The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, March 10, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Lindon City Center at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Prayer: Marilyn Simister

PRESENT

Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Ron Anderson, Commissioner
Julie Bryner, Commissioner
Gary Godfrey, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner
Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
James McMurray, Planning Intern
Lorenzo Barcellone, Planning Intern

ABSENT

Jim Peters, Commissioner

The meeting began at 7:03 p.m.

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

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

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The Minutes of the regular meeting of February 11, 2004 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 1, Line 26: Replace the word "let" with the word "led."

The Minutes of the regular meeting of February 25, 2004 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 2, Line 32: Replace the abbreviation "N" with the word "North."
Page 3, Line 43, 43: Add the phrase "walk a greater distance from the parking space to their unit, for instance, to" before the word "haul."
Page 8, Line 31: Break condition one into a subsection "A" after the word "UNTIL."
Page 8, Line 34: Reassign condition two as subsection "B" of condition one.
COMMISSIONER GODFREY MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2004 AND FEBRUARY 25, 2004 AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Ross Childs of 38 West 600 North, pointed out his home across from the new office buildings on 600 North. He informed the Commissioners that his lot is zoned half residential and half commercial. He explained that he has been trying to sell his home for four months and he has found that no buyer wants to buy this as a residence, but as possible commercial property. He wanted to know if there is a possibility that the zoning can be amended to make this lot fully within the commercial zone. He pointed out his lot on an aerial photo. Mrs. Childs commented that the commercial zone across the street is restricting their ability to sell and this property is more viable as commercial property.

Mr. Smith observed that the Childs had approached him about their proposal. He pointed out that Lindon has about fifty to sixty divided lots along the borders of the zones. The Lindon City Code says that the more restrictive of the zones will prevail, so this property is considered residential. He observed that if this property is rezoned as commercial , then the property owner will have the ability to put in anything that the general commercial zone permits. He questioned what the neighboring properties will then be subjected to and what the Planning Commission sees as the future of the lots in this area. He noted that a zone change would also required a general plan amendment.

The Childs' Realtor explained that the Childs' have received an offer to buy the home if the property can be rezoned as commercial. They will lose the sale and incur financial risk if the property is not rezoned. Chairman Sweeten asked if the Childs' have discussed zoning with the neighbors. Mr. Childs replied that his neighbor to the west has his home for sale. The neighbor to the east has expressed a preference to sell. He listed each of the neighbors and told the Commissioners that most want to sell and move, with the exception of one or two.

The Commission discussed the neighbor's change of attitude on selling since the public hearing on the zone change for the property across the street. At that time, the neighborhood did not want their property zoned as commercial. Mr. Childs agreed that the neighborhood wanted to wait and assess the impacts. Commissioner Nixon suggested that, instead of rezoning on a lot by lot basis, the entire neighborhood agree on a rezoning plan. Commissioner Anderson commented that rezoning is a long process involving public hearings and may not be solved in time to meet the Childs' needs. Commissioner Simister commented that the neighbors on the next street should also be involved in the zoning decisions. Commissioner Nixon agreed and suggested that the Childs' discuss their concerns with the City Council also. The Planning Commission reached consensus to have the Childs contact the neighbors and return with an agreed upon rezoning plan. Chairman Sweeten asked if there was any other public comment. There was none.

4. NEW BUSINESS (Reports by Commissioners)

Commissioner Bryner reported some graffiti on a fence bordering a trail. Mr. Smith replied that he would submit a work order to TAG for clean-up. This program with the Juvenile Court System was discussed and explained. Commissioner Bryner asked the result of the request for 200 South that she had mentioned at the last meeting. Mr. Smith replied that the City Engineer was looking into possible improvement issues for the City.

5. LEES HOMESTEAD - 190 N. 400 W. - R2 OVERLAY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
This is a request for approval of an R2 Overlay project consisting of two triplexes on a X 1.4 acre parcel.

Ms. Joy Lee of 594 North Locust reported that she had worked out an agreement with Mr. Griffith on the fence issue from the last meeting. She will be installing a wood-grain vinyl fence two-feet onto her property to allow for maintenance and protection from the horses. Chairman Sweeten asked Mr. Griffith if he was comfortable with the agreement. Mr. Griffith replied yes.

Ms. Lee reported that she had contacted BFI about the location of the garbage enclosure and pointed to the location at the end of the drive that they feel will be conducive to collection truck operation. She also pointed out the addition of parking spaces to the front unit.

Chairman Sweeten asked about the angle in the driveway. Ms. Lee replied that she thought that was what the Planning Commission wanted. Commissioner Nixon commented that the driveway would be better if it was parallel, as it runs west, to the north property line and then jogged north so that it adjoined 400 West between the houses across the street. He drew the suggested alignment on a map. Ms. Lee replied that she would add this alignment to the site plan.

Ms. Lee noted that she had put more windows on the west side and added sheds for the units under the roof overhang on the east side. The sheds are 7 X 4 feet in size. She also informed the Commissioners that the buildings will be finished with stucco and rock. She tendered pictures of a project that used these colors. The Commission expressed favor to these proposals.

Commissioner Anderson asked about her plans for the fence. Ms. Lee replied that she planned vinyl on the north and south property lines and chain link on the east. Commissioner Nixon asked about the portion of the lot behind the existing house. Mr. Lee replied that this portion will be included as part of the development on the plat, but will be fenced off with a gate access. She plans to use this portion of the lot for storage and animals.

Ms. Lee commented that she has considered moving the fence in front of the ditch, instead of piping the ditch. After discussion with the Planning Commission, she decided to pipe the ditch because of access issues.

Commissioner Nixon asked what restrictions on storage of personal property on the lot portion behind the existing house the Lindon City Code required. Mr. Smith replied that as long as the storage does not become a nuisance, there are no restrictions. The Commission discussed storage and commented that a screening fence and landscaping would help.
Commissioner Nixon asked about the new parking stalls. Ms. Lee pointed out the location of two stalls near the front unit. Mr. Smith commented that this is just pads, and no carports. Commissioner Godfrey commented that he preferred that cars not be in front of the units. Commissioner Nixon observed that two cars in front was no worse than any other home in Lindon. Ms. Lee noted that putting the parking here would help solve the issue of residents blocking the driveway to be close to their door to load or unload their vehicle.

Chairman Sweeten asked if there was any public comment. Mr. Griffith requested verification that the portion of the lot behind the existing home could not be sold separately. This was confirmed. He asked about upgrading an old shed in this portion of the lot. He was told that this is not required. Chairman Sweeten asked if there was further comment. There was none. Commissioner Godfrey expressed appreciation to Ms. Lee for her efforts to work with the neighbors to address the issues and concerns.

COMMISSIONER SIMISTER MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY JOY AND FRED LEE FOR APPROVAL OF LEES HOMESTEAD, A SIX-UNIT R2 OVERLAY PROJECT AT 190 NORTH 400 WEST WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT VINYL FENCING BE SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAT ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES;
2. THAT THE IRRIGATION DITCH BE PIPED ON THE EAST SIDE AND CHAIN LINK FENCE BE PUT ON THE PROPERTY LINE;
3. THAT THE DRIVEWAY BE ADJUSTED TO ALIGN PARALLEL TO THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE AS DISCUSSED; AND,
4. THAT THE ELEVATIONS, MATERIALS AND COLORS ARE APPROVED AS PRESENTED (EXHIBIT A).
COMMISSIONER NIXON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

6. PETERSON WOODWORK - 923 W. 500 N. - 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. Steve and John Peterson were present to address the Commission. Mr. Smith presented some background material on this application. He noted that the Planning Commission reviewed this issue for the first time last November. He displayed an aerial photo of the area and explained that the owner has constructed a driveway, cut the curb and sidewalk, modified the storm draining and put an overhead door into the building. He is now requesting a modified site plan. This issue came to the attention of the City by a complaint from a neighboring business. He explained that the storm drain was not constructed correctly in the beginning and has been a problem for the site a number of years. He noted that the changes have improved the storm drain, to a degree, but that it does not detain runoff as required. He explained that the Public Works Department want the curb, gutter and sidewalk replaced. Chairman Sweeten commented that it is hard to hold the present owner responsible to correcting the storm drain, but he expressed an inclination to have the site restored unless the owners have an attractive plan to retain the changes.

Mr. Steve Peterson explained that his father-in-law bought this building last summer. The tenants, Meyer & Leichty, had sandbags on hand and complained of constant flooding. They called a landscaper, who suggested this solution. He explained that they did not know that they were creating other problems for themselves. They ran a pipe the full length of the property to contain the storm water. Chairman Sweeten observed that the problem is that all of his drainage is passed on to the next business to become their problem. Mr. Steve Peterson explained that the drainage was coming into the building and now it goes into the storm drain system. Commissioner Nixon asked if there was off-site drainage in this area. Mr. Smith replied no and showed the detention in the area on an aerial photo.

Commissioner Anderson observed that the reason the curb on 500 North was painted red is because it is a half-street and no access is allowed there. Mr. Steve Peterson replied that he was trying his best to handle the loading problems for his business and pled ignorance. He explained that they had tried to load out of the south side, but had created a traffic problem for his neighbors and tenants. He observed that the driveway on the north side that he had constructed is a loading area only and is not used for continuous access to the building. Chairman Sweeten observed that if Mr. Peterson had asked to make the changes in advance, he would probably been turned down. He added that to leave the site as is creates a "dangerous precedent." Commissioner Anderson commented that the Code required a twenty-foot landscaping strip for every business. Mr. Peterson has modified and mostly removed his. The problem is that there are other businesses that will point to this and asked why they can't do the same.

Commissioner Simister asked which issue is considered to be the most pressing, the drainage or the driveway. Mr. Smith replied that the driveway is the bigger problem. He acknowledged that although the change to the storm drain causes stress to the regional storm drain system, staff feels that 500 North is not designed to handle the traffic problems that are created by allowing direct access. He added that Public Works would not have approved a curb cut in this location. Commissioner Simister asked if there was a way to modify the site to allow the driveway to remain. Commissioner Nixon commented that he did not feel that this is an option to consider. Chairman Sweeten agreed that he felt the curb, gutter and sidewalk should be restored. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the storm drain can possibly be corrected in the future with a pipe and detention on the undeveloped property to the south.

Commissioner Simister asked if the door in the building would be allowed to remain. Mr. Smith replied that the door meets building code and can remain, but that no access is allowed from 500 North. Mr. Steve Peterson objected that this creates a traffic problem on the south side that his tenants complain about. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the building does not fit Mr. Peterson's needs. Mr. Peterson replied that he will remain in the building and that the Commissioners seem to have their minds made up. He left the Commission meeting.

Chairman Sweeten asked Mr. John Peterson about the business opening onto the south side. Mr. John Peterson commented that the parking lot on this side is already limited and suggested that further problems will be created when the neighbor to the south develops this parcel. Commissioner Anderson suggested that a smaller driveway and access be considered if the landscaping is restored. He mentioned the possibility of stabilizing the grass so it can be driven on. Commissioner Nixon pointed out that if each unit is allowed to have a driveway, a larger problem is created. He noted that the issue is not just the driveway, but upholding the law. He suggested that a site plan amendment to allow the pipe to remain might be considered because the drainage was inadequate.

Commissioner Godfrey asked if the other units had overhead doors. He wondered if a space could be cleared inside to allow the trailer to be loaded inside rather than in the parking lot where it obstructs traffic. Mr. John Peterson explained that they were using the space inside for assembly and the interior flow does not accommodate loading from this side. He asserted that they need the rear access. Commissioner Godfrey asked if it is the intention of the business to back over the landscaping and use the rear door. Mr. John Peterson replied yes. Chairman Sweeten observed that more traffic would be obstructed on 500 North than in the parking lot to the south. Mr. John Peterson agreed that it would be awkward. He asked what would entice the Planning Commission to allow them to keep the access on 500 North. He suggested the purchase of a building permit for the addition of a door to the building, bonding for the curb, gutter and sidewalk, and a reasonable fine. He requested permission to keep the access and continue working.

Chairman Sweeten pointed out that allowing the violation to continue sets a dangerous precedence. Mr. Smith agreed that there were other businesses in this commercial park that would like to do what the Peterson are doing. He added that the City cannot accept a fine and ignore a violation. Compliance is what is needed. He commented that if the violation is not corrected, the judge is asked to order compliance.

Commissioner Simister asked if the operations inside could be adjusted to allow them to use the door on the west. Mr. John Peterson replied that the lease on unit B is coming due soon, and if they can use that unit, they might be able to bring the trailer loading inside. The Commission discussed this possibility with Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson was advised to get permission from the Building Department before modifying anything inside the building.

COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST BY STEVE PETERSON FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CURRENT SITE PLAN BY ALLOWING THE CREATION OF A SECOND DRIVEWAY ACROSS EXISTING LANDSCAPING, BUT WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE CITY ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO MAINTAIN THE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS UNTIL, AT SOME FUTURE DATE, DEVELOPMENT IS REQUIRED TO PUT IN DETENTION, AND FURTHER, THAT THE OVERHEAD DOOR ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING IS ALLOWED TO REMAIN, BUT CANNOT BE USED FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS. THE APPLICANT IS ORDERED TO RESTORE THE LANDSCAPING, CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK, UNDER INSPECTION BY THE CITY, WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THIS DATE. COMMISSIONER BRYNER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

7. LISTON COMPLEX - 240 N 943 W.
This is a request for a design review in the Mountainview Industrial Park.

Mr. Larry Liston introduced himself to the Commissioners. Mr. Smith pointed out the lot in the Mountainview Industrial Park and commented that there are a few issues to discuss. He noted that the original plan was to put the building on the property line, however, the Pheasant Hollow Park lies behind this property facing 800 West. There are no specific regulations for public facilities, but since this is a conditional use permit, staff would like to see the building moved about 20-25 feet from the property line. Commissioner Nixon asked what type of building the applicants plan. Chairman Sweeten asked if the setback was recommended for fire protection reasons. Mr. Smith replied that fire protection is one reason, but then explained that Pheasant Brook Park is only partially developed and that a ballfield is planned for the area bordering this parcel. He commented that the park has a block wall that will be extended to eventually surround and delineate the whole park.

Commissioner Nixon asked if the applicant plans a metal building. Mr. Smith replied that this was the first plan, and that it would require architectural detail as per the Lindon City Code. Commissioner Simister expressed the opinion that the building should be moved away from the property line. Chairman Sweeten observed that the setback between a commercial zone and a residential zone is forty feet. Mr. Smith replied that the park is zoned "public facilities." He added that the City does not want to be unreasonable, but feels that moving the building from the property line about 20-25 feet would resolve maintenance issues on the building and the fence.

Commissioner Godfrey asked the intended use of the building. Mr. Liston replied that the building will house the family-owned business, a design and remodel business. He told the Commission that the building would mostly be used for storage and that they were considering a block building instead of a metal building. The Commission discussed the composition of the building, the height, and a setback. They noted that the S & L Landscaping building on Center Street would be similar. Mr. Smith brought up the aerial and the distance to the wall was measured. He asked if the Commission and Mr. Liston were comfortable with the recommended twenty-five feet. Mr. Liston replied that he was willing to setback twenty-five feet, especially if the city participates on the construction of the wall as mentioned in DRC. Councilmember Bayless was asked her opinion. She replied that she felt that the Council would also request the setback. Chairman Sweeten asked if there was any public comment. There was none. The Commissioners thanked Mr. Liston for his willingness to work with the City.

8. ALL-AMERICAN GYMNASTICS - 19 S. 1400 W.
This is a request for a design review of All-American Gymnastics facility in the LI zone immediately east of I-15.

Mr. Ken Coleman of M13 Construction was present. Mr. Smith displayed an aerial photo of the area and pointed out the subject parcel next to the new Graphik buildings. He observed that this lies in the Light Industrial zone, which allows for special education uses if certain criteria are met. He mentioned that this business would fall into the same classification as Flyerz Cheer Gym on the other side of the freeway. He commented that the applicants would like the Planning Commission to look at the plans and give any feedback or concerns they have on the project.

Commissioner Nixon asked if the landscaping requirement for I-15 is met in this design. Mr. Smith pointed out the increased parking capacity of this site to meet the requirements for a gymnastics school, and informed the applicant that the zoning ordinance requires ten feet of landscaping along I-15 and twenty feet on 1200 West. He noted that the applicant is proposing a metal building that will be set back from the freeway and that the sides of the building must be treated architecturally to meet the requirements. He explained that the building must be able to be converted to an industrial use if sold in the future. Commissioner Anderson asked about requirements for the T-zone overlay and whether this fell into the mixed commercial zone rather than the light industrial. Mr. Smith brought up the zoning map and showed how this particular parcel falls in the light industrial zone rather than the mixed commercial a little further north. He commented that he would check the T-zone requirements in the code.

Commissioner Nixon commented that it appeared that the site could accommodate the ten-feet of landscaping. Commissioner Godfrey agreed. Commissioner Anderson observed that the parking for this site would be better than if it was in a complex, because it is not shared. Mr. Coleman agreed and noted that not many parents stay to watch lessons. Most of the parking will be empty most of the time. The Commissioners asked if competitions will be held here. Mr. Coleman replied that this is a possibility. Commissioner Nixon suggested that Mr. Coleman bring pictures and elevations of the building for the site plan review. Mr. Coleman replied that the building is planned to be a flat-panel construction with architectural treatment. Commissioner Bryner asked if this business is moving from Orem, or opening an additional location. Mr. Coleman replied that they will be moving. Commissioner Nixon asked if the building would be two story. Mr. Coleman replied yes, the ceilings need to be high for gymnastics, and the front of the building would have an office on the second floor. The Commissioners discussed the proposal and commented that it looked like a good project.

9. NOAH'S 24-HOUR SPORTS COMPLEX
This is a request for a design review of Noah's 24-hour Sports Center located on the future 700 North near the new I-15 Interchange.

Mr. Bert Thomas, Mr. David Bell, and Mr. Bill Bowser introduced themselves. Mr. Smith presented this application for a design review for a 24-hour sports center near the new I-15 Interchange. He displayed an aerial of the proposed property and noted that the zoning is general commercial. He explained that the future 700 North is planned for this area, and showed the road master plan. He commented that the master plan is intended to show a general location for roads and not a specific location. He noted that the applicants will construct a portion of 700 North as part of this project. He displayed the proposed site plan and commented that the site must meet the landscaping and parking requirements, but that the applicants would like the opinion of the Planning Commission on the project and some direction on planning for 700 North. He explained that this is a private recreational facility and presented a picture of a barn in Park City as representative of the kind of building that will house the facility.

Mr. Bowser explained the operation of this automated sports facility. He commented that the facility will be booked online and a code given to open the doors. The facility will be staffed 24-hours a day. He explained that he has done the software for several other public facilities, but this will be his first private facility. He showed the proposal for the curve in 700 North and commented that this alignment makes the remaining parcel to the north more viable as a commercial parcel. Commissioner Nixon commented that the road must connect with the Pleasant Grove section of this road also. Mr. Smith agreed and commented that this project would help open the road.

Mr. Bowser pointed out that the curve in the road is reflected in the site plan to make it more interesting. He commented that the goal is to preserve a "farm-like atmosphere." Commissioner Nixon agreed that this alignment would work for him, but expressed concern that the alignment also needs to work for his neighbors. Mr. Bowser showed how, in his opinion, the alignment he proposes would work for the development to the west. Mr. Dean Blackhurst commented that Lindon needs to do what is best for them and Pleasant Grove will connect to it and take it to the freeway. Commissioner Anderson commented that it seemed to be a great compromise for all the property owners.

Chairman Sweeten asked who would build the roads. Mr. Smith explained that the developer would participate, but that the road is a team effort between Lindon and Pleasant Grove. Mr. Bowser explained that before much more planning can be done, the curve of 700 North must be determined. He observed that his plan will incorporate a good first impression of Lindon in the heavily landscaped property with water elements. He expressed the opinion that this project would help initiate the growth in the area. Commissioner Nixon suggested that architectural standards like what is envisioned for State Street need to be determined in this area also. Commissioner Simister commented that the vision for 700 North includes a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere with parking behind the buildings. Mr. Bowser felt that this vision could be incorporated into his site and suggested that the one shown is just to show maximum parking. Commissioner Bryner asked about the view of the project from the freeway. The distance from the freeway was shown to be quite far.

Commissioner Nixon commented that the Planning Commission and Council have been discussing an architectural theme for State Street. He expressed the opinion that a farm theme for this area seems appropriate. Commissioner Godfrey expressed the opinion that a farm theme will be well received by the citizens of Lindon.

Mr. Bowser asked if the Commission could help him get a definitive road alignment. He noted his time limitations. Mr. Smith suggested that he could take the proposal to Pleasant Grove tomorrow to continue the discussion already in progress on this issue. Mr. Bowser explained that they had approached Pleasant Grove on the utility issue. The utility service in the area was discussed. Commissioner Godfrey commented that this may be good catalyst for the area. Mr. Bowser asked for a realistic time frame. Mr. Smith replied that it could be two months to two years. The Commissioners discussed the plans for the project with the applicants.

10. PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT
1. Westside Master Plan Values Survey

Mr. Smith explained that he was close to a rough draft on this project, but wanted to prioritize some goals before it is finalized. He asked Planning Intern James McMurray to present the survey. Mr. McMurray distributed the survey and explained that he wanted each Commissioner to rank their response to the statements from one to five with a one being "strongly agree" and a five being "strongly disagree." He also asked them to rank the statements in order of importance from one to six. The Commissioner spent a few minutes filling out the survey. Mr. Smith spent a few minutes signing up new Commissioners for the American Planning Association.

ADJOURN

THE COMMISSIONERS REACHED CONSENSUS TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 10:01 P.M.

APPROVED - March 24, 2004

back to top