|
|
Home » City Government » Planning Commission » Planning Commission Schedule 2005 (Agendas and Minutes) » Planning Commission Minutes 2005 » June 8, 2005
June 8, 2005
The Lindon City Planning Commission held a regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, June 8, 2005, beginning at 7:00 p.m., in the Lindon City Center, City Council Chambers, at 100 North State Street, Lindon, Utah.
Conducting: Dustin Sweeten, Chairman
Pledge of Allegiance: Dustin Sweeten
Invocation: Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
PRESENT ABSENT
Dustin Sweeten, Chairperson
Ron Anderson, Commissioner
Julie Bryner, Commissioner
Gary Godfrey, Commissioner
Evan Nixon, Commissioner
Jim Peters, Commissioner
Marilyn Simister, Commissioner
Adam Cowie, Planning Director
John Martineau, Planning Intern
Debra Cullimore, Deputy Recorder
The meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of May 25, 2005 were reviewed. The following corrections were made.
Page 2, Line 22: add the sentence, “Mr. Byron was informed that the fence is to be placed at the back of the sidewalk.”
Page 2, Line 41: add the condition, “That the placement of the fence is back of sidewalk.”
Page 7, Line 18: change the word “wall” to the word “fence”.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE MINUTES OF THE MAY 11, 2005 MEETING AS CORRECTED. COMMISSIONER NIXON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Joyce Gunther, reporter for the Daily Herald newspaper, apologized for any misinformation which may appear in any articles she writes. She stated that she makes every effort to submit correct information, but that there is a possibility that wording changes may occur during the editing process which she has no control over.
CURRENT BUSINESS
1. Building Elevation Approval - Jorge Valdizan commercial building. 550 North State Street. This is a request for approval of the building elevations for a commercial strip mall in the CG zone.
Curtis Miner and Jorge Valdizan approached the Commission. Mr. Cowie reminded the Commission that the site plan for this project had been approved in the previous meeting, but that the Commission had made recommendations for minor revisions to the elevations of the building and had requested to review those changes prior to final approval. The Commission had recommended that the stone on the center columns of the building be carried to the top of the windows, that decorative lighting be added, and that awnings be placed in key areas of the building. Mr. Miner showed drawings which included the modifications requested by the Commission, including the stone extending to the top of the windows, and the addition of cable suspended metal awning structures over the center windows. Mr. Cowie asked about the addition of lighting. Mr. Miner stated that he had made an effort to incorporate lighting as well as the awnings, but was unable to find an acceptable combination. Mr. Miner was asked if it would be possible to add can type lights under the awning. Mr. Miner stated that he would add them. Commissioner Peters asked Mr. Miner about the color of aluminum trim on the face of the building. Mr. Miner stated that it is proposed as non anodized aluminum, but could be easily changed to a bronze colored anodized aluminum. Commissioner Nixon stated that the bronze color would be preferable. Mr. Miner agreed to make that change.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR THE JORGE VALDIZAN COMMERCIAL PROJECT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT THE ALUMINUM ON THE FACE OF THE BUILDING BE BRONZE IN COLOR.
2. THAT CAN LIGHTS BE ADDED TO THE AREA UNDER THE AWNINGS.
COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
2. Conditional Use Permit – Paradise Pools. 35 North 1400 West. This is a request for an outdoor display of an upright swimming pool in the HI/T zone.
Jason Lott was the representative for Paradise Pools. Mr. Cowie explained that Mr. Lott is requesting a conditional use permit to allow outdoor display of a swimming pool. The pool is currently displayed outdoors at the business, which is located next to the freeway. Mr. Lott noted that the pool has been displayed for the past year. Mr. Cowie reviewed the current landscaping at the business, which includes a twenty foot grass strip as well as several evergreen bushes and small trees. Mr. Cowie stated that the purpose of the permit would be to ensure that any safety issues related to display of the pool had been addressed. Mr. Cowie noted that during conversations with Mr. Lott, he had expressed a willingness to make any necessary changes.
Mr. Lott explained the construction of the display. He stated that the pool is attached to two six inch by eight foot beams. The beams are anchored to the building, which secures the pool to the building.
Commissioner Peters noted that there is currently a moratorium on signage in the City, and asked if the pool would be considered a statue sign. Mr. Cowie stated that the pool contains no signage, and would be considered a product display. Commission Nixon commented on other types of products which are allowed to be displayed.
Commissioner Anderson requested further in formation regarding the landscaping elements on the site. Mr. Lott stated that the grass extends from the fence to the building, and that there are trees planted on each two foot section of building between the windows. Commissioner Bryner asked Mr. Lott if he is responsible for the landscaping. Mr. Lott explained that he leases the building, and that the owner of the building is responsible for the landscaping. Commissioner Nixon suggested that Mr. Lott be required to plant several more trees. Chairperson Sweeten inquired as to the freeway frontage of the site. Mr. Cowie informed him that the business has 125 feet of frontage. Chairperson Sweeten asked Mr. Lott if he leases the entire building. Mr. Lott stated that he leases approximately 2/3 of the building. Commissioner Anderson commented that it would not be reasonable to require Mr. Lott to plant trees on the part of the building that he doesn’t lease. Chairperson Sweeten agreed, and felt that Mr. Lott had adequate trees on the site.
Mr. Lott inquired as to the allowable percentage of the building which can be used for signage, and if windows are considered in that percentage. Chairperson Sweeten informed Mr. Lott that the sign ordinance is currently under revision, but that window signage will be a part of the maximum allowable percentage. Mr. Lott commented on window shades he was considering, which contain a digital picture. Mr. Cowie informed Mr. Lott that the sign ordinance will be reviewed by the City Council on July 21, and that no application for signage could be submitted until the City Council approves the revised sign ordinance. Mr. Cowie also informed Mr. Lott that the shades would likely exceed the maximum allowable amount of signage. Mr. Lott stated that he would look in to shades without pictures, or possibly tinting the windows as an alternative.
Chairperson Sweeten asked for further comments or discussion. Hearing none, he called for a motion.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY JASON LOTT FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR DISPLAY OF THE SWIMMING POOL AS PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1. THAT THE DISPLAY BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.
COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Cowie instructed Mr. Lott to come to the building department to fill out the application for the building permit. He suggested that Mr. Lott bring photographs and plans of the anchoring system at that time. Commissioner Nixon asked if the display would be reviewed by the City engineer. Mr. Cowie stated that the engineer would review it only if Phil Brown had any concerns.
3. Design Review – Old Station Square, 9 lot subdivision. Near State Street and Lakeview Drive. This is a request for comments on the proposed subdivision and Timp-Lake Trail located in the CG zone.
Brigham Ashton and Chandler Nelson were the representatives for this item. Mr. Cowie explained that this item will be on the agenda for the Planning Commission meeting on July 22. Mr. Ashton and Mr. Nelson are requesting guidance on the location and design of the Timp-Lake Trail which will traverse through the property. The trail will be connected to a tunnel structure which will run east to west under State Street and will exit onto the property for this project. The exit of the tunnel is expected to split the property line between lots seven and eight. Placement of the trail through the development is flexible. Mr. Ashton and Mr. Nelson are requesting input regarding sidewalk and landscaping requirements in association with the placement of the trail.
Chairperson Sweeten inquired as to whether the City is purchasing the property for the trail easement. Mr. Cowie stated that it was his impression that the ground was being donated by the developers. Chairperson Sweeten noted that some leeway should be given to the developers in exchange for their willingness to help the City.
Mr. Ashton discussed the layout of the development, and stated that the street layout had been modified in order to address concerns of citizens regarding possible speed problems as vehicles enter the residential area. He also stated that there had previously been some concern regarding Lot 9. Mr. Ashton has purchased Lot 9 and incorporated it into the development. The easement for the trail will be located on Lot 7 and 8. Mr. Ashton stated that they are considering locating the buildings on Lot 7 and 8 more to the front of the property, with the parking area and trail in the rear. His concern is that the placement of the trail to the rear may create a feeling of an ally way.
Mr. Cowie presented specifics of the tunnel. He stated that the tunnel will be sixteen feet wide, that it will be lighted, and that daylight will be visible at both ends. Commissioner Peters commented that similar tunnels which have been constructed in California have subsequently been closed due to associated problems. Councilmember Bayless noted that the tunnel will have a slight dip, as the entrance on the east side will be higher than the entrance on the west side. Commissioner Nixon asked if the exact location of the entrance on the east side had been determined. Mr. Cowie stated that the location for the east entrance is currently being studied. Chairperson Sweeten inquired as to the time line for construction of the tunnel. Councilmember Bayless stated that no specific date has been set to begin construction, but it will be in the near future. She also informed the Commission that there is a similar tunnel located near the BYU horse arena, and suggested that the Commissioners visit that tunnel to get a more specific idea of the design. Commissioner Bryner inquired as to whether gates would be installed at the ends of the tunnel. Councilmember Bayless stated that gates are not anticipated due to the fact that the tunnel will be very open and accessible, and that any possible safety concerns will be addressed prior to construction.
The Commission discussed at length various options for placement and design of the trail and associated landscaping. During the discussion, safety and aesthetic concerns were addressed. Commissioner Nixon pointed out that there may be a problem with the alignment of 200 North Street from the east side of State Street. He expressed concern that the alignment of 200 North in relation to the proposed development may create an undo expense for the City. Mr. Cowie informed Commissioner Nixon that the realignment of the street would be a City project, due to the fact that it is not located on the development site, but assured him that it is being looked at. Mr. Nelson stated that the street in the development had been placed where the City engineer had instructed them to place it. Councilmember Bayless stated the street realignment would have occurred eventually regardless of the proposed development, and that it would be a City project.
Following discussion, each Commissioner gave specific recommendations for the design and placement of the trail. Recommendations were as follows:
Commissioner Nixon felt that the pedestrian trail should be located near the street. He also commented that the use of asphalt for the trail would highlight it as something different than a sidewalk.
Councilmember Bayless stated that she was speaking as the trail committee chairperson, not as a City Council representative, but felt that a trail with a berm area at the rear of the parking lot could be a pleasing addition. She stated that the material for the construction of the trail had not yet been determined, but that if there was a strong feeling for asphalt being used in this area it would probably not be a problem.
Commissioner Anderson agreed that an asphalt surface would be appropriate, and would provide for multiple uses of the trail.
Chairperson Sweeten suggested a multiuse trail should be placed at the rear of the development and that it should be separate from the commercial development.
Commissioner Anderson felt that if the horse trail were placed at the rear of the development, a wider sidewalk rather than a standard sidewalk and a separate trail area would be appropriate.
Commissioner Simister suggested that the horse trail should be located at the rear, and that the walking trail should be located closer to the businesses.
Commissioner Peters stated that he agreed with Chairperson Sweeten’s comments, and added that he would like to see a buffer between the street and the sidewalk, and suggested that the sidewalk be constructed so as to meander through the development.
Commissioner Godfrey felt that a portion of the equestrian trail should be a soft material, that the sidewalk should be a standard width, and a fifteen foot landscape strip should be included. The fifteen rather than twenty foot landscape strip concession would be made in consideration of the space used by the equestrian trail at the rear of the development.
Commissioner Bryner suggested a wide sidewalk with a berm on each side in the front area of the commercial development.
Mr. Cowie discussed the required forty foot setback for the adjacent residential zone. He stated that the property adjacent to lot 9 is actually commercial, but recommended the 40 foot set back be maintained in that area as well. Mr. Cowie stated that a seven foot masonry wall or vegetative screening is also required. Commissioner Godfrey expressed concern regarding a seven foot wall, which may create a tunnel which horses would be traveling in. Mr. Ashton inquired as to whether they could do a planting in the area as opposed to the masonry wall. Mr. Cowie explained that the Planning Commission can approve a vegetative screen.
Commissioner Peters discussed the accesses to the property from State Street and Lakeview Drive, and inquired as to whether state regulations had been considered in the placement of the access. Mr. Ashton stated that further review of accesses may be necessary. Commissioner Peters also pointed out that cross easements between parcels is typically required. Mr. Cowie suggested that Mr. Ashton discuss cross easements with the City engineer.
Mr. Ashton thanked the Commission for their suggestions. Commissioner Godfrey thanked the applicants for their patience and cooperation on the project.
4. Conditional Use Permit – Harrison Transportation Truck Terminal. Approximately 50 South 1550 West. This is a request for a trucking terminal with an associated warehouse/office in the LI zone.
Stephen Harrison, Scott Worthington, and Paul Maglebee were the representatives for this item. Mr. Cowie explained that this application is for a CUP in the Light Industrial zone located off of 1550 West Street. Mr. Cowie reviewed elements of the site plan and noted that the back half of the property will be used as a detention basin. The business consists of a trucking operation which includes ten trucks and approximately fifteen trailers. The trucks and trailers are on the road the majority of the time. The buildings on the site will be used as office space, as well as for minor warehouse storage.
Mr. Harrison addressed the pre-treatment of the water from the truck wash area of the site. He stated that the water is treated in the first catch basin and is treated twice, so as to prevent pollution downstream.
Mr. Cowie stated that there are no staff concerns regarding this application, and that recommendations made by the engineer have already been implemented into the site. Mr. Cowie explained that the elevations of the building will be constructed of split faced block. Curtis Miner, the architect for the project, explained that the elevations would consist of a combination of split faced block and stucco, and that the pattern of the block would create a banding effect. Chairperson Sweeten asked if the decorative elements meet the minimum requirements. Mr. Miner explained that the entire face of the elevation would be considered decorative.
Commissioner Nixon asked for information regarding the two proposed forty foot driveways, commenting that they were located very close together. Mr. Worthington stated that the drives provide the minimum area necessary to accommodate turning the trucks around. Commissioner Nixon asked if there was a possibility of using one sixty foot drive as opposed to two forty foot drives. Mr. Worthington stated that one sixty foot drive may be possible if they can fit it onto the site. Chairperson Sweeten commented that double drives had been allowed at other businesses, and that the Commission should make an effort to be consistent. Chairperson Sweeten noted that it would be difficult to turn the trucks around on a single sixty foot drive. Mr. Worthington stated that turning the trucks on a single sixty foot wide drive would require a double turn. Commissioner Anderson felt that two forty foot drives with a landscaped strip in the middle would be acceptable.
Commissioner Peters inquired as to storage of hazardous materials on the site. Mr. Worthington stated that only trucks and trailers would be stored on site, and that they do not transport hazardous materials.
Commissioner Simister inquired as to the number of people employed by the company. Mr. Worthington stated that they employ approximately twelve drivers and three office personnel. Commissioner Simister noted that the twenty available parking spaces should be adequate. Mr. Worthington noted that all twelve drivers would not normally drive at the same time.
Commissioner Simister inquired as to the proposed landscaping elements. Mr. Worthington stated that they intend to use elements which are low maintenance, but that create a clean look. He asked the Commission if there was a preference for grass as opposed to decorative rock on the sides of the site. The consensus of the Commission was that either rock or grass could be installed at the sides of the site, at the discretion of the applicants.
COMMISSIONER PETERS MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY HARRISON TRANSPORTATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TRUCKING TERMINAL. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
5. Minor Subdivision – Westlind Commercial Condominiums (phase 2). 1392 West 70 South. This is a request for a minor subdivision to allow converting an existing building into commercial condos.
Mr. Cowie explained that there had been a misunderstanding with the representative for this item. The applicant had understood this item would be reviewed at the meeting on July 22 and was not in attendance. Mr. Cowie stated that the Commission would not have final approval on this item, but would be making a recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Cowie suggested that if the Commission felt comfortable with it, they could proceed without the presence of the applicant.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE REQUEST BY DAVID HANDY AND WESTLIND PROPERTIES, LC, FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR THE CREATION OF COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS. COMMISSIONER PETERS SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
6. Minor Subdivision – D & D subdivision. Approximately 575 North State Street. This is a request for a 2 lot minor subdivision in the CG zone.
Curtis Miner and Michelle Dunn were the representatives for this item. This subdivision is a required condition of approval for the Dunn Investments commercial building planned on Lot 2. Mr. Miner showed the location of the lot line for the proposed subdivision. Commissioner Nixon inquired as the cross easements between the two lots, as well as the required cross easements to the lot to the north of the Dunn property. Mr. Miner requested that the cross easement between the two lots be listed as a blanket easement which would extend the length of the property, in order to accommodate future changes. Following further discussion regarding placement of cross easements, a motion was made.
COMMISSIONER NIXON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST BY SKIPP DUNN FOR A 2-LOT MINOR SUBDIVISION AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THAT A CROSS EASEMENT IS PROVIDED BETWEEN LOT 1 AND LOT 2.
2. THAT A CROSS EASEMENT IS PROVIDED AT BOTH ENDS OF THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE.
COMMISSIONER GODFREY SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS – Reports by Commissioners
Commissioner Peters stated that he had been contacted by Bill Mentor, who was representing Green Valley Condominiums regarding damage which had occurred to the streets in that development. Commissioner Peters noted that the streets in the development are privately owned and maintained. The damage occurred due to a hydraulic leak from a garbage truck owned by BFI. Mr. Mentor stated that they had put sand on the areas where the hydraulic fluid had leaked. The sand had subsequently bonded with the asphalt. Mr. Mentor was unsure of the extent of the damage at this time, but felt that a slurry seal may be necessary in order to repair any damage. Mr. Mentor was inquiring as to whether the City may be willing to share the cost of the repairs, due to the fact that the damage had been caused by a BFI truck which was under contract with the City at the time the damage occurred. Councilmember Bayless suggested that representatives of Green Valley contact BFI regarding the damage to determine if they are willing to assist in needed repairs. Commissioner Anderson commented that it may be appropriate for the City to make contact with BFI, due to the fact that the contract is held by the City. Mr. Cowie stated that he will address the issue in staff meeting with Mr. Dameron.
Commissioner Peters mentioned that the repaving of the lower portion of 600 North Street had filled in a speed bump on the street. He stated that the speed bump is necessary in the area, and should be repaired prior to the street being striped.
Commissioner Bryner inquired as to the final site plan for Low Book Sales. She stated that to the best of her recollection, the timbers on the side of the building had been approved as wooden timbers, not as a façade. Mr. Cowie reviewed the approved site plan and determined that it had been followed as approved. Chairperson Sweeten asked if the sign application for Low Book Sales had been received prior to the moratorium. Mr. Cowie indicated that the signage had been approved, and would be installed prior to the opening of the business.
Commission Bryner inquired as to the outcome at City Council meeting of the Mike Anderson application. Mr. Cowie informed the Commission that the City Council had followed their recommendation, and had required curb and gutter around the bulb of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Cowie noted that the City Council had made an additional requirement that the City receive a statement from the Hinckley family, who own a parcel of property adjacent to the proposed development, regarding any negative effect they felt the development may have on their ability to develop their property in the future. This resulted in a tentative agreement to sell the back parcel of their property to Mr. Anderson.
PLANNING DIRECTOR REPORT
Mr. Cowie stated that at the June 7 City Council meeting there had been only three Councilmembers present, and that only three would be present at the June 21 meeting. Therefore, any final decision regarding adoption of revisions to the sign ordinance would probably not take place until July.
Mr. Cowie reminded the Commissioners about the joint field trip to tour the Fieldstone development in Herriman on June 15 at 6:00 p.m.
Commissioner Nixon suggested that the agenda for meetings be e-mailed to Commissioners. Mr. Cowie obtained e-mail addresses of the Commissioners.
Mr. Cowie requested the attendance of Commissioner at a meeting with CRS Architects on June 16 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting will assist in developing guidelines for design standards which will be incorporated into development on State Street and other main corridors in the City.
Mr. Cowie commented on the approved site plan for Utah Auto Sales. He stated that the approved site plan included grass down the sides of the site. Decorative rock has been installed rather than grass. Mr. Cowie inquired as to whether this was an issue the Commission felt they should pursue. Mr. Cowie stated that the decorative rock could be allowed, but that the approved site plan included grass in those areas. Commissioner Nixon commented that it would not be productive to ask them to come in for review and approval if the rock would ultimately be approved. Chairperson Sweeten felt that it may set a precedent if they were not required to return for approval of the decorative rock. He stated that grass would not have been required, but that it was included on the approved site plan, and that the decorative rock should be reviewed and approved. The consensus of the Commission was that Utah Auto Sales should return for approval of the decorative rock rather than the grass indicated in the approved site plan.
Mr. Cowie discussed review of grading plans by the Commission. He stated that the Hillside Ordinance requires review of grading plans by the Planning Commission. He stated that there have been engineering concerns related to specific projects. The Planning Commission will review grading plans for remaining Hillside projects.
Commissioner Godfrey inquired as to the outcome of the Check City application. Mr. Cowie informed him that it had been approved by the City Council with the condition that the hours remain from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, as recommended by the Planning Commission.
Commission Godfrey asked if the City Council had expressed any concern regarding the narrow ally way behind the Valdizan project. Mr. Cowie stated that Captain Cody Cullimore of the Police Department had been present at the meeting, and felt that any safety concerns would be eliminated by providing adequate lighting of the area.
Commissioner Godfrey also requested information regarding the outcome of the application for Grays Auto. Mr. Cowie stated that it had been approved with the additional condition of cleaning up the area at the rear of the building. Commissioner Godfrey expressed concern over allowing a business operating under a non-conforming use permit to expand. Mr. Cowie explained that the Council felt that the business is not expanding, but that the storage structure will allow the existing business to operate more efficiently. Commissioner Peters observed that Mr. Gray has been in business for forty years, and that the building was built in compliance with the code at that time.
ADJOURN
COMMISSIONER BRYNER MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 9:35 P.M. COMMISSIONER SIMISTER SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL PRESENT VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION CARRIED.
APPROVED – June 22, 2005
__________________________________
Dustin Sweeten, Chairperson
________________________________
Adam Cowie, Planning Director
|
|
|
