|
|
Home » City Government » Council » Minutes Archives; 2000 - 2003 » 2002 Council Minutes » August 20, 2002
August 20, 2002
The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, August 20, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., in the Lindon City Center Council Chambers at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
The Meeting began at 7:08 P.M.
RECOGNITION
Several baseball teams from Lindon City placed in the Utah State Tournaments. The Mayor and Council will give recognition to these players, coaches and teams.
Mayor Ellertson commented that Lindon residents had participated in an active and involved summer for baseball. He noted that several teams had done well and asked Councilmember Acerson to explain. Councilmember Acerson asked Coach Dirk Crenshaw to introduce the team. Coach Crenshaw introduced each player of the Lindon Dodgers present in the audience. There were seven players present. The team was recognized for their achievement of third in the city and eighth in the State. The trophy was examined and admired. Applause was given to the boys for their accomplishment.
Mayor Ellertson asked the age of the team members. Councilmember Acerson replied that the boys were 11 and 12 years old. He thanked the coaches for their examples of sportsmanship to his son and the youth of Lindon. Mayor Ellertson commended the coaches for their willingness to serve and thanked the parents for their support. He observed that this indicates the quality of the community and their participation was valued by the City Council and administration of Lindon. He talked briefly on President Bush’s initiative for volunteerism. The Council left the podium and congratulated the boys and coaches in person.
PROCLAMATION
Utah Fire Fighters/Muscular Dystrophy Month - This proclamation establishes from August 17 to September 17, 2002 as “Utah Fire Fighters/Fill the Boot” month for voluntary contributions to help fight muscular dystrophy.
Mayor Ellertson introduced this request by the Pleasant Grove/Lindon Public Safety Department for support of their efforts on behalf of the Muscular Dystrophy Association. He read the proclamation and asked if there were any questions or discussion. There were none.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF AUGUST 17 THRU SEPTEMBER 17, 2002 AS “UTAH FIRE FIGHTER/MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY MONTH.” COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Larry A. Ellertson
Invocation: Jeff Acerson
PRESENT ABSENT
Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
James A. Dain, Councilmember (arrived 8:28pm)
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
MINUTES
Review of the Minutes of July 16, 2002 and the Minutes of an Executive Session on July 16, 2002.
The Minutes of the regular meeting of July 16, 2002 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 2, Line 31: Replace the word “Macy’s” with the corrected spelling of “Macey’s.”
Page 8, Line 42: Add the sentence “The Council heard these suggestions for alternate access and did not approve or disapprove of them.”
Page 9, Line 11: Add the phrase “COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS ABSENT.”
Page 9, Line 14: Replace the number “4” with the number “3.” Replace the word “ONE” with the word “TWO.”
Page 13, Line 9: Replace the name “Jason” with the name “Jared.”
Page 13, Line 27: Replace the word “the” with the word “to.”
Page 14, Line 23: Add the phrase “COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS ABSENT.”
Page 14, Line 26: Replace the number “4” with the number “3.” Replace the word “ONE” with the word “TWO.”
Page 18, Line 3: Replace the word “fine” with the word “find.”
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF JULY 16, 2002 AS CORRECTED. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
The Minutes of the Executive Session of July 16, 2002 were reviewed. No corrections were necessary.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE SESSION OF JULY 16, 2002. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
OPEN SESSION - Citizens comments
Mayor Ellertson invited comment from the public. Ms. Lori Gleave of 1925 North 60 East, Orem asked what the white poles were by the Oak Canyon Jr. High School. She commented that they had blocked the view of “pastoral” Lindon for the Orem residents on the south side of 200 South, Lindon/2000 North, Orem. Mayor Ellertson replied that these are cell phone towers that were declined by Orem City. The cell phone company then approached the Junior High School. Councilmember Hatch commented that the site is much more aesthetic than what was originally submitted. She asked if notices had been delivered to the Orem residents. It was determined that some Orem residents were invited to comment. Councilmember Acerson commented that the towers generate money for the school and that was why the school wanted them.
MAYOR’S COMMENTS AND REPORT
Mayor Ellertson reported that Lindon is working on the details for the 700 North roadway to the new freeway interchange. He observed that the on/off ramp is scheduled for completion in September and Lindon is hoping to have 700 North open within a year.
Mayor Ellertson noted that there are some regional transit meetings coming up that are of interest to the public. He asked that if residents had comments, suggestions, or solutions to propose that they either plan to attend one of the upcoming meetings or to contact him. Details of the meeting locations and times will be forthcoming. Mr. Harlow Clark, newspaper representative for the New Utah, asked what Utah County’s interest was in the transit plan. Mayor Ellertson explained that this is a coordination effort on the part of several counties and their regional associations to devise long term traffic solutions for I-15 and alternate modes of transportation(bus, train) that will keep traffic moving. He commented that Orem City and Provo City have expressed support of a parallel street system to I-15 for collection of traffic without adding on ramps.
Mayor Ellertson also thanked Lindon residents for their support of Lindon Days. He commented that he had noticed a number of people relaxing and getting to know one another. He asked if there were questions. There were none.
CONSENT AGENDA - No Items
CURRENT BUSINESS
1. Review and Action - North Utah County Rodeo Team - Request for funding as Sponsor. The North Utah County Rodeo Team is requesting a $300 sponsorship funding for an advertisement in the program. The City Council has sponsored this ad over the last few years.
Whitnie Willis, 308 South 240 West, Lindon, announced that the North Utah County Rodeo Club is getting ready to put on its annual rodeo. She commented this Rodeo Club is one of the smaller ones in Utah, but had sent four members to the Nationals, and included two State champions. The club covers an area from Lindon to American Fork and the Pleasant Grove, American Fork and Lone Peak High Schools. She asked if Lindon City would consider continuing their sponsorship. Mayor Ellertson asked if the Council had any questions or comments and commented that this is something that Lindon has done for the last four or five years. Councilmember Bayless observed that this sponsorship promotes the values and ideals of Lindon and the catchphrase “A Little Bit of Country.”
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE THE SPONSORSHIP OF THE NORTH UTAH COUNTRY RODEO CLUB AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF $300.00 FOR AN ADVERTISEMENT IN THE RODEO PROGRAM. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Public Hearing - Ordinance to Amend and Adopt Impact Fees. This is a readvertised public hearing. The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve an ordinance which will update city-wide impact fees for culinary water, parks and recreation, and sewer; and adopt a new streets impact fee for the area around and impacted by the new I-15 Interchange. Lewis Young Robertson and Burningham (financial consultants) have completed this study and will be present to answer questions.
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Jason Burningham of Lewis Young Robertson and Burningham, financial consultants, distributed updated studies to the Council and then summarized the history of the impact fee. He informed the Council that a few years ago the State legislature noticed an inconsistency in the impact fee amounts charged from city to city. The idea behind the State statute is that cities go through a process to validate the equitable and proportional share of the costs of servicing new development. They also set restrictions on the types of services that are allowed to recoup the costs through impact fees.
Mr. Burningham observed that there are two service areas to evaluate. The first is the I-15 service area for the roadway impact fee. He commented that the Council redefined the service area at the last Council meeting to include a different mix of land uses. He displayed the adjusted map and pointed out the outlined area. He added that the area taken out was felt to be not as directly affected. Other areas added were determined to have a direct benefit. The redefined map contains 658 acres of fairly undeveloped land of which 625 acres are zoned general commercial, mixed commercial, light industrial, and heavy industrial. The remaining 30 acres are set aside for a residential component. The second service area is the city-wide service area that includes such impact fees as sewer, parks and culinary water.
Mr. Burningham explained that impact fees are used to defray the costs of new development. The roadway impact fees are a new assessment. The City Engineers have determined that the ultimate capacity of the subject streets is 58,000 trips generated over the next 20 years. Based on this capacity the recommended fee is $89 per trip of demand. He explained that each type of land use is assigned a different trip demand.
Mr. Burningham reviewed the costs that had been included in the impact fee study. He explained that costs total $5.2 million over the anticipated 58,000 trips of total capacity. He summarized the methodology used to determine the roadway impact fee and displayed the list of anticipated land uses. He commented that they had evaluated the types of demands that these types of land uses generate, compared it with other cities, and have revised the fees downward slightly. He gave an example of a convenience store and a shopping center fee. He commented that the study evaluates the demand that a land use will put on the infrastructure and assesses a proportional fee. If a land use can provide a study or verification that proves their business is different from the normal, they may be assessed a variation of the fee or a change can be made to the fees.
Mayor Ellertson asked for clarification of the adjustment factor. Mr. Burningham explained that the adjustment factor assigns the probability that a particular trip is actually the end destination. Mayor Ellertson observed that a convenience store is usually not an end destination, but only a stop along the way, and only 5% of their customers actually make a special trip there. Mr. Burningham agreed.
Mr. Burningham discussed the city-wide impact fee study. He showed the current and recommended culinary water impact fees and explained the costs that had been included to calculate the slightly increased impact fee. He commented that a user will be assessed by their meter size which indicates the demand on the system, so a commercial use with a larger meter would have larger impact fee. He observed that there is a significant increase in the sewer impact fee as the City has anticipated improvement costs of about $6 million over next the the next 20-25 years. He mentioned that the recommended fee is comparable to neighboring cities to the north. Councilmember Bayless asked why the study is anticipating more ERUs needing sewer than needing culinary water. Mr. Burningham replied that the accepted ratio of sewer to water use is 1.02 or 1.03 to one.
Mr. Burningham noted that the recommended assessment for the parks impact fee is a tiered structure that places more burden on low density development. He disclosed that the low density fee is just under $1,500 and the medium and high density fees are $1,129. Mr. Dameron asked if the categories equate to Lindon’s zoning of R1-20 for low density, R1-12 for medium density and R2 Overlay for high density. Mr. Burningham agreed that it may be applied that way. Councilmember Bayless asked if the census supports the density designation. Mr. Burningham agreed that it did and then explained that the census categorizes density somewhat differently by those homes that are mortgaged or owned, and rental properties as a separate classification. Mr. Dameron noted that the R1-20 and R1-12 zones both include homes that are mortgaged or owned and suggested that both of these zones should be included in the low density classification. Mr. Burningham clarified that low density is single-family-detached homes. Councilmember Bayless commented that Lindon’s medium density R1-12 zone is classified the same as the low density R1-20 zone by the census because they both contain single-family-detached homes.
Mr. Dameron suggested that the density category names in the study correspond with the majority of the types of housing in the zone. He felt that the low density category should be renamed single-family-detached, and the medium and high density be combined into condos and R2 Overlay projects. Councilmember Bayless agreed. The Council discussed accessory apartments and how the impact fees would be applied to them.
Mr. Dustin Sweeten, citizen, commented that the study recommends assessing single family homes more impact fee than apartments. He felt that apartments have more impact than single family homes on parks. Mr. Burningham replied that the most used parks are those in affluent areas. He noted that “parks” is an all inclusive term that includes recreation programs and facilities like recreation centers, swimming pools and trails. Single family dwellers use these facilities just as much or more than apartment dwellers and have a larger impact per house because of the larger number of residents per house. Mayor Ellertson asked if there were other questions.
Mr. Harlow Clark clarified that impact fees are assessed on new development based on the assumption that older development has already paid impact fees of about $7,000 per home towards the new roads. Mr. Burningham agreed and added that repairs to roads are not paid out of impact fees, but come from other revenue sources such as road taxes and property taxes.
Mr. Sweeten verified that the roads impact fees are assessed on the properties fronting the major roads, and include peripheral areas too. Mr. Burningham agreed that there is an equal level of impact fee assessed over the whole service area. Mr. Sweeten commented that the impact of the major streets in the area may have been considered more from an engineering aspect than a business aspect. Mr. Burningham replied that the City Engineers have proposed a service area that would receive direct benefit from the construction of the major street. He added that the initial service area proposed was larger, and has been refined by adding some properties and removing others. Mr. Sweeten noted that his property on State Street is outside of the proposed service area and added that his opinion is that his exposure will lose more than it will gain because the traffic that now exits the freeway on 1600 North in Orem and uses State Street to travel north will now exit on the new freeway interchange and by pass his part of State Street. He suggested that those who use 700 North to access State Street will mainly turn north and Pleasant Grove will gain as much or more exposure than Lindon. He suggested that State Street not be included in the service area because there won’t be the impact. He noted that the corners of 700 North and State Street will gain exposure impact, but those to the south will have impact to a lesser degree.
Mr. Ron Anderson, citizen, commented that the impact fees will not be used to build the whole width of the street, only three lanes. Therefore the property owners along 700 North will not only pay for the additional width of the street, but the impact fees too. They will be paying more for 700 North than those off the street. Councilmember Hatch commented that the impact fees also pay for 1700 West which will not impact State Street at all. Mr. Sweeten observed that there will always be a fairness issue where one is assessed and another is not. He expressed the opinion that either only those who actually front on the road be assessed or that a city-wide assessment be considered. Mr. Anderson commented that Mr. Sweeten’s suggestion may have validity. He agreed that a city-wide road impact fee may answer all fairness issues. Mr. Burningham disagreed and commented that there are just as many who will say to assess everyone as who will say to assess only those along the road. Councilmember Acerson asked if there was precedent to consider to answer the question. Mr. Burningham pointed to Pleasant Grove City where the acreage between State Street and the freeway (about 800 acres) was included in the service area.
Mr. Burningham suggested that a city-wide road impact fee only be considered if there are urgent needs in other parts of the city. He noted that a city-wide road impact fee will spark arguments from home builders that are not near 1700 West and 700 North. Mr. Dameron agreed and suggested that the Council establish a reasonable boundary.
(Councilmember Dain arrived at 8:28 p.m.)
Mayor Ellertson commented that the road impact fee is weighted based on use, which is unlike the culinary and other impact fees. He added that although the uses are treated equal, each use will not pay the same impact fee amount. Mr. Burningham agreed and noted that the impact fee is not dependent on the location of the business within the service area. He observed that this recommended road impact fee schedule is the typical approach used in the United States. The only way to have a more “fair” approach is to establish a toll road so that those who use the road are the ones who pay the costs associated with its construction and maintenance. There was a discussion on those who use the road will be mainly residential commuter traffic, but those who benefit from the commuter traffic are the businesses who will locate on the road. Mayor Ellertson pointed out that no matter who is assessed the impact fee, the consumer is the ultimate person who pays it, because all costs are passed on to the end user.
Mr. Sweeten asked if there was a possibility of losing commercial development to impact fee costs. Councilmember Dain replied that the ordinance allows the City to consider waiving or reducing fees for anticipated tax dollars. Councilmember Bayless commented that she was struggling with that concept. Councilmember Bath observed that the option is open to the Council, but they may decide not to exercise that option. Mr. Burningham agreed that the option was included whether or not the Council decided to use it. He added that the decision to waive or reduce needs to be justified by other revenue to the City in the form of sales tax or property tax at least equivalent to the amount of the impact fees. Mr. Dameron asked who is responsible to do the justification study. Mr. Burningham that the City was the body needing justification for their action in waiving or reducing the impact fee and should conduct the study.
Councilmember Bayless suggested that, since there still were issues that need resolution on the roadway impact fee study, that item be continued and the city-wide impact fee be finalized tonight. Mayor Ellertson agreed. Mr. Burningham suggested an “ad hoc” committee consider the service area question. He added that the city did not want to have development occur and not have a revenue source in place. He noted that if a right-of-way is donated to the City for one of the streets instead of being bought, the impact fee could be reduced by that amount. Mr. Dameron suggested that the amount of cost for right-of-way acquisition be itemized so that staff can reduce the impact fee by that amount. Mr. Burningham agreed and informed the Council that this cost is $14 per trip of demand.
Mr. Anderson asked if the 1700 West alignment is planned for the west or east side of the drainage ditch. Mr. Dameron replied that the road was not engineered yet. Mayor Ellertson discussed the ditch with Mr. Anderson.
Mr. Burningham pointed out that the impact fees are based on costs, so it may need a reevaluation in a year. He observed an impact fee is not a “one-time shot to put in place and leave there,” it needs updating and review. Mr. Clark verified that impact fees were for new construction. He asked what new construction was planned for parks. Mayor Ellertson replied that the funds would be used for new improvements in existing parks and property for new parks.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO TABLE THE IMPACT FEE STUDY ON THE I-15 SERVICE AREA FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
Councilmember Bayless noted that the goal of the impact fees are to cover costs, not to “line the City’s pockets.” Mayor Ellertson suggested that closure on this item be sought as quickly as possible and proposed a time limit of two months. Councilmember Bayless agreed.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AMENDED HER MOTION TO TABLE THE IMPACT FEE STUDY ON THE I-15 SERVICE AREA FOR A MAXIMUM OF TWO MONTHS TO ALLOW FURTHER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON RE-SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Ellertson observed that the other portion of this item is the city-wide impact fee study. He asked if there were further questions on this. Councilmember Bath commented that he felt comfortable with the suggested fee structure. Mayor Ellertson questioned the differentiation of the park fees by density. Mr. Burningham expressed his opinion that it may be considered arbitrary to handle all residential equal. Councilmember Bayless suggested that the fees be apportioned based on the current zoning. Mayor Ellertson asked if that would include one or two fees. Mr. Burningham replied that two fees based on density are supported by the study. He suggested that the category names be changed to correspond with the census. The naming of the categories was discussed and accessory apartments were mentioned. A name suggestion was “all other residential development” with a list of types. Another suggestion was “all other residential development” with an exclusion of accessory apartments. Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Burningham if the Council would regret the generic “all other.” Mr. Burningham commented that he felt more comfortable with the second category being “all other residential development” and not specifically excluding accessory apartments.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE #2002-22, FIXING AND PRESCRIBING A POLICY FOR ESTABLISHING IMPACT FEES AND ADOPTING A CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN FOR THE PROVISION OF CULINARY WATER, WASTEWATER AND PARKS & RECREATION SERVICES PROVIDED BY LINDON CITY WITHIN THE CITY-WIDE SERVICE AREA WITH A CHANGE IN THE CATEGORY NAMES IN SECTION 13.3 ON PAGE 48 OF THE STUDY TO SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENTIAL AND ALL OTHER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE VOTE IS RECORDED AS FOLLOWS:
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(5-0).
3. Continued Public Hearing - Ordinance Amendment - Home Occupations - Section 17.04.440 (Ordinance #2002-23). This public hearing was continued at the last City Council meeting held on July 16, 2002. The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve an ordinance which will amend Section 17.04.440 of the Lindon City Code - Home Occupations. The Planning Commission recommended approval.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Ellertson thanked Councilmember Acerson for his handling of a “potentially explosive” situation that involved a neighborhood dispute over a home occupation. Councilmember Acerson reported that the situation is continuing. He expressed the opinion that employee parking should be allowed unless it becomes a nuisance or safety hazard. He pointed out that home occupation permits are conditional and based on complaints. He suggested that if complaints are received, then the City can act and investigate. He pointed out that there are hazardous parking situations on any street at any time, and many of which are far worse than one employee parking at a house. He observed that he doesn’t like a resident being pushed around based on an ordinance, when that resident is making a good faith effort and the other neighbors “won’t give up.” He suggested that the City allow a “little leeway.”
Mayor Ellertson suggested that the Council look at the proposed clause “c.” Councilmember Bayless commented that she agreed with “c” as written. Councilmember Acerson pointed out that a home occupation owner can park their personal car on the street and let their employee park in the driveway and be in compliance with this clause. Councilmember Bayless replied that particular sentence can be struck and let the employees park on the street, and the clause can still limit a business to one employee or part time equivalent.
Councilmember Acerson asked Councilmember Bayless if she could see multiple employees as part of a home occupation. Mayor Ellertson suggested limiting the parking rather than the employees. Councilmember Bayless felt that each employee would have their own car. Councilmember Acerson suggested that the vehicles should be limited to one and the employees can car pool. Councilmember Bayless felt that this would create a situation because there would be more cars if there were more employees. She suggested that a home occupation is not the appropriate place to have a lot of employees.
Councilmember Bath agreed that adding employees would be adding traffic to the neighborhoods. He pointed out that there are situations where there are three or four home occupations on a street and if you add employee’s vehicles to the street, you will add problems. Mayor Ellertson pointed out that a business may have three employees within the family. Councilmember Acerson expressed the opinion that if parking and traffic become a nuisance then it can be dealt with. He suggested that neighbors have a right to complain if there is a safety issue or a nuisance, but many just look for a way to complain. Councilmember Bath agreed that neighbors complaints are sometimes unprovoked and/or unjust, but with the number of home occupations in the city, the problem is compounded.
Councilmember Acerson described a situation with two home occupation across from each other that had created congestion problems, but now the two businesses have done a lot to deal with the safety issues. Councilmember Bath commented that he was not against home occupations, but if the City allows one employee now, and possibly more later, he felt that this was mixing commercial business with residential zoning.
Mayor Ellertson verified that the issue that has raised this question is vehicle parking. Councilmember Acerson replied affirmatively. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the intent of this amendment is to allow a business to continue with one employee who parks their vehicle off street.
Mrs. Maxine Smith, citizen, commented that she supports Councilmember Bath’s stance. She expressed the opinion that commercial businesses should be kept away from residential zones. Councilmember Hatch commented that computers have allowed residents to do the same things in their homes that they used to do downtown. Mayor Ellertson pointed out that many successful businesses started out in someone’s home. Councilmember Acerson commented that one of the businesses he referred to earlier has been functioning for eight years. Councilmember Hatch added that there is sometimes more parking problems with a family party than a home business.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE #2002-23 AS PROPOSED WITH ONE SPELLING ERROR CORRECTED IN CLAUSE “J.” Councilmember Bayless commented that this amendment as proposed is a compromise, but it will give the Planning Commission the ability and authority to control problematic situations. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. Councilmember Dain suggested that this amendment makes the ordinance friendlier to home occupations that the current statute. Mayor Ellertson suggested that clause “c” was superfluous because clause “j” covered all situations. Councilmember Bath felt that this would create an “enforcement problem.” The Council discussed governmental interference in citizen’s lives, the trend of home businesses and the types of businesses that are run out of the home.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS CALLED THE QUESTION. THERE WAS NO SECOND. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. It was noted that there was a motion on the floor and a vote was called.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON AYE
COUNCILMEMBER BATH NAY
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS AYE
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN AYE
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH AYE
THE MOTION CARRIED (4-1).
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO REVIEW THE ORDINANCE AND ASKED MR. SMITH TO PREPARE A REPORT THAT COMPARES LINDON’S ORDINANCE WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES IN UTAH AND NATIONWIDE. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
4. Review and Action - Insurance for Retired Employees. This is a request by staff for Council review and action concerning a continuation of insurance coverages for retired employees. Currently, the city has no retired employees but will have one on November 30, 2002. A discussion was held with the Council during the budget public hearings about this topic and information is now ready to be reviewed.
It was decided to temporarily hold this item to allow Mr. Swaner to give his presentation because of the late hour.
5. Discussion - Timpanogos Community Visioning Project. The planning firm of Swaner and Associates have been given a contract through Mountainlands Association of Governments to assist in bringing a cohesive “vision” to Utah Valley which will encompass all cities in the area. Representatives from Swaner will be present to give the Council an overview of the project.
Mr. Sumner Swaner of Swaner and Associates distributed project packets to the Council and explained that his firm has been retained to study three things: transportation issues, open space issues and future annexation lines for the cities in Utah County. He was present to solicit input from Lindon City and it residents. He announced a public workshop to be held on September 19, 2002 and asked the Council for names of “stakeholders” that could be specifically invited to contribute. The meeting will be held at Pleasant Grove Junior High School from 5:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. They are hoping to generate a toolbox similar to Envision Utah. Councilmember Bayless asked if the workshop is open to the public or if participants need to register. Mr. Swaner replied that it was open and described the tentative outline. He thanked the Council for their time.
4. Review and Action - Insurance for Retired Employees. This is a request by staff for Council review and action concerning a continuation of insurance coverages for retired employees. Currently, the city has no retired employees but will have one on November 30, 2002. A discussion was held with the Council during the budget public hearings about this topic and information is now ready to be reviewed.
Mr. Dameron introduced this item as an issue that had been discussed briefly during the budget hearings concerning the participation of retired employees in the City’s health insurance program. He suggested that the issue had two parts: one to set the policy that allows retired employees to participate in the City’s insurance program, and one that sets the amount of the premium to be paid by the retired employee. Mr. Clark asked if this program assumes that most employees will retire before they are 65 years of age. He was informed that the City had an employee that would be retiring this fall that had requested this benefit. Councilmember Dain expressed the opinion that the first part was agreeable to the Council. The question remained on the amount of premium participation. Mayor Ellertson asked how this was handled in other industries. The Council discussed insurance plans at such employers as Alpine School District, BYU and Orem City. Mayor Ellertson asked if there was general consensus on the providing of the benefit. The Council agreed. He noted that the question remained on the amount of participation. He asked Mr. Dameron to research plans and present a proposal. Mr. Dameron agreed.
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE POLICY THAT WILL EXTEND INSURANCE COVERAGE TO RETIRED EMPLOYEES WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE CITY WILL WORK TOWARD DETERMINING AN AMOUNT OF EMPLOYEE VS. EMPLOYER PREMIUM PARTICIPATION OVER THE NEXT MONTH. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
6. Review and Action - Change Order Request - Street Rehabilitation Projects. This is a request by staff for approval of a change order amount which exceeds the parameters of staff authority.
Mr. Dameron explained that when the City planned the storm drain on 200 North Street the street was planned to be patched. It was found after the work was done that more is needed than a patch and reconstruction of the street is recommended. Councilmember Dain asked why it was felt that rehabilitation of a half street was advantageous to the City. Mr. Dameron replied that this street is likely to remain a half street for a long period of time and the pavement was in very poor shape to start. Mayor Ellertson confirmed that the funding was available in the budget.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHANGE ORDER REQUEST BY THE CITY ENGINEERS FOR $39,544.53 TO ALLOW RECONSTRUCTION OF 200 NORTH STREET BETWEEN 200 EAST AND 400 EAST. COUNCILMEMBER HATCH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
7. Review and Action - Bid Award - 600 North Improvements East of Locust Avenue, and Main Street & State Street Intersection Realignment. Bids were received and opened on July 29, 2002 for the improvements to the above named areas. The low bidder was Johnston & Phillips with a bid price of $179,641.10. Staff recommends the contract for this project be awarded to Johnston & Phillips.
Mr. Dameron informed the Council that bids had been opened for the construction and improvement of 600 North between Locust Avenue and 200 East, and the realignment of the Main Street and State Street intersection. The low bidder is Johnston & Phillips with a total bid of $179,641.10 for both projects. Mayor Ellertson asked if this included the curb and gutter. Mr. Dameron replied yes and noted that the company is doing a storm drain project in Lindon at present. Councilmember Dain asked if the project is scheduled for completion before winter. Mr. Dameron answered yes. Mayor Ellertson commented on the close bidding.
COUNCILMEMBER HATCH MOVED TO ACCEPT THE LOW BID OF $179,641.10 FROM JOHNSTON & PHILLIPS AND AWARD THE CONTRACT TO THEM FOR THE 600 NORTH STREET IMPROVEMENT EAST OF LOCUST AVENUE, AND MAIN STREET & STATE STREET INTERSECTION REALIGNMENT PROJECTS. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
WATER, GENERAL PLAN, BUILDING INSPECTION, ENGINEERING
Councilmember Dain asked for an update on the water supply. Mr. Dameron replied that Lindon City has not yet used any “storage water.” The Council discussed how Provo had now closed all irrigation use because they want to save their storage water for culinary use. The water that is owed to Lindon from Pleasant Grove was discussed. The Deer Creek Dam construction project was also discussed. Enforcement of water regulations were noted.
SEWER, SOLID WASTE, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES
Councilmember Hatch reported that the “mega baler” had produced six bales in at a rate of three minutes each at a demonstration Monday night, August 19, 2002. The size and weight of the bales were discussed. Savings to the District were noted.
TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ADMINISTRATION
Councilmember Bayless noted that she had been surveyed by UTOPIA. She reported that she had answered twenty minutes of questions. Mr. Dameron commented that the residential survey had been started and the business survey would begin on Friday, August 23, 2002. He observed that an estimated take rate would be given to Lindon in three weeks and a full report in six weeks. Councilmember Bayless reminded the Mayor that a new Board of Adjustment member was needed as Mr. Jensen had moved from Lindon. Mayor Ellertson commented that he was open to suggestions.
STREETS, SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC SAFETY AND COURT
Councilmember Bath announced a police department auction for Saturday August 24, 2002 at 10:00 a.m.
PARKS, RECREATION, EMERGENCY MNGMNT, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER
Councilmember Acerson acknowledged receipt of the letter to the Stake Presidencies of the Lindon Stakes concerning needed fire department volunteers. He suggested that another be sent to the Stake President of the newly formed Central Stake, David P. Harding. Councilmember Dain asked about the response to the letter. Councilmember Hatch replied that one person had approached him before this meeting to indicate his willingness to volunteer. Councilmember Acerson asked about the time frame for installation of the play equipment in the Panorama storm water detention basin. Mr. Dameron replied that the equipment installation was scheduled for this fall. Councilmember Acerson asked when the Council would like to receive the report of the Lindon Days Chairpersons. The Lindon Days events and various comments were discussed. Mr. Dameron suggested that he could call the Armstrongs to set a date at their convenience.
ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
Mr. Dameron:
1. Asked the Council if there were any items on the tracking list that they would like to review. The various items were discussed and it was decided that none of the items required Council review.
2. Noted that Constitution Week was approaching and a proclamation would be forthcoming. Mayor Ellertson mentioned that September 11 was approaching also and asked to speak with Mr. Dameron later about an American Legion request concerning that.
3. Announced a Utah County Public Hearing on the ZAP tax on August 21, 2002 to decide about putting this item on the November 2002 ballot. The hearing will be held at 8:00 p.m. in room 1400 of the County offices.
4. Noted that Councilmember Dain had submitted a unique design for the Pioneer Park pavilion.
5. Reported on the URMMA meeting in Cedar City he had attended two weeks ago. He commented that the board had voted to accept a new member city, Farmington. The insurance market was discussed. Mr. Dameron reported that a presentation on the mixed use zone had been given and he discussed the highlights of that presentation with the Council. He also announced a new vehicle safety program promoted by URMMA. The safety inspections and programs that are part of URMMA’s program were discussed.
6. Announced an Emergency Preparedness meeting chaired by Glen Mott for September 19 from 7-9 p.m.
7. Asked Councilmember Bath if the police department would like to demonstrate their new software program for the Council. Councilmember Bath replied affirmatively. Mr. Dameron suggested that the demonstration be scheduled for September 2002.
8. Reported that UDOT is planning to reconstruct State Street from Orem to Lehi next spring. The project was discussed. Councilmember Dain asked if this might be a good time to incorporate a street light scheme for State Street in Lindon.
9. Announced that Planning Director Kevin Smith had been selected as Employee of the Quarter.
10. Informed the Council of a joint City Council/Planning Commission field trip on Tuesday, August 27 to plan for access management on 700 North Street. The time is set at 5:30 p.m.
11. Reported that the Lindon Arena is being used more often now and asked if the policy for not charging for use needed to be changed. Mayor Ellertson commented that he was glad to see it being used. Councilmember Bath suggested that something to offset the costs of maintenance may be appropriate. The issue was discussed and it was decided to leave the policy as is for the time being.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL AND MOVE TO THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 11:10 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION AND RECONVENE THE CITY COUNCIL AT 11:29 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 11:30 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
APPROVED - September 3, 2002
_______________________________________
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
_______________________________________
Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor |
|
|
