The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 in the Lindon City Center, Council Chambers at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.

Conducting: Bruce Carpenter
Prayer: Lori Atchison

PRESENT

Bruce Carpenter, Chairman - arrived at 7:25
Ron Anderson, Commissioner
Lori Atchison, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Alternate Commissioner
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Dustin Sweeten, Commissioner
Kevin Smith, Planning Director

ABSENT

Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
Lindsey Bayless, Councilmember
Venla Gubler, Administrative Clerk

The Meeting began at 7:09 p.m.

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

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

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

COMMISSIONER ANDERSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 27,2003 AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER ATCHISON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

3. PUBLIC COMMENT

There was no public comment

4. NEW BUSINESS (Reports by Commissioners)

Commissioner Peters made a presentation concerning ADA parking requirements and the layout of the parking at the new Stake Center at 600 North 50 East. It appears that the arrangement as laid out by the Church does not work very well and should be changed. There was much discussion about how to fix the problem and it was decided that the church should be contacted to see if they could fix the problem. The Commission also decided that they should take a closer look at how ADA parking is laid out on site plans.

Commissioner Nixon indicated that the configuration of the south driveway at the Canal Drive Chapel is a safety concern and should have a yield or stop sign so drivers would not just drive directly onto the 550 East or 300 North without looking.

Commissioner Nixon indicated that the City should re-look at its traffic calming program to see if we as a City should make it easier to have traffic calming measures installed. Various different opinions were discussed by Commissioners on this issue specifically whether or not it's a good idea to have easy standards for traffic calming measures to be installed. It was decided that Commissioner Nixon could review a copy of the current Traffic Calming program and decided if changes should be proposed.

Commissioner Nixon questioned if the City had a Storm Water infiltration program. Mr. Smith indicated that the City has a new program that has just been implemented to account for runoff and storm water pollution.

Commissioner Sweeten commented that Utah Auto Sales has a lot of cars parked on the streets in front of and around his sales lot and wanted to know if that was ok or a problem or what was being done. Mr. Smith indicated that while there is a lot of cars around the site it was not a violation of any current City code that he could find. Mr. Smith indicated that Utah Auto Sales is very similar to Hauns Automotive, Los Hermanos, the Pizza Factory, and Grays Auto. All these business park employees and customers on State Street and surrounding streets. Mr. Smith did indicate that he would speak with Mr. Gallagher regarding his customer parking and making sure that it stayed open for customers.
Mr. Peters asked if the traffic study would be done for 600 North now that the Church is complete and the road is open. Mr. Smith indicated that we would check into it.

(Chairperson Carpenter arrived and assumed the chair.)

5. RIMROCK - 600 NORTH STATE STREET - SITE PLAN APPLICATION
This is a request for site plan approval for a new retail business center on the corner of State Street and 600 North.

Mr. Smith explained that the applicants are requesting approval of a commercial retail center. This 3.24 acre site is proposed to have 45,000 sq. ft. of leaseable retail space. They are proposing an additional access onto 600 North. Rimrock has indicated that they have discussed this with the neighborhood and they are in agreement with the new proposed access. Mr. Smith indicated that the Commission might want to verify this with the neighbors that are present.

In addition Mr. Smith indicated that at this time Rimrock does not have elevations prepared for the proposed buildings. The Planning Commission can continue this item until they provide elevations or approve the request contingent upon Planning Commission approval of future elevations. Rimrock wants to wait until they have tenants for the buildings before they propose elevations.

Mark Hampton, representing Rimrock, was present and gave a brief overview of his project and indicated that he had been in conversations with some of the property owners on 600 North while some of them still do not want the driveway onto 600 North they agreed in concept to the proposal if they had to have a driveway. He also explained that he had elevations for the main building but did not have elevations for the building on the very corner of the property. The Planning Commission reviewed the elevations. The Planning Commission commented that the elevations are very well done but that we still need to see the corner building before a formal approval could be given.

Commissioner Peters indicated that he remembered that a main driveway through the center of the project was to be designed into the site plan to encourage traffic to goto go to State Street instead of 600 North. Mr. Peters indicated that there was a drive access but that it didn't give the feel of a main access and might not be used as it should. He asked if it could be widened. Mr. Hampton indicated that it could be done but it will require a realignment of the parking lot. Commissioner Peters also suggested that the cross easement for the parking lot be a one-way easement. This was discussed. Commissioner Atchison indicated that parking could be a problem and that it appeared that there might not be enough for the size of the buildings on the property.

Chairperson Carpenter opened the meeting for public comment. Lamar Barrington, a home owner on 600 North, indicated that he had a few points he wanted to make. He indicated that during the zone change for the back corner of the property the Commission agreed that their would be no additional access onto 600 North from the parcel. He indicated that he and his neighbors felt that this would be best for the neighborhood. He then indicated that while they felt it best not to have a drive access if the Commission was going to approve one it should be at the intersection of 400 West. Mr. Hampton agreed that this would be the best location and that he would agree to relocate it there if necessary. Mr. Barrington pointed out that he did not see trash enclosures on the property. After review it was found that there were four trash enclosures on the site. Mr. Barrington indicated that on past site plans the access onto state street was wider. It appeared to him that the site plan being considered was only two lanes. He wanted to know if it could be widened like the original. Mr. Hampton said he would discuss that with UDOT and see if it could be widened. Mr. Barrington summarized by saying that neighbors do not want any access on 600 North and that it appears that the developer is trying to do too much with this property.

No motion was made. Mr Hampton indicated that he would go to work on the remaining issues and would return with new plans.

6. GOODFELLOW CORPORATION - 390 NORTH 2000 WEST - AMENDED SITE PLAN
This is a request to add a storage building to the rear of the property and to expand the outside storage area.

Mr. Smith explained that Goodfellow Corp. has purchased the old rest stop property from the State of Utah and desire to expand their equipment storage area. In addition they desire to finish a storage building with was started illegally and without a building permit in 1999.
Mr. Smith further explained that it is staff opinion that Goodfellow has not complied with their original conditions of approval as approved on September 9, 1998. In order for staff to feel comfortable allowing Goodfellow to expand their operation onto the south property and receive a building permit for the new shop the following should occur:
1. They should be required to construct the 8 foot precast concrete wall completely around the storage area including the north property line.
2. The two "parts storage containers" proposed to be used as part of the fence need to be behind the fence. A sight obscuring gate should be installed next to the building.
3. The current access road on the north should be asphalted including the rest of the parking lot as per Condition of Approval #2 on the Sept. 9, 1998 minutes.
4. Clarification should be given on what types of materials if any are allowed to be storage outside the storage area.
5. Verification should be presented by Goodfellow that all tree planting requirements have been met.
6. A 20 foot strip of grass with the require trees should be planted along the I-15 frontage.
These items as well as any others deemed necessary by the Planning Commission should be completed before they are allowed to proceed. In the event Goodfellow decides not to proceed with their proposal they still need to comply with these requirements and should be given a date by which these requirements will be met.

Mr. Robinson was present to represent Goodfellow Corp. He indicated that he was not around when the original site plan was approved but that he was here now and wanted to do what had to be done to bring the property into compliance.

Chairman Carpenter asked for the applicant to explain what they were planning to store on the new expansion area to the south. Mr. Robinson explained that they need room for more equipment sales area. They would be cleaning equipment and displaying it on the area. Mr. Peters indicated that Mr. Goodfellow when he originally came in painted a much nicer picture of what was going to be built on this property and it hasn't happened. He then asked Mr. Robinson why the City should allow an expansion on this property. Mr. Robinson explained that he hasn't been involved with the business for too long and would do his best to bring the property up to established standards and try and correct what is wrong.
Commissioner Nixon asked what the building would look like. Mr. Robinson explained that the existing container building would be coming down and a new split faced block building would be used.

The Commission then discussed the various items still incomplete from the previous approval. The Commission indicated to Mr. Robinson that his project could not be approved until the original conditions were met. It was also discussed that whether or not Goodfellow decides to expand, these conditions must be meet. Chairman Carpenter asked Mr. Robinson how much time does he need to complete these improvements. Mr. Robinson said he only needs about 3 months.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR GOODFELLOW CORP. AT 390 NORTH 2000 WEST ALLOWING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SHOP BUILDING AND AN EXPANSION OF THEIR OUTSIDE DISPLAY AREA UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ALL CONDITIONS OF THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ARE COMPLETED AND IN ADDITION IF ORIGINAL CONDITIONS ARE NOT COMPLIED WITH BY DECEMBER 10, 2003 THE COMMISSION WILL REVIEW WHETHER OR NOT TO REVOKE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. COMMISSIONER SWEETEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

7. 17.72. - ASSISTED LIVING CENTERS - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT

This is a request to adopt an ordinance to regulate assisted living centers. This is a continuation of the August 13, 2003 meeting.

Mr. Smith explained that the Planning Commission is considering a second draft of the new assisted living center ordinance. This ordinance is designed to provide regulations and requirements regarding the construction and placement of assisted living centers in residential as well as non residential zones.
The Planning Commission discussed various items related to this ordinance and comments were received from the public.
COMMISSIONER SWEETEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST TO ADOPT SECTION 17.72. - ASSISTED LIVING CENTERS OF THE LINDON CITY CODE AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. LARGE ASSISTED LIVING CENTERS BE CONSIDERED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES WHEN IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
2. THE CITY COUNCIL SHOULD CONSIDER IF ASSISTED LIVING CENTERS SHOULD BE COUNTED AS PART OF THE DENSITY ALLOWANCE IN THE VARIOUS R2 DISTRICTS.
3. THE MINIUM SIZE OF A LOT SHALL NOT BE SMALLER THAN 26,000 SQ. FT.
4. UNDER NOTICING REQUIREMENTS, THE TIME TO BE NOTICED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BE CHANGED FROM 30 DAYS TO 15 AND THAT D.R.C. REVIEW AND APPROVAL ALL INFORMATION BEFORE IT IS MAILED TO NEIGHBORS.
5. THE TIME TO ALLOW AN APPEAL BE EXTEND FROM 14 DAYS TO 30 DAYS.
6. REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING.
COMMISSIONER NIXON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

8. 17.44. - R1 ZONE - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE - AMENDMENT

Because of time constraints the Planning Commission moved the discussion and consideration of this item to the September 24, 2003 meeting.

9. WESTSIDE RESIDENTIAL MASTER PLAN - DISCUSSION ITEM
The Lindon City planning interns along with staff gave a presentation showing research
they have done comparing and contrasting the various photos and master plans that were completed by the Planning Commission and Council. Many similarities were discussed between the various photos. It was decided that staff would seek out more examples of the desirable features of the various photos and development plans.

10. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT

Mr. Smith discussed issues related to grading plans in the hillside overlay district.

ADJOURN

COMMISSIONER ATCHISON MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 11:15 P.M. COMMISSIONER SWEETEN SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.

APPROVED - December 10, 2003

back to top