|
|
Home » City Government » Planning Commission » Minutes Archive; 2000 - 2002 » Planning Commission Minutes 2001 » June 27, 2001
June 27, 2001
The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 at 7:00 P.M. in the Lindon City Council Chambers at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Loren Morse
Invocation: Bill Johanson
PRESENT
Loren Morse, Chairman
Ron Anderson, Commissioner
Lori Atchison, Commissioner
Bill Johanson, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
Dan Wolfley, Planning Intern ABSENT
Jeff Southard, Commissioner
The Meeting began at 7:08 P.M.
BUSINESS
1. Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the regular meeting of May 23, 2001 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 6, Line 34: Replace the word “feet” with the word “feel.”
Page 9, Line 14: Replace the word “side” with the word “wide.”
Page 11, Line 43: Add an “‘s” to the end of the name “BFI.”
Page 12, Line 7: Replace the word “in” after the word “make” with the word “it.”
The minutes of the regular meeting of June 13, 2001 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 4, Line 5,6: Add the condition “3) THAT THE DEVELOPER ATTEMPT TO INTEGRATE THE NEW PATHWAYS AND TRAILS CROSS SECTION FOR 70 SOUTH.”
Page 6, Line 22: Replace the name “Walker” with the name “Van Wagoner.”
Page 6, Line 24: Replace the name “Walker” with the name “Van Wagoner.”
Page 8, Line 41: Replace the word “Development” with the word “Business.”
Page 10, Line 25: Add the phrase “30-feet or more” after the word “south.”
Page 10, Line 25, 26: Add the sentence “He expressed concern that 30-feet may even not be enough and should match the homes across the street” after the sentence ending “considered.”
Page 11, Line 41: Delete the words “to get” after the word “up.”
Page 13, Line 14: Add the word “be” after the word “may.”
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF MAY 23, 2001 AND JUNE 13, 2001 AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Public Comment
There was no public comment.
3. New Business (Reports by Commissioners)
Commissioner Peters asked Mr Smith to check on a half-street that has not been brought to grade at 480 North. There was a discussion on the location and the surrounding property owners.
Commissioner Peters reported a trailer blocking the line of sight around a curve on 600 North between Locust Avenue and State Street. He also suggested that the curve be painted red.
4. Total Health Institute, Plat “A” - 600 North State Street - Preliminary Subdivision Request.
This is a request by the applicant for approval of a 1-lot subdivision.
Mr. Kent Taylor, Dr. Michael Cutler, and Mr. Mark Hampton were present to represent Total Health Institute. Mr. Smith observed that this item had been continued from the last meeting. The Council has amended the zoning to the commercial designation for the balance of the property to make it consistent with the General Plan.
Mr. Hampton remarked that Rimrock Construction has delivered a color drawing to the neighbors of the building from 600 North. Commissioner Nixon asked how far south the building had been moved from 600 North. Mr. Hampton replied that the building had been moved 28-feet from the property line which corresponds to 33-feet from the street. The building would rise 25-feet above the landscaping which is a 5-foot berm with a 2-foot shrub screen for a total of a 7-foot barrier. Trees were also incorporated into the landscaping design. There was discussion of the building being higher than the homes across the street. Mr. Hampton indicated that they had looked at moving the building further south, but plans for the therapy pool precluded any more shifting.
Dr. Cutler introduced himself as a general practitioner of 7 years. As a member of the Tri-City Medical Clinic in Pleasant Grove, he has seen an increased need for non-traditional remedies and complimentary therapies. He has partnered with some friends to create this complex that will include toxicology, massage therapy, physical therapy, chiropractic therapy and possibly other disciplines before long. They will provide low cost, private-label herbal products for their patients only. The emphasis will be on preventative care. He declared that the biggest health issue in the United States is open access to care and scheduling. Commissioner Peters asked a few questions about Dr. Cutler’s credentials. Dr. Cutler disclosed that he and his partners would be occupying only one floor of the building. He would have professional tenants occupying the other floor.
Commissioner Anderson verified that only one building would be built at the present time. The developers confirmed that the building facing west would be built first. Mr. Hampton commented that all of these questions so far addressed the site plan and not the subdivision plat. Commissioner Nixon asked the developers if they still wanted the subdivision approval if the site plan was not approved. They were uncertain. Mr. Smith explained that the site plan helped determine the approval on the subdivision. Commissioner Nixon expressed the opinion that the development should have access to State Street. Mr. Hampton explained that they did not own the property between this project and State Street, and only had an option on it.
Commissioner Peters observed that the parcel fronting State Street is critical to the overall style being promoted in Lindon. He was concerned that this project was being presented piecemeal and wondered how it would come together to fit into State Street. He expressed concern that the developers were determining the style of State Street. He felt that the Planning Commission should adopt a uniform style and market it to commercial developers. He asked Dr. Cutler about his plan to market his private label products. Dr. Cutler explained that he would be mailing orders to patients of the clinic only. He has no plans to advertise, package or bulk mail any products.
Councilmember Bayless asked for the size of the parcel on which an option is held which is located between the proposal and State Street. She was told that the remaining parcel is 3 acres. The developers future plans, if the option is exercised, were discussed. The developer plans professional office space similar to this application. Commissioner Nixon asked Commissioner Peters to explain his concern about the style of State Street. Commissioner Peters explained that no “official style” has been adopted. Lindon City has a theme of “country” which he felt was carried out by Linden Nursery and Los Hermanos. Commissioner Nixon observed that landscaping standards had been adopted for State Street. Commissioner Peters agreed, but added that no building style had been adopted. He felt that allowing any building on State Street would set a precedence for that style that may not be in harmony with what is envisioned for State Street in the future. Councilmember Bayless commented that this application was not on State Street. Commissioner Anderson observed that the three acre parcel in front would buffer this parcel from State Street. He was more concerned that this application fit into the residential neighborhood along 600 North.
Commissioner Nixon observed that the other offices in this complex may generate traffic in larger amounts than the clinic. He suggested a cross easement for traffic access to State Street for this subdivision proposal. Commissioner Peters thought that requiring a cross easement to State Street may increase the traffic that would access 600 North. Mr. Smith commented that a medical office generates more traffic than a regular professional office according to the City’s traffic engineer. However, the medical office generates 1/3 less traffic than a retail site. He observed that the anticipated traffic counts do not exceed the design of 600 North. Commissioner Nixon agreed that the traffic would not exceed the street’s physical design, however, he expressed the opinion that not having the cross easement would not stop people from accessing 600 North either. This may help divert traffic to State Street. Mr. Hampton stated that the access to State Street was not available. When asked for an easement during the negotiations for the purchase of this parcel, the owner just told the developers to buy the whole parcel outright rather than a portion. He was not agreeable to an easement.
Commissioner Atchison asked Dr. Cutler for particulars on his operating hours. Dr. Cutler replied that, at first, the hours would be 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. and Saturday 9 A.M. to 1 P.M. Later he hoped to add an evening clinic until about 7 P.M.. Commissioner Anderson confirmed that if the option was exercised, the developer had plans to open the access to State Street. Mr. Hampton verified that the plan was to open the access. The buildings that will be built on the front parcel would back to the north and south property lines and leave an open line of vision from this first building clear to State Street.
Commissioner Peters asked for details on the therapy pool. Dr. Cutler replied that the pool building was planned to be about 4,000 square feet and an attached extension of building #1 to provide therapy year round. Commissioner Peters asked the distance from the building to the south property line and the size of the building. The developers did not have this information yet because the building’s plans have not been drawn. Mr. Smith informed the Commissioners that the required setback is 20 feet to other commercial property and 40 feet to residential property. Commissioner Johanson verified that the property directly south of this parcel is also zoned commercial. Councilmember Bayless asked the planned distance between the buildings. She was told approximately 35-40 feet.
Mr. David Rockhill of 380 West 600 North expressed concern about the traffic accessing this clinic from the residential street in front of his home. He also questioned Dr. Cutler’s mention of a pharmacy. Dr. Cutler replied that he would have liked to have an in-house pharmacy, but it is not allowed to by the State of Utah. He informed the Commission that there would be no retail sales in conjunction with the clinic, just supplies on hand like splints, bandages, etc. Mr. Rockhill observed that the hours of the clinic would be 8-5 and Saturday 9-1 with maybe extended hours later on. He said that the parking lot was designed to hold about 100 cars. Mr. Smith clarified 103 cars. Mr. Rockhill asked Dr. Cutler how many practitioners would share the clinic. Dr. Cutler replied that there would be three health care providers. He informed the Commission that each practitioner would have about 30-35 appointments per day. Mr. Hampton commented that the other offices may have other health care providers. Mr. Rockhill asked if any tenants have expressed interest in the north building. Mr. Hampton replied that a civil engineer was looking at the main floor.
Mr. Rockhill asked the City Council to consider ways to slow traffic on 600 North. He said that the design of the buildings seemed to be acceptable to the neighborhood. He expressed concern about lights burning in the parking lot all night. Mr. Smith replied that the neighborhood could request traffic calming measures on 600 North and explained the application process. Commissioner Nixon commented that patients would be slowing to turn into the parking lot and not speeding on into Lindon from State Street. Mr. Smith observed that the berm alongside the road would give a feeling of narrowness to drivers which would tend to slow them also.
Mr. Lamar Barrington of 420 West 600 North had questions on Dr. Cutler’s plans to sell products to clinic customers. He asked about delivery trucks accessing the clinic parking lot. Dr. Cutler replied that he was anticipating only low volume sales, so there would only be occasional deliveries by truck. He explained that he wanted a professional image to be the public perception of his clinic. Chairman Morse commented that the building design did not include a loading dock so any deliveries would more likely be UPS.
Mr. Barrington emphasized that the proposal presented for a clinic was better than other commercial ventures that could have located there. He requested though that the Commission prevent any further access to 600 North from the commercially zoned property. Mr. Smith suggested that access to 600 North could be strongly discouraged. Mr. Hampton suggested that the property owner of the parcel fronting on State Street may agree to this restriction. Mr. Smith observed that the City Engineer had mentioned a possibility of business patrons parking on 600 North and walking into the complex rather than turning across State Street if there was no driveway access allowed from 600 North. Dr. Cutler commented that they would cross the clinic parking lot to access those businesses. Chairman Morse expressed hesitation to restrict access at this time, because the best interests of the neighborhood should be determined at the time a development proposal is received. Commissioner Nixon suggested a cross easement across the west side of the parking lot and the contiguous land under the option, to optimize the access to both parcels from the one access off 600 North on the west side of the proposed commercial subdivision.
Mr. Barrington asked if the Commissioners had come to consensus on restricting access to 600 North. Chairman Morse expressed the opinion that the Planning Commission could not limit the access at this time. Mr. Smith asked if the Commissioners wanted a cross easement recorded on the subdivision plat. Commissioner Peters asked if the cross easement was necessary. Commissioner Nixon felt that a cross easement would help limit the access points to 600 North. There was a short discussion on another access point nearer to State Street possibly diverting traffic into the complex before they proceed any further down 600 North Street.
Commissioner Peters asked if there was any limitation on what businesses could locate in the tenant space of the clinic building. Mr. Smith replied that whatever is allowed in the commercial zone by ordinance could locate in the building. The limits are provided in the Standard Land Use Table. Commissioner Atchison asked if the ordinance included retail. She was informed that the commercial ordinance allowed retail establishments. Dr. Cutler reiterated his plans for professional offices and asserted that retail businesses would not be leased any portion of the buildings. Mr. Smith commented that the parking was not sufficient for a retail establishment. Dr. Cutler observed that he definitely did not want a retail establishment using his parking.
Commissioner Nixon suggested that the building be pushed to the east and the staff parking lot removed. He cited concerns of trash pickup disturbing the residences to the east. He suggested that the staff parking and trash containment areas be moved to the west side of the buildings.
Commissioner Peters asked the height of the building. Mr. Hampton replied that the highest point was at 28-feet, 6-inches below the barrel vault. Commissioner Peters suggested that the building be moved further south away from the street. Mr. Hampton asserted that the building could not be moved any further south without reducing the needed parking. Commissioner Peters felt that the setback was lacking and suggested a setback of at least 35-feet. Chairman Morse commented that the ordinance required a 20-foot setback. Commissioner Nixon observed that the setback from a residential district is 40-feet, not 20-feet. However, he commented, he wished that he had this project to live across from instead of the building he had now. Commissioner Peters expressed the opinion that a larger setback was needed from 600 North. Commissioner Johanson observed that the neighborhood was agreeable to the present proposal. Mr. David Rockhill observed that the building was set back 33-feet from the back of the sidewalk.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY RIMROCK CONSTRUCTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE TOTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE, PLAT “A,” A 1-LOT SUBDIVISION AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) THAT A CROSS EASEMENT BE PROVIDED ON THIS PARCEL AND ON THE REMAINING PARCEL TO THE WEST FOR ACCESS TO STATE STREET AND 600 NORTH.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mr. Smith questioned whether this requirement was to be made now on this plat or later when the developer had exercised the option and acquired the parcel. Chairman Morse expressed the opinion that the Commission could only require an easement on the property the developer presently owned. Commissioner Peters clarified with Commissioner Nixon that the motion included an easement to State Street. Commissioner Nixon verified that he felt that access was needed to State Street and away from 600 North. Commissioner Peters observed that this would limit the development potential of the parcel fronting on State Street. He asked if Commissioner Nixon envisioned a dirt road access to State Street. Commissioner Nixon replied that only the easement was required. Commissioner Peters suggested that the easement be required on the present plat for now and an easement be required on the future development proposal when it is presented to the Planning Commission.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON RETRACTED HIS SECOND ON THE ABOVE MOTION. THE MOTION DIED.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY RIMROCK CONSTRUCTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE TOTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE, PLAT “A,” A 1-LOT SUBDIVISION AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) THAT A CROSS EASEMENT ON THE ENTIRE WEST SIDE OF THE PARCEL BE SHOWN ON THE PLAT FOR THE USE OF THE PARCEL TO THE WEST.
COUNCILMEMBER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
5. Total Health Institute - 600 North State Street - Site Plan Approval Request
This is a request by the applicant for approval of a new 8000 sq.ft. office building in the General Commercial Zone.
The Commissioners discussed the site plan. Commissioner Peters verified that the parking lot extended to the west property line. Mr. Smith noted the 40-foot sideyard setback only on the residential (east) side. Councilmember Bayless verified that this was the amended site plan and had the changes requested by the neighborhood. This was confirmed.
Commissioner Peters suggested that a restriction on retail space be considered. Mr. Smith observed that the distance from State Street would limit the retail businesses. He commented that there was not sufficient parking spaces for retail either. Mr. Hampton responded that it was not their intention to lease to retail businesses, especially since the parking was inadequate.
There was discussion of a possible difficulty in providing garbage service because of the lack of a turnaround in the staff parking lot. It was decided that the solution was to move the trash containment area to the front parking lot.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY RIMROCK CONSTRUCTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE TOTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE SITE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. A 5-FOOT BERM AND 28-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON 600 NORTH AS PER THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, EXHIBIT “A.”
2. THE STORM DRAIN BE A MINIMUM OF 12-INCHES WHEN IT LEAVES THE PROPERTY.
3. THE TRASH ENCLOSURE BE RELOCATED TO THE WEST PARKING LOT.
There was discussion of the storm drain requirement. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the storm drain meet minimum city standards when it leaves the property. Mr. Smith suggested that the City Engineer review the storm drain plan. Commissioner Nixon felt that this requirement would minimize maintenance and make for good neighbors.
THERE WAS NO SECOND ON THE MOTION. THE MOTION DIED.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY RIMROCK CONSTRUCTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE TOTAL HEALTH INSTITUTE SITE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. A 5-FOOT BERM AND 28-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON 600 NORTH AS PER THE LANDSCAPING PLAN, EXHIBIT “A.”
2. THE STORM DRAIN BE REVIEWED BY THE CITY ENGINEER AND CONSTRUCTED TO HIS RECOMMENDATIONS.
3. THE TRASH ENCLOSURE BE RELOCATED TO THE WEST PARKING LOT.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR EXCEPT COMMISSIONER NIXON WHO VOTED NAY. THE MOTION CARRIED.
6. Cindy Evans - 380 North Gillman Lane - Conditional Use Permit
This is a request by the applicant for approval to keep a stallion on her property.
Mr. Smith noted that Ms. Cindy Evans was not present. He described his efforts to contact her to no avail. Commissioner Johanson asked if the property in question was a ˝-acre parcel. This was verified. It was noted that the stallion was presently on the property. Mr. Smith gave the Commissioners some background on the application. He reviewed the issues that should be determined, such as an adequate enclosure for the animal, the applicant’s upkeep and maintenance plan for the animal, and how the applicant will protect the neighbor’s property from the animal if it becomes aggressive.
Councilmember Bayless submitted a letter declaring a possible conflict of interest, since the subject property is located within 500-feet of her home. The conditions of a possible conflict of interest and the ways to deal with them were discussed briefly. The animal ordinance as it pertains to stallions and property owners was discussed. Mr. Smith revealed that he had received complaints from neighboring property owners about the horses escaping from this property. He stated that the police reports indicate that the animals were at large five times during September 2000 and another four times in the next 2 ˝ months. There had been a problem with too many horses on the property also. There had been five at one time.
It was decided to discuss the neighbor’s concerns that may be present. Mr. Smith displayed a picture of the enclosure and the horse. There were letters from many in the neighborhood explaining their concerns. Commissioner Nixon commented on the condition of the fence and the number of times the animals were reported loose. Mr. Smith observed that not all the time the animals were loose were reported by the neighbors either. Sometimes they would just put them back into the corral. Commissioner Nixon observed that many of the neighbors complained about the treatment of the horses. He noted many times the animals were unfed or were fed by the neighbors.
Mr. Smith observed that the upkeep and safety of the animals were part of the Planning Commission’s concerns in determining the owner’s fitness to receive a conditional use permit for a stallion. He suggested that the Commissioners find the enclosure not adequately fenced and send her a warning letter. Chairman Morse suggested that the fencing was inadequate, and the feeding and maintenance of the animals was not adequate. Commissioner Anderson felt that the animal was a threat to the neighborhood. Mr. Smith acknowledged that Ms. Evans did not have a good track record. Commissioner Johanson asked if the enclosure met the setback requirements from the neighbor’s yards. Chairman Morse felt that the enclosure did not meet requirements of either size or strength. Commissioner Nixon expressed the opinion that she was negligent in the care of the animals by not feeding or exercising them.
Mr. Smith summarized the discussion. He suggested sending a letter to Ms. Evans detailing the concerns of the Planning Commissioners and the neighbors, and informing her that the Commission would be hearing her application for a conditional use permit on July 11, 2001. The letter would mention concerns about the upkeep and maintenance of her animals and whether the stallion enclosure was of adequate size and strength. Chairman Morse asked the Commissioners if they wanted to mention the privacy concerns of the neighbors. It was decided to continue the discussion at the next meeting and allow the neighbors to voice their concerns there.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST BY CINDY EVANS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO KEEP A STALLION ON HER PROPERTY AT 380 NORTH GILLMAN LANE. COMMISSIONER NIXON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
7. Wadley Farms - 35 East 400 North - Conditional Use Permit - Reception Center
This is a request by the applicant for approval of a reception center in the R1-20 zone.
Mr. Smith reminded the Commissioners of the change that had been made to the ordinances to allow recreational facilities by conditional use if the grounds are 10 acres or more and harmonious to the neighborhood. He reported that no complaints had been received by the neighborhood.
Mr. and Mrs. Colledge explained that they owned 17-acres of working farm with several historic buildings that had been renovated and restored. Their friends and neighbors had asked to use the structures for weddings and the schools have asked for tours. They have brought the buildings up to code and met the handicap criteria to open to the public. Commissioner Anderson asked about off-street parking. He was shown that a large area of off-street parking had been constructed. Ms. Colledge observed that more parking could be added when needed. A picture of the sign was shown. Chairman Morse asked if the neighbors had been noticed of this meeting. It was determined that the neighbors had not been given notice of the application to the Planning Commission. Mr. Smith commented that conditional use permits are reviewable on complaint.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY KRISTINE COLLEDGE FOR APPROVAL OF THE WADLEY FARMS RECEPTION CENTER AT 35 EAST 400 NORTH. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
8. Hub Cap City - 551 North Geneva Road - Amend Conditional Use Permit
This is a request by the applicant to amend their conditional use permit to allow auto sales and storage in the parking area in front of their building on State Street.
Mr. Smith reported some of the previous issues with this business owner had been taken care of and some were still a problem. He showed pictures of the block wall that had been built and a number of cars arrayed in front of the wall, some for sale and some inoperable. He stated that the area within the walls was intended for storage of the inoperable cars. The applicant had asked for an amended conditional use permit to allow the sale of used cars.
Commissioner Anderson commented on the number of cars on the lot and how some were in the driveways and beyond the curb. Ms. Nadine Gibb explained that they have been organizing behind the wall so that they could move the inoperable vehicles there. These vehicles had been moved here to this location when another piece of property had sold and made the move imperative. Their long term plan was to sell the business and retire. In the meantime, her husband was fixing the cars one at a time and selling them to reduce their inventory. She commented that this business is secondary to the hub cap business and that they are making wheel racks to organize and store the hub caps.
Commissioner Peters asked about the stack of old tires inside the wall. Ms. Gibb explained that they were stacking them to haul away. Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Smith if the Lindon City Ordinances restricted the storage of tires. Mr. Smith replied that there was nothing specifically on tires, but that they may be classed as a nuisance. Commissioner Peters observed that they harbor pests. Ms. Gibb agreed. Commissioner Anderson mentioned some insulation, trusses and old tires being stored in the railroad right-of-way that had not been removed after the wall was built. Ms. Gibb claimed no knowledge of this storage.
Commissioner Nixon suggested that as the problems are taken care of, more sales space may be given to them on the conditional use permit. Commissioner Peters suggested a time limit on the resolution of the problems. Ms. Gibb was asked what a reasonable time limit would be to sell the 20 used cars. She was unsure. There was a discussion of hauling them off to a junk dealer. Chairman Morse suggested a time limit of one month. There was a suggestion of six months. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the end of September be the time limit on correction of the problems and a 30 day limit be given to move the inoperable vehicles behind the fence.
Commissioner Peters mentioned that winter was coming and the tires would need to be removed before then. He agreed with the three month time limit. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the conditional use permit to sell be revoked if the clean up is not completed in the 3-month period.
There was discussion on customer parking. It was determined that there were several cars on consignment for sale at the business. Commissioner Peters suggested that the consignment cars be removed until the total number of cars is reduced to make room for twelve customer parking spaces. Commissioner Nixon suggested a time limit of five days to remove the consignment cars. Commissioner Peters suggested 10 days. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the three month limit include reducing the number of operable cars for sale to twelve and to clean up behind the back wall in 30 days. Commissioner Anderson asked for a time limit on hauling the tires off. Commissioner Nixon suggested 10 days.
Commissioner Johanson suggested that the number of customer parking spaces be determined and the balance of the parking lot be used as the sales area. Ms. Gibb showed the Commissioners the extent of the parking area on a picture. Commissioner Nixon agreed that the balance of the parking lot could be sales space. Commissioner Peters disagreed and thought that a limit on the number of cars should be set. Mr. Smith suggested that the sales lot be limited to operable vehicles displayed for sale. Commissioner Peters was concerned that the place would look more like a wrecking yard if all they had to do was put a sign in the window of their “running but not sellable” vehicles. Mr. Smith clarified that the vehicles should be operable, pass a safety inspection, and be able to be test driven.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY HUB CAP CITY FOR APPROVAL FOR A DESIGNATED AUTO SALES AREA FOR 10 CARS FOR THEIR PROPERTY AT 551 NORTH GENEVA ROAD WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. WITHIN 90 DAYS, REMOVE ALL CARS EXCEPT THE 10 CARS FOR SALE WHICH SHALL BE OPERABLE—BE ABLE TO PASS A SAFETY INSPECTION AND BE DRIVEN FOR A TEST DRIVE;
2. CLEAN ALL TRASH FROM THE OUTSIDE OF THE WALL, INCLUDING THE TIRES, INSULATION, ETC.;
3. REMOVE ALL EXISTING TIRES WITHIN THE WALL;
4. REMOVE ALL CARS ON CONSIGNMENT SALES AGREEMENTS WITHIN 10 DAYS UNTIL THE ABOVE RESTRICTIONS ARE COMPLIED WITH;
5. ATTEND A REVIEW OF THIS APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ON SEPTEMBER 26, 2001.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
9. Country Cars - 550 North State Street - Amendment to Conditional Use Permit
This is a request by the applicant for re-approval of the car lot which was approved in early 1999 and has since expired.
Mr. Smith explained that the owner of the property, Skip Dunn, had originally submitted a site plan that showed a number of improvements to the property. He noted that the only things left to complete were the planting of the trees, the set-up permit for the sales office and the sign being replaced.
Chairman Morse asked if the building was a permanent structure. Mr. Sweeten replied that the building was temporary and would be there a maximum of two years. He pointed out that the fence, lights, pavement, and etc. had been installed.
Commissioner Atchison inquired about a maximum number of cars on the lot. She thought it may hold 80 cars. Mr. Sweeten told the Commissioners that his intent was to have 30-40 cars on the lot.
Mr. Smith discussed briefly with the Commissioners about a cut-off on car lots on State Street. He felt that the current number of five was adequate and that future car lots should be located in the MD district.
Chairman Morse asked Mr. Sweeten for an appropriate limit on the number of cars. Mr. Sweeten explained that he could not give an accurate count without walking over the lot. Commissioner Nixon suggested an interim figure of 60 total cars on the lot. If Mr. Sweeten needs more, the application can be amended.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DUSTIN SWEETEN FOR APPROVAL FOR COUNTRY CARS, A USED CAR LOT AT 550 NORTH STATE STREET WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. A LIMIT OF 60 CARS TOTAL ON DISPLAY AT A TIME;
2. COMPLETE THE LANDSCAPING AS PER THE SITE PLAN WITHIN 30 DAYS;
3. PLANS FOR A PERMANENT BUILDING BE SUBMITTED WITHIN 2 YEARS.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
10. Utah Auto Sales - 52 North State Street - Temporary Conditional Use Permit
This is a request by the applicant for approval of a two-year permit to sell cars on the property on the corner of State Street and 60 North Street.
Mr. Smith noted that Mr. Gallagher was not present. After discussion, THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED BY CONSENSUS OF THE COMMISSIONERS.
11. AA Storage - 650 West 600 North - Non-Conforming Use Amendment
This is a request by the applicant for approval to expand a legal non-conforming use in the Commercial Zone adding an RV storage area to the storage units existing.
Mr. Smith displayed an overhead transparency of an aerial photo showing this property. He explained that the present storage units are a legal non-conforming use in the commercial zone. Mr. Dennis Butler explained that he had acquired the adjacent property 9 years ago. He would like to use it for RV storage. Mr. Smith had checked with the City Attorney that this request is an expansion of a existing non-conforming use. He read the ordinance dealing with non-conforming uses and the conditions that would allow their expansion. The Planning Commission needs to find that the expansion would be in harmony with the existing codes for the zone, that the expansion would place no unreasonable burden or damage the neighbors.
Commissioner Nixon asked if Mr. Butler would rather put more storage buildings on the parcel. Mr. Smith explained that this is a temporary expansion until the freeway interchange is constructed and the property developed commercially.
Commissioner Anderson suggested a 6-foot security fence with slats. Commissioner Peters wondered if the slats would present a security problem. Mr. Butler agreed that the neighbors would not be able to see into the compound to report intruders, however, he planned to solve that problem with motion-activated lights.
Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Butler if he planned to pave the lot. Mr. Butler indicated that it would be gravel for now, and he would continue to slowly pave the area. Commissioner Atchison questioned Mr. Butler on the types of recreational vehicles that would be stored there.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER NIXON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Commissioner Anderson asked Mr. Smith if landscaping was required by the ordinance along 600 North Street. Mr. Smith replied that it depended on the type of non-conforming use, whether the use is permanent or temporary. A permanent non-conforming use requires landscaping, while the temporary has less requirements. Commissioner Anderson suggested that the landscaping be bonded for. Mr. Smith observed that the temporary non-conforming use is for a maximum of 2 years and then it must be made into a permanent non-conforming use if the use is continued. The Commissioners discussed the landscaping that may be required, like piping the ditch and putting in a fence. Mr. Dustin Sweeten commented that this property would eventually be commercial. Chairman Morse asked Mr. Butler if his use would be temporary or permanent. Mr. Butler asked how long he would have to complete the landscaping if the use was permanent. Mr. Smith informed him that the landscaping would need to be completed within one year. Mr. Butler decided on a temporary non-conforming use to store recreational vehicles outdoors.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DENNIS BUTLER FOR APPROVAL OF A TEMPORARY EXPANSION OF HIS LEGAL NON-CONFORMING STORAGE BUSINESS LOCATED AT 650 WEST 600 NORTH WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. STORAGE OF RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ONLY, INCLUDING, MOTORHOMES, BOATS, TRAVEL TRAILERS, CAMPERS, HORSE TRAILERS, AND SMALL RV’S ON TRAILERS LIKE 4-WHEELERS, SNOWMOBILES AND WAVE RUNNERS;
2. THE RV STORAGE WILL BE ALLOWED FOR A MAXIMUM OF TWO YEARS;
3. INSTALL A FENCE WHICH IS SIGHT-OBSCURING ON THREE SIDES, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST.
COMMISSIONER NIXON LISTED THESE FINDINGS TO SUPPORT THIS MOTION.
1. THIS USE IS IN HARMONY WITH THE PURPOSE OF THIS ZONE.
2. NO UNREASONABLE BURDEN WILL BE PLACED ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
3. ENCOURAGE THE REMOVAL OF THESE ITEMS FROM LINDON’S STREETS, TO REDUCE THE CONGESTION, AND PROMOTE SAFETY.
COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
12 Ordinance Revision - Chapter 17.32 - Subdivisions
This is a request by City Staff to amend the Lindon City Subdivision Ordinance bringing in into compliance with the Utah State Code and the Lindon City General Plan.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER NIXON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Smith told the Commissioners that revision of the Subdivision Ordinance was needed to bring the City Code into compliance with the State Code. The changes proposed will bring the ordinance into consistency with the General Plan also.
Mr. Smith pointed out the changes and deletions in 17.32.010. The Commissioners and Mr. Smith talked briefly on the conditions that require a subdivision plat. The creation of small irregular parcels was discussed. Commissioner Peters asked if the County Recorder could enforce the subdivision ordinance and not record these unknown and unauthorized deeds. Mr. Smith replied that the County Recorder’s Office is not an enforcement agency for the city’s subdivision codes. He noted that the changes were from the State Code.
Councilmember Bayless commented on 17.32.020 (14). Mr. Smith asked if the Commissioners had any objections to removing 17.32.030 (3)(4) and (5). There were none. Mr. Smith noted the addition of 17.32.050 and 060 out of the State Code. He explained that these are the requirements for and exceptions to the filing of subdivision plats. Mr. Smith observed that the City Engineer had suggested that change to 17.32.110(4). The Commissioners discussed the changes which limited the mention of private streets in the ordinance. Councilmember Bayless objected to the removal of 17.32.110 (6)(e) that lists the shoulder requirements for streets without curb and gutter. Mr. Smith replied that all streets are required to have curb and gutter.
Councilmember Bayless asked for clarification of the phrase “determined by use” in 17.32.110 (6)(d). Mr. Smith explained that the “use” determines whether the street is a collector or minor street. Each of these kinds of streets has different requirements of width and grade. Commissioner Nixon suggested the wording of “No private streets allowed that do not meet public street standards.” Mr. Smith wondered if the Commissioners would prefer the removal of all mention of private streets from the ordinance. The Commissioners agreed. Commissioner Anderson suggested a minimum width for half streets. Mr. Smith suggested that this be left open so the Commissioner could adjust the width for flexibility and to meet the situation.
Councilmember Bayless questioned the use of the wording “street names.” Mr. Smith pointed out that although the streets do not have names like Maple or Oak, the names of the streets are their numbers, 200 South and 900 East. Commissioner Peters suggested changing the wording there to “names(numbers)” to avoid confusion.
Mr. Smith directed that Commissioners to the final clause of 17.32.160 which allowed the Planning Commissioners to recommend a modification of grade to the City Council. Chairman Morse commented that this could open the door to some problems. Mr. Smith pointed out how the clauses attempted to forestall situations like those encountered with the Bald Mountain Development. Commissioner Nixon commented that the Development Review Committee would not allow an unsafe condition. Chairman Morse predicted that the clause would be tested. Mr. Smith pointed out that if the request met the requirements and the findings it would be allowed. He commented that it was being done now, this would put the procedure and guidelines into the code.
Councilmember Bayless pointed out a spelling error and suggested the addition of the word “pathway” to 17.32.340 (1)(i). Commissioner Nixon suggested that (f) Street Construction and (h) Street Paving should be combined into one clause.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED REVISION OF THE LINDON CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE IN ITS ENTIRETY AS CORRECTED AND MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVE TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER JOHANSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR EXCEPT COMMISSIONERS ANDERSON AND MORSE. THE MOTION CARRIED.
COMMISSIONER JOHANSON MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER PETER PETERS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
13. Ordinance Adoption - Chapter 17.48.110 - Mixed Commercial
This is a staff-initiated review of a new commercial zoning district for the area primarily in and around the new freeway off-ramp on the west side of Lindon.
Commissioner Atchison questioned the wording of 17.50.060 (G). She felt that any time a planting died it should be replaced. The Commissioners discussed how much landscaping width should be required along city streets and along the I-15 frontage. Commissioner Anderson felt that the landscaping should be by the building on I-15 where it could be seen and appreciated, rather than in the ditch along the frontage. Mr. Smith suggested putting a 10-foot planter by the building and leaving the trees along the I-15 frontage. The Goodfellow business was discussed.
Commissioner Anderson expressed the opinion that the fencing and the open space requirements were excessive. He said that he had called a developer in Sandy and found that the typical open space requirement is 10%. Building materials were discussed briefly. Mr. Smith asked if the Commissioners wanted to reduce the open space requirement to 10%. Commissioner Johanson suggested that Lindon’s motto of “Little Bit of Country” dictated more than the usual. Commissioner Anderson felt the requirement of 20% would hurt the smaller lot holder and make it not buildable. He felt that 10% would be enough. Commissioner Atchison suggested a compromise of 15%. Commissioners Nixon, Peters, and Chairman Morse endorsed this proposal.
Commissioner Nixon suggested that the tree locations be capable of being adjusted and modified to fit the circumstances. Commissioner Atchison discussed the lighting clauses. Chairman Morse asked if the Commissioner felt that this ordinance was ready for the Council.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED NEW SECTION OF LINDON CITY CODE TITLE 17.47 - MIXED COMMERCIAL IN ITS ENTIRETY AS CORRECTED AND MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR EXCEPT COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WHO VOTED NAY. THE MOTION CARRIED.
14. Ordinance Adoption - Standard Land Use Table - Appendix A
This is a staff-initiated review of the Standard Land Use Table which regulates the types of land uses allowed in each zone in the City.
After discussion, THE COMMISSIONERS DECIDED BY CONSENSUS TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO JULY 11, 2001.
ADJOURN
THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED BY CONSENSUS AT 11:45 P.M.
Certified as Correct, August 8, 2001
Loren Morse, Chairman
Attest,
Kevin Smith, Planning Director |
|
|
