Planning commission reviews draft landscape code to qualify Centerville residents for Weber Basin rebates

Centerville Planning Commission members reviewed a first-draft amendment to the city's landscaping code on Oct. 8 that staff said is intended to make Centerville properties eligible for Weber Basin Water Conservancy District rebate programs while also addressing new state water-conservation guidance.

The packet presented proposed changes to City Code (listed in the meeting materials as CCC 12.51) and included Weber Basin and state Division of Water Resources (DWR) materials. Staff said the draft would, if adopted as written, align the city with both Weber Basin's rebate requirements and the DWR technical guidance that the city pulled from DWR's website.

Why it matters: Weber Basin offers rebates and incentives for residents who replace turf with low-water landscaping, but staff and the commission repeatedly raised the question of whether the district's standards would make existing park-strip lawns and other established grass areas citywide nonconforming. That outcome would affect homeowners who only make routine repairs or minor improvements to their property.

Staff member Sydney, who presented the packet, told commissioners that Weber Basin and the state have become more stringent and that "we've had requests from residents for participation in this very program and had had to say no" because current city code does not meet Weber Basin eligibility. Sydney also said representatives from Weber Basin reviewed the draft and indicated the version in the packet "satisfies our requirement as it's currently written."

City Attorney Lisa cautioned that state law and Weber Basin's rebate rules are not identical. "State law does not require the city to go that far," she said, referring to Weber Basin's requirement language that would prohibit lawns in park strips and other narrow landscape areas. Lisa noted the state applies some restrictions to new development, while Weber Basin's program language — as it is being interpreted by the district and reflected in the draft — could be read to require citywide ordinance language for rebate eligibility.

Commissioners focused discussion on two points: (1) what events or permits would trigger a requirement to bring existing property into compliance (for example, lot splits, subdivisions, building permits, or major site plan changes), and (2) whether the city's adoption should be limited to new development or written broadly so residents could qualify for rebates. Several commissioners said they were comfortable adopting stricter landscaping standards for new development and major reconfigurations, given Centerville's largely infill character, but expressed concern about creating a large number of nonconforming properties.

Technical details discussed in the meeting: - Weber Basin's program language in the packet limits turf to 35% of front and side yard landscaping areas (the presenter said Weber Basin's cap is 35% of front/side yard). DWR-language cited in the materials applies a different threshold (the presenter said the state's standard is 50% and that state application is generally limited to new development when referenced that way). - For nonresidential sites, the state limit discussed was 20% maximum turf; Weber Basin's program in the packet recommended 15% for program eligibility. - The draft and Weber Basin materials included a provision that would prohibit lawn in landscape areas less than 8 feet wide; commissioners said the draft wording needed clarification (for example, whether the rule applies where an area's narrowest point is under 8 feet). - Staff said the city would not create a new automatic code-enforcement patrol for park-strip landscaping; compliance would largely be addressed at the time property owners seek land-use approvals or building permits.

Commissioners asked staff to obtain clarifications from Weber Basin and from Corey Snyder (a reviewer referenced in the packet) on ambiguous language (for example, what the various percentage requirements apply to and what exactly triggers nonconforming status). Staff offered to invite Weber Basin representatives back to the next meeting to answer those questions.

Action and next steps: The commission agreed to take two weeks to review the draft and supporting materials and to invite Weber Basin to a future meeting. Sydney also reminded commissioners that the packet contains a separate water-conservation element that must be adopted into the city general plan and submitted to DWR by specified year-end deadlines; she suggested fast-tracking that element if the broader landscaping code needed more time.

Ending: Staff will follow up with Weber Basin and return to the commission for further discussion; commissioners indicated support for scheduling a public hearing on the draft after clarifying whether the proposed language would apply only to new development or to the city as a whole.