|
|
Home » City Government » Planning Commission » Minutes Archive; 2000 - 2002 » Planning Commission Minutes 2001 » April 25, 2001
April 25, 2001
The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, April 25, 2001 in the Lindon City Council Chambers at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Loren Morse
Invocation: Bill Johanson
PRESENT
Loren Morse, Chairman
Ron Anderson, Commissioner (arrived 8:50 P.M.)
Lori Atchison, Commissioner
Bill Johanson, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner (arrived 7:50 P.M.)
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
Adam Cowie, Planning Intern ABSENT
Jeff Southard, Commissioner
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
The meeting began at 7:07 P.M.
BUSINESS
1. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the regular meeting of April 11, 2001 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 4, Line 15: Replace the words “verified that” with the words “asked if.”
Page 5, Line 5,6: Replace the word “SIGNED” with the word “VOTED.” Add the phrase “EXCEPT COMMISSIONER PETERS WHO VOTED NAY” to the end of the sentence.
Page 6, Line 17: Replace the word “made” after the word “required” with the word “make.”
Page 8, Line 7,8: Delete the phrase “, but thought that with only nine homes and the easement worked out with Bentleys, the half street may be enough for now.”
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 11, 2001 AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER PETERS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Public Comment
John Hansen, Lindon Mobile Home Park, requested permission to replace an older ten-foot-wide mobile home with a new 35-foot-wide manufactured home. Planning Director Kevin Smith told the Commissioners that staff was concerned with off-street parking in this mobile home park. He reminded the Commission that Mr. Hansen had appeared before them on a previous occasion to discuss replacing older mobile homes. Parking had been a major concern of the Commissioners at this meeting. Mr. Smith displayed an overhead transparency of the aerial view of the neighborhood to familiarize the Commission with the area of concern. He then showed a transparency of the proposed site plan.
Mr. Hansen and the Commissioners discussed the setbacks and how he proposed to provide two off-street parking stalls. Mr. Hansen proposed to put the mobile home 45-feet from the edge of the street to allow parking in front of the unit. Commissioner Peters questioned the setback from the rear line of the property. Mr. Hansen replied that there was still 50-feet from the rear of the home to the property line. Mr. Smith pointed out that the lots on the other side of the street may have minimal rear yards.
Commissioner Morse asked Mr. Hansen if these units were permanently installed. Mr. Hansen replied that the units are not put on permanent foundations. The spaces are rented to the owners of the units. He informed the Commissioners that this particular unit would be occupied by a single woman. Chairman Morse verified the width of the side yards as six feet. Commissioner Peters asked the width of the asphalt road in front of the unit. Mr. Hansen replied that it was about 30 feet. Commissioner Johanson requested that the front yard of the home have some landscaping and not be totally dedicated to parking.
Commissioner Peters commented that replacing the older home with a new one would improve the character of the mobile home park. Mr. Smith expressed concern that this request was an expansion of a non-conforming use. He told the Commission that he would request an opinion from the City Attorney before issuing a set-up permit. Commissioner Atchison confirmed with Mr. Hansen that the surface of the parking spaces would be either gravel or asphalt.
After discussion, the Commissioners agreed that this proposal was an improvement to the mobile home park and approved the issuance of a permit subject to verification that this proposal is not an expansion of a non-conforming use with the City Attorney.
David Siddoway and Michele Warner(represented by her husband), requested the Planning Commission’s opinion on their proposal to locate a cheerleading school in the MD zone. Mr. Smith informed the Commissioners that the Standard Land Use Table had been amended to allow Indoor Soccer Arenas only with the condition that they be located on the periphery of the zone. Not all indoor recreational uses had been approved for the light industrial zone. He observed that the petitioners would need to apply to change the Standard Land Use Table for their proposed use.
Chairman Morse asked Mr. Smith to explain what zones would permit this use. Mr. Smith replied that the CG, PC or MC zones allowed indoor recreational uses. Mr. Warner explained that a suitable building was not available in these zones at a reasonable rent. Mr. Siddoway informed the Commissioners that a building with a width of 200 feet was needed to accommodate the floor required and a retail spot that large was triple the amount of a similar space in the light industrial zone. He mentioned similar businesses in Pleasant Grove in the industrial zone.
Commissioner Atchison asked if this was an existing building that they proposed to lease. Mr. Warner informed her that the building was an existing structure located on the west side of the freeway on the south side of 200 South. The building location was discussed and the neighboring businesses determined. Mr. Smith inquired the anticipated number of students in a class. Mr. Warner answered approximately 20. Mr. Smith observed that the parking standards of the light industrial zone may not be sufficient. Mr. Warner commented that the classes would not begin until 4:00 P.M. when most of the neighboring businesses would be closing. He also observed that most students’ parents would be dropping-off and picking-up their children and so only limited parking would be needed.
Mr. Smith commented that light industrial uses were required to allow six spaces per unit which he did not feel was sufficient for this use. He also did not feel that the proposed location met the “periphery of the zone” condition. He suggested that the business could be defined as a “school” for identifying appropriate parking standards. Commissioner Johanson agreed that the business provided training.
Commissioner Atchison questioned the applicants on their plans for performances. Mr. Siddoway replied that performances would have to be located at a public school building. Mr. Warner agreed. Mr. Smith suggested that the Planning Commission could restrict the use of the parking if a conditional use permit was issued. He commented that if the other tenants of the building complained, the conditional use permit could be reviewed. Chairman Morse questioned the number of stalls available at this location. Mr. Warner replied that there were six in front of the building, three around the side and a possible twelve that were shared in the parking lot with the other businesses. Commissioner Peters verified that there were nine dedicated parking stalls for this unit.
Chairman Morse observed that the Commissioners had concerns about a commercial use in the light industrial zone. He suggested that the petitioner submit an application to change the standard land use table and possibly poll the other tenants of the building. Commissioner Peters expressed the opinion that he was not opposed to a change if conditions concerning parking were alleviated or the other building tenants were satisfied. The other Commissioners agreed.
Boyd Hooley, a resident of 400 West, expressed concern about a unsafe access. The situation was described and the location determined. Mr. Smith advised Mr. Hooley to address the City Council on this issue. Commissioner Peters suggested a barricade across the access to temporarily solve the safety issue.
3. New Business
Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Smith to report on the City Council’s design review of the Bald Mountain Project. Mr. Smith reported that the City Council had instructed the developers to complete the 1200 East roadway to the extreme southeastern edge of the property and apply the Hillside Ordinance to the appropriate lots. He reported the discussion and reasoning of these decisions. Commissioner Peters reported that the developers had expressed discontent with the requirements.
4. Skywriter Signs - 105 South 1385 West - Review Architectural Design for Building
This is a request by Gayle McMurray to change the style of architectural treatment to his metal building constructed in Westlind Industrial Park.
Mr. Smith reported that Mr. McMurray had called to excuse himself for medical reasons. He informed the Commissioners that the proposed alternative methods of bringing the architectural treatment into compliance would be ready by the next meeting. Commissioner Peters suggested a written notice to Mr. McMurray that the item would be decided at the next meeting. Chairman Morse agreed and suggested some wording that should be included. The Commissioners agreed to continue this item to the next meeting in May.
5. Keetch Subdivision, Plat “A” - 250 North State Street - Plat Vacation - Public Hearing
The applicant is requesting to vacate the 4-lot subdivision approved by the City 2 years ago.
Mr. Smith presented this application to vacate a 4-lot subdivision plat. He described the location of the parcel as immediately north of the Somewhere Inn Time Bed and Breakfast Inn on State Street. He told the Commission that the developer had recorded the subdivision and bonded for the construction of the road, however, the lots had not sold. The bond was now expired. The bank holding the bond and the developer have requested that the plat be vacated so the road and improvements don’t need to be installed. Vacating the plat will make one parcel of the 4-lot subdivision. Mr. Smith informed the Commission that he had recorded notices against the lots prior to the bond expiring that informed potential buyers that no improvements were included.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER PETERS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Chairman Morse asked the audience if they had any comment on this item. There was none. After discussion, COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY BRUCE KEETCH TO VACATE PLAT “A” OF KEETCH SUBDIVISION AT APPROXIMATELY 250 NORTH STATE AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
(Commissioner Nixon arrived at 7:50 P.M.)
6. Center Street Estates - 800 East Center Street - Design Review
This is a request by the applicant to discuss City policy on half streets with the Planning Commission.
Mr. Smith told the Planning Commission that the applicant had requested this discussion on the appropriate minimum width for a half road. He had photographed several street cross-sections around the city to show different widths in use. He informed the Commission that the General Plan designates a 66-foot right-of-way for Center Street. He noted that the City Engineer had prepared a Center Street road alignment map.
Commissioner Peters verified that Center Street would definitely be crossing the canal as shown in the General Plan. The pictures were reviewed and the various widths of roads discussed. He asked if the neighbor to the south of this project was still adamant that he was not interested in development, or if something had been worked out with him. Mr. Smith asked the Commission to decide how much road would be required to provide minimum access for the 20 homes proposed in this project and the Bentley’s back lot.
Commissioner Peters asked how much width was available in front of the Bentley’s. The pictures were examined closer. Commissioner Peters, upon being shown a picture of 600 North, commented that this street was too narrow for existing conditions. Commissioner Nixon asked him to explain. Commissioner Peters cited reasons of curbside parking blocking the travel lanes, low visibility for turning, and unsafe shoulders.
Chairman Morse asked Mr. Bang if he had any comments. Mr. Bang observed that the access was owned by Mr. and Mrs. Bentley. He had just left a meeting with the Bentleys and felt that an agreement had been reached “in principle.” Commissioner Peters asked the width of the easement in front of Bentley’s home. Mr. Bang estimated 25 feet. Mr. Brad Olsen, Mr. Bang’s partner, asked the Commissioners to consider allowing a half street in the Bentley’s 125-foot-long 25-feet-wide easement as a “temporary situation.” He reiterated that the Walkers were disinterested in developing their parcel. He pointed out that this proposal was not for 20 homes, but only for 9 lots. Commissioner Nixon asked if the new site plan included a temporary turn-around on the end of Center, below the canal, as requested. The new site plan was examined.
Chairman Morse asked if the traffic study had been completed. Mr. Smith replied that the traffic study had not been received from the engineer yet. The Center Street road alignment map was studied. Commissioner Peters asked if the reimbursement ordinance had a time limit. Mr. Smith replied that the limit was 7 years. Commissioner Peters observed that allowing a half street pushed the access problem into the future and alluded to the problem with 600 North Street. Commissioner Nixon commented that the issue was safely accessing the lots. Commissioner Peters advocated acquiring the full width of access.
Mr. Smith asked the Commissioners to decide a minimum width for a half street. He asked if the 25-feet in front of Bentley’s was sufficient for a minimum half street to serve 8 lots. Commissioner Nixon commented that it was obvious that 50-feet of asphalt was not needed. He observed that it was also obvious that 24-feet was not enough as evidenced by 600 North. He proposed that the minimum access be two 10-foot travel lanes and an 8-foot shoulder on one side or 28-feet total. He then posed the question, “Would we allow 24-feet?”
Mr. Olsen proposed to restrict parking on a 24-foot road. Commissioner Nixon observed that restricting the parking would not be fair to the Bentleys. Mr. Olsen pointed out that the Bentleys would have curbside parking along the new 750 East Street on the side. He asserted that the Bentleys would not have their parking taken away, just moved around the corner. Commissioner Nixon did not feel that the Planning Commission could impose that upon the Bentleys without their agreement. Mr. Olsen asked if the Planning Commission would approve 8 lots on a 24-foot access road if he could get the Bentleys agreement to restrict parking. Commissioner Peters objected by pointing out that it was not working on 600 North, so “why would it work here?” Chairman Morse asked if the City Engineer had a recommendation. Mr. Smith replied negatively.
Chairman Morse asked if there were comments from the audience. Mr. Gordon Van Wagoner, representative for the Walkers, reiterated that the Walkers were not interested in development of their land at the present. He questioned whether the developers had really worked things out with the Bentleys. He objected to being forced to sell or look like the “bad guy.” Mr. Smith assured Mr. Van Wagoner that he would not be forced to sell because there was no pressing safety issue. He agreed that Mr. Van Wagoner should not be made to feel the “bad guy” either.
Commissioner Peters proposed that the minimum width of a half street should be 28-feet from the curb face. Commissioner Nixon observed that the pavement on the opposite side from the curb may have a “ragged edge.” Mr. Van Wagoner asked what was proposed for the narrow area of Center Street by the LDS Church. He observed that those neighbors would feel the pressure of the extra traffic. Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Van Wagoner why he would not consider turning over the asphalted area in front of his home. He observed that it could not be planted since it was asphalted. Mr. Van Wagoner asserted that he could use it for his parking and did not appreciate being pressured to give it to the City. He acknowledged that he might consider development in 10-20 years, but was not looking forward to this land being developed now. He touched on the agreement not to develop made when the land was sold to the original owners.
Chairman Morse verified that Mr. Bang felt an agreement was imminent with the Bentleys though not yet in writing. He asked Mr. Van Wagoner to identify his main concern with this project. Mr. Van Wagoner replied that safety is his main issue. The Commissioners discussed the easements for Center Street. Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Van Wagoner if the bottleneck near 725 East Center Street were improved, would he consider working with the developer to make a wider easement at the Bentleys. Mr. Van Wagoner said he would consider it.
Commissioner Nixon summarized the discussion so far. He had proposed a 28-foot minimum width for a half street. An option to consider may be if the parking is limited, the minimum width of the half street may be reduced to 24-feet. Chairman Morse asked Mr. Smith if a motion or a consensus of opinion was needed. Mr. Smith indicated that a consensus of opinion was all that was necessary for now. Chairman Morse asked the Commissioners if they needed feedback from the City Engineer before reaching a decision.
Commissioner Atchison expressed favor to the 28-foot minimum half street and felt that the 24-foot would not be adequate. Commissioners Peters and Johanson agreed with Commissioner Atchison. Commissioner Johanson reviewed the other conditions that were part of the motion at the meeting of April 11, 2001. Chairman Morse asked the Commissioners if there was consensus on a minimum width of 28-feet for a half street. The Commissioners agreed. Mr. Smith was asked to convey the Commissioners’ consensus to the City Council. Discussion was held on whether the applicants should take this item to the City Council for their opinion. The easements for Center Street through the Hal and Nyal Richins property were discussed briefly. Mr. Olsen asked the Planning Commission for preliminary approval of the subdivision.
Chairman Morse recommended that the developers looks for means to solve the problems listed in the conditions to the motion referred to above. Commissioner Nixon commented that direction had been given on only one of the items listed, but the developers needed to solve the other eight items. Chairman Morse agreed and asked if there were any other issues to be discussed. Mr. Van Wagoner suggested that the developer work out an agreement with the Bentleys and put it in writing. Chairman Morse suggested that the applicant resolve issues at the staff level and possibly talk with the City Council about the minimum width for a half street. He expressed the opinion that the concept of the subdivision was acceptable pending the resolution of the conditions. The Commissioners agreed with this assessment. Mr. Olsen thanked the Commissioners for their input.
7. Happy Acres Plat “A” - 650 East 800 North - Preliminary Subdivision
The applicant is requesting a 2-lot subdivision.
Mr. Smith presented this application for a 2-lot subdivision at 650 East and 800 North. He observed that neither lot is governed by the Hillside Ordinance. The purpose of the subdivision was discussed. The Commissioners discussed the alignment of 1200 East with 800 North currently being engineered by the City Engineer. Chairman Morse questioned Mr. Leo Coleman on the sewer connections.
Mr. Coleman referred to an agreement made with Bald Mountain for connection to the sewer that will be installed with that subdivision. Mr. Rex Daley of Bald Mountain Development confirmed the agreement for sewer laterals to 3 buildings containing 6 units.
(Commissioner Anderson arrived at 8:50 P.M.)
Commissioner Nixon recalled the application for an R2 Overlay which had been considered and approved at the meeting of February 28, 2001. He commented that the road and utilities would need to be bonded for on 800 North. Mr. Coleman acknowledged his awareness of this requirement.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY LEO COLEMAN FOR HAPPY ACRES SUBDIVISION AT APPROXIMATELY 650 EAST 800 NORTH AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE ROAD AND UTILITIES FOR 800 NORTH BE BONDED FOR. COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
8. LDS Stake Center - 50 East 600 North - Design Review
This is a request by the LDS Church for a design review for a new Stake Center to be built on the future 600 North.
Mr. Smith presented an overhead transparency of the proposed site plan that showed the Planning Commission the location and layout of the chapel. He explained that the Church would occupy a portion of the lot and a remainder parcel would eventually be subdivided into two ½-acre lots. Chairman Morse invited Mr. Roger Knell of Knell Architects to explain the concept and answer questions from the Commissioners and audience. Commissioner Peters verified that the proposed remainder parcel would sit between the church lot and the undeveloped portion of Main Street. The size was determined at 411 feet x 176 feet. Commissioner Nixon asked why the church had chosen to take the eastern side of the parcel rather than the western along Main Street. Mr. Knell explained that the homes would facilitate the Main Street right-of-way, that the lots had been pre-sold as part of the sales contract to Alan Colledge of Wadley Farms, and that the homes would be better on Main Street rather than sandwiched between the Church and the Lindon City Cemetery.
Commissioner Anderson asked where the culinary water line was being extended from. Mr. Smith commented that the supply would be extended up the Main Street easement and that the costs of extension would be paid from the impact fee fund. Commissioner Johanson asked if this extension would benefit the city by “looping” the water lines. Mr. Smith verified that several ends would now be joined and “loops” completed. Commissioner Nixon noticed that the storm drain extension would come from Locust Ave. along 600 North to the edge of the property. Mr. Smith observed that this extension would also be paid from the appropriate impact fee fund. Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Knell what the width of the proposed 600 North street from Main Street to 200 East would be. Mr. Knell indicated that the road would be completed to a 50-foot width with curb and gutter on both sides. He noted that the water and sewer lines would be extended only to the west property line between the church parcel and the cemetery. Commissioner Anderson commented that he would like to see the water and sewer both completed in the Main Street easement. Commissioner Nixon asked if the secondary water was already installed. Mr. Smith verified that the 600 North secondary water line was already in place.
Commissioner Peters commented on the access from 200 East on 600 North. Mr. Knell informed the Commissioners that access had been worked out with the Alpine School District and the Tomlinson’s. Commissioner Peters expressed concern about the access on the Locust Avenue end of 600 North. He asked about the anticipated traffic counts. Mr. Knell informed that the Commissioners that the chapel would be a 3-Ward Building with approximately 100 cars per ward at one time, which he considered minimal. Commissioner Nixon observed that would be 600 trips on one-day-a-week.
Mr. Jim Byron of 50 West 650 North disagreed with Mr. Knell’s assessment of minimal traffic. He pointed out that the north side of 600 North was owned by Alpine School District for a future school. He asserted that with a Junior or Senior High School (as anticipated by the District) and more residential homes planned for the area, that there would be more traffic than would be generated by the church. Mr. Lyle Lamoreaux, of 235 North 200 East advocated the completion of Main Street as an additional access. He also was concerned about traffic with the proposed school and homes. Mrs. Afton Huggard of 628 North Locust Avenue claimed to have an agreement signed by the City when she had donated land for 600 North that would widen 600 North and put in curb and gutter on her parcel. Mr. Byron pointed out a problem with widening the road over the Gardner Ditch. Commissioner Peters expressed favor to improving 600 North all the way to Locust Avenue. Commissioner Nixon expressed favor to improving Main Street between 400 North and 600 North. He reasoned that Main Street is designated as a collector. He assumed that the same property owner who was selling to the Church also owned the parcel near Main and 400 North. After discussion, it was determined that, although it was the same family, the parcel ownership was not the same person. Commissioner Peters suggested that the easement for Main Street be required in this development application.
Mr. Richard Baldwin of 488 North 40 West verified that Main Street would not be developed at this time, that only a water main would be installed in the easement. Mr. William Minter of 519 North 80 West, a retired highway engineer, suggested that there were concerns not being addressed that were affected by a “traffic generator” like the proposed chapel. He claimed that the pavement on Locust Avenue was failing, and that Locust Avenue was not improved with curb and gutter or sidewalk. He expressed concern that the Stake Center and School would put pressure on Locust Avenue and 600 North that was not designed into the structure of the streets. He suggested that the City condemn the right-of-way for Main Street. He asserted that another main access was required. He also suggested that an Environmental Impact Statement should be required.
Mr. Gary Otterstrom of 649 North 75 West claimed that the most important issue to be faced in this application was public safety. He asserted that the City had an obligation to improve and expand 600 North if it was used as a main access for this project. He pointed out that there was a bus stop across from 600 North on Locust Avenue. He claimed that gravel was washing across Locust Avenue from storm water crossing the street from 600 North. He alleged that the gravel made vehicles slide into the bus stop and a serious accident would occur if not corrected soon. Mrs. Joy Lee of 594 North Locust agreed and asserted that there were no storm drain boxes on 600 North. Commissioner Peters agreed that flooding was a problem on 600 North. Commissioner Anderson observed that storm drain facilities would be installed and extended from Locust Avenue up 600 North as part of this project.
Mr. Brad Hall of 612 North 75 West felt that 600 North should be widened and improved on the Locust end of the street. He asserted that in winter especially, the street was only 1 ½ lanes wide, which was not wide enough for access to a Stake Center. He commented that Mr. Knell’s traffic estimates were low and would be closer to 120-150 cars per ward. He alleged that many children were also residents of 600 North and that no sidewalks were available to protect them as they walked to school. He claimed that the average vehicle speed on 600 North was 35 mph.
Mr. Lamoreaux observed that the use of the chapel would probably be limited to wards to the east of this site and the immediate neighborhood would have the problems, but not the benefits of having a chapel in the vicinity. Mr. Byron advocated widening 600 North. Mrs. Huggard reiterated that she possessed a written promise to widen and develop the road.
Chairman Morse observed that the design review process was for the purpose of identifying potential obstacles to a development. He acceded that there are issues with 600 North and asked if any other issues needed to be addressed. Commissioner Nixon asked if the Colledges were present. He wondered if they were interested in developing Main Street to 400 North. Mr. Knell told the Commissioners that the Colledges had been approached and were not interested in development. However, Main Street was part of the school district parcel also and could be developed from 600 North to 800 North as part of that development.
Chairman Morse asked if any elevations of the chapel were available. Mr. Knell replied that the LDS Church had four standard plans and when the site was finalized, a standard plan would be chosen. The slope of the parcel was examined and discussed. It was determined that a retaining wall would be needed on the south and west sides of the parking lot. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the building could be moved to minimize the retaining wall. The location of the picnic pavilion was discussed and suggestions for its placement were given. Chairman Morse asked if there were any other concerns.
Mr. Knell asked if the City was ready to address safety on the west end of 600 North or whether the City was going to require the LDS Church to improve the whole street as a condition for approval. Mr. Smith acknowledged that this issue would require further study. Commissioner Nixon suggested a driveway from the parking lot to Main Street through the proposed lots. Mr. Knell clarified and reviewed the concerns expressed about 600 North. Commissioner Nixon asked Mr. Knell to site the building on the parcel in such a way that would minimize the retaining wall. He observed that the proposed school would have access to 800 North, which was also designated as a collector street. Mr. Byron commented that the school was more likely to be an elementary or junior high school as opposed to a senior high school. Mr. Hall suggested completing Main Street to 480 North and so directing some access through that route.
Chairman Morse thanked all the participants for their comments. Mr. Minter asked if the City was going to require an environmental impact statement. Mr. Smith replied that the City required components of this statement, but not a complete EIS. Mr. Knell noted that potential hazards had been identified.
9. Standard Land Use Table Review
This is a staff-initiated review of the Standard Land Use Table which regulates the types of land uses allowed in each zone in the City.
Commissioner Nixon asked for an explanation of how uses were determined for the T-zone since the land use table contained all “n’s” or “not permitted” in this column. Mr. Smith clarified that the t-zone was an overlay only, so anything allowed in the underlying zone would be allowed in the t-zone. Pages four, five and six were reviewed. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the uses shown as “permitted” in the heavy industrial zone be changed to “not permitted” and those uses be “permitted” in the light industrial zone. This suggestion was approved. Used Motor Vehicle sales were made a conditional use in the Mixed Commercial zone. Sales of camera and photographic supplies, sporting goods, and computer goods and services were permitted in the light industrial zone. Hay, grains and feed sales were permitted in the planned commercial and mixed commercial zones. Sales of farm and garden supplies were permitted in the general commercial zone. All services listed on page six were changed to “not permitted” in the planned commercial zone and any services not elsewhere codified were made conditional in the mixed commercial zone. There was a short discussion on pawn shops.
10. Planning Director’s Report
There was no report.
ADJOURN
THE COMMISSIONERS ADJOURNED BY CONSENSUS AT 10:44 P.M.
Certified as Correct, May 9, 2001
_______________________________________
Loren Morse, Chairman
Attest,
_______________________________________
Kevin Smith, Planning Director |
|
|
