of phase two paved area which the previous owner did not. Staff is not recommending who should pay these fees, only that they be paid unless otherwise approved or modified by the City Council

4. That sidewalk be installed along the Frontage Road to connect to existing sidewalk on either side of the site.

5. That inventory of vehicles and equipment be contained on paved surfaces and not on the dirt areas. If the inventory or storage grows large enough that the applicant is storing improperly, this will indicate that the third phase needs to be approved.

Chairman Powell opened the public hearing. Seeing no one who wished to comment on the issue, he closed the public hearing.

Brian Hulse agreed that the additional fees needed to be collected but felt that the Planning Commission should assist the new owner in obtaining the fees from the previous owner and reflect that in any motion that is made.

Steve Bateman asked if the property was encumbered by the lack of payment of the fees?

The question was raised if the City could put a lien on the property legally. Mr. Allred indicated that he has not been involved in that type of action before. He was not sure if there was a mechanism in place to place a lien on the site. The only leverage he sees is to tell the new owner the site is encumbered and that the deficiencies must be corrected.

Steve Bateman stated that he would like to know if the City could place a lien on the property for future issues.

Mr. Allred indicated to the Planning Commission that he has drafted a letter per the request of Mr. Smith to the previous owners concerning these issues: secondary water, drainage, etc. They will be taking this letter from the City outlining what needs to be done in regard to the fees etc., and present it prior to the closing of the sale to previous owners to try to work out and remaining issues.

Chairman Powell asked how the one-time fee for the asphalt relate to the drainage impact fee.

Mr. Allred indicated that it was a one-time fee that is to be used for future storm drain facilities. There is also a monthly storm drain utility fee calculated by how much impervious surface that is located on the property.

Mr. Smith indicated that the previous owners have been paying that monthly fee. They just haven’t paid the one-time impact fee.

Grant Talbot asked about a storm drain line that is shown on the site plan.

Mr. Smith indicated that there is a box or dry well on site. The City Engineer along with Balling Engineering, indicated that the asphalt will need to be cut and a 12 inch pipe placed from the dry well to pipe that will be installed in the front. The asphalt is graded so that it drains into the box.

Brian Hulse made a motion to recommend approval to the City Council the amended site plan as attached for Smitty’s RV to be located at 240 North Frontage Road with the following conditions:

1. Removal of the cargo storage containers from the rear or east side of the site or rearrange them so they are not so unsightly.

2. Install a piped storm drain system across the front of the site per the City Engineer.

3. Pay proper storm drain fees for the use of phase two paved area.

4. The sidewalk be installed along the Frontage Road to connect to existing sidewalk on either side of the site.

5. The inventory of vehicles and equipment be contained on paved surfaces and not on the dirt areas. If the inventory or phase grows large enough that the applicant is storing improperly, this will indicate that the third phase needs to be approved.

6. The Conditional Use Permit being formally granted when the storm drain impact fee is paid.

7. Secondary water be hooked up and used to irrigate the new landscaping along the Frontage Road and on Phase 2 as shown on the proposed site plan.

Steven Bateman seconded the motion. Voting was unanimous (6-0).

REZONE -- .41 acres proposed to be changed from Agricultural A-1 to Residential R-1-85 (single family 8,5000 square foot minimum lot size) -- Brad Porter property located at 115 West Chase Lane -- Brad Porter, applicant.

Paul Allred, Community Development Director, reports Brad Porter’s home is proposed to be located in the Pheasant Village Subdivision Plat. Staff recommended when the rezone was considered for the Pheasant Village Subdivision that the Porter property be considered for inclusion in the plat. Since that time, Mr. Porter has agreed to be rezoned to make the location of the street easier and to eliminate a nonconforming Agricultural A-1 lot. By rezoning the land to Residential R-1-85, the parcel will be able to contribute two additional lots to the plat and be compatible with surrounding zoning on the south, west and east. The change in zoning conforms to the aims of the General Plan for this area of the city.

Staff recommends approval of the rezone petition as requested.

Grant Talbot made a motion to recommend approval of the rezone petition of .41 acres from Agricultural A-1 to Residential R-1-85.

Bruce Powell seconded the motion. Voting was unanimous (6-0).

SUBDIVISION -- AMENDED CONCEPTUAL --Pheasant Village Subdivision -- Approximately 95 West Chase Lane -- Residential R-1-85 Zone -- Proposal to add 2 more lots to the project -- Dale Anderson, applicant.

Paul Allred, Community Development Director, indicated that the applicant, Dale Anderson, is requesting that the Planning Commission allow for two additional lots to the proposed subdivision plat. Brad Porter’s .41 acres allows for two more lots to be added. The inclusion of these lots in the plat will make platting the subdivision easier and will remove a nonconforming Agricultural A-1 lot from the area. The amended plat would, in essence, add only one other dwelling to the area. This represents a very small increase (5%)in the overall density for the area.

Staff recommends approval of the amended conceptual subdivision plat and that the matter be forwarded to the City Council for consideration.

Bruce Powell made a motion to recommend approval to the City Council of the amended conceptual subdivision plat.

Robert Chamberlain seconded the motion. Voting was unanimous (6-0).

SUBDIVISION -- AMENDED CONCEPTUAL -- Cutler Phase 2 Subdivision -- Approximately 2150 North Main Street -- Agricultural A-1 Zone -- Hiram Alba, applicant for Chris Cutler, owner.

Paul Allred, Community Development Director, reported to the Planning Commission Mr. Cutler and Mr. Alba were not able to reach a financial agreement on demolition of accessory buildings with the Devore family on Lots 2-3 of the proposed Cutler Subdivision Phase 2. This disagreement has resulted in the applicants’ desire to only plat a one-lot subdivision. A three- lot plat was previously planned. Staff does not oppose the change to the plat and recommends approval. The proper materials have been submitted for review and found to be in compliance with City ordinances. There will be a subdivision plat required since the single lot will need to dedicate a road to the City.

Brian Hulse made a motion to recommend approval of the amended conceptual subdivision plat for the Cutler Subdivision Phase 2 with a reduction in the plat of two lots, resulting in a single-lot subdivision.

Grant Talbot seconded the motion. Voting was unanimous (6-0).

SUBDIVISION -- PRELIMINARY PLAT -- Cutler Phase 2 Subdivision -- Approximately 2150 North Main Street -- Agricultural A-1 Zone -- Hiram Alba, applicant for Chris Cutler, owner.

Paul Allred, Community Development Director, indicated the applicant has met the City’s requirements for preliminary plat approval. Staff have checked the ordinance, reviewed the checklist and determined that the preliminary plat is valid and should be approved. The data for soils, drainage, street lighting, utilities and other pertinent matters are in compliance with staff recommendations for proper development of the subdivision.

Brian Hulse made a motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat as proposed conditioned upon submittal of the minor items that staff deems appropriate and necessary.

Grant Talbot seconded the motion. Voting was unanimous (6-0).

DIRECTOR’S REPORT

Mr. Allred reminded the Planning Commission that they will be meeting again next week on March 8. On the agenda is the legal opinion and discussion from the Assistant City Attorney on the General Plan concerning the Neighborhood Commercial Zone.

There will be training for the Planning Commission on Wednesday March 22, 2000 and the regular meeting will be held on Thursday, March 23, 2000.

The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.

Bruce Powell, Chairman

Colleen Sessions, Recording Secretary



 
 
MuseumEmergencyRecreationConstructionMap Calendar