The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, October 22, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. in the Lindon City Center, Council Chamber, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Dustin Sweeten, Vice Chairman
Prayer: Marilyn Simister

PRESENT

Bruce Carpenter, Chairman (arrived at 7:13 p.m.)
Ron Anderson, Commissioner (arrived at 7:15 p.m.)
Lori Atchison, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner (arrived at 7:27 p.m.)
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Dustin Sweeten, Commissioner
Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember (arrived at 7:17 p.m.)
Kevin Smith, Planning Director
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk
James McMurray, Planning Intern

ABSENT

Lorenzo Barcellone, Planning Intern
The meeting began at 7:05 p.m.

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Vice Chairman Sweeten invited the audience, staff and Commissioners to join him in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

The minutes of the regular meeting of October 8, 2003 were reviewed. The following corrections were made:
Page 2, Line 11: Add the sentence "Commissioner Peters requested a handicapped child sign for the street."
Page 2, Line 20: Delete the word "though" from the sentence.
Page 2, Line 35: Replace the word "doe" with the word "does."
Page 3, Line 15: Add the sentence "It was decided that other accesses to the Parkway should be restricted to the shared driveway with the Park-n-Ride."
Page 3, Line 39,40: Add the phrase "FROM LINDON PARK DRIVE" after the word "ACCESS."
Page 4, Line 40: Replace the word "white" with the word "what."
Page 5, Line 21: Replace the words "but since this is" with the word "for." Add a period after the word "building." Capitalize the word "A."
COMMISSIONER ATCHISON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF OCTOBER 8, 2003 AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Darrin Hunsaker, resident of 600 North, told the Council that he thought that there was going to be a traffic study on 600 North west of Locust Avenue as part of the Walmart project. He wondered if it had been completed or when he could expect notification of the results.

(Chairman Carpenter arrived at 7:13 p.m.)

Mr. Smith replied that the traffic counts had been done and he would forward those results to Mr. Hunsaker. Mr. Hunsaker commented that there was a proposal to commercially develop additional property on the corner of 600 North and State Street. He observed that his issue is with traffic accessing the residential section of 600 North. He suggested that all access to this development be restricted to State Street. Vice Chairman Sweeten replied that the proposal referred to had been rejected as it has been presented and that the developers had not presented a new proposal for this corner.

(Vice Chairman Sweeten turned the meeting over to Chairman Carpenter at 7:14 p.m.)
(Commissioner Anderson arrived at 7:14 p.m.)

Chairman Carpenter asked if there was other public comment. There was none.

4. NEW BUSINESS (Reports by Commissioners)

Commissioner Sweeten asked Mr. Smith the status of the Rimrock Project that had been previously discussed. Mr. Smith replied that the developer, Rimrock Development, was still working on finalizing the elevations. Chairman Carpenter asked if the developer was working with the neighbors on 600 North. Mr. Smith did not know.
Chairman Carpenter asked for a report on the Council business from Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith replied that the proposed amendment for section 17.44 had been adopted, but they want to consider building height again as a future amendment. The Council also added a definition of an accessory building to this ordinance. Mr. Smith informed the Commissioners that the new Lexus dealership had been approved with the white rail fence on the "park and ride" frontage only.

(Councilmember Bayless arrived at 7:17 p.m.)

Chairman Carpenter asked the decision on the detention pond for the Lexus site. Mr. Smith replied that the Council had approved the design as recommended by the Commissioners. He noted that the only change was the addition of landscaping to the frontage road. Chairman Carpenter commented that he had received numerous comments of surprise at the width of the entrance to the Hollow Park on 400 North. Mr. Smith replied that the entrance to the park is the standard size and will appear more in scale when it is closer to being finished.

5. UTAH AUTO SALES - 10 NORTH STATE STREET - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT - PUBLIC HEARING
This is a request to expand a legal nonconforming use by allowing Utah Auto Sales to expand to the west side of State Street from their existing lot.

Mr. Smith commented that Mr. Gallagher was not present. The Commissioners reached consensus to continue the item.

6. HIGHLANDS AT BALD MOUNTAIN - 700 NORTH 800 EAST - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
This is a request for approval of phase II of the Bald Mountain project. This request is for approval of a 34-lot subdivision.

Daniel McKeon, Travis Ludlow and Chad Clifford were present to discuss this project with the Commissioners. Mr. Smith showed the area on an aerial photo. He pointed out the particular parcel of property and the previously approved and constructed Phase I development. He informed the Commissioners that a plat for this new phase had been approved, but it had not been built and that one or more of the former developers had sold parcels that were not legal lots. New developers were trying to get the parcels together into a coherent development. He presented the proposed replat. He told the Commissioners that the new plat is almost identical as that approved before. It will be recorded in a couple of phases. He pointed out the 1200 East collector road and some lots that may be subject to the Hillside Overlay requirements.

Chairman Carpenter asked if 1200 East was planned to be a divided road. Mr. Smith replied yes. He added that the City is requiring this road as a regional connector. It will require severe grading and a retaining wall. The City Engineer has recommended that the road be divided to contour better to the hillside. He pointed out the debris basin at the base of the mountain and to the northeast of 1200 East. He commented that the City is hoping to build this collector road with either federal or state funding. There will also need to be collaboration with Pleasant Grove City. He pointed out the City boundary. He noted that one of the issues that need to be discussed with the Planning Commission is whether this subdivision can be approved with a half street connection to Pleasant Grove.

(Commissioner Nixon arrived at 7:27 p.m.)

Commissioner Peters asked about the easements for the aqueduct and the power line. Mr. Smith pointed out the easements on the proposed plat. Mr. Ludlow pointed out how the plat allowed for homes to be built around and near these features. Mr. Smith noted that some of the easements for roads cross steep ground, but that the plat seems to comply with hillside issues. He commented that some of the lots will require retaining walls near the roads and the aqueduct. Commissioner Peters questioned allowing more grading in the area. Mr. Ludlow informed the Commissioners that only lot 29 would be affected by the Hillside Overlay. It would be cut down by about 15 feet on the road side of the lot. Commissioner Peters verified with Mr. Smith that this large of a cut would be allowed. This was confirmed.
Commissioner Anderson asked how this plat differs from the last one. Commissioner Nixon commented that the last developers had removed the hillside lots from the plat and postponed the issue. Mr. Ludlow replied that the plat had been altered to meet the requirements of the Hillside Overlay. Two lots have been removed to allow larger acreage and building pads on each lot. Mr. Smith agreed that some of the lots are bigger so that the average slope is less than twenty percent.

Commissioner Simister objected to some lots having streets on both sides of them(double frontage). Mr. Smith pointed that out that the upper road (1200 East) is not accessible from these lots because of slope issues. Most will have retaining walls on the back that will prevent access to the upper road. He pointed out that there is a slope easement along the back of lots adjoining the upper road also. Chairman Carpenter commented that this subdivision will have three accesses in the future–800 East and 1200 East in Lindon, and 1000 South in Pleasant Grove.

Commissioner Nixon asked the developers what improvements they plan to provide on 1200 East. Mr. Smith displayed the street master plan and told the Commissioners that less than half of the east/west portion of 800North/1200 East lies within Lindon and that the hillside portion (north/south) will be completed with federal funding. Chairman Carpenter confirmed that there will be no gain to the City from this development, in collector road, open space or parks. Commissioner Anderson asked if the developers should dedicate the right-of-way for 1200 East. Mr. Smith replied that he did not think the developers were planning to dedicate the road, but were wanting to be paid.

Mr. Smith introduced the City Engineer, Mark Christensen. Mr. Christensen told the Commission that there were some circumstances peculiar to this subdivision. There is the approval of a half street for the collector. He explained that there is some grading required to bring the road to the correct elevation to make the connection to the existing street in Pleasant Grove. He suggested that a workable solution to this issue is to require the south half of the street to be finished and a temporary connection made to Pleasant Grove. He showed the Commissioners what must be done to lower and bring this collector to the correct elevation and alignment. Commissioner Nixon asked if the curb, gutter and sidewalk would be completed. Mr. Christensen replied that this work would only be done on the south half and only through the curve return on 650 East. These improvements will not be fully finished because the street will not be at final grade.

Mr. Christensen pointed out another issue peculiar to this subdivision is a parcel that is not included in either this plat or the previous one. This parcel will be landlocked and there will be no access. He noted that the developers had been trying to buy out this parcel. He pointed out the parcel. Mr. McKeon noted that this situation had been created by the previous owner. Mr. Smith commented that the lot is not buildable. Mr. McKeon informed the Commission that they had made a good faith effort, but now are of the opinion that the parcel can be sold to the existing neighbors. Mr. Smith commented that there is frontage on 1200 East but there is no access in that direction.

Mr. Christensen observed that the next issues are the aqueduct easement and the power line easement. He pointed out a lot that may need a retaining wall to protect the soil around the aqueduct. He also noted that there is a street that is designed over the aqueduct easement that the Bureau of Reclamation has not approved and may not allow. He pointed out the power line easement. He noted that a retaining wall may be needed where the poles cross the street, or alternatively, one of the poles may need relocation.

Mr. Christensen informed the Commission that Lot 23 has some slope issues. He noted that it will likely need a retaining wall. He suggested a note on the plat to inform potential owners that this lot may need additional grading and/or a retaining wall to make it buildable. Mr. Ludlow concurred with this assessment and recommendation. He felt that the homeowner may have a preference on the aesthetics of the retaining wall, so this decision can be deferred until time of construction.

Chairman Carpenter commented that the homeowners along the 1200 East frontage would not be able to finish their yards if there was no requirement to construct this collector. Commissioner Peters asked if the City is going to trust the homeowner to meet the requirements to finish the frontage of this street. Mr. Christensen explained that there would be a slope easement to buffer the homeowners from the construction of 1200 East. Chairman Carpenter verified that the homeowners fences and retaining walls would be outside of the slope easement. Commissioner Nixon asked how the slope easement is defined. Mr. Ludlow replied that the lot line is within three feet of the toe of the slope. Mr. Harlow Clark, newspaper representative, asked how the slope would be separated from the lots. Mr. Christensen replied that there would be no separation other than the slope easement. Mr. Clark asked about protection of children. He was told that homeowners will be responsible for their own fencing. Commissioner Sweeten asked if there would be a guard rail to protect motorists. Mr. Christensen replied yes.

Commissioner Simister asked if people will want to build under the power lines. Mr. Ludlow informed her that the power lines are high and a two-story house can be built under them. He acknowledged that part of the challenges inherent to the power line easement is that there will be restrictions by Utah Power and Light on the homes built. He also noted that the easements cannot be crossed by structures. The Commissioners questioned this statement. Mr. Smith brought up a picture of Panorama Park Subdivision and showed the line of the aqueduct through the houses. Mr. Ludlow commented that they are attempting to move the poles on Lot 28 to make it more desirable.

Mr. Christensen asked if there were other questions for him. Commissioner Simister asked if he was comfortable with the intersection with Pleasant Grove. Mr. Christensen replied that this intersection would be temporary for now. He acknowledge that it will be less than desirable and showed the Commission how the roads would not line up because the new part is on the future alignment of 1200 East and 800 North rather than the actual alignment that exists. He observed that this is the best we can do for now and will be acceptable. He commented that the road will be better when the 1200 East/800 North collector is fully constructed.

Commissioner Nixon asked if there would be a problem with homes accessing the 1200 East/800 North collector by backing out of driveways. He noted that this is a problem on collector streets in Orem. Mr. Christensen replied that it would be desirable not to have homes accessing this collector. Commissioner Nixon observed that Orem is having to purchase homes to get the frontage they need to expand their collectors. Mr. Christensen replied that this street is planned in advance to be of collector width, and that the circumstances would be different than in Orem. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the streets be changed so that the homes back on this collector rather than front on it. Mr. Smith commented that collector streets are designed to handle some access. Chairman Carpenter agreed with Commissioner Nixon that he was not sure that access should be allowed from these homes. He acknowledged that the traffic would not be a problem overnight, but it will eventually become a problem that could be solved now. Commissioner Anderson asked the width of the collector. He was told sixty-six feet. He commented that he thought it was wider. Mr. Christensen replied that it cannot be wider and still accommodate the existing homes along 800 North, Lindon/1000 South Pleasant Grove. The Commissioners and Mr. Ludlow discussed optional road alignments, slopes, and easement restrictions.

Commissioner Nixon asked if the street section for 650 East includes a trail. Mr. Ludlow replied that they plan a standard cross section and are not proposing either parking strips or trails. Commissioner Nixon asked the reason for this plan. Mr. Ludlow replied that there is a challenge in matching the existing road on 650 East. He suggested that the City did not want to create a "bubble" near the change in the road width. The Commission and Mr. Ludlow talked about adding a park strip along the street and moving the sidewalks further on the lots.

Mr. Christensen commented that the debris basin at the foot of the canyon was built as part of the first phase of this development. Mr. Smith displayed an aerial and pointed out the debris basin. Commissioner Nixon confirmed that the structure is a debris basin and not a detention basin. Mr. Christensen explained that FEMA had defined a flood basin in this area and that the developers have applied to have it removed. Commissioner Simister asked the difference between a debris basin and a detention basin. Mr. Christensen explained the functions of each. He added that there is no problem with flooding in this area unless fire strips the hillside.

Mr. Christensen showed the extension of 650 East to the Pleasant Grove border and noted that this street completion is part of the improvements required for the previous Phase I development, Meadows at Bald Mountain. There is a bond available to complete the paving of this section of road, but the utilities are needed first.

Mr. Christensen observed that the last item on his list of issues is the hillside protection zone. He noted that property is identified for the hillside protection zone by two criteria–either by it's location above the Salt Lake Aqueduct, or by the average slope of the individual lot exceeding twenty percent. He pointed out the earlier noted location where a proposed street (730 North) will cut through a hill. Commissioner Nixon asked if the code specifies a maximum cut and fill. He was informed that there is no maximum specified. Mr. Ludlow was asked the amount of the anticipated cut for this street. He replied that the maximum cut would be eighteen feet. Mr. Christensen noted that lot 29 may be the only lot affected by the hillside overlay ordinance.

Chairman Carpenter asked if there was any public comment. Mr. Ken Millet of Pleasant Grove informed the Commission that he owns the property directly to the north of this proposed project. His land is within both Lindon and Pleasant Grove boundaries. He expressed concerns about the proposed 1200 East/800 North collector falling more within his property than his neighbor's. He felt that it was unfair to assess more of this collector to him. He also expressed concern that the level of the proposed street would leave his property with a steep access. He noted that there was already a home there that would require a steep re-graded driveway. Mr. Christensen informed the Commission of the agreement with Pleasant Grove on the alignment of the collector and that the street had been moved south to make the homes on the north side more accessible. The grading necessary to bring the street to the planned level was discussed. Mr. Millet asserted that the previous developers were going to put the street in and pay for it.

Chairman Carpenter asked if the street improvements were coordinated with Pleasant Grove City. Mr. Smith replied that Pleasant Grove City had been involved with all the planning. He commented that there were ways to facilitate the construction of the collector without encumbering Mr. Millet. Commissioner Nixon noted that the Planning Commission did not want to approve a development plan that would create problems for the future. Mr. Smith agreed. Chairman Carpenter asked if Pleasant Grove City had responded to Mr. Millet's concerns. Mr. Smith showed how the collector had been shifted to the south to mitigate the slope problems and put less of the burden on Mr. Millet. The existing access to the aforementioned home will be undisturbed for the near future. Mr. Christensen commented that the present agreement for alignment was an attempt to balance everyone's interests that are involved, including Pleasant Grove City, Lindon City, Mr. Millet and Mr. Gregory. Commissioner Nixon commented that the agreement had been made before these present developers had become involved. This was confirmed. Mr. Millet asserted that he was not happy with the agreement then and continued to disagree with it.

Commissioner Simister asked why only half of the connector with Pleasant Grove is being proposed to be completed now, and pointed out that there were lots facing this half street. Mr. Clifford explained that they had offered Mr. Millet a plan to complete that street with no results. Mr. Smith added that this proposal facilitates temporary access which will be improved in the future with the full construction of the collector. Commissioner Nixon asked if the developers would bond for the full improvements. The Commission and Mr. Smith discussed the ordinance for half streets. Commissioner Simister expressed concern about approving a partial half street. Mr. Smith noted that public safety had reviewed and approved the proposal. The Commissioners discussed the number of homes that would face the half street and future improvement issues. Mr. Millet's development plans for his 26-acre parcel were discussed.

Commissioner Sweeten suggested that if the lots did not face north, there would be no need for a street on that side and this issue would be deferred. Commissioner Peters suggested that the developers work with Mr. Millet and come back with a proposal at the next Planning Commission meeting.

Commissioner Nixon referred to the 730 North street cut. He asked what will protect the slope of this 18-foot cut. Mr. Christensen replied that the developer will be required to submit an erosion control plan. The slope of the lot adjoining the street was discussed, along with driveway access from the street and retaining walls.

Commissioner Peters expressed concern about allowing only 25-feet of asphalt on 800 North up to the connection with Pleasant Grove. He also commented that he could understand Mr. Millet's concerns about being responsible for more than half of the street. He suggested that some kind of agreement needs to be worked out with Mr. Millet. Mr. McKeon replied that they were of the opinion that they had exhausted all efforts with Mr. Millet. Commissioner Peters pointed out that some grading would be needed on Mr. Millet's property to make the temporary connection to Murdock Drive. Commissioner Nixon disagreed and commented that these issues can be addressed when access from Mr. Millet's property is needed.

Commissioner Peters commented that the landlocked lot mentioned by Mr. Christensen is a problem created by the previous developer and should be solved by him. He noted that he was not "amiable" to the creation of a flag lot in that area. He commented that he was not sure what to do about the power pole on lot 25. Mr. Christensen suggested requiring relocation of this pole. Mr. McKeon observed that they had started negotiation with the power company on this pole relocation. Commissioner Nixon expressed concern that the slope easement for 1200 East would not be large enough. He asked about damage to homeowners' fences during construction. He suggested that the easement proposed is minimal and does not allow any flexibility. Mr. Christensen replied that the easement is a temporary one for construction. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the easement be widened to ten-feet from the toe of the slope.

Commissioner Peters brought up the standard cross section on 650 East street and asked about the inclusion of trails. Commissioner Nixon suggested that a smooth transition can be made for 650 East and that a trail should be built there. Commissioner Peters expressed the opinion that this is a short section that does not connect to any other trail, may create short-term maintenance problems for the City, and may be unnecessary. Commissioner Nixon explained that the trail does not have to be built now, but that the street width should allow for future construction. He suggested a wider park strip for now. Mr. Ludlow pointed out potential problems with an existing water line and storm drain line. Mr. Christensen agreed. Commissioner Nixon then suggested that 650 East be exempted from the pathway cross section, but all the other streets of this development should be constructed with the wider park strip to allow for future pathways. The Commission agreed to this proposal.

Commissioner Peters asked about the completion of 650 East to City standards. Commissioner Nixon agreed. He asked if sidewalk was planned for the west side of the street. He was informed that there would just be curb and gutter. Mr. McKeon commented that 650 East is the responsibility of the previous developer. Mr. Smith added that a bond for these improvements is held by the City.

Commissioner Peters asked what the Commission wanted to do about the lots fronting on the 800 North collector. Commissioner Nixon suggested that the developers consider reconfiguring the lot layout so that no lots front this direction. The developers agreed to explore this possibility.

Commissioner Nixon suggested that the developer should also dedicate half of the proposed 1200 East/800 North collector to the City. The Commissioners discussed this suggestion. Commissioner Anderson agreed and commented that the street is part of the City's master plan. Commissioner Sweeten commented that the collector does not improve the value of the subdivision and may even make some of the lots hard to sell. Mr. Smith observed that the City differentiates between development improvements and system-wide improvements. The City agrees that the 1200 East/800 North collector is a system-wide improvement. Commissioner Nixon commented that he is not asking them to pay for the development of the street, just to dedicate the property. Commissioner Sweeten disagreed with this concept and the Commissioners discussed the proposal. The options for the City and the developers were explored briefly. Mr. McKeon thanked the Commissioners for their patience and time. They would take the suggestions and see what could be done.

COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REQUEST BY BLACK SCOT DEVELOPMENT FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR HIGHLANDS AT BALD MOUNTAIN, PLAT "A," A 34-LOT SUBDIVISION AT APPROXIMATELY 700 NORTH 800 EAST. COMMISSIONER SWEETEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

5. UTAH AUTO SALES - 10 NORTH STATE STREET - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT - PUBLIC HEARING
This is a request to expand a legal nonconforming use by allowing Utah Auto Sales to expand to the west side of State Street from their existing lot.

It was noted that there were citizens present in the audience that would like to submit public comment on Item 5. The item was reopened to allow this comment. Mr. Smith summarized the application to expand the Utah Auto Sales lot to the west side of State Street. He commented that the Lindon City Code covers expansion of a nonconforming use with two criteria– that the use is in harmony with the purpose of this zone and that the use will not damage or cause unreasonable burden on its neighbors. He suggested that the Commissioners open the public hearing by motion.

COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER SWEETEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

Chairman Carpenter opened the discussion for public comment. Mr. Robert Dayley pointed out the location of his home west of the proposal. His back yard adjoins the parcel. He observed that he is present as the representative for this neighborhood and would like to voice their concerns. He listed the security of the neighborhood from strangers, noise and light pollution, safety of the public in crossing State Street, the city ordinance not allowing more dealerships and the precedence this may set, damage to property values, and access to utilities.

Commissioner Peters commented that noise and light pollution can be corrected upon complaint. He asked Mr. Dayley what he sees as the difference between a car dealership or any other commercial business. Mr. Dayley replied that he could see no difference. He acknowledged that the neighborhood has always been aware that some kind of commercial enterprise would be put on this property eventually. Mr. Smith observed that noise and light pollution have specific code requirements and can be addressed if the neighborhood will voice their complaints.

Commissioner Simister commented that one resident of the neighborhood had expressed concerns to her about windows on the second story of the commercial structure being able to overlook the back yards of the neighboring homes.

Mr. Dayley expressed concern about the surveyors accessing his yard without asking permission. He asked the City to relay this concern to the developer. Chairman Carpenter thanked Mr. Dayley for sharing the concerns of the neighborhood. He asked if there was any other public comment. There was none.

COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

7. OSTLER INDUSTRIAL PARK - 150 SOUTH 1800 WEST - PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
This is a request for approval of a one-lot subdivision in the Light Industrial zone.

Mr. Smith presented this proposal for a 1-1/4 acre lot addition to the Ostler Industrial Park. He noted that there were no staff concerns. Mr. Mike Ahlin explained that there would be two more lots later. Commissioner Nixon asked if the power line easement had been taken into account when planning future lots. Mr. Ahlin replied yes. The Commission discussed possible site plan issues with Mr. Ahlin.

COMMISSIONER SWEETEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY MIKE AHLEN FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL OF OSTLER INDUSTRIAL PARK, PLAT "E," A ONE-LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

8. LEE HOMESTEAD - 594 NORTH LOCUST AVENUE - DESIGN REVIEW
This is a request for a deep lot subdivision in the R1-20 Zone.

Mr. Smith displayed the location of the proposed deep lot on an aerial photo. He noted that the proposal is on 400 West next to the old public works yard. He noted that the zoning in this area is R1-20 and displayed the various lot division options proposed by Ms. Lee. He commented that one proposal shows an access of 25-feet. Commissioner Peters noted the existence of a home on the parcel. Chairman Carpenter asked if the home was going to stay. Ms. Joy Lee replied yes.

Commissioner Nixon informed Ms. Lee that the lot size requirement is exclusive of the driveway access. Commissioner Anderson added that the Planning Commission cannot reduce the lot size so that she can have four lots. The lots must meet the ordinance requirements. Mr. Smith read the deep lot ordinance to the Commissioners. The Commission discussed whether the request for a deep lot met the intent of the ordinance. Commissioner Sweeten expressed the opinion that a deep lot was not allowed in this case. The Commissioners discussed the addition of a cul-de-sac and division into two or three lots. It was noted that a garage and shop may need removal for three lots.

Commissioner Nixon suggested that the lots may not be of enough value to justify the construction of a cul-de-sac. He suggested two large lots that would face on 400 West. This was discussed with Ms. Lee. She asked about the possibility of an R2 Overlay on one of the large lots. This possibility was explored. She thanked the Commission for their time and told them she would be work on it.

9. NIELS FUGAL SONS CO. - 794 NORTH GENEVA ROAD - FENCE HEIGHT MODIFICATION
This is a request for approval of an eight-foot fence in the General Commercial Zone.

Mr. Guy Fugal told the Commission that he would like to replace the existing fence with a decorative concrete fence. Mr. Smith explained the proposal and the location. He pointed out 700 North and noted that a fence over seven feet requires Planning Commission approval. He commented that staff's vision of this gateway street is for landscaping adjacent to the right-of-way. This proposal is for a retaining wall and fence to shield a construction yard. He observed that this parcel may develop commercially in the future and landscaping could be required then.

Commissioner Simister confirmed that the street level is lower than the original ground level. This proposal would put an eight-foot fence on top of a retaining wall. Mr. Smith affirmed this statement. He added that the street was lowered when it was constructed. He acknowledged that the applicant has a legitimate concern to protect their property. Mr. Fugal commented that when he donated the property for 700 North, the varying level was an unknown issue. Commissioner Simister confirmed with Mr. Fugal that he did not plan to add landscaping along his frontage with the construction of the fence. Mr. Fugal agreed. He explained that the fence will be constructed two-feet from the property line. The retaining wall will be two-feet high.

Commissioner Sweeten observed that the property values have risen since the construction of 700 North. Commissioner Anderson commented that the right-of-way is larger than the constructed street of three lanes. He noted that there will be city-owned property that is unlandscaped and that it may remain that way for a long time. Commissioner Nixon asked if the property can be sloped rather than a retaining wall built. Mr. Fugal explained that the slope would start within his construction yard and that equipment would need to be moved before earthmoving could commence. He felt that this would create "havoc" that was unnecessary and could be avoided by building the retaining wall.

Mr. Christensen observed that the right-of-way for 700 North is 102-feet. There is presently 41-feet of asphalt, including a center left turn land and two travel lanes. There is no curb and gutter for now, as this will be added when the street is fully widened. Chairman Carpenter noted that this leaves 24-feet of empty space for future expansion of the street. The Commission discussed storm drain and the location of the fence. Chairman Carpenter asked why an eight-foot fence was desired. Mr. Fugal replied that the concrete panels he wishes to use are eight-feet tall and will allow his equipment yard to retain its privacy and security.

Commissioner Nixon asked Mr. Smith if the Commission can require landscaping. Mr. Smith observed that this is not a new business or one that is changing its use. He noted that there is nothing in the city code that would dictate this requirement. Commissioner Simister observed that the fence is a new permanent structure. The Commissioners discussed the proposal.

COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DAN FUGAL FOR AN EIGHT-FOOT FENCE IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT THE APPLICANT GRADE THE SLOPE WHERE POSSIBLE, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER, INSTEAD OF CONSTRUCTING A RETAINING WALL.
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

Commissioner Simister commented that the fence would probably be removed when the property developed commercially. Sidewalks were discussed.

COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY DAN FUGAL FOR AN EIGHT-FOOT FENCE IN THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE AS PROPOSED. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR EXCEPT COMMISSIONER NIXON WHO VOTED NAY. THE MOTION CARRIED.

10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT
1.Canberra Heights Grading Plan Modification
Mr. Smith displayed the proposed amendment to the Fonseca grading plan. He explained that the property owners wish to build a retaining wall on the east property line and fill the lot between there and the side of the home. They are working with the property owner on that side. Mr. Fonseca was asked the height of the wall. He replied five to eight feet. The Commission discussed the proposal. CONSENSUS WAS REACHED TO APPROVE THE GRADING PLAN MODIFICATION.

Mr. Smith invited the Commissioners to attend a "Friends of the Utah Valley Justice Center" dinner. Commissioner Peters showed pictures of a preservation project in Panguitch, Utah.

ADJOURN

COMMISSIONER ATCHISON MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 10:47 P.M. COMMISSIONER SWEETEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

APPROVED - January 14, 2004

back to top