|
|
Home » City Government » Council » Minutes Archives; 2000 - 2003 » 2001 Council Minutes » August 7, 2001
August 7, 2001
The Lindon City Council held a regularly scheduled meeting, beginning with a Work Session at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 7, 2001 in the Lindon City Center Council Chambers at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
PRESENT
Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
ABSENT
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
James A. Dain, Councilmember
The meeting began at 6:20 p.m.
WORK SESSION
The Mayor and Council will continue the review process of the Standard Land Use Codes applicable across all zones of the City.
Planning Director Kevin Smith noted that the previously discussed changes had been made to this document. He asked the Council to review those changes. Mayor Ellertson directed attention to the bottom of page 3 to start the review with SLU 5000. Note was made to include an additional title to the Wholesale and Retail Trades for Wholesale Trades.
Councilmember Bath suggested that the wholesale business of Tire and Tubes be permitted in the PC zone. He mentioned that these stores had one section that sold retail and another for wholesale. There was a discussion of the definition of wholesale. Mayor Ellertson noted that the SLU Table was more restrictive to wholesale businesses than retail businesses. He suggested that the word “wholesale” be defined in the title of the section as “sale for resale.” Mr. Smith observed that some confusion existed in the definition and some discount or large purchases were termed as “wholesale.” He commented that wholesale stores are generally not open to the general public. Councilmember Acerson observed that wholesale purchases did not have sales tax on them because they are intended for resale.
Mayor Ellertson initiated a discussion on the sale of questionable magazines. Councilmember Bath commented that the sales of these materials could be compared to the sale of tobacco products. The Council did not want to make selling these items easy to do in our community. Mr. Smith observed that sexually-oriented businesses were limited to the heavy industrial area. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the sexually-oriented business ordinance did not set restrictions on the sale of “questionable” magazines. He noted that some restrictions were in place on the display of these magazines and their location in the store. However, he asked Mr. Smith to check with the City Attorney on what other statutes were provided to protect the citizens of Lindon. He suggested a possible ordinance or proclamation that attempts to define the community standards and weed out offensive materials. Mr. Smith observed that the courts have set some standards through case law. Councilmember Acerson commented that these standards are fairly defined and limited, such as proximity to schools, etc. Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Smith to research the possibility of a stricter standard with the City Attorney.
Mayor Ellertson noted that the entries in the wholesale portion of the SLU Table, 5000-5198, were either conditional or permitted in the industrial zones. Councilmember Bayless noted that she had several questions on the retail portion of the SLU. Mayor Ellertson questioned Mr. Smith on the zoning of the property occupied by Home Depot. Mr. Smith replied that Home Depot is in the PC-1 zone. Mayor Ellertson noted that Home Improvement Centers are “permitted” in the PC-1 zone. Councilmember Bayless suggested that 5393 Arts, Crafts, Hobbies and 5394 Musical Instruments also be “permitted” in the PC-1 zone rather than “conditional.” Mayor Ellertson suggested that 5391 Dry Goods & General Merchandise also be “permitted.”
Mayor Ellertson initiated a discussion on New & Used Car Sales, 5511 and 5512. Mr. Smith suggested that Auto Sales Lots be “not permitted” in the commercial zone to limit their proliferation on State Street. Councilmember Bayless agreed. Mr. Smith asked for direction on New & Used Car Sales in the PC zone. Councilmember Acerson commented that the sales tax income from such businesses was a consideration. Mr. Smith observed that State Street in Orem and Provo had many such businesses and asked the Council if they wanted a similar direction along State Street in Lindon. Mr. Dameron commented that there are plans for a car lot near Walker’s gas station. Mr. Smith observed that he had received an application for one on the corner of State Street and Gillman Lane also. He explained the application to the Council. Councilmember Acerson mentioned a tendency for individual sales of used cars near the IHC Urgent Care Center on 200 South. Mr. Smith reported that the police can cite any car left for over 48 hours on the side of the street.
Councilmember Acerson asked if the consensus was that there be no car lots on State Street. Councilmember Bayless clarified that there should be no new ones. Mr. Smith explained that the presently occupied and approved car lots would continue to operate as legal non-conforming uses. He noted that if one dealer closes, another dealer reopens the lot within a short period of time. Councilmember Bath agreed that car lots should not be permitted in the future. He felt that Lindon should not be “loaded down” with car lots on State Street. Mayor Ellertson asked if restaurants should be limited too. He suggested that limiting the businesses could be construed to be finite and micro-managing. Councilmember Bayless considered limiting auto sales different from limiting restaurants because of the nature of the business. Councilmember Bath suggested that lines of auto sales lots was not an accurate representation of the character of Lindon. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the action to restrict auto sales lots may be considered arbitrary and capricious. Mr. Smith suggested that this action is similar to restricting billboards along the roadways or having a minimum lot size.
Mr. Smith asked about 5511 Motor Vehicles (new with used). He observed that a car dealer may get approved by selling just a few new cars along with his major sales of used cars. Councilmember Bath suggested changing the “with” to “and/or.” Mr. Dameron suggested that the used car sales be made “ancillary” to the new cars sales. Councilmember Bayless observed that if a dealer really wants to locate on State Street in Lindon, they can come and negotiate with the City Council. Mr. Smith agreed and commented that he tells applicants that the Council is not close-minded to suggestions. He encourages applicants to come and discuss their goals. Mayor Ellertson agreed and noted that anything can change and nothing is set in stone. Councilmember Bayless suggested that car dealerships also be not permitted in the PC zone. Mr. Smith observed that the area near the new freeway interchange is planned for the commercial and mixed commercial zones. He asked about car dealerships in that area. Councilmember Bayless suggested a PC2 zone. Mr. Smith observed that the general commercial designation for that area had been considered to promote retail expansion along the freeway.
Councilmember Bayless questioned SLUs 5810 and 5811. She asked why restaurants and fast food establishments are not treated more equally across the zones. Mr. Smith observed that Orem had been promoting restaurants on the freeway and fast food away from the freeway. Councilmember Bayless asked if SLU 5830 Drinking Places - Non-Alcoholic would be considered an establishment like Jamba Juice. She noted that it was a conditional use in the PC zone. Mayor Ellertson observed that if they offered a sandwich they may be considered a restaurant.
Mr. Dameron asked about SLU 5820, Drinking Places - Alcoholic Beverages. It was noted that this is not permitted in any zone. There was discussion of making Lindon a dry city like Draper. Councilmember Bayless noted that some alcohol is sold in a store. Mr. Dameron commented that the Lindon Gateway Center may attract a restaurant like Chilies that will come and request a liquor license. Councilmember Bath observed that alcohol is not their primary use like a tavern would be. Mr. Smith suggested that this listing remain “not permitted” for now and address it later when an application was submitted.
Mr. Dameron suggested that SLU 5910 be changed to say “Pharmacy” as a more appropriate label. Councilmember Bayless questioned why 5961 Hay, Grains & Feed was “not permitted” in the PC zone. She noted that 5940 Farm & Garden Supplies and 5963 Nursery - Plants were allowed. Mr. Smith commented that the storage requirements for Hay, Grain and Feed were different. There was a short discussion on a business like IFA in the PC zone. Mr. Dameron observed that the vision for the PC-1 area was a commercial plaza similar to Riverwoods. Mayor Ellertson suggested that Nurseries - Plants be not permitted in the PC zone may be compared to businesses with outside storage and this should be considered in the decision to allow them in the PC zone.
Councilmember Acerson discussed 5980 Fuel & Ice Dealers. Councilmember Bayless suggested that SLU 6111 Banking & Credit Services be allowed in the PC zone. Councilmember Bath noted that none of the financial services were allowed in the PC zone. Mr. Dameron suggested that they should be permitted. Councilmember Bayless suggested that if 6112 Check Cashing & Other Credit Services was allowed in the general commercial and mixed commercial zones that their colors be controlled. She also suggested that 6220 Photographic Services - Including Commercial and 6231 Beauty & Barber Shop be permitted in the PC zone. Mayor Ellertson suggested that they be a conditional use.
Mayor Ellertson directed attention back to 5944 Cigars- Cigarettes. He suggested that these retail stores be a conditional use in the PC, CG, and MC zones rather than permitted. Mr. Smith suggested that 5933 Secondhand Merchants be made conditional also. He observed that an example of this type of business would be Lamar’s.
Mr. Smith observed that the changes would be made and the next three pages would be ready for review in two weeks.
REGULAR SESSION
Conducting: Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Pledge of Allegiance: Lindsey Bayless
Invocation: Toby Bath
PRESENT
Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor
Jeff Acerson, Councilmember
H. Toby Bath, Councilmember
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
James A. Dain, Councilmember
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
ABSENT
Jerald I. Hatch, Councilmember
The Meeting began at 7:10 p.m.
PRESENTATION
Mayor Ellertson will recognize the “Employee of the Quarter,” nominated by the employees and selected by an employee committee.
Mayor Ellertson observed that he was happy to recognize the “Employee of the Quarter,” Mr. Ott Dameron. He thanked Mr. Dameron for his dedication and sincere desire for the well being of this community. He reported that this award is given by his peer employees and as such, must mean more than coming from the Council. Mayor Ellertson noted that Mr. Dameron always strives to do what’s best for the community and is diligent in keeping the Council on task. He appreciates Mr. Dameron’s efforts and recognized that a simple certificate does not do justice to his efforts. Pictures were taken by the press.
Mr. Dameron expressed his surprise and shock when presented this award by the employees. He observed that he was honored and would accept on behalf of all employees of Lindon City. Mr. Dameron’s daughter congratulated him from the audience (Yeah, Daddy!)
MINUTES
Review of the Minutes of July 17, 2001.
The Minutes of the regular meeting of July 17, 2001 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 2, Line 12,13: Replace the word “than” with the word “that.”
Page 2, Line 16: Add the phrase “said no and further” after the name “Smith.”
Page 9, Line 37: Add the year “2002" after the word “spring.”
Page 10, Line 33: Replace the word “observed” with the words “questioned whether.”
Page 10, Line 34: Replace the word “would” with the word “may.”
Page 12, Line 32-36: Replace the phrase “,characterizing herself as the City Mother, asked why the wireless companies would avoid stealth technology because of the expense” with the sentences “expressed frustration that the company was not more actively pursuing the co-location possibility. These towers have great impact on communities that can be somewhat mitigated by stealth technology. To hear that financial reasons are being cited to avoid stealth technology is not acceptable.”
Page 12, Line 38,39: Delete the sentence “She commented that she was confused as to why NexTel would look for another location if only stealth could be used, and the Sprint tower was available.
Page 17, Line 37: Replace the period after the word “road” with a question mark.
Page 17, Line 39: Replace the word “He” with the word “They.”
Page 19, Line 19: Replace the word “were” with the word “where.”
Page 19, Line 32,33: Add the sentence “The Council directed staff to research option and report back.”
Page 20, Line 20: Replace the word “The” with the word “They.”
OPEN SESSION - Citizens comments
Mayor Ellertson asked if anyone would like to address an issue not on the agenda. Mr. Tim Goff of 120 North Main asked the Council to consider swimming pool for Lindon. He observed that non-resident fees to access another area pool were high. Mayor Ellertson mentioned that a survey had been conducted 3 years ago asking Lindon residents about buying in participation on the Pleasant Grove pool. The survey respondents had not been in favor of the idea. There was discussion on this survey and the offer from Pleasant Grove. Mr. Goff offered to circulate another petition. Mayor Ellertson observed that this may be a good idea. Mr. Goff reported that the Sant home was for sale. This home is adjacent to one purchased recently on the edge of the City Park.
MAYOR’S COMMENTS/REPORT
Mayor Ellertson commented that Lindon is in the midst of Lindon Days Activities. He mentioned that he had received and passed on positive comments on the program for this year’s event. He reported that 350 people had participated in the Gold Medal Mile Walk held on Monday evening. He passed on the compliments received for the participation in the event.
Mayor Ellertson promoted the events for the remainder of the week, mainly the Saturday parade, breakfast, flag raising and fair. There was a short discussion of plans for the Parade.
CONSENT AGENDA - No Items
CURRENT BUSINESS
1. Report and Action - Report and Funding Request. The North Utah County Rodeo Club will report to the Council on their activities and request sponsorship funding for the current fiscal year. Funding for the last two fiscal years has been approved in the amount of $350.00 per year.
Ms. Whitney Willis and Ms. Cassidy Kasslie Mitchell were present to represent the North Utah County Rodeo Club. Ms. Willis asked the Council to consider being a part of the rodeo as a sponsor for the 3rd year. She reported that the club works very hard to put on the rodeo. She announced that 6 athletes from this club had placed in the Top 10 in the State Championship. Two members had won state championships and had been invited to Fallon, Nevada for the Silver State Regional Championship. There they had placed in the Top 10 and helped the state win the Title for the 3rd year in a row. These had also gone on to the Nationals in Springfield, Ohio where they won the national Team Title. She asked for a $350 sponsor donation similar to the last 2 years. She also thanked Councilmember Bayless for her help with the Queen contest and thanked the Council for the use of the bottom half of the building for the contest.
The upcoming dates of events for the Rodeo Season were discussed. Ms. Willis informed the Council that this club had 13 members. There are about 1300 rodeo club members state-wide, of which 43 were on the State Team, 2 had gone to the Nationals and 4 to Fallon. Mr. Dameron mentioned that an article had been in the newspapers about Ms. Willis’s brothers getting rodeo-sponsored scholarships. Ms. Willis invited the Council to a rodeo competition in Pleasant Grove on August 24th and 25th.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A $350.00 SPONSORSHIP DONATION TO THE NORTH UTAH COUNTY RODEO CLUB. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Public Hearing - Subdivision Ordinance Revision - Chapter 17.32 - Ordinance #2001-8. The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve a revision of the Lindon City Subdivision Ordinance which is the result of the recently adopted General Plan for the City. The Council reviewed this revision to Chapter 17.32 of the Lindon City Code during its meeting of July 17, 2001.
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO OPEN ALL THREE PUBLIC HEARINGS. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Smith commented that this item had been continued from the last meeting in July. He noted that the changes were in bold, underlined and italics. Previous changes are not showing in this draft.
Mr. Smith noted a change to Section 17.32.080 that makes the City, not the Planning Department, responsible for the filing system. He asked the Council to review page 4, line 28 pursuant to the discussion concerning the requirement of curb, gutter and/or sidewalk. He suggested that some conditions be set that determine when curb, gutter and sidewalk shall not be required. Councilmember Dain suggested that the conditions be more vague, so that the Council can look at each case individually and consider any Planning Commission recommendations. Mr. Smith commented that it may work for now with the present Council, however, the future may change and as Councilmembers change. What is considered appropriate now may not be then. He suggested that the Council make standards so that there is consistency. Mayor Ellertson suggested that one condition may be when the curb, gutter and sidewalk is not required to handle drainage. Councilmember Bayless suggested that the Council wait for the Engineer’s report. Mr. Smith commented that it could be adopted without the conditions and then amended later.
Councilmember Bayless requested that an on-going discussion of road widths be considered. Mr. Smith observed that the present draft requires no less than 28 feet. He asked if this was adequate. Councilmember Bayless was not sure and again requested a discussion. Mayor Ellertson commented that the traffic report seemed to suggest that narrower roads promoted slower speeds. Mr. Smith told of a personal experience with a narrow road. Councilmember Bayless confirmed that she had no problem with approving the ordinance as written, but felt that further traffic studies should be pursued. Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Dameron the best way to promote and continue this discussion. Mr. Dameron suggested assigning the City Engineer Mark Christensen to examine some options.
Councilmember Bayless noted a spelling correction in partial width street(s). Mr. Smith noted the change in 17.32.130 to say “numbers and/or names.” Mayor Ellertson suggested that the ordinance indicate a preference for numbers. Councilmember Acerson asked if names are used, is a dual system of names and numbers required? Mr. Smith observed that numbers are preferred, but he had never had a developer argue that he wanted names. Mayor Ellertson requested that a statement be added about a preference for numbers on the grid system.
Mr. Smith noted that a change in page 6, “as provided for in 17.32.120(6)(e)” may need more discussion, since the previous reference to curb, gutter, and sidewalk requirements needed more input. Councilmember Bath noted the change about the City Council on line 8 of page 8.
Mayor Ellertson asked if there was any public comment. There was none. Mr. Smith asked if the Council was satisfied with the deep lot ordinance. He noted that he had not seen anything that needs to be changed in the three times it had been used since the ordinance had been adopted. Councilmember Bayless expressed the opinion that she still doesn’t like them, but “if we have to have them, then this is workable.” Mr. Smith observed that the developer must show that there is no other way to develop the lot.
Mayor Ellertson asked if there were any questions. He observed that Section 17.32.120 (6)(e) is open and uncompleted. He asked if the Council wanted to approve the ordinance amendment with this unchanged. Mr. Dameron suggested that the Council continue this item to the next meeting. Mr. Smith agreed.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PROPOSED REVISION OF THE LINDON CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
3. Public Hearing - Mixed Commercial Ordinance Adoption - Chapter 17.50 - Ordinance #2001-9. The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve the adoption of the Mixed Commercial Ordinance as an addition to the Lindon City Code. This action is in accordance with the recently adopted General Plan for the City. The Council reviewed this new ordinance during its meeting of July 17, 2001.
Mr. Smith noted that this copy included the changes from the last meeting. He noted that on Page 1, the height standards had been changed. The last two lines had been struck. He said that adopting some type of distance to height standard had been discussed, but not decided on. Councilmember Dain asked if the height was a maximum or an average. Mr. Smith replied that a definition for “Building, Height of” is included in Section 17.04. He noted that the definition could be added here. Mayor Ellertson suggested that a reference to the definition in Section 17.04 be added to this section.
Mr. Smith reported that there were not many other changes. The landscaping and open space requirements had not changed. He noted that the Mixed Commercial ordinance will affect the Mixed Commercial zone along 700 North to the freeway. The area will need a zone change when this ordinance is adopted.
Mayor Ellertson asked if there was any public comment. There was none. Councilmember Dain made a suggestion for Page 2, 17.50.070. He suggested that the wording be changed to “have finishes constructed of brick...”, and add the material “stone” to the list. Councilmember Acerson initiated a discussion on landscape berms. He felt that the requirement to vary their height no less than 3 feet was not very high. Mr. Smith replied that they should be sculpted and the intent is a berm with a 3- feet minimum height. He observed that the property owners in the area are concerned that the landscaping is too restrictive. Councilmember Acerson asked where berms are required in other sections of the code. Councilmember Dain asked if the purpose of the berms is to camouflage the parking. Mr. Dameron observed that the berms primary purpose is to provide aesthetics to the site.
Mayor Ellertson asked how wide the area is that must be bermed. Mr. Smith replied 20-feet. Mr. Dameron asked the height of the berm being put in by the Total Health Institute. Mr. Smith replied 5-feet. Councilmember Acerson asked for some comparisons or examples of berms with this height. Mr. Dameron commented that he believed the Riverwoods development had 5-6 foot berms. Mr. Smith observed that the berms at Riverwoods vary between 3 - 5 feet. Mayor Ellertson suggested that the ordinance require an average height that is greater than the minimum. Councilmember Bath suggested that there be a minimum run of the maximum height. Councilmember Acerson asked for some pictures and examples.
Mayor Ellertson suggested continuing this item for two weeks. He asked if there was any public comment. There was none. Mr. Smith asked the Council if they approved of the lot sizes and parcel size for a zone change. There was a short discussion of the minimum size needed for various establishments. Councilmember Bayless suggested that the minimum lot size be changed to ½ acre.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PROPOSED NEW SECTION OF THE LINDON CITY CODE TITLED 17.50 - MIXED COMMERCIAL TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCILMEMBER DAIN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
4. Public Hearing - Accessory Apartments Ordinance Amendment - Section 17.46.100 - Ordinance #2001-10. The City Council will hear public comment and possibly act to approve an ordinance amendment to Section 17.46.100 of the Lindon City Code, “Accessory Apartments” dealing with detached accessory apartments.
Mr. Smith observed that this is a redraft of the accessory apartment ordinance. The Accessory Apartment Ordinance is part of the R-2 Overlay Ordinance. The changes start on the 2nd page. Mr. Smith reported that Chief Building Official Phil Brown had suggested the addition of a second kitchen definition to page 3. He commented that many second kitchens become an apartment eventually. He added that this requirement is similar to one in Provo.
Councilmember Dain verified with Mr. Smith that an owner of a second kitchen could sign a waiver and affidavit so that he doesn’t have a double minimum on his utility bill. Mr. Smith read through the requirements for a second kitchen. He observed that these requirements give the City control over illegal accessory apartment creation. Mayor Ellertson asked if the term “kitchen” is defined. After discussion, it was decided that a cooking range constitutes a second kitchen.
Mr. Smith directed attention to the regulations concerning attached and detached accessory apartments. He noted that this draft contains the recommendations of the Planning Commission. Mayor Ellertson suggested the substitution of the word “appearance” for the word “character” in 17.46.100(6)(c). Councilmember Bayless commented that not all of the Planning Commissioners had been in favor of this change. Mr. Smith agreed and stated that three Commissioners had felt that detached accessory apartments should be allowed, one had felt that they should not be allowed at all, and one had felt that the restrictions were too narrow and they should be allowed on smaller lots in Lindon. They had decided to let the City Council decide the issue.
Mr. Smith declared that the issue needs clarification. He gave as an example a resident who wishes to add an apartment to a single family home on 127 East 400 North. This resident would like to put another home on his property of less than 40,000 square feet, but there is not enough room for another lot. There is the possibility of making the additional home an attached accessory apartment. Mr. Smith presented a sketch of a possible scenario. He showed how a manufactured home could be attached on other side of the garage. He declared that he felt this sketch would meet the intent of an attached accessory apartment as written in the ordinance. The only problem may be the size of the apartment. The ordinance says that the apartment should be a maximum of 1200 sq. feet. This home has 1700 square feet.
Mr. Guy Moore of 127 East 400 North brought his own drawings to pass out to the Council. He explained that he had talked to his insurance agent about adding the additional home onto the garage. The insurance agent had expressed reservations to this plan and had discussed fire walls. The insurance agent was not sure that his underwriter would accept this plan. He explained that he had not discussed his conversation with the insurance agent with Mr. Smith yet. He asked if a variance would be considered. He claimed that he only lacked 10 feet of frontage on 400 North. Councilmember Dain asked Mr. Moore the size of his lot. He replied that he was just slightly short of 40,000 sq. feet.
Mr. Smith observed that two variances would be needed: a frontage variance and a lot size variance. He commented that the Board of Adjustment could not include the flag part of the lot in the square footage requirements. Councilmember Dain asked if there was a chance that the Board of Adjustment would approve something like this. Mr. Dameron commented that the Board would have to be asked themselves. He could not assume to second guess their answer. Mr. Smith told Mr. Moore that the Board of Adjustment is a separate body from the City Council whose standards are set specifically by State Code. One of the reasons for a denial is that a hardship is self-imposed or economic in nature. Mr. Dameron suggested that Mr. Moore apply to the Board of Adjustment for a hearing.
Mr. Moore explained his situation to the Council and claimed that Mr. Smith had told him he could build an accessory apartment with a breezeway. Mr. Smith explained that he had mentioned that a breezeway might be considered as part of the ordinance amendment, but that the amendment was still under discussion and may not be adopted. Mr. Moore claimed that he had not intentionally misunderstood Mr. Smith, but he had assumed that he could build with a breezeway. He had returned home and sold his house in Nevada on that assumption. His wife has cancer problems and the doctor had suggested that treatment would be easier if she could be closer to her doctor in Utah. He claimed that he is now homeless and must be out of the Nevada house by the 15th of August. Although he owns the other home on the lot, it is not large enough for all of the occupants. His children are living there. He observed that he needs a building permit for a second home.
Councilmember Bayless asked Mr. Moore the insurance agent’s reason recommending that the homes not be connected by the garage. He wasn’t sure, but it was something about a roof fire and firewalls on the garage, and the sewer line. He commented that he had noticed his neighbors as required by the accessory apartment ordinance and some of them were here in support tonight. Mr. Mark Walter of 105 East 400 North claimed that the concern of the insurance agent is not only the firewall on the old house. He said that attaching the new home would block off some doors and windows. It would also leave only 10 feet of setback on each side of the home. If there was a fire in the back lot, the fire marshal would have no way to get the fire engine back there.
Councilmember Dain observed that it looked like this is an issue for the Board of Adjustment. Councilmember Bath commented that the owner needed a lot size variance because he would be about 4000 square feet short of ½ acre. Mr. Smith explained the time frame for calling a Board of Adjustment hearing. Mr. Darrell Frampton of 140 East 400 North told the Council that Mr. Moore needed to build before winter. Why was it taking the City so long to address Mr. Moore’s needs? He claimed that Mr. Moore had been talking to the City for over a year. Mr. Smith replied that he wished he could make it happen faster, but it will take time to call a meeting of the Board of Adjustment.
Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Smith to explain what needs to be done now to expedite the situation. Mr. Smith replied that the home may possibly be approved as an accessory apartment if the size of the apartment is reduced. Councilmember Dain commented that applying to the Board of Adjustment was not a guarantee of approval. Mayor Ellertson asked Mr. Smith to suggest the best approach. Mr. Smith explained that Mr. Moore has two alternatives: a deep lot or an accessory apartment. He will need to make the home smaller to comply with the accessory apartment ordinance. The deep lot will need approval by the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Moore asked for the blessing of the City Council to the Board of Adjustment. Councilmember Bayless explained that the Board of Adjustment is totally independent of the City Council and a recommendation would not be a guarantee of approval. There was a discussion on the duties of Board of Adjustment.
Mr. Walters suggested that another way to accomplish the goal be found if a variance is not approved. Mr. Moore agreed that he was not a defeatist and would like to figure out a way. He noted though, that time is of the essence. Mayor Ellertson commented that other than changing the ordinance, which is also a long process, the Board of Adjustment may be the next best alternative. He asked Mr. Smith to call and notice them for a meeting. Mr. Dameron suggested that Mr. Moore submit an application for a variance to the Board of Adjustment as soon as possible.
Mr. Smith observed that the accessory apartment ordinance needs to be clarified to help clear up these misunderstandings. Councilmember Bath declared that he didn’t think that detached accessory apartments are something that he would want to see in Lindon. Councilmember Bayless agreed. Councilmember Dain asked if a getaway office could be termed an apartment. It may have a bathroom or a small sink, under-counter fridge and microwave. After discussion, the Council thought that the office may be defined as an accessory outbuilding. The determining factor would be something that precludes another family from moving into the structure. Mr. Smith described an apartment over a garage with a large great room and a theater. Mayor Ellertson asked how the apartment would be accessed. Mr. Smith replied that the apartment could be accessed by a staircase on the side.
Councilmember Bayless declared that the intent of the accessory apartment ordinance was that the structure would still look like single family home. If the apartment and the home are detached and separate, it defeats the intent and should be considered an R2- Overlay project. Councilmember Bath agreed that a separate family dwelling is an R2 Overlay project and not an apartment. Mr. Smith asked the Council to consider an estate with a large home that the owner wishes to construct servants quarters or a guest house. Councilmember Dain suggested that the owner owned enough property that they could deed the house on a separate lot even though it may still look like part of the estate. This use would not be prohibited.
Councilmember Acerson recited an example of a family member in Moab with a detached mother-in-law apartment. The mother-in-law needed care but wanted to remain autonomous. The apartment is rented out now. Mr. Smith asked if the home is owner occupied. Councilmember Acerson replied yes. Mr. Smith observed that he didn’t see the detached accessory apartment provision as a way to get around the R2 Overlay ordinance. He commented that the home still has to be owner-occupied and the owner must sign an affidavit to that effect.
Councilmember Dain asked how the ordinance would be policed. Mr. Smith replied that the neighbors are the best source of complaints when there are problems. He also observed that care must be taken to not just allow detached accessory apartments for family members. Eventually, the family member will move and the apartment will be rented to the public. Mr. Dameron suggested that the apartment must not detract from the character of the home.
Mr. Smith observed that there did not seem to be much support for detached apartments. He asked if the Council wanted the clauses remove removed that deal with them. Councilmember Dain suggested that attached apartments be defined more clearly. Mr. Smith replied that they must have a common wall. A breezeway or pathway would not be considered as attached. Councilmember Acerson asked why the Councilmembers were opposed to detached apartments. Councilmember Bayless observed that if an apartment was in the basement the owner is more aware of the activities of the renter. If the apartment is in the backyard, the renter will not be monitored as closely. Mayor Ellertson verified that if the apartment was not attached, it would then fall under the R2 overlay ordinance and be considered two separate homes.
Mr. Smith observed that some R2 Overlay projects will not be allowed because of full districts and separation requirements. Councilmember Dain commented that a nice detached apartment can still be approved as an R2 Overlay project. Councilmember Bayless suggested that subsection 7 be removed and the ordinance not allow detached apartments.
There was a discussion of attaching an apartment with a breezeway. Mayor Ellertson commented that the breezeway attaching the apartment was not the problem, but those who would take advantage of this provision by building long, over-extended breezeways.
Mr. Dameron asked if the Council wanted to approve apartments as part of a detached garage. Councilmember Bayless declared that this provision would still defeat the purpose of the R2 Overlay. Mayor Ellertson observed that there are ways to build an apartment over the garage that do not change the appearance or character of the building. He asked Mr. Smith if it was possible to craft an ordinance that would allow those apartments that are okay, and not allow those that are not okay. Councilmember Bayless asked if the Council wanted to allow apartments over the garage. Mayor Ellertson declared that he would like to see if something could be done to allow the apartments that meet the intent of the ordinance. He would like to see a workable definition of attached and detached apartments and some conditions attached to their approval.
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO CONTINUE THE CONSIDERATION OF THE ACCESSORY APARTMENT AMENDMENT TO THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AND ALLOW THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TIME TO CRAFT LANGUAGE CONCERNING THE SUGGESTED CHANGES. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER BATH MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
5. Review and Action - Reimbursement Agreement - Gateway SID. Lindon Gateway, L.C. (Johansen/Thackeray) has proposed an agreement between themselves and the City which would memorialize the priority of expenditures for the Gateway SID construction improvements. The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and recommends approval as to its legal provisions and as to form.
Mayor Ellertson commented that this agreement is the culmination of much discussion. Mr. Dameron observed that the City Attorney had reviewed the document and the Council had gone through the priority list. He said that Staff recommended approval. Mayor Ellertson commented that the motion should include permission for the Mayor to sign on behalf of the City. Councilmember Dain asked if there were any questions and comments.
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN LINDON CITY AND LINDON GATEWAY L.C. AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL AND CONVENE THE LINDON CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AT 9:30 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
BOARDMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO ADJOURN THE LINDON CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND RECONVENE THE LINDON CITY COUNCIL AT 9:57 P.M. BOARDMEMBER ACERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Thackeray asked if the Council wished to look at the proposed lighting scheme. The Council replied affirmatively. Mr. Johansen asked if a motion was needed about the water shares. Mr. Dameron replied that this would be taken care of administratively.
Mr. Johansen explained that this lighting scheme is integrated as part of the landscaping. Mayor Ellertson asked if each dot represented a light. They replied yes. Mr. Thackeray explained the drawing. Mayor Ellertson asked what kind of lights were planned. Mr. Thackeray replied that they were in-ground lights. Mayor Ellertson asked if the architect had any pictures of similar installations to help the Council picture the final product. Councilmember Dain commented that he liked the plans for lights on the entry sign. The Mayor agreed.
Mr. Johanson observed that the plan may change some with the traffic study and recommended improvements. Mr. Dameron asked the Council for their vision of the completed project. Councilmember Dain described a landscape that was not completely washed with strong light, but it was not spooky either. He suggested a mix of overhead and landscaping lights, with the intersections overhead, and the in-between on the ground. Mr. Thackeray asked, “With the parking lot lights at Home Depot, were more overhead lights needed?” Councilmember Dain suggested overhead pedestrian lighting of about 8-12 feet tall. Mr. Johansen suggested that the City talk with the landscape architect. Mayor Ellertson requested examples. Councilmember Dain requested examples that they could go and see, not just pictures. The Councilmembers agreed.
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
WATER, GENERAL PLAN, BUILDING INSPECTION, ENGINEERING
Councilmember Dain reported that the fire station is ready to bid. He suggested a mandatory prebid meeting to explain and tour the building and hand out plans. He asked Mr. Dameron how much advertising was required. Mr. Dameron replied 5 weeks. Mr Dameron suggested that Fire Marshal, Mark Hales, have one final look at the plans. Councilmember Dain agreed and asked him to post the advertising. He suggested that the mandatory prebid meeting be held on a Tuesday.
SEWER, SOLID WASTE, PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES
Councilmember Hatch was excused.
TRAILS, PLANNING, ZONING, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ADMINISTRATION
Councilmember Bayless reported that new Planning Commissioners were still needed. She asked the Mayor if he had any appointments ready. Mayor Ellertson, as an aside, asked that the Open House planned for August 9, 2001 be cancelled. He asked that a note be put on the door like the last time. Councilmember Bayless suggested meeting candidates for the Planning Commission next week. Mayor Ellertson agreed on August17, 2001 starting at 5:30 p.m.
Councilmember Bayless reported that the County is talking about putting the county trails on the back burner for now. Three trails, which will remain a focus, go through Lindon. They are the Bonneville, the Lakeshore, and the Murdock trails.
Councilmember Bayless gave the Mayor some information on the Pioneer Home layout, and the list of names for the Veteran’s Memorial to be engraved on the plaque and read at the dedication on Saturday. She requested that the Veteran’s Memorial be placed by the flagpole for now and then moved after completion of the landscaping and building repairs to an a spot next to the building.
STREETS, SIDEWALKS, PUBLIC SAFETY AND COURT
Councilmember Bath reported that he had met with Pleasant Grove about the wrecker situation. He declared that it was one more step closer to being resolved and they were making progress.
He reported that he had talked to Public Works Director Don Peterson about a hole in the street at 200 East and 400 North. He observed that he thought water was leaking underneath and eating away the pavement. It was getting worse fast. Mr. Dameron replied that he would follow up with Mr. Peterson on this pothole.
PARKS, RECREATION, EMERGENCY MNGMNT, LINDON FAIR, NEWSLETTER
Councilmember Acerson announced a Saturday morning breakfast for Lindon Days. He welcomed any help to flip pancakes. He reported that another house in the foothills had been burned. This one is also arson. The Council discussed the situation and mentioned that 9 fires had been started so far in the area.
ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
Mr. Dameron:
1. Announced an engineering coordination meeting on Aug 16, 2001. The first Recreation Committee meeting would be held the same day at 7:30 pm.
2. Reported that Councilmember Hatch had wanted to talk about the church requesting picnic tables at the ballpark. He mentioned that if the City could supply picnic tables next spring, they would have the schedule available then to pencil in recreation activities for the City’s use.
3. Reported progress on the removal of the Billboard sign in the park. The last word from Mr. Parkinson, yesterday, was that the situation had been worked out and that the billboard would be coming down within 30 days.
4. Asked the Councilmembers to look over the settlement agreement with Judge Keetch. Action would be taken at the next meeting. If there are any questions, give Mr. Dameron a call.
5. Announced the Utah League of Cities and Towns Seminar is September 5 through 8, 2001. Mayor Ellertson and Councilmember Bayless confirmed their attendance. Councilmember Acerson tendered a tentative yes. Mr. Dameron announced that he would be attending this year.
6. Asked for a place and date for the City Christmas Party reservation. He passed along a suggestion from Ms. Colson that they consider the Veteran’s Hall and cater it. This was discussed and approved. Suggestions were made to soften the acoustics. Saturday December 8, 2001 was decided on.
7. Reported a new volunteer for the Recreation Committee. Lisa Armstrong is willing to serve on the Committee. She was welcomed.
8. Directed attention to the newest speed trailer report. He asked if there were any comments. He noted that the wider streets showed an average speed of 37-38 mph as the 85th percentile and the narrow residential streets were at 27-28 mph. Councilmember Bath commented that the white lines to narrow the street also helped. Councilmember Bayless noticed that no green lines had been painted yet for the pathways.
9. Announced that the Mayor and he had met with Pleasant Grove concerning the reimbursement agreement for the freeway interchange. The south boundary of the impact fee area is needed to finish the agreement. It will then come to the Council for approval.
10. Reported that URMMA has asked the City to come up with a policy on the use of computers, internet and emails. Suggestions for comparable policies were made.
11. Reported that he would be updating the wage and salary study. Councilmember Dain suggested that a look be taken at the starting rates. Suggestions were made for altering the policy.
COUNCILMEMBER DAIN MOVED TO APPROVE THE PAY VOUCHERS. COUNCILMEMBER BATH SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER ACERSON MOVED TO ADJOURN THE CITY COUNCIL AT 10:45 P.M. COUNCILMEMBER BAYLESS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
APPROVED - August 22, 2001
Ott H. Dameron, City Administrator/Recorder
Larry A. Ellertson, Mayor |
|
|
