The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, February 25, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Lindon City Center, Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Prayer: Jim Peters

PRESENT

Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Ron Anderson, Commissioner (arrived at 7:10 p.m.)
Julie Bryner, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
Lorenzo Barcellone, Planning Intern
James McMurray, Planning Intern

ABSENT

Gary Godfrey, Commissioner
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember

The meeting began at 7:04 p.m.

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Chairman Sweeten led the Commission, audience and staff in the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

There were no minutes ready for review.

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no public comment.

4. NEW BUSINESS (Reports by Commissioners)

Commissioner Bryner suggested that 200 South needs some sidewalk from 500 East to State Street. She pointed out a safety hazard with telephone poles "inches away from the road" and no crossing guard or sidewalks for students going to Rocky Mountain Elementary. Mr. Smith replied that he would bring this suggestion to the attention of the City Council. Commissioner Nixon commented that Rocky Mountain Elementary had redefined their boundaries so that no students from Orem would need to cross this street. Commissioner Bryner felt that the corner of 500 East and 200 South, in particular, should be made safer and pointed out that there was no left turn lane from the west.

Commissioner Peters suggested that a development plan for State Street should be considered. He expressed the opinion that definitions of colors, architectural features, landscaping and fencing should be considered. He reminded the Commission of his presentation on Panguitch's architectural standards and felt that something similar would be beneficial to Lindon.

(Commissioner Anderson arrived at 7:10 p.m.)

Commissioner Bryner asked if such a standard would be included in the ordinances or if a separate guideline document would be issued. Commissioner Peters replied that it would be included in the ordinance. Chairman Sweeten commented that the ordinance for Commercial zones is fairly broad. Commissioner Peters agreed and added that there are more standards existing in the Industrial ordinance than the Commercial ordinance. He suggested that a rough draft should be considered immediately to guide development on State Street. The Commission discussed the need to stiffen the standards and other cities' architectural standards. Commissioner Peters suggested that Lindon is one of the few cities in which State Street is not fully developed and that this is Lindon's chance to guide development on State Street and enhance Lindon's image.

5. LEE'S HOMESTEAD - 190 NORTH 400 WEST - R2 OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
This is a request for approval of an R2 Overlay project consisting of two triplexes on a 1.4 acre parcel.

Ms. Joy Lee of 594 North Locust told the Commission that she had talked to the neighbors about fencing options. Mr. Smith presented this application for an R2 project at 190 North 400 West. He displayed the original site plan and the new versions that had been developed from the suggestions at the last meeting. He informed the Commission that two new layouts had been submitted for consideration. The first layout moves the rear building back, reorients the front building and shifts the driveway. The second layout moves the front building and the driveway. He presented the revised elevations.

The Commissioner discussed the elevations. Ms. Lee pointed out the windows and location of the door. She noted on the site plans that the driveway is shifted and presented pictures of the view across the street from where the driveway ends to show that lights will point between the houses. She observed that if the driveway is put at an angle, the lights will shine into the Farrar home. She suggested that the driveway would be better straight than angled. Commissioner Nixon asked where she stood to take the picture. Ms. Lee replied that the picture was taken from what would be the middle of the driveway. Commissioner Nixon observed that there is no reason that the driveway must be at an angle, and suggested a curve in the driveway to bring it closer to the north property line and still bring the vehicles out in a straight line between the homes. Ms. Lee asked about blind curves and safety. Commissioner Nixon pointed out that the driveway curve is gentle and should be bordered by lawns. Commissioner Bryner commented that the driveway will be slightly meandering. Commissioner Peters observed that bringing the driveway closer to the property line on the north side will eliminate the landscaping on that side. Commissioner Nixon suggested that a landscaping shield on the south may be more effective.

Ms. Lee asked about a "swing-out" on the driveway for a mail gang box. Commissioner Nixon felt that this could still be accommodated. Mr. Smith suggested that the gang box could be accommodated on the parking lot also. Ms. Lee commented that she had talked to the neighbor on the north about the irrigation ditch access. Their concern was only to get through the fence. She noted that she had talked to the water master about piping this ditch and that a 24-inch pipe is required.

Ms. Lee commented that she had talked to some of the neighbors about the composition of the fence and told the Commission that those that had expressed a preference wanted a wood fence, except Mr. Griffith, who wants cinder block. She wondered, however, if Mr. Griffith realized how distant the parking lot would be from his home. She pointed out that the parking lot lies about 100-feet from the back of his home and is also behind his shed. She expressed the opinion that Mr. Griffith's home will be shielded from the parking lot by his shed and the distance. She presented pictures. Chairman Sweeten observed that Mr. Griffith had expressed concern about lights from vehicles in the parking lot shining into his house. Mr. Smith displayed the location of the parking lot and measured distances from the home in question on an aerial photo.

Ms. Lee showed how the parking lot would shift in the alternative site plans. Commissioner Bryner asked Ms. Lee which plan she would favor. Ms. Lee indicated Option #1. Commissioner Peters asked if Ms. Lee had considered the other issues raised by the Commission at the last meeting, mainly basements, garages and lowering the height of the buildings. Ms. Lee replied that she had discussed these suggestions with her contractor and was told that lowering the buildings and adding basements would add extra costs of $15,000. She would prefer to move the buildings back. She observed that the buildings meet the code. Commissioner Peters asked about garages. Ms. Lee replied that she has decided not to add garages, but sheds. She showed how the sheds would be attached to the buildings. Commissioner Bryner asked the size of the sheds. Ms. Lee replied that they would be big enough to hold a bike and a barbeque. Commissioner Peters commented that the sheds would need additional approval by the Commission.

Mr. Richard Griffith of 156 North 400 West commented that he is still the home closest to the parking. He asked if Ms. Lee would consider rotating the back building and putting the parking in the back corner. Commissioner Anderson commented that this would make the parking more visible from the street. Mr. Griffith asked Ms. Lee and the Commission to consider moving the parking back as far as possible. The possibilities were discussed and it was noted that the parking may not be conducive to resident use if they have to walk a greater distance from their parking space to their unit, for instance, to haul their groceries. They may park on the driveway or other areas to get closer to their doors. Mr. Griffith observed that he plans to add a new master bedroom to his home on the back, which will bring his bedroom closer to the shed/garage and parking lot.

Chairman Sweeten suggested that trees and shrubs block light and noise better than a masonry fence. Commissioner Nixon agreed that a landscape buffer helps light, but not noise. Commissioner Simister asked the distance between the parking lot and the fence. Ms. Lee replied 30-feet. She added that the parking lot is tight and it may be difficult to move or tighten it further. Commissioner Peters confirmed that the size of the parking spaces meets the code. Mr. Smith verified that the spaces themselves were 9 x18 and a distance of 24-feet was between the rows. He noted that a back-up space will be needed on the end of the parking lot.

Mr. Griffith commented that he has horses on the back of his lot and any wood fence would be "history." Chairman Sweeten suggested that vinyl would solve this problem. Mr. Griffith expressed a preference for masonry to reflect sound. Commissioner Nixon suggested that if Ms. Lee is considering converting the project to condominiums at any time in the future that garages would solve noise problems now. Ms. Lee replied that, if she decided to convert, she would come back for covered parking. She added that what she would really prefer to do is break up the parking into smaller lots of two or three spaces nearer the units, rather than having a central parking area. Commissioner Peters encouraged this idea.

Commissioner Bryner asked if Ms. Lee was intentionally trying to keep the area behind the home separate from this project. Ms. Lee indicated that she wanted to use this parcel for personal use. Chairman Sweeten reminded her that the Commission would not consider this lot as a separate parcel for development purposes. Commissioner Peters commented that he would like to see the disposition of this lot because it will also determine the size of the project and the location of the perimeter fence. Ms. Lee indicated how she would prefer the fence location. The Commission discussed the fence location options.

Commissioner Nixon asked Ms. Christiansen if she had a preference on the fence. She replied no, that she just wanted to maintain access to the irrigation ditch. Commissioner Nixon suggested that, since there is commercial zoning on the east border, he would be willing to consider no fence on that portion if the fence on the south is upgraded to block. He felt that the impacts of this project are greater on the south side. Chairman Sweeten suggested that some fence is needed here to protect resident's children. Commissioner Nixon replied that any commercial venture will be required to build a block fence on this border. Chairman Sweeten noted that the ordinance requires enclosure of the project. Commissioner Bryner asked Ms. Lee what kind of fence she would prefer. Ms. Lee replied that she would prefer white wood. The Commission, Ms. Lee and the neighbors discussed Commissioner Nixon's suggestion.

Commissioner Anderson asked if Ms. Lee intended to pipe the ditch. She indicated that she intended to pipe the ditch along the back of the project, but not on the portion that would remain undeveloped. The Commissioners discussed the size of the pipe.

Chairman Sweeten asked if there were any other concerns. Mr. Griffith asked if Ms. Lee would rent out RV storage spaces on the undeveloped portion. Chairman Sweeten replied that rental of RV storage is prohibited in non-commercial areas. Mr. Griffith asked if the City had received complaints about noise in other R2 projects. Commissioner Nixon replied that a former Commissioner lived across the street from a project and had reported no complaints from the neighbors. The project was pointed out on an aerial map.

Commissioner Bryner observed that she would prefer the fence to be continuous and uniform. Chairman Sweeten agreed. Commissioner Simister felt that requiring a continuous fence may not be fair, since any fence on the back will be removed and changed on the commercial border. Commissioner Anderson suggested that any change in the composition of the fence will not be visible from the street. Commissioner Peters commented that he agrees with Commissioners Nixon and Simister and added that he would like to see the fence on the south upgraded. Chairman Sweeten pointed out that there is just as big a concern on the north where the project adjoins the existing home. Ms. Lee noted that a six-foot fence already exists here. Commissioner Bryner added that the garage on the south side of the existing home buffers this home from the project.

Commissioner Nixon suggested that light is more easily shielded than sound, so a block fence may be needed. He recommended that an upgraded fence be installed on the south side, that the ditch be piped the whole distance and a wire fence be installed along the commercial boundary. Chairman Sweeten asked if criteria is contained in the ordinance to consider an exemption on the fence issue. Commissioner Nixon read the ordinance criteria and suggested that the Planning Commission can allow a wire fence in this situation.

Commissioner Nixon commented that his other concern is the dumpster at the end of the driveway. Ms. Lee replied that the dumpster will be enclosed. Chairman Sweeten confirmed that the dumpster will not be directly visible from the street. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the dumpster should be moved to the north of the driveway behind some vegetation. The Commissioners discussed truck access to the dumpster.

Commissioner Simister commented that Ms. Lee should not be discouraged by the comments and suggestions so far. She observed that Ms. Lee had done a good job incorporating the changes to the setbacks, building location and driveway. She added that she would like to see a plan that separates the parking though. Chairman Sweeten commented that he would like to see more architectural treatment to the side facing the street. He pointed out that since the building adjustment, this side does not resemble a residential home. He felt that windows were needed. Ms. Lee pointed out a couple of locations a window could be added. Chairman Sweeten observed that the Commission cannot approve a vague window addition and needs finished elevations. The Commission discussed how to improve the elevations.

Commissioner Peters agreed that progress is being achieved and suggested that decisions are needed on the fence and the elevations. Ms. Lee admitted to frustration on the lack of an approval and asked for a list of additional changes. Commissioner Nixon suggested some research into costs per lineal foot for wood, vinyl and block fencing. He observed that the Commission seems to be willing to make a tradeoff on the fence. Chairman Sweeten summed up the discussion by stating that the Commission seems comfortable with layout #1 as shown with the change on the curve of the driveway. He suggested that elevation changes, fencing and parking options should be considered. He also suggested that Ms. Lee contact the garbage company to find out requirements for garbage truck pickup. Commissioner Nixon commented that the front of the building facing the street should look like a house, not an apartment. He also encouraged further research into a basement. Mr. Smith suggested that Ms. Lee seek his advice before the next Commission meeting. Commissioner Peters also suggested that Ms. Lee make a firm decision on the lot shape as this will help determine the material of the fence.

THE COMMISSION REACH CONSENSUS TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST BY JOY AND FRED LEE FOR APPROVAL OF LEES HOMESTEAD, A SIX-UNIT R2 OVERLAY PROJECT AT 190 NORTH 400 WEST.

6. LINDON CAR WASH - 600 NORTH STATE STREET - SITE PLAN REVIEW
This is a request for approval to locate a full-service car wash across the street from the new Wal-Mart.

Mr. Russ Naylor of Nichols Naylor Architects (SLC) introduced himself to the Commission. Mr. Smith displayed an aerial showing the location of the proposed project on the corner of 600 North and State Street. He showed the Commission the zoning of the lot and surrounding area and then displayed the proposed site plan. Chairman Sweeten asked the square footage of the parcel. Mr. Naylor replied 1.33 acres. Mr. Smith observed that staff had no concerns and commented that the Commission might want to discuss the block wall to shield the residential uses. Chairman Sweeten confirmed that the ordinance requires a block wall to shield residential use and not the residential zone. Mr. Smith verified this statement and read the applicable passage from the ordinance. He noted that the fence requirement can be modified in certain circumstances.

Commissioner Simister commented that there is an irrigation ditch on the west side of the parcel. Mr. Naylor replied that the portion of this ditch that lies within the boundaries of the parcel will be piped. He noted that the water master had provided the size of the pipe. Commissioner Peters commented that this ditch carried a lot of water and may require a larger size. Mr. Smith commented that this would be reviewed by the city engineers.

Chairman Sweeten asked about the corner that will be left after the realignment of 600 North. Mr. Smith replied that this corner is city property and that it can be handled in two ways–either deed it to the adjoining property owner and retain utility easements, or retain it in city ownership and give the adjoining property owner the right to use it with a maintenance agreement. The Commission discussed the ramifications of each option and noted that this change in the alignment of 600 North is part of the offsite improvements required for the Wal-Mart site across the street.

Mr. Naylor explained the details of the site plan and business operation. He pointed out the wash area, detail area, employee and handicap parking, sales area, play area, and public bathrooms. He commented that the building will be faced with stone and stucco and pointed out the features of the elevations. Commissioner Peters asked if there would be a surface treatment on the inside of the wash area. Mr. Naylor explained that the inside would be concrete walls. He informed the Commission that the outside will be brown tones from light tan to dark brown and rust for the stucco and stone wainscoting. He directed the Commission to visit a similar establishment in Provo on University Avenue for colors. He noted that the roof will be a 40 year architectural shingle. Commissioner Peters suggested that some arches be added to incorporate the look of the City Center and the new Walmart. He also suggested a standing seam roof similar to the City Center. This was discussed.

Commissioner Nixon suggested moving the dumpster where it will impact the residences less. He pointed out a location and the site was discussed. Commissioner Simister asked about the area north of the parking lot. Mr. Naylor replied that this 67-foot area between the parking lot and fence is landscaped to buffer the residences in that area.

Commissioner Anderson asked about queuing to the wash bays interfering with traffic to the signal light on 600 North. Mr. Naylor replied that the business is not expecting quantities of traffic. Mr. Dean Erickson added that the driveways were determined by UDOT. The driveway onto State Street was pointed out and it was noted that this driveway is designated "exit only." Commissioner Bryner asked how customers would go east on 600 North from State Street. Mr. Naylor pointed out the route customers would take on the business property to turn left onto 600 North.

Commissioner Simister asked about the fence on the east side of the property bordering the residential area. Mr. Naylor replied that the fence would be six-foot precast concrete. Mr. Smith suggested that the neighbor on the parcel that fronts 600 North may not want a boundary wall along his property because he is presently marketing his parcel as commercial. Mr. Smith suggested that Mr. Naylor and Mr. Erickson might want to talk to this neighbor as it may save them the expense of a wall on this property line.

Chairman Sweeten suggested a vinyl fence on the care center (west) side. Mr. Erickson pointed out that the canal separated the parcels. The Commissioners and applicants discussed the care center's layout and the need for a fence on this boundary. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the care center is a commercial business and the code does not require a fence.

COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DEAN ERICKSON FOR APPROVAL OF A FULL-SERVICE CAR WASH AT 600 NORTH STATE STREET IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. THAT A MASONRY FENCE BE CONSTRUCTED ON THE EAST AND NORTH BOUNDARIES, AND SUGGEST THAT THE APPLICANT COORDINATE WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER ON THE EAST BOUNDARY ADJACENT TO THE HOUSE FOR SALE.
2. THAT ARCHED WINDOW ELEMENTS THAT MATCH THE CITY CENTER BE CONSIDERED.
3. THAT THE APPLICANTS BE REQUIRED TO ACCEPT A DEED FOR THE PROPERTY VACATED BY THE REALIGNMENT OF 600 NORTH FOR LANDSCAPING PURPOSES.
4. AND, THAT THE GARBAGE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE BE MOVED AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL HOMES.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR, EXCEPT COMMISSIONER PETERS WHO VOTED NAY. THE MOTION CARRIED.

The Commissioners discussed the reason for Commissioner Peters' dissent. He explained that he felt the architectural standards for Lindon's State Street should include a standing seam roof.

7. MS PROPERTIES - 435 NORTH 1200 WEST - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT
This is a request to add an additional 12,000 sq. ft. building on the Intermountain Galvanizing Plant.

Mr. Smith displayed the area and the amended site plan. Mr. Dan Smith, construction manager for MS Properties introduced himself. Mr. Smith pointed out the alignment for the future 1200 West extension through the site and noted that the new building will be positioned to accommodate the road. He noted that there were some issues with unauthorized outside storage on a parcel owned by this company. He suggested that one of the conditions of approval be compliance with the zoning ordinance. He informed the Commission that the heavy industrial ordinance does not have architectural standards. He pointed out a possible concern with storm drainage. Commissioner Nixon asked if landscaping was required for this zone. Mr. Smith replied that twenty-feet along the road frontage was required.

Chairman Sweeten asked if the Commission could require the extension of 1200 West with this application. Mr. Smith explained that this may be perceived as a "takings" issue and advised against this approach. The Commissioners asked about the color of the building and were told it would match the existing buildings.

Commissioner Anderson explained his storm drainage concerns. He pointed out a blocked pipe, a maintenance problem on a ditch and flooded fields. He suggested that the approval be contingent on a city engineer's review and recommendation to fix the problems. Chairman Sweeten confirmed that this new building may aggravate a problem that already exists. Commissioner Anderson agreed. Mr. Smith suggested that City Engineer, Mark Christensen, and Public Works Director, Don Peterson, visit the site to assess the problem. Commissioner Peters suggested a continuance pending the engineer's review and the submittal of a proposal to bring the zoning violation into compliance. The Commission discussed this suggestion and decided to make compliance a condition of approval.

COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DAN SMITH AND MS PROPERTIES FOR A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT TO ADD A NEW BUILDING ON THEIR EXISTING SITE AT 435 NORTH 1200 WEST WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT A BUILDING PERMIT NOT BE ISSUED UNTIL:
A. THE STORAGE SITE TO THE NORTH IS BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE, AND
B. THE CITY ENGINEER PRESENTS A SOLUTION TO THE DRAINAGE PROBLEMS IN THIS AREA TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

8. PETERSON WOODWORK - 923 WEST 500 NORTH - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT
This is a request to amend the site plan and allow for the creation of a second driveway across the existing landscaping.

Mr. Smith informed the Commission that the applicants were not present and this item should be continued. The Commission discussed the safety issues of backing onto 500 North, storm drainage problems, and the removal of city property without approval. Chairman Sweeten commented on the danger of precedence.

THE COMMISSION REACHED CONSENSUS TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST BY STEVE PETERSON FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT SITE PLAN BY ALLOWING THE CREATION OF A SECOND DRIVEWAY ACROSS THE EXISTING LANDSCAPING.

9. ORDINANCE REVIEW - 17.74 - PATHWAYS AND TRAILS
Staff will present and discuss a new and updated version of the trails ordinance.

Mr. Smith informed the Commission that the review and discussion of this ordinance proposal is by Council request. He noted that general provisions for trails have been made in the residential code, the general plan and the development manual. This ordinance would define and make more specific requirements. He observed that the ordinance had been put on temporary hold prior to this because of the need to find a surface material suitable for the pathways and trails. He noted that there has been a lot of opposition from lot buyers to pathways and conjectured that this opposition stems from misconceptions on the surface material and the primary users. Most buyers have the idea that gravel will be used and that horses are the users. There is also the question on whether or not pathways can be replaced by wider sidewalks, and where to require pathways–on every street or just the main connections between the mountain and lake.

Commissioner Nixon expressed the opinion that every new subdivision should be required to put in pathways. Chairman Sweeten commented that pathways are a means to connect neighborhoods. Commissioner Nixon asked if research on material to reinforce turf that would allow horse use had been done. Mr. Smith commented that turf brings up the question of maintenance. The Commission discussed turf options and reinforcement.

Mr. Smith asked the Commission to consider whether the pathway/street cross section is wide enough. He pointed out that one of the results is narrower streets which may encourage traffic calming. The Commission discussed this idea briefly.

Commissioner Peters expressed the opinion that the major problem is with maintenance. Mr. Smith informed the Commission about installation and maintenance options that have been implemented in Lehi. The Commissioners discussed the probability of pathways becoming a liability to the City instead of an asset. Commissioner Nixon suggested that pathways could be limited to collector streets. He pointed out that most areas are not far from a collector. He observed that the City may be able to maintain these limited pathway corridors.

Commissioner Simister commented that most walkers, horse people and other pathway users were not in favor of gravel. Commissioner Nixon suggested pulverized asphalt. Commissioner Bryner asked if there was an expert that could be consulted. Mr. Smith replied that John Knudsen at the State and Jim Price of MAG have been consulted. The options for surfaces, such as wood chips and sand, have limitations. He commented that the most desirable surface material, crushed limestone, is not readily available. He observed that the Lindon City Public Works Department is opposed to trails because of the maintenance issue. He commented that it may be unrealistic to consider pathways for local streets, but that the importance of the issue as a whole should not deter the City from implementing a plan to incorporate pathways and trails into the City landscape. Chairman Sweeten confirmed that the problem lies in discovering a solid surface that does not scatter and resists weeds. Mr. Smith confirmed this statement.

Mr. Smith noted a proposal had been discussed once to build wider sidewalks, and have park strips with trees. Commissioner Nixon asked if the funds are available to build and maintain this suggestion. Mr. Smith replied that the Council seems to be willing to commit to the funding. Commissioner Simister commented that it would be nice to have a way to ride a horse from the west side to the trailhead on Canal Drive. Mr. Smith replied that Lindon City is negotiating with UDOT to find solutions for crossing the freeway, Geneva Road, and State Street with the TimpLake Trail. Progress is also being made on the Lakeshore Trail which connects the Provo River Walkway along the Utah Lake to the Jordon River Walkway. Commissioner Bryner commented on the Aqueduct trail along McKinley Road in Canberra Heights.

10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT

The Commissioners discussed training and meeting start times.

ADJOURN

THE COMMISSION REACHED CONSENSUS TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 10:20 P.M.

APPROVED - March 10, 2004

back to top