Centerfield plans public hearing to collect input on trio of ordinance changes

“When people are invested in the city, that’s when good things happen.”

Travis Leatherwood, Centerfield City Mayor

CENTERFIELD—Centerfield is in the process of considering several ordinances that are either new or need to be updated and will hold a public hearing next week to explain and gather citizen input on three of them.

Another one has been abandoned due to being inconsistent with state law, and yet another is in a preliminary concept and fact-finding stage.

The public hearing on the three ordinances that are all but ready for adoption is set for Thursday, April 24 at 7 p.m. at Centerfield City Hall, and in accordance with new state law will be in conjunction with a meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission and not the city council.

Mayor Travis Leatherwood hopes that fact doesn’t dissuade people from taking an interest and participating.

“When people are invested in the city, that’s when good things happen,” Leatherwood said Monday, citing that in the case of one of the ordinances being considered—which would change the maximum front-yard fence height at homes to 42 inches, up from 36. The idea originated with a Centerfield resident rather than with any member of city government.

“We love it, love it, love it when people bring things to our attention and say, “What about this?”

The fence-height change, Leatherwood said, “allows just a little more privacy” while still balancing the public-safety consideration of maintaining reasonable sightlines into yards.

“As we looked into it, it looked like a great fit,” he said.

The hearing next week will consider that ordinance change, as well as one that would require construction sites within city limits to provide dumpsters and portable outhouses, as well as another ordinance rectifying a technical oversight in providing compensation to Planning and Zoning members.

“We went from $50 a meeting to $75 a meeting, but never changed the ordinance,” Leatherwood said. “There was a public hearing as far as the budget goes, but it just didn’t get reflected in the ordinance.”

Because that was more than a year ago, Leatherwood said, city attorney Kevin Daniels advised the city to just redo the public hearing to make sure all the legal Ts were crossed and Is dotted.

Regarding the ordinance to require dumpsters and outhouses at all construction sites, Leatherwood said that’s just Centerfield catching up to “all of the cities around us, and I think all of Sevier County,” which have similar ordinances.

It would mean that providing those facilities would be part of getting a building permit from the County Building Inspector’s Office, which would then be able to verify that whenever performing an on-site inspection.

Police would also be able to enforce the law, though Leatherwood said the city would most likely want to issue a warning upon first offense rather than bring the weight of the new law down without mercy.

Leatherwood said officials had discussed an ordinance that would have required new homes built in the city to be 1,100 square-feet or more. But “The state said, ‘You can’t require anything more than 1,000 square-feet,’” Leatherwood said.

But that only applies to the city itself, not private entities that could establish different requirements of their own. For instance, homeowners associations or subdivisions with CCRs (covenants, conditions and restrictions) could mandate larger square footages for homes within their boundaries.

But, Leatherwood said, “as a city requirement, we can’t require more than 1,000 square-feet,” which is where city ordinances already are and where they will remain.

Finally, Leatherwood said the city is looking into creating an ordinance to govern minor subdivisions, but it’s a tricky dance.

“The hard part for a city is trying to determine what that looks like for the city they’re in,” he said, especially for a city like Centerfield that really doesn’t see a lot of building going on at the same time, but there’s just enough to make such an ordinance beneficial if not necessary.

“We’re looking around at other cities and what they do, but we’re still working on that one,” he said. “It’s kind of a pain,” he said, trying to decide whether the city should require a subdivision of just a lot or two to put in sidewalks or not, for example, or what kinds of infrastructure upgrades.

“We’ve got to see what’s best for our city,” he said. “That’s the biggest issue: What’s it going to look like for our city and what’s going to be best for our residents.”

And that’s why he wants the city to take its time coming to those decisions.

“I’m in a hurry, but not in that big of a hurry. The worst thing you can do is hurry and do something and not spend the time it needs—and then have it be wrong.”

And he also wants as many residents as possible to be involved in the process, and doing things like attending public meetings and hearings—such as the one next week.

“I would be thrilled if that room was just filled every time,” he said.

He knows that there is almost no ordinance or decision that will please everyone. But the more residents are involved and give input, the greater the chances the city will get things right.

“Every time people raise a concern … I invite them to come to city council meetings and talk,” he said. “…If we can do what’s best for the majority, then I think we’re headed in the right direction.”