Centerville City Hall
250 N. Main Street
Centerville, UT 84014
(801) 292-8034 fax
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Monday - Friday
August 4, 2015
Minutes of the Centerville City Council meeting held Tuesday, August 4, 2015 at 7:10 p.m. at Centerville City Hall, 250 North Main Street, Centerville, Utah.
Mayor Paul A. Cutler
Ken S. Averett
STAFF ABSENT Blaine Lutz, Finance Director/Assistant City Manager
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE led by John Henry Phillips, Cub Scout
PRAYER OR THOUGHT Reverend Briggs, Episcopal Church of the Resurrection
Dale McIntyre – Mr. McIntyre stated that he has been to most of the Council meetings and reviewed the minutes, and has found that not everything that is said is included in the minutes. He asked if there is a reason the minutes cannot be verbatim, and said he thinks it would be beneficial for the citizens.
Councilman Larry Wright – Councilman Wright said he would like the Council to consider providing a video recording of Council meetings for citizens who are unable to attend. He said he was told by UTOPIA representatives that it could probably be done at no cost to the City.
The Council discussed visual recording and storage options.
DAVIS SCHOOL DISTRICT BOND ELECTION
Craig Poll, Assistant Superintendent of the Davis School District, showed a video and gave a presentation about the District’s proposed bond issue on the November election ballot. He explained the District’s infrastructure and capital needs to be able to provide room to learn for the growing student population. The bond income would fund capital needs, and would not be used to fund salaries or educational supplies. Councilman Wright expressed the hope that the money would be used to really benefit the students rather than for structural aesthetics. Mr. Poll responded that it costs just as much to build an ugly building as an attractive building, and explained some of the District’s cost-saving construction decisions. Mayor Cutler thanked Mr. Poll for the presentation, and stated that he supports the bond. Councilman Wright stated he also supports the bond.
MINUTES REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE
The minutes of the July 7, 2015 work session and Council meeting, the July 8, 2015 joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting, and the July 21, 2015 Council meeting were reviewed. Councilwoman Fillmore requested two amendments to the July 7, 2015 Council meeting minutes. Council members Fillmore and Ivie requested amendments to the July 8, 2015 joint meeting minutes, and it was suggested the Council table approval of the July 8 minutes. Councilwoman Fillmore agreed to send information regarding an email she referred to during the July 8th meeting to the City Recorder. Councilwoman Ivie agreed to send to the City Recorder a proposed addition she requested pertaining to Councilwoman Fillmore’s comments in the July 8 meeting, to be considered as an addition to those minutes. Councilman Wright made a motion to accept the July 7, 2015 work session minutes, the July 7, 2015 Council meeting minutes as amended, and the July 21, 2015 Council meeting minutes. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). Councilman Wright made a motion to table approval of the July 8, 2015 joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting minutes. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
SUMMARY ACTION CALENDAR
a. Approve purchase of a Jacobsen R311 4WD with cab large-area mower from RMT Equipment in the amount of $69,101 for Parks Department
Bruce Cox, Parks and Recreation Director, explained the proposed mower replacement. Councilman Wright made a motion to approve both items on the Summary Action Calendar. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RAP TAX BALLOT QUESTION
The Council previously initiated the process to place reauthorization of the RAP Tax on the ballot. The next step in the process is for the Council to approve a resolution submitting the RAP Tax ballot proposition to the residents. Ninety percent of the current RAP Tax revenues are used for debt service relating to the Performing Arts Center. None of the RAP Tax revenues after April 1, 2016 – assuming voter approval of the extension – will be needed for debt service on this facility. The proposed ballot question would allow revenues to be used for “recreational facilities and cultural facilities and organizations for the City.”
Mayor Cutler stated that Former Mayor Ron Russell has offered to serve as a contact for citizens regarding the proposition. Councilman Wright expressed concern that, given Former Mayor Russell’s affiliation with the Performing Arts Center, he would bias citizens in favor of more funding for the Performing Arts Center. Mayor Cutler reminded Councilman Wright that the Council will decide how the funds are used. The Mayor said it is his understanding that the Council is supportive of using most of the revenues for parks and trails, with a smaller amount going to support the Whitaker Museum and CenterPoint Theatre. Mayor Cutler expressed a desire for a broad coalition of citizens representing a variety of interests in the community to work together on this issue. Council members Wright and Higginson both emphasized they would like a show of support for all aspects of RAP, not just the Performing Arts Center. Councilman Wright reemphasized his support for the RAP Tax to provide funding for the Whitaker Museum. Lisa Romney, City Attorney, reminded the Council that they cannot get involved with leading the effort in their official capacity as Council members. The City Council is required, however, to write the argument in support of the proposition that will be posted on the State website. Councilman Wright suggested the Council ask the different City committees and boards to write out why they would support RAP Tax renewal. Ms. Romney stated that committees can be used for research, but cannot be used for campaign purposes.
Councilman Wright made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 2015-13 submitting a ballot question to residents regarding the reauthorization and imposition of a local sales and use tax of one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) on certain qualifying transactions within the City to fund recreational facilities and cultural facilities and organizations. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). City Manager Thacker emphasized the need to have an active group of citizens working on public awareness. Mr. Thacker stated he feels Ron Russell would be a strong advocate for park improvements and recreation for the community, and could take direction from the Council regarding what should be emphasized. Councilman Wright recommended holding an opportunity for public comment during open meeting. Councilman Averett said he understands Councilman Wright’s concerns regarding a possible bias with Former Mayor Russell, but he feels that no one has served the community more or better than Ron Russell, and he is supportive of Ron Russell’s involvement.
CONSIDER RESOLUTION INITIATING PROCESS OF CREATING LOCAL DISTRICT AND SERVICE AREA FOR FIRE/EMS SERVICES
Councilman Averett disclosed that his son works as a part-time employee for both the South Davis Metro Fire Agency and the North Davis Fire District. City Manager Thacker briefly reviewed information presented at the July 7th Council work session. The South Davis Metro Fire Agency was originally created with the intention to consider moving to an independent taxing district after a number of years. The existing debt of the Agency cannot be paid entirely from impact fees. If a district is not created, the debt will have to be paid with assessments from the individual cities. The need to fund capital improvements is also a driving force behind the current discussions regarding creation of a district. If a district is created, the funding sources currently relied on would continue to be relied on. An offset would occur for the citizens with the cities reducing property taxes by the same amount as the initial increase from the district. The district would then need to go through the Truth-in-Taxation process for any future increase. The cities would continue to be assessed an amount similar to current assessments for the operations budget.
Councilman Wright stated that he would prefer a clean break between the cities and the proposed district. He said he does not think it will take long for the District to increase property taxes, and he does not agree with the citizens paying what he considers two property taxes for fire services. Mayor Cutler agreed that the proposed format is a hybrid, not a clean break. The Mayor added that during Fire Board discussions a majority of cities were in favor of preserving property tax income to the cities. For some of the cities, the amount assessed by the Fire Agency exceeds property tax income. Councilwoman Ivie asked if the Resolution allows for assessments to the cities to end. Karl Hendrickson, Fire Agency Attorney, responded that the Resolution does include the ability to end city assessments. The assessment formula now and over time is subject to a separate interlocal agreement that has to be reviewed and approved prior to the final decision. Fire Chief Bassett further explained the desire of some cities to preserve property tax income and retain a certain amount of control. Mr. Thacker pointed out that property tax revenue goes into the General Fund, and the City’s assessment is paid from the General Fund.
Mayor Cutler stated that the Agency is in need of more revenue, and does not have the ability to bond. The proposed Resolution No. 2015-14 would start the process of proposing creation of a Fire District. Mr. Hendrickson added that any non-participating city could contract with the new district. Councilman Wright stated that the services need to be provided. He has concerns with the taxation issues, but feels the City should move forward with the Resolution. The Council discussed when and where to hold an open house for citizen education.
Councilman Wright made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 2015-14 proposing creation of a Fire District, recognizing that this is the beginning of a process that will involve the public. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). Councilman Higginson stated he feels retaining as much control and accountability as possible is in everyone’s best interest. Chief Bassett stated that he has rough story boards and presentation information ready. Councilman Wright suggested the Chief make an informational video. Councilwoman Ivie said she feels strongly that the open house should occur prior to the September public hearing. Councilwoman Fillmore suggested the Fire Agency host a first open house at the station, with a second open house prior to the September 15th meeting at City Hall. She added that she knows Chief Bassett is always willing to speak to citizens and answer questions. Chief Bassett suggested the information could be added to what is presented at the Fire Prevention Open House already scheduled for September 9th at the Centerville Station.
At 9:03 p.m. the Council took a break, returning at 9:12 p.m.
• Mayor Cutler reported that he, the City Manager, the Police Chief, and representatives of the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) met recently with four property owners impacted by deer residing on their land year-round. These owners are seeking the City’s help in reducing the number of resident deer, which feed on their gardens, orchards and other vegetation. As of August 1, 2015, the DWR has authority to assist Utah cities with deer control problems, subject to regulatory requirements and guidelines. A city must develop an “urban deer plan” and solicit public comment before DWR with allow implementation of the plan. The plan could include trapping and euthanizing, or recruitment of experienced sportsmen to help eliminate the deer with property owner consent. Councilwoman Fillmore expressed safety concerns with the shooting option, and said she prefers the trapping and euthanizing option. A majority of the Council indicated a desire to move forward with the process.
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
• The Council confirmed support for encouraging Planning Commission attendance at training opportunities with per diem of $35 for any training session of 2 hours or more. Staff will prepare a document for approval in a future meeting.
• The Utah League of Cities and Towns Annual Conference will occur September 16-18. Officials wishing to attend should provide registration information to the City Recorder by August 27th.
At 10:02 p.m. Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
Aug 4, 2015 Joint City Council/Planning Commission Worksession
Minutes of the joint work session of the Centerville City Council and Planning Commission held Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 5:30 p.m. at Centerville City Hall, 250 North Main Street, Centerville, Utah.
Paul A. Cutler
Ken S. Averett
Cheylynn Hayman (arrived at 5:58 p.m.)
David Hirschi, Chair
Steve Thacker, City Manager
STAFF ABSENT Blaine Lutz, Finance Director/Assistant City Manager
VISITORS Interested citizens (see attached sign-in sheet)
SOUTH MAIN STREET CORRIDOR PLAN/OVERLAY ZONE
Councilwoman Ivie asked why density is the last of the five recommended issues for discussion, considering density is the issue the public cares about most. Mayor Cutler, Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, and Lisa Romney, City Attorney, all stated that discussion could begin with any of the issues. The Planning Commission has already made a recommendation to the Council regarding density for the City Center and Traditional Districts. Mayor Cutler added that a number of property owners have asked for flexibility, and the Council needs to consider their request and their property rights.
Ms. Romney reviewed existing ordinance provisions for permitted uses and conditional uses in both districts (Commercial-Medium) as presented in the staff report. Councilman Wright asked if a convalescent center would be allowed. Mr. Snyder responded that a convalescent center is allowed in the C-M Zone, an assisted living facility is not. However, the market is experiencing a blending of the two types of services, and the City may want to revise its definition to be consistent with the market.
Mayor Cutler commented that the data presented at the August 4th joint work session showed the two districts to be heavy in commercial uses. Commissioner Johnson stated he likes the idea of allowing more flexibility for property owners, and is not opposed to either full commercial, mixed-use or full residential. Councilmen Wright and Higginson agreed that commercial uses naturally reduce density. Commissioner Kjar stated he believes Main Street commercial uses will be office, not retail, and he would not want to limit property owners with zoning that is not feasible. Councilman Wright said he would like to look at barriers that prevent small business, and help reduce costs to make small business more affordable on Main Street. Councilman Averett agreed with Commissioner Kjar that Main Street will attract office commercial uses such as dentists, lawyers, and other local services, not retail.
Mayor Cutler stated that the existing ordinance does not include clear definitions of mixed-use, and it might be helpful to clarify what is meant. Councilman Averett commented that with the east side of Main Street backed by single-family residential, and the west side backed by medium density, it would make sense to have commercial fronting the east side and low to medium density or mixed-use on the west side. Chair Hirschi added that, without the commercial component, the area would be vulnerable to high-density residential. Commissioner Kjar stated that “mixed-use” in citizens’ minds means high-density residential and said he thinks it would be tough to lease the required commercial spaces in mixed-use. Councilwoman Fillmore responded that it depends on the definition of commercial. The data shows that 20% of the subject area has been developed commercially in the last fifteen years. She said she agrees with everything that has been said, and added that the City needs to be more clear about the amount of commercial versus residential required, and a density cap should be added. Councilman Wright said he agrees with the residents’ request of Residential-Low (R-L). Councilwoman Fillmore responded that the reality with single-family development now is smaller yards and homes closer together, with at least eight units per acre. She said she does not want high-density, but if the density cap is unfeasible the area will remain blighted. Mr. Snyder clarified that a single-family development is currently allowed, but an entire block cannot be filled with a single lot-type. Councilwoman Ivie said she does not want the Planning Commission to ever be in the position that they have to vote in favor of something because of the ordinance that they know is a bad development, like happened with the proposed development on the Hafoka property. Mr. Snyder responded that in that situation the issue of residents wanting single-family overrode the possibilities with multi-family. He pointed out that with the Hafoka property there was push for more active open space, but the development is still required to pay Park Impact Fees toward City open space. There needs to be equity. Councilwoman Ivie said she believes the Council is in place to listen to public outcry and respond.
Councilwoman Ivie said she feels allowing commercial is a good thing, and she likes the idea of having mixed-use only on the west side, but there needs to be a major density cap even if the area stays blighted and takes longer to redevelop. Councilman Averett suggested a low enough density that it feels like residential with commercial allowed. Councilwoman Fillmore added that requiring entry on ground level could be another control. Councilman Averett agreed with the need for patio homes for the aging community. Commissioner Kjar said the concern with the Hafoka property was that the open space was not really active open space. Councilwoman Fillmore said she likes the idea of separating east and west, but feels it would be unreasonable to go lower than six units per acre on the east side and eight units per acre on the west side of Main Street. She also suggested ten units per acre on the west side and eight units per acre on the east side. She said stronger language is necessary clarifying that the commercial element needs to be predominant with residential secondary. Mr. Snyder explained density per acre for several developments within the City for comparison.
Councilman Wright mentioned that one issue brought up during the public hearings is the impact density will have on the community and the ability to provide services, schools, and traffic impacts. He asked how an acceptable and sustainable threshold of density is determined. Mr. Snyder responded that it is hard to tabulate fairly because a lot of traffic on the roads is made up of people outside the community drawn by the commercial element. Mayor Cutler pointed out that an acceptable level of density is a matter of opinion. Mr. Snyder added that it would be difficult to guess what the market will generate in the future. The possibility of a traffic study is included in the ordinance to review developments as they come up. Councilman Wright said he does not know how to set a density cap without knowing the impacts. He said he thinks the City needs to take a more holistic look at the corridor. Ms. Romney referred to the limited numbers of units that are likely to redevelop as explained at the August 4th joint work session. The largest property in the subject area is the O’Brien Glass property, which is under consideration for redevelopment now. Councilman Wright repeated his suggestion that the City would have more options if it took over responsibility of Main Street from UDOT. Ms. Romney added that residential development has not occurred in the two districts since 2000.
Councilman Higginson stated he would prefer six units per acre with no conditional use so that it really is a six-unit cap. The Council and Planning Commission discussed whether or not a unit per building cap should be included. Councilwoman Fillmore and Mr. Snyder spoke in favor of a unit per building cap. Mayor Cutler explained that the density cap per acre would be an overlay regardless of the number of buildings. Chair Hirschi agreed that doing away with the building component would be a mistake. Commissioner Hirst said she would like to know how low the cap can be and still have redevelopment possible. Mayor Cutler read aloud a letter submitted by owners of properties between 100 South and 400 South on Main Street requesting medium density rather than low density.
The recommendation submitted to the Council by the Planning Commission includes a cap of four units per acre permitted and up to eight conditional. Commissioner Johnson stated he feels there was some misunderstanding of conditional use on the part of the Commissioners at the time the recommendation was made. Commissioner Johnson added that Councilman Higginson’s suggestion is closer to what he had in mind. Ms. Romney explained that with a conditional use permit the City looks at negative impacts, and it is difficult from a legal standpoint to show negative impact for density. Councilman Wright said he would like to eliminate conditional use and place a cap on density per acre. Councilwoman Fillmore responded that even the limited control provided by conditional use can be beneficial. Councilman Higginson said he would consider four units per building permitted with six conditional. Chair Hirschi pointed out that every project is different and unique, and removing conditional use would take away the Planning Commission’s ability to consider and improve a development. Councilman Wright said he feels the focus of the Planning Commission is different from the focus of the Council. He said he feels the Council’s focus should be putting a framework in place after considering what the citizens say. The Planning Commission is then to operate within that framework.
Councilwoman Fillmore said she would prefer to consider the smaller parcels and put a caveat in place to make development of smaller parcels possible. Councilman Averett agreed that it does not make sense to try to put all properties in the same box. He said conditional use may be necessary, but the Council needs to be comfortable with the maximum conditional use allowed. Council members Ivie and Wright agreed that if permitted use is limited to what the City is comfortable with, the level of review with conditional use is not necessary. Mr. Snyder pointed out that without conditional use public input cannot be considered. If requirements of permitted use are met, approval is guaranteed. Any problems that arise along the way cannot be mitigated. Conditional use allows more discretion for the Planning Commission to improve a situation.
Councilmen Wright and Higginson agreed with setting the maximum they are comfortable with per building as the conditional use level, with something lower set as permitted. Chair Hirschi added that a density cap adds a level of control. Councilman Wright said he believes allowing six on the east is appropriate. Mr. Snyder responded to a question from Councilwoman Fillmore stating that the Council could choose to make the decision, or could remand the issue back to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ince agreed with Councilwoman Fillmore, and stated that one or two units per parcel should be allowed regardless of parcel size. Councilwoman Ivie said she prefers four units permitted on the east and six units permitted on the west, not less than one unit per parcel. Commissioner Johnson stated he is comfortable with a minimum of eight units. He said he is not opposed to high-density, and does not think 12-15 units per acre would be a bad addition to Main Street. Chair Hirschi stated that developers need some flexibility, and he feels the City should be encouraging business development along Main Street.
Councilwoman Fillmore repeated that she would like to see the commercial element strengthened. Councilwoman Ivie said she would like to see an option for single-family development by itself. Councilman Wright stated he is comfortable with one-four units per acre permitted on the east side with up to six units conditional use, and one-four units per acre permitted on the west side with up to eight conditional. Councilman Higginson agreed. Commissioner Ince said he is comfortable with four and six. Commissioner Hayman pointed out that there has been no discussion of per building limits, and said she is uncomfortable with the six units per building currently allowed. She suggested allowing 1-3 units per building permitted and up to four units per building conditional. Councilwoman Fillmore added that she would like to require street-level entry for stand-alone residential.
Regarding building height, Mayor Cutler pointed out current restrictions. Councilman Wright stated that the impact of shadows on surrounding residences needs to be considered. The Council and Planning Commission discussed height restrictions and setbacks. Mr. Snyder added that placing parking behind a building creates a buffer, but if the ordinance is too definitive there will be scenarios where it does not work. Commissioner Kjar said the issue is not so much how high a building is off the street, but how it affects the homes behind it. Councilman Averett stated he prefers pitched roofs over flat roofs. Commissioner Hirst agreed.
The work session was adjourned at 6:57 p.m.