The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, July 28, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in Lindon City Center, Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Invocation: Dustin Sweeten

Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Ron Anderson, Commissioner - arrived 7:05
Julie Bryner, Commissioner
Gary Godfrey, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner - arrived 7:04
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Lile Lavaki, Community Development Clerk
James McMurray, Planning Intern

The meeting began at 7:03 p.m.

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

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

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Minutes will be reviewed at the next regular meeting.

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no public comment.

4. NEW BUSINESS (Reports by Commissioners)

Chairman Sweeten inquired about a nonconforming building on State Street which is going through a face lift. He questioned at what point in the modification process is the owner required to pull a building permit and how much modification will the City allow before imposing current ordinance. Mr. Smith explained that this particular project has a building permit and that he and Mr. Phil Brown, Chief Building Official, reviewed the plans and issued a building permit. As for imposing the existing ordinance, the City can only do so when adding square footage. Commissioner Peters observed that this project is located on State Street and the City may want to impose certain architectural requirements. Commissioner Anderson noted that the site looks much better than before. Commissioner Simister expressed desire to require landscaping along State Street. Chairman Sweeten commented that the business had sufficient parking and could replace the stalls along State Street with a twenty-foot landscape. Mr. Smith noted that the Planning Commission can require the landscape, however, its not often the City deals with this issue and cited the dance studio as an example. Mr. Smith cautioned that the owner could argue that the parking stalls are needed. Commissioner Godfrey felt that any requirement should be imposed prior to building permit issuance of the building permit.

Commissioner Peters inquired about the architectural design requirements for State Street. Commissioner Anderson asked if Mr. Jim Dain had been contacted. Mr. Smith reported that the City Council has agreed to hire a professional consultant to assist the City with this item and Mr. Dain has been asked for his expertise. Commissioner Peters commented that the cemetery cast concrete fence has created a weed problem along the sidewalk on 600 North and 200 East. He reported Alpine School District is going to put up their property, approximately 25 acres on 600 North, for bid. Commissioner Peters expressed his desire for the City to purchase portion of the available acreage for a park and referred to Sugarhouse Park as an example of what could be accomplished. Mr. Smith observed that this is something to discuss with Mr. Ott Dameron, City Administrator, but noted that the City has requested four acres for a park. Commissioner Bryner mentioned Celebration Park in Texas as another example of what can be accomplished in the area. She asked Councilmember Bayless for her input.

Councilmember Bayless expressed concerns with the cost to not only purchase property, but also the cost to develop parks. She reported that a park impact fee is assessed on building permits and is earmarked for such use. Commissioner Anderson asked if Walkers on 700 North is required to install a white rail fence. Mr. Smith replied "yes."

Chairman Sweeten declared that he no longer has a financial interest in Low Book Sales and therefore will remain on the Commission.

5. Low Book Sales - 600 North State Street - Site Plan. This is a request for site plan approval for a 3.5 acre used car lot in the General Commercial zone.

Mr. Dave Nielson of Low Book Sales, introduced Mr. John Whitle as his architect and Mr. Chas Phelt as his financial official. Mr. Smith displayed an aerial photo of the site and presented this item. He explained that the City has spent considerable time over the last few months working through the nonconforming use issue. Now that the issue has been resolved, Low Book Sales is requesting site plan approval. The plan submitted is similar to the site plan review by the Planning Commission in June. The applicant is proposing to display 181 cars for sale, 18 customer parking stalls, and 38 stalls for employees. Mr. Smith noted that the applicant has new elevations for review. Mr. Nielson cited John Mecham’s Auto Dealership building in Park City as an example of the design he wishes to build. He expressed desire to use similar earth tone colors and roofing material. Mr. Smith pointed out that the roof material is similar to that on the City building. Commissioner Peters inquired about building heights. Mr. Smith noted that the maximum height allowed in the zone is 48 feet. There was a discussion of the type of rock and stucco system. Mr. Whitle explained the "pop-out" feature on the front of the building. Commissioner Nixon inquired if the same would be applied to the back of the building. The reply was "no."

Mr. Smith mentioned five items that the Planning Commission may want to review with Mr. Nielson:
1. Whether or not there should be a 600 North access.
2. Traffic flow-through from the office buildings in the rear to State Street.
3. A proposal for white vinyl fence to the rear of the site that is not incorporated with any landscaping.
4. Appearance and storage limitations for the secured storage area.
5. Type of maintenance to be conducted in the shop.

The applicant observed that he really does not care if there is an access on 600 North, however, to be sensitive to the neighbors, customers will turn right at the light thinking there is a right hand access into the business and there is not. Therefore, they will use the neighborhood streets to turn around. Chairman Sweeten asked Mr. Smith if the city engineer has studied this issue. Mr. Smith reported that the engineer feels the access is needed. Commissioner Nixon inquired for the reason the 600 North access does not line up with 400 West. Mr. Whitle replied that this is a draftsman’s error and will be corrected. Mr. Smith explained the need for the access to assist with the traffic flow from the office buildings to the east. Commissioner Peters asked for clarification of the two accesses to the public right-of-way to the east. Mr. Nielson observed its for people from the east buildings wanting to access State Street. Commissioner Peters reminded the Commissioners that 600 North was never intended to be or designed as a thoroughfare. Chairman Sweeten commented that "the City can’t burden the current owner with the easement." Mr. Nielson reported he will allow people to use the two accesses, however, he needs to be able to secure his site and inventory.

Commissioner Bryner inquired about the six-foot fence on the east property line. Mr. Whitle noted this also as a draftsman’s error, however, there will be a three-foot, double rail fence on the west, north, and east sides. He also explained the drive-through route from the east accesses to State. Mr. Smith asked if the parking stalls to the south of the "drop-off" area are needed. Mr. Whitle noted that the stalls provide good exposure without overcrowding. The Commissioners expressed concern with the lack of a straight through, east to west access from the site to State Street. Commissioner Bryner inquired what would be used to secure the east side after hours. The applicant reported that a chain with metal posts on both sides will be installed. Commissioner Bryner suggested putting in some landscaping. Mr. Nielson asked if he could incorporate "rock posts" every fifteen-feet of the three-foot split rail fence to match the building and referred to the business Somewhere Inn Time as an example. Mr. Smith read the fence ordinance and noted that changes can only be made to the location of the fence. He also reported that the fence referred to was approved under a different ordinance. Commissioner Bryner observed that the 600 North access is needed, but recommended eliminating the southeast access from the public right-of-way.

Commissioner Peters inquired about the waterfall feature. Mr. Whitle commented it’s a six-foot rock structure in a small pool area that will re-circulate the water. Mr. Nielson conveyed his desire to do something nice for the neighbors. Commissioner Peters expressed concerns with possible safety and liability issues with standing water in the pool and suggested a recirculating feature. Commissioner Godfrey observed that the waterfall feature on the corner of State and 600 North is a nice addition and pointed to Pleasant Grove’s water fountain as a plus to its development by Macey’s. Mr. Nielson explained that he informed the neighbors he would make the site look attractive. Mr. Whitle commented that split block would be used in the shop area to protect it from damage. He discussed the elevations, intended use of the shop building and how vehicles will enter and exit the service shop.

Commissioner Nixon inquired if the City is going to require the applicant to provide access to the public right-of-way to the east of the property. Chairman Sweeten observed that Mr. Nielson is willing to provide access but the Planning Commission could not require it. Chairman Sweeten asked if the applicant needed or wanted the two accesses on the east side. Mr. Nielson reported he does not need them, but is trying to accommodate the city, neighbors, and businesses to the east.

Commissioner Godfrey inquired about the landscape setback on the north side. Mr. Smith noted that 20-feet is required. Mr. Nielson explained he would like to have a gradual berm from State Street to the edge of the access to 600 North. He also wants to construct meandering sidewalk along State Street to preserve the large trees if possible. Mr. Smith observed that UDOT does not allow meandering sidewalk on State Roads. Commissioner Nixon suggested a steeper roof pitch and the use of rock for a more rustic look, instead of exterior insulated finish system (EIFS) stucco. There was additional discussion on the showroom, the big pillars at the front entrance, and the type of material to be used on the building. Mr. Whitle noted the corners and part of the pillars will be of harristone rock veneer with beams on top and the walls will be EIFS stucco. Commissioner Godfrey inquired about the wall space between the showroom and shop. Mr. Nielson reported that this wall space is reserved for a wall sign. Commissioner Nixon asked for clarification of the sign ordinance. Mr. Smith read the ordinance.

Commissioner Godfrey and Commissioner Peters expressed approval of the proposed site plan with slight modification to the parking stalls on the south side of the "drop-off" area. The Planning Commission commended Mr. Nielson for a job well done on the building elevations. The Commission expressed their desire for Lindon to develop its own unique architectural appearance. Commissioner Anderson explained that one of the unique feature Lindon City has incorporated is the cupola and referred to Wal-Mart as an example.

Mr. Smith asked the applicant about the secured storage area. Mr. Nielson explained he does not want the storage area where neighbors can see it, however, he desires to blend it in with the south side of the site where he will construct a six-foot high solid screen white vinyl fence for the neighboring property owner. The area is reserved for newly purchased vehicles to be stored and cleaned prior to placement on the lot for sale. Commissioner Peters inquired where the Mr. Nielson purchases his vehicles. The reply was that the majority are bought in Utah.

Commissioner Peters also asked about the sound system, lighting, and hours of operation. Mr. Nielson informed the Planning Commission that he has invested in a paging system and all his employees will carry a pager. There will be no loud speakers or overhead paging. The hours of operation are from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday thru Saturday, and closed Sunday. The Service Center hours are 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. The lights along 600 North will be programmed to dim at 9:30 p.m.

Commissioner Peters asked about the unloading of cars. Mr. Smith noted it would be similar to the Lexus of Lindon and Utah Auto Sales. Mr. Nielson explained how its being done at the Salt Lake site and noted that vendors will unload where they are told to unload which will be on State Street.

Mr. Nielson was asked to explain the type of maintenance work in the service shop. He noted that maintenance is limited to light wrench work. Mr. Smith commented that auto repair shops are not allowed on State Street. Mr. Nielson wanted to "make it clear that there will be no major auto repair whatsoever performed in the building or on the site." Chairman Sweeten inquired what type of service is being offered. The response was "we do a lot of oil changes for our customers." The applicant restated that auto repairs would not be done on site and this is not part of his business. There were discussions about traffic calming devices for 600 North. Mr. Nielson offered to donate money for a sign on 600 North deterring traffic into the neighborhood.

COMMISSIONER BRYNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY LOW BOOK SALES FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A 3.5 ACRE USED CAR LOT AT THE CORNER OF 600 NORTH STATE STREET AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. A BERM ON THE NORTH SIDE BE EXTENDED FROM THE DRIVE APPROACH ON 600 NORTH SLOPING UP TO MATCH THE HEIGHT OF THE BERM ON THE EAST PROPERTY LINE
2. A LEFT TURN ONLY SIGN BE PLACED ON THE ACCESS TO 600 NORTH
3. THE TWO ACCESSES TO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ARE APPROVED AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN
4. THE SOUTH PARKING STALLS OF THE "DROP-OFF" AREA ARE REMOVED TO ALLOW THROUGH TRAFFIC
5. A SILENT PAGING SYSTEM BE MAINTAINED
6. SIDEWALK BE INSTALLED ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF 600 NORTH
7. EARTH TONE COLORS BE USED ON THE ROOF AND BUILDING
8. NO UNLOADING OF VEHICLES ON 600 NORTH
9. NO TEST DRIVING ON 600 NORTH OR IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
10. NO LIGHT POLLUTION
COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

6. Lindon Bluff - 800 North 650 East - Preliminary Subdivision. This is a request for approval of a 3 lot residential subdivision in the R1-12 zone.

Mr. Dan Parkinson was present. Mr. Smith presented this project and noted that this is the previous site of H5 Development’s R2 Overlay project which was denied by the City Council. Mr. Parkinson is now requesting approval for three lots which will be used for single family homes. Commissioner Peters asked Councilmember Bayless why the Council denied Mr. Parkinson’s R2 Overlay project. Councilmember Bayless observed that the cost per unit and safety were issues for the Council. Mr. Smith informed the Planning Commission that the Council has put a six months stay on R2 Overlay application acceptance and is putting together a committee to study the ordinance.

COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DAN PARKINSON FOR APPROVAL OF LINDON BLUFF, PLAT "A" THREE LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AT 800 NORTH 650 EAST AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

7. Turbo Tubzz - 295 South 1250 West - Site Plan Amendment. This is a request for approval to add an additional building to the existing site in the Light Industrial (LI) zone.

David Peterson, engineer for the applicant, Mr. David Green, was present. Mr. Smith showed an aerial photo of the site. Mr. Smith explained that Turbo Tubzz currently has a concrete tilt up building to the rear of their site along I-15. The applicant is requesting approval to construct a metal building along their frontage on 1250 West. The proposed building will have split face block on 30% of all sides. The building is intended to be used for storage for the existing business. Mr. Smith reported that the parking area has become outside storage and gravel has been installed instead of sod. It was mentioned that some of the required trees cannot be planted due to the gas line running through the property. Mr. Smith informed the Planning Commission that the Zoning Department currently has an open code enforcement file on this site.

Chairman Sweeten inquired if the Planning Commission should consider an expansion when the site is out of compliance. Mr. Peterson noted that the applicant can’t put landscape in until after the expansion. Chairman Sweeten observed that the landscape should have been installed with the first building. Mr. Smith cited Goodfellow as an example of how to make an applicant complete all site plan requirements. He also suggested that Mr. Green could be required to post a cash bond for the incomplete items. Commissioner Godfrey commented that a cash bond may be preferable. Chairman Sweeten wondered if this would allow people to postpone completing the landscape. It was noted that a Certificate of Non-Compliance had been recorded against the property by the Chief Building Official due to lack of a final inspection. Commissioner Simister suggested requiring the applicant to complete the building and landscaping and clean-up the site before reviewing the expansion. Commissioner Peters concurred.

Mr. Smith informed the Planning Commission that Mr. Peterson is one of the best engineers he has worked with, however, he wished Mr. Green, the applicant, was present to discuss these issues. Chairman Sweeten asked Mr. Peterson why Mr. Green was not in attendance. Mr. Peterson replied that his client had asked him to attend. Commissioner Peters inquired if the new building would eliminate the outside storage issue. Mr. Peterson replied "yes." Mr. Peterson suggested that the owner may be able to move some of the products inside the current building and the remainder could go into a storage unit. Commissioner Godfrey asked if the code allows finished products to be stored outside. Mr. Smith replied "yes, but in a designated area." Mr. Smith pointed out that the finished products are currently being stored in required parking stalls.

Commissioner Peters observed that the three-foot gravel area on the south side of the property must be replaced with grass. Commissioner Godfrey inquired about the building. Mr. Peterson explained it’s a metal building with split-face block and dark blue trim. He commented that the owner would be eager to comply to conditions handed down by the Planning Commission because the metal building kit is on the site, being stored in the parking lot, awaiting assembly.

COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST TO AMEND THE SITE PLAN FOR TURBO TUBZZ ALLOWING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A STORAGE BUILDING ON THEIR EXISTING SITE AT 295 SOUTH 1250 WEST WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS BEING COMPLETED WITHIN 60 DAYS OR SOONER:
1. THE BUILDING MUST BE FINALED AND BROUGHT TO COMPLIANCE
2. ALL LANDSCAPING ALONG I-15 BE INSTALLED
3. CASH BOND PAID FOR LANDSCAPING (SOD, TREES, SPRINKLER SYSTEM) ON 1250 WEST
4. OUTSIDE STORAGE MUST MEET CITY STAFF APPROVAL
5. MUST CONSTRUCT DETENTION BASIN ON SITE
COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Commissioner Godfrey noted that this is a really good business which provides a needed service to the community.

8. Keetch/Schwartz Property - 300 North State Street - Design Review. This is a request to review a design concept for the property at the corner of State Street and Lakeview Drive (300 North).

Ryan Schill and Brigham Ashton are the petitioners. Mr. Smith displayed an aerial photo of the site. The petitioners displayed two possible layouts to access the property from Lakeview Drive. The parcel is zoned General Commercial and the developers, Mr. Schill and Mr. Ashton, would like to develop the area in phases. The first phase would be Evan’s Beauty College and the next phase would be a combination of other retail uses. There were no elevations submitted for the beauty college, however, the petitioners discussed the proposed use, parking, and the drop-off and pick-up area. Chairman Sweeten inquired about access to lots 7 and 8. Mr. Ashton told the Planning Commission they are open to suggestion on this issue. Mr. Ashton inquired about the possibility of mixing commercial with residential in the development. He acknowledged that he is aware that the current zone does not allow mixed uses in this area, however, Mr. Ashton asked the Planning Commission if they would be willing to entertain an amendment. Mr. Ashton then requested to know how the Planning Commission would feel about such a proposal. Commissioner Anderson explained to Mr. Ashton and Mr. Schill that many developers have come in with similar proposals. However, the feeling exists that Lindon only has 1.5 miles of State Street frontage and would like to maximize the General Commercial zone.

Commissioner Simister observed that the parcel is very deep. Commissioner Anderson reported that the previous owner approached the City and requested to change the entire parcel to commercial. Chairman Sweeten reminded the petitioners that what is being proposed is not allowed in the general commercial zone. Mr. Ashton asked if the Planning Commission could "give him hope" that he could build a phase one which would be the beauty college. Mr. Smith noted that there needs to be discussions about the future of Lakeview Drive. Commissioner Anderson commented that the problem with the current design is the access–they are all from Lakeview. He felt the main access needs to be from State Street. Commissioner Peters observed that there are so many questions that it would be improper to approve phase one without <STRIKE>know</STRIKE> knowing the full development intention. Mr. Schill asked if there is a way to accomplish both desires; country living and commercial development. Commissioner Peters explained that there is a possibility, however, the Planning Commissioners cannot design the project for the petitioners.

Mr. Smith showed proposed street plans for Lakeview Road and noted that the City has a 66-foot easement for the widening of the road. Mr. Ashton reported that in order for UDOT to grant his project access from State Street, UDOT wants a 90 degree angle to line up with 200 North. Commissioner Bryner stated that she personally does not like the residential over commercial concept. It gives a "modern feel" which is not in harmony with Lindon City. Chairman Sweeten noted that a beauty college generates very little tax revenue for the City. He also mentioned that this parcel is a "prime" commercial parcel and wondered why the applicants want to put in a professional plaza instead of retail. Commissioner Anderson observed that if there are access issues then the parcel may not be as "prime" as the Commission thinks.

Chairman Sweeten suggested having the petitioners submit an application for the beauty college. Mr. Ashton commented that he and his partner are with BMA Development and desire to develop something nice for the community on this parcel. He mentioned incorporating an assisted living center towards the rear of the property. Commissioner Godfrey suggested the petitioners contact Councilmember Acerson for advice.

9. Planning Director Report

1. Grading Plan - Lot 36 of Canberra Heights
Commissioner Peters asked if retaining walls can be placed on property lines. Mr. Smith replied "yes" if the Planning Commission approves it. Mr. Smith noted that the applicant left the rear area of the parcel untouched. He also mentioned that the way the ordinance is worded, it is almost impossible for people to meet every requirement of the ordinance.
CHAIRMAN SWEETEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE GRADING PLAN FOR CANBERRA HEIGHTS PLAT "A" LOT 36. COMMISSIONER BRYNER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

2. Pole Sign – Discount Tire submitted a permit for a pole sign which is allowed in the Travel zone. The sign is 35 feet tall and has a 200 square foot face.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE DISCOUNT TIRE’S POLE SIGN. COMMISSIONER PETERS SECONDED THE MOTION ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. Skywriter Sign Building - The current owner would like to install a four-foot strip of landscape which includes trees along I-15. Mr. Smith noted that this falls under the Design Variance ordinance. He explained that the owner wants to display products along I-15. Commissioner Nixon mentioned the possibility of adding more landscaping around the billboard. Chairman Sweeten felt comfortable with averaging the landscaping.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION REACHED A CONSENSUS TO APPROVE A LANDSCAPE VARIANCE AS LONG AS STAFF ENSURES THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE EQUALS THAT OF THE REQUIRED TEN-FEET OF LANDSCAPING ALONG THE I-15 FRONTAGE.

4. Mr. Smith informed the Planning Commission that a Request For Qualification (RFQ) for a professional consultant to advise the City on an architectural design standard for State Street has been sent out and the deadline is August 20, 2004.

5. The Utah League & Towns Fall Conference is scheduled for September 15th, at the Sheraton Hotel in Salt Lake City. This is a one day event.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION REACHED CONSENSUS TO ADJOURN AT 10:50 P.M.

APPROVED - September, 8, 2004