|
|
Home » City Government » Council » Schedule: Agendas and Minutes 2005 » Council Minutes 2005 » July 5, 2005
July 5, 2005
The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting On Tuesday, July 5, 2005, beginning at 7:00 p.m., in the Lindon City Center, City Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Jeff Acerson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Jeff Acerson
Invocation: Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
PRESENT ABSENT
Jeff Acerson, Mayor
Eric Anthony, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Adam Cowie, Planning Director
Debra Cullimore, Deputy Recorder
The meeting was called to order at 7:05
MINUTES – The minutes of the regular meeting of June 21, 2005 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 3, Line 6: replace the words “both ends” with the words “the east and west end”.
Page 12, Line 28: replace the word “revenue” with the words “programmed income”.
Page 12, Line 33: replace the word “is” with the words “may be”.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE JUNE 21, 2005 MEETING AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
OPEN SESSION –
Mayor Acerson asked if there were any residents who wished to address the Council for an item not on the agenda. Sandra Christensen, a Lindon resident residing on Lakeview Road, inquired as to where the Timp Lake Trail will be located as it extends west from the Old Station Square development, and how wide the trail will be. Mr. Cowie informed her that the trail is planned to be located on the north side of Lakeview Drive across from Gillman Lane, and will then cross to the South side onto the Old Station Square development. The trail is expected to be approximately ten to twelve feet in width. David Brown, a resident of Lakeview Drive, inquired as to the placement of the trail in relation to the utility easements and private property. Councilmember Bayless informed Mr. Brown that the trail will not go onto private property without the permission of the property owners. Mr. Dameron noted that the trail is still in the planning stages, but that it will be a multi-use trail, with areas for equestrian use, as well as pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Mayor Acerson asked about the approximate time frame for the engineering of the project to be completed. Councilmember Bayless stated that engineering should be completed by October 2005. Mr. Dameron informed Ms. Christensen that an open house will be held at that time to give area residents a chance to review the trail plans.
MAYOR’S COMMENTS/REPORT –
Mayor Acerson gave no report.
CONSENT AGENDA –
No items.
CURRENT BUSINESS –
1. Public Hearing for Road Vacation and Preliminary Plat – Old Station Square Commercial Subdivision and Road Vacation (Ordinance #2005-7). This is a request by BMA Construction & Development, Brigham Ashton and Chandler Nelson, for preliminary subdivision plat approval of Old Station Square Commercial Subdivision, 9 lots, in the CG zone at approximately 250 North State Street and Lakeview Drive. Approval of this subdivision also requires the vacation of a section of Lakeview Drive. The proper noticing requirements for the road vacation have been met. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO OPEN THE THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR AGENDA ITEMS #1 THRU #3. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Cowie gave an overview of the application. He stated that the application includes the vacation of a portion of Lakeview Road and re-routing it to a new location just south of the Utah Idaho Map Supply store. The Planning Commission felt that the project should be approved in two phases, with Phase I being lots 1 through 8, and Phase II being lot 9 with the road vacation. The phasing of the project will prevent the vacation of the existing road prior to the completion of the new road.
Mr. Cowie noted that during the public hearing of the Planning Commission meeting on June 22, area residents had expressed concern regarding traffic impacts on Lakeview Drive and Gillman Lane, visibility and winter driving conditions on State Street, and the need for placement of a traffic light at the new intersection.
Mr. Cowie went on to explain that the Timp Lake Trail will exit from a future tunnel under State Street onto the development between lot 7 and lot 8. The trail will be routed along the rear of the development in a fifteen foot area of dedication with an additional five foot easement. The trail will be located within the forty foot setback which is required for the adjacent residential zone.
Mr. Cowie then reviewed the recommendations for approval made by the Planning Commission, which are as follows:
1. That the vacation of Lakeview Drive not become effective until the new roadway is finished and approved by the city for use by through traffic.
2. That the new roadway shall be blocked to through traffic until such approvals have been given.
3. That a five foot easement and fifteen foot trail dedication be provided from the tunnel to the west border and along the south border of the site.
4. That the landscaping requirement and pedestrian easement be provided twenty feet from back of curb to facilitate a meandering sidewalk (to be reviewed by staff).
5. That the bulb on Lakeview Drive be eliminated.
6. That options be reviewed to minimize traffic impact on Gillman Lane.
7. That the alignment of 200 North on the east side of State Street be reviewed.
8. That staff review the alignment of the ditch and prepare a recommendation as to who should pay for the installation of the pipe in the area of dedication.
9. That a pedestrian easement from the exit of the tunnel be provided between lot 6 & lot 7.
10. That cross easements be provided between all lots.
11. That the State Historical Preservation Office be contacted and allowed eight weeks after City approval to perform documentation of the historic building located on lot #9.
Mr. Cowie went on to discuss several of the recommendations made by the Planning Commission. He explained that the Planning Commission had felt that the meandering sidewalk would be pleasing. The meandering sidewalk would not directly conform to City ordinance as far as placement of trees and fence, but would be a workable idea, and the developer is agreeable to the idea. As far as traffic calming devices for Gillman Lane, Mr. Cowie suggested waiting until completion of the road to determine if such devices are warranted. Councilmember Carpenter asked why the Planning Commission had recommended removal of the bulb on Lakeview Drive. Mr. Cowie stated that it was the opinion of members of the Planning Commission that the bulb was unnecessary. The alignment with 200 North east of State Street has been discussed with the engineer. The engineer is aware of a potential alignment problem, and is addressing those concerns. Councilmember Carpenter inquired as to future plans for lot 9. Mr. Ashton stated there is no specific business planned for the lot, but they would like to have an access from State Street as well as an access from Lakeview Drive. Councilmember Carpenter informed Mr. Ashton that UDOT has control over access from State Street, and that due to traffic safety concerns, as few State Street accesses as possible are provided. Various possibilities for directing traffic through the development were discussed.
Councilmember Bayless expressed concern that the property owners of lot 1 may not be in agreement with the placement of the trail. Mr. Ashton assured her that all property owners associated with the development are in agreement regarding the placement of the trail. Mr. Dameron stated that all property owners would be required to sign the dedication and plat documents. Mr. Marchbanks, the owner of lot 1, stated that he was in agreement with the trail placement.
Councilmember Bayless felt that the piping of the ditch warranted some discussion. Mr. Cowie stated that Public Works Director, Don Peterson, is currently in discussion with the water company regarding water rights associated with the ditch. Mr. Cowie noted that it appears at this time that the Christensen and the Griffith homes are served by the ditch. Mr. Cowie noted that a wall will be located on the property line, and may require agreements with owners of the neighboring parcels as to how irrigation water will be delivered. Mr. Cowie also stated that the piped ditch is expected to be located directly under the wall. Mr. Ashton mentioned that the possibility of a vegetative screen as an alternative to the wall had been discussed with the Planning Commission. Councilmember Carpenter commented that the vegetative screen may be preferable for trail users. Mr. Ashton felt that the vegetative screen would be easier to work with when neighboring parcels are developed. Mr. Cowie pointed out that the wall or vegetative screen are not part of the approval for this meeting, and would be addressed at a later meeting. Councilmember Hatch suggested the possibility of relocating the ditch to an alternate location within the area of dedication or the easement. He noted that access to the ditch for maintenance purposes may be necessary at some time, and locating the ditch under the wall could make access difficult.
At this time, Mayor Acerson called for public comment. Sandra Christensen, a resident of Lakeview Drive, commented that there may be potential safety concerns for workers in the area of the ditch, due to downed barbed wire which may not be visible because of vegetation and weeds. She suggested that workers exercise caution when working in the area.
Doug Christensen, a resident of Lakeview Drive, inquired as to the amount of tax revenue which is being used for the construction of the tunnel that which we will be built under State Street. Mr. Dameron informed him that grant funds in the amount of $500,000 have been obtained to construct the tunnel. The City will provide matching funds of 7%. Mr. Christensen asked if bids for the construction of the tunnel had been obtained. Mayor Acerson stated that engineering estimates had been used to obtain the funding for the tunnel. Mr. Christensen also commented on the master plan for the city which indicates 180 North Street, a cul-de-sac road in this same area, would be constructed. He stated that the change to the master plan allowing this new configuration would increase traffic on Lakeview Road. Councilmember Carpenter noted that traffic issues had been discussed at length in previous meetings, and that engineering studies indicate that traffic on Lakeview Road should not be significantly altered due to the realignment. During further discussion, it was determined that 180 North was a developer proposed street, and was not proposed by the City. The proposed development did not occur, which eliminated the construction of the street. Mr. Christensen noted that the use of stop signs in the development had been discussed at a previous meeting. Mr. Cowie stated that stop signs had been discussed with the City engineer. The engineer felt that stop signs were not warranted due to the fact that there is no cross traffic. Councilmember Carpenter noted that stop signs could be used in the future if it is determined that they are warranted. Mr. Christensen commented on the use of speed humps on Gillman Lane and Lakeview Drive. He asked how it would affect the use of the streets by emergency vehicles. Mary Ellen Brown, a resident of Lakeview Drive, commented on traffic speeds on Lakeview Drive. She felt that there are significant safety concerns for the residents, and that traffic calming devices are needed at this time. Mr. Cowie suggested that area residents contact the City to begin a citizen initiated traffic calming study and program. Ms. Christensen commented on the designation of Lakeview Drive as an emergency response road. She felt that the realignment of the road may increase response time for emergency vehicles. Councilmember Bath stated that response time should not be significantly increased, due to the fact that the area of realignment is relatively small.
Mayor Acerson called for additional public comment. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR OLD STATION SQUARE. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
The Council went on to discuss the street bulb adjacent to lot 9. Councilmember Bath felt that the bulb is unnecessary. Councilmember Carpenter felt that the bulb would be advantageous if an entrance is located on lot 9, but noted that it would not be possible to approve an entrance without a site plan. Councilmember Bath suggested approving the site plan without the bulb with the option to include the bulb upon development of lot 9. Mr. Ashton noted that the preference of the developers would be to eliminate the bulb.
Councilmember Hatch suggested that 40 South Street be included in the traffic study for possible traffic calming devices, as there is potential for impact on that street as well. Councilmember Hatch stated that he is not in favor of Lakeview Road entering State Street on the hill. He felt that there may be safety concerns associated with visibility and winter driving conditions. Councilmember Hatch expressed concern that traffic flow on the west side of the city may be negatively impacted by the realignment of the road. He clarified that he does not have a problem with the developers or the proposed development, but he does not agree with the decision made by UDOT which allows only one of the entrances to Lakeview Drive road off of State Street.
The Council then discussed the historic building located on the site. The house sustained damage in a recent traffic accident in which a vehicle struck the corner of the structure. Chief Building Official, Phil Brown, had inspected the site, and felt that there may be potential safety concerns if the structure is not removed. Councilmember Bayless requested that the State Historical Office be given adequate time to document the historic home. Mr. Ashton commented that he is concerned about possible safety and liability issues if the structure is not removed. He stated that the developers have discussed using some bricks from the historic structure in the new development. He also stated that the developers are willing to include a historic marker on the site. Mr. Ashton stated that they are willing to allow time for documentation, but requested that it be completed as quickly as possible.
Feeling that all potential concerns had been addressed, Mayor Acerson called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2005-7 TO VACATE A SECTION OF LAKEVIEW DRIVE WHERE IT INTERSECTS WITH STATE STREET AND REROUTE THE ROADWAY TO A NEW LOCATION. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY NAY
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH NAY
THE MOTION CARRIED (3-2).
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST BY BMA CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT FOR A TWO PHASE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WHICH WILL INCLUDE VACATING A PORTION OF LAKEVIEW DRIVE, WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. THAT THE VACATION OF LAKEVIEW DRIVE WILL NOT BE EFFECTIVE UNTIL THE NEW ROADWAY IS FINISHED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY FOR USE BY THROUGH TRAFFIC.
2. THAT THE NEW ROADWAY SHALL BE BLOCKED TO THROUGH TRAFFIC UNTIL SUCH APPROVALS HAVE BEEN GIVEN.
3. THAT A FIVE FOOT EASEMENT AND A FIFTEEN FOOT TRAIL DEDICATION BE PROVIDED FROM THE TUNNEL TO THE WEST BORDER AND ALONG THE SOUTH BORDER OF THE SITE.
4. THAT THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT AND PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT BE PROVIDED TWENTY FEET FROM BACK OF CURB TO FACILITATE A MEANDERING SIDEWALK.
5. THAT THE STREET BULB ON LAKEVIEW DRIVE BE ELIMINATED.
6. THAT OPTIONS BE REVIEWED TO MINIMIZE TRAFFIC IMPACTS ON GILLMAN LANE AND 40 SOUTH STREET AS NECESSARY FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
7. THAT DISCUSSION CONTINUE AS TO THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO PROVIDE CONTINUED IRRIGATION SERVICE TO PROPERTY OWNERS, THAT IF IT IS NECESSARY TO PIPE THE IRRIGATION DITCH THE CITY WILL BARE THE EXPENSE, AND THAT THE DITCH SHOULD BE RELOCATED TO THE AREA OF THE TRAIL DEDICATION OR THE ASSOCIATED EASEMENT.
8. THAT A PEDESTRAIN EASEMENT FROM THE EXIT OF THE TUNNEL BE PROVIDED BETWEEN LOT 6 AND LOT 7.
9. THAT CROSS EASEMENTS BE PROVIDED BETWEEN ALL LOTS.
10. THAT THE STATE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION OFFICE BE CONTACTED AND ALLOWED UP TO SIX FIVE WEEKS FOR DOCUMENTATION AND POSSIBLE RESTORATION OF THE HISTORIC BUILDING LOCATED ON THE SITE. THE HISTORIC BUILDING MAY BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY UPON COMPLETION OF DOCUMENTATION THE PROCESS IF IT IS LESS THAN SIX FIVE WEEKS.
11. LOT 9 ACCESS FROM THE WEST WILL BE DECIDED UPON APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THAT LOT.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY NAY
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED (4-1).
Councilmember Hatch expressed appreciation to the developers for their willingness to cooperate with the City.
2. Public Hearing for Road Vacation and Preliminary Re-Plat – Rhoades’s Plat “C” and Road Vacation (Ordinance #2005-8). This is a request by Mike Anderson (on behalf of owners Smoot and Johnson) for preliminary subdivision re-plat approval for Rhoade’s Plat “C which changes lots 1 and 8 to lots 9 and 10. This re-plat is necessary relative to the approval of Country Cove Estates, Plat “B”. Approval of this subdivision also requires the vacation of a section of 270 North Street. The proper noticing requirements for the road vacation have been met. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions.
Seeing that Mr. Anderson was not yet present at the meeting, Mayor Acerson suggested that the Council move on to agenda item three, and return to agenda item two when Mr. Anderson arrived.
3. Public Hearing for Road Vacation and Preliminary Plat – Noah’s Center Commercial Subdivision and Road Vacation (Ordinance #2005-9). This is a request by Bill Bowser for preliminary subdivision plat approval of Noah’s Center Commercial Subdivision, 4 lots, in the CG zone at the corner of 2000 West and 700 North. Approval of this subdivision also requires the vacation of a section of 2000 West. The proper noticing requirements for the road vacation have been met. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions.
Mr. Cowie reviewed the application. He stated that the vacated area of the street will be fence to fence. The underlying property owner of the vacated portion has not as yet been determined. However, staff recommends that the road be vacated to Noah if it is determined that they are the owners. Mr. Cowie also indicated that the developers have agreed to dedicate a small triangle of property measuring 38 feet on each side to the City for placement of an entrance sign to Lindon City. The exact location of the triangle may change depending on the determined ownership of the vacated road portion, but the triangle will still be provided. Mr. Cowie stated that the Ordinance for this vacation will include a map description as well as a legal description once ownership of the vacated portion is determined. Mr. Bowser asked if there is a possibility that half of the vacated area is located in Pleasant Grove. Mr. Cowie clarified that the area is in Lindon, but may be owned by the owners of the adjacent parcel. Mr. Bowser indicated that the owner of the adjacent parcel, Dennis Baker, had signed documents to shift the property line, and it is his understanding that the line has been established. Mr. Cowie informed the Council that it is the responsibility of the applicants to provide documentation of the property line to the City.
Mayor Acerson called for public comment. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR
THE NOAH’S CENTER COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION ROAD VACATION. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Dameron noted that the city has been in touch with the engineers for the Pleasant Grove side of the intersection. He indicated that they are aware of the new road alignment, and are considering creating a four way intersection in the area. Councilmember Anthony asked if 2000 West will be able to accommodate the traffic flow created in the area. Mr. Dameron indicated that it could.
Feeling that potential concerns had been addressed, Mayor Acerson called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST BY BILL BOWSER FOR A FOUR LOT SUBDIVISION THAT WILL REQUIRE THE CITY TO VACATE A PORTION OF 2000 WEST WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. THAT THE EXISTING 2000 WEST ROADWAY BE VACATED TO THE UNDERLYING PROPERTY OWNERS AT SUCH TIME AS OWNERSHIP IS DETERMINED.
2. THAT A THIRTY EIGHT FOOT TRIANGLE BE RESERVED TO THE CITY FOR A FUTURE SIGN IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT FOUR.
3. THAT CROSS EASEMENTS TO ADJOINING PARCELS BE PROVIDED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LOT TWO AND THE PARCEL TO THE EAST.
4. THAT THE VACATION OF 2000 WEST IS NOT EFFECTIVE UNTIL THE NEW 2000 WEST REALIGNMENT IS FINISHED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY FOR USE BY THROUGH TRAFFIC.
5. THAT THE NEW ROADWAY SHALL BE BLOCKED TO THROUGH TRAFFIC UNTIL SUCH APROVALS HAVE BEEN GIVEN.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2005-9 APPROVING A REQUEST TO VACATE A SECTION OF 2000 WEST NEAR WHERE IT INTERSECTS WITH THE PROPOSED 700 NORTH ROADWAY AND REROUTE 2000 WEST TO A NEW LOCATION, WITH ATTACHMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE TO BE PROPERLY UPDATED WHEN OWNERSHIP OF THE VACATED PORTION IS DETERMINED. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY: AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mike Anderson had not yet arrived at the meeting. Mayor Acerson suggested continuing the public hearing for Mr. Anderson’s application and moving on with agenda items.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE ROAD VACTION FOR RHOADES PLAT “C”. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
4. Site Plan – Automated Recreation Center. This is a request by Bill Bowser for site plan approval of an automated recreation center on lot #1 of the Noah’s Center Commercial Subdivision. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions.
The representatives for this item were Bill Bowser, Bert Thomas, and Alex Sheil. Mayor Acerson asked the applicants to describe the proposed development. Mr. Bowser stated that the Noah’s Center in Lindon will be the first one in the country. The facility will be fully automated. Customers will book services via the internet or a toll free number. They will be given an access code to enter the area of the building which they have reserved. Mr. Bowser noted that booking an area of Noah’s Center will be similar to booking a hotel room. Councilmember Carpenter inquired as to the number of employees on site. Mr. Bowser stated that most operations will be conducted remotely, and that only one maintenance employee will be on site. Mr. Bowser noted that if a customer has any kind of problem, they would call the remote command center from a phone which is provided. There will be a camera associated with the phone to enable the customer to see and talk to the person at the remote command center. If the problem cannot be addressed remotely, the maintenance employee will be called to the location of the problem.
Councilmember Anthony inquired about the proposed security system. According to Mr. Bowser, the same type of system which will be used in the Noah’s Center is used by the U.S. Military, as well as many U.S. Embassy Buildings. Councilmember Anthony asked how security problems which occur inside the facility would be handled. Mr. Bowser pointed out that only customers with the correct access code would have access to any particular part of the building. He stated that if a problem does arise, the entire facility is under constant video surveillance from the remote command center. The proper authorities would be notified immediately, and depending on City ordinance, employees may have the capability to detain suspects until police arrive. Mr. Bowser also noted that parents would have the ability to view the facility from their computer at home to monitor their children.
Mayor Acerson asked the applicants why they had decided to locate the business in Lindon. Mr. Bowser stated that they had studied the demographics of the area and determined that they were favorable to the business. He stated that there is a potential customer base of approximately 300,000 considering a twenty minute drive. Mr. Bowser also indicated that the intent of the developers is to duplicate the business in hundreds of locations around the country.
Councilmember Hatch asked if there would be separate entrances for the recreation area and the reception area. Mr. Bowser stated that customers using separate areas of the facility would never see or hear each other.
The applicants then reviewed the architectural and landscaping elements for the proposed project. The exterior of the building will be pre-fabricated concrete panels cast from barn wood. The exterior will have the look of aged barn wood and will be gray in color. The area around the entries will include stone and timber elements. The roof will consist of sheet metal and/or architectural shingles in a diamond shaped pattern. The window frames will be bronze colored aluminum. The applicants distributed three dimensional drawings of the structure to the Council. Mr. Bowser noted that the intent is to achieve a distinctive look which will be easily recognizable in other locations. Councilmember Hatch asked how many floors are in the facility. Mr. Bowser stated that there are three floors inside the building, and that the roof area will be used as a skating rink in the winter and an outdoor grotto or garden type area in the summer. He went on to explain that the ice area will be large enough to accommodate thirty to forty skaters at a time, and that heated seats surrounding the skating rink are planned. The area can be reserved for private parties.
In discussing the landscaping elements, Mr. Thomas noted that he was under the impression that the fence was required to be four feet high. He had observed several other fences in the City and found that they were three feet high. Mr. Dameron reviewed the ordinance and found that it states that the required height for the fence is three feet. Mr. Bowser noted that the required Little Leaf Linden trees would be placed at the perimeter of the site, and that various trees would be used in the parking area and other landscaping, and would include one tree for approximately every two parking spaces.
Councilmember Bayless asked the applicants if they had given any consideration to signage. Mr. Bowser stated that the intent is that signage will be minimal. Business is booked on the internet, and customers receive written directions to the location of the business. The purpose of signage will be to direct customers to the appropriate area of the facility. Mr. Bowser indicated that they do not expect to reach the 110 square feet of allowable signage. Mr. Bowser indicated that there may be some signage in the planting beds on the west end of the building, and an image projector may be used to identify specific events, such as weddings, at the facility.
Councilmember Anthony noted that there is always risk involved in business, and asked the applicants what would become of the building if the proposed business fails. Mr. Bowser stated that they have considered this possibility, and felt that the building could be easily converted to office space.
Mr. Cowie reviewed the conditions of approval recommended by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission had recommended that the driveway be widened to include three lanes, or that a second entrance with two lanes be provided. The City engineer recommended the widening of a single driveway, due to the fact that it would be necessary to locate a second driveway too close to the intersection of 700 North and 2000 West.
Mr. Cowie also noted that the height of the parapet wall will exceed the maximum allowable height of forty eight feet. Code does allow parapets to exceed forty eight feet, but Mr. Cowie wanted to be certain that the Council was aware of the height of the building. He compared it to the Low Book Sales building with regard to height. Councilmember Anthony observed that this project will set the standard for development in the area. Mr. Cowie pointed out a possible problem in the future regarding visibility for lot 2 due to the extensive vegetation at Noah’s Center. Councilmember Anthony asked if there would be shared parking between the two lots. Mr. Cowie stated that there will be cross easements between the lots. Councilmember Anthony asked if the parking on the site meets minimum requirements. Mr. Cowie indicated that minimum parking requirements have been met.
Councilmember Bayless asked if there would be any prohibited activities at the facility. Mr. Dameron noted that “fight clubs” are prohibited by City ordinance. Mr. Bower stated that activities will be driven by City ordinances, and that no prohibited activities would be allowed. Mr. Thomas noted that along with the camera surveillance at the facility, the rental agreement stipulates that customers agree to have any damage to the facility charged to the credit card used to book the facility. Therefore, he felt the possibility of any activities which would be unacceptable would be minimal.
Mr. Cowie also brought to the attention of the Council a potential problem regarding the location of the sidewalk, fence, and trees on 700 North. He stated that it may be necessary to locate the fence and trees closer to the road, due to the location of the sidewalk. Mr. Thomas stated that the sidewalk is intended to run parallel to the curbing on the highway. Mr. Cowie suggested that flexibility in placement of the fence and trees be included as a condition of approval.
Mayor Acerson called for further discussion. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY BILL BOWSER FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE RECREATION CENTER WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. THAT THE ENTRANCE TO LOTS 1 AND 2 FROM 2000 WEST BE INCREASED TO ONE ENTRANCE WITH THREE LANES.
2. THAT STAFF BE ALLOWED TO DETERMINE PLACEMENT OF THE FENCE AND TREES ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Bowser noted that material removed from the Proctor Lane area during road construction will be used as fill for the Noah’s site. He also stated that they have excess road impact fee credits of approximately 60,000. He inquired as to the possibility of directing those needing credits to the Noah Corporation. Mr. Dameron stated that the excess credits could be handled on a staff level by directing developers who need them to Mr. Bowser. Mr. Dameron inquired as to whether there would be sales tax charged on activities at the facility. Mr. Bowser stated that some research is still necessary, but it appears at this time that the facility will be considered a “hospitality” business, which will produce tax revenue for the City.
5. Review and Action – Design Variance – Utah Auto Sales Signs. This is a request by Kevin Gallagher, owner of Utah Auto Sales, for a design variance to the Low Profile sign requirements in the Lindon City Code – Title 18 – for the new auto complex at 17 North State Street. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
Mr. Gallagher was not present at the meeting. The Council made the decision by consent to move on with other agenda items while awaiting the arrival of Mr. Gallagher.
6. Public Hearing – Continued – Amendments to the City’s Sign Ordinance – Title 18 of the Lindon City Code (Ordinance #2005-10). The Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve amendments to Title 18 – Sign Ordinance of the Lindon City Code. This public hearing was continued from the meeting of June 21, 2005.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S SIGN ORDINANCE. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Cowie reviewed elements which have been discussed during previous meetings and public hearing. He stated that the main issues which have been addressed are LED type signs, wall signs, awning signs, and the maximum allowable percentage of signage. Mr. Cowie presented examples of different types and sizes of signs for comparison by the Council. Mr. Cowie also mentioned that the Alpine Transition and Employment Center, located at 350 North State Street, has requested to move their fence behind their sign, due to the fact that view of the sign is obscured by the fence. Mr. Cowie went on to explain a problem which had been brought to his attention regarding signage. The Little Leaf Linden trees which are a required landscaping element on State Street may obscure view of monument signs. Mr. Cowie presented examples of several signs to demonstrate the potential problem. He stated that a forty five to sixty foot clear vision area may be considered around signage. Councilmember Anthony commented that on a recent trip to France, he had observed that the trees in commercial areas were pruned to a height of approximately forty feet, which brought the branches of the trees above the signage. He felt that this may address the issue. Mr. Cowie pointed out that there was still a potential that the trunks of the trees could obscure the view of signs. Mr. Cowie will take this concern into consideration in the amended sign ordinance, as well as with the Tree Advisory Board.
Mr. Cowie then discussed the size of monument signs relative to street frontage. He pointed out that corner lots are currently allowed to use frontage from both sides of the lot in figuring the allowable signage.
Mr. Cowie presented specific examples of LED type signs. He noted that the Planning Commission had recommended that LED signs not exceed three feet by twelve feet, and be prohibited in all zones except the T zone in the area of I-15.
Mr. Cowie presented examples of signage which had been digitally placed on photographs of a vacant building. The examples depicted various types of wall, awning, and window signs. The Council discussed individual preferences for these types of signs. Mr. Cowie noted that neon signage cannot be legally prohibited. Prohibiting signage must serve a “specific governmental interest”. However, the City does have discretion to limit signage. He suggested limiting the allowable amount of neon lighting on signage to fifty lineal feet. Councilmember Hatch stated that he felt that fifty lineal feet was not sufficient. Mr. Cowie commented that he had felt there was consensus from the Council during previous discussions that neon lighting should be prohibited. The Council discussed the use of neon in lighting to illuminate cabinet and can lights. Councilmember Carpenter suggested differentiating neon used as a lighting source as opposed to neon used for decorative purposes. Councilmember Bayless agreed that neon contained within a can or cabinet light should not count towards the allowable amount. The Council discussed the use of decorative, or exposed, neon for the lettering and logos on signage only. There was a consensus among all Councilmembers except Councilmember Bayless that exposed neon lighting should be used for lighting lettering and logos on signage only. Councilmember Bayless felt that the amount of exposed neon should have a specific limitation.
The Council then discussed and voted on back lit awnings, as well as the use of awnings for signage. The consensus of the Council was to disallow signage on awnings. The consensus of the Council also was to prohibit back lit awnings. Councilmember Anthony noted that all language in the revisions relating to awning signs could be removed.
The Council then discussed wall signs. Mr. Cowie reviewed examples of wall signs which demonstrate twelve to fifteen percent of total wall coverage. Following discussion, the majority of the Council agreed that the maximum allowable percentage for wall signs should be twelve percent.
Mr. Cowie also addressed the issue of banner signs. He stated that banner signs will be required to be attached to the wall of the building or a fence and be a maximum of 10% of the wall space they are attached to.
Mr. Cowie requested input from the Council regarding the use of LED type signs in the T zone. Councilmember Bath stated that he felt that the three foot by twelve size recommended by the Planning Commission would be sufficient, but that he may consider allowing fourteen feet. Councilmember Hatch felt that three feet by twelve feet was not sufficient to be easily read by passing vehicles or to clearly identify businesses from the freeway. Following further discussion, the Council reached a consensus that LED type signs along the T zone could be allowed at four feet by fourteen feet. Councilmember Hatch suggested limiting the location of the LED type signs. Mr. Cowie observed that UDOT has similar limitations on billboards. Steve Bown, owner of Skyline Productions in Lindon felt that the cost of the LED type signs would be somewhat prohibitive, but agreed that there should be a minimum distance between them. Mr. Cowie stated that he had considered a 500 foot separation, which would allow approximately twenty five signs along the freeway. He pointed out to Mr. Bown that a business located directly across the freeway from his business had applied for an LED type sign prior to the moratorium, which would prohibit Mr. Bown from installing an LED type sign. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that each side of the freeway would be treated independently regarding the 500 foot separation for LED type signs.
Mr. Cowie proposed that statue signs would be required to be part of the front elevation, and could not exceed the maximum allowable percentage of wall space for that elevation.
The Council discussed further various options for figuring signage size based on street frontage. Councilmember Hatch suggested that for businesses on State Street, only State Street and not side street frontage should be used to figure maximum allowable signage. He felt that this approach would equalize frontage and signage along State Street.
Mr. Cowie stated that he would draft the changes the Council had discussed and present them at the next meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S SIGN ORDINANCE TO THE MEETING OF JULY 19, 2005. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
At this time, Linda Nelson and Nancy Zundell requested to address the Council regarding the Lindon Days Celebration. They received input regarding the parade, the hay ride, and the breakfast. They informed the Council that they are working with several non-profit organizations through Wal-Mart to obtain funding for various events. They also requested that the Council contact area businesses to ask for sponsorship of events to help cover the cost of the celebration. They distributed posters which outlined events and requested that each Councilmember place two posters in area businesses to help publicize the event. Mayor Acerson thanked Ms. Nelson and Ms. Zundell for their time and effort in planning the event.
Rhoades Subdivision
Mike Anderson had arrived at the meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ROAD VACATION OF RHOADE’S PLAT “C”. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Cowie explained that this application is for a re-plat for lots 1 and 8 of the existing Rhoades subdivision in order to allow for a new road alignment created by the Country Cove Estates project. He noted that the ordinance relating to the road vacation includes a mapped description of the area of vacation, which is a small triangular parcel. The area will be vacated to the Johnson family. The county has asked that the City record a Quit Claim Deed for lot 9. The county requested that the entire lot be included in the Quit Claim, and that a value or sum of at least one dollar be listed. Mr. Dameron inquired as to why this was not required for the vacation associated with the Old Station Square development. Mr. Cowie stated that the county may request the same action in the future for Old Station Square, but it has not been requested at this time. Mr. Cowie also mentioned that the City had been in contact with Mr. Rhoades regarding final improvements in front of the Smoot home. Mr. Rhoades has indicated that he is willing to participate in the installation of those improvements.
Mr. Cowie commented on a recommendation of the Planning Commission that the existing curb, gutter, sidewalk, asphalt, and road base be removed from the vacated area. He felt there should be clarification as to who is responsible for the removal of materials and the associated costs.
Another concern which had been brought to the attention of the City is the pressurized irrigation system used by the Smoot’s. Completion of the new road will require removal of the box which controls the pressurized irrigation system. Mr. Cowie suggested relocating the control box on to the Smoot property. Moving the irrigation box would have additional expense associated with it for reinstallation of sod and driveway repairs. Councilmember Carpenter asked if the Smoot’s are willing to relocate the box themselves. Mr. and Mrs. Smoot were present in the audience. Mr. Smoot stated that they are not willing to participate in any expense created by the development, due to the fact that it is not their development. He noted that he has already made concessions in order to facilitate the completion of the development. Mayor Acerson observed that there is no direct benefit to the Smoot’s from the development.
Mr. Anderson stated that he is willing to be responsible for the demolition of the vacated street area, as well as the improvements to the north side of the street.
Mayor Acerson asked how this proposal compares with the original proposal submitted by Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson stated that due to the purchase of the Hinckley property, the angle of the street has been changed slightly, the lots are deeper than previously proposed, and one lot has been added to the development. According to Mr. Anderson, the change in the development did not necessitate the relocation of the irrigation box. It would have been necessary to relocate it with the original proposal as well. Councilmember Carpenter asked if the changes in the irrigation system should have been bonded for along with the final improvements in front of the Smoot home. Mr. Cowie stated that there is no indication that the irrigation should have been included in the bond. Mr. Anderson felt that if the improvements to the Rhoades Subdivision had been completed, this issue would not need to be addressed at this time. Mayor Acerson asked Mr. Cowie about the participation of Mr. Rhoades in the additional expenses. Mr. Cowie stated that Mr. Rhoades has agreed to participate in the sidewalk, curb, and gutter structures in front of the Smoot home only. Mayor Acerson asked Mr. Anderson if Mr. Rhoades is not willing to be responsible to relocate the irrigation box and bare the cost of the associated expenses of sod and driveway repair, would he be willing to take care of it himself. Mayor Acerson went on to suggest the possibility of sharing the expense between Mr. Anderson and Mr. Rhoades. Mr. Anderson stated that if necessary, he is willing to bare the expense. He noted that he will be responsible for the demolition and removal of the existing structures on the vacated portion, which will be a significant expense. Mr. Dameron pointed out that the changes are not City driven, nor are they driven by the Smoot’s. The expenses have been created due to Mr. Anderson’s development. Mayor Acerson clarified that if Mr. Rhoades is not willing to participate in the improvements, Mr. Anderson will be responsible for relocating the irrigation system, as well as restoring the sod and driveway to original condition. Councilmember Bath pointed out that it is the usual practice of the City to have required improvements completed by the developer. Mr. Dameron verified with Mr. Anderson that he understood that if the previous developer is not willing to participate, Mr. Anderson will be responsible for required improvements. Councilmember Bayless felt that the specific improvements should be clarified. Mr. Anderson stated that his understanding was that the additional improvements include moving the irrigation system, and the associated sod and driveway repairs. Mr. Smoot expressed concern regarding the final grade, and requested that the final grade be correct.
Councilmember Anthony observed that Mr. Smoot did not seem entirely supportive of the original agreement, but was willing to participate. In the original agreement, the Smoot’s would have two building lots, and the new agreement will reduce that to one lot. Councilmember Anthony asked Mr. Smoot why he is willing to agree to this. Mr. Smoot stated that he would experience a loss in square footage with the original agreement. With this proposal he will maintain his parcel size, which is preferable for him.
Councilmember Bayless noted that the original motion for this application included the requirement that Mr. Anderson address the grade of the lots. Mr. Anderson stated that he will create a slope down to the existing grade, and that it will be a three to one drop.
Mayor Acerson called for additional public comment. Hearing none, the public hearing was closed.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR RHOADES PLAT “C” ROAD VACATION. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY MIKE ANDERSON FOR THE RHOADE’S PLAT C SUBDIVISION, WHICH WILL INCLUDE VACATING PORTIONS OF 270 NORTH WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. THAT MR ANDERSON BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY PORTION OF THE EXPENSE OF RELOCATING THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM, AS WELL AS RESTORATION OF THE SOD AND DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS NOT PAID FOR BY MR. RHOADES.
2. THAT MR. ANDERSON BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK, ASPHALT, AND BASE GRAVEL FROM THE VACATED AREA.
3. THAT MR. ANDERSON BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE STREET.
4. THAT ALL SIGNATURES FOR BOTH THE COUNTRY COVE ESTATES PLAT B AND THE NEW RHOADES PLAT C BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO RECORDIING EITHER PLAT.
5. THAT AFTER BOTH PLATS ARE SIGNED, THE CITY PREPARE AND RECORD A QUIT CLAIM DEED ON THE NORTH LOT (JOHNSON LOT) PER COUNTY RECORDER INSTRUCTIONS IN ORDER TO RELEASE ALL INTEREST IN THE ROADWAY AREA AND FINALIZE THE VACATION.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2005-8 APPROVING A REQUEST TO VACATE A SECTION OF 270 NORTH IN FRONT OF THE HOME LOCATED AT 505 EAST 270 NORTH AND SLIGHTLY REALIGN 270 NORTH TO A NEW LOCATION. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Utah Auto Sales
Mr. Gallagher was not present at the meeting. Following discussion, the Council made the decision to address the application without his presence.
Mr. Cowie reviewed the application. He stated that the applicant had previously been granted approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council for a fourteen foot monument sign based on 247 feet of frontage. Subsequently, it had come to the attention of the City that the site has only 197 feet of frontage. The error occurred due to a miscalculation of the property line by the applicant. The 197 foot measurement allows for an eight foot sign. The next measurement of 201 feet allows for an eleven foot sign. Mr. Gallagher is requesting a variance to install a twelve foot monument sign. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request.
Councilmember Bayless stated that the application submitted was inaccurate, but that does not bind the City to give a variance. Councilmember Carpenter observed that Mr. Gallagher’s new lot was approved as an extension of an existing business. As such, it qualifies for only a six foot sign. Councilmember Anthony felt that the practice on signage should tend to be more conservative, rather than more liberal. Councilmember Bath agreed that one large sign, already on the existing business, and one small sign for his extended lot would be more acceptable, and be in compliance with the City’s existing sign ordinance. Mr. Cowie addressed the issue of the trees near the sign obscuring the view of the sign to passing traffic. Councilmember Carpenter felt that the issue could be addressed by lowering the sign to a level under the trees. Councilmember Bayless agreed that the sign could be lowered four to five feet.
Mr. Dameron observed that the 197 foot frontage qualifies for an eight foot sign. Councilmember Carpenter again pointed out that as an extension of an existing business, the site qualifies for only a six foot sign, and felt that a six foot sign should could be required.
Mr. Cowie noted that he felt partially responsible for the misunderstanding, as the application had been reviewed several times before the mistake was noticed. Councilmember Carpenter stated that it was not the responsibility of the City to find the mistake. Mr. Dameron agreed that it is the responsibility of the applicant to provide accurate information.
Mayor Acerson called for further discussion. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST BY UTAH AUTO SALES FOR A DESIGN VARIANCE TO THE SIGN AT 17 NORTH STATE STREET, AND ALLOW AN EIGHT FOOT SIGN BASED ON THE 197 FOOT FRONTAGE OF THE SITE. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH NAY
THE MOTION CARRIED (4-1).
It was noted that some members of the Council felt that only a six foot sign should be allowed.
7. Discussion – Proposed West-Side Residential Overlay Zone. The Council will discuss the proposed west-side residential overlay zone.
Mr. Cowie gave an overview of the status of west side residential development. He stated that the City had recently met with Griffin Johnson of Fieldstone Developers. The general consensus of the meeting was that the City should set specific guidelines for potential residential development on the west side of the City. The guidelines would eliminate numerous revisions to proposals submitted by developers. Mr. Cowie presented a proposed R3 Overlay Zone, which would be in the existing Light Industrial or Mixed Commercial zone in the area. The overlay would not alter the underlying zone, but would allow a residential component to be placed over this area should an application be approved. The R3 zone would be surrounded by a 300 foot buffer zone. Notices have been delivered to surrounding property owners. The R3 overlay would be site specific for this location only. The R2 overlay would be applicable to the area with the same requirements as in other areas, including the 750 foot distance between projects. The proposed R3 Overlay would consist of approximately 10,000 square foot minimum lot sizes for detached single family dwellings, and may also contain an aspect of retirement housing or small multifamily projects consistent with the R2 Overlay. Overall density would be left up to the developer. The specific guidelines should give the City the ability to approve or deny an application quickly, based on the application complying with the guidelines.
The Council discussed specific recommendations for moderate income housing, required set backs, maximum square footage of homes, and required parks and other open spaces. Mr. Cowie stated that he will make final revisions, and hopes to have the final R3 Overlay Zone proposal prepared to present to the Planning Commission at the regular meeting on July 13th.
8. Review and Action – Lindon City and UDOT Cooperative Agreement – Signal Light at 700 North Geneva Road. This is a proposed agreement between Lindon City and UDOT for the construction of the infrastructure for a signal light at 700 North Geneva Road. The light itself will not be installed until all state traffic warrants are met.
Mr. Dameron reviewed the item. He stated that the agreement is for the signal light at 700 North Geneva Road. UDOT has requested that the City complete the underground work for the light, which will be installed after required traffic warrants are met. UDOT will reimburse the City for all contractor work. The City will have financial responsibility for the engineering and the plans for the project. He noted that this agreement voids two previous agreements, and that it is a significant financial benefit for the City.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LINDON CITY AND UDOT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR A SIGNAL LIGHT AT 700 NORTH GENEVA ROAD. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL REPORTS –
WATER, SEWER, SOLID WASTE, HOUSING CONSORTIUM
Councilmember Hatch had been asked by Mac Ostergaard to inquire as to the status of the piping project for the storm water ditch located on his property. Mr. Dameron informed Councilmember Hatch that the City will coordinate with Mr. Ostergaard as the project is designed and constructed.
TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, ADMINISTRATION
No items were reported.
PUBLIC SAFETY, COURT, BUILDING INSPECTIONS
Councilmember Bath inquired as to the security light on the water pump house for well #1 located on Center Street. He stated that the light is very bright, and should be looked at to determine if a change is necessary to reduce the brightness of the light.
PARKS, RECREATION, ENGINEERING, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER
Councilmember Anthony reported that he had met earlier in the day with residents in the area of the Squaw Hollow Park/Debris Basin. He stated that residents are working cooperatively to resolve issues, and that the plans are moving along nicely. Mr. Dameron observed that residents in the area are aware that the primary purpose of the park is as a debris basin. Residents are aware that no permanent structures can be placed in the bottom of the basin, and have requested that the playground equipment be placed near the street in order for parents to be able to see their children when at the playground.
GENERAL PLAN, STREETS & SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS
No items were reported.
ADMINISTRATORS REPORT
Mr. Dameron reviewed dates for events, including the Northeast Utah Valley Transit meeting on July 14th and the City summer party on July 15th at 6:00 p.m. He also reminded the Council that the sod laying party at Hollow Park will take place Saturday, July 16th at 7:00 a.m. He asked the Council if anyone was planning to attend the Adair barbeque. Several Councilmembers stated that they are planning to attend. The project tracking list was reviewed. Mr. Dameron reported that recycling accounts had increased to 290 this month. Mr. Dameron informed Councilmember Anthony that that a Recreation Task Force meeting is scheduled for July 28th at 5:00 p.m. in Alpine. Councilmember Anthony stated that he has a Squaw Hollow Park meeting scheduled for the same evening. Councilmember Carpenter noted that he had seen an article in the newspaper which indicated that Pleasant Grove had closed their recreation program to non-residents. Mr. Dameron observed that Lindon City has been working cooperatively with Pleasant Grove City to provide recreation programs to Lindon residents, and felt that the closure would not apply to Lindon. Mr. Dameron will follow up with Pleasant Grove officials. Mr. Dameron informed Mayor Acerson that the next Mayor’s Open House is scheduled for July 14th. Mayor Acerson reported that he will be out of town on that date. Mr. Dameron stated that a list will be provided for residents who wish to speak to the Mayor, and individual meetings can be scheduled at another time.
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
ADJOURN –
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 1:00 A.M. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
APPROVED - July 19, 2005
_____________________________________
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
______________________________
Jeff Acerson, Mayor
|
|
|
