The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting on January 20, 2004, beginning at 7:00 p.m., in the Lindon City Center, Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson
Pledge of Allegiance: Kevin Hurst, Troop 496
Invocation: Toby Bath

PRESENT

Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk

ABSENT

Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember

The meeting began at 7:10 p.m.

RECOGNITION - Mayor Ellertson and the City Council will recognize several police officers who have recently received awards for going beyond the call of duty.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the Council was honored to have several public safety personnel present in the audience tonight. He turned the time over to Captain Cody Cullimore. Captain Cullimore commented that it was his honor to present awards to some of the people that he works with every day. He explained that the Public Safety Department has instituted a program to recognize outstanding service to the community.

Captain Cullimore called Mike Bartell to the front. He read the award to the audience and told them that on April 4, 2003, Officer Bartell removed a deadly weapon from a suspect at risk to himself and saved a coworker from a potentially dangerous situation. Officer Bartell was awarded the Silver Star Award. Captain Cullimore next introduced Colin Gordon. He informed that audience that Officer Gordon was called on a medical call on October 3, 2003 and found two residents overcome by deadly paint fumes. He entered the building, at risk to himself, to render aid. Officer Gordon was also awarded the Silver Star Award. Captain Cullimore awarded Dispatch Supervisor, Linda Chipman, the Outstanding Civilian Employee award. He commented that she has served the residents and department for many years with unselfish devotion and dedication. She has always "gone the extra mile." Captain Cullimore presented Officer Mike Bartell as the Outstanding Officer of the Year. He informed the Council and audience that Officer Bartell responded to a report of a damaged mail box on March 22, 2003. He found that the elderly lady was on a fixed income and then purchased and replaced her box at his own expense. Captain Cullimore called Detective John Lloyd to the front. He presented Officer Lloyd with the Outstanding Service Award. He explained that this award is chosen by the Chief of Police. He commented that Detective Lloyd is an exemplary school resource officer.

Mayor Ellertson observed that these officers have served the community well. He commented that all of these things happened without any of us even knowing. He appreciates their interest in the best welfare of the residents and noted that their job is about "taking care of us, 24/7." He thanked the public safety employees on behalf of the Council and the residents. There was applause and picture taking.

MINUTES - The minutes of the regular meetings of December 16, 2003 and January 6, 2004 are ready for the Council's review.

The Minutes of the regular meeting of December 16, 2003 were reviewed. There were no corrections.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 16, 2003. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

The Minutes of the regular meeting of January 6, 2004 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 7, Line 1: Replace the phrase "it would be nice" with the phrase "the City cannot."
Page 7, Line 2: Add the phrase "or how they will build" after the word "are." Delete the word "but" and the phrase "this can be."
Page 7, Line 3: Delete the phrases "administered. What is" and How do you define that and."
Page 7, Line 4,5: Replace the phrase "how does it apply to an acreage that is already surrounded by homes" with the phrase "It would be difficult to make that decision without becoming arbitrary."
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 6, 2004 AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

OPEN SESSION - Citizens Comments

There was no comment from the public.

MAYOR'S COMMENTS/REPORT

Mayor Ellertson observed that he had nothing new to report. Harlow Clark, newspaper representative, asked if there were any new details on the Mountain View Corridor. Mayor Ellertson explained that this project is still in the planning stages and nothing new is scheduled yet.

CONSENT AGENDA - No Items

CURRENT BUSINESS

1. Continued Public Hearing - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Assisted Living Centers. The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve a proposed ordinance amendment adding Chapter 17.72 - Care Facilities Overlay zone to the Lindon City Code. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions. This public hearing was continued from the meeting of January 6, 2004.

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

Mayor Ellertson commented that the Council is hoping for closure on this issue tonight and would like any additional public comment that does not cover ground already covered. Mr. Brad Hall, 612 North 75 West, asked if the Council had given more consideration to matching the State on the numbers of rooms in a small and large facility. He also asked where the proposed cap on large facilities had been derived from in the draft ordinance. Mayor Ellertson replied that there had been consideration of making facility distinctions of small and large at the last meeting, however, there is no "specific science" on the numbers.

Mr. Smith asked if the Council would like to discuss the changes that had been made in the proposed ordinance since the last discussion. The Council replied yes. Mr. Dameron suggested that there were some items that were pending from the last discussion and maybe it would be a good idea to start there. Mr. Smith commented that he had prepared two draft ordinances based on comments from the last meeting. One ordinance specifies small, medium and large distinctions on size, and the second proposed ordinance specifying small and large facilities. He asked the Council to note that the numbers of each size are left blank. He commented that the staff does not know the appropriate number that would reduce the impact that is acceptable to the community. He noted that the City Attorney, Jared Frei, has reviewed the proposed ordinance and sent his comments. He pointed out some additions to the language that were recommended by the City Attorney.

Mr. Smith replied to the question on the derivation of the proposed cap on large facility size by stating that 125 beds is the average size of large facilities in Utah County. He detailed the sizes of facilities and how he derived the number. He pointed out the changes in 17.72.20 that details the zones where the various sizes of facilities could be allowed. He noted that this section specifies that only a specific size of facility may be allowed in a particular zone. Councilmember Bayless requested the removal of the word "small" from Section 17.72.030(1) so that the section would apply generally rather than specifically.

Mr. Smith thanked Councilmember Bayless, then pointed out the addition of the requirement for the design of all sides of the exterior elevations to appear architecturally similar to a single family home. He also noted the addition of a parking addendum, which will allow the Planning Commission and Council to increase parking either in the review process or upon public complaint. He commented that if the facility is catering to a group that drives, more parking may be needed. Councilmember Bayless verified that the size of a facility in a commercial district will be determined by deducting the requirements for landscaping and parking from the total acreage of a lot. The building may occupy the remaining property. Mr. Smith replied that this is the typical procedure for commercial districts. He informed the Council that the commercial district has a thirty percent landscaping area requirement and that parking must accommodate the staff and one additional space for each three beds. He observed that a provision should probably be added that requires a facility in a commercial district to comply with the architectural style of the zone where it is located.

Mr. Smith informed the Council that the second ordinance removes the medium facility. He noted that four-sided compatible architecture, and the increase in parking had been added here, and that numbers for the sizes were left blank. Other additions to both ordinances include the exclusion of care for family members, the deletion of the PC-1 zoning district from the list of allowed commercial zones, and the removal of the word "senior" so that all those that need assistance are recognized. He commented that the draft ordinances do not have any association with the R2 Overlay ordinance. He suggested that care should be taken that this ordinance not conflict with state-mandated goals for moderate income housing. Councilmember Bayless commented that many of the issues seem to have been addressed and progress is being made.

Mayor Ellertson thanked Mr. Smith for his work in helping to iron out issues. He suggested that comments from the public should now be taken. Mr. Hall confirmed that all references to elderly care in the group home ordinance, Section 17.70, are being removed. Mr. Smith verified this statement. Mr. Hall asked if the remaining sections of 17.70 concerning juvenile and handicapped facilities would be tied to this new ordinance. Mr. Smith replied no. Mr. Hall asked if a juvenile facility could be next door to an assisted living facility. Mr. Smith replied that juvenile facilities are not allowed in residential zones. Mr. Hall asked if the draft ordinance covers both types of care facility, social and medical. He observed that the State of Utah does not cover social facilities. Mr. Smith replied that all facilities that assist with daily living activities are covered.

Mr. Hall commented that he prefers the ordinance without the medium size facility. He suggested that small facilities could be as large as twenty-six beds, but not on a local street. He expressed the opinion that the larger facilities should be located on collectors. He commented that there is less likelihood of "warfare" with the community if a facility is defined as "small." He asked if small facilities could be put in commercial districts. Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Smith if a facility meets the architectural standards, then could there be a facility with a number of beds less than large. Mr. Smith replied that the ordinance is written to only allow small facilities in residential district. He asked if the limited area along State Street should be used for small facilities.

Mr. Hall commented that many facilities are located in transition zones between residential and commercial. He suggested that this use makes sense in these kinds of areas, but there may be problems in trying to define what makes a transitional zone. He also asked if assisted living facilities should have a minimum size placed on the lot they are proposed to be built on. He wondered if a facility could be placed on a 12,000 square foot lot. Mr. Smith observed that a facility operator/developer is not likely to consider a minimum-sized lot as economically feasible, but that there are many large lots and acreage within these zones.

Mr. Hall suggested that the room size requirement does not match the State requirement. Mayor Ellertson replied that the State requirement overrules and so it does not conflict. He asked if less street lights would be used if higher light poles were allowed. Mayor Ellertson explained how light is directed.

Mr. Hall suggested that, if medium facilities are kept in the ordinance, the Council should consider not precluding a walk-out basement by limiting the height. Mr. Smith explained the height requirement and noted that it does not preclude walk-out basements. Mr. Hall commented that the State requires 350 square feet for each resident. He calculated that a facility with 125 residents (maximum large facility) would create an institutional hotel, not an assisted living center. He suggested that the cap be placed at fifty. Mayor Ellertson thanked Mr. Hall for his comments and asked if there were any other questions, issues or comments. There were none.

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

Mayor Ellertson suggested that this time be used to talk about the issues among the Council. He noted that there are two ordinances to consider. The question seems to be on the medium-sized facility in a residential zone and what size to limit it to that the Council determines will fit in the zone architecturally. The Council agreed. Councilmember Bayless suggested that the list of eight items be narrowed. Mayor Ellertson commented that provisions for four-sided architecture and parking availability are included now. Councilmember Bath expressed the opinion that the changes as proposed meet with his approval.

Councilmember Bayless commented that assisted living centers are a conditional use and wondered if the parking stipulation was necessary. Mayor Ellertson explained that the ordinance covers more than assisted living facilities now. He felt that a retirement center, or other type of care may require more parking and that this should be addressed on the front end, rather then when there is a complaint. Mr. Smith commented that the parking stipulation may be addressed better in the general requirements section. He explained that this condition may be applied to retirement or social facilities where the residents still drive. He added that, in these cases, parking may be required up to one per bed, plus one for each on-duty staff member. The parking needs for residents, visitors and staff must be considered. Councilmember Acerson suggested that a general statement that parking may be considered during the conditional use hearings may serve the purpose. Mayor Ellertson felt that some direction should be given rather than leaving it open to interpretation. Councilmember Bayless suggested that the wording could include, "number of parking stalls required for types of facilities other than assisted living centers will be set at conditional use time." Mr. Dameron suggested that the provision could say that as much as one stall for every staff member and bed could be required. Mayor Ellertson commented that the Seville in Orem presently requires one for each two beds and his experience has been that this is not enough. He expressed the opinion that the ordinance should contain some guidance on the what may be required. Mr. Smith suggested that one stall to one resident and staff member may be required. Councilmember Acerson observed that this would give notice to developers on what to expect. The Council agreed and the provision was added to section 030.

Councilmember Bayless observed that item three to take out references to seniors and make the ordinance deal with assisted living more generally has been taken care of in this draft. Mayor Ellertson noted that items four and five will need more time and discussion to resolve. These are questions on the number of beds in a residential zone and how to associate the R2 Overlay density issues with this ordinance. Mayor Ellertson added that issue six, which excludes care for family members in a home, and eight, which restricts assisted living centers to CG and MC zones, not PC-1, are also completed. He noted that issue seven needs more discussion also.

Mayor Ellertson commented that issue five on the R2 overlay is an attempt to get a feel for impact on residential neighborhoods. The Council's purpose and intent is not to limit R2 units more than is already provided by the R2 Overlay ordinance. The types of housing involved here, assisted living centers and multi-family housing, have two different goals. One is to provide affordable housing and the other is to provide assistance with every day living. Councilmember Bayless observed that both have impact on the density of a neighborhood. She commented that she can see that maybe they should be considered together, however, she can also see why they should be considered different.

Mayor Ellertson observed that the R2 Overlay ordinance allows six units per acre. He commented that the 2000 census determined that the average household is about four persons. Six units with four persons would equate to 24 people per acre. He acknowledged that an assisted living center would not include children, which the census does. Councilmember Bath expressed the opinion that the R2 Overlay should not apply to assisted living centers, but that assisted living centers should not be created next to R2 Overlay projects as this would make neighborhoods even more dense.

Councilmember Carpenter commented that he had been part of this discussion through the Planning Commission, too. He would like to express his opinion that there is a conflict of interest between the neighbors who are concerned about the size of a facility and the seniors who will make use of the facility. He acknowledged that although the word "senior" is removed from the ordinance, the vast majority of those who will take advantage of the services offered will be seniors. Councilmember Carpenter informed the Council that he has published a book on aging successfully. He told them that he was deeply committed to serving seniors with appropriate facilities. He commented that it is human nature to be inclined to associate with people most like ourselves, but it would be a mistake to exclude the valuable dimensions that seniors can add to our neighborhoods. He added that he would welcome a facility into his neighborhood.

Councilmember Carpenter observed that he believes seniors want to live in residential settings. He noted that most seniors are cared for by family up to a point, but that care giver burnout is an issue of increasing significance. He informed the Council that approximately thirty percent will need the services of a facility. Seniors want to live in residential settings and their families prefer that they live in residential settings. He asserted that the goal for our senior population is not to be "out of sight, out of mind" like many of the mentally ill have been treated.

Councilmember Carpenter observed that the answer is not clear on how big a facility needs to be to serve the seniors adequately. He informed the Council that the typical assisted living facility in the United States is about fifty beds. The average facility for Utah is about forty beds. He noted, however, that there is a huge move to consolidation. The reason is that smaller facilities are going out of business. The larger facilities can offer a higher quality of living and the opportunity of making new associations. He expressed the opinion that large facilities should be allowed in residential neighborhoods. He noted that he had supported the number of forty beds for a medium-sized facility while he was in the Planning Commission. He expressed the opinion that this is an appropriate size for both the neighborhood and the seniors. He also supports allowing smaller assisted living centers on local streets.

Councilmember Carpenter suggested that serving our seniors is more important than the neighborhood issues. He clarified that neighborhood issues are important, just not as important as caring adequately for the senior population. He acknowledged that this is a difference of opinion, but he observed that he trusts this group to weigh all the issues and make a decision. He commented that the Council has heard repeatedly that a large facility is not wanted in the neighborhoods, but the seniors themselves have voiced the need for more services. If a change is not made, Lindon will be stuck with the past. He asked the Council to consider allowing the facility that seniors and their families want.

Councilmember Acerson commented that the seniors exist in our communities and it is not an issue of bringing in people that we do not know. He pointed out that these are our grandparents and parents. They have given valuable contributions to our community in the past and will continue to do so in the future if we allow them the quality of life they deserve. He asserted that an assisted living center of the right size will provide this quality of life. Seniors deserve a community setting close to their families.

Councilmember Bayless cited her years as Councilmember and Planning Commissioner for her strong feelings for the preservation of the unique community that is Lindon. She asserted that she is committed to allowing assisted living centers, but she observed that she does not feel comfortable with allowing thirty to forty beds in a residential neighborhoods. In her experience, some seniors prefer the larger facilities and some the smaller facilities. She felt that there is value to both. She pointed out that there is an area of Lindon that is being considered for higher density residential use that would not have the animal rights that are part of the values of Lindon. She suggested that the larger facilities in residential settings be considered for this area. She commented that she, personally, would prefer the smaller facility in an open, residential setting. She suggested that Lindon's values can be preserved and allow for all size facilities in their proper places.

Councilmember Bath observed that he had a lot of interaction with assisted living facilities. He acknowledged that he has been "bothered" about the size issue. He expressed the opinion that the bigger a facility is, the less attention is paid to the residents. He felt that many of the larger facilities trim their staff to minimum levels to make more money. He asserted that there are smaller facilities that are successful and the people are happy. There are some people that like the "one on one" relationships that are fostered by small facilities. He commented that he was not in favor of large facilities and would prefer to eliminate the medium designation. He agreed with Councilmember Bayless that he, personally, would prefer living in a small facility because of the better relationships with employees and other residents. He also agreed that the goals of Lindon are to maintain the country atmosphere, and large facilities defeat this purpose. He commented that he supports assisted living centers, just not the large size in residential neighborhoods.

Mayor Ellertson commented that the question remains on how to accommodate a facility that allows existing residents to remain in our community, and yet, attempt to maintain the residential nature– the rural nature–of Lindon. The facility must also offer a valuable service to seniors. He commented that his experience has convinced him that Lindon can have nice facility that will fit and still be managed to offer seniors a good life. He acknowledged that one person's "good life" is different than another's and may be difficult to measure. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the challenge is not to limit the choices for our seniors.

Mayor Ellertson expressed the opinion that larger facilities should be in commercial districts that abut residential neighborhoods. He felt that both sizes can be accommodated in the community. He noted that he has struggled with the belief that the impact on all residents, both in the neighborhoods and the facility, must be considered. He observed that the current draft allows small facilities of up to 5,000 square feet and house 16-20 people in residential neighborhoods. He commented that his hope is that the Council can find a solution that tries to salvage all of the best of both worlds. He observed that assisted living centers seem to serve those whose ambulatory forays are limited. The non-assisted living center residents are more mobile. He suggested that these are also the larger facilities, so if only for traffic reasons, should be limited to transitional zones near commercial.

Councilmember Bayless commented that there are parts of State Street that are not fully developed commercially. If retirement cottages are built in these neighborhoods, although it is technically commercial, they are still functionally part of the neighborhood. She commented that State Street is included within the church boundaries and community neighborhoods. She asserted that the situation is not limited to either being part of a neighborhood or part of a shopping center.

Mayor Ellertson suggested that the Council try some numbers on for size. Councilmember Bayless suggested that the first number be the cap on the size of large facilities. Mayor Ellertson commented that one part of him says why put a limit. Does the project in and of iself set its own limit? He asked if a number gives a developer something bigger to shoot for than they normally would consider. Councilmember Bayless expressed the opinion that consideration of Lindon's goals should dictate a limit. She noted that Lindon is not the same as neighboring cities and a cap should be set. Councilmember Carpenter noted that one of the concerns of the largest sizes is that they run the risk of becoming a warehouse. Councilmember Bayless expressed the opinion that 125 is too high.

Councilmember Carpenter commented that being institutional is not dependent on size, but rather is dependent on whether they meet the needs of the seniors. He felt that size is an issue better determined by market than legislation. Councilmember Bayless asked if the Council would like to find a comfort level or leave it open. The Council discussed the Seville and it was noted that this facility has 86 beds and 50 parking stalls. Mayor Ellertson commented, as an aside, that he had reviewed a senior day car facility project proposal this past week as a member of a CDBG review board. He observed that finding creative solutions for care giver burnout may give rise to more of these types of facilities. Councilmember Acerson suggested a cap of 100. Councilmember Bath suggested a cap of 80. Councilmember Carpenter commented that he could live with either number. Councilmember Bath suggested a compromise of 90. The Council agreed. Mr. Smith observed that if information is received in the future that this cap should be higher, then it can be reconsidered. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the expense of property in the commercial zone may limit the numbers of large facilities.

Councilmember Bayless suggested that the Council next consider which ordinance to work with–the one with two sizes or the one with three sizes. Councilmember Bath commented that he had expressed his opinion on this already. Mayor Ellertson, citing the concerns expressed about impact on the community in residential areas, suggested that facilities larger than 5,000 square feet are out of character with a neighborhood. Councilmember Carpenter observed that churches, schools and home businesses with large asphalt areas are also out of character in a residential neighborhood, but we are accustomed to these in residential zones and consider them appropriate. He noted that residents want schools, but not next door, just as they are objecting to assisted living centers.

Mayor Ellertson replied that this ordinance is an attempt to compromise between the competing interests. Councilmember Carpenter commented this is a unique situation because, normally, schools and churches ignore the wishes of both the City and neighborhoods. He added that, conceptually, these types of uses belong close to the neighborhoods they serve just as assisted living centers belong there. He expressed the opinion that home businesses are more obtrusive than assisted living centers. He suggested that 32-40 bed facilities should be allowed on collector streets and give the seniors the choice.

Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Smith to point out collector and arterial streets on the map. Mr. Smith brought up the aerial photo and showed the major and minor collectors marked in green and purple. Councilmember Bayless commented that most of these streets are old Lindon streets where the residents are not expecting something of this magnitude "dropped in on them." Councilmember Carpenter commented that the traffic impacts are negligible on a collector street and that the primary impact is the big building. Councilmember Bayless replied that a facility affects the dynamics of a neighborhood. Councilmember Carpenter suggested that a facility can be an asset that is embraced by and involved in a neighborhood. Councilmember Bayless clarified that the dynamics she was referring to are those specific to Lindon, like larger lots and animal rights. Mayor Ellertson commented that the larger facilities are usually made a neighborhood unit into and of themselves. Councilmember Carpenter agreed, but noted that these large facilities are not located within residential neighborhoods. The Council discussed the purpose of a medium sized facility and whether it is appropriate for Lindon on a collector street.

Mayor Ellertson commented that all of the Council have numbers they are thinking. He suggested that someone start with their number. Councilmember Carpenter suggested that the medium size cap at 32 or that 32 be the top of a small facility in the alternate draft. Mr. Dameron commented that Councilmember Bath had suggested 16 at the last meeting. Councilmember Carpenter observed that he and Councilmember Bath represent the two extremes. Mayor Ellertson suggested a compromise of 24. Councilmember Bayless suggested 22. Councilmember Acerson suggested 28. Councilmember Carpenter suggested that the average of all the numbers given is about 24. Councilmember Bayless asked if this included Councilmember Hatch's number that he suggested last week.

Mayor Ellertson suggested that more residents would be comfortable if the size of the facility is limited. Councilmember Carpenter observed that in his research and talking with neighbors of facilities in Orem, he found that neighbors had found that their fears did not come to pass. They had great concerns about impacts in advance and found these alleviated after the facility was built. The sizes of the facilities in Orem were discussed–one is 16 beds and one is 28 beds. Councilmember Bath commented that he was willing to make a concession to 20 beds. Councilmember Carpenter observed that this size limit may lose some of the amenities that matter to some people. Mayor Ellertson commented that there is no way to know one way or the other when discussing quality of life issues.

Councilmember Acerson asked if the Council preferred two sizes or three sizes. Mayor Ellertson expressed concern about the potential impact of a medium-sized facility in a residential district on a collector street. Councilmember Bayless agreed that although the traffic may not exceed expectations, she questioned asking one neighbor to accommodate a larger facility than another neighbor around the corner that is not on a collector street. She suggested that Councilmember Hatch's suggestion of limiting medium-sized facilities to commercial or transitional zones with commercial zoning on one or more sides be given more consideration. Councilmember Carpenter commented that allowing medium-sized facilities in transitional zones would open more neighborhoods along State Street to development potential.

Mr. Smith brought up a zoning map and pointed out the commercial zones. He commented that designating a transitional zone would be similar to the T-zone along I-15. It would set a certain distance from State Street within which medium-sized facilities would be allowed. Councilmember Carpenter observed that this approach is similar to the one Alpine has taken. He noted that their transitional zone encompasses a fair distance of about 3-4 blocks from their main street. Mr. Smith commented that the Council will need to decide how wide to make the transitional zone and whether to follow parcel lines or stick to a set distance. There was a short discussion and Councilmember Bayless asked Mr. Smith to bring up her neighborhood. Mr. Smith measured off a distance of about 300 feet beyond the commercial zone on Gillman Lane.

Councilmember Bayless commented that a parcel needs to abut the commercial zone to be considered a transitional area. She expressed concern that this proposal not create islands of assisted living centers within the distance, but not adjoining the commercial zone. Councilmember Carpenter observed that this may be a solution and noted that this may shift the burden to transitional zones rather than on collector streets. Mr. Smith commented that residents in these areas could point out that they are already burdened by the proximity of the commercial district and this would add to the burden. Mayor Ellertson commented that if the Council decided to do three sizes, this seems to be a potential solution. Councilmember Bayless noted that the commercial zone already takes a 500-foot swathe through the center of town that will not get narrower. Councilmember Carpenter asked Councilmember Bayless if she felt that this was a solution to her concerns about "violating the character of Lindon." Councilmember Bayless replied that she still considers this proposal an invasion "way into the neighborhoods."

Councilmember Bath expressed the opinion that he still thinks there should just be two sizes. He suggested that this is more in line with Lindon's goals. He added that if we try to have transitional zones, then we are trying to force facilities on the residents. Mayor Ellertson asked him what he proposed for size limits on the two sizes. Councilmember Bath replied that he would like to see a limit of 20 for the small facility.

Mayor Ellertson commented that if the figure used earlier of 300 square feet per resident is used, twenty residents would require a facility of 6,000 square feet in the residential zone. Councilmember Bath noted that just adding the four beds from sixteen to twenty adds over 1,000 square feet to the size of a building. The size of some homes in Lindon was discussed. Mr. Smith pointed that Lindon has three homes over 15,000 square feet and 60-70 homes over 3,000 square feet. He noted that assisted living centers may be spread out more and not split into multiple levels, but it may be done. Mayor Ellertson questioned access in multiple floors and suggesting limiting the footprint. It was noted that the BelAire in Orem was about 5,000 square feet and accommodates sixteen people. Mr. Hall commented that there are not many homes of 5,000 square feet in the transitional areas. Mayor Ellertson suggested that facilities in transitional zones could be constructed so that conversion from assisted living centers to non-assisted living centers may be possible. He agreed that the challenge is still based on how to balance the impact on the neighborhood with the quality of life within the facility.

Councilmember Carpenter informed the Council that the Planning Commission had spent a lot of time discussing how a facility might look in a neighborhood. They had considered allowing basements within a footprint limit also. He suggested that three triplexes could easily exceed this footprint limit of 5,000 square feet. He noted that three triplexes can be built on one acre. He pointed out that the medium size has a minimum lot size requirement. He observed that assisted living facilities have a low impact on the neighborhood compared to that of an R2 Overlay project.

Mayor Ellertson suggested that maybe two smaller units rather than one large facility should be considered. He asked if the limit should be on the footprint or the number of beds. Councilmember Bayless replied that it may not be feasible to have bedrooms in the basement. A kitchen or laundry can be put in a basement, but these rooms do not change the footprint substantially. The Council discussed how an R2 Overlay project might have different effects on a neighborhood than an assisted living center. Councilmember Bayless commented that she still has concerns about increasing density, but is not sure how to compare the R2 Overlay ordinance to assisted living centers. Councilmember Carpenter observed that he had considered the spacing between facilities and how that might affect nearness to R2 projects. He had concluded that a facility may still end up nearby an R2 project, but less often.

Councilmember Bayless summarized the list of issues for a possible motion. She noted that parking may be increased up to one stall for one bed plus staff. She listed the addition of a provision that architectural styles must be compatible with the zone in which the facility is located. The word "small" is removed from 17.72.020(1). Parking requirements may be set and increases up to the before mentioned maximum during the conditional use permit process or upon complaint. The architecture must resemble a single family home on all four sides. References to "senior" are removed. Assisted living facilities are not allowed in the PC-1 district. The R2 Overlay ordinance will not be associated with assisted living facilities. There will be a maximum cap of 90 beds on large facilities. She then commented that she was going to make a motion with the draft containing two sizes.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE #2004-2 ADOPTING CHAPTER 17.72 - CARE FACILITIES OVERLAY ZONE WITH THE INCLUSION OF THE PROVISION THAT A SMALL FACILITY SHALL PROVIDE CARE FOR UP TO EIGHTEEN RESIDENTS WITHIN A FOOTPRINT LIMIT OF 6,300 SQUARE FEET AS PER THE STATE REQUIREMENT FOR SIZE IS UNDERSTOOD. IN ADDITION, THE ABOVE MENTIONED LIST OF CHANGES, CORRECTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS IS MADE A PART OF THIS MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON NAY
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER NAY
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH ABSENT
MAYOR ELLERTSON VOTED AYE AND BROKE THE TIE. THE MOTION CARRIED.
A five minute break was called.

2. Preliminary Plat - Ostler Industrial Park, Plat "D." This is a request by Mike Ahlin, Ostler Industrial Park Development, for preliminary subdivision approval of Ostler Industrial Park, Plat "D," 4-lots, in the Light Industrial zone, at approximately 100 South 1800 West. The Planning Commission recommended approval with two conditions.

Mr. Smith informed the Council that they would be looking at two plats for Ostler Industrial Park, D and F. He showed them the Ostler Industrial Park on an aerial photo and pointed out neighboring businesses. He told the Council that Plat D, of four-lots, had no development planned for now. He commented that the Planning Commission had reviewed this proposed plat and recommend that the Public Works Director and City Engineer verify that no additional easements are needed to access the Proctor Ditch, and note a potential fence line agreement with the property owner to the east. Mayor Ellertson observed that lot 4 is reserved for the Proctor Ditch. He asked if there were plans for the other three lots. Mr. Bob Kunz, engineer, replied that Lot #1 is sized to serve for an expansion of Coverstar on the north boundary. He commented that Lots #2 and #3 have a common buyer but no proposal. Councilmember Bath asked about the potential property boundary agreement. Mr. Smith replied that this is a common problem and will be taken care of before recording of the plat. Councilmember Carpenter asked if staff had reviewed to see if any additional easements are required to access the Proctor Ditch. Mr. Smith replied yes and that no additional easements are required.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION REQUEST BY MIKE AHLIN FOR OSTLER INDUSTRIAL PARK, PLAT D, A FOUR-LOT SUBDIVISION AT 100 NORTH 1800 WEST IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. Preliminary Plat - Ostler Industrial Park, Plat "F." This is a request by Mike Ahlin, Ostler Industrial Park Development, for preliminary subdivision approval of Ostler Industrial Park, Plat "F," 2-lots, in the Light Industrial zone, at approximately 110 South 1800 West. The Planning Commission recommended approval with one condition.

Mr. Smith displayed the two proposed lots in Plat F. He informed the Council that these two lots would be used for future expansion of the Mix Right business. He observed that the Planning Commission has recommended that the easement on the north side of Lot #1 should be declared a public access and utility easement to facilitate access management for 2000 West. He explained that this easement would be part of the parking lot and would allow access through both directions between 2000 West and 1800 West. Mayor Ellertson asked if there were any further comments or discussion. There were none.

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY MIKE AHLIN FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL OF OSTLER INDUSTRIAL PARK, PLAT "F," A TWO-LOT SUBDIVISION AT 110 SOUTH 1800 WEST WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE EASEMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LOT ONE BE DECLARED A PUBLIC ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

4. Discussion - Design Review - Deep Lot Subdivision. This is a request by Steve Fryer for a review of a deep lot proposal at 275 East 200 North in the R1-20 zone.

Mr. Smith showed the Council the proposed parcel on an aerial photo. He explained that this is a design review and that the Planning Commission had also reviewed the proposal to see if fits the criteria for a deep lot. He pointed out that 200 North is a half street for most of its distance between 400 East and 200 East. He reviewed the criteria of the ordinance for the Council. He noted that the first two criteria are of the most concern–the property is now or has been in the past impossible or impractical to develop according to normal subdivision standards, and subdividing hardships created by previous development shall not be considered a reason for approval. The Planning Commission explored the options for roads and concluded that the parcel appears to meet the requirements and that there was no other way to subdivide. He noted that the Hollow creates development problems in this area because of the excessive amounts of fill needed to finish the street.

Councilmember Bayless asked if the parcel included enough square footage to include a 50-foot road. Mr. Smith demonstrated that deducting a road and cul-de-sac from the parcel would not leave two legal lots. Mr. Steve Fryer commented that the Hollow drops below the level of the 200 South in a northwesterly direction in this area. Councilmember Bayless asked Mr. Smith to show a wider area on the aerial and put up the street master plan. The various future streets and parcel blocks were examined. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was access to the back of the parcel through the Hollow. Mr. Fryer replied that this is swampy land. Mr. Smith added the flood zone to the map and commented that any homes built within this area will need flood insurance and a base elevation of one-foot above maximum 100-year water level. He pointed out that Hollow Park is located on the north side of the Hollow near this parcel.

Mayor Ellertson asked what Mr. Fryer planned for access to the proposed deep lot. Mr. Fryer replied that there is about an eight-foot drop on the north side of 200 North in this area. He will dedicate the frontage on 200 North necessary to widen the street to full width, however, he is planning no further street improvements. He would like a 25-foot driveway on the east side to access the rear lot. He explained the history and topography of the north side of 200 North. Mayor Ellertson commented that 200 North has been discussed with the City Engineer in the past. Mr. Smith agreed and observed that, although various solutions to finishing 200 North had been suggested, no definitive answers had been decided. Mayor Ellertson asked the Council if the parcel appears to meet the criteria for a deep lot. The Council reached consensus that the proposal appears to qualify for deep lot consideration.

5. Discussion - Request by Lindon Elementary PTA. This is a request by the Lindon Elementary PTA, represented by Cindy Toombs, safety commissioner, for the Council to consider a reduced speed school zone and controlled crosswalk at the intersection of 60 North Main Street.

Ms. Marie Alexander of 440 East 630 North, presented the Council with a request to have a school crossing. She introduced herself as the President of the Lindon Elementary PTA and described the safety issues that prompted her request. She pointed out the speed of traffic going through the Hollow and approaching the school from the north. He She told the Council that a child had almost been hurt here just before Christmas. The Mayor and Council discussed the traffic patterns of busses and parents, and the number of children crossing Main Street. The Council directed City Engineer, Mark Christensen, to prepare a traffic study.

6. Review and Action - UTA Interlocal Agreement with Cities along its Purchased Rail Right-of-Way (Resolution #2004-1). Mayor Ellertson will present the final review of the proposed Interlocal Agreement for approval between the Utah Transit Authority and Lindon City outlining the responsibilities of each party for the rail right-of-way.

Mayor Ellertson commented that there was a change to the agreement that he wanted to bring back to the Council for approval. He reminded the Council that the basic agreement had been approved at the last meeting. He pointed out that the term of the agreement has changed to 50 years with a negotiated renewal rather than an automatic renewal. The other change is that the waiver of fees is specifically "quid pro quo" or that UTA will waive fees for crossings and the city will waive fees for construction and licenses. He also mentioned that attorney's fees are not reimbursed. Mr. Rick Nay of 645 North Geneva Road, asked about plans for a pathway along the railroad. Mayor Ellertson replied that the pathway is presently planned only through American Fork and Pleasant Grove and does not reach Lindon. Mr. Nay asked if his barn would be a safety hazard where 700 North is planned to cross the light rail line. Mayor Ellertson replied that this intersection is planned to be controlled by crossing lights, so there should be no vision problems with the barn.

COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION #2004-1 ADOPTING AND APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY AND LINDON CITY AND EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZING A WAIVER OF FEES PURSUANT TO SECTION 10-8-2 U.C.A., AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN ANY AND ALL DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF LINDON CITY. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH ABSENT
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (4-0) WITH ONE COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT.

7. Review and Action - Access Management Plat - 700 North Segment. Mark Christensen, Engineer, will present a proposed access management plat for the recently completed segment of 700 North Street between State Street and Geneva Road. This plan will outline the limited accesses onto and off the segment of 700 North Street described.

Mr. Christensen presented the Council with a project collage for 700 North. He then explained that he had met with the property owners with undeveloped lands that are adjacent to the finished portion of 700 North to develop an access management plan. He observed that there are three property owners, the Fugal, Melendez and Ewell families, that have agreed to this plan. The plan outlines the extent of present and future access points on 700 North. Councilmember Acerson suggested that the plan be confirmed in writing. Mayor Ellertson agreed and suggested that a letter be crafted that has the map attached to confirm the agreement. Mr. Christensen agreed. He pointed out that the accesses being used or developed by Walmart and Walkers that are part of the plan. He noted the points of shared access, full access and limited access. He also noted the areas of median on 700 North. It was suggested that the Planning Commission be given a copy of this plan.

COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN AS PRESENTED. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Mr. Christensen thanked the Council for their wise position on access management and noted that the plan will be included in the Lindon City Land Development Policies, Standard Specifications and Drawings Manual.

8. Review and Action - Amendments to the Land Development Policies, Standard Specifications and Manual. This is a staff request for the Council to approve the annual updates to the above referenced manual. The annual meeting with contractors and developers is scheduled for January 30, 2004.

Mr. Christensen observed that the Planning, Building and Engineering Departments find changes over the year that need to be made to the Lindon City Land Development Policies, Standard Specifications and Drawings Manual. He explained that this year most of the changes have to do with the implementation of the Storm Water directives. Mr. Christensen reviewed the list of changes with the Council.

The Council requested that the phrase, "or his designee," be added to Section 1.02 after the title "Planning Director." There was discussion about required title reports on preliminary plats. It was decided that a preliminary title report, "or other proof of ownership acceptable to the city" should be required. He pointed out the additions that are being moved from the storm water policy manual to the development manual. He noted that this puts all pertinent information for developers and contractors in one place. He pointed out a change on requiring concrete collars on manholes and the addition of several appendixes, including the access management plan for 700 North. The Council discussed the changes.

COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO ADOPT THE REVISIONS AND UPDATES TO THE LINDON CITY LAND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES, STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DRAWINGS MANUAL AS PROPOSED AND DISCUSSED ABOVE. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

9. Review and Action - Councilmember Assignments. Mayor Ellertson will present the proposed assignments for members of the Council for the coming year.

Mayor Ellertson presented the assignment list. He noted that the only new assignment is the creation of a budget audit committee. He asked if there were questions. There was a short discussion.

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS AS PROPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

COUNCIL REPORTS:

WATER, SEWER, SOLID WASTE, HOUSING CONSORTIUM

Councilmember Hatch was excused.

TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ADMINISTRATION

Councilmember Bayless reported on her conversation with Paul Harper, with Utah County, about the Lakeshore Trail going through the old Geneva Resort in Lindon. The Council discussed this proposal as well as crossing points for the east-west trail on the freeway, Geneva Road and State Street. She reported that these proposed crossings need to be on the master plan. It was decided that this item of discussion should be added to the Retreat. She noted that a request from Jim Price, of Mountainland Association of Governments, for the cities to encourage the County Commissioners to be more supportive of the Bonneville Shoreline Trail. Mayor Ellertson observed that this may be made part of regional planning. Councilmember Bayless asked the Lindon City ordinance on trails and pathways to be part of a discussion soon. She expressed the opinion that Lindon was missing opportunities.

PUBLIC SAFETY, COURT, BUILDING INSPECTIONS

Councilmember Bath asked Captain Cullimore if he had anything to discuss with the Council. Captain Cullimore reported that investigation is being conducted to bring a problem with vandalism under control. He noted that a number of car windows had been shot out by Beebe guns in recent weeks. The amount of damage was discussed.

PARKS, RECREATION, ENGINEERING, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER

Councilmember Acerson inquired about the dates of Lindon Days. It was decided to leave the dates as August 7-14. He informed the Council that he had a possible chairman for the event. The position was discussed.

GENERAL PLAT, STREETS AND SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS

Councilmember Carpenter commented that he had nothing to report this week.

ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT

Mr. Dameron:
1. Announced that the Annual Developer and Contractor meeting was scheduled for January 30, at 9 a.m.
2. Informed the Council that a public hearing for the UTOPIA bond backstop is scheduled for February 3. There was a short discussion on UTOPIA.
3. Asked for hearing requests from the project tracking list. The Council discussed the various pending items. There were no requests.
4. Requested suggestions for Retreat agenda items. Mayor Ellertson suggested that water rates be discussed. Councilmember Bayless suggested the trails plan and Councilmember Acerson suggested that a vision statement for Lindon City be discussed.
5. Noted that JUB Engineers has requested time for a Funding Strategies Workshop. The request was discussed.
6. Presented the Larry Miller landscape plan that had been received. He noted that the plan will be presented to UDOT.
7. Asked for direction from the Council on a letter from BFI. It was decided to add this discussion to the Retreat agenda.
8. Reported that the Chamber of Commerce has asked for a grant to send mailers to Lindon businesses. The amount of the grant was decided to be minimal and directly applied to Lindon City. The Council reached consensus to approve the grant.

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

ADJOURN

COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADJOURN THE COUNCIL MEETING AT 11:50 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

APPROVED - February 3, 2004

back to top