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
November 4, 2015
Minutes of the Centerville City Council meeting held Tuesday, November 4, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. at Centerville City Hall, 250 North Main Street, Centerville, Utah.
Mayor Paul A. Cutler
Council Members Ken S. Averett
STAFF PRESENT Steve Thacker, City Manager
STAFF ABSENT Blaine Lutz, Finance Director/Assistant City Manager
VISITORS Interested citizens (see attached sign-in sheet)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Randy Mansfield, Marine Corps League
PRAYER OR THOUGHT Councilwoman Ivie
Robert Bruhn of the Marine Corps League presented a check for $300 to Police Chief Child for the Centerville DARE Program. Chief Child thanked the Marine Corps League for their donation and service, and reported on the success of the DARE Program.
Heather Strasser – Ms. Strasser thanked the Mayor and Council for their continued service, and specifically thanked Councilman Higginson for the time he has spent listening to her concerns in the past months. As a cofounder of Zone Centerville Right, Ms. Strasser expressed the opinion that the Bountiful land swap issue scheduled for discussion later in the meeting would have a detrimental effect on the quality of life in Centerville if approved by Bountiful. She applauded Mayor Cutler for reaching out to Bountiful Mayor Lewis, applauded Council members Ivie and Higginson for their presence at a public hearing held in Bountiful on October 27th, and applauded Councilman Higginson’s message delivered at the public hearing that Centerville is interested in partnership and preservation for the shared hillside.
Marty Money – Adding to Ms. Strasser’s comments, Ms. Money encouraged the Council to continue to reach out across the City’s southern boundary to champion the preservation of shared open space. She expressed a desire to pay the resource forward for the next generation. She stated that the trickle-over effect of development on the hillside boundary with Bountiful would threaten to unravel preservation efforts already in place in Centerville. Ms. Money asked the Council to discourage municipal endorsement of the project, and protect and preserve the hillside.
Blaine Roskelley – Mr. Roskelley thanked those who have served, currently serve, and will serve on the City Council, and said he hopes the best for the community in the weighty matters that need to be considered.
William Ince, Centerville Planning Commission – Commissioner Ince read from a letter sent to him by Congressman Chris Stewart regarding the proposed Bountiful land swap, stating that the matter is currently a local issue, with Bountiful engaging in preliminary discussions. Congressman Stewart stated he will not consider a potential deal until he is presented with a formal proposal. Commissioner Ince strongly endorsed everything said by Councilman Higginson at the October 27th public hearing in Bountiful, and encouraged continued city participation in the discussions.
Holly Ince – Ms. Ince stated that she sat through the work session prior to the Council meeting, and is concerned that the Council is more worried about widening sidewalks on Main Street than the effect on private property. She added that many Centerville streets do not have sidewalks. She said she is an avid walker and, considering the noise on Main Street, she does not think widening the sidewalks will encourage more walkers.
Ryan Archibald – Mr. Archibald said he attended the work session, and although the designs presented look nice, he feels focusing on what is placed on the curb before determining density is a mistake. Mr. Archibald expressed the opinion that density should be decided first.
Mayor Cutler clarified that the Council met in a work session on October 29th to discuss density and other items in the ordinance. The follow-up work session prior to the Council meeting allowed the Council to continue the discussion.
Kyle Green – Mr. Green expressed approval that the deer problem is scheduled for discussion on the agenda. He stated that deer have taken up permanent residence in his backyard, affecting his ability to have a garden. Regarding Main Street, Mr. Green stated that people are against density, although the City continues to add more and more. He expressed the opinion that the bridge under construction over I-15 will be a pedestrian hazard, and said that adding more density will continue to increase problems. Mr. Green said he lives on a street without sidewalks, and he does not want sidewalks, but he agreed that pedestrian safety is a major concern as density increases. Density increases risks and demands on infrastructure and emergency responders. He encouraged the Council to minimize the risks and limit the number of people crammed into the city. Mr. Green thanked the Council for their service.
Ted Olson – Mr. Olson asked the Council the potential for light-rail coming to Centerville. Mayor Cutler responded there is zero chance of light-rail coming to Centerville. It is not on any long-range plans. Councilman Higginson stated that light-rail was talked about during the campaign process by some candidates, but there is no risk of light-rail coming to Centerville. Councilwoman Ivie said that bus rapid transit was proposed a year ago by UTA, but Centerville elected not to be involved in continued studies. Mr. Olson thanked the Council for the clarification, and expressed the opinion that light-rail in Centerville would be a waste of time and money. Councilman Wright said he feels it is good to be vigilant and make sure it doesn’t come.
Bret Millburn, County Commissioner – Commissioner Millburn is a former Chair of the Wasatch Front Regional Council, providing recommendations regarding transit projects, and is a member of the UTA Board of Trustees. He agreed with Councilman Higginson’s observation that rumors of light-rail in Centerville are strictly rumors. It is not on any long-term plan and has no funding allocated. Light-rail is not coming down Main Street in Centerville. There are other opportunities to enhance transit, including increased bus service, and possibly bus rapid transit at some point in the future. Centerville chose not to participate in continued studies, and the message that Centerville is not interested in light-rail was very clear.
Kami Layton – Ms. Layton said she is still concerned that a plan encouraging density would increase the chance for light-rail. She quoted from past newspaper articles and a letter written by former Mayor Russell, and stated that precautions should be taken in the General Plan to shut the door on the possibility. Ms. Layton asked Councilwoman Fillmore if she wants light-rail on Main Street in the future. Councilwoman Fillmore responded she does not, adding that the concept was explored many years in the past, with public input, and the decision was made that light-rail is not right for Centerville – the issue is closed. Ms. Layton expressed her opinion that mixed-use is not in character for Main Street.
Robyn Mecham – Ms. Mecham said she was told by a developer that parking with mixed-use does not work. She urged the Council, if mixed-use is included in the SMSC Plan, to add more parking before the TZRO is removed.
Patricia Hedrick – Ms. Hedrick said she knows from experience that parking is a constant problem with mixed-use development.
MINUTES REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE
The minutes of the October 6, 2015 work session and the October 20, 2015 Council meeting were reviewed. Councilwoman Fillmore and Mayor Cutler requested changes to the October 20, 2015 Council meeting minutes. Councilman Averett made a motion to accept the October 6 work session minutes and the October 20, 2015 Council meeting minutes as amended. Councilwoman Fillmore seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
SUMMARY ACTION CALENDAR
a. Approve Software Service Agreement with Municipal Code Online, Inc. for conversion, adoption, hosting and related services for transfer and servicing of Centerville Municipal Code to an online code
Councilman Wright made a motion to approve all items on the Summary Action Calendar. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
SOUTH MAIN STREET CORRIDOR (SMSC) OVERLAY ZONE
Continuing the ongoing discussion and consideration of the SMSC Overlay Zone, the Council met in a work session on October 29th and again prior to the Council meeting to discuss proposed Zone Code text amendments. After the October 29th work session staff made revisions as directed by the Council. Anticipating that the Council will not vote unanimously on all of the amendments, Mayor Cutler suggested the Council adopt the revised document included in the staff report, and consider each section individually to make any additional changes. Councilman Wright pointed out that the Council has not received a report from staff regarding the consequences of removing mixed-use from the scenario, as requested at the October 20th Council meeting. Mr. Snyder responded that the entire fabric of the ordinance could be left in place and the mixed-use component removed from the use lists. He said he still takes the position that the impetus of redevelopment was centered on going beyond commercial uses. He admitted that mixed-use is not the only possible impetus for change, but said that from a landowner perspective redevelopment would not make sense without a change in use unless the market changes, or the building/property deteriorates to a point that redevelopment is necessary. Mr. Snyder pointed out that the two districts under consideration are not retail centers, are made up mostly of small parcels, and are more than 60% locally owned. He predicted that, without mixed-use as an incentive, most of the properties will not change for a long time. He added that the concern with proposed development on the O’Brien property has related to density, which is addressed with the density caps.
Mr. Snyder suggested that, if mixed-use is eliminated from the ordinance, form-based code would delay redevelopment of the Commercial-Medium (C-M) Zone. He suggested that commercial uses would need to be expanded to incentivize redevelopment, and urged the Council to look outside the proposed development of the O’Brien property and consider the corridor as a whole. More intensive commercial use would most likely involve increased traffic intensity and later hours. Mr. Snyder referred to the strip of stores adjacent to Dick’s Market in the north gateway area as an example of increased commercial value. Councilwoman Fillmore pointed out that increased commercial intensity would have a serious impact on neighboring residential neighborhoods. Mr. Snyder added that a third option available to the Council is to leave the C-M zoning as it is, including the 35-foot building height restriction on the east side. Councilman Wright said he thinks an RDA could be used to incentivize commercial redevelopment. Mr. Snyder responded that he does not believe an RDA is very likely, but an improvement district program might be possible with a majority vote of property owners.
Councilman Wright commented that the assisted living facility being considered by Brighton Homes for the O’Brien property exceeds the square-foot limitations in place for commercial. He said he believes there is a problem if the zoning laws established by the Council for the future are considered simply guidelines. Mr. Snyder encouraged the Council to stay away from making decisions based on a particular property, but agreed that, if the rumored proposal is submitted, the city would be looking at hybridizing the plan to accommodate a larger facility in a more commercial venue than is being discussed at the moment. Councilwoman Fillmore added that any proposal submitted would go through the established thorough public process and be judged based on merit. Any property owner has the right to submit a proposal and request a change.
Mayor Cutler expressed a desire to move forward and make decisions. Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 2015-25 regarding proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments for the SMSC Overlay Ordinance – including changes to the City Center District, Traditional District, North and South Gateway Districts, adding a Public Space Plan for Main Street, and other related changes, with the intent to affirm or amend section by section. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion.
Section 1 – Definition Lisa Romney, City Attorney, pointed out changes made to Section 1 since the October 29th work session. The Council discussed the definition of mixed-use development. Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to replace “public street” and “public or private street” in Section 1 (A), (B) and (C) with “Main Street”. Councilman Averett seconded the motion. Mr. Snyder commented that the selected language was used to ensure appropriate transitions to the residential neighborhoods. Councilman Wright commented that a more complex ordinance reduces incentive to redevelop. Councilwoman Fillmore agreed, and stated that the motion would make the ordinance more simple. The motion to replace language in the definition of mixed-use development passed by majority vote (4-1), with Councilman Wright dissenting.
Section 2 – Traditional and City Center Districts Ms. Romney highlighted changes made to Section 2 since the October 29th work session, particularly the removal of multiple-family dwelling units as a permitted use on both the east and west sides of Main Street, and removal of additional dwelling units as a conditional use. Councilwoman Ivie said she does not grammatically like the use of commas in use lists, i.e., “Restaurant, Eatery” in Subsection (1). Mr. Snyder explained that the use of commas is standard in defining different types of uses. Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to use a dash or a colon instead of a comma when defining categories within categories in the ordinance. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by majority vote (3-2), with Council members Averett and Fillmore dissenting.
Councilman Wright made a motion to eliminate the last two permitted uses in Section 2: Dwelling – Town House or Two-Family as part of mixed-use development on both the east and west sides of Main Street. Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Ivie and Wright in favor, and Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson voting against. Councilwoman Fillmore said she feels consistent land use planning is best, and made a motion to eliminate single family dwellings as a permitted use. The motion died for lack of a second.
Section 3 – North Gateway Mixed-Use District Ms. Romney highlighted changes made to Section 3 since the October 29th work session, particularly the elimination of additional dwelling units as a conditional use.
Councilwoman Ivie asked the Council to go back to Section 2, and made a motion to eliminate the Conditional Use Density of not more than 8 dwelling units per acre from Section 2 (3), Maximum Gross Density. Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson dissenting. Councilwoman Fillmore reminded the Council that staff presented data showing that with a cap of 8 units per acre, the maximum capacity of units in the entire corridor covered in Section 2 would be 72, assuming that every parcel redeveloped to maximum capacity.
Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to remove the exception allowing any legal lot at least two dwelling units regardless of size from Section 2. Councilman Higginson asked how many properties would qualify for the exception. The Council and staff looked at a map of the two districts and found that perhaps only two properties would apply. Mr. Snyder explained that the exception was included to incentivize redevelopment of the smaller parcels. Councilwoman Fillmore commented that the initial reason for reevaluating the plan was potential redevelopment of the large O’Brien property, but the bulk of the corridor is made up of small, locally owned parcels. The density cap hampers the incentive for small parcel redevelopment. She said she feels the proposed amendments are a good compromise, taking care of the density concern on the bigger parcels, yet still considering the smaller parcels and the ability for positive redevelopment. Councilwoman Ivie said she is concerned that tiny apartments would contribute to the transitory nature of the area. Councilman Wright asked what would prevent a property owner from subdividing to get more density. Mr. Snyder responded that the subdivision ordinance and the zoning all tie back to the General Plan and policies, with approval required by both the Planning Commission and the Council. Councilwoman Fillmore pointed out that some of the properties, using the density calculation, would be allowed 1.8 dwelling units. The exception gives the property owners options that should be given. She said she feels very comfortable rounding up the ability of the smallest properties to redevelop. Councilwoman Ivie responded that the neighborhood has a lot of strain already, and the possibility of increased traffic on Main Street, and the remote chance of 72 dwelling units in the corridor, is not okay with her. Councilwoman Fillmore pointed out that some of the commercial uses that might go in would be even more intensive than residential.
Councilwoman Fillmore repeated the three options available: encourage redevelopment of small, locally owned parcels; encourage redevelopment of higher intensity commercial use; or leave it as it is and likely not have redevelopment for many years. Councilwoman Ivie said she is not sure those are the only options, and said she is okay with redevelopment not occurring for a few years. Councilwoman Ivie said that developers will look for opportunities to develop, and she feels the Council needs to be true to the citizens already living here and do what they want. Councilwoman Ivie repeated her motion to eliminate the exception from Section 2. Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson dissenting. Councilman Higginson pointed out there is only one legal lot smaller than an eighth of an acre.
Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to reduce the exception from two to one dwelling unit regardless of size as part of mixed-use development. Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson dissenting.
Section 3 – North Gateway Mixed-Use District Councilman Wright said he considers the North Gateway area to be a commercial area, and made a motion to remove all dwellings from permitted uses. Mayor Cutler pointed out that the Bavelas property is the only property that would be eligible for mixed-use. Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion. Councilman Higginson pointed out he has not heard the citizens ask for commercial only, just for limited density, which is why he has not voted to eliminate the mixed-use component. He said he would prefer to allow property owners flexibility. Councilman Wright responded he does not personally think residential makes sense at that location. Mayor Cutler pointed out, and Councilman Averett agreed, that the area already has a fair number of residences. Any additional dwellings would be part of mixed-use. Councilman Wright agreed, and withdrew his motion.
Councilman Wright made a motion to eliminate the Section 3 Maximum Gross Density Conditional Use of not more than eight dwelling units per acre as part of mixed-use development. Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson dissenting. Councilwoman Fillmore expressed a desire to consider rezoning residential neighborhoods adjacent to the North Gateway area from Residential-Medium (R-M) to Residential-Low (R-L). Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion requesting a staff report on the possibility at the next Council meeting. Councilman Averett seconded the motion. Councilman Wright expressed the opinion that this issue would be better to leave for the next Council. The motion passed by majority vote (3-2), with Council members Ivie and Wright dissenting.
Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to cap the Section 3 Maximum Gross Density Conditional Use at six units per acre as part of a mixed-use development instead of eight in the North Gateway District. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by majority vote (3-2), with Council members Ivie, Higginson, and Wright in favor, and Council members Averett and Fillmore dissenting.
Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to cap the Section 2 Maximum Gross Density Conditional Use at six units per acre as part of a mixed-use development instead of eight in the Traditional and City Center Districts. Councilman Wright seconded the motion. Councilman Higginson suggested allowing a maximum of six on the east side of Main Street and eight on the west side. Councilwoman Ivie changed her motion to reduce the Maximum Gross Density Conditional Use to six dwelling units per acre on the east side of Main Street in the Traditional and City Center Districts. This would leave the Conditional Use of eight dwelling units per acre as part of mixed-use development in place for the west side of Main Street. Councilman Wright said he feels six is a good compromise for both sides of the road. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, stating he feels it is a good compromise. Councilman Wright made a substitute motion to allow six dwelling units per acre on both the east and the west sides of Main Street as part of mixed-use development. Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson dissenting. The original motion to cap the Maximum Gross Density Conditional Use at six dwelling units per acre on the east side of Main Street and eight dwelling units per acre on the west side passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to cap the Section 3 Maximum Gross Density Conditional Use at six dwelling units per acre on the east side of Main Street and eight dwelling units per acre on the west side as part of mixed-use development in the North Gateway District. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Ivie, Higginson, and Wright dissenting.
Section 4 – Pages Lane Mixed-Use District Ms. Romney stated the edits made to Section 4 since the October 29th work session eliminate any possibility of residential in the Pages Lane District. Mayor Cutler mentioned that it would be unlikely that the Council would find something that would work for the Pages Lane District without a specific project application. The Council agreed with the removal of residential from the Pages Lane District, and did not desire further changes to Section 4 at this time.
Section 5 – Public Space Plan Mr. Snyder explained that the proposed Public Space Plan is symmetrical, divided into three sectors: the Street Furnishings Sector, the Pedestrian Path Sector, and the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector. Some of the language related to the Furnishings Sector as proposed in the ordinance is in conflict with UDOT standards. The Plan would rely on performance standards to implement amenities that would support the 5-6 foot sidewalk system. Councilman Wright expressed a desire to table approval of the Public Space Plan to a special Council meeting on November 10th, and said he would prefer using the phrase “may include the following elements” rather than “shall include the following elements”, leaving the details up to the Council at the time of application. Councilman Higginson expressed a desire to have as much detail in place as possible before the TZRO expires. Councilman Averett stated he is not available on the 10th. Councilman Wright repeated he would rather provide flexibility on the details for individual proposals. Ms. Romney advised that developers need enough guidelines to know what to propose. Councilwoman Fillmore commented that from the Planning Commission perspective, there are “shalls” and there are “shoulds”. The “shalls” are a powerful tool, and the “shoulds” give flexibility. Councilwoman Fillmore said having a few “shalls” in the first ten feet will provide for a more unified, improved corridor. Much more flexibility could be given in the next ten feet.
Mayor Cutler proposed that the Public Space Plan could be passed as it is to provide some protection when the TZRO expires, with the intention of making changes at the next meeting, or it could be eliminated from the ordinance at this time. Councilwoman Ivie suggested adding a substitute section with the desired park strip and six-foot sidewalk requirements for a little protection now, with the intention to talk about more on the 17th. Councilman Higginson said he would rather get as much protection as possible now. Councilman Wright suggested the Council pass the Public Space Plan as it is now and let the next Council look at making changes. Councilwoman Fillmore commented that the Council hired a landscape architect that presented some good ideas. She recommended the Council discuss which elements they liked for inclusion in the text, with the intention to revisit the Plan again on the 17th. Councilwoman Fillmore stated she has some minor text edits to make before the Plan is approved. Councilman Wright said he would prefer to wait and approve the Plan at the next council meeting.
Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to spend a short amount of time making edits now to have an ordinance in place. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, and asked when the TZRO expires. Staff responded that it expires on November 12th. The motion passed by majority vote (4-1), with Councilman Wright dissenting.
Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to replace “expanded pedestrian pathway” with “pedestrian protection from traffic”. Mayor Cutler commented that the change does not have any teeth. Councilman Wright said he does not think the change is necessary. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, but said he feels they mean the same thing. Councilwoman Fillmore responded that the intention is to frame the street and create a division between the street and the sidewalk. The motion passed by majority vote (3-2), with Council members Ivie and Wright dissenting.
Councilwoman Fillmore explained her desire to replace “street lighting” with “pedestrian lighting” in subsection (c) under Priority Street Furnishings Sector Design Elements. Mr. Snyder agreed the city could probably negotiate lighting with UDOT as long as standards are met. Councilman Higginson made a motion to replace “street lighting” with “pedestrian lighting” in Subsection (c) for the Street Furnishings Sector. Councilwoman Fillmore second the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
Councilwoman Fillmore expressed approval of Subsection (e) for the Street Furnishings Sector regarding landscaping near utility structures. Councilman Wright stated he would prefer using “may” rather than “shall”. Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to add the statement: “Landscaping elements shall also be used as a visual buffer between cars and pedestrian traffic.” Councilman Wright repeated he has a problem with imposing the requirements on every developer. Councilwoman Ivie commented that planter boxes in the park strip would get in the way of citizens watching the 4th of July parade every year. Councilwoman Fillmore agreed that the parade should be considered, and expressed confidence that a solution could be found. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion. Councilman Averett agreed with the parade concern. Councilwoman Fillmore referred to options presented by the landscape architect during the work session prior to the Council meeting, and stated confidently that the city could give flexibility to property owners and still achieve a unified look. Councilwoman Ivie responded that parade seating would still be eliminated. Mayor Cutler pointed out that the options presented by the landscape architect include plaza space that would provide more parade seating. Councilwoman Fillmore pointed out that the Plan would realistically be applied only to the Traditional and City Center Districts, leaving a lot of the parade route the same. Mayor Cutler said the proposed language does not seem to have a lot of teeth. Councilman Averett said he would want the Plan to be parade-viewer friendly. Councilwoman Fillmore agreed with the concern, but commented that the more day-to-day concern is providing pedestrian friendliness and protection. She suggested providing a list of recommended plants that would be parade friendly. The motion passed by majority vote (3-2), with Council members Ivie and Wright dissenting.
Ms. Romney suggested a six-foot sidewalk width requirement rather than the range of 5’-6’. She also pointed out a minor correction to Subsection 3(A) of the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector Design Elements changing “back of sidewalk” to “back of curb”. Councilman Higginson made a motion to change the sidewalk width requirement to six feet in the Pedestrian Path Sector. Councilman Averett seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to change “back of sidewalk” to “back of curb” in Subsection 3(A) for the Pedestrian Space/Plaza Sector. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to delete “and/or” from the first line of Subsection 3(B), and eliminate “pedestrian path lighting” from the same Subsection. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). No changes were made to Section 6.
Section 7 – Building Height Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to change the maximum building height for buildings on the east side of Main Street to 25 feet. Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Averett, Fillmore, and Higginson dissenting. Councilman Higginson stated he feels 30 feet is a compromise between 25 and 35, allowing for pitched roofs. Councilwoman Fillmore said she heard from the public that people care more about density than building height.
Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion directing staff to update the Public Space Plan illustration, specifying a right-of-way of approximately 66 feet, and a Pedestrian Path Sector of six feet. Councilwoman Ivie seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). Councilwoman Ivie made a motion directing staff to bring back updated visuals and a draft ordinance on November 17th. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
Councilwoman Fillmore made a motion to accept Ordinance No. 2015-25 as amended. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by majority vote (3-2), with Council members Ivie and Wright dissenting.
Mr. Snyder stated he is aware of an application waiting for the TZRO to be lifted. The Council discussed whether to lift the TZRO or wait and let it expire. Councilman Averett made a motion to repeal Ordinance No. 2015-05, ending the TZRO effective November 5, 2015. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which failed (2-3), with Council members Ivie, Fillmore, and Wright dissenting.
At 9:27 p.m. the Council took a break, returning at 9:40 p.m.
URBAN DEER PLAN DRAFT
Bruce Cox, Parks and Recreation Director, reported on the progress of the urban deer control process with the Department of Wildlife Resources (DWR), and discussed a draft of an Urban Deer Plan with the Council. Councilwoman Ivie suggested giving hunting priority to Centerville residents. The Police Department will oversee the selection and approval process. Councilman Wright suggested the City publicize the opportunity to participate. Councilman Averett expressed the opinion that the cost of the program should be itemized and a fee set accordingly, at least covering background costs. Councilman Wright responded he hopes a fee is not charged, and added that government can provide services without collecting money. Mr. Thacker suggested a compromise requiring those who want to keep the meat to pay a fee. Councilwoman Ivie pointed out that processing meat is a huge undertaking. Mr. Cox explained the trapping process, and stated this is the first time the DWR has allowed the program to happen in this manner.
Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to set a public hearing for November 17th. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0). Councilwoman Ivie asked that the Urban Deer Plan be amended to give priority participation to Centerville residents prior to the public hearing.
MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS
The proposed amendments are part of a continuing effort by the City Attorney to prepare the Code for conversion to the online version made possible by the contract with Municipal Code Online, Inc. The amendments are not intended to change the substance of the Code – unless required to harmonize with State law – but consist primarily of improved wording, reformatting, renumbering, and conforming to State law. Councilman Averett made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 2015-26 amending various provisions of Title 2, and Ordinance No. 2015-27 amending various provisions of Title 3 of the Centerville Municipal Code. Councilman Higginson seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).
• A majority of the Council expressed a desire to send a formal letter to Bountiful regarding the proposed hillside land swap. The Mayor said he would work with Mr. Thacker to draft a letter for Council signatures. Councilman Higginson commented that he could support a statement of the Council’s preference, but would not support a letter telling Bountiful what to do. Councilwoman Fillmore agreed that the letter needs to be diplomatic. Mayor Cutler expressed confidence that the Council’s concerns can be stated and the good relationship between the two cities preserved.
CITY COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT
Councilman Averett reported on Citizen Corps Council/Emergency Management training efforts, emphasized the importance of emergency management, and stated he has thoroughly enjoyed the liaison assignment.
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
• Mr. Thacker presented a landscaping concept plan for the 1250 West/Parrish Lane intersection prepared by Dan Sonntag of MGB&A. Councilwoman Fillmore pointed out that Maverik will hopefully participate financially in improvements for the southwest corner. Maverik’s application and the offer for a sign from Hogan were the impetus for engaging an architect.
• The Council tabled discussion regarding the use of the City’s newsletter and utility bill insert to the November 17th meeting.
Mayor Cutler reported there may shortly be an opening on the Trails Committee. Councilwoman Ivie expressed regret at loosing Chair Alan Peterson, and agreed to communicate with him further for confirmation. An application has been received and will be considered by the Mayor and Council at a future meeting. Councilman Averett reported he has received an application for the Parks and Recreation Committee that he will forward to the Mayor.
At 10:52 p.m. Councilwoman Ivie made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Councilman Wright seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (5-0).