Centerville planning commission denies landscaping waiver for Pastures Phase 3, tables related site-plan amendment

The Centerville City Planning Commission on April 22 denied a request to waive landscape standards for the Pastures Phase 3 development in the Shorelands Commerce Park and then tabled the related site-plan amendment so staff and the applicant can resolve outstanding questions about calculations, encroachment and screening.

Planning staffer DeWeese laid out the request as an applicant-driven attempt to keep existing gravel landscaping and outdoor storage that do not match the landscaping plan approved with the project’s final site plan on Dec. 8, 2021. Staff told the commission the original approval included conditions requiring landscaping and irrigation per the approved plan and a parking modification allowing a minimum of 117 stalls; staff said the landscaping conditions had not been met and that a waiver of strict compliance requires explicit findings before it can be granted.

"This doesn't feel like a waiver. This feels like an amended site plan," Centerville City Planning Commission Chair said during the debate, expressing the concern that approving a waiver could set an inconsistent precedent across the Shorelands zone. Multiple commissioners said the request read more like a proposed change to the site plan than a narrow exception to the code.

Applicant Craig Salmon defended portions of the existing treatment, saying some gravel and rock were placed prior to the city's involvement and that similar treatments exist elsewhere in the Shorelands area. Salmon told the commission the gravel on the east side was installed "last fall" and that the development had participated in a tax-increment arrangement intended to support the project's higher design standards.

Commissioners pressed staff and the applicant to explain an apparent discrepancy between the project's tabulation tables and on-the-ground conditions. Staff said the applicant’s revised site tabulation shows roughly 29% landscaping on paper versus the original 28.55% figure, but commissioners said they could not trace how the landscape architect had counted certain areas — including whether compacted gravel storage and shaved asphalt were being treated as landscaping or hardscape. Several commissioners emphasized the commission’s duty to "trust but verify" and requested that the landscape architect or the applicant provide clear calculations and mapping that show how percentages were measured.

Commissioners also flagged an unapproved outdoor storage use on portions of the property, encroachment onto a UDOT parcel that delayed the application, and the wetland area immediately south of Building 3 as complicating factors that must be addressed with screening or other mitigation. Counsel and staff recommended that the applicant submit a revised, complete site-plan amendment addressing those items rather than seeking a waiver.

A motion to deny the waiver of strict compliance was made by a commissioner and seconded; the commission voted to approve the motion and the chair announced the denial as unanimous. With the waiver denied, staff said the site-plan amendment, as presented, did not meet current code and recommended tabling the application. The commission then voted to table the site-plan amendment so staff and the applicant can reconcile the calculations, address encroachment, provide a screening plan for the outdoor storage area, and verify parking and design compliance before returning to the commission.

Next steps: staff will work with the applicant to assemble an amended site-plan submittal that documents accurate landscape area calculations, clarifies the classification of gravel storage versus landscaped areas, shows required screening for storage, resolves any encroachment issues, and confirms parking counts. The tabled site-plan amendment will return to the commission for a public hearing after those items are addressed.

Votes and motions: The commission approved a motion to deny the waiver of strict compliance for the Pastures Phase 3 landscaping; the chair announced the denial as unanimous. The commission later approved a motion to table the related site-plan amendment pending the requested clarifications and corrections.

Context: The debate highlighted broader tensions about how Shorelands Commerce Park design standards are interpreted and applied, whether the Shorelands code needs revision for clarity, and the balance between water-wise xeriscaping and the code's requirement for live plant material in certain parts of a development.