SOUTH JORDAN CITY
COMBINED
CITY COUNCIL & BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING
September 7, 2010
Present: Mayor Kent Money, Council Member Brian Butters, Council Member Kathie Johnson, Council Member Larry Short, Council Member Aleta Taylor, Council Member Leona Winger, CM John Geilmann, ACM Gary Whatcott, City Attorney Rob Wall, IS Manager Jon Day, Lieutenant Matt Evans, City Council Secretary MaryAnn Dean
Others: Bruce Newbold, Chris Drent, Kelly Burgon, Kim Burgon, Sandra Bright, June Pino, Layne Dalton, Linda Dalton, Jeane Lambert, Ray Lambert, Stan Wells, Lisa Arntsen, Kim Arroyo, Jennifer Shino, Rex Holt, Donna Holt, Carol Brown, Ken Brown, Grace Holt, Cindy Seeley, Steve Barnes, Lavar Harling, Jean Perschon, Kevin Tominey, Rulon Dutson, LaRoyce Fisher, Robert Perschon, Nimia Waller, John Waller, Matthew Arntsen, Bill Porter, Noni Davies, Ray Robinson, Ben Seeley, Steven Seeley
6:00 P.M.
REGULAR MEETING
I. GENERAL BUSINESS
A. Welcome and Roll Call
Mayor Money welcomed everyone present. All members of the City Council were present.
B. Opening Ceremony
1. Invocation
Council Member Butters offered the invocation.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
Ben Seeley, scout, led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Mayor Money thanked staff for their work on the emergency preparedness plan work meeting. It was very informative. He said the individuals and families within the City need to be prepared in a disaster as they will be taking care of themselves for the first few days, depending on the disaster.
C. Motion to Approve Amended Agenda Items, If Any
CM Geilmann said item VIII. B.1. and B.2. are being pulled from the agenda.
Council Member Johnson made a motion to approve the amended agenda. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
Council Member Winger noted the upcoming Constitution Day Celebration scheduled for September 16th, and 7:00 p.m. at Bingham High School. Governor Herbert and Mayor Peter Coroon will be present to talk about the Constitution.
Council Member Winger recognized Kristin Sokol for her work with the South Valley Journal. She expressed appreciation to Mrs. Sokol for her work.
D. Minute Approval Council & B.O.A. Meeting Minutes
1. August 17, 2010
Council Member Butters made an amendment to page 5 of the City Council minutes.
Council Member Winger made a motion to approve the August 17, 2010 City Council minutes, as amended. Council Member Short seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
II. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS
Mayor Money said he appreciates the time and service of the Youth Council.
A. Oath of Office – Youth Council Mayor Pro Tempore Neil Eddington
This item was not done.
B. Oaths of Office – New Youth Council Members (Group 1)
The Youth Council members (Group 1) were administered the Oath of Office by Anna West, City Recorder.
III. CITIZEN COMMENT
Cyndy Seeley, 1122 W. 10260 S., said she has a daughter that attends Paradigm High School. It is hazardous for the kids to walk to the school. There is no walkway for the students in front of the school. There is no sidewalk. The students have to walk in the bike lane up to 11400 South. It is an open campus for lunch and there is not a safe way for them to go north. She suggested they do something like was done on 1000 West, with pressed gravel on the shoulder so they have some walking space next to the road. She noted that she has also spoken with school leaders and staff. They need to see what can be done to get the kids to school in a safe place.
Jennifer Shino, real estate agent representing the Gedge family at 9640 S. 1300 W. Ms. Shino indicated that her address is 2561 W. 13221 S. (Riverton). She said the Gedge family listed their 9.18 acres 2 years ago. The property has been under contract twice, but the offers were withdrawn because they were told that they cannot get their concept through the City. The property is now zoned for 1/3 acre lots. No one wants lots that large. The first offer was a 55 and older concept; the second offer was for single family custom homes. She said they would like to rezone the property to ¼ acre lots. She also noted recent crime problems on the property.
IV. SUMMARY ACTION CALENDAR
A. Proclamation – September 2010 as National Senior Center Month in South Jordan City
Council Member Winger made a motion to approve the Proclamation – September 2010 as National Senior Center Month in South Jordan City. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
V. SUMMARY ACTION ITEMS HELD OVER
None.
The City Council moved to item VIII. on the agenda.
VIII. OTHER BUSINESS
A.1. Consideration of Ordinance 2010-14, Amending and Enacting Title 13, City Code on Secondary Water. Public hearing was held August 17, 2010. By Associate Director Public Works Jason Rasmussen.
Assistant City Attorney Ryan Loose reviewed the new draft of this Ordinance. He said they have addressed the questions regarding the due process and the verification of the petition. It was noted that the Bonanza Acres/Polo Club Court project will follow this process. The Resolution will be recorded against every property in the project. He said how the money would be fronted and paid back would be included in the Resolution for each project. He said different areas might demand a different repayment process. He noted that the City Council does not have to entertain the requests by the neighborhoods; at any time, they can say no.
Council Member Winger asked about non payment and the ability to shut off culinary water. Assistant City Attorney Ryan Loose explained how the charges for utility bills are handled. Council Member Butters asked if they need to specifically include interest as part of the collection? Assistant City Attorney Loose said it is already the practice, but they can add that in.
Assistant City Attorney Loose noted that the public hearing is held the same night as the Resolution is proposed to create a service area.
Council Member Winger said she is concerned about non-exclusivity. There are many different situations with secondary water. Does this adequately address that? City Attorney Wall said the City Council can structure the service area to fit the individual circumstance. He believes that issue is addressed.
A.2. Potential Action Item – (See VIII. A.1.) Ordinance 2010-14
Council Member Taylor made a motion to adopt Ordinance 2010-14, with the addition of the word interest to be included, as noted by Council Member Butters. Council Member Short seconded the motion.
City Attorney Wall noted a change in section 13.08.100 to include that the Resolution shall be recorded in the Salt Lake County recorders office, and to strike the language against every service property.
Council Member Taylor amended her motion to include the change, as noted by City Attorney Wall. Council Member Short seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was unanimous in favor.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND POTENTIAL LEGISLATIVE ACTION ITEMS
A.1. Public Hearing – Consideration of Resolution R2010-30, Authorizing the City to Enter Into a Development Agreement With Arbor Gardner LC and Rezone Ordinance 2010-03-Z to Rezone 16.41 Acres, Property as Listed Within File Number REZ-2010-03 From R-2.5 to Redwood Road Mixed Use Historic on Property Located at 10317 South 1300 West. Arbor Gardner LC (Applicant)
John Shirley, ASA Architects, gave a presentation on the proposed development. He said there needs to be walkability, an organic feel, varying colors, landscaping, and architectural themes. He showed the proposed site plan. He feels they have created more open space while increasing the density. They are marketing the development for empty nesters and young families. They have doubled the parking required by the City. They do not have an open space requirement, but have provided plenty of open space. They also provided an easement to the back of the existing homes. He showed samples of neighborhoods with varying densities within the proximity of this project. He reviewed the proposed landscape plan. The common areas will be maintained by the HOA. There are three different landscape themes that the residents can pick from.
Mr. Shirley reviewed the color schemes proposed for the architecture. There are two basic home styles. The front porches are a very important element. There are covered patios and private areas in the back. The materials are brick and hearty board. No siding will be used. He reviewed the schematic street scape and discussed the architectural design standards. He said the plans have been reviewed by an architectural conservator. There was a lot of thought that went into this process.
Council Member Short asked if the people living next to the stub road would know that the road could go through? Council Member Johnson said the City requires that a sign be put up saying that the road is for future development.
Council Member Winger asked if a road would be stubbed into Mr. Burgon’s property? Mr. Shirley said he does not believe so, but he is not part of those negotiations.
The City Council discussed the current proposal which takes the density from 35 units to 57 units. The density is currently 3.67 units per acre. The homes will be approximately 3,000 square feet. The lot sizes vary from 5,098 – 8,812 sq. ft.(6,480 average). The price ranges of the homes are from $285,000-$350,000, or more. All will have 2 car garages.
Council Member Taylor asked if the roads are up to City standards? City Engineer Klavano said the structural section and width of the road are to City standards. The roads will be public; the driveways are private.
Council Member Butters asked if any streets will require the snow plows to back up? City Engineer Klavano said no.
Parks and Recreation Director Tingey gave an update on the Aunt Mame project. He discussed how the project has evolved and developed over the last few years. He reviewed the proposed future concept and needs for the future. Council Member Winger said this is the hope for the plan, not the promise of what will happen. Parks and Recreation Director Tingey concurred.
Mayor Money opened the public hearing.
Grace Holt, 10221 S. 1230 W., said she lives across from the development. She said she is concerned about the retention ponds and is concerned about the potential of homes being flooded. If water floods their basement, who would be responsible if something happens?
City Engineer Klavano said they are looking at spreading the basins throughout the development, which will help. There are already groundwater issues in the area. He said the hydrology issues and engineering will need to be addressed as part of the development process.
Council Member Taylor asked if there will be water sitting in the retention ponds for long periods? City Engineer Klavano said the goal is to get the water into the ground. The pond will be landscaped. He said they are looking at a storm drain system in Mabey Lane. Eventually, the retention basins will be used as detention basins. Mayor Money said the area will be able to take care of its own run off and won’t spill over.
Council Member Johnson asked where does the liability fall? City Manager Geilmann said it depends on the water source, etc. That will have to be addressed on a case by case basis. City Engineer Klavano noted that there are retention basins used all over the City.
Kevin Tominey, 10118 S. 1000 W., said this item was not approved by the Architectural Review committee; there was only a presentation done. He read the purpose of the Redwood Road Mixed Use Zone. He said this project is ¾ mile from the Redwood Road Corridor. He said he does not believe this meets the intent of the historical mixed use zone, in code 17.54.120. He said this is not limited residential; this is mostly residential. Mayor Money said he believes that refers to the whole zone, not just one development.
Council Member Johnson said this area was added to the Redwood Road Corridor as a historical zone. Mr. Tominey said when he served on the Planning Commission, people asked what is going on with Arbor Development. He said he understands that there are no back door deals, nor are they involved with anyone in the City. He said he believes that, but it looks different. Even tonight, it felt like the City was pitching for Arbor Development. He said it is a bit of a conflict of interest because the City owns Aunt Mame’s property and is looking to develop that and use it as a commercial enterprise. Mr. Tominey said he feels the City should have made their own Historical Zone, and not used this in the Redwood Road Mixed Use zone. Council Member Johnson said they are in the process of doing a historical zone, but this project is already ready to go.
Council Member Winger said she has not heard about making a profit center of Aunt Mame’s property. They have done no work on the inside of the building, and there is no money to do so.
Mr. Tominey said even if Aunt Mame’s home is set aside, where is the mixed use? This is done as a performance development, but there are no amenities, except the park. There is no economic benefit and the architectural features are that the builders are using hearty board. He said the other homes in the area are full brick.
Mayor Money said the whole area is a Historical Zone. There are dental offices there. Council Member Taylor agreed that this being in the Redwood Road Mixed Use Zone is confusing.
Mr. Tominey said this is confusing and difficult to understand. It should have been cleaned up and made as its own historical area. The area was zoned R-2.5 and then the market shifted. He said the problem is that the developer spent too much on the ground. The City can’t subsidize every developer by giving more density. He said he personally feels that restoring Aunt Mame’s property is good. He said he does not feel, however, that the City should subsidize the developer for what was a bad decision. He said they are just trying to get more density to get out from under the property.
City Attorney Wall said the naming of the zone as Redwood Road Historical Mixed Use does not make the notice defective. He said it could be misleading, but he does not feel it is a reason to approve or disapprove this item.
Lisa Arntsen, 1113 W. 10260 S., said she represents many in her neighborhood. She has 8 kids and this was the first home they ever purchased. She said a lot was taken into consideration with that decision. She understands that the developers are doing their job. This property was zoned R-2.5. She said she loves the river bottom parks and she will not likely go to this park because of access. She does not feel the trade off for density is worth it. She has visions of neighbors that plan to settle and stay for many years. She said higher density brings higher turnover in homes. She said that makes a difference on her personal investment and it matters what happens in their neighborhood. She said higher density does not fit in with their neighborhood. It is between the LDS and Hindu Temples. What is the City Council’s vision for this significant spot of land? She presented a petition of names from her neighborhood opposing the change (Attachment A).
Carol Brown, 10221 S. 1040 W., passed out some handouts (Attachment B). She said she lives in the subdivision adjacent to the east. She noted that the Shire Ridge Subdivision (9900 South 1000 West); they recently sold 8 homes. That developer is probably not making a lot of money, but he is developing what he promised and doing the right thing. Those lots are between ¼ acre and 1/3 acre. She referred to Arbor’s Oak Hills subdivision. They have only sold 1 home in 2 years. Those lots are 8,000 sq. ft. She said the homes in their subdivision have brick and rock facing fronts. They are 3600-4000 sq. ft. homes. She said in the proposed Hidden Village subdivision, the homes are 1050 sq. ft. with 1 bedroom. She said senior citizens will have a hard time with the stairs and young families will want a bigger yard. She said she feels the density is too deep. She has not talked to one person in favor of this proposal. She said the lots are selling in their subdivision, and in Shire Ridge subdivision. She asked the City Council to table the decision or vote against it and move it back to the zoning it has or back to ¼ and 1/3 acre lots.
Cyndy Seeley, 1122 W. 10260 S., said her property abuts the Burgon property. She said whatever guidelines are put on this property could be applied to the Burgon property that is currently agricultural. She said she is concerned that the Planning Commission misunderstood them. She said they are not against high density homes in South Jordan; the concern is with this particular plot. This area was deemed as historical. The City had the vision and made commitments to historical things throughout the City. She said the Mayor previously said that he wanted the City leaders to get together with the property owners and plan something special for this parcel. She said for some reason, the Burgon’s and Fraughton’s have been excluded. She said a meeting was never held to plan something special in the Historic District. She said she is not opposed to developing this property, but there are no plans for a road or path to the Burgon or Fraughton properties. She said it does not seem appropriate to have homes in this area 8 feet apart. She said that does not fit a historical district. She said they should keep it at R-2.5. They should make it a truly historic district. She said she is not enticed by the proposed homes; they do not look like turn of the century homes. She reiterated that in the back of the development, the homes are 8 feet apart. The proposed lots are small. It is not appropriate for this area. This area could be a shining star in the City.
Kim Burgon, 10201 S. 1300 W., lives in a historic home. He said he has never asked for an increase in density. He always had a vision of the historic zone. He said whatever they give to the neighbor’s property, he wants the possibility to do the same on his property. He said plans were drawn and commitments were made to his family. He said Dennis Newbold and City representatives visited his home. They said they wanted a sidewalk and the plans moved from there. He said the new development agreement releases Arbor of some of their agreements, and puts it on the City. There was a discussion about the $50,000 for the development of Mabey Lane. Mr. Burton said he thought the City was responsible for that now.
Mr. Burgon said he was previously told that his issues with the wall, sewer, etc. would be addressed with the subdivision plan. He said he does not want the plan changed a lot more. He lives here. This is his home.
Council Member Johnson asked what was agreed to? Mr. Burgon said his concern is regarding the improvements around his home, such as the fencing. He said he does not feel he can win the density battle; he just wants what his neighbors are given.
Council Member Short asked if Mr. Burgon wanted to build a similar development, would he sign a similar agreement? Mr. Burgon said yes. He said people keep saying that they want him to keep the farm. He is concerned about the noise and pesticides 18 feet from the new homes. There is a fine line there. He noted that there was never a meeting regarding the ideas for the Historic Zone.
Bruce Newbold, 2611 Horseshoe Cir., said his family and Arbor Development got this whole thing started. He said they donated the property and Aunt Mame’s home to the City. He read a prepared statement (Attachment C). He noted that it is an incorrect assumption to say that people that live in a higher density residential neighborhood are of less importance than those that have larger lots. The lot size will not ruin the adjacent subdivision. He encouraged the City to move forward with the proposal.
Council Member Taylor asked how much property did the Newbold’s originally own? Mr. Newbold said 11 acres. It includes all of the grove up to 1300 West and down to Aunt Mame’s home. Council Member Taylor asked who was the north portion purchased from? Mr. Newbold said it was the Mabey’s home and then Burgon’s inherited it.
Council Member Taylor asked if the family is satisfied with the proposal for the Historic area? Mr. Newbold said they were most excited about the original plan. As they look at the situation today, this makes sense. There will be high quality families live in this area. He said they support and encourage it. He feels the historic park will add to the City and will make the area more unique.
Council Member Winger expressed appreciation to Mr. Newbold for his work with the City, especially on Aunt Mame’s property. Mr. Newbold said the original plan is not realistic in today’s world. He feels the proposal will be a beautiful asset and neighborhood.
Rex Holt, 10291 S. 1230 W, said he lives on the east side of the north arm of this property. He expressed concern about traffic along Mabey Lane. He noted a recent car accident on Mabey Lane. He estimates that there will be an extra 100 cars using the area with this subdivision. He said if the whole area develops, it could add 300-400 cars using Mabey Lane to get to 1300 West. He hopes the future plans include a red light. If they can’t install a light, they should consider a 4 way stop at Mabey Lane and 1300 West. Mr. Holt said he feels the 5,000 sq. ft. lot is a little small.
Council Member Winger asked if Mr. Holt has been coerced into supporting this application? Mr. Holt said no.
Kimberly Arroyo, 1114 W. 10210 S., said she lives in the neighborhood to the east. She said it directly affects their property values and traffic in the area. She expressed concern about allowing higher density on this property given the other large areas of land in the area that will want the same thing. She said it sets a bad precedent if they bail out this developer. She said she has a ½ acre that she was going to build on, but now they have to wait. She said they are not bailing her out, and should not bail the developer out. She indicated that they have a stable neighborhood and she wants to keep it that way.
Noni Davies, 10250 S. 1064 W., said she is opposed to any changes in density. She said they have had 1/3 acre lots sell in their neighborhood in the last few months. There are unsettled questions in this area and a lot of farmland. She said she is concerned about the lack of brick and stone facing. The small size of homes is also concerning.
Kelly Burgon, 10091 S. 1300 W., said he has concerns regarding zoning. He said the citizens are frustrated because they recently discussed the master plan. On that plan, the area is zoned 3.0 units per acre. They should stick with the master plan. If they stick with the master plan, they will have a better solution. He said the Mayor requested a meeting with the neighbors; they have not been invited to any meetings. They have one of the larger pieces of land being talked about. He said one concern they have is the view of this subdivision from 1300 West. The homes next to 1300 West are closer together than the second row of homes. On Mabey Lane, the homes are proposed to be 8 feet apart. That is also a concern. If they stuck to the master plan, it would solve a lot of those issues.
Mayor Money closed the public hearing.
John Gust, Arbor Development, said this is a historical district and the architecture expresses a sense of community. They have given every consideration to the design and integrity of the project. He said the homes in the development will be new, not historic. He said they normally would have sold off the project to a homebuilder, but they feel so strongly about this project that they are building the homes. He said the development agreement has unusual things in it, such as they can’t make a change to the homes without getting Planning Commission approval. He said this will be of high quality. The Newbold family supports the project. He said there was always 6 homes proposed next to 1300 West. He said it was purposely stacked with 60 ft. distance between the homes. He said the side yards are 14 ft. between homes, not 8 as has been stated. He said the view corridors are larger than they would be with larger homes and 30 ft. setbacks.
Council Member Johnson asked if the Burgon’s would get their fencing? Mr. Gust said yes. The fence will go along the boundary, north to south, between the 2 properties.
Council Member Taylor asked what part of the park is Arbor paying for? Parks and Recreation Director Tingey said the park is being developed by the City, but the land was donated by Arbor Development. The park is 2.2 acres.
Mayor Money said the change in plans made the park more functional.
Council Member Johnson said the project is 4 units per acre, according to her calculations. Parks and Recreation Director Tingey said they also have to account for the .92 acres owned by the canal. Council Member Johnson said the developer is already entitled to 41 units; now they are asking for 57 units. Surrounding them are a commercial development, the Hindu Temple, the mink farm to the north, Aunt Mame’s house, and the park in the center. It is a lot of elements to bring together. She said she feels the developers have given a lot of consideration to the neighbors. She said it is not perfect, but she feels the neighbors will be pleased with the development, if they give it a chance.
Council Member Butters made a motion to take a break. Council Member Short seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
A.2. Potential Action Item – (See VI. A.1.) R2010-30 Development Agreement
A.3. Potential Action Item – (See VI. A.1.) Rezone Ordinance 2010-03-Z
Council Member Winger said she would like the issue tabled. She said they should do this, and do it right. They have worked on it for 4 years; what is another couple of meetings. She said this group should get together and work together. She said she lives in Cornerstone Condos with a density of 9.26 units per acre. She said people in her neighborhood don’t move in and out. She is appreciative that the City had the money to do the Aunt Mame project. She has had many calls on this issue; they were split 50/50 in favor versus against. There is no conspiracy going on between staff, the developer, and the City Council. The integrity of the City, the Mayor, and City Council cannot be questioned. She said they should stub the road into the Burgon property. She said there was a meeting promised between the neighbors on 1000 West and the developers. There were also promises made to the Burgon family. They can work the issues out by sitting down with the neighbors. Those meetings should take place. She said it is important to maintain the Temple view and protect the Hindu Temple property as well. She said they cannot say what will happen with Ed Fraughton’s property; it is not part of the discussion tonight. She likes the idea of a community garden in this project. She appreciates the work done on the parking spaces. She does not think they will have a higher turnover rate with the higher density. She said she has recently had a request to make the area commercial and office. She has had a request for a hotel, bed and breakfast, and a reception center. She said one Council cannot bind another. She said they can’t say that a property will forever be 1/3 acre lots. She agreed that the developer is entitled to 41 homes. The current proposal is for 57 homes. There could be some discussion on that point. She feels that John Gust should work with the neighbors. She agreed that a traffic light is needed on 1300 West Mabey Lane. She said they are not here to bail out a developer. She said the restoration of the Aunt Mame property will bring property values up. She is grateful for the increase in park size.
Council Member Winger made a motion to table this issue. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion.
Council Member Short agreed with many of Council Member Winger’s comments. He said he feels the development can be a shining star. Staff has worked hard on this project; the ideas have changed over the years.
Council Member Short made a motion to approve Resolution R2010-30, and Rezone Ordinance 2010-03-Z. Council Member Butters seconded the motion.
Council Member Winger said they are so close. There is no reason to divide a neighborhood when, with a little more effort, they could unify it.
Council Member Taylor concurred. She said there are some very nice things that could be done in this area. She recommended that they create more space, trails, and landscaping. She said they are close to coming up with something everyone can be proud of. She said this is premium property. She feels the properties would sell if they limited it to 41 homes. She feels they should stick with the R-2.5. She said thousands of people visit this part of South Jordan. She said they should look at the property from 1300 West and see what they are giving to the City. She said they should see what they can do to make this development work.
Council Member Johnson said she understands the concerns of the citizens. She said Arbor reached out with an even higher density. They took the comments of the residents and came back with this proposal. They need to balance both sides of the issue. She said everyone has property rights. They need to consider what is fair for both sides.
Council Member Butters said they won’t solve the traffic issues tonight. This is not designed to be a slum development. He agreed with most of Council Member Winger’s comments. He also agreed that the developer has rights as well.
Mayor Money said he would like to see the corn field preserved. The only way to preserve the property is to buy the density rights. He said the City is better off because of the developments that the Arbor/Gardner/Boyer Group has done. They have kept the architectural bar high. He said this boils down to a density issue. Originally, the developer was approved for 2.5 units per acre. That is what was promised, but times have changed. He said the developer has tried to tone down the density with the architectural elements. He is okay with the proposal except where it goes to the north and how that is representative to the neighbors. He has no problem with the density around Aunt Mame’s, the architectural elements, and the park. The traffic issue shows Mabey Lane going through to 1000 West. He said he hopes that they are not so far apart that they can’t sit down and work out some details. He said he does not feel the R-2.5 density is realistic anymore. If all sides are willing to look at this, they can work out the issue.
Roll call vote. The vote was 3-2 in favor, with Council Member Winger and Council Member Taylor opposed.
Council Member Butters noted some formatting problems in the development agreement. There needs to be more space at the top and there needs to be proper formatting for the notary signatures.
B.1. Public Hearing – Consideration of Resolution R2010-02, Approving the Amendment to the Future Land Use Plan Map, LUA-2010.03 Changing Density from R-2.5 Low Density Residential to Village Mixed Use on Property Located at 9710 South Redwood Road
Community Development Director Shaw reviewed the background information on this property. Staff is recommending approval. Mayor Money said he likes that the VMU (Village Mixed Use) Zone requires a development agreement.
Mayor Money opened the public hearing.
Ray Robinson, 2054 W. 9640 S., said he lives on the property north of the Perschon property. He said he has been there 42 years on a ¾ acre lot. He said there was a proposal to put high density (85 homes) on this property 4 years ago, and it was rejected. Then there was proposal for 65 homes on the property. The subdivision agreed with that, but now the proposal is to change it to VMU. He said one concern is that there is not a firm decision on what the zone will entail. Before a decision is made, the City should give them information concerning what the VMU is. He said the Perschon’s have a right to develop, but it needs to be further defined. The VMU leaves it very open ended.
Council Member Taylor said one thing the VMU Zone does is allow them to put residential development next to residential and commercial next to commercial. Mr. Robinson said he was told that, but there is no document that describes what can be done. He recommended that the document be made available before a decision is made.
Community Development Director Shaw said the Ordinance is partially drafted. Mayor Money said there is some nebulism with the nature of the mixed use zone. Mr. Shaw said there could be office on this property, but they are putting height and bulk restrictions on that. They are considering a restriction of 2-3 stories out on Redwood Road.
Council Member Johnson said they need to make sure that the Robinson’s are part of the discussion when the VMU zone Ordinance is written. Director Shaw said staff has invited the Robinsons to have input on the Ordinance when it is proposed.
Randy Van Dyke, 2062 W. Lawrence Cir., said he is a son-in-law of the Perschon family. They have thought carefully about the recommendation for the VMU zone. They will be good neighbors and flexible in the process. The last project was killed because they could not get financing for the R-2.5 zoning. He said the property has been owned by the Perschon’s for over 60 years. They would like to develop the property during Bob’s lifetime.
Bill Porter, 2021 W. 9640 S., said he borders the Perschon property, and has lived at his property for 30 years. He agreed that Mr. Perschon has been a good neighbor. He said he supports his effort to develop the property. He said they would like to see the Ordinance in writing to make sure their vision is on paper.
Bob Perschon, 1934 Lawrence Cir., said he used to pheasant hunt on the property to the north. He said large lots and large homes are a thing of the past. He said times have changed. To be realistic, a person can have a beautiful home with a garden and fruit trees on a smaller lot. The VMU allows for people to have flexibility to have larger homes and smaller homes. He asked how many 1/3 acre lots are repossessed or sitting dormant?
Mayor Money closed the public hearing.
Jean Perschon, 1207 W. Quiet Acres Cove, said they want to support the neighbors and address their concerns. It was very beneficial to have meetings with the neighbors. With the way their property is situated, the VMU gives them the flexibility to meet their needs. She said she was apprehensive about the VMU designation at first, but now believes that it is the right thing for the property.
Council Member Johnson said she appreciates the Perschon’s involving the neighbors.
B.2. Potential Action Item – (See VI. B.1.)
Council Member Johnson made a motion to approve Resolution R2010-02. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion.
Mayor Money said he sees the Village Mixed Use designation as a partnership between the landowner, the City, and the neighborhood. They all have input on how it is to be developed. It is a good zone for this location.
Council Member Butters suggested that they add to the motion that if there were any fees paid by the Perschon’s to bring this before the City Council, those fees should be waived.
Council Member Johnson amended her motion to include that all fees be waived, as outlined by Council Member Butters. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was unanimous in favor.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND POTENTIAL ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ITEMS
None.
VIII. OTHER BUSINESS
This item was done earlier in the meeting.
IX. BOARD OF ADMUSTMENT ITEMS
Council Member Winger made a motion to adjourn the City Council meeting and go into a Board of Adjustment meeting. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
A.1. BOA-2010.04 , Approval of Board of Adjustment Findings. Kent and Donna Miller (Applicants), Presented August 17, 2010
A.2. Potential Action Item – (See IX. A.1.)
Board Member Winger made a motion to approve file BOA-2010.04, Board of Adjustment Findings, Kent and Donna Miller (applicants). Board Member Taylor seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was unanimous in favor.
B.1. BOA-2010.03, Requesting a Variance of the Required Lot Frontage in the R-3 Zone at 10601 South 1300 West. LaRoyce Fisher (Applicant)
Mr. James Fisher, Applicant’s son and representative, said they are trying to subdivide the property in half. The current frontage is 158 ft.; the frontage on the two properties will be 75 ft. and 83 ft. Almost every other property around them has a 75 ft. frontage. He requested that the Applicant be treated the same as the neighbors. The property was rezoned with the understanding that they would come to ask for the variance to subdivide.
Board Member Winger asked what is the undo hardship if the application is denied? Mr. Fisher said the land can’t be used for horse property or an agricultural use and the maintenance to take care of it is extensive. He would appreciate being able to split the properties.
Board Member Butters asked what is the hardship if the variance request is denied. Mr. Fisher said he feels the variance should be granted on the basis that everything else around them has the same frontage. They want to be treated the same as their neighbors. They want to be able to use their land the same as everyone else.
Board Member Money said that applicant is trying to create an additional lot. Mr. Fisher said that was their intent and one of those lots would be a little larger than neighboring lots.
Board Member Money asked whether this was an issue for the Board of Adjustment. City Attorney Wall replied yes, that frontage, set backs etc are all issues for the Board. City Planner Schindler explained that the current ordinance for that zone requires that each lot has a 90 ft. frontage and the Applicant only has 158 ft. frontage instead of the necessary 180 ft. frontage required for two lots.
It was noted that City ordinance now requires a 90 ft. frontage for each new lot created but when the Applicant purchased the lot and when the neighboring lots were created the current 90 ft. frontage requirement was not enacted. The Ordinance has changed since the surrounding lots were formed. The only part of the Ordinance that is not met with the Fisher’s application is the amount of frontage. There is enough room on the property for the setbacks.
B.2. Potential Action Item – (See IX. B.1.)
Board Member Taylor made a motion to grant the variance File # BOA-2010.03, requesting the lot frontage in the R-3 zone. Board Member Winger said because of the hardship that it will cause? Board Member Taylor said because the change will allow the Fisher’s to match the surrounding properties.
Board Member Johnson said that there needs to be a finding to support the grant of the variance. Board Member Taylor moved to grant the variance based on the premise that the Fisher’s should have the right to use their property as any other resident. The Fisher’s don’t have the ability to use their property in the same way as their neighbors.
Board Member Butters asked City Attorney Wall whether the motion sufficiently covers the legal requirements. City Attorney Wall responded that it did not and that the law requires that the Board makes five findings.
Board Member Taylor moved that the variance should be granted because they do not have the ability, at this point, to use their property in the same way as their surrounding neighbors do.
Mr. Fisher stated that the Applicant cannot take care of the lot as it is and it just creates weeds and gophers. There is no way to get irrigation in.
City Attorney Wall stated that the five legal requirements for which findings need to be made were set forth in the staff report.
Board Member Money said that there are special circumstances that are attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zone because they have smaller frontages.
Board Member Short stated that because of the change in Ordinance to require larger frontage, it has created a hardship. Board Member Taylor stated that the City is trying to adjust for that by granting the variance.
Board Member Butters stated that the variance will not substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest. City Attorney Wall asked that the Board explain the facts behind the finding that was made. Board Member Johnson stated it will only make this property the same as those that are surrounding it.
Board Member Money stated that granting the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right because the Applicant should be able to subdivide her lot with a similar frontage as her neighbors.
City Attorney Wall stated that the Board must find that the spirit of the land use ordinance is met and justice is served by granting the variance. Borad Member Money stated that it is implicit because it will make her property like the surrounding property. Board Member Taylor stated that by granting this, they will have the right of their property like those around them and the spirit of the land use ordinance will be met. Board Member Winger seconded the motion. Roll call vote. The vote was unanimous in favor.
The Board of Adjustment moved back into a City Council meeting.
X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS AND OTHER BUSINESS
A. CALENDARING ITEMS
Council Member Short said the Historical Committee is dedicating the White Fawn Flour Mill monument on September 11th, 2010 at 11:00 a.m.
The Council noted Constitution Day on September 16, 2010. Mark Shurtleff will be speaking at the Senior’s luncheon on September 16th at 11:30 a.m.
B. COMMENTS FROM MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Council Member Butters commended the Parks and Recreation staff for the Sounds of the Summer, and Movies in the Park. He also commended the Police Department for their night out against crime.
Council Member Winger thanked Dustin Lewis for the earthquake training in tonight’s work session.
The City Council discussed a trip to Virginia for a sewer issue. They fly out September 19th and return on September 20th. CM Geilmann requested that if the whole City Council is going, they should be on different flights. The City Council will call staff tomorrow to work out their schedules. It was noted that Mayor Money is not going on the trip.
C. CITY MANAGER BUSINESS
CM Geilmann asked that the City Council give input to staff on the Chicken Ordinance that is on the First Reading Report.
D. NEW BUSINESS
None.
Council Member Butters made a motion to go into closed meeting to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property. Council Member Johnson seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
XI. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
A. Closed Executive Session To Discuss The Purchase, Exchange, or Lease of Real Property
Council Member Winger made a motion to go back into an open meeting. Council Member Taylor seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
ADJOURNMENT
Council Member Butters made a motion to adjourn. Council Member Short seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous in favor.
The September 7, 2010 City Council meeting adjourned at 11:58 p.m.
This is a true and correct copy of the September 7, 2010 City Council & Board of Adjustment meeting minutes, which were approved on September 21, 2010.
South Jordan City Recorder