The Lindon City Council held a regular meeting on Tuesday, June 17, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Lindon City Center Council Chamber at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Invocation: Lindsey Bayless

PRESENT

Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
James A. Dain, Councilmember
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Kristen Colson, Finance Director
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk

ABSENT

Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember

The meeting began at 7:20 p.m. due to a lack of a quorum.

MINUTES

The Minutes of the regular meeting of June 3, 2003 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 2, Line 33: Replace the words "to work" with the words "a good working relationship."
Page 5, Line 35-37: Add the sentence "Mr. Dameron requested Councilmember Hatch to have the landfill district send a letter explaining the benefits of paying the tipping fee directly."
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JUNE 3, 2003 AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

OPEN SESSION

There was no public comment.

MAYOR'S COMMENTS/REPORT

Mayor Ellertson commented that the City was continuing to work on the issues of transportation, public use of the hillside, and funding to connect 700 North to the I-15 Interchange. He asked if there were questions for him. There were none.

CONSENT AGENDA - No Items

CURRENT BUSINESS

1. Review and Action - Conditional Use Permit - Maple Manor Assisted Living Center. This is a request by Scott and Michele Farrer for consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an assisted living center to be located at 514 North Locust Avenue in the R1-20 zone. This land use is not codified in the standard land use tables of the city and therefore will need to be evaluated using the compatibility standards as outlined in the Lindon City Code. The Planning Commission has recommended approval.

Planning Director Kevin Smith presented this item to the Council. He showed the Council and audience an aerial photo of the neighborhood and described the proposed project. He explained that the applicant has requested a 50 bed, 32 room assisted living facility. Mr. Smith displayed the proposed site plan. He pointed out the 31 parking spaces, and the common areas for dining and visiting. He informed the audience that the Lindon City Code addresses types and locations of land uses in a Standard Land Use Table. This specifies whether a land use is permitted, not permitted or conditional. Because it is hard to anticipate every land use that may apply to the City for approval, the City has adopted a Compatibility Standard that gives the Planning Commission and Council a set of standards by which a use is judged. He observed that the Code specifies regulations for small scale projects of twelve or less people, but not a facility of fifty people. Therefore, the Planning Commission used the Compatibility Standard to judge whether this proposed facility will "fit" the neighborhood. The Planning Commission has recommended approval to the City Council with the following five findings: 1. The Planning Commission considers the proposed facility to fit the nature of the residential area; 2. The Commission considers Locust Avenue adequate to handle the anticipated traffic volumes; 3. Although the Commission considers the size of the building as a concern because of its increased impact on the neighbors in traffic and parking, these concerns have been addressed by professionals and thought to have minimal effect; 4. The Planning Commission will require the applicant to submit a final site plan and elevations for approval; 5. The facility shall be limited to no more than fifty residents.

Mr. Smith observed that the dominant issue for the Planning Commission was the scale of this project, although they expressed the opinion that the use is compatible. There was considerable concern expressed by neighbors about parking and traffic impacts. The Planning Commission asked the Planning Department to solicit an opinion from the City Traffic Engineer and, in addition, to find out if neighboring communities have set special restrictions due to parking problems. No problems concerning parking were reported by the cities surveyed. It was found that Lindon requires more parking spaces (one for every two beds) than any other city but one. The City Traffic Engineer's opinion was that Locust Avenue could handle the small amount of additional traffic created by this development and even recommended that the parking for the center could be reduced.

The Commissioners did not feel that the issues of parking and traffic would, therefore, facilitate a denial, but the issue of size may be considered. Commissioner Peters, in particular, thought the facility should be smaller. Mr. Smith also noted that Councilmember Bayless was present at the Planning Commission meeting and could respond to questions about the Commissioners' opinions and findings.

Mayor Ellertson turned the time to Scott and Michele Farrer(applicants), of 623 West 20 South in Lindon, for their presentation. Mr. Farrer told the Council that he believed that all the issues concerning traffic and parking had been fairly addressed at the three Planning Commission meetings, Development Review Committee meetings and neighborhood meeting. He expressed the opinion that if parking and traffic are not issues, then the major concern seems to be the appearance of the building. To that end, the Farrers have modified the facility to appear more "residential." They have removed the cupolas, steepened the roof angle and planned landscaping to minimize the facility's size. He presented an artist's drawing of the proposed building.

Mr. Farrer noted that the Planning Commission had found the proposed land use "compatible and harmonious" with the zone in which it is located, according to the Lindon City Compatibility Standard. He quoted from the City Engineer's statement of opinion that the expected amounts of additional traffic on Locust Avenue would not affect the level of service and that a "parking reduction" could be considered. Mr. Farrer suggested that if parking is reduced, more landscaping may be added that will further minimize the size of the facility. He noted that the proposal already plans for 24,000 sq feet of landscaping. He also observed that the hallways are presently planned for a width of eight feet. State requirements on hallways are six feet. He told the Council that the whole building can shrink two feet in width just by reducing the size of the hallways.

Mayor Ellertson commented that openness is nice also. Mr. Farrer replied that he had visited many facilities and his research had found that most hallways are six feet wide. He referred to a letter from Orem City that states that Orem City has found neighborhood opposition when a proposal is made, but after it is built there are no complaints. Ms. Farrer added that there has been a lot of neighborhood talk about violations. She asked that it be recorded in the minutes that the Farrers have contacted the State of Utah and found that they are in complete compliance to this point in the process. Mr. Farrer expressed the opinion that this project is unique in that it has garnered such support from many of the neighbors too. There is a recognized need for this type of facility in Lindon. He had made every effort to fit the facility into the neighborhood. He added that Locust Avenue is a collector street and is adequate to handle any extra traffic.

Councilmember Dain asked the size of the proposed facility. Mr. Farrer replied 20,000 square feet with 50 beds. Councilmember Hatch asked the parcel's acreage. Mr. Farrer replied 1.3 acres. Mayor Ellertson asked the present use of the parcel. Mr. Farrer replied that there is an old house, barn and outbuildings there. Mr. Demas Jasper, of 491 North Locust, asked if there had been any promises made to Mr. Farrer on what he could do with the property. Mr. Farrer replied no. He told the audience that he had attempted to use the property for his business but was discouraged by the city and had removed his equipment. He also checked to see if he could develop the property into condos and was told that this was not a consideration.

Mayor Ellertson opened the discussion for public comment. Mr. Randy Jones, 517 North Locust, informed the Council that he lives directly across the street from the proposed site. He observed that he has concerns about the negative aspects of the proposal. He commented that his first reaction to the proposal was favorable. He still agrees that this location can be a good one if the facility is "built in prudence." He also agreed that the architecture of the building is nice, but noted that the size proposed is 21,000 square feet or roughly 15 times the size of his home. He informed the Council that his wife spent time visiting facilities in Utah County and found that there are none of this size located in a residential neighborhood. He felt that the smaller facilities are hardly noticeable, while this one would draw attention just because of its size. He also felt that overflow parking at the facility would affect his home. Mr. Jones observed that he, like many residents of Lindon, had decided to reside here because of the "feeling." He informed the Council that the petition they had in front of them had been signed by 200 neighbors in the immediate vicinity of this proposal. They all agree that the facility is a good idea, but not at the proposed size. He noted that support of the project would be more universal if it was limited to 10,000 square feet with 16 beds. He suggested that this size is compatible with the neighborhood. He urged the Council not to base their decision on the profit margin of the business but on the concerns of the citizens. He felt that residential areas should be kept residential, and that Lindon's "Little Bit of Country" should be preserved.

Ms. Amy Jones, same address, read an open letter to the Council. She expressed concern that this proposal had divided the community into opposing camps. She "implored" the Council to downsize the "care center." She commented that she was not opposed to the idea and felt that it could bring good things to their neighborhood, but that the facility itself would "stick out like a sore thumb." She expects to continue to raise her children here in Lindon, but hoped that she did not have to fence them in to protect them from strangers. She added that she was looking forward to her new neighbors. There was applause from the audience after her statements.

Mr. Brad Hall, 612 North 75 West, outlined his objections to this proposal– parking, size, need and the historical nature of the current buildings. He compared the parking survey of facilities in different cities done by Ms. Jones to the survey completed by staff. He expressed the opinion that Ms. Jones survey is more accurate. The City did not take the direct approach, but called the various cities and took photographs. Ms. Jones personally visited or called to speak with the administrator of each facility. She asked questions about staff, parking and whether there were problems. He suggested that the Council call and confirm her results.

Mr. Hall addressed the proposed size of the facility. He told the Council that the closest comparison that Ms. Jones could find is the Jamestown Square assisted living facility. This is located in a business district and the parking lot fills up fast. He reported that some patients are able to drive, since this is a level #1 facility. He suggested that a ratio of one driver in eight residents is a realistic result. He also suggested that most neighbors will not complain to the City, but Ms. Jones actually knocked on doors and talked directly with the residents of several facilities. He gave an example of a bush that blocked the vision of drivers at the end of 600 North here in Lindon. He said that he intended to call the City several times, but never did. He never complained, but a problem did exist. He felt that the same situation would arise with this facility. There is no room to expand the parking lot if there is a problem, so the only alternative would be to reduce the number of patients. This may cut into the viability of the project and leave an empty shell in the neighborhood. He wondered if this empty shell could be turned into a drug rehab center or other undesirable facility.

Mr. Hall observed that the neighborhood wants this proposal to work and feels that a smaller facility would lessen the negative impacts. He referred to the petition with 200 signatures and noted that this number is a large percentage of support for a smaller facility in the neighborhood. He commented that the proposed facility is three times the size of what the state considers large and consumes every legal inch of the lot area. He noted that, as a wheel chair user most of his life, he prefers eight-foot hallways. This facility is larger than any house in Lindon and has the parking out front. He agreed that it is nice looking, but leaves the impression that it is a hotel in a residential area. He suggested that this facility would be equivalent to twenty-five condos. He asked the Council to consider the question, "Do you think it would be a good fit if the condos were zoned as newly married housing?" He felt that this is a commercial business in a residential area and that it will be too large to blend in this overly dense neighborhood. He pointed out that this neighborhood is 22% above the maximum allowed by the R2 Overlay ordinance and asked how much more would be allowed.

Mr. Smith explained that each land use is considered a separate line item in the code because they are hard to compare to each other. Therefore, an assisted living center cannot easily be compared to a duplex, which is a commercial business allowed in the residential zone. Home occupations are another example of commercial businesses that are allowed in residential zones. Mr. Hall observed that the density is higher in this neighborhood than any other neighborhood in Lindon. He suggested that if this is allowed, it will set a precedent and possibly open the door for another developer to put 100 beds on 2.6 acres. He asked if the Planning Commission would have been so concerned about the size if this was a commercial lot rather than a residential one.

Mr. Hall addressed the need for the facility. He informed the Council that the Utah State Health Department shows that the occupancy rate is 57% for assisted living centers in Utah County. Ms. Farrer commented that the State figures the occupancy rate on the number of persons the facility is licensed for and not the number of rooms that are occupied. Therefore, if one person is occupying a room licensed for two persons, the room is 50% vacant even though the facility itself considers that room fully occupied and paid. Mr. Hall observed that there are empty beds available within a mile to the north and the south of this proposed facility. He added that there is a "gas war" going on, tempting residents with enhanced amenities. He noted that the Farrers are offering a shuttle service, a new building and a location in Lindon as their amenities. He suggested that the neighborhood does not want to shut the facility out, just downsize it. He felt that this was a generous compromise on the part of the neighborhood.

Mr. Hall addressed the historical nature of the property. He informed the Council that this home was 93 years old. The previous owner, Mr. Verl Christiansen was born in that house and lived his entire life there. He stated that Lindon has no city code to protect historical buildings and suggested that they draft a one. He added that he had contacted the head of the Lindon Historical Society yesterday. He reported that she would have someone from the Society come to tonight's meeting and would be discussing these plans at their next scheduled meeting. He thanked the Council for their time. Mayor Ellertson asked if Mr. Farrer would like to respond.

Mr. Farrer referred to the parking studies done by Ms. Jones and the City. He commented that the Planning Commissioners had done their own research and read a quote from the draft minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of June 11, 2003 in which the Commissioners refuted Ms. Jones study. He suggested that parking is a "non-issue." He added that the need for the facility is not the concern of the neighborhood, but his research has shown that facilities in Utah County are full. He observed that the size of the building is intended to utilize the property and to provide the residents of the facility with services and a social lifestyle. He intends to keep a nice facility. He pointed out that most of the residents of this facility will be residents of Lindon. He suggested that Ms. Jones need not fear for her children because these people and their families are not strangers. They just need a little assistance to get by. He noted that this would not be any more like a hotel than an LDS chapel, of which there are several in this neighborhood. He suggested that the issue with the neighborhood is that this is a profit making business. He also disputed the petition. He talked with a neighbor who had signed it and this neighbor signed it because of the "outlandish" claims on staffing needs.

Ms. Farrer commented that it is legal to put our older residents in ten by ten rooms and have eight people spending their evenings sitting around a coffee table. They would like to provide larger rooms and more activities for their residents. She noted that they had staked their home and business on the success of this venture and felt that their research was valid. She reported that they had three of their own grandparents in such facilities and this proposal is in the best interests of the residents of the facility.

Mayor Ellertson asked if Mr. Smith would like to give any additional information. Mr. Smith said that he would like to clarify some of the issues raised by Mr. Hall. He informed the Council that the Planning Commission had specifically asked him to call other cities for their reports on complaints. He was not asked to call each facility individually. In addition, he suggested that Mr. Hall's representations on parking were not quite accurate. He explained that all conditional use permits are reviewable upon complaint. If there are complaints, then the Planning Commission and permit holder meet to find ways to solve the concerns of the neighborhood. He is not sure what could be done if the parking is found to be inadequate at this point. However, the City Engineer has reviewed the proposal and has issued an opinion that there is minimal impact for both traffic and parking. He asserted that he has no opinion on this proposal. Staff's position has addressed traffic and parking only with this position being based on a professional opinion.

As far as the historical value of the property, Mr. Smith informed the audience that Lindon does have a code dealing with historic preservation. It is section 2.38. At the time this ordinance was adopted, the City and Historic Preservation Commission performed a "reconnaissance survey" of possible historic sites in Lindon. This code gives the City the ability to hold a project up, while investigation into options other than tearing a structure down are conducted. He asked if there were questions for him from the Council.

Mr. Dameron asked if this home is on this list referred to by Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith replied that the barn is on the list. He explained that Utah is a private property oriented state and as such, looks at alternatives other than depriving an owner of his rights to develop and use his property.

Ms. Jones explained her reasons for fearing for her children's safety as a bad experience in the past. Ms. Joy Lee of 594 North Locust asked how the City taxes an assisted living facility. She pointed out that there are 32 rooms so there could feasibly be 64 beds at maximum capacity. Ms. Farrer explained that the license application will be for 50 beds not 64 beds. Councilmember Dain asked if a new owner could apply for more beds. Mr. Farrer replied yes, if the new owner can meet the State requirements. Mayor Ellertson replied that the City would receive property tax based on the non-residential value and a business license fee.

Mr. Demas Jasper, 491 North Locust Avenue, commented that he could see no problems with the proposal when it was first presented to him. He noted the location of the bus garage as a reason for this attitude. However, he suggested that the process of changing the area from residential to something else is of more concern to him. He felt that the applicants should have the burden of proof that their proposal will be of benefit to the neighborhood. The residents have bought homes based on the premise that the neighborhood is residential. The applicants cannot extend the condos or have a business on the property, but he can build three homes there. Mr. Jasper urged the Council to take a second look at changing the nature of the neighborhood.

Mr. Doyle Cardon, 504 North 40 West, assured his neighbors that demographics are changing fast and it is in the best interests of the residents of Lindon to be prepared to care for their older citizens.

Mr. Gary Otterstrom, 649 North 75 West, told the Council that he appreciated the forum provided to air concerns. He commented that there were strong feelings on the issues. Mr. Otterstrom informed the Council that this proposal is essentially a commercial business in a residential neighborhood. He told the Council that he had signed the petition and felt that the petition was a bending of the neighborhood's real desires. He suggested that the petition shows that a great majority of the public have spoken and aired their feelings. He also suggested that it was incumbent on the Council as the representatives of the City to follow the wishes of the majority and downsize the facility. He felt that this was a reasonable request on the part of the neighborhood and was essential for their safety. He also suggested that he would like to see the City or the applicant be required to cover the irrigation canal and install curb, gutter and sidewalk as part of this development. He indicated that his wish is that the proposal would move around the corner on 400 North and that the City address the issue of this historic nature of the home and barn.

Mr. Paul Lesser, 515 North 20 West, agreed with Mr. Jasper's objection. He commented that he owns the condo immediately adjacent to the parcel. He agreed that when a person buys a home, they essentially buy into the neighborhood. He observed that his first impulse had been negative concerning the proposed use of the property, and it violated his sense of propriety and rightness. Now, after investigating the situation, he and his wife have decided that they are fully in favor. He observed that this proposal will be much more attractive than an expanse of dirt, heavy equipment and trailer homes there. He has visited with Mr. Farrer about the improvements that are anticipated, and Mr. Farrer has been very accommodating and agreeable. He felt that Mr. Farrer should not be asked to do more. He suggested that this facility would be a more pleasing view for those across the street than what is there now. He also suggested that more trees and shrubbery would break up the expanse of the building. He informed the Council that he had refused to sign the petition and asked why this arbitrary limit of size had been decided on by the preparers of the petition. He observed that not one proponent of the petition had offered a valid reason for this arbitrary limit. He commented that Mr. Farrer is committed to making a nice facility and to taking care of the neighborhood's concerns and needs. He suggested that the facility not change unless the Council can factually find a reason to do so. He also suggested that "large" is relative and it would not be justified to limit the size without an appropriate reason to do so.

Bill Cranney, 537 North 80 West, agreed that the if the amenities are the justification of the size, he is fully in favor. He commented that he would like a nice facility if the time comes to put his mother there. Mr. Jones interjected that this would be the largest facility in a residential area in Utah County if this goes in.

Mr. Alan College, 35 East 400 North, observed that the "Little Bit of County" that is Lindon is under continual pressure to modify our half acre lot zoning. The task is how to maintain balance. He expressed concern about putting in a facility of this unprecedented size on a 1.3 acre lot in an area that is already saturated with multi-family housing. He agreed that if the parcel was zoned commercial there would be no question of its approval. He noted that Lindon's demographics are changing and the political climate is changing. There is significant financial pressure to change Lindon's code and modify our lifestyle. He did agreed that foresight is needed to care for our elderly.

Mr. Mike Marchbanks, 140 South 400 West, told the Council that he had spent about 50 years in Lindon. He expressed the opinion that this facility is greatly needed in Lindon and told the Council and audience that he had taken care of his grandparents because there were no such facilities available. He also had researched local facilities and told the Council that he was told that they were all full with waiting lists. He commented that most rooms are made for a couple, but most do not move until a death leaves them single, which may be a reason that the State does not show the rooms as fully occupied. He suggested that there may be less traffic associated with this facility than a homeowner with several teenagers and a dozen licensed cars. He noted that many seniors are generally not driving cars when they decide that they need help to live independently. He praised the Planning Commission for their "extreme due diligence." He agreed that traffic is a legitimate concern since all of Lindon is growing. He noted that his home has been impacted by the Home Depot, but that this development also brings in a tax base that is enjoyed by all in Lindon. This does not mean that he is advocating commercial development in areas intended for residential facilities, but he expressed the opinion that this would appear to be residential. He suggested that most people will drive by this building without even noticing it, and that Lindon needs to take care of its own senior citizens.

Mr. Cranney asked about the fate of the bus garage. Mayor Ellertson informed the audience that the bus storage will be moving, but the lot will continue to be used as a maintenance yard. Mr. Otterstrom asked what would happen to the bus garage if Alpine School District abandons the site. Mr. Smith replied that the property is zoned residential along Locust Avenue. Mr. Jasper asked what this proposal could be used for in a subsequent ownership. He suggested that the size limits the uses for which the building could be used. He asked about the possibility of a halfway house.

Mr. Matt Bean, 87 West 725 North, encouraged all participants to require those who submit information to respond with factual information. He pointed out that there are questions on the validity of vacancy rates, parking problems and other issues. The sense is that any information submitted is refuted and judged without credibility. He commented that he appreciated Mr. Jasper's comments on moving away from residential zoning. He asked that the Council be careful to consider the facts.

Ms. Annette Johnson, 535 North Locust Avenue, told the Council that Locust Avenue has seen a tremendous increase in the amount of traffic through the years. It has reached the point that it is hard to get out of the driveway at times. She expressed concern about children using the street for walking because there are no sidewalks. She observed that teens driving 40-50 mph threaten the safety of her granddaughters. She expressed the opinion that this facility will add more to the traffic problems.

Mr. Hall commented that Ms. Jones had confused two facilities named Bellevue. There are conflicting figures. He asked that the Council disregard the information given on this facility. Mr. Kim Martin of 281 West 500 North told the Council that he had signed the petition. He urged the Council to keep the residential concept. He suggested that the Council make sure that the parking is adequate. He expressed concern of on street parking, light pollution and noise pollution.

Mr. Deny Farnworth, 728 West 20 South, introduced himself as a Lindon resident and a developer. He told the Council that he and most residents came to Lindon because it is a farming community. He told the audience that someday he might need a place to care for his mother. His sister is an RN at a facility similar to the one proposed. His sister told him that parking is not an issue at the facility where she works, because no one comes to see the residents. He suggested that the size could give the residents more amenities. He expressed the opinion that they should have more things to do–if they don't, they are not living. He observed that he would love to have this facility in his neighborhood.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the Council had heard a lot of comment. He commented that he recognizes that the process of government is not always pretty or quick, but it is effective. He noted that he recognizes that Lindon may face a need for such a facility at some point in the future. The concern seems to be not the kind of the facility but the location. He agreed that Lindon is changing. He suggested that the Council may need some time to digest the information given and to research and verify the data. He asked if there were comments from the Council.

Councilmember Dain expressed the opinion that the discussion tonight reminds him of similar discussions on high density housing. He suggested that the Council address issues such as density and distance between facilities of this type.

Councilmember Hatch told the audience that he personally knows the Farrers and they have just as much concern for children as anyone in Lindon. He agreed with Mr. College that Lindon needs to find a balance between size and amenities. He asked the audience to compare Lindon with other cities that are similar, not Orem, but places like Salem. He expressed the opinion that animal rights are important, and we should make sure that the time doesn't come that there is no room for horses in Lindon. He observed that horses cannot vote, but there is a "little bit less of country" every day. He felt that the facility needs to be downsized.

Councilmember Bayless told the Council that she has listened to the discussions at both Planning Commission meetings and the Council meeting tonight. She suggested that the Farrers consider increasing the landscaping on the west side to shelter and conceal the size of the facility. She told the audience that concerns about lighting are addressed in the Lindon City code and is one issue that is simply dealt with. She commented that the intent of the Planning Commission's recommendation is that they want the Council to have a strong voice on the size of the facility. She observed that she appreciates that the Farrer's have seen the need for such a facility and want to care for Lindon's seniors. She thinks that it would be nice to stay in Lindon if it becomes necessary for her to seek extra help. She commented that she tends to agree that the facility may be too large. She asked for time to research on her own how big a facility in Lindon should be. She observed that she prefers not to delay the issue, but she is not comfortable to approve it as is.

Mayor Ellertson thanked the audience for taking the time to come and express their concerns. He asked the Council if they were ready for a motion. Councilmember Dain commented that he was not sure whether the Farrer's time table dictated a denial or a continuance. Mr. Farrer replied that they were not on a time table. He expressed appreciation for the dialog. He urged the Council to research facilities on their own. He suggested that if the facility is too large, he could shrink the hallways to reduce the size of the building, and hoped that the Council would consider less parking and more landscaping. Councilmember Dain suggested that the Council needs to consider how many to allow in a neighborhood. He suggested that time be taken to draft an ordinance.

Mr. Michael Bauer agreed that an ordinance would direct future developers on Lindon's aims and goals. Mr. Otterstrom suggested that the ordinance come first. Councilmember Bayless explained that if the application is denied to put an ordinance in place first, the whole process must be redone, including the financial application process. A question was asked as to what size Mr. Farrer would be willing to reduce the facility. Mayor Ellertson commented that the Council would learn that amount from Mr. Farrer before the next meeting.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 15, 2003 TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL REVIEW AND THE INPUT OF THE ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS. SHE DIRECTED STAFF TO START THE PROCESS OF ORDINANCE PREPARATION. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-0, WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

2. Preliminary Plat - Gillman Farm Subdivision, Plat "A." This is a request by Deny Farnworth for approval of Gillman Farm Subdivision, Plat "A," 27 lots, R1-20 zone, at 250 North Gillman Lane and along Lakeview Drive. The Planning Commission has recommended approval.

Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Smith to present this application. Mr. Smith displayed an aerial of the neighborhood and outlined the subdivision proposal. He pointed out the large lot that consumes the bulk of one parcel and the other lots in an adjacent parcel. He noted that utilities will be installed in a easement through the Maxfield property. He informed the Council that the Planning Commission had given the recommendation that the intersection of Gillman Lane and Lakeview Road should be improved by widening the asphalt. Councilmember Bayless recommended that the pathway cross section be required for the improvement of Gillman Lane. Councilmember Dain explained the pathway cross section to the developer, Mr. Deny Farnworth. He responded by declaring that if the pathway "is for the horses, he is for it."

Mr. Farnworth brought up the possibility of closing the irrigation ditch on Gillman Lane. He pointed out that the ditch only serves the fields that will be developed, so will no longer be needed. The ownership of the home and size of the lot on the corner of Lakeview Drive and Gillman Lane was discussed. Mr. Smith disclosed that the lot did not contain enough acreage to be subdivided. The Council discussed the possibility of widening the road and acquiring the right-of-way necessary. There was also discussion of the responsibility for financing these off-site improvements. Mr. Farnworth offered to do a joint venture with the City and be reimbursed over a period of time. Councilmember Dain suggested that Mr. Farnworth approach the owner about dedication if Mr. Farnworth puts in the improvements.

Mayor Ellertson verified that the Maxfields are willing to allow a utilities easement through their property to 800 West. Mr. Farnworth assured the Mayor that Mr. Maxfield had agreed to the easement. Mayor Ellertson asked if there were other questions. There were none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DENY FARNWORTH FOR GILLMAN FARM SUBDIVISION, A 27 LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE R1-20 ZONE AT 250 NORTH GILLMAN LANE WITH THE CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT MR. FARNSWORTH APPROACH THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE CORNER OF LAKEVIEW DRIVE AND GILLMAN LANE ABOUT ADDITIONAL ROADWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY. 2. THAT THE MODIFIED PATHWAY CROSS SECTION BE INSTALLED ON THE GILLMAN LANE ROAD FRONTAGE. 3. AND THAT THE PLAT SHOULD SHOW AND THE CITY ACQUIRE UTILITY EASEMENTS THROUGH THE MAXFIELD PROPERTY. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-0 WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Mr. Marchbanks commented on the continuity and success of trails.

3. Review and Action - Agreement - Reagan Outdoor Advertising. This is a request by the City Attorney for approval of the negotiated agreement between Lindon City and Reagan Outdoor Advertising pertaining to the billboard sign located at approximately 200 North State Street.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the agreement terminates January 2005. Councilmember Hatch suggested that language be added that prohibits modifications that would make the sign larger. The Council discussed this suggestion and agreed. Mr. Dameron commented that he would have the City Attorney add the language that the sign will not exceed the present size as discussed.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LINDON CITY AND REAGAN OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, INC. AS AMENDED AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS: COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER BATH ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE COUNCILMEMBER DAIN AYE COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

4. Review and Action - Resolution - Holiday Fireworks Limitations. The City Council is aware of the extremely dry and volatile conditions of undeveloped areas in the city. The City Council will consider a resolution which will prohibit the use of fireworks in or near any of these areas.

Mr. Dameron presented this Resolution to restrict fireworks in or near any undeveloped areas of Lindon. The Council discussed the restrictions of previous year's resolutions. It was noted that previously the restrictions had been for undeveloped areas east of 1200 East or the Murdock Canal. This proposal is for any undeveloped acreage in the City. Councilmember Hatch expressed approval of this proposal because of the fire danger. Mayor Ellertson commented that the hillside was a "tinderbox." Mr. Dameron observed that Governor Leavitt had declared a State of Emergency because of the wildfire danger. It was discussed that the Resolution should parallel the State's declaration.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2003-9 ESTABLISHING A RESTRICTION ON THE USE OF FIREWORKS IN SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY WITH A POSSIBLE AMENDMENT AS DISCUSSED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE STATE OF UTAH'S DECLARATION. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS: COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER BATH ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE COUNCILMEMBER DAIN AYE COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

5. Public Hearing - Final Budget for Fiscal Year 2003/2004. The City Council will hear public comment concerning the final city budget for fiscal year 2003/2004. Two public work sessions and one public hearing have previously been held where the budget issues were discussed. Tonight, the Council will receive comments and act to approve the budget for fiscal year 2003/2004, amend the budget for fiscal year 2002/2003, set the certified property tax rate for 2003/2004, and adopt the city wide fee schedule.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Finance Director Kristen Colson directed the Council to review the overview section of the proposed final budget. She explained that each fund shows the revenues and expenditures of the last three years and an estimated balance as of June 30, 2003. She invited the Council to review and discuss the Budget Issues on pages 1-7 of the budget document.

Ms. Colson informed the Council that Budget Issue #1 asks if Lindon City should provide employees with a 2.2 percent cost of living allowance (COLA) increase and provide for a merit step increase in January 2004. She commented that the fiscal impact of this issue is $25,906 for the COLA and $16, 910 for the merit increase. She recommended that these increases not be approved at this time, but asked that the Council plan to review the City's financial standing in December 2003. At that time, if the City's standing is improved, this issue should be reconsidered and the budget reopened. The Council discussed Ms. Colson's suggestion. Mayor Ellertson suggested that when this issue is reopened, there should be further discussion on increasing the employee contribution to health insurance. Councilmember Bayless asked if any future approved employee wage increases would be retroactive to the beginning of the fiscal year. Mr. Dameron suggested that this subject could also be addressed when the financial standing is evaluated. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR BUDGET ISSUE #1 CONCERNING PROVIDING COLA AND MERIT STEP INCREASES. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Ms. Colson introduced Budget Issue #2 by asking the Council if the City should fund the increase in medical, dental & life insurance benefits for employees. She estimated the impact to the budget at $15, 310 and recommended that the City continue to fund the benefits with the employee contribution remaining at $26.00 per month. The Council discussed the issue. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE BUDGET ISSUE #2 AS RECOMMENDED BY CONTINUING TO FUND EMPLOYEE INSURANCE BENEFITS WITH THE EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTION REMAINING AT THE PRESENT LEVEL. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Budget Issue #3, providing medical, dental and life insurance for the Mayor and Councilmembers, was discussed next. Ms. Colson recommended that this issue not be funded at this time, but be reevaluated with the potential employee raises in December 2003. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR BUDGET ISSUE #3, TO FOREGO IMPLEMENTING AN INSURANCE BENEFIT FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL UNTIL THE REVENUES ARE REEVALUATED MIDYEAR. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Ms. Colson was requested to inquire about the midyear additions to the insurance plans. Ms. Colson presented a proposed increase in the culinary water rates as Budget Issue #4. She explained that this increase is recommended by the City Engineer to keep the culinary water fund current with expected expenditures. The recommended increase is equal to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase of 2.2 percent. She estimated the impact on the budget as $15,343.00. Ms. Colson observed that the rates are structured to help those who use less water–a conservation rate. The Council discussed the rate structure and the proposed increase. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE BUDGET ISSUE #4 AS RECOMMENDED AND INCREASE THE CULINARY WATER RATES BY 2.2 PERCENT. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Budget Issue #5 was presented as a proposed increase in the franchise tax of 1 percent. Ms. Colson explained that the City is currently charging 3.5 percent franchise tax. She noted that the legally allowed rate is 6 percent. The 1 percent increase to 4.5 percent would allow the City to continue park improvements and balance the budget. The impact to the budget was estimated at $108,400. Councilmember Dain commented that the funds are really needed to keep the park improvements on schedule. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVED THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR BUDGET ISSUE #5–INCREASE THE FRANCHISE TAX FROM 3.5 PERCENT TO 4.5 PERCENT. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT.

Mayor Ellertson asked when this franchise tax increase would take effect. Mr. Dameron replied that the effective date is July 1, or as soon thereafter as the entities are notified as per their franchise agreements. However, the Council will need to approve an ordinance increasing the percentage beforehand.

Ms. Colson introduced Budget Issue #6 as the implementation of a flat mobile telecommunication tax rate of $1.00 per month for each mobile telephone number assigned to any customer whose place of primary use is within Lindon. She noted that the budget impact is estimated at $24,000. Mr. Dameron explained that Lindon City currently collects franchise tax for stationary lines, but not for mobile phone providers. There was a discussion of the proposed cell phone tax. Councilmember Hatch commented that the problem with most tax increases is that once the need for the increase has passed, the tax remains. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE BUDGET ISSUE #6 AS RECOMMENDED AND IMPLEMENT A $1.00 PER MONTH MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TAX FOR CUSTOMERS WHOSE PRIMARY USE IS WITHIN LINDON CITY. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR EXCEPT COUNCILMEMBER HATCH WHO VOTED NAY (2-1). THE MOTION DID NOT CARRY.

Mr. Dameron observed that an ordinance for this tax increase would need to be prepared for public hearing as well. Councilmember Hatch agreed to vote for this motion now but when the economy gets better he wants to reopen this item for discussion.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN RESTATED HIS MOTION TO APPROVE BUDGET ISSUE #6 AS RECOMMENDED AND HAVE STAFF PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Ms. Colson presented the proposed changes to the Lindon City Fee Schedule. The Council discussed the proposed increase in the price of cemetery plots and water relief petitions. She noted that the price of water relief petitions is current with the water share market, but does not push the price of water shares up. Ms. Colson commented that the increase in the Contractor Cleanup Fee is being recommended by the Chief Building Inspector and Planning Director. This increase discourages contractors from storing materials in the city streets and leaving cleanup to the City. She explained that the increased deposit for the Volleyball Net and Ball were necessary to cover replacement costs. The increase in the garbage collection rates reflect the pass through of the increased tipping fees from the Transfer Station District. Ms. Colson presented the increases in the culinary water rates as previously discussed. There was a discussion of why the increase seems to be more than proportionally greater for the larger meters. Mr. Dameron replied that he would investigate the reason for the seeming disparity with the City Engineer, but that the rate is as recommended by this department.

Mayor Ellertson questioned the intent of the higher rate for non-resident buyers of cemetery plots. He suggested that there exists a possibility that a resident could buy up extra lots for nonresident use and deplete the inventory for residents users. This was discussed by the Council. Mayor Ellertson also suggested that the Contractor Cleanup Fee as suggested should be a minimum fee and that actual costs should be recovered if they exceed this amount. The Council and Mayor discussed paying the tipping fee directly to the Transfer Station District. Mr. Dameron reminded the Mayor that he was waiting for a letter from the director of the Transfer Station District on the benefits to the City of this course of action. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHANGES TO THE LINDON CITY FEE SCHEDULE AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Ms. Colson presented Resolution 2003-10 to approve and adopt the Budget for Fiscal Year 2003/2004, amend the Budget for fiscal year 2002/2003, adopt the Fee Schedule and Employee Compensation Programs, enter the RDA agreement and set the certified tax rate. Mr. Dameron presented a fax received that day from the County giving the most current certified tax. He suggested that the rate be changed in the resolution to 0.001874. The Council concurred. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was public comment. There was none.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2003-10 APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2003/2004, SETTING THE CERTIFIED TAX RATE AT 0.001874, AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003, ADOPTING THE CITY-WIDE FEE SCHEDULE, ADOPTING THE CITY COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, AND ENTERING INTO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE LINDON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS: COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER BATH ABSENT COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE COUNCILMEMBER DAIN AYE COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

6. Review and Action - Agreement - City and RDA. The RDA contracts with the City to provide administrative services for the RDA. The Council will review and act on this agreement.

The Council discussed continuing the agreement with the RDA to compensate the City $30, 611 for use of services, facilities and supplies by the Agency.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT CONCERNING LINDON CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY USE OF CITY SERVICES AND FACILITIES DURING FISCAL YEAR 2003/2004 AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED (3-0) WITH TWO COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT.

Adjourn City Council meeting

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND CONVENE THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AT 11:13 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Convene the Redevelopment Agency and then the Municipal Building Authority

BOARDMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CONVENE THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY AT 11:17P.M. BOARDMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Reconvene the City Council meeting

BOARDMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY AND RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 11:20 P.M. BOARDMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

7. Discussion - Wise Water Use. The Mayor and City Council will discuss the use/misuse of water within the city limits thus far this year.

Mayor Ellertson commented that he had hoped the press would be present. He told the Council that he believes that residents are really working at conserving water this year. He noted that lawns are not as green. He informed the Council that he asked the utilities department to review the culinary water accounts for water usage. Three accounts in various areas were chosen at random and it was found that the use is less in the last twelve month period compared to the previous 12 month period. Councilmember Dain commented that there had been a lot of press given to water conservation issues and it has made residents more aware. Mayor Ellertson commented that he had attended a presentation on water conservation measures. The various approaches were discussed.

Mayor Ellertson noted that there are still a few citizens who choose to ignore all restrictions and recommendations. He suggested that a scout service project might be to deliver notices to these water abusers. Mr. Dameron suggested that a notice thanking users for their individual conservation measures might be appropriate also. Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Dameron to check into the conservation statistics of the irrigation system. Mr. Dameron replied that he would ask Public Works Director Don Peterson and City Engineer Dave Thurgood to check on this information.

COUNCIL REPORTS:

WATER, GENERAL PLAN, BUILDING INSPECTION, ENGINEERING

Councilmember Dain reported that he had attended a meeting of Murdock Canal shareholders. The purpose of the meeting had been to inform users of measures planned to cover the canal. The funding for the project was disclosed and it was noted that assessments for shares will be increasing. Councilmember Dain mentioned that the estimated loss to evaporation was about 100 million gallons.

SEWER, SOLID WASTE, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES

Councilmember Hatch reported that a resident has requested to use the Veteran's Hall kitchen during Lindon Days for a fund raiser. He was asked to refer the citizen to the Lindon Days chairperson.

Councilmember Hatch reported that a pathway had been lost in a street restriping project on 400 West. Mr. Dameron explained that the company had already been informed and would be redoing the project.

TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ADMINISTRATION

Councilmember Bayless reported a safety issue on the intersection of 600 South and Lindon Parkway.

STREETS, SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC SAFETY AND COURT

Councilmember Bath was excused.

PARKS, RECREATION, EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER

Councilmember Acerson was excused.

ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT

Mr. Dameron: 1. Announced the Engineering Coordination Meeting for Thursday, June 19. Councilmember Bayless volunteered to attend. 2. Noted that the Walmart relief petition would be heard by the Planning Commission at their next meeting. 3. Relayed a request for a music festival sponsorship. He was instructed to respond with a denial to the request. 4. Asked for hearing requests on the Project Tracking List. The various projects were discussed. No requests were made.

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

ADJOURN

COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO ADJOURN CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 11:54 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

APPROVED - July 1, 2003

back to top