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
February 10, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING
Wednesday, February 10, 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
Corvin Snyder, Community Development Director
Lisa Romney, City Attorney
Kathy Streadbeck, Recording Secretary
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
OPENING COMMENT/LEGISLATIVE PRAYER Commissioner Johnson
MINUTES REVIEW AND APPROVAL
The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting held January 27, 2016 were reviewed and amended. Commissioner Hirst made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Daly and passed by unanimous vote (7-0).
COMMISSION BUSINESS – Continuation of Discussion on 2016/2017 Planning Commission Goals
Cory Snyder, Community Development Director, reminded the Commission that each year the Planning Commission develops a prioritized list of planning goals or issues for City Council consideration. The City Council has not yet outlined their goal setting process, but this will likely take place in the coming months. The Planning Commission will likely be asked to participate in this process by providing their goals/priorities. This is the Planning Commission’s chance to raise any concerns and to be proactive in their planning.
Chair Hirschi asked the Commission to share their thoughts and ideas regarding planning goals. He believes the Planning Commission can be more effective as planners by providing a list of their priorities for City Council consideration. He said the West Centerville Neighborhood Plan, the South Main Street Corridor Plan (SMSC), and the Subdivision Ordinance update are important issues to be considered in the near future.
Commissioner Kjar said his top priorities are the West Centerville Neighborhood Plan and the SMSC plan, specifically Pages Lane redevelopment. He sees great opportunities for redevelopment on Pages Lane and feels a set plan needs to be considered sooner rather than later.
Commissioner Hirst said she would like to plan for better trails and pathways throughout the city. She believes this element is often overlooked and needs to be planned for early on during development. Mr. Snyder said this has been a priority in the past and the Trails Committee has done a great job to get several trail segments developed throughout the city. It would be beneficial to plan for the connectivity of these trail segments including the development of additional trail segments. The Commission also discussed having a member of the Trails Committee come visit with the Planning Commission and show what progress has been made.
Commissioner Daly said the Foothills Plan is important and he would like to proactively address this issue. He said there has been a lot of rumors and confusion around the Foothills and what could be developed. He said it would be better to look at options that may be viable and desirable rather than getting caught off guard with an application that may not be the best fit.
Commissioner Hayman said she was intrigued by the discussion about “Routine and Uncontested” matters during the work session just prior to this meeting. She agrees the Planning Commission spends most of their time approving routine applications. If this function were delegated to staff then the Commission would have more time to deal with planning issues and their list of priorities could be extended.
Commissioner Wright said there are several issues that will come to the Planning Commission in the next year because they are currently hot topics. Perhaps it is more beneficial to prioritize those items which the Commission feel are important for proactive planning of the community such as trails and the foothills. She also agreed with Commissioner Hayman regarding “Routine and Uncontested” matters.
Mr. Snyder said the ability to delegate “Routine and Uncontested” matters to staff for approval is possible but there are challenges. He explained this would require some education for the public. The public could become frustrated as things are approved and developed without their previous knowledge. The public may not understand how one application was approved when another was required to be heard at the Planning Commission. Lisa Romney, City Attorney, suggested the Commission review the “Routine and Uncontested” ordinance and understand how the policy works, then perhaps a recommendation can be made in the future.
Commissioner Johnson agreed there are several routine applications that could be approved by staff rather than coming to the Planning Commission. He also suggested that public hearings be eliminated from the conditional use permit process as they are considered public clamor which cannot be considered in an administrative decision.
Lisa Romney, City Attorney, summarized the potential goals discussed by the Planning Commission as follows (Note: this list is in no particular order of priority. The Planning Commission will discuss priority in a future meeting):
• South Main Street Corridor Plan, including Pages Lane area
• West Centerville
• Trails and Pathway element
• Foothills Plan
• Review administrative decisions and procedures, including elimination of public hearing for conditional use permits and staff approval for some administrative decisions
• Subdivision Ordinance updates and recodification
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT
1. The next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting will be Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 7:00 p.m.
2. Upcoming Agenda Items:
• 2016/2017 Planning Goals
• South Main Street Corridor Plan, density & space plan
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
David Hirschi, Chair Date Approved
Kathleen Streadbeck, Recording Secretary