SOUTH WEBER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING

Transcription

1 SOUTH WEBER PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE OF MEETING: 23 May 2013 TIME COMMENCED: 6:30 p.m. PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: Delene Hyde Tim Grubb Rob Osborne Rod Westbroek Rorie Stott (excused) CITY PLANNER: DEPUTY RECORDER: TRANSCRIBER: Scott Hess Emily Thomas Michelle Clark A WORK MEETING WAS HELD PRIOR TO THE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 6:00 P.M. TO DISCUSS AGENDA ITEMS, CORRESPONDENCE, AND/OR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS VISITORS: Doris Rice, Sherrie West, Jacob Wilson, Megan Wilson, Val Johnson, Kimball Johnson, Teri Johnson, Nancy Berrett, Vic Berrett, Ross & Debbie McKinnon, Debbie Buckner, Lynette Winterton, Scott & Celeste Petersen, Ryan & Brittany Marvel, Debbie & Matt Youngber, Kent & Louise Mueller, Jason & Lindsey McRoberts, Mark Burnett, Cheri & Scot Slager, Randy & Lorraine Mills, Brent & Eileen Johnson, Steven & Claudia Neilsen, Mark & Brenda Goddard, Bart Boren, Emily Boren, Bill Markham, Susan Markham, Julie Losee, Aaron Losee, Avery Losee, Kemry Losee, Ric Madge, Kte Madge, Charlen Richens, Michael Chabries, Laura Chabries, Brylie Stevenson, Greta Coston, Briana Redd, Brad McDougel, Richard Hawkes, Matt Spencer, Angie & Zach Burton, Nicole Bridges, William Bridges, Denise Jonas, Stacy Hauck, Manuel Hauck, Ken Watson, Bob Galbraith, Carol Christensen, Mark Christensen, Brad Orr, Bill Cook, Carl Humphries, and Amy Watson. Commissioner Hyde excused Commissioner Stott from tonight s meeting. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST: There was no conflict of interest declared by the Planning Commission. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA: Commissioner Grubb moved to approve tonight s agenda as amended. Commissioner Westbroek seconded the motion. Commissioners Grubb, Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. The motion carried. APPROVAL OF 25 APRIL 2013 MEETING MINUTES: Commissioner Westbroek moved to the minutes of 25 April 2013 as written. Commissioner Osborne seconded the motion. Commissioners Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. Commissioner Grubb abstained. The motion carried.

2 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 2 of 9 Commissioner Westbroek moved to open the pubic hearing for Rezone Application #13-2. Commissioner Grubb seconded the motion. Commissioners Grubb, Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. The motion carried. * * * * * * * * * * PUBLIC HEARING * * * * * * * * * * Rezone Application #2013-2, Application to Rezone Parcels and from Residential Moderate (RM) to Residential High (RH); Applicant: Stevenson Homes Inc. Application has been made by Stevenson Homes Inc. to rezone two parcels: and The property is located along the frontage road nearing the entrance to the Canyon Ridge Estates development. Together the parcels total approximately 4.57 acres. The parcels are currently zoned Residential Moderate (RM) which allows 2.8 dwelling units per acre. The request is to rezone the parcels to Residential High (RH) which allows 13 dwelling units per acre. Pending approval of this application, the applicant is proposing to do a future development of townhomes on this property. The South Weber City General Plan Project Land Use Map shows these parcels to remain as Residential Moderate (RM); however, there is a floating asterisks in the vicinity that allows for Residential High (RH) zoning in the area does not specify exact location. If the rezone is approved, this would be the second Residential High (RH) zoning in this area (the first being the townhome development, Village at Valley Meadows). Commissioner Hyde asked if there was any public comment. Bryce Stevenson, 2343 Bluffridge Drive, Syracuse, Utah: said he is requesting a rezone from Residential Moderate (RM) to Residential High (RH). He said his intention for the rezone is to install 42 to 44 townhouses 4 plex units similar to Destination Homes project around the corner. He explained that the property has sat vacant for a long time, and is a very expensive piece to development. He understands there are storm drain issues with this project. He feels that financially it would be difficult to develop this property in any other format. He also feels it the type of project would create a buffer from Highway 89. He said this development will be a nice subdivision and will add to the community. Mark Burnett, 8021 South 2700 East, said he opposes the rezone request for this property. He lives near this property and the rezone will affect his home value with additional noise, traffic, etc. When he purchased his home he was told the property would be developed with 10 luxury homes. Mr. Burnett referred to City Ordinance South Weber City general plan. He feels high density in this area is inconsistent with the area. He explained that when the first town homes were approved, he had no idea it would open the door for others. Mr. Burnett said the current property owner has failed to maintain the existing property. There are storm water issues surrounding this property because of the lay out of the property. He asked the city stick to the originally adopted general plan. Commissioner Hyde stated the applicant is not the owner of the property. Carl Humphries, 2518 East 8200 South, asked who is the owner. Emily stated Greg Wilde. He asked if there was any discussion with Mr. Wilde when he bought the property concerning the zone of the property. He was not in favor of the land south of the church being made into

3 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 3 of 9 high density; however, he does like the people who have moved into this development. He agrees with Mr. Burnett in that this rezone would not fit well into the community in this area. He has heard of individuals in the area who are willing to put up money to fight this in the community. Nancy Berrett, 8070 South 2575 East, this land is exactly in her backyard. Before she moved to South Weber they lived in a beautiful condominium. They sold their condo just in time, because little by little the original owners sold their condos with new owners not taking care of the property. Mike Chaberies, 2515 East 8240 South, feels this would be a spot zone. Ric Madge, 8054 South 2575 East, said he is concerned about increased traffic with the addition of up to 44 extra buildings. He stated there are a lot of people living in this area who have children with very little facilities. He is objecting this proposal. Val Johnson, 8249 South 2260 East, asked if the owner of the property is here in the room representing himself or does he live in South Weber. He stated the owner may not be a resident of South Weber and wouldn t have the same kind of interest as we would for this city. Mr. Johnson feels the Planning Commission needs to take into consideration why all of us came here to live in South Weber. Ryan Marvel, 8087 South 2700 East, stated his parents own the property where he is currently living. He is concerned about the parking issue, which has not been addressed. He doesn t see a solution for the car situation. He is concerned about the increased amount of children. He is not in favor of this rezone. Richard Hawkes, 8230 South Deer Run Way, feels there a lot more questions then answers with this rezone request. He doesn t see a plan that may cause the citizens to have an open mind, but someone who is speculating what to do with the land. Ken Watson, 8001 South 2550 East, is not opposed to this rezone but does have some questions. He is concerned about the increase in traffic. He has family members that live in condos and apartments right now and there is never enough parking. He would like to make sure there would be enough parking for individuals. He discussed a woman who came to his home with a little yellow card that identified the property and rezone request. He was offended that she said they don t want this caliber of people living in the city. Kate Madge, 8054 South 2575 East, is not opposing the rezone request, but would like to know who is going to pay for maintenance on the roads, drainage issues that will flood others, increase in school system, etc. She is concerned this will be a burden to the community. She is also worried about the delinquent property owner. Linda Marvel, 8087 South 2700 East, called from Thailand. She feels there are a couple of things that need to be addressed. She said Greg Wilde and city signed a contract on this property for high end homes. She feels they need to stick to their agreement. She said because Mr. Wilde spent too much on this property, there is no reason, why the community should have to suffer.

4 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 4 of 9 She explained that this property is a fire hazard every summer. Mr. Wilde needs to take care of this property. She feels the city should hold Mr. Wilde to his contract. Zac Burton, 2572 East 8150 South, said he has a problem with the fact that South Weber City is even entertaining this rezone. He feels the city should look at the long term impact of this rezone. Brad Orr, 8129 South 2475 East, has an issue with the intersection of the frontage road and South Weber Drive. It has already become a safety hazard with the charter school traffic. He feels it is a horrible idea to rezone this property. He referred to Destination Homes town homes to the south of this property that have not taken care of their landscape. Carol Christensen, 8143 South 2475 East, feels this development would look visually ridiculous from Highway 89. She said there are a lot of residents who built their dream homes near this property. The park is too small to accommodate more people. Bill Cook, 2677 East 8150 South, stated he is not opposed to rezoning this property and feels it should be rezoned back to agricultural. He is sorely disappointed in the maintenance of the property. He is concerned about how this development would decrease property values. Bill Markham, 2490 East 8125 South, stated he recently purchased a lot south of this property. He would not have purchased this lot had he known this property was going to be rezoned high density. He is concerned if the city is looking at this as a tax base. Doris Rice, 8058 South 2525 East, stated we have heard the complaints but there is one issue that hasn t been brought forth. She said the location must have influenced those who built their high end homes and now if this is allowed there will be some very unhappy people. Scott Petersen, 7890 South 2450 East, said earlier this fall he was trying to go through a proposal to develop this particular piece of property. Mr. Wilde is not making a fortune off of this property, which is a misunderstanding from what he is hearing tonight. Mr. Petersen feels the property should not be rezoned to high density. Manuel Hauck, 2562 East 8150 South, built a retirement home in South Weber. He is opposed to this rezone. Lynette Winterton, 2357 East 8100 South, works at the elementary school and is very much aware of the population there. She understands the charter school is full. She sees this rezone as being a hardship on the elementary school. Claudia Neilsen, 8082 South 2575 East, stated she has a corner of her property that touches this property. She is concerned about the grade of this property and more flooding at her home. She has had nine floods in eleven years. Charlene Richins, 7910 South 2310 East, stated she runs past this property, she would like to know how many people we want waiving signs on the corner advertising for this subdivision.

5 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 5 of 9 Susan Markham, 2490 East 8125 South, purchased a lot south of this property. She and her children love South Weber and want to stay in South Weber. She feels somebody s problem should not impact an entire community. Lorraine Mills, 8036 South 2575 East, stated she has had flooding from this property. She was told it is the landowners responsibility to retain water. Randy Mills, 8036 South 2575 East, stated he is totally against this rezone. Amy Watson, 8001 South 2550 East, thanked the Planning Commission for listening to the public. Commissioner Grubb moved to close the pubic hearing for Resolution # Commissioner Westbroek seconded the motion. Commissioners Grubb, Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. The motion carried. * * * * * * * * * * PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED * * * * * * * * * * Scott Hess, read letters received concerning this rezone request. He said he will not read Carol Christensen s letter since she made a public comment tonight. Jason McRoberts, see attached Sally Roberts, see attached Kenneth Hicks, see attached Trever Compton, see attached Robert and Linda Marvel, see attached Scott Hess, City Planner, stated he is a planner and has worked for South Weber City for six years. He grew up in South Weber. He understands residents concerns. He said the city has a general plan. He stated this area had a floating asterisk. The city doesn t know what applications will be and the ability to rezone is a right that individuals have. He reminded those in attendance that no development equals weeds. He reported that the city has fined the current property owner for the weeds. He stated the city can also hold a lien against the property owner s taxes. Scott said the drainage issue is a civil issue and the city wouldn t be able to address that; however, the city would address that with development. He said a developer is required to install storm drainage improvements. He then discussed concerns with the frontage road and South Weber Drive. He stated South Weber Drive is a state road. He has seen two different plans for that intersection but would need to be addressed by UDOT. Parking for this development would be addressed at the Sketch Plan. The Planning Commission doesn t consider financial reasons for a rezone. This application is strictly for a rezone request. At this point, the Planning Commission doesn t have the specifics on construction of the units. The question for the Planning Commission is whether or not a floating asterisk has or has not been fulfilled.

6 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 6 of 9 Commissioner Grubb stated he enjoys mix use. He feels there are opportunities for us to grow as citizens when there are mixed uses. He doesn t want any development to become an eyesore, crime ridden, etc. The Planning Commission does try to follow the general plan. He said the city is not in the business of making money, but it is more about providing opportunities for people. This property does have a lot of issues that would be addressed should it go to the next stage. Storm drainage and access is an issue. This property would require a secondary access if there is more than 30 units. He does believe the frontage road was designed to handle a lot of traffic. He has no desire to hurt the safety with the citizens of this community. He has no desire to help out a developer. He is not trying to make anyone s property any less valuable. He is concerned about the happiness and safety of the community. He feels strongly that everybody has the right to go through this process. He appreciates the input from citizens. If there are not enough parks, the city does push parks on developers. Commissioner Hyde stated this only the beginning. This item will go on to the City Council. She stated she has lived here fifty years and when she was little you knew everyone in South Weber. She said individuals in attendance tonight wouldn t be here if their development wasn t allowed. If you want to own your view, you have to own the property. People have a right to develop their property. Commissioner Westbroek said he has reviewed the city master plan. He does realize this is just a rezone, but feels you have to look at the long term affect of this rezone. He understands why people are attracted to South Weber. He feels the high density in the area has been met with the town homes that are already there. He feels this property has big issues. He is aware of the storm drainage concerns. Commissioner Westbroek moved to deny Resolution # based upon the issues he has brought up. The motion died due to lack of a second. Commissioner Osborne has little patience for people who threaten suing or people trying to tell people what to do with their property. He does feel the city has met their obligation with high density. Commissioner Westbroek moved to deny Resolution # Commissioner Osborne seconded the motion. Commissioners Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. Commissioner Grubb voted no. The motion carried 3 to 1. Discussion Item: At the request of the City Council, discuss proposed Ordinance 13-10, An Ordinance Amending Title 11 Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 4 Improvement Requirements, and provide alternative recommendation(s). (*Public Hearings for this item were previously held on March 28, 2013 and April 23, 2013). Commissioner Hyde stated in March, the Planning Commission made a favorable recommendation to the City Council to amend the standard street width to always be a seventy foot (70 ) right of way and not allow for a sixty foot (60 ) connection at all (Ordinance 13-10). On April 23, 2013, the City Council held a public hearing and discussed this recommendation. After the discussion, it was determined that the Planning Commission should provide additional recommendation options.

7 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 7 of 9 Commissioner Grubb feels the City Council needs to tell us or be more specific as to what they want. Commissioner Hyde feels the Planning Commission made a good recommendation. Commissioner Westbroek discussed putting something in the ordinance that would define a definite hardship. Commissioner Grubb feels the out is already there and the original recommendation is already good. Emily read from the City Council minutes of 23 April Commissioner Osborne stated the Planning Commission made a recommendation. Tom Graydon, Fire Chief, said he was in attendance at the City Council meeting. He recommended the Planning Commission and City Council try to find a common ground. Commissioner Hyde feels the Planning Commission needs to stick with what was originally recommended. Commissioner Grubb moved to stay with what was originally recommended. Commissioner Westbroek seconded the motion. Commissioners Grubb, Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. The motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS: General Plan Asterisks for High Density: Scott discussed the property located at 475 East and Interstate 84. There are accesses issues with this property. He attended the City Council meeting in which they discussed having the Planning Commission address asterisks for high density. ADJOURN: Commissioner Osborne moved to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 8:35 p.m. Commissioner Grubb seconded the motion. Commissioners Grubb, Hyde, Osborne, and Westbroek voted yes. The motion carried. APPROVED: Date Chairperson, Delene Hyde Attest: Deputy Recorder: Emily A. Thomas Transcriber: Michelle Clark

8 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 8 of 9 Time: Work meeting began at 6:07 p.m. Planning Commission Work Meeting May 23, 2013 Attendance: Commissioners Hyde, Grubb, Westbroek, and Osborne, Deputy Recorder Emily Thomas, City Planner Scott Hess, Fire Chief Thomas Graydon Visitors: None Rezone Application #2013-2, Application to Rezone Parcels and from Residential Moderate (RM) to Residential High (RH); Applicant: Stevenson Homes Inc. Commissioner Hyde inquired about the floating asterisks and whether or not this has been used by the previous townhome development. Scott stated that this requires us to consider whether or not we are at capacity for this type of housing (moderate income) in the City. There is currently approximately 200 multi-family units plus the apartment complex. This is about 10% of the total land use. We are looking at a build out population projected at approximately 13,000. We are currently providing enough single family home developments. The market is requesting this (multi-family) type of use. The question is, have we fulfilled our moderate income housing requirement in the City. Scott added that he can t imagine how the current townhome development, Village at Valley Meadows, has driven the value of the surrounding homes down. Commissioner Grubb inquired whether or not the asterisk on the General Plan Projected Land Use has been fulfilled. Scott stated that he spoke to Barry Burton about this project and they both agreed that the asterisk is used in the General Plan because it is difficult to be so prescriptive. He commended the Planning Commission for how well they follow the City s General Plan. Commissioner Grubb stated that the City Ordinance puts a constraint on the number of acres that can be used for this type of development in one area. He added that this area could handle more of this type of development and the frontage road can handle the additional traffic. He added that he likes mixed use developments because they bring a mixture of uses and people to an area. Commissioner Grubb is concerned with other issues that will need to be addressed at the development stage (access, drainage, public safety, etc). Chief Graydon added that he also has issues with access and public safety these too would need to be addressed at the development stage, but he wants to make the developer aware. Commissioner Grubb stated that the Planning Commission is not here to help make the Developer money. Commissioner Westbroek stated that for years we have wanted to maintain the country

9 South Weber Planning Commission Meeting 23 May 2013 Page 9 of 9 feel in the City. There is a townhome development already in the area. Economics are not our concern. Commissioner Osborne stated that he feels the spirit and intent of the asterisks has been fulfilled. There are other areas in the City that this type of zoning can go. Commissioner Hyde stated that we have worked hard on our General Plan and need to decide if we have met our obligation for this type of zoning on the east side. Our decision needs to be based on zoning and not on the development. Discussion Item: At the request of the City Council, discuss proposed Ordinance 13-10, An Ordinance Amending Title 11 Subdivision Regulations, Chapter 4 Improvement Requirements, and provide alternative recommendation(s). (*Public Hearings for this item were previously held on March 28, 2013 and April 23, 2013). Commissioner Hyde asked why the City Council has sent this back. It should have been approved or just made changes at the time it was before them. Commissioner Westbroek asked what the request is. Emily stated that they wanted another recommendation. Commissioner Hyde stated that she doesn t appreciate having to do her job twice. The purpose of the original recommendation was to make sure everyone had to follow the same standards. This would get rid of the good old boys club mentality. Chief Graydon stated that they were looking for some wiggle room for developments. Rodger added that this could be for small parcels that are in-between two other parcels along a smaller right of way. Commissioner Westbroek stated that all Developers will want the wiggle room. Commissioner Grubb stated that the seventy foot (70 ) right of way is the same asphalt width. If there is a small parcel in between, then the Developer could do the 70 right of way and add nice trees in the wider park strip. The work meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Work meeting minutes transcribed by Deputy Recorder, Emily Thomas.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16