November 18, 2015

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
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 7:00 p.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT
Cheylynn Hayman
David Hirschi, Chair
Gina Hirst
Logan Johnson
Kevin Merrill

MEMBERS ABSENT
Scott Kjar
William Ince

STAFF PRESENT
Corvin Snyder, Community Development Director
Brandon Toponce, Assistant Planner
Lisa Romney, City Attorney
Kathy Streadbeck, Recording Secretary

VISITORS
Vivian Talbot
Robin Mecham
Nancy Smith

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

OPENING COMMENT    Commissioner Hayman

MINUTES REVIEW AND APPROVAL

The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held October 28, 2015 were reviewed. Commissioner Johnson made a motion to approve the minutes as written. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Merrill and passed by unanimous vote (4-0). Commissioner Hayman abstained as she was not present at this meeting.

PUBLIC HEARING | RASBAND RESIDENTIAL BLDG LOT | 85 E CHASE LN - Consider proposed Conceptual Site Plan for an unplatted residential building lot, for the purpose of constructing a new dwelling on property located at 85 East Chase Lane.  Glade Jones, Calute Homes, Applicant.

Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, reviewed the approval process for this property, explaining that given the circumstances this simple application requires a full site plan approval process. The lot has stood vacant for some time and is considered abandoned which triggers the full approval process. The applicant has already been approved for a rezone from Agricultural-Low (A-L) to Residential-Low (R-L). The applicant is now seeking conceptual approval.

Brandon Toponce, Assistant Planner, reviewed the conceptual site plan application. The purpose of this review is to ensure that the lot is buildable, meets all the applicable Zoning Ordinances, and to ensure all appropriate public utility easements are established. The proposed use is permitted in the R-L Zone, is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, and meets all applicable development standards. The applicant has provided necessary utility provider sheets showing the property can be adequately serviced. The final site plan must show all utilities being properly stubbed into the property, along with an indication of the closest fire hydrant. The applicant has shown utility easements on the plan as required to be accepted by the City Council. The applicant will be required to pay all development fees. The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plan indicating several items that will need to be completed during final site plan approval (i.e., basement depth, drive approach removal, park-strip, etc.)

Chair Hirschi said, at one time, there was a previous home on this property. He said the utilities are likely already established and questioned what else needs to be accomplished in this regard. Mr. Snyder said the utilities are already available, but the applicant will need to ensure they are properly sized, in good condition, and adequate for the proposed use.

Lisa Romney, City Attorney, said the public utility easements and legal descriptions still need to be recorded and suggested this be added to the conditions of approval.

Glade Jones, Applicant, said he is accepting of the conditions of approval and will record the public utility easements and legal description as requested. He said he will also address the items called out by the City Engineer.

Chair Hirschi opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing.

Chair Hirschi made a motion for the Planning Commission to accept the Conceptual Site Plan for the Rasband Residential Lot to be located at 85 East Chase Lane, with the following conditions:

Conditions:
1.    All fees shall be paid; including all related development fees.
2.    The applicant shall submit a final site plan application meeting the standards found in Section 12-21-110(e) of the Ordinance.
3.    A final site plan shall be approved prior to the issuance of a building permit
4.    All utilities shall be indicated on the final site plan.
5.    Building sketches shall be provided as part of the final site plan application identifying the total building height.
6.    The closest fire hydrant shall be indicated on the final plan.
7.    The following engineering concerns shall be addressed and reviewed by the City Engineer:
•     A 4-foot park-strip shall be indicated with a 1-foot sidewalk easement
•    The existing drive approach shall be removed.
•    If a new bridge is created, approval by Davis County shall be obtained
•    A fixture count must be completed to determine the size of the culinary water line
•    The existence of a basement shall be determined
•    A bond shall be posted for all public improvements
8.    Applicant shall prepare and submit legal descriptions for the perimeter public utility easements and sidewalk easement to be submitted to the City with final site plan application with a copy sent to the City Engineer and City Attorney for preparation of required easements for the property.

Reasons for the Action:
1.    The applicant has clearly shown how the property may be developed [Section 12-21-110(d)(2)].
2.    The applicant has submitted a full application [Section 12-21-110(d)(1)].
3.    Proposed utility easements are required on all developed lots [Section 12-21-110(e)(2)(iii)(d), 15-5-106(8)].
4.    A final site plan application shall be required for submittal [Section 12-21-110(e)].

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Johnson and passed by unanimous vote (5-0).

PUBLIC HEARING | CODE TEXT AMENDMENT, SECTION 12-61-062 – DEUEL CREEK HISTORIC DISTRICT - Consider proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment for Section 12-61-062–Deuel Creek Historic District; which purpose is to help promote preservation of the original town site.  Centerville City, Applicant

Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, reported the Landmark Commission has been working on this proposed amendment for some time. He explained the Landmark Commission's primary duty is to preserve the built environment. They do this by promoting and nominating historic structures for local and national registrations and by providing incentives for preservation. The proposed amendment recognizes a local neighborhood to be celebrated by Centerville and provides incentives if those structures are preserved. The proposed amendments are for a local district only and are strictly voluntary.

Brandon Toponce, Assistant Planner, reviewed the process the Landmark Commission went through in order to create the proposed historical district overlay zone, including work by a consultant and intern and work done by the Landmark Commission. He reviewed the proposed boundary for the Deuel Creek Historic District Overlay Zone. This area has a large concentration of homes 50 years and older and is rich in history. In addition, the Landmark Commission felt it was important to keep the District walkable; this is why the area does not extend across Main Street. He explained the Landmark Commission held three public hearings to receive input and suggestions from the public.

Mr. Toponce reviewed the details of the proposed text amendment to establish the Deuel Creek Historic District Overlay. The proposed amendments are for a local celebratory district and are completely voluntary. The proposed district would only be recognized by Centerville and not subject to any state or national guidelines. This informal style allows the community to create an individual incentive program and gives the neighborhood a chance to become more involved in shaping the future of their community. Mr. Toponce reviewed the proposed property classifications, the proposed development standards, the proposed review and building permit process, and the incentives program. He also explained that the reference numbers throughout the proposed document will be corrected as needed.

Mr. Toponce said the Landmarks Commission believes the proposed Zoning Code Text Amendment has been created in a way that will encourage historic preservation.  In addition, it appears the proposal is in harmony with all applicable goals and objectives found within the General Plan.

Commissioner Merrill asked how much participation came from residents during the public meetings. He also asked if there are any additional monetary incentives for historic preservation, i.e., tax reduction or grant possibilities. Mr. Toponce said the public meetings got a fair turnout of residents who were willing to share ideas and provide support. In addition, a letter was sent to every resident within the proposed boundary informing them of the proposed amendment. Mr. Toponce explained that some tax incentive or grant options may be provided if a home owner chooses to register on the national level and follow national guidelines. The proposed amendments are local to Centerville and do not include tax or grant incentives.

Commissioner Hayman said the incentive for a reduction in building permit fee says "up to" a 25% reduction. She questioned if there is a scale? She said she is inclined to remove the words "up to" and provide a flat 25% reduction. Staff and the Commission agreed a flat rate reduction is best, thus eliminating a need for interpretation.

Chair Hirschi questioned if the proposed amendments run with the land requiring a future property owner to keep the integrity of the historic property. He said a property owner could get a significant break on building permit fees and then turn around and sell the property for a greater profit. Mr. Snyder said a time frame could be added requiring a property owner to reside for a specific amount of time before the incentive payout is allowed.

Lisa Romney said a clarification needs to be made that the 25% reduction is off the building permit fee only and not off all building fees. She also suggested the Procedures statements [Section 12-49-070 (a) and (b)] be combined for clarity. Mr. Snyder clarified the 25% reduction is for the building permit review fee only and does not include any reduction from applicable impact fees.
Chair Hirschi opened the public hearing. Seeing no one wishing to comment; he closed the public hearing.

Commissioner Merrill made a motion for the Planning Commission to accept the Zoning Code Text Amendment for Section 12-61-062 and the creation of Section 12-49, Deuel Creek Historic District, as depicted within the Staff Report dated November 18, 2015 and with changes as discussed this evening and to recommend approval to the City Council.

Reasons for the Action:
1.    The proposed amendment meets the requirements found in Section 12-21-080(4)(e).
2.    The proposed zoning text amendment meets the goals and objectives of the General Plan concerning a historic district [Section 12-480-8(3)].
3.    Creating the Deuel Creek Historic District would not have a negative impact on the surrounding community.
4.    Through research, site visits, three public work sessions and several meetings, the Landmarks Commission believes they have covered important aspects of location, guidelines and incentives.
5.    The Landmarks Commission believes the proposed district and subsequent created documents will be beneficial to the neighborhood.

The motion was seconded by Commissioner Hirst and passed by unanimous roll-call vote (5-0).

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT

1.    The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be Wednesday, December 9, 2015.
2.    Upcoming Agenda Items:
•    Huffaker Dental, Duplex Rezone & Conceptual Subdivision (134 South Main)
•    Holbrook Property, Rezone & Lot Split (1851 North Main)

The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m.

________________________________            ___12-9-2015________
David Hirschi, Chair                                              Date Approved

__________________________________
Kathleen Streadbeck, Recording Secretary