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
October 12, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING
Wednesday, October 12, 2016
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.
David Hirschi, Chair
Logan Johnson, Vice Chair
Cory Snyder, Community Development Director
Lisa Romney, City Attorney
Marsha L. Morrow, City Recorder
Interested citizens (see attached sign-in sheet)
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
PRAYER OR THOUGHT Commissioner Daly
MINUTES REVIEW AND APPROVAL
The minutes of the September 28, 2016 Planning Commission meeting were reviewed and amended. Commissioner Wright made a motion to approve the September 28, 2016 Planning Commission meeting minutes as amended. Commissioner Daly seconded the motion, which passed by (4-1) vote. Commissioner Hirst abstained, as she was not present at the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – CODE TEXT AMENDMENT CLIMATE-CONTROLLED STORAGE - Consider the proposed Zoning Code Text Amendments to add a new business use of “Storage, Climate Controlled” including, but not limited to Chapter 12.12-Definitions, and Section 12.48.080-South Main Street Corridor Overlay District Zone, Permitted and Conditional Uses by Specific District, Steve Tate, Applicant
Commissioner Johnson recused himself from this item because he has significant professional interest in this topic.
Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, explained that at their September 14 meeting, the Commission directed staff to prepare the South Main Street Overlay District option and the North Gateway District of that corridor plan. Staff has provide the Commission with a Definition of “Climate Controlled Storage,” (Chapter 12.12), and Chapter 12.36, Table of Uses to allow this use in the C-H (Commercial-High) Zone. Mr. Snyder explained the subdistricts in the North Gateway, which are C-H Zone and C-M Zone. The Parrish Square is in the C-H Zone, therefore, all the uses in the C-H Zone will continued, even though the overlay is in place. The Staff report addresses the proposed changes as follows:
[New] Storage, Climate Controlled - a type of self-storage use that provides climate controlled storage, within a single building or suite, containing one or more enclosed areas providing individually accessible interior compartments within the building, each of which is leased to the general public for the purpose of storing non-hazardous personal property of households and businesses and not used for residential occupancy, the conducting of business operations, the storage of vehicles, or storage of bulky commercial/industrial types of machinery.
[Existing] Section 12-48-080 Permitted And Conditional Uses By Specific Subdistrict
1. North Gateway Mixed-Use Subdistrict. The following uses, as defined in this Title, shall be the permitted and conditional uses in the North Gateway Mixed-Use Subdistrict of the SMSC Overlay Zone:
a. Permitted Uses:
i. Permitted Uses, as shown in CZC 12.36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone
ii. Dwelling, Town House; Dwelling, Two-Family; or Dwelling, Multiple-Family (Maximum Allowed four dwelling units per building), as part of a mixed-use development
b. Conditional Uses:
i. Conditional Uses, as shown in CZC 12.36-Table of Uses for the respective underlying zone
c. Maximum Gross Density:
i. Permitted Use Density – Not more than four dwelling units per acre as part of a mixed-use development
ii. Conditional Use Density – Not more than six dwelling units per acre as part of a mixed-use development
iii. Exception – Any legal lot shall be eligible for at least two dwelling units regardless of size as part of a mixed-use development
d. [additions] Area Exemptions/Alterations:
i. Parrish Square Shopping Center – The Parrish Square Shopping Center shall be exempted from the SMSC Plan provisions and the following provisions shall apply:
1. The area shall be subject to the Development Standards and Regulations of General Applicably of the Commercial-High (C-H) Zone, as listed in CZC 12.34-Commercial Zones
2. The area shall also be subject to the Design Standards, as listed in CZC 12.63-Parrish Lane Gateway Design Standards
3. The Permitted and Conditional Uses, as shown in CZC 12.36-Table of Uses for the C-H Zone
4. Added Conditional Use: Storage, Climate Controlled, not exceeding 10,000 square feet within the Parrish Square Shopping Center
Mr. Snyder explained the three (3) factors the Planning Commission would need to consider when making a recommendation and final decision for a Zoning Ordinance text amendment and the pros and cons for such amendment as written in the staff report and draft findings, as written in the Staff Report. Chair Hirschi said in reviewing this issue, he thought of the unintended consequences of rolling this area out of the South Main Street Corridor Guidelines, but did not find a lot, and Cory touched on some of the issues. He questioned what could be built in its place if a developer were to come in, tear everything down in the Parrish Square, and start over. Cory replied that every use that is allowed in the C-H Zone, but not residential. As the amendment is written, it removes the residential component. The amendment will return the Parrish Lane Gateway back to its original zone prior to being added to the South Main Street Corridor Plan, except for the addition of the Climate Controlled Storage just specific to the Parrish Square. Chair Hirschi asked why the corner lot was included in the zone. Mr. Snyder explained during the discussions with the consultant the City hired, the Parrish intersection became the focal point (the North Gateway). He explained the issues discussed in making the decision.
Commissioner Wright asked for clarification on the conditional uses allowed on the South Main Street Corridor that would not be allowed on Parrish Square. Mr. Snyder explained the C-H Zone has its own list, which would not include residential but add the Climate Controlled Storage as a use only in Parrish Square. Commissioner Wright also asked for clarification on the differences between the Parrish Lane Design Standards and the South Main Street Design Standards. Mr. Snyder said that Parrish Lane is focused on primarily on any large project on Parrish Lane associated with or visually connected to Parrish Lane, i.e. trying to upgrade color, lights, architecture issues, etc., rather than just cookie cutter style. South Main Street is not a traditional bulk area. It is now a form based, concentrating, in addition to uses, on moving buildings to the front of the street, setting multiple story expectations and how the buildings would be treated in materials. Form base in principle is less worried about regulating uses and more worried about the design.
Steve Tate, Applicant, thanked the Commission for their discussion on what they want to do at Parrish Square. He said he has tried multiple times to rent out the space with no success. He feels the Climate Controlled Storage is the only business that would be successful in the corner space. He said taking it out the South Main Street Corridor would help them as a developer and property owner in the city as they consider future planning. He said having to move the buildings to the front of the street would be economically impossible to do. Mr. Tate briefly explained what his long-term planning would be if he could do what he wanted with that property.
At 7:29 p.m., Chair Hirschi opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to comment, Chair Hirschi closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Hirst asked for how long the space they are discussing had been empty. Mr. Tate responded only 30-60 days. Cross Fit was there but left to go across the freeway. He said the original owner of Parrish Square put in Cross Fit when he purchased the shopping center. Prior to that, it had been vacant for about 15 years. They have tried marketing the space in the last 8 months with no response.
Commissioner Hirschi made a motion to recommend approval to the City Council of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments regarding “Climate Controlled Storage” as written in red and highlighted in the Staff Report, for the suggested reasons for actions a – e in the Staff Report. Commissioner Daly seconded the motion.
Commissioner Daly made an amendment to the motion to add Finding f. as follows:
f. The Planning Commission finds that the Parrish Square Shopping Center is more closely related to Parrish Lane than it is to Main Street.
Commissioner Wright second the amendment to the motion. The amendment to the motion passed with a unanimous roll-call vote (4-0). Commissioner Wright commented that this action was a perfect solution to the concern the Commission had of allowing Climate Controlled Storage in all C-H Zones, which was more than what the Commission wanted. She agreed that Parrish Square relates more with Parrish Lane than Main Street.
Commissioner Hirst said she agreed the change of taking it out of the South Main Street Corridor Overlay, but felt the Climate Controlled Storage would be strange for that area. Commissioner Daly explained the prior discussions by the Planning Commission, which led them to the consideration before them tonight. He said in his opinion it was a good fit for a way to make use of an otherwise difficult situation. Commissioner Wright stated that Climate Controlled Storage is different from the regular storage, as the hours of operation would only be during regular business hours or extended business hours. That would eliminate people coming during all hours of the day and night. It would also help eliminate some of the illegal activities that take place in the back of the building, that the neighbors have complained about, since the access would be from the back. Commissioner Hirst also asked if there would be any access from the front. Mr. Tate explained his intent would be access from the back only, as a courtesy to the other tenant. He explained it would also alleviate parking problems. Chair Hirschi stated that in the earlier Planning Commission deliberations, that there is quite a bit of demand for this kind of storage, but they did not want to open it up to all C-H Zones.
Chair Hirschi called for a vote on the main motion. The main motion passed by unanimous roll-call vote (4-0).
At 7:44 p.m., Commission Johnson rejoined the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING – CODE TEXT AMENDMENT RECEPTION CENTER I-H ZONE - Consider the proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment for Chapter 12.36-Table of Uses Allowed, to allow “Reception Center” in the I-H (Industrial-High) Zone - Jaden Malan, Newmark Grubb Acres, Agent
Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, explained that that applicant has an interest in leasing a building for a Reception Center (see attachments) in the south Industrial Park located in the Industrial-High (I-H) Zone (approximately 1343 West 75 North. Mr. Snyder said a Reception Center, currently not listed in the Table of Uses (Chapter 12.36) in the I-H Zone; therefore, this would be a use change in the I-H Zone by adding that use in that district. Mr. Snyder explained the Proposed Zoning Ordinance Text Edits as drafted in the Staff report:
Chapter 12.36-Table Of Uses Allowed: [add] “Reception Center” to I-H Zone Matrix as a permitted use.
Mr. Snyder reported in making the decision the Planning Commission should consider the change as being unrelated to a specific property and determine if the allowable uses are appropriate in all areas within a specified zoning district. He explained the three (3) factors (as written in staff report) that the Planning Commission should consider when making a recommendation and final decision for a Zoning Ordinance amendment. He said these required factors are located in Section 12.21.080(e) of Centerville City’s Zoning Ordinance. The proposed changes, if approved, would apply to any property located in an I-H Zone. Factors 2 & 3 are more related to specific map amendments, rather than text changes.
Mr. Snyder stated that staff’s position from reviewing the General Plan is that the proposed amendment to allow “Reception Centers” helps to preserve the economic vitality of an aging area. However, a “Reception Center” use is more closely related to a personal service use and less specific to professional service, specialty retail, or manufacturing uses. He said the Commission would need to determine if the need to create economic vitality outweighs the need to remain steadfast to professional services and manufacturing. It is staff’s position that there are many office and professional service uses already in place in the West Centerville Neighborhood Plan, which was adopted a long time ago. Thus, allowing other quality services for the community would not have a negative effect in the area.
Mr. Snyder explained the additional considerations with permitted use versus conditional use. The debate is ongoing on land uses listed as a permitted use, rather than using the more subjective criteria of the CUP process. Staff believes that in the case of “Reception Centers,” the CUP process would mitigate concerns with “hours of operation” and “occupancy” activities regarding late evening events beyond the standard Noise Ordinance restrictions. Staff acknowledges that other zoning districts already list this type of use as “permitted” in the Public Facility-High (PF-H) and Commercial Very-High (C-VH) and “conditional” in the Commercial-High (C-H) Zones. Mr. Snyder said staff has given the Planning Commission two options; 1) to recommend approval, with findings; or 2) deny the ordinance amendments, with findings.
Commissioner Daly questioned whether the screening on each side of the building was required in this case. Mr. Snyder replied when areas used for outside storage of materials, the screening is required. Commissioner Daly said his concern is that people may not know that there is parking in the back and would park on the street, in front of neighbor’s parking lots, etc. Mr. Snyder said this should be part of the debate as to whether this would be an appropriate place for this kind of use. He further stated, if the Planning Commission approved this amendment, there would still be other steps of approval to consider the other details and if the standards were met. The Commission further questioned if the Planning Commission is to consider this amendment as a permitted use or conditional use. Mr. Snyder explained the CUP process would mitigate some of the concerns, such as hours or operation, but some of the other zoning districts already list this type of use as a “permitted use.”
Jaden Malan, Applicant, stated he is a real estate agent with Newmark Grubb Acres, a commercial real estate company. He represents Luz Estrada who has been in business for about 8 years. Her business is currently located on Redwood Road and Cutler Street, in a similar area with office users, warehouse users and retail. He said Ms. Estrada is looking to expand and would like to use the site in Centerville. They like the building, which would be a good fit for her business. He explained the parking currently shown on the site is where the parking for the Reception Center would be. The parking area has recently been repaved and repainted. Mr. Malan said the building has been vacant for 2 years. He could not see the building used for manufacturing because as it is right now, it would have to be converted back to a warehouse. It is away from residential and would be a good fit for a Reception Center. Mr. Mahan explained that most of the events held are private events held at off-business hours, so it would not cause problems with daytime traffic. Commissioner Wright asked about the hours of operation. Ms. Estrada (the owner) said most of her parties start and 5 p.m. and go until around midnight or 1:00 a.m.
At 8:06 p.m., Chair Hirschi opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to comment, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Johnson expressed concern regarding problems if there were an emergency in that location. Commissioner Daly said he had no major concerns with the hours of operation, since the theater is in the area. He thought it made sense to have it a conditional rather than a permitted use, since in the commercial-high its conditional use. A CUP would give them more authority to mitigate any concerns. Chair Hirschi questioned if it would be legal to change it to conditional use, as it had been advertised as a permitted use. Would they have to renotice, if they made the change to a conditional use? City Attorney Lisa Romney explained the Planning Commission could make that recommendation to the City Council, since it is an amendment to the Zoning Code and not an applicant initiated rezone. Chair Hirschi said he would tend to agree with Commissioner Daly’s recommendation to make it a conditional use. He said they would have a better feel of what the affect would be on the neighborhood, and if circumstances would warrant it to be conditioned. Commissioner Johnson agreed, since this was not dealing with a density issue. Commissioner Wright said she would agree with it being conditional, so as to be able to deal with any issues that might be associated with this type of business.
Commissioner Johnson made a motion to recommend approval to the City Council of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments regarding “Reception Center” as follows:
Chapter 12.36-Table Of Uses Allowed: [add] “Reception Center” to I-H Zone matrix as a conditional use with suggested findings a – d in the Staff report, strike e & d and add a new finding e.
Suggested Reasons for Action (findings):
a. Section 12.430.1, Need for Commercial and Industrial Development Policies states that “…To assist in the provision of revenues for high quality local services, and TO PROVIDE
NEEDED PERSONAL AND BUSINESS SERVICES…”
b. Section 12-480-6 – “Goal …1 Enhance the Centerville City Business Park District.”
c. Section 12-480-6 – “Goal 1…Preserving the economic viability of a now aging development area is critical to the success of the neighborhood.”
d. The Planning Commission finds that “Reception Centers” are also made available in similar and greater intensive districts.
e. The Planning Commission finds that the conditional use approval process can help mitigate unique attributes of “Reception Centers.”
Commissioner Daly seconded the motion which passed by unanimous roll call vote (6-0).
Mr. Snyder asked to address the applicant. He informed the applicant to contact the City Recorder to schedule it for the City Council. He reminded the applicant that the Planning Commission changed the use to a conditional use rather than a permitted use and that is what the Council will consider.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Mr. Snyder reminded the Commissioners that he would be out of the country for the next meeting.
Upcoming projects (November 9, 2016 meeting):
1. Ray Conceptual Subdivision, Legacy Crossing Storage Final Site Plan
City Attorney Lisa Romney reminded the Commissioners that she would be gone for the next two meetings. Chair Hirschi said he would be not be in attendance at the November meeting.
CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS REPORT
• September 20, 2016: Repeal SMSC Public Space Plan Amendments. Adopted a limited Public Space Plan with Eastside 4-ft park strip and 5-ft sidewalk, Westside as built, Bike lane
striping - Motion: Approved
• September 20, 2016: GP Amendment to Remove I-VH Zoning from West Centerville Neighborhood - Motion: Tabled to first meeting in November
At 8:20 p.m., Chair Hirschi made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Hirst seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous vote (6-0).
David Hirschi, Chair Date Approved
Marsha L. Morrow, City Recorder