|
|
Home » City Government » Council » Schedule: Agendas and Minutes 2005 » Council Minutes 2005 » April 19, 2005
April 19, 2005
The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, April 19, 2005, beginning with a Work Session at 6:00 p.m. in the Lindon City Center, City Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
WORK SESSION – 6:00 P.M.
The Mayor and City Council will meet in a work session with Don Peterson, Public Works Director, and David Thurgood, City Engineer, to discuss issues and concerns for fiscal year 2005-2006.
PRESENT ABSENT
Jeff Acerson, Mayor Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Eric Anthony, Councilmember – arrived at 7:08
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember – arrived at 6:58
Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember – arrived at 6:22
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Adam Cowie, Planning Director
Debra Cullimore, Deputy Recorder
The meeting began at 6:15 p.m.
PRESENTATION
Public Works Director Don Peterson, along with City Engineer David Thurgood, presented information to members of the Council regarding current projects in the city and proposed projects for the next fiscal year. He distributed printed materials to the Council which outlined proposed and current projects. Mr. Peterson commented on a main storm drain which is located near the bowling alley on the west side of State Street. There is also an area of the drain which is located on the East side of the highway near the Ostergaard property which has a tendency to flood during storms. The drain is constructed of different sizes of pipe which causes ridges where debris becomes caught as it is washed down the storm drain. There are also sections of the drain which are open, and when flow is high, water can flood out of the open areas. Mr. Peterson stated that new pipe will be installed along the length of the drain to close the gaps and give better flow. Councilmember Carpenter expressed concern that the water which flows out of the open areas under the present circumstances would have to go somewhere, and he was concerned that it may cause flooding elsewhere. Mr. Thurgood informed the Council that the size of the pipe in the drain in that area is currently twenty four inches and that it will be increased to thirty six inches. The uniform size of the pipe along with the increased size will create much better flow, and should eliminate the flooding problems which are currently being seen. Councilmember Carpenter inquired as to the size of the drainage area. Mr. Peterson stated that the drain begins in Cedar Hills and runs through Pleasant Grove before entering Lindon. Mr. Dameron mentioned the possibility of sharing the cost of the upgrades with those cities. Mr. Peterson stated that the main area of focus at this time will be the area near the Ostergaard property. Councilmember Carpenter asked if the thirty six inch pipe was large enough to handle a heavy flow of water. Mr. Peterson informed him that the pipe will get larger as it travels the length of the drain and picks up more flow, eventually reaching a size of forty eight inches. The thirty six inch pipe will be used in the area which had been discussed to alleviate the flooding problems.
Mr. Peterson commented on another situation, which has caused flooding problems in the past, occurs when head gates for irrigation water are not properly adjusted. Mayor Acerson asked who would have access to adjust the head gates. Mr. Peterson informed him that anyone can adjust head gates, that they are not locked, and that it is necessary to adjust them during irrigation turns. Mr. Peterson mentioned that there had been some problems with flooding earlier in the day because several head gates had been shut in order to work on the system and had not been reopened. He stated that the city would like to upgrade the system after July 1st, and indicated that the estimated cost for the project was included with the printed information he had distributed. He commented on further flooding which had occurred during the day in the area of 200 South and 850 East. Mr. Peterson stated that the situation would be corrected during the road project with Orem City which will begin this summer. Councilmember Carpenter asked if July was soon enough to begin this project. Mr. Thurgood stated that it will be at least the end of June before the project can begin, due to the fact that it will be necessary for Orem to complete another major project replacing a water line before this project can begin.
Councilmember Carpenter asked if these were the only two proposed storm drainage projects for the year. Mr. Peterson stated that they are the only two due to the significant costs involved.
Mr. Peterson then gave an overview of current capital projects for streets. He specified which projects are under contract with Geneva Rock, as well as projects which have been completed, and projects which have not yet begun. Mayor Acerson commented that Mr. Dameron had reviewed the streets projects, and asked if he had any specific concerns. Mr. Dameron stated that the street system requires constant maintenance. He mentioned that it had been six years since the last bond was issued, so new projects were being paid for with current funds. Mr. Peterson stated that he did not yet have the annual schedule for chip sealing and slurry sealing completed, but would forward it to the Council as soon as it is ready. Mr. Peterson stated that they have seen better results and received fewer complaints when slurry sealing rather than chip sealing has been used in residential areas. Councilmember Carpenter noted that there were several projects on the list without cost estimates. Mr. Peterson stated that it is not clear at this time if those roads can be repaired or if it will be necessary to dig them up and replace them. Mr. Thurgood mentioned that those projects are located near the I-15 interchange and there is a possibility some of the streets may be abandoned as the area develops. Mr. Peterson stated that one option would be to use a double chip seal on some of the roads to maintain them until a decision is made regarding the long term plans for the area. Mr. Dameron commented that the city is reluctant to invest a large amount of money in the area when the long term use is in question.
Mr. Peterson commented on a railroad crossing in the same area that is need of attention. He stated that the Public Works Department had been in contact with Union Pacific Railroad Company. The railroad asked if the City is willing to participate in the cost of the project. Mr. Peterson stated that with a similar project on Center Street the City provided the materials necessary for the repairs and the railroad provided the labor. Mr. Dameron suggested that the cost of the project could be estimated by reviewing the documents associated with Center Street project.
Mayor Acerson mentioned a problem he had noticed on the street at 900 East and 100 South. He stated that there is a soft spot in the road that has been dealt with before, but that it is appearing again. Mr. Peterson agreed to investigate this situation.
Mr. Peterson then updated the Council on current parks projects in the City. He first commented on Hollow Park, noting that the conduit was being installed, the concrete footings and floor for the restroom have been poured, and the footings for the pavilion have been dug. He also stated that the trails have been staked, and that the conduit for lighting on the trail still needs to be installed. Mr. Peterson stated that the estimate for sod in the park is 365 pallets. He stated that after the sprinkling system is installed, he will invite residents to participate in installing the sod. During the construction of the Pioneer Park, 400 pallets of sod were used, and enough residents came out to participate so that the project was completed in about three hours. Mr. Peterson observed that the citizens enjoyed being involved and taking part in the project. Mr. Dameron agreed that it is a positive experience for the residents to participate in the construction of the parks, and they feel some ownership when they do. Mr. Peterson informed the Council that Mr. Thurgood is preparing to advertise for the bid for construction of the Pheasant Brook Park, which will contain two baseball diamonds. Mr. Thurgood noted that those two diamonds would bring the total number of baseball diamonds owned by the city to six.
Mr. Peterson then addressed the equipment needs of the Public Works department. He stated that the truck used to remove blockages in the sewer and storm drain systems is ten years old and is in need of being replaced. He stated that the truck they have been using currently could be sold for around $60,000, and that several contractors have expressed an interest in purchasing it. The price range on new trucks is around $240,000. Mayor Acerson asked Mr. Peterson about the condition of the truck the city currently owns. Mr. Peterson stated that the truck has been well taken care of and is in good shape, but observed that the new trucks have greater capabilities. Mr. Peterson also gave the Council information on an excavation system that is being considered as an attachment to the truck. The system shoots water down into the ground and then vacuums the water and soil back out. The method of excavation is referred to as “hydro-excavation.” Mr. Peterson observed that with the increased use of fiber optics underground, it may become difficult to use traditional equipment to do excavation work. Mr. Peterson noted that the system could also be used to clean out sewer and storm drains. He stated that a new nozzle was introduced this year that is self-guided and is designed to remove clogs from the storm drain system. Councilmember Carpenter asked Mr. Peterson if the nozzle was included in the package with the other equipment. Mr. Peterson explained that it is separate cost, but that there is approximately $2200 remaining in this year’s budgeted funds, and he would like to purchase the nozzle with the available money. Councilmember Carpenter also commented on the purchase of the requested truck. He noted that after selling the used truck for $60,000 the remaining cost to purchase the new truck would be approximately $180,000 and that the truck would be used for a ten year period. Councilmember Carpenter asked if it is consistent with industry standards to spend $18,000 per year for a similar piece of equipment. Mr. Peterson stated that the annual cost for other large equipment, such as backhoes, is around $13,000. Mr. Peterson mentioned the possibility of keeping the loader they are presently using for an additional year to help off set the cost of the new truck. Mr. Dameron observed that the City has been fortunate to keep good equipment. Councilmember Carpenter noted that he has received many positive comments from Public Works employees who have expressed appreciation for the high quality equipment they have to work with. Councilmember Carpenter asked Mr. Dameron if the storm drain impact fees are covering current costs. Mr. Dameron stated that the monthly storm water utility fee is covering expenses and the impact fees are used for capital expenditures. Mr. Peterson pointed out that the cost of the truck would be split between the water, storm water, and sewer budgets. Councilmember Carpenter inquired as to the repair costs associated with the truck. Mr. Peterson commented that many of the maintenance problems in the past had been a result of the metal tanks on the truck rusting, but that they are now equipped with plastic tanks.
Mr. Peterson then addressed a telemetry system he would like to purchase for the water and sewer systems. He stated that recorders would be placed in approximately ten sites around the city with a cost of seven to ten thousand dollars per site.
The final issue Mr. Peterson addressed was fencing around the City Cemetery. He stated that the white fence that had been located at the entrance to the cemetery had been removed, and several citizens have expressed concern that there is no fence. Mr. Dameron suggested that they discuss the fence in Staff Meeting the following day. He commented that he felt a white two rail fence similar to the one at the City Center would maintain the country feel the Council is trying to achieve in the City. Mr. Dameron also reminded the Council that a committee had been invited to help make decisions on other elements in the cemetery, and suggested the same procedure be followed. He noted that several citizens had expressed concern that horses would get into the cemetery if no fence is installed.
Mr. Dameron invited Mr. Thurgood to review the water study which was conducted last fall. Mr. Thurgood stated that all of the recommendations from that study have been implemented, and that the water budget should now balance out. He stated that another study would be conducted this fall. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the city would like to avoid raising water rates if possible.
Mayor Acerson clarified with Mr. Peterson that the figures presented at this meeting are preliminary numbers, and that final figures would be presented at a later date. Mr. Peterson confirmed that information.
REGULAR SESSION – 7:00 p.m.
The meeting was called to order at: 7:04 p.m.
Conducting: Jeff Acerson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: H. Toby Bath
Invocation: Jeff Acerson
MINUTES – The minutes of the regular meeting of April 5, 2005 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 8, Line 46: Add the sentences: “He specifically asked about storm water. Councilmember Hatch informed Mr. Lee that there was no real latitude on storm fees because of the loan paybacks involved with the project. The Council responded that other fees were attached to like circumstances because of the large projects underway to upgrade the infrastructure.”
Page 11, Line 43: add the letter “y” to the word “the”.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 5, 2005 MEETING AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
OPEN SESSION – Citizen comments
The Little Miss Lindon Royalty for the 2004 – 2005 year presented the new royalty for the 2005-2006 year. The new Little Miss Lindon Royalty was introduced as:
Holly Nelson Little Miss Lindon
Marlee Whetten Attendant
Janessa Olsen Attendant
Bethany Pratte Attendant
Annie Lawrence Attendant
The outgoing royalty presented the Council with cookies, and expressed appreciation for their help with the float and the service project. Mayor Acerson thanked the previous royalty, and wished the new royalty good luck.
Terry Shellenberger, a Lindon resident residing at 741 East 200 South, informed the Council that he was present to gather information regarding conditions on 200 South. He stated that he has been walking and jogging on that street for the past fifteen months, and has lived on 200 South for the past nine months. Mr. Shellenberger stated the road is need of repairs and would like to know when area residents can expect those repairs. The road is on the boundary of Lindon and Orem, and Mr. Shellenberger wondered if both cities thought the other city was responsible for street repairs. He also voiced concern over speeding violations on the street, and stated that he has seen very little traffic enforcement in the area.
Mr. Dameron informed Mr. Shellenberger that the repairs are part of large joint project with Orem City that will begin this summer. Mr. Dameron stated that the road will undergo extensive repairs from 400 East to 1350 East. He stated that the project would include new storm drains, as well as curb and gutter on the Lindon side.
Captain Cody Cullimore of the Pleasant Grove/Lindon Police Department addressed Mr. Shellenberger’s concerns regarding speeding violations and traffic enforcement. Captain Cullimore stated that it is an area the Police Department pays particular attention to, because of the two schools located in the immediate area. Clair Bracken, a Lindon resident in the audience, commented that she is employed at Oak Canyon Junior High School which is located in the area. She stated that often faculty, staff, and parents of students receive speeding tickets while traveling to and from the school.
Mr. Shellenberger suggested the possibility of changing the speed limit on the street from 25 miles an hour to 35 miles an hour. He felt that with strict enforcement of the higher speed limit more people would comply. Mr. Shellenberger also noted that due to the steepness of the road it is difficult to travel at 25 miles an hour.
Mayor Acerson asked Captain Cullimore how many citations have been written in the area. Captain Cullimore stated that he would have a report at the next meeting. Captain Cullimore also informed Mr. Shellenberger that he will increase enforcement in the area as officers are available. Mayor Acerson thanked Mr. Shellenberger for voicing his concerns.
MAYORS COMMENTS/REPORT –
Mayor Acerson commented on the training provided by The Utah League of Cities and Towns in St. George. He noted that he, Mr. Dameron, and several Councilmembers, had the opportunity to attend the training, and had received valuable information.
CONSENT AGENDA –
No items.
CURRENT BUSINESS –
1. Review and Action – Property Line Adjustment. This is a request by Clair and Patricia Larsen to relocate a property line between two existing lots in the R1-20 zone at 16 West 400 North. The Planning Commission recommended approval with no conditions.
Mr. Cowie introduced the item, stating that it is request for a re-plat. He informed the Council that the item requires Council approval because it is a minor subdivision. Mr. Cowie gave an overview of the area, demonstrating the present location of the property lines. He stated that the property line is irregular as it skirts around the garage structure located on one of the lots. There was a variance approved in 1992 to allow the construction of the garage. The request is to move the property line to the other side of the garage. Mr. Cowie stated that both lots are non-conforming, but that the re-plat brings them both more into compliance. Mr. Cowie stated that the Larsen’s own both lots, and are considering selling one.
Councilmember Anthony observed that there are currently three driveway accesses to the property. Mrs. Larsen confirmed that number. Councilmember Anthony asked if the middle driveway would be included in the lot with the house to the east. Mr. Larsen confirmed that it would, and stated that it is the access to the rear of the lot where the east home is located.
Mr. Cowie informed the Council that Mr. and Mrs. Larsen had notified all neighbors within 750 feet of their property, and had received no complaints regarding the proposed change. Mrs. Larsen inquired as to the requirement for notification of neighbors within 750 feet, when adding an apartment to a residence only requires notification of neighbors within 300 feet. Councilmember Carpenter stated that there are occasions when neighbors have concerns. Mayor Acerson noted that it was an unusual circumstance that one party owns both pieces of property, and that there is usually another party involved.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE RE-PLAT REQUEST BY CLAIR AND PATRICIA LARSEN TO RELOCATE THE PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN TWO EXISTING LOTS AT 16 WEST 400 NORTH. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Review and Action – Conditional Use Permit – Utah Auto Sales Sign. This is a request by Utah Auto Sales to construct a low profile (monument) sign in the CG (General Commercial) Zone with an attached red LED motion sign. This item is being brought to the Council because of expressed concerns over State Street development. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the sign without the red LED portion.
Mr. Cowie gave an overview of the item, and showed an example of the proposed sign. He informed the Council that the proposed sign is a monument sign, and is fourteen feet in height. Mr. Cowie stated that based on the frontage of the business, the size is allowed, but that the Planning Commission and staff had concerns regarding the proposed LED portion of the sign. Mr. Cowie commented that former Planning Director Kevin Smith had interpreted LED signs as changeable copy signs, which are defined in the Lindon City Code as “a sign that can be changed by manual, mechanical, or electronic means.” Upon further review of the code, staff feels that LED signs should be classified as motion signs, which is defined in the Lindon City Code as “any outdoor advertising structure and projection facility which displays changing copy by means of motion, slide or similar picture projection equipment.” Mr. Cowie stated that if the sign is interpreted as changeable copy then it requires no specific Council approval.
The Planning Commission made a recommendation that the City Council review the sign ordinance to keep up with changing technology, as well as make a recommendation of which definition fits the LED signs. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the monument sign, without the LED portion.
Mayor Acerson invited the Council to discuss the issue, stating that it would be necessary to determine what type of sign the LED is, whether changeable copy or motion. He asked if any of the Councilmembers had any experience with the matter, or would like to express an opinion.
Councilmember Anthony asked for clarification on the wording in the code referring to “electronic means.” Mr. Cowie stated that in his opinion that would refer to a situation where the entire sign would flip or rotate, similar to the large sign located at University Mall. Councilmember Carpenter agreed that the Council should review the sign ordinance, but observed that it would not affect this application. Councilmember Hatch recalled that he had been involved in approving the existing sign ordinance, and that a changeable copy sign was intended to define the type of sign located at the City Center Park, in which letters are manually changed. He stated that there had been some compromise on the ordinance, as some members of the Council at the time did not want to approve any type of electronic signage. Councilmember Hatch also noted that Scrubbs Carwash already has a similar sign, and felt that due to that fact, other similar signs should not be disallowed. Mr. Cowie suggested that because one mistake had been made, it was not necessary to make the same mistake again.
Shaun Corbridge was the representative for this application, and stated the Planning Commission had suggested that he gather information from other cities regarding their sign ordinances for comparison. Mr. Corbridge reviewed elements of sign ordinances from several other cities in the area. He stated that the only areas with restriction on LED type signs were the Provo River Bottoms and historic districts located in other cities. Councilmember Carpenter commented that there are not many restrictions placed on electronic signs in Utah Valley, but he stated that Lindon wants a country feel to the city, and that Lindon wants to be different than surrounding areas. Councilmember Hatch asked Councilmember Carpenter how he felt about the overall size of the proposed sign. Councilmember Carpenter stated that he is not opposed to size of the sign, but is concerned about the LED portion.
Mayor Acerson asked Captain Cullimore to address any safety issues he is aware of involving LED or other types of motion signs. Captain Cullimore commented on a particular sign located at approximately 300 North State Street in Orem. He stated that motion signs are a distraction to traffic in the area, and that they can be a cause of accidents. Mayor Acerson agreed that the Council does not want to approve a sign that could cause a significant distraction. Councilmember Bath expressed the opinion that if the LED portion of the sign were kept to the two foot by eight foot size that it wouldn’t be a big concern. He stated that businesses need to be competitive, and appropriate signage can contribute to the overall success of a business. Mayor Acerson commented that if electronic signs are allowed it may create an environment where every business would have one. Mr. Corbridge stated that the cost of the signs is somewhat prohibitive. He stated that the cost for the proposed sign is approximately $18,000, which would not be affordable to most small businesses. Councilmember Anthony observed that the cost would come down as the technology advanced, and cost would not prohibit businesses from installing this type of sign for long, therefore the decision could not be based on the cost of the sign.
Councilmember Hatch stated that he could possibly agree to the twenty four inch LED sign, but he was certain that if Councilmember Bayless were not out of town, she would be strongly opposed to any electronic signage. He stated that in order to control the number of signs, the Council needs to specify a required distance between signs.
Councilmember Anthony commented that he is confused concerned about the requirements placed on the buildings themselves, such as earth tone colors, and that those same elements are not carried over into the signage. He felt that the requirements for signage should be similar to requirements for the elevations of the buildings, and that the signs should tie in with the architecture of the project.
Councilmember Hatch stated that he has been a business owner, and can look at the issue from that perspective. He felt that the Council needs to create an environment in which business owners have every opportunity to make their business successful. Mr. Corbridge informed the Council that requirements for signage for large corporations are very specific. Most corporations are required to maintain their standard logo including matching colors due to the name recognition associated with it by consumers. Councilmember Anthony stated that he works for a company that insists on those same standards, but added that it may not work in all communities. Councilmember Anthony expressed the opinion that bright signs take away from the architectural elements of the businesses. He has implemented policies on properties he is associated with which reduce negative effects of signage. He suggested the Council concentrate on a more subtle look for signs.
Mr. Cowie encouraged the Council to determine what definition they would give this sign application. The definition of the sign would determine if it could be approved.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO IDENTIFY THE LED SIGN PROPOSED BY UTAH AUTO SALES AS A MOTION SIGN. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE SIGN REQUEST FOR UTAH AUTO SALES WITHOUT THE LED PORTION, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Dameron inquired of the Council as to the direction for staff concerning the sign ordinance itself. After discussion, the three pertinent areas of concern were voiced as size, color, and new technology (LED signs, etc.)
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH THEN MOVED THAT NO SIGN APPLICATIONS BE ACCEPTED FROM THIS TIME FORWARD PENDING AMENDMENTS TO THE SIGN ORDINANCE, SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO THE SIZE, COLORS, AND NEW TECHNOLOGY (LED SIGNS, ETC.) COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
3. Design Review – Valdizan Retail Project. This is a request by Jorge Valdizan for a design review of a proposed retail strip mall in the CG (General Commercial) Zone at 550 North State Street. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposal and offered several suggestions.
Mr. Cowie reviewed the item for the Council. The location of the proposed project is 550 North State Street. Mr. Cowie stated that the project is located in a commercial zone and that the property borders a residential zone. The proposed project is a retail strip mall, with an associated restaurant. Mr. Cowie stated that the Planning Commission had concerns about parking availability, but that the proposed parking plan does meet minimum requirements. Mayor Acerson stated that if proposed parking meets minimum requirements the Council would be unable to impose further parking requirements. Mr. Cowie informed the Mayor as well as the Council that no motion is necessary for this design review, and that they have a broad range to make recommendations and suggestions to Mr. Valdizan. Mayor Acerson commented on other restaurants on State Street where parking has become an issue, noting that those restaurants are converted houses. Mr. Cowie stated that another Planning Commission concern was the five foot walkway area at the rear of the building. Councilmember Carpenter observed that it is not uncommon to have narrow walkways at the rear entrance to retail businesses. Councilmember Bath asked Captain Cullimore to address the issue from a law enforcement standpoint. Captain Cullimore stated that as long as there is visibility into the area and there is sufficient lighting, there should be no law enforcement or safety concerns. Mr. Cowie went on to say that the specific concerns raised by the Planning Commission addressed the layout of the parking and the potential of cars backing up and blocking the east entrance. The City Engineer determined that it was not likely to present a significant problem due to the fact that there are two separate entrances. Mr. Cowie also mentioned that the Planning Commission had recommended that the rock proposed on the elevations of the building be extended up the face. Mr. Valdizan showed revised drawings of the project where that recommendation had already been implemented on the tower portion of the buildings.
Councilmember Carpenter asked Mr. Valdizan how many units were planned for the strip mall. Mr. Valdizan stated that there could be up to six units. Councilmember Carpenter asked how much seating was available in the restaurant. Mr. Cowie stated that there would be thirty to forty available seats. Councilmember Anthony asked if the restaurant requires more or less parking than the retail areas. Mr. Cowie responded that restaurant parking generally requires more than a retail area. Councilmember Bath commented that the restaurant may require more parking to seat thirty to forty people. Councilmember Carpenter stated that it appeared to him parking should be sufficient. There are twelve parking spaces near the restaurant. If the restaurant has ten to twelve tables, it would use only ten to twelve parking spaces. Councilmember Anthony inquired as to whether other parking in the project could be used for restaurant parking. He was informed that it is a common parking area for all the businesses in the project, and any parking would be available to any of the businesses. Councilmember Anthony commented that while the Council and Planning Commission could express concerns about the parking, they could not challenge it, as it is in compliance with the code.
Councilmember Hatch inquired as to the width of 550 North. Mr. Cowie stated that the street has a fifty foot width. Councilmember Hatch suggested eliminating parking on the south side of that street to prevent any potential problems with traffic. Mr. Cowie stated that it would be a possibility, but that it would be necessary to red stripe the curb.
Councilmember Carpenter stated that the Council has nothing further to add to the recommendations made by the Planning Commission. He cautioned Mr. Valdizan to use caution when planning the parking areas to avoid inadequate parking which may have a negative affect on the success of the business.
4. Public Hearing – Ordinance – R2 Overlay Zone Amendments. This public hearing was continued from the last City Council meeting awaiting a recommendation from the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission met on April 13, 2005 and has submitted several recommendations concerning the amendments to the R2 Overlay Zone.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE R2 OVERLAY ZONE AMENDMENT. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Acerson invited Mr. Dameron to review the proposed amendments. Mr. Dameron noted that the proposed amendments had been reviewed at the last Planning Commission meeting. Councilmember Carpenter asked if Councilmember Bayless had attended that meeting. Mr. Cowie stated that she had not attended due to the fact that she is currently out of town. Mr. Dameron stated that the Planning Commission had thoroughly discussed each of the proposed amendments and voted on each one. He then reviewed each item and the vote it received from the Planning Commission as follows:
1. Increase buffer zone to 1.000 feet NO
2. Reduce units per acre to four NO
3. City street standards on drives over 150 feet NO
4. Comply with street standards on streets YES
5. Minimum lot size of one acre NO
6. 2 to 1 ratio of depth to frontage YES
7. No hammer head turnarounds allowed NO
8. Three parking stalls per unit YES
9. Driveway not more than 150 feet NO
10. Match set backs of neighbors YES
11. Include moderate income housing YES
12. Parking structures in rear YES
13. No detached single family dwellings NO
(But single family dwellings must meet the definition of moderate housing.)
Following the review of each item, Mr. Dameron noted the involvement of Councilmember Bayless in the process of reviewing the R2 Overlay, and suggested the Council continue this item until the full Council could review and discuss any changes.
Mr. Cowie gave a visual presentation to the Council demonstrating the effect on the R2 Overlay zones if the proposed changes were implemented. He stated that by increasing the buffer zone between projects from 750 feet to 1000 feet and reducing the number of allowed units per acre from six to four, several of the districts would be at capacity. He stated that only districts three, eight, and ten would still have space available for R2 projects. Councilmember Carpenter stated that he felt it would be advisable to continue the item for further discussion with a full Council. He noted that the information on the closing of districts was new information that should be considered, and didn’t perceive that to be the intent of the committee. Councilmember Carpenter stated that his interpretation of the amendments was such that the original requirements would apply to existing projects, and the requirements imposed by the amendments would apply only to new projects. He noted that the closing of so many R2 districts would be an unintended consequence of the amendments.
Mr. Cowie pointed out that with the small number of openings for projects, it would be possible that the R2 Overlay would be at capacity in as little as six months. He stated that the feeling of the Planning Commission is that the outcome of the amendments indicates that the City does not want the R2 Overlay. Councilmember Carpenter stated that it was not the intent of the committee to eliminate R2 projects. Mayor Acerson observed that regardless of the intent it would be the outcome if the proposed changes were implemented. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the committee had not had strong feelings on all of the proposed changes, but that they had felt more strongly about the sense of the amendments than the Planning Commission. .
Mr. Dameron asked the Council how they felt about the hammerhead turnarounds which the Planning Commission had recommended to allow. Members of the Council expressed that they do not want to allow hammerhead turnarounds. Mr. Cowie commented that if the most recent R2 project had not been allowed a hammerhead turnaround, it would have eliminated the project. He noted that the feeling of the Planning Commission had been that a full street width should not be required on a small lot. Councilmember Carpenter stated that if a lot does not have adequate size to allow for street areas without hammerhead turnarounds then it is not an appropriate site. He also noted that this particular problem may be addressed by requiring a 2 to 1 ratio of depth to frontage. Councilmember Carpenter observed that there are several recommended amendments addressing the same problems, and that it is not the intent to make the ordinance too restrictive.
Mayor Acerson commented that at some point the R2 Overlay would reach build-out. Councilmember Carpenter stated that the law reads that the city is required to have a plan to provide moderate income housing, but that courts would recognize build out. Councilmember Carpenter also noted that the east side of the city is essentially closed due to the fact that the community in that area will not allow any moderate income projects to be approved. The Council discussed the definition of moderate income. Mr. Cowie reviewed the Utah State Code Book, and found that moderate income is defined as at or below 80% of the median income of the County. The median income in Utah County is in the low $30,000 range. It was noted that the definition of moderate income housing changes in accordance with the change in the median income. Councilmember Anthony commented that considering the current cost to purchase property for projects, the only way to achieve moderate income housing is though multiple family units. He stated that by building four to six units per acre, the cost of the property is spread between more units. A citizen in the audience inquired as to the role accessory apartments play in meeting the moderate income housing requirements. Councilmember Carpenter reported that accessory apartments are counted as affordable housing, and that the R2 could be eliminated and the city could still meet the requirement for providing moderate income housing through accessory apartments alone. Councilmember Anthony explained that the R2 Overlay was implemented because the City has a desire to go beyond what is required. After further discussion, the Council made the decision to continue the discussion until such time as the entire Council could participate in the decision making process.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED R2 OVERLAY AMENDMENT TO THE MEETING ON MAY 3, 2005. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
5. Resolution – Creation of Lindon City Tree Advisory Board. This resolution will approve the creation of a Lindon City Tree Advisory Board and set an annual meeting schedule for the Board in anticipation of Lindon’s application for Tree City USA designation.
Mr. Dameron explained that this resolution is the first step in achieving Tree City USA designation from the Arbor Day Foundation. Mr. Cowie will draft the tree ordinance, and present it in one to two months. The resolution identifies the members of the Tree Advisory Board and sets a meeting schedule, as well as setting terms of office. The Tree Advisory Board was identified as Eric Anthony as Council representative, Marilyn Simister, Janeil Callus, Darla Carter, and Janine Cartwright as citizen representatives, and Adam Cowie and Wade Webb as staff representatives. The meeting schedule is defined as once per quarter on the third Thursday of the month at 7:00 p.m. in the months of January, April, July, and October. Councilmember Anthony inquired as to the method for communication between the Board and the City Council. Mr. Dameron stated that it would be outlined in the ordinance. Councilmember Anthony stated that he is very happy to serve on the Board, and anxious for the Tree City USA designation to take place.
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION #2005-8, CREATING A TREE ADVISORY BOARD AND SETTING AN ANNUAL MEETING SCHEDULE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY WITH ONE ABSENT.
COUNCIL REPORTS
WATER, SEWER, SOLID WASTE, HOUSING CONSORTIUM
Councilmember Hatch had no items to report. He requested to be excused at 8:50 p.m.
TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, ADMINISTRATION
Councilmember Bayless was not present at the meeting
PUBLIC SAFETY, COURT, BUILDING INSPECTIONS
Councilmember Bath reported to the Mayor and Council regarding a service project in which the City had participated. Clothing, toys, and other items were gathered and given to an Indian Reservation. He stated that the letter expressed great appreciation for Lindon’s participation in the project. Councilmember Bath commented on the poor living conditions experienced by many people living on the Reservation. He stated that two semi truck loads of goods had been delivered and it was a great help to the people there.
Captain Cullimore reminded the Council of the flood prevention training Thursday, April 21st. He stated that he and Public Works Director Don Peterson were planning to attend the meeting together and would report to the Council on any pertinent information they receive at the training.
PARKS, RECREATION, ENGINEERING, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER
Councilmember Anthony addressed Lindon residents Linda Nelson and Nancy Zundell who were in the audience and expressed appreciation for their attendance. He stated that he had approached Linda and Nancy to chair the Lindon Days Celebration. They had enthusiastically agreed. Ms. Nelson and Ms. Zundell had several concerns and questions regarding specifics of the event. They were instructed to discuss the questions with Councilmember Anthony as well as those who had previously chaired the event to get the information necessary to organize. Ms. Zundell requested information to be included in utility bills regarding the need for volunteers to help with the various events. Ms. Nelson and Ms. Zundell mentioned several ideas they have for the celebration. Mayor Acerson expressed appreciation for their willingness to serve the city, and for their enthusiasm.
GENERAL PLAN, STREETS & SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS
Councilmember Carpenter gave a power point overview of the Northeast Utah Valley Transportation study which was conducted recently. The area included in the study was Northeast Utah County along the I-15 corridor, east of I-15 to the foothills. It addressed projected future travel demands and how those demands will be met. He commented that the demand is rising rapidly, and the financial resources for meeting the need are limited. Population in the study area is projected to double by the year 2030. Employment growth in the area is expected to double in that time period as well. Councilmember Carpenter pointed out that the only existing corridor in the area is I-15, and based on these projections, the traffic flow on I-15 is expected to increase by four to six times the current rate.
Councilmember Carpenter outlined three different plans proposed by the study. The first is a “no build” plan, which would not add any new travel corridors. The second proposed plan would include the construction of several non-controversial road projects. The final plan is a long range plan and includes more extensive construction of freeway and highway roads.
Councilmember Carpenter explained the grading system used by the study to rate existing roads conditions in the study area. Roads receiving an A grade were functioning well, while roads receiving an F grade were failing. He stated that most roads in the study area received C and D grades with several areas, such as the Lindon interchange on I-15 at 5:00 p.m., receiving F grades. Councilmember Carpenter stated that if the no build plan is adopted and no additional corridors are constructed, all main arteries in the study area will fail as population and travel increase.
Councilmember Anthony observed that when proposed projects to the north of Lindon are added, it tends to create traffic congestion problems for Lindon. Councilmember Carpenter agreed that none of the proposed plans create a good situation for Lindon, but the main area of concern for the City will be State Street.
Decisions will be made in the future regarding the construction of main transportation corridors in the valley.
ADMINISTRATORS REPORT
Mr. Dameron invited Mr. Cowie to address the Council regarding a State Street Study which will be conducted in Lindon. Mr. Cowie stated that he had met that day with Soren Simonsen of CRSA Architects. The firm will be hired by Lindon City to conduct a study of the commercial area on State Street to make recommendations for a uniform design plan. He stated that the firm will inventory existing buildings and uses, as well as conduct an analysis of visual preferences based on public comments. Photos and drawings will be used to illustrate different design options. The study will address streetscape architecture, lighting, and signs. Mr. Cowie suggested the Council refer to the guidelines set by the study in the ordinance, rather than drafting a lengthy ordinance addressing each of the requirements individually. Mr. Cowie stated that the firm would like to hold an open house to receive public comment on preferences for their final recommendations. The available dates for the open house are May 24 or June 22. Mr. Cowie stated that the study would require Council approval at their next meeting. The fee for the study is $15,000, and includes attendance by the firm at the public open house and three public meetings to discuss their findings. The timeline for the study is estimated to be several months. Mr. Cowie commented on the common taxing district with Pleasant Grove, and stated that they hope to achieve a subtle change between the two cities while preserving design standards.
Linda Nelson and Nancy Zundell commented from the audience that they felt a committee should be formed to make recommendations to the firm. Mayor Acerson commented that it is necessary to have it be an open process which anyone can participate in. Councilmember Carpenter stated that all of the suggestions made by citizens would not be implemented, but that the Council wants to hear a variety of ideas. Councilmember Bath noted that as the Council receives input from citizens, ideas may change about what they would like to implement.
The Open House was scheduled May 24th from 7:00 – 9:00 p.m. at the City Center.
Mr. Dameron informed the Council that there would be two meetings conducted the following day. The Engineering Coordination meeting will be at noon. Mr. Dameron, Mayor Acerson, and Councilmember Carpenter will attend. There is also a scheduled meeting on the McKinley Drive trail at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
The Council reviewed the project tracking list and discussed concerns regarding signage of several proposed projects.
Mr. Dameron informed Mayor Acerson that the Mayor’s Open House has been scheduled for May 12th at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
On May 12th at 6:00 p.m. Mayor Acerson, Mr. Dameron, Mr. Cowie, Councilmember Bayless, and Councilmember Carpenter will meet landowners on the west side of the City to begin discussion regarding the type of development that will take place in that area. Mr. Dameron requested that Mr. Cowie invite two members of the Planning Commission to attend that meeting as well.
Mr. Dameron informed the Council that Miss Pleasant Grove has asked to address them at the first regular meeting in May. She will make a request for them to participate in a fundraising project. Mr. Dameron explained to her that the Council is unable to donate any funds unless there is a direct benefit to the community. Mayor Acerson stated that he has a contact for her to help with the project and he will be happy to provide her with that information.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURN
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT
9:57 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
APPROVED - May 3, 2005
_____________________________________
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
_____________________________
Jeff Acerson, Mayor
|
|
|
