Segment: Why I voted the way I did - The Stephens Property

This past week the council voted on a parcel that has had a lot of intereston from to public on the agenda; a rezone request from Agriculture to Commercial Highway. Want the short version? Skip to the bottom. 🙂

A public hearing on this parcel to hear from the public was done at the planning commission level in June. There were no comments about this item and the PC recommended unanimously to the council for approval. This also passed the council unanimously. You can watch this agenda item unfold for both the planning commission and city council on our YouTube channel. I will link them below.

Alright, let’s dive in. As I stated this passed the council with a favorable vote, which of course means I voted yes. Here’s why:

•this property received an overwhelming support during the general plan feedback to be commercial Highway. The developer has approached the council and planning commission numerous times in the past, each time with a High density residential component. Each of these presentations failed because of the desires of the community to not have more HDH developments and mixed use. The developer decided to come back and ask for exactly what we were projecting it to be, commercial highway. This is in line with the general plan and also in line with the feedback of the general plan survey. I know because I had just read all 4,500 comments again just a few months earlier.

•Another item of note was the uses within our CH zone. During the survey of the general plan, we realized a lot of the uses we allowed did not conform to the desires of the residents. Thus the code committee immediately got to work and revamped all the uses. The general plan feedback was highly considered and utilized while updating to better align with what the citizens would like by way of commercial. When we were finished, the uses went before the Planning Commission for a public hearing to get further from the public with how we did. The planning commission recommended the updated uses to the city council who passed the ordinance change unanimously. Why does this matter? Because at the time we were allowing a lot of uses we soon realized the public did not want; truck stops, RV parks and such. Better aligning our code with the desires of the community meant that we would attract only what we want and would not have our hands tied to accept something we didn’t want. As a member of the code committee, I felt we worked hard to use the feedback from the citizens to shape our new uses. The public feedback we did receive mostly included to remove a truck stop to which we had already done.

•Some caveats:

This did not come forward with a concept plan as the developer is hoping the zoning being CH will allow for more committtment. Having come to the table in the past and unable to proceed forward created a loss of confidence from potential buyers. Because of this, the developer does not have a presentation at this time, but will be allowed the uses within the zone and will be required to meet all the standards of the zone.

•This area is set to be master planned. In a previous meeting I stated that I wanted to have a code for master planning completed so that when these properties come to us (those that have hatch marks on the general plan) we can have greater control with what comes to that area and other upgrades or things they need to do to create a uniform and complete feel. While this idea was not denied, it also did not receive a lot of support. The code committee has been overwhelmed at many other projects that also need to be addressed ASAP and the priority of developing a code for master planning has been moved to work on other very needed items. However, codifying a master plan arrangement still remains a high priority for me and I will work hard to make sure it is given the attention it needs as soon as we are feasibly able.

•Too long/didn’t read (TLDR): In summary, I voted yes to this rezone because I felt it followed the general plan and because we had updated our uses to better align with the vision of the citizens. The public was given the ability and time to review this revisions and were updated just in time before this development came before us (phew!). Because of this, I favored this rezone request, but still believe more work is needed within our code to guarantee the best development for this property.

Planning Commission meeting

City Council meeting

Segment: Why I voted the way I did - Poll Property

 Happy Thursday South Weber!

I wanted to take a moment and address the vote the council had before us on Tuesday evening regarding the rezone request for the development on the property west of Highmark Charter School. It was my intention at the time of the vote to give numerous reasons for my “no” vote, but when the time came I only mentioned one. Here are my other reasons as well:

•I have serious concerns about the traffic/congestion of this development in an area where we already have a great deal of traffic. 2100 E continues to have increased traffic and close calls at that intersection. While a traffic study will be required when a concept plan is going under approvals, it will only tell us if the road can physically handle the traffic (which it can) but won’t clearly relay information about how that traffic will impact residents. In short, it is something we will have to work with, rather than prevent.

•While the concept plan presented isn’t tied to the development and will still need to go through the approval process and it is likely some changes will be made, it concerned me to have 2 story townhomes looking directly into the playing/recess field of Highmark. A lower density on this project would’ve meant a greater buffer distance between this field and a higher likelihood of single level homes, where one wouldn’t be able to see into the playing field from an upstairs room, which I find unsettling.

•This parcel of 10 acres was slated to be all commercial. I do agree that it would be difficult for South Weber to fulfill that much commercial and I will admit I was in favor of lowering the percentage of commercial **if** it lowered the overall density of this development. The acreage of commercial went down, but the residential portion still requested the highest amount of density available to them on the majority of the parcel. What the final proposal ended up being is residential with some commercial, instead of commercial with some residential. Had the residential portion been on less acreage or a lower zoning density, I would’ve been more open to the plan.

•I have concerns approving this development will set a precedent for other properties that have cross hatchmarks. What is stop them from presenting to us 20% commercial in exchange for 80% HDH residential on a property we are hoping to have as mostly commercial? Nothing. When we have done it for one property, it will be difficult to argue no to another property.

•And finally, for the reasons I stated at this meeting, I do feel this went against the feedback we received on our General Plan. The general plan is shaped by the feedback of the residents - it is their right and privilege to weigh in on how their future city will be developed. It was abundantly clear that majority of the city did not favor adding anymore multi-family zoning other than what was already built or zoned. I understand that sometimes in city matters, compromising is key. However, in my opinion this didn’t compromise enough when they chose the highest zone they had available to them on 80% of the property. A patio home zone, which would’ve been closer to 40 homes instead of 62 would’ve been far more enticing to me to work with.

This rezone request passed 3-2. As the approval process begins, I promise to ensure all aspects of our code have been met and will address some of these concerns at that time as a plea to the developer to consider. Sometimes developers are willing to work with a project even though they have a right to do more. Thank you for being involved. Difficult decisions aren’t easy to make, but I appreciate hearing from my constituents how they feel and helps me know how best to represent them.

If you desire, below is the meeting. Every council member weighed in on why they voted the way they did in case you would like to hear it straight from them.