|
|
Home » City Government » Council » Schedule: Agendas and Minutes 2005 » Council Minutes 2005 » September 20, 2005
September 20, 2005
The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, September 20, 2005, beginning at 7:00 p.m., at the Lindon City Center, City Council Chambers, 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Jeff Acerson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Linda Nelson, Lindon Resident
Invocation: Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
PRESENT ABSENT
Jeff Acerson, Mayor Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Eric Anthony, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Bruce Carpenter, Councilmember
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
Adam Cowie, Planning Director
Debra Cullimore, Deputy Recorder
The meeting was called to order at: 7:04 p.m.
MINUTES – The minutes of the regular meeting of September 6, 2005 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 3, Line 41: change the word “on” to the word “are.”
Page 5, Line 46: change the word “in” to the word “a.”
Page 6, Line 33: insert the words “regarding alternate route B2” after the word “consultation.”
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 6, 2005 MEETING AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
OPEN SESSION –
No public comment.
MAYOR’S COMMENTS/REPORT -
Mayor Acerson reported on the Utah League of Cities and Town Conference attended by the Mayor and several Councilmembers September 14-16. Mayor Acerson stated that they received valuable training and information that will be beneficial to the City. Mayor Acerson also reported on discussions conducted regarding proposed changes to the distribution of sales tax revenue to cities. Following extensive discussion, league representative felt that the status quo for tax distribution should be maintained. League Representatives will lobby the legislature to request that no change in sales tax revenue distribution take place.
Mayor Acerson also reported that North Utah County Mayors are scheduled to meet with County Commissioner Larry Ellertson this week to discuss the enclosure of the Murdock Canal. Mayor Acerson hopes to have an updated report on the status of the canal enclosure at the next regular City Council meeting.
CONSENT AGENDA –
No items.
CURRENT BUSINESS -
1. Preliminary Plat – Walker Subdivision. This is a request by Ron Walker and Lisa Dixon for preliminary subdivision approval of Walker Subdivision (Deep Lot), 2 lots, in the R1-20 zone at 421 North 150 East. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions.
Ron Walker and Lisa Dixon were present at the meeting for this item. Mr. Cowie reviewed the application. He stated that the application is for approval of a 2-.lot minor subdivision under the Deep Lot ordinance. Mr. Cowie noted that the area of the subdivision is sufficient to allow two 20,000 square foot lots. The new lot will be located behind the existing dwelling at 421 North 150 East, with driveway access from 150 East. Mr. Cowie commented on several sheds on the site which may be currently located in existing utility easements. He stated that it will be necessary to relocate the sheds outside the required easements setbacks, or have the easements vacated by the utility companies. Mr. Cowie noted that there was no public comment during the Planning Commission meeting, and that the Planning Commission had recommended approval with a 5-1 vote. Chairperson Sweeten voted nay to the recommended approval, due to the fact that he felt proper noticing may not have occurred. Chairperson Sweeten noted that typically any deep lot application elicits a response from neighboring property owners. Mr. Cowie stated that several of the notices had been returned because the addresses were not current, and that he is certain that required notices were sent to property owners in the area.
Councilmember Carpenter inquired as to any discussion which may have occurred during the Planning Commission meeting regarding the precedent which may be set by approval of a deep lot subdivision. Mr. Cowie stated that the Planning Commission had not discussed this in detail. Councilmember Carpenter read from the City Code, 17.32.320, which indicates that “Subdividing hardships created by a previous development plan, thereby making a deep lot necessary to develop property, shall not be considered as a reason for approval of a deep lot.” Councilmember Carpenter noted that previous deep lot applications have been denied if the deep lot is necessary due to a “self imposed hardship.”
Councilmember Anthony observed that paragraph 2 of the ordinance specifies that the minimum required lot size “shall not include the area of any right-of-way which traverses the lot or the private driveway access for the lot.” He noted that it appears that the access area has been included in the lot measurements for this application.
Councilmember Carpenter suggested that the application be returned to the Planning Commission for further review of the implementation of the ordinance to specific deep lot applications. The Council discussed several previous deep lot applications which could be used for comparison. Councilmember Hatch stated that to the best of his recollection, the possibility of future streets had been discussed in relation to previous applications, but that he did not recall the specifics of any discussion relating to “self imposed hardships.” Councilmember Carpenter observed that standards must be applied consistently to all applications in order to maintain fairness. He again observed that he felt further review by the Planning Commission would be necessary. Mayor Acerson called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST BY RON WALKER AND LISA DIXON PENDING REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
1. THAT THE SIZE OF BOTH SUBDIVISION LOTS IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE 20,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.
2. THAT THE CONDITIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ORDINANCE ITEM #1 ARE ESTABLISHED ACCORDING TO PREVIOUS PRECIDENT.
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Preliminary Plat – Lindon Gateway, Plat “C”. This is a request by Daniel Donaldson for preliminary subdivision approval of Lindon Gateway Subdivision, Plat “C”, 2 lots, in the R&B zone at 380 South Technology Court. The Planning Commission recommended approval with no conditions.
Mr. Cowie introduced Daniel Donaldson as the representative for this item. Mr. Cowie stated that the applicant is requesting approval of a new subdivision plat to expand an existing property in order to allow construction of a larger parking area to serve the existing building on the site. The building will house an in-bound call center which will require additional parking to accommodate the projected number of employees.
Councilmember Carpenter stated that he had been present during review of this item by the Planning Commission. He felt that any potential concerns had been addressed during that meeting, and that further discussion would not be necessary. Mayor Acerson called for further comments or discussion. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DANIEL DONALDSON FOR A 2-LOT MINOR SUBDIVISION TITLED LINDON GATEWAY PLAT C. COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED
Mr. Donaldson commented that he would like to convey appreciation for the efforts of Mr. Cowie in completing this application and approval in such an efficient manner. Mr. Donaldson observed that the project is time sensitive, and that it was necessary to complete the process as quickly as possible, and that Mr. Cowie had handled the process very efficiently. Mr. Donaldson noted that the proposed business will create approximately 500 new jobs, and will be a great benefit to the area. Mayor Acerson commented that Lindon is excited to have the business locate in the City.
3. Preliminary Plat – Old Station Square, Plat “A” (Revisions). This is a request by BMA Construction for preliminary subdivision approval of a revised Old Station Square, Plat “A”, 9 lots, in the CG zone at Lakeview Drive and State Street. The original plat has not yet been recorded. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions.
Brigham Ashton and Mike Marchbanks were the representatives for this item. Mr. Cowie reviewed the application, which is a request for a revision to the approved plat. The revision would subdivide lot 1 located in the northwest corner of the proposed development. Lot 1 has sufficient square footage to allow the subdivision, and the applicants felt it would be beneficial to include the new lot on the plat before it is recorded. Mr. Cowie stated that the second part of the proposal is a fifty foot extension to the proposed State Street tunnel and cross easements to lots 5, 6, and 7 of the development. The proposed tunnel extension would extend the length of the tunnel to approximately 165 feet. The Planning Commission felt there may be significant safety concerns in relation to the length of the tunnel, as well as pedestrian traffic in relation to the vehicular traffic on the associated lots. Mr. Cowie presented photographs of a similar tunnel located in Provo for comparison.
Councilmember Anthony inquired as to estimated costs associated with the tunnel extension. Mr. Cowie stated that the City engineer has communicated that the cost of the tunnel extension would be offset by the land provided by the developer for the trail area in the development. Councilmember Anthony requested additional information regarding cross easements to lots 5, 6, and 7 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Cowie stated that the intent of the cross easements would be to provide some feasibility on the plat for access to those lots.
Mr. Marchbanks stated that the purpose of the request is to add final details to the plat, and that they had felt that extending the tunnel further west may address some safety concerns related to the associated pedestrian traffic. Mr. Marchbanks observed that the Planning Commission had pointed out some legitimate concerns associated with extension of the tunnel. Mr. Ashton suggested the possibility of reducing the length of the retaining structures at the entrance to the tunnel to accommodate cross easements. Mr. Cowie stated that due to the grade of the area, the length of the retaining structures could not be reduced. Mr. Ashton noted that the intent of the request is not to extend the tunnel, but to provide access to lot 8 from other areas of the development. Councilmember Carpenter asked the applicants if extension of the tunnel is not approved, if they would want the recommended cross easement between lot 5 and lot 7. Mr. Ashton felt that the recommended cross easement would be a reasonable solution, as they would connect lot 8 to other areas of the development.
Mr. Cowie noted that the revision to the plat may eliminate Phase II of the development, which is specified as lot 9 in the original plat. The existing lot 9 will become lot 10 of the revised plat. Mr. Cowie suggested that lot 10 should be specified as Phase II in any motion.
Councilmember Carpenter asked if fill and retaining structures would be used along the edge of the trail. Mr. Ashton pointed out that a fifteen foot dedication has been provided for the trail, with an additional ten foot easement to address slope and retaining issues.
Councilmember Anthony asked the applicants if they would be amenable to the cross easements recommended by the Planning Commission. Mr. Ashton stated that the cross easements would give access lots 5 and 7, and would connect lot 8 to other areas of the development. He felt that the recommended cross easements would be acceptable. Councilmember Anthony noted that there may be significant safety issues associated with the cross easements. The Council discussed several options to address possible pedestrian safety issues, such as the use of marked pedestrian right-of-ways, pedestrian street crossing flags, or stop signs for vehicular traffic. Mr. Cowie commented that an engineering review would be appropriate to address safety concerns associated with the cross easements.
Mr. Ashton commented on necessary changes to two power pole structures due to placement of the roadway in the proposed development. He stated that relocation of the pole adjacent to the roadway in the development will necessitate a change to one pole in the City Park located east of the development. Mr. Ashton stated that the pole in the park will require either guy wires or replacement of the existing wooden pole with a metal pole. Replacement of the existing pole would be a greater expense than the addition of guy wires. Mr. Dameron suggested the possibility of sharing the cost of replacement between the City and the developer. Mr. Ashton felt that cost sharing of the pole replacement would be an acceptable solution. Councilmember Bath noted that the pole is located near the entrance to the park. He observed that if a realignment of the street were to take place in the future, relocation of the pole may be necessary. He suggested that the engineer review the location of the pole in relation to any future road alignment, as well as in relation to an existing mature tree which may require removal if the metal pole is installed in the present location. Councilmember Bath felt that both of these concerns could be addressed by placing the pole in an alternate location.
Mayor Acerson observed that an engineering review would be appropriate prior to approval of the plat. Mr. Ashton stated that it would be his preference to begin construction as soon as possible, and inquired as to the possibility of beginning construction of the sewer system prior to approval of the plat. Mr. Dameron stated that construction of the sewer prior to plat approval can begin at the risk of the developer. Mr. Marchbanks stated that they would prefer recording of the plat prior to beginning construction. Mr. Dameron suggested that the plat be recorded without the cross easements, and that the cross easements could be added to the plat at a later date. Mr. Ashton asked if the plat could be approved prior to the engineering review. Councilmember Carpenter felt that an engineering review would be necessary prior to any approval.
Councilmember Carpenter requested that the minutes reflect the following information and recommendations regarding Council discussion of this item:
1. That the Council is not in favor of the proposed tunnel extension.
2. That proposed cross easements should be reviewed by the City engineer prior to approval of the subdivision re-plat request.
3. That the City would prefer the power pole in the City park be metal rather than use guy wires on the existing wooden pole, and that the City will meet with the developer to work out the details of cost sharing for installation of the metal pole.
4. That lot 10 of the subdivision will be Phase II of the development upon completion of the new road and vacation of the associated portion of Lakeview Drive.
5. That the alignment of the power pole in the City park be considered in relation to future road alignment and the existing mature tree adjacent to the pole.
6. That the subdivision of lot 1 would be acceptable.
Mayor Acerson called for further comments or discussion. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REVISED OLD STATION SQUARE SUBDIVISION PLAT REQUEST TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Ashton inquired as to the installation of the sidewalk structures on lots 5 and seven. Mr. Dameron informed Mr. Ashton that those issues could be addressed with DRC staff.
4. Review and Action – Conditional Use Permit – PacifiCorp/Utah Power Electrical Transmission Line Up-grade Along 2000 West and 200 South. This is a request by PacifiCorp/Utah Power to upgrade the high voltage transmission lines along 2000 West and 200 South and to allow a change from a lower two pole structure to a higher mono-pole structure and alter a portion of the existing routing. The City Council continued this item from the meeting of September 6, 2005 to allow time to conduct an independent cost analysis of the route labeled “B2” and to dialogue with Vineyard Town concerning the width of 200 South and the location of the new mono-poles in relation to this street. PacifiCorp has now indicated that the “B2” route is acceptable and requests action from the City Council on their request for a Conditional Use Permit.
Ken Short, Delynn Rodeback, and Michael Doyle were present as representatives for this item. Mr. Cowie noted that this item had been continued from the previous City Council meeting pending an engineering review of the viability of route “B2” as an alternate route. The City contacted Keith Heigerhorst, an independent electrical engineer, regarding the review. However, prior to the review being conducted, PacifiCorp representatives communicated that they would be willing to consider route “B2” as an alternate route. In the previous meeting, the Council had expressed a desire to discuss placement of the poles along 200 South with Vineyard representatives. Mr. Cowie stated that the City has communicated with Noah Gordon, Vineyard’s engineer. Mr. Gordon has indicated that Vineyard is aware of the placement of the poles adjacent to the roadway. Mr. Cowie referred to information in an engineering review in the information packets provided to the Council at this meeting which indicated that considering a 45 mile per hour speed limit, a minimum 18-20 foot buffer should be provided between the roadway and the power poles. If less than the recommended buffer is provided, the engineer recommended the use of some sort of barrier around the base of each pole, such as a jersey barrier, orange traffic barrels, or a guard rail. Mr. Cowie noted that relocation of some of the poles may have an impact on wetlands in the area, and may not be allowed by the Army Corp of Engineers.
Mr. Cowie also noted that the landfill board has explored the possibility of an additional access road to the transfer station adjacent to 2000 West. Mr. Doyle noted that the access road is proposed at a twenty foot width, and will be used for access to the landfill on Saturdays only. Preliminary plans show a ten foot separation between the existing road and the additional access road. Mr. Doyle observed that there would be sufficient room to locate the poles between the two roads. He stated that the City engineer had specified a seven to ten foot buffer between the road and the poles in previous conversations, and that an eighteen foot buffer had not been previously discussed. Mr. Doyle stated that UDOT standards specify an eighteen inch set back from curb considering a 45 mile per hour speed limit.
Mr. Short noted that a ninety foot separation is required between the new power lines and any existing power lines. He also observed that route “B2” would require four total structures, while route “A1” would require three structures. The additional structure would be necessary to accommodate access to the future Shoreline Substation.
Councilmember Carpenter inquired as to the length of the lines between the poles on both proposed routes. He noted that it appeared that the distance between two of the poles could be extended, there by reducing the number of poles on route “B2”. Mr. Short stated that the distance between poles is designed to accommodate distribution lines which extend east and west, as well as transmission lines going north and south crossing on the same pole. Mr. Short commented that the likelihood of “blow out” of the transformers is reduced if the span between poles is shorter.
Mr. Doyle noted that the lines for route “B2” will extend over four parcels of land, while route “A1” would pass over only the transfer station property. Mr. Rodeback requested that the City assist PacifiCorp in negotiating right-of-ways with individual property owners.
Councilmember Carpenter stated that he felt further discussion should be conducted with Vineyard representatives to ensure the proposed poles are not in the right of way associated with 200 South. Mr. Dameron suggested that the City may want to proceed with the independent engineering review requested in the previous meeting to ensure that the poles are in the best location, and that any possible safety concerns have been addressed. Councilmember Carpenter noted that Lindon City does not have control over decisions which are made in regard to placement of the poles in Vineyard, but that the City can make requests to alleviate safety and right of way concerns. Councilmember Carpenter commented on an editorial which had appeared in the Daily Herald Newspaper which expressed the opinion that cities should not be expected to absorb the cost of under grounding utility lines, but that those costs should be passed along to consumers of electricity. Councilmember Carpenter and Councilmember Bath expressed agreement with that sentiment.
Following further discussion, it was the general feeling of the Council that concerns relating to this application had not been sufficiently addressed to approve the conditional use at this time. Councilmember Carpenter stated that he felt that major concerns would not be affected by continuing this item, and that any elements which the City has control over could be addressed as conditions of approval. Mayor Acerson called for further discussion. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CONTINUE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION BY PACIFICORP/UTAH POWER PENDING THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
1. THAT THE CITY REVIEW INFORMATION OBTAINED FROM AN INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING REVIEW REGARDING PLACEMENT OF THE POLES AND ROUTING OF THE LINES.
2. THAT DISCUSSION WITH PROPERTY OWNERS REGARDING NECESSARY RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION TAKE PLACE TO DETERMINE THEIR WILLINGNESS TO COOPERATE.
3. THAT DOCUMENTATION BE PROVIDED SHOWING THAT POLES ALONG 200 SOUTH WILL BE PLACED A MINIMUM OF 18 FEET BACK OF CURB.
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE WAS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER NAY
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED (3-1) WITH ONE ABSENT.
5. Design Review – R3-Overlay Zone – Proposed Subdivision. This is a request by Fieldstone Homes to review a proposed subdivision layout in the R3 Overlay Zone with the City Council before a formal application is submitted. The Planning Commission has met with the developer and has given him some ideas and opinions.
Mr. Cowie stated that Fieldstone representative had requested to continue this item until later in the meeting, as the representative making the presentation for this meeting was en-route from another meeting in Park City and should arrive at this meeting shortly.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CONTINUE AGENDA ITEM #5 UNTIL LATER IN THE MEETING. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
6. Review and Action – Reimbursement Ordinance Application – Ostler Industrial Park. This is a request by Mike Ahlin for the City Council to consider a reimbursement agreement application for recently completed road improvements in the Ostler Industrial Park along 1800 West. If approved, an ordinance will be prepared which officially binds the parties into an agreement.
Mike Ahlin was present as representative for this item. Mr. Dameron gave an overview of the reimbursement agreement requested by Mr. Ahlin. Mr. Dameron stated that a portion of the work on 1800 West adjacent to the Ford property had been completed by Mr. Ahlin in approximately 2002, with the remainder of the work being recently completed. The proposed agreement would allow reimbursement to Mr. Ahlin for work completed recently. Mr. Dameron stated that the City engineer had reviewed the proposed agreement, and had requested additional time to review specific amounts listed in the agreement.
Mr. Alan Ford, the neighboring property owner to the west, expressed that he felt he was being unduly penalized for work which had been completed that did not directly benefit him in relation to development of his property. Mr. Dameron pointed out that if Mr. Ford does not access the improvements to the property, he is not obligated to pay any portion of the reimbursement. Mayor Acerson clarified that the intent of reimbursement agreements is to allow a land owner or developer who installs improvements which benefit any other land owner to recover a portion of the cost of installation of the improvements when they are accessed by the other land owner. Mr. Ford stated that he felt that costs for work which was completed in the past should not be a part of this agreement. Mr. Ford also expressed concern that in the event that he decides to sell, the agreement may be seen as an encumbrance of his property. Mr. Dameron noted that the agreement does not create an encumbrance on the property, but that it may require investigation of the agreement by a purchaser.
The Council reviewed several possible discrepancies in the proposed costs shown in the agreement, as well as other specifics relating to reimbursement agreement in general. Mr. Ahlin agreed to review the stated costs in the proposed agreement further with the City engineer and Mr. Ford to assure the amounts specified in the agreement are consistent with actual cost. Mr. Ahlin stated that he wanted to ensure that the amount Mr. Ford would be required to pay for accessing the installed improvements would be fair.
Item #5 Continued - R3 Overlay Design Review –
Tom Spencer, Land Development Manager, and Kyle Honeycutt, Land Project Manager, were the representatives for Fieldstone Developers for this item. Griffin Johnson of Fieldstone Developers was also present at the meeting. Mr. Cowie reviewed the request. He stated that the parcels for the proposed development are located in an overlay zone in the existing LI zone. The R3 Overlay does not affect the underlying zoning in the area. Mr. Cowie noted that during discussion of this item, the Planning Commission had expressed concern that their opinions had not been sufficiently conveyed to the City Council. The Planning Commission felt that the R3 Overly ordinance should not have been approved, and that the proposed development is not consistent with the type of development the Planning Commission is trying to achieve in that area of the City. Mr. Cowie addressed possible drainage issues in the area associated with the Proctor Ditch, which currently accommodates storm drainage Lindon City as well as neighboring cities. The applicants are currently proposing a detention basin located in the large park area. Mr. Cowie stated that if drainage associated with the Proctor Ditch could be addressed, the developers could provide a minimal area for detention, and relocate the majority of the park to the area across the street. Relocation of the park would create better access for area residents.
Mayor Acerson noted that the result of approval of the R3 Overlay Ordinance had not accomplished the type of development envisioned by the Council. He felt that the limits set by the R3 Overlay had reduced the opportunity for creative elements which would make the proposed development attractive and consistent with the desires of the Council and the Planning Commission. Councilmember Anthony agreed that the proposed development has no feeling of openness, and the initial proposal submitted by Fieldstone some time ago, while higher in density, had a more open feel which seemed to be achieved through the use of clustering. Councilmember Anthony noted that while this proposal is lower in density, it does not convey a sense of community.
Councilmember Bath inquired as to the density of the original proposal. Mr. Johnson stated that the original proposal submitted by Trophy Homes had included approximately 450 units, with a density of approximately 5.8 units per acre. The current proposal includes approximately three units per acre. Mr. Johnson noted that the developer has been in discussion with the City for over a year trying to come to an agreement for the development. He stated that they had requested this review to illustrate the “box” the developer has been put in by the R3 Overlay ordinance. Mr. Johnson suggested that minor changes to the ordinance, such as allowing lot averaging rather than minimum lot size, would create a greater opportunity for use of creative elements in the development. Mr. Johnson observed that the proposed development is in compliance with the ordinance, and that lot averaging is the key to more creative use of the available area and the layout of the development. Mr. Johnson observed that the constraints of the ordinance push the developer away from creative elements.
Lindon resident Linda Nelson inquired as to the possibility of eliminating the moderate income housing element from the proposed development. Councilmember Carpenter noted that State law requires that the City provide an opportunity for affordable housing in existing and future development. Mr. Honeycutt noted that he has previously worked as a developer in the Las Vegas area. He gave comparisons of developments in Las Vegas which have used lot averaging successfully to create a variety of housing types within a development. Mr. Spencer noted that lot averaging would not increase the number of proposed units, but rather allow for more creative placement of structures and amenities in the development.
Mr. Johnson noted that the developer is not requesting a change to the ordinance, and they do not want to delay construction while a review takes place. The Council discussed various possibilities for changes to the ordinance, as well as engineering issues associated with the detention area and storm drainage for the development. Mr. Johnson noted that the developer has purchased a portion of the land for the development based on the ordinance. Mayor Acerson suggested that a review of the ordinance would be advisable prior to approval of the proposed development. Following further discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that the R3 Overlay ordinance should be reviewed for possible revisions. The Council noted that possible revisions should be completed as expeditiously as possible. Mayor Acerson called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO IMPOSE A MORATORIUM ON R3 OVERLAY APPLICATIONS FOR A MAXIMUM OF SIXTY DAYS TO FACILITATE REVIEW OF THE R3 OVERLAY ORDINANCE, AND TO EXPEDITE THE REVIEW PROCESS. COUNCILMEMBER ANTHONY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
7. Report – Lindon Days Committee. The Council will hear a report from the Lindon Days Committee Chairs, Linda Nelson and Nancy Zundel, concerning their findings and conclusions regarding Lindon Days. They will also present the Council with 25 copies of a DVD entitled “A More Perfect Union” to be distributed by the Mayor and Council for educational purposes. This item was continued from the meeting of September 6, 2005.
Linda Nelson and Nancy Zundel approached the Council to give a report on the 2005 Lindon Days Celebration. Ms. Nelson stated that a final accounting report is not yet available, as individual events have not completed the accounting process. The final figures for the celebration will be forwarded to the Council as soon as they become available.
Ms. Nelson and Ms. Zundel went on to discuss various events from the 2005 celebration, as well as possible additions or changes for the 2006 celebration. The council gave input regarding elements they would like to see continued in the future as well as elements which may be changed in the coming years. Ms. Nelson and Ms. Zundel have agreed to chair the event next year as well, but will be working with other individuals who they anticipate will assume the responsibilities of chairing the event in 2007.
Mayor Acerson and the Council expressed appreciation to Ms. Nelson and Ms. Zundel for their time and effort in carrying out the celebration.
8. Resolution – Boundary Adjustment with Pleasant Grove (Resolution #2005-15). This proposed resolution will indicate the intent of Lindon City to adjust a portion of the common boundary with Pleasant Grove City at approximately 800 North, between 200 East and Main Street in Lindon City, and at 1000 South, between 1100 East and 1320 East in Pleasant Grove City. The same resolution is on the agenda for consideration by Pleasant Grove City this evening.
Brian Haws, City attorney, introduced this item. He stated that this resolution will begin the process of adjustment of a portion of the boundary line between Lindon City and Pleasant Grove City along the Pleasant Grove 1000 South Street. Mr. Haws noted that the City been in contact with Pleasant Grove officials, and that both cities are aware of the need to make the adjustment in order to have a consistent boundary line. Mr. Haws noted that the process will include required published public notice for three consecutive weeks, noticing of affected property owners of the content of the resolution with a specified time period for any response, and a public hearing during City Council meeting following the required noticing. Mr. Haws stated that the Pleasant Grove City Council is also addressing a resolution to begin the boundary adjustment process at their meeting tonight. Mr. Haws observed that if 25% of the affected property owners are opposed to the adjustment, the cities will be unable to move forward. Councilmember Carpenter noted a correction in item #1 of the Resolution which would change the word “the” to the word “with.”
There were several citizens present in the audience to address this item. Steve Phelon is considering purchasing a portion of the affected property. The Fryer family was also present, and expressed opposition to the boundary adjustment. The Fryer family submitted a written statement of opposition, which is included as an attachment to the minutes. The citizens present were informed that they will have the opportunity to comment further during the public hearing to address this matter.
Mayor Acerson called for further comments or discussion from the Council regarding the Resolution before them. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COUNCILMEMBER CARPENTER MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 2005-15 INDICATING THE INTENT OF LINDON CITY TO ADJUST A PORTION OF ITS COMMON BOUNDARY WITH PLEASANT GROVE CITY WITH THE NOTED CORRECTION ON #1. COUNCILMEMBER BATH 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.
TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS, ADMINISTRATION –
Councilmember Bayless was not present at the meeting.
PUBLIC SAFETY, COURT, BUILDING INSPECTIONS –
Councilmember Bath inquired as to the time frame for installation of the traffic light at 700 North State Street. Mr. Dameron informed him that the process has begun, and that signage is required to be in place for a period of time prior to beginning construction to allow drivers to become familiar with the construction area.
PARKS, RECREATION, ENGINEERING, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER –
Councilmember Anthony reported that the Tree Advisory Board is currently reviewing placement of Trees for Hollow Park and will be making recommendations.
GENERAL PLAN, STREETS & SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC BUILDINGS –
Councilmember Carpenter reported that the General Plan Committee meetings will continue for approximately three more weeks. Councilmember Carpenter stated that during discussion with the committee regarding moderate income housing, the Committee felt that some clustering could be utilized to help create additional open space, and that some alternative to single family dwellings would create variety in the community, as well as help create open space. Details have not been discussed at this time.
Councilmember Carpenter commented on a session he had attended at the Utah League of Cities and Towns Conference which addressed inventory and replacement of aging infrastructure. Presenters at the conference suggested reserving some revenue to replace infrastructure items as it becomes necessary. Mr. Dameron observed that the majority of the infrastructure in Lindon is relatively new. Councilmember Carpenter suggested that the City begin to formulate a long range plan for maintenance and replacement of infrastructure in the future. Mr. Dameron suggested reviewing this item at the next engineering coordination meeting to be held the tomorrow.
ADMINISTRATORS REPORT -
Mr. Dameron reported on the following items:
1. Engineering coordination meeting will be held on Wednesday, September 21, 2005. Councilmember Carpenter will attend.
2. There will be a joint training session for the City Council, Planning Commission, and Board of Adjustments on September 22 at 6:00 p.m. The training will address LUDMA requirements recently approved by the legislature.
3. The Council reviewed the project tracking list.
4. Mr. Cowie is addressing the United States flag which was installed at Low Book Sales. No permit was obtained for installation of the flag, and the flagpole exceeds the maximum allowable height specified in the City Code.
5. There are currently 314 recycling accounts.
6. CRS Architects is continuing the revision process for commercial design guidelines.
7. The Council was given minutes from the Recreation Task Force meeting.
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 12:00 A.M. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
APPROVED – October 4, 2005
____________________________________
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
_________________________________
Jeff Acerson, Mayor
|
|
|
