|
|
Home » City Government » Planning Commission » Minutes Archive; 2000 - 2002 » Planning Commission Minutes 2001 » February 28, 2001
February 28, 2001
The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, February 28, 2001 in the Lindon City Council Chambers at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Loren Morse
Invocation: Jeff Southard
PRESENT
Loren Morse, Chairman
Ron Anderson, Commissioner
Lori Atchison, Commissioner
Bill Johanson, Commissioner
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Jeff Southard, Commissioner
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
Dave Franson, Planning Intern
Adam Cowie, Planning Intern ABSENT
Evan Nixon, Commissioner
Lindsay Bayless, Councilmember
The meeting began at 7:05 P.M.
BUSINESS
1. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the regular meeting of February 14, 2001 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 2, Line 10: Add the word “about” after the word “inquired.”
Page 2, Line 16: Add the word “additional” before the word “parking.”
Page 2, Line 22: Add the word “about” after the word “inquired.”
Page 2, Line 34: Replace the words “out of” with the word “beside.”
Page 2, Line 35: Add the phrase “and outside the perimeter” after the word “radius.”
Page 3, Line 7,8: Add the phrase “if it helped lessen the impact on the hillside and improve the character of the subdivision” to the end of the sentence.
Page 5, Line 6: Replace the word “fascia” with the words “front elevation.”
Page 5, Line 12: Replace the word “FASCIA” with the words “FRONT ELEVATION.”
Page 5, Line 39: Replace the word “east” with the word “west.”
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 14, 2001 AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Public Comment
There was no public comment.
3. New Business
Commissioner Peters questioned Mr. Smith on the procedures and time limits entailed in enforcing a notice of zoning violation, in particular, the flags at R Kars at 190 South State. Mr. Smith explained the current policies and procedures of his department and informed the Commissioners of the steps taken to enforce the sign ordinance at the aforementioned business.
4. Walker Heights - 500 North 800 East - Hillside Development Review
This is a request by Bill West for Planning Commission review of his proposed two-lot subdivision.
Planning Director Kevin Smith informed the Commissioners that this application was for review only and no formal action would be needed. He explained that a violation of the Hillside Ordinance had occurred when the subdivider graded two lots in preparation for later improvement and platting. He noted that City Engineer Mark Christensen was present to discuss the grading in light of the Hillside Ordinance, and what measures can be taken to bring the subdivider in compliance. He displayed a vicinity map and pointed out the location of the proposed 2-lot subdivision. The Commissioners asked questions to pinpoint the particular piece on 800 East on the east side of the street between the homes and the Squaw Hollow detention basin property. The map of the original contours before grading was examined. Commissioner Peters verified the location of the driveways that had been graded onto the lots.
Mr. Bill West and Mr. Roger Dudley of Dudley Engineering were present. Mr. West explained the background of his “error.” He told the Commissioners that the City had required some grading for the construction of 800 East in Walker Heights “A.” He knew that at some point in the future these lots would be sold, so he had the equipment operator level off a pad and sculpt the hillside to match the cut for the road. He asserted that he was not aware of the Hillside Ordinance.
Mr. Dudley admitted the property had been “over graded.” He pointed out the “dark area” on the map that indicated the grading required for the construction of 800 East. He told the Commissioners that he had studied the two lots to see if they were subject to the Hillside Ordinance. He had determined that one lot was not part of the Hillside Overlay and one lot was. Commissioner Southard confirmed this information with City Engineer Mark Christensen.
Chairman Morse asked Mr. Christensen to explain his concerns to the Commissioners. Mr. Christensen disclosed that he needed guidance from the Commissioners on how to apply the Hillside Ordinance. He explained that the present contours of the lots made them undevelopable according to the Hillside Overlay. However, if the original contours of the land were considered, only the one lot would fall under the Hillside Overlay requirements. Chairman Morse confirmed with Mr. Christensen that if the land had not been graded, it would be developable. Mr. Christensen further explained that he could see two options: one, the land could be restored to the original contours at great expense to the developer, or, two, the original contours could be considered in the present development plan.
Commissioner Southard asked if the lots were studied individually and separate for application of the Hillside Overlay, or if they were considered together as one parcel. Mr. Dudley confirmed that the lots were studied individually. Commissioner Peters asked for clarification of the grading allowed by the Hillside Ordinance. Mr. Christensen explained that the Hillside Overlay Ordinance allows no grading within 20 feet of the lot lines or greater than 30 feet from the house. Commissioner Peters asked about neighboring parcels, particularly their ownership and characteristics. Mr. Smith disclosed that the fenced ballfield above this parcel was owned by Trent Melhoff and the debris basin to the North was owned by the City.
The Commissioners and Mr. Christensen discussed the purpose of the Hillside Overlay. Chairman Morse asked Mr. Christensen to elaborate on the environmental effects of this grading. Mr. Christensen disclosed that erosion had occurred because of the steepness of the resulting slope and the absence of vegetation. Mr. West observed that the parcel had been reseeded last spring and the silt had been cleaned from the storm drain. Commissioner Southard confirmed with Mr. Christensen that the parcel had been reseeded. Mr. Christensen acknowledged that the reseeding had helped some. Mr. West explained that a drought had occurred right after the land had been reseeded, so the cover was not sufficient yet. Mr. Christensen revealed that some oak brush had been removed also.
Commissioner Peters questioned the stability of the slope if homes were built there. Mr. Christensen informed the Commissioners that a geo-technical report would be required. Mr. West presented a geo-technical report to the Commissioners and revealed that the engineer had drilled the land to 39 feet. His conclusions in the report were favorable according to Mr. West. Commissioner Peters asked if the geo-technical report included a soil report. Mr. Christensen quickly scanned the report and answered affirmatively. Mr. Christensen told Mr. West and Mr. Dudley that a fire report was needed. Other reports required by the Hillside Ordinance were briefly discussed by the Commissioners. Mr. Dudley asserted that the majority of the oak brush removed from the property had been taken out by the required grading for 800 East.
Chairman Morse recapped the discussion and asked the Commissioners if they wanted to require that the land be restored to its original condition or go forward with what had been done already. Commissioner Johanson expressed the opinion that ignorance of the law is no excuse. He advocated that penalties be considered. Mr. Smith informed the Commission that a violation of the Hillside Ordinance is a “Class C” misdemeanor. The procedures for levying fines, the amount of the fine, and the possibility of jail time were discussed briefly.
Commissioner Peters expressed concern with establishing precedence. Commissioner Anderson agreed and commented that if the City lets a violation like this occur with no recourse on the violator, the next violator could say, “you didn’t do anything to him.” Commissioner Johanson commented that many people endorsed the opinion that it is better to ask for forgiveness than permission. He felt that the City should make it advisable to ask permission first. Mr. Smith indicated that he would talk with the City Attorney.
The amount of grading that was required by the City in the construction of 800 East was discussed. Erosion control and revegetation was discussed further. Mr. Dudley pointed out that the homes, which would eventually be built on the lots, would be landscaped. Commissioner Southard asked if the lots had been sold. Mr. West claimed that no lots had been pre-sold. Commissioner Anderson suggested that the homeowners be required to landscape immediately. Mr. Smith suggested that the landscaping be part of the subdivision bond, so that if it is not completed in a timely manner, the City will move on the bond and finish the landscaping. He summarized the discussion thus far. Mr. Smith will follow up and discuss fines and/or jail time with the City Attorney, Lot 1 will be evaluated by the Lindon DRC under the Hillside Ordinance provisions with its pre-existing conditions and contours, and although Lot 2 conforms with the Hillside Ordinance, include it in the reports required for Lot 1.
Chairman Morse commented that he felt using the lots for homes was a more valid use for them than just letting them sit idle. There was further brief discussion on the steepness of the lots, bonding for landscaping and the reports required by the Hillside Ordinance. Commissioner Peters observed that it was obvious that parts of the Hillside Ordinance could not be applied since the grading. Mr. Christensen commented that he was trying to find something to apply. He suggested limiting further grading and requiring revegetation. The slope of the driveway to the building pads was discussed. Mr. Smith asked the applicants to assemble their information and meet with the DRC. He informed the Commissioners that they would see this application again to approve the subdivision plat.
5. Happy Acres - 800 North 700 East - Conditional Use Permit - R2 Overlay
Leo Coleman is requesting approval of a 6-unit town home project next to Meadows at Bald Mountain Subdivision.
Mr. Smith presented the background information on the location and zoning of this project. He told the Commissioners that 5 of the units will face the new 650 East being constructed as part of the Meadows at Bald Mountain project and the 6th unit will face 800 North which will be constructed as part of this project. Commissioner Anderson asked the size of the parcel where the town homes are proposed to be built. Mr. Leo Coleman disclosed that the parcel is one-and one-third acres.
Mr. Smith informed the Commission that one of staff’s concerns is the location of the driveway for the unit on the corner of 650 East and 800 North. It may be too close to the corner for safety. Commissioner Peters observed that this corner was not a standard curve. Mr. Smith explained the route of the 1200 East collector and how it affected this corner and its shape. The 1200 East collector and the agreement with Pleasant Grove and the developers of Bald Mountain was discussed.
Mr. Coleman presented a plan to change the driveway so that it was located about 27-28 feet from the corner. The present plan was about 10 feet from the corner. It was disclosed that the Code called for 20 feet between the driveway and the corner. The elevations of the plans were examined and discussed. The town homes are proposed to be an over/under design with a garage for each unit. Mr. Coleman asserted that the town homes would have the appearance of a home from the street.
Chairman Morse asked for the notification and attendance list of the neighborhood meeting held. Mr. Coleman gave him the list and noted that some of the five or six residents that attended were in the audience tonight. Chairman Morse asked if they had any comment or questions to make to the Planning Commission.
Jana McKnight, Don Wilson and Ron Frank were present. Ms. McKnight informed the Commission that Mr. Coleman had represented to them in the neighborhood meeting that the units would be sold. She confirmed with Mr. Coleman that now he was considering renting the units rather than selling them. She expressed concern about rental units and the care that tenants take of them. She felt that ownership tends to make for better neighbors. She talked briefly about accessory apartments and another project Mr. Coleman was doing in Lindon.
Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Coleman for his predicted rents on the units. Mr. Coleman told him from $1000 to $1100 each. Mr. Smith informed Ms. McKnight that an accessory apartment is approved in a house that is owner-occupied. This project would be an R2 Overlay project and does not fall under the same regulations. Commissioner Southard asked if the units could be sold. Mr. Smith told him that a condominium association could be formed to allow ownership of individual units. The construction of the project to condominium standards was discussed.
Commissioner Southard asked Mr. Smith for any other staff concerns. Mr. Smith informed him that the only concerns were the location of the driveway near the corner and the neighborhood meeting. He commented that Mr. Coleman had gone to some lengths to make the units look like single family homes. The number of units allowed on the acreage were discussed. Commissioner Southard asked about the landscaping standards for R2 Overlay projects. Commissioner Anderson asked Mr. Coleman if he was aware of the fencing standards. Mr. Coleman indicated yes and discussed his location and terrain briefly. Mr. Smith informed Mr. Coleman that a 6-foot fence was required unless waived by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Anderson pointed out that trees on the property line may be considered.
Commissioner Southard informed the neighbors present that this project met the standards of the ordinance and so could not be stopped. Ms. McKnight indicated appreciation for the R2 Overlay ordinance and said that she would prefer ownership of the town homes to rentals because rentals tend to depreciate quicker. She asked about response to complaints. Mr. Smith explained that the owner would be cited in the case of a valid complaint, not the renter. Conditional Use Permits were explained briefly also. Ms. McKnight asked about the time line for the construction of the 1200 East collector. Mr. Smith explained that the collector was a long range plan and no immediate plans were contemplated for its construction.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY LEO COLEMAN FOR HAPPY ACRES TWIN HOMES AT 650 EAST 800 NORTH WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE DRIVEWAY OF THE NORTHERNMOST TOWN HOME BE MOVED AWAY FROM THE CORNER OF 800 NORTH, AND THAT MR. COLEMAN WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS REGARDING THE FENCING AND COME TO THE CITY WITH A CONSENSUS OF NEIGHBORHOOD OPINION. COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
6. 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 presented Mr. Gayle McMurray to the Commissioners and submitted a picture of the proposed material and a picture of the building. He said that Mr. McMurray’s question to the Commission was whether his proposed material met the standard of the ordinance as a “similar material approved by the Planning Commission.”
Mr. McMurray explained that this proposed material was used in the sign making industry. Chairman Morse asked what the original approved design called for. Mr. Smith replied that brick was the original material. Mr. McMurray explained that the contractor had mistakenly not allowed for the brick in the pouring of the concrete floor and footings. Now to accommodate the brick the sheet metal would have to be cut out and more support provided.
Commissioner Anderson asked how it could have been completed so far off the original plans. Mr. Smith explained that it could have been corrected during the building process and agreed that now it would be difficult to correct. Mr. McMurray wondered if he put up more panels for the Commissioners to look at, it may give a better feel for how it would look completed. Commissioner Atchison commented that it was hard to visualize and more panels may help. Commissioner Johanson observed that if this style of a panel was accepted on this building then it would set precedence and other buildings would have this style.
Mr. McMurray told the Commissioners that he had no foundation for brick and a walkway had been installed on one side of the structure that was 10 inches deep. Commissioner Peters expressed the opinion that he personally did not care for the appearance of the material. He wondered if something else could be done in lieu of brick. Chairman Morse suggested looking at other buildings in the area for ideas. Mr. McMurray explained that the suggestion for this material had come from Councilmember Dain. Commissioner Johanson also expressed a negative opinion of the proposed material. Chairman Morse commented on the precedence issue. Mr. McMurray was asked to bring in another proposal. Mr. Smith asked for a time frame on submitting an alternative. Commissioner Southard suggested 30 days. Commissioner Anderson suggested that an architect should be consulted. Chairman Morse confirmed with Mr. McMurray that he would come and suggest an alternative material in 30 days. Commissioner Peters expressed hope that Mr. McMurray could find an economical resolution.
7. 17.46.10 - Accessory Apartments - Ordinance Amendment
This is a Planning Commission request to revise sections of the accessory apartment code. The Commission will consider amending the code to prohibit detached accessory apartments.
Mr. Smith explained that he had gotten more requests for detached apartments and was hopeful to come up with a policy that met the goals of the City. Commissioner Johanson observed that the previous ordinance required attached accessory apartments. Mr. Smith observed that this policy was not written into the previous ordinance, but may have been standard procedure. The Commissioners discussed the application for a building permit discussed at a previous meeting. Commissioner Peters commented that it was a good-looking project. The size of the lot was discussed. Commissioner Southard asked if the consensus was that no detached accessory apartments be allowed. The Commissioners denied that assumption and discussed situations that may be considered.
Commissioner Peters suggested that the size of the lot should be a consideration. Mr. Smith proposed several hypothetical situations including a proposal for an apartment over a garage that would be temporary quarters until a home could be built. Commissioner Southard confirmed with Mr. Smith that these proposals would comply with the requirements of the present accessory apartment ordinance. Commissioner Johanson expressed the opinion that the size of the lot may determine whether detached accessory apartments would be considered. Commissioner Southard described a housing project on South Mountain in Draper that incorporated an accessory apartment over the garage on a small lot. He suggested that the Commissioners may want to look at this project. Commissioner Anderson suggested increasing the setbacks for detached buildings with accessory apartments. Commissioner Peters suggested a 30-foot minimum setback.
Kim and Shelley Bonnett, members of the audience, presented the Commissioners with their plan to build a small home for his elderly parents, separate, but close to their home. His acreage and location were determined and discussed. Commissioner Peters asked why the Bonnetts wouldn’t consider subdividing the large lot and building the home on a separate lot. Mr. Bonnett explained that they had a long narrow lot without enough frontage to separate a lot off, and they wanted his parents close to the main house for easy care, but separate for their privacy and independence.
Mr. Smith commented that a bungalow could be built in the backyards of homes in Lindon. Commissioner Johanson cited an example of a small bungalow/home that he was aware of. Commissioner Southard also brought up Wadley Farms that has several buildings on the acreage. Commissioner Johanson expressed the opinion that the size of the lot may be the determining factor in allowing detached apartments. Various types of guest houses, pool houses, and other detached buildings that may be potential accessory apartments were discussed. Attaching these structures to the main building by a common wall or breeze-way were considered. Commissioner Peters endorsed the opinion that the size and shape of the lot were important considerations in possibly allowing detached accessory apartments.
Commissioner Southard summarized the discussion on allowing detached accessory apartments by increasing the setbacks required and meeting all other criteria for accessory apartments including parking, separate utilities and entrance, and maintaining the look of a single family home. Chairman Morse speculated that the Commissioners may be “opening a can of worms.” Commissioner Johanson reminded the Commission that the owner would be occupying the home and would be on the site. Chairman Morse asked the Commission for an adequate setback. The Commissioners discussed the Uniform Building Code and Fire Code requirements. Commissioner Anderson suggested that the present code allowed 7 ½ feet, so make it 10 feet. Chairman Morse suggested that Mr. Smith take the discussion and suggestions of the Commissioners and write it into a form that the Commission could consider at the next meeting. The Commission agreed.
8. Planning Director’s Report
Mr. Smith reported that the American Planning Association would be having their annual convention in Springdale near Zion’s National Park at the end of March. He asked the Commissioners if they would like to attend. Commissioners Peters and Johanson expressed interest.
Mr. Smith disclosed that Aseptic Services had submitted an appeal of the Commission’s decision to deny their application for a conditional use permit to the City Council. He reported that the business was being investigated by the County Health Department, the District Attorney’s Office and the County Sheriff for violations. The Commissioners discussed clean up of the site and collection of fines.
ADJOURN
COMMISSIONER SOUTHARD MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 9:40 P.M. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Certified as Correct, March 28, 2001
__________________________________
Loren Morse, Chairman
attest,
_______________________________________
Kevin Smith, Planning Director |
|
|
