CITY OF OREM
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
February 22, 2005
5:00 P.M. STUDY SESSION
CONDUCTING
Mayor Jerry C. Washburn
ELECTED OFFICIALS
Councilmembers Les Campbell, Dean Dickerson, Douglas
R. Forsyth, Karen A. McCandless, Stephen E. Sandstrom, and
Shiree Thurston.
APPOINTED STAFF
Jim Reams, City Manager; Paul Johnson, City Attorney; Jeff
Pedersen, Administrative Services Director; Stanford
Sainsbury, Development Services Director; Bruce Chesnut,
Public Works Director; David Stroud, City Engineer; Donna
Weaver, City Recorder; and Rachelle Conner, Deputy City
Recorder
REPORT – UVSC General Plan
Dr. Val Peterson, Vice President of Administration and External Affairs, and James Michaelis,
Associate Vice President for Facilities Planning, for Utah Valley State College (UVSC) met with the
City Council to give an update of UVSC’s General Plan. Gould Evans Master Plans rated the campus
in the top six of the finest examples of modern campuses.
Dr. Peterson advised they have held several meetings concerning the General Plan which included
faculty and staff, students, and the general public. They have also set up three committees to assist
with the changes.
He discussed the General Plan update, indicating it will include the following:








A perimeter road being built around the entire campus. A green belt will be put in along the
freeway, and the campus will be the central core. The perimeter road will replace 800 South
from approximately 900 West to 1200 West.
A new Performing Arts Building.
A new entrance for the campus by the Performing Arts Building will be constructed. The
entrance will come from 1200 West and have double lanes.
A new Digital Learning Center. Possible construction to begin next year.
A large fieldhouse with an indoor track and practice facility.
UVSC will take possession of the old Vineyard Elementary Building as well as the Alpine Life
and Learning Building on July 1, 2005. UVSC plans to shift its Education Program to the
Vineyard building.
A pedestrian underpass will be constructed for University Parkway.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday Saints Institute of Religion Building will need
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.1)



$2,000,000 for work on the infrastructure before adding on to their current building.
Representatives for the Church have been in discussions with the Steele family to possibly
purchase property from them to build a new building.
An expansion of both the Science and Business Buildings.
There will be more parking available.
A new roundabout will be constructed at approximately 850 West 800 South. UVSC has
received many positive comments from neighbors regarding the roundabout at 1200 South
400 West. Five thousand vehicles go through the roundabout each day, and it has helped the
traffic flow.
Dr. Peterson then noted the first Orem Owlz baseball game in the new stadium will be
March 24, 2005. A new scoreboard will be installed within six weeks. The stadium is said to be one
of the nicest minor league baseball stadiums in the United States.
Mr. Reams asked if UVSC planned to stick with the modernistic design, and Dr. Peterson explained
that the new buildings may have some variation, but they will still compliment the current designs.
REVIEW OF AGENDA ITEMS
The Council and staff reviewed the agenda items.
CITY COUNCIL NEW BUSINESS
Councilmember Thurston
Mrs. Thurston reminded the other Councilmembers of the Miss Orem Pageant mock interviews. The
interviews are scheduled for March 23, 2005 at 7:00 p.m.
The Council adjourned at 5:55 p.m. to the City Council Chambers for the regular meeting.
6:00 P.M. REGULAR SESSION
CONDUCTING
Mayor Jerry C. Washburn
ELECTED OFFICIALS
Councilmembers Les Campbell, Dean Dickerson, Douglas R.
Forsyth, Karen A. McCandless, Stephen E. Sandstrom, and
Shiree Thurston.
APPOINTED STAFF
Jim Reams, City Manager; Paul Johnson, City Attorney;
Stanford Sainsbury, Development Services Director; David
Stroud, City Engineer; Donna Weaver, City Recorder; and
Rachelle Conner, Deputy City Recorder.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Alex Winters
INVOCATION /
INSPIRATIONAL THOUGHT
Tim Christensen
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.2)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
City Council Meeting of February 8, 2005 and City Council Work Session with the CDBG
Advisory Commission of February 15, 2005
Mrs. McCandless moved to approve the minutes of the February 8, 2005, meeting of the Orem City
Council and the February 15, 2005, Work Session with the CDBG Advisory Commission.
Mr. Dickerson seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mr. Campbell, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Forsyth,
Mrs. McCandless, Mr. Sandstrom, Mrs. Thurston, and Mr. Washburn. The motion passed
unanimously.
MAYOR’S REPORT/ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL
Upcoming Events
The Mayor referred the Council to the upcoming events listed in the agenda packet.
Upcoming Agenda Items
The Mayor referred the Council to the upcoming agenda items listed in the agenda packet.
Appointments to Boards and Commissions
Mayor Washburn recommended that Sharon Goff be appointed to serve on the Summerfest Advisory
Committee.
Mrs. McCandless moved to appoint Sharon Goff to serve as a member on the Summerfest Advisory
Committee. Mr. Dickerson seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mr. Forsyth, Mr. Dickerson,
Mr. Campbell, Mrs. McCandless, Mrs. Thurston, Mr. Sandstrom and Mayor Washburn. The motion
passed unanimously.
Recognition of New Neighborhoods in Action Officers
No new Neighborhoods in Action officers were recognized.
Youth City Council
Camille Harris, Spring Youth Mayor, indicated the Youth City Council had made valentines for the
residents of the Seville Retirement Center. The Youth City Council will meet February 23, 2005, to
plan more service projects.
PERSONAL APPEARANCES
Time was allotted for the public to express their ideas, concerns, and comments on items not on the
agenda.
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.3)
Karen Acerson, representative for the Timpanogos Storytelling Festival, expressed appreciation to
the City Council for their support of the Storytelling Festival. She also thanked the Council for
allowing them to use the new City park for the festival. She voiced her concern about the new park
being called Canyon Park, as there are already two other parks in that area with similar names. She
asked the Council to consider changing the name. She suggested Timpanogos Park or Festival Park.
Mrs. Acerson expressed concern that there are so many out-of-state visitors that attend the
Storytelling Festival, the park would be easier to locate if there was some name recognition involved.
Over 25,000 people attended the event last year. Mrs. Acerson then reported that Beth Horner, a
Timpanogos storyteller would be performing at the Scera Little Theater, Wednesday,
February 23, 2005, at 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Washburn advised the City Council had already had a discussion about changing the name of
the park and that Timpanogos Park had been one of the suggestions.
CONSENT ITEMS
There were no consent items.
SCHEDULED ITEMS
6:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – Ivory Homes
RESOLUTION AND ORDINANCE – Amending the General Plan Land Use Map from
Professional Services to Low Density Residential; and Section 22-5-(A) and the Zoning Map
from PD-6 to Planned Residential Development for property at 700 East 1200 North
The applicant has requested this item be continued to the March 22, 2005 City Council meeting so
that issues with easements and utility lines can be resolved.
Mrs. McCandless moved to continue the General Plan amendment request on 700 East 1200 North
to March 22, 2005, at 6:15 p.m. Mr. Campbell seconded the motion. Those voting aye: Mr.
Forsyth, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Campbell, Mrs. McCandless, Mrs. Thurston, Mr. Sandstrom and
Mayor Washburn. The motion passed unanimously.
6:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – Washburn and Associates
RESOLUTION – Amending the General Plan Land Use Map from Medium Residential to
Community Commercial for property at 1353 South 800 East, 1363 South 800 East, and
1373 South 800 East
David Stroud, City Planner, reviewed with the City Council a recommendation to change the
Community Commercial land use designation be applied to three parcels currently designated as
Medium Density Residential. A change in the land use classification to Community Commercial
would permit a request to rezone the properties to one of the following commercial designations: the
Commercial Non-Retail (C1), Commercial-Local (C2), or Business Park (BP) zone. A rezone is not
requested at this time. The C1 zone would permit uses similar to the office building to the north.
The C2 zone is general commercial similar to what is located along State Street. Finally, the BP
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.4)
zone is used for business park settings with increased landscaping and architectural controls. It is
likely the applicant would request a rezone to the C1 zone as this is the adjacent zone to the north.
The property to the north of the parcels in this request is under ownership of Temple View
Terrace L.C; and there is approximately 5,000 square feet of vacant space with the three buildings.
The change in the land use map and future rezone would permit these three parcels to become part of
the existing commercial development or a development that is independent. Additional parking may
be the only change, or new office building(s) may be constructed. Property to the south and west are
zoned residential and have homes and apartments. The property to the east is also zoned residential
and is the site of a church.
The parcel at 847 East 1400 South was originally included in this request. The Planning
Commission expressed concerns about changing the land use on this piece, and as a result, the
applicant has since retracted his request for this parcel. This parcel was also the main concern at the
neighborhood meeting held on January 13, 2005. The residents did not want this parcel to be used as
a commercial access. They also did not want a building or parking lot to be located between the
houses on 835 East and 855 East on 1400 South.
The current drive access for the commercial property to the north is approximately 100 feet from the
intersection of 800 East and University Parkway. At times, traffic queuing at the light makes it
difficult to enter or exit the existing office development. If the property in this request is rezoned in
the future to C1, there is the potential to create a secondary drive access farther south to provide a
safer ingress/egress. This is only a possibility, however. Also, the City Engineer has stated there are
no plans to widen 800 East at this location.
The City Council has expressed concern in the past regarding commercial creeping into residential
zones. The burden of proof rests on the applicant to show the City Council why this request is in the
best interest of the public.
Paul Washburn, applicant, wanted to confirm that their intention is to rezone as C1. The name of
this entire project is Temple View Terrace. It was developed in 1970. Squire and Company and
Jackman and Associates have continuously occupied this location. Their businesses have grown, and
they would like more room to expand and stay in the same location. The existing office suites have
been good for the area.
Mrs. McCandless expressed appreciation to Paul Washburn for advising what his intentions for the
property were. She has received correspondence about commercial creep. It questioned the need to
bring more commercial development into residential areas. There are a lot of commercial areas in
Orem that could be used instead.
Paul Washburn agreed that was true in a lot of situations, however, this area is unique. The age of
the homes is a big issue. The homes can be refurbished but with the costs involved, that is unlikely
to occur. The lots are too narrow to develop into residential lots if a street is put in. The Stanley
Family owns one of the homes and would like to relocate to an area with less traffic. One of the
homes is a rental unit. Current residents report difficulty accessing or leaving their properties.
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.5)
Tim Christensen, applicant, remarked that right now there is not enough parking. This has caused
individuals to park on the street. Their new project will improve parking by getting vehicles off
street. This will help preserve the neighborhood.
Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing.
Dustin Palmer, 773 East 1400 South, indicated his home is located around the corner from where the
proposed change will take place. He said he would like to see this change occur, as it would be an
improvement for the neighborhood. He lives next to an apartment building and feels a quiet office
building would make a better neighbor.
Rachel Watts indicated that she lives at 855 East right by the Community of Christ Church. She
indicated that she was not opposed to the proposed amendment change; however, she was concerned
about the possibility of high profile buildings being built behind her home. She explained it was a
privacy issue for her. She doesn’t want individuals in an office building to be able to see into her
backyard.
Mr. Christensen advised they do not have a site plan yet, but they anticipate the building being closer
to the street than the surrounding homes.
Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing.
Mr. Dickerson moved, by resolution, to amend the General Plan Land Use Map for property at
1353 South 800 East, 1363 South 800 East, and 1373 South 800 East from Medium Residential to
Community Commercial. Mr. Sandstrom seconded the motion.
Mr. Forsyth expressed concern about the rezone possibly including a transitional treatment home.
He advised that he has no problems with office buildings being built there.
Mrs. McCandless strongly encouraged Mr. Washburn and his associates to apply for C1 zoning
rather than C2. She indicated that there are multi-residential buildings to the west of this property,
and agreed with Mr. Palmer that an office building is more desirable to live by than a busy apartment
building. Mrs. McCandless remarked that the lot is too deep to buy the house and refurbish it unless
someone purchased the whole parcel and removed one of the homes. She noted that if this area were
to remain residential, the neighborhood would likely see more traffic than they do right now.
Mayor Washburn commented that the Council is against allowing commercial encroachment to enter
into residential areas. He explained that he has studied the area and the impact a new building would
have on the existing residents. He indicated that he felt this amendment would not be too much of an
encroachment to the neighborhood.
Paul Washburn stated his intention will be to apply for the rezone and site plan simultaneously.
The Mayor called for vote. Those voting aye: Mr. Campbell, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Forsyth, Mrs.
McCandless, Mr. Sandstrom, Mrs. Thurston, and Mr. Washburn. The motion passed unanimously.
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.6)
6:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – Steve Strate
RESOLUTION – Amending the General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density Residential to
Regional Commercial for property at 1800 South Sandhill Road
Mayor Washburn indicated that he had received a letter from Mr. Green, the attorney representing
Mr. Strate. The letter asked Mayor Washburn to recuse himself from voting on this item. The
request was based on a letter that he wrote to the Southwest Area Alliance. Mayor Washburn stated
that he had written the letter to clarify that this is still an impartial situation and there is a public
process that has to happen. It was not written to show that his mind was made up. He advised that
he had the City Attorney read the letter before it was sent. Mayor Washburn declared that as a
member of a legislative body he is entitled to have an opinion. He then asserted that he has not made
up his mind yet, but if he had, it would still not disqualify him from participating in this discussion.
He then advised he would not recuse himself from this item of business.
David Stroud presented a recommendation to the City Council to deny the applicant’s request to
change the land use designation at approximately 1800 South Sandhill Road from Low Density
Residential to Regional Commercial. The applicant requests the Regional Commercial land use
designation be applied to two parcels under his ownership. The larger of the two parcels is
2.15 acres and the smaller one is 0.17 acres. The property bordering on the west has a Regional
Commercial land use designation and is zoned Highway Services while all other property around it is
designated Low Density Residential and is zoned R8.
The zones that implement the Regional Commercial land use designation are C3, HS, and BP. The
applicant is not requesting a zone change at this time; however, it is important to understand the
impacts of all possible zones.
The C3 zone requires a minimum parcel size of three acres. Both parcels (0.17 acres and 2.15 acres)
are less than required and less than three acres when combined as well. This potentially eliminates
the option of the C3 zone. The HS zone requires a minimum parcel size of one acre. The larger of
the two parcels meets this requirement, but the smaller parcel does not. However, it may be
combined with an existing parcel zoned HS and meet the requirements of the Code as to size. The
BP zone requires a minimum parcel size of 0.25 acres. The smaller parcel would not meet this
requirement where the larger parcel does. One lot would be conforming and the other nonconforming as to size if the BP zone was designated on the property.
Changing the land use designation will impact the area depending on what zone is approved. The
C3 zone is designed for regional shopping centers similar to Smiths/Shopko at Center Street and
State Street or Pinehurst Retail located at 450 West 800 North. The likelihood of a regional
shopping center at this location is remote. The HS zone is designed primarily to provide uses that
cater to the traveling public and is applied generally between I-15 and 1200 West and Sandhill Road
from 1600 North and extending as far south as the south boundary of the subject parcels. It should
be noted the parcels in this request are adjacent to existing property zoned HS, as well as the
R8 zone. The BP zone is designed for business park settings that increase landscaping and establish
architectural controls. Two areas in the City have the BP zone: UVSC and Canyon River
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.7)
Subdivision at 1560 East 800 North. It is most likely that in the future, the applicant would request
the property be rezoned to Highway Services.
The burden of proof rests on the applicant to show why this request is in the best interest of the
public. The applicant feels that because of the future widening of Sandhill Road, adjacency to
existing Regional Commercial and Highway Services, and proximity to Interstate 15, the property is
no longer appropriate for low density residential use.
Two neighborhood meetings have been held concerning this item. The first meeting was on
September 15, 2004. The applicant and residents at this meeting decided to work together to see if a
PD zone could be agreed upon instead of the potential Regional Commercial zone. Because of this,
the item was pulled from the corresponding Planning Commission meeting in September. In the
following weeks, the applicant and residents could not come to a mutual agreement for development
of the property, and the applicant asked that the item be placed in the next available agenda with his
original request. The second neighborhood meeting was held on January 13, 2005.
The Planning Commission has found this request is not in the best interest of the City in that
Sandhill Road is too narrow to accommodate the additional commercial activity, and the applicant
has not proposed a remedy for the traffic problems additional commercial uses will have on Sandhill
Road.
Brian Green, the attorney for Steve Strate, addressed the Council. He said he respected Mayor
Washburn’s comments about the letter Mr. Green had sent to him. He then explained that the
application requested involves a reclassification of the two parcels of property, so later they can
request to have them rezoned as Highway Services. He advised that the larger parcel is still vacant
because it has a residential classification. He said that orphan parcels like this will never develop as
residential. Staff’s recommendation was to approve the application for the General Plan change. He
stated his intent was not to offend anyone; however, he felt the current boundary between this
commercial property and the residential properties is illogical. Along the freeway there is a
classification of high density residential and commercial. He said the decisions the City has made up
to this point demonstrate a formal or informal policy to make 2000 South the southernmost boundary
of the commercial classification. He explained that examples of this are the Jeppesen annexation and
rezone, and the 2000 General Plan Annexation Declaration that involves parcels in this area.
Mr. Green then addressed the arguments raised against the application pertaining to potential traffic
problems caused by it. He questioned why the annexation of the Ercanbrack property was not a
traffic concern. He also mentioned that the City had built a park in that area, which generates much
more traffic than Mr. Strate’s two acres of property would. Mr. Green asserted that, in his opinion,
traffic is not a compelling argument to deny this application.
Mr. Green indicated that when the Jeppesen annexation occurred in 2001, members of the Council
raised the concern that a few people were being allowed to dictate citywide land use planning at the
expense of other land owners. Mr. Green stated he felt that was occurring in this situation. He noted
that there are people against the reclassification, and that is to be expected. He remarked that with the
widening of Sandhill Road it would accommodate more traffic. It does not make sense to have this
applicant not benefit from his property.
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.8)
Mr. Sainsbury clarified that the City did the Southwest Area Study two years ago, which
recommended that the only land use change would be through a PD zone. He advised that property
owners would have to work with the neighbors to come up with a plan, which everyone could feel
comfortable with.
Mr. Sandstrom questioned if there was a specific reason Mr. Strate had decided to request a Regional
Commercial change rather than Community Commercial. Mr. Green replied that the surrounding
properties were designated as Regional Commercial, so it would make sense to keep Mr. Strate’s
property the same.
Mr. Sandstrom then asked what type of land use designation would be required if Mr. Strate wanted
to go with a PD zone. Mr. Sainsbury explained that it would depend on the type of PD zone Mr.
Strate requested. If he requested a commercial PD zone, he would apply for a commercial land use
designation. If it were a residential PD zone, he would apply for a residential land use designation.
Mayor Washburn requested that Mr. Reams characterize the widening of Sandhill Road in terms of
what the design will be and if there would be a capacity change.
Mr. Reams explained that twelve years ago the City prepared a design for Sandhill Road. The
citizens of the community approved a road bond in November, so the funds will soon be available
for the widening of the road. They are anticipating a three lane road--one lane in each direction with
a center turn lane. There will be a raised median within much of the middle lane and there will be a
roundabout on the south end. The City will buy property off of the east side and the west side for the
widening. This will not encroach on the existing homes in the area. There is an open house for the
Sandhill Road design, Tuesday evening, March 1, 2005, at Cherryhill Elementary.
Mayor Washburn clarified that while the design still has only three lanes, it makes it safer than what
is there now. The capacity, however, will not be greatly increased.
Mrs. McCandless asked what type of use Mr. Strate was proposing for the property. Mr. Green
reiterated that they are keeping with the HS zone because that is what is zoned around the property,
and it would make sense to keep this property the same. He added that Mr. Strate is not against
submitting a request for a commercial PD zone. He advised it would be similar to the area of
400 North to 800 North on 1200 West with a small retail frontage and storage areas in the back of
the property for deliveries.
Mayor Washburn opened the public hearing.
Bill Rouse, Lakeview Neighborhood in Action chairman, advised he had attended all of the
neighborhood meetings concerning this rezone request. He stated that the neighbors have questioned
Mr. Strate about what he is proposing to build there, and they have not received an answer. Mr.
Rouse remarked that commercial traffic is getting worse and worse. There is more traffic coming
onto Sandhill Road in that area. The neighbors have tried to meet with Mr. Strate to come up with a
plan; however, Mr. Strate cancelled the last meeting on the advice of his attorney. The neighbors
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.9)
would like something nice for the neighborhood. They don’t want something put in there that will
not fit in with the community.
Mary Johnson, 434 West 1840 South, advised she had attended a neighborhood meeting in which
Mr. Reams was present. He suggested they try to do a PD zone with Mr. Strate. The neighbors set
up one meeting; however, Mr. Strate was not interested in doing a PD zone, so he cancelled the next
meeting. One of the main concerns is the traffic problem. There is a study being conducted by Utah
Department of Transportation (UDOT) and Mountainland Association of Government (MAG)
regarding what will be happening with traffic in this area. She indicated the City and UDOT are
strongly leaning towards a collector and distributor road system. This would accommodate the entire
commuter commercial traffic, and the future Stevens Henager College traffic, and that would leave
Sandhill Road for residential traffic only. She noted that this is a mixed use area due to the
annexations of different properties. When the City annexed the Jeppesen property, the Council
advised that this was in no way giving a message that the rest of property would be zoned as
commercial. Ms. Johnson stated that Mr. Strate and others have questioned who would want to live
next to the freeway. She stated that the Governor has a home right off the freeway, and there are
many expensive homes next to I-215. MAG advised Ms. Johnson that when they make the
improvements to the freeway system, and if they do a collector distributor road, it will be federally
mandated to put up a noise wall. On February 16, 2005, the Planning Commission approved an
eight-lot subdivision south of 2000 South. The subdivision is on the east side of Sandhill Road;
however, it is closer to the freeway than Mr. Strate’s property. Four lots would fit on Mr. Strate’s
property, if it were left as residential. Some people do choose to live by the freeway. There are new
homes being built right now. She noted that the property values would be maintained if commercial
was not allowed to encroach on the neighborhoods.
Linda Edwards indicated that she has lived on Sandhill Road for twenty years. She explained that the
area used to be very rural and now it has gone commercial. She can’t sit on her deck and have a
conversation because of the noise. The street is very busy with residential traffic, and she feels it is
worse than the commercial traffic. She commented that, in her opinion, this area is not really
residential nor is the area Mr. Strate would like to develop.
Paul Abbott advised he lives across the street from Mr. Strate’s property. He stated that he bought a
house on Sandhill Road because it was a nice neighborhood. He said he is worried about having a
big building in front of his home. He explained that he has six children, and they play in the front
yard. He remarked that it scares him to have people going in and out of the area that he doesn’t
know. He expressed concern that when big businesses move in, the neighborhood “goes to pot”.
Teresa Pond noted she lives at 1785 South. She declared that this is a residential neighborhood and
commented on the new beautiful Nielsen’s Grove Park. She also expressed concern for the safety of
her children if more commercial were allowed into the neighborhood. She advised that dump trucks
and diesels driving on Sandhill Road actually shake her house.
Mike Whimpey, 1862 South 400 West, requested the Council consider the protection of residential
areas. He mentioned his concern was the commercial signs coming into residential neighborhoods.
The Allen Patch sign flashes lights all night and keeps his family awake. He said he disagrees with
the comparison of their neighborhood to the area from Center Street to 800 North. He declared the
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.10)
two areas are completely different. He asked the Council to look at the feel of the neighborhood on
Sandhill Road and protect it as residential.
Mr. Sainsbury clarified that there is a broad range of uses that could go in this zone. The traffic level
would depend on which use was approved. Some uses would generate a small amount of traffic
while others, such as a gas station, would generate a high volume. He requested the record show that
it would depend upon which use was adopted in that zone that would determine the amount of
traffic; not every use would produce the same amount.
Mr. Green responded to allegations made by neighbors referring to comments made by Mr. Strate,
saying, that Mr. Strate has never been unwilling to meet with the neighbors to discuss a compromise
with them. He indicated that Mr. Strate had presented his idea to the neighbors, and they rejected it.
He said the neighbors told Mr. Strate to come back with something different. Mr. Green stated that
Mr. Strate did not want to keep paying an architect for designs, so he requested that the neighbors
come back to them with some ideas. He advised that they have not been given anything tangible
from the neighbors. It is unfair to paint Mr. Strate as being unwilling to work with the neighbors,
and it is a misperception on the part of neighborhood that Mr. Strate would build an “ugly red
warehouse”. Mr. Strate would not build anything higher than a residential home, and it would have
more of a maintained landscape setting than the current business park with the warehouses.
Bill Rouse declared that Mr. Strate had told him that on the advice of his attorney he would no
longer attend meetings on the PD zone. Mr. Rouse stated the neighbors were very willing to meet
with Mr. Strate, and they had several proposals to present to him; however, they did not have the
chance.
Mayor Washburn closed the public hearing.
Mayor Washburn commented that the Council has inherited an interesting situation. This is a mixed
use of properties, most of which evolved before coming to the City. He stated it is the Council’s job
to determine what would be fair to Mr. Strate and the residents as property owners. This creates a
big challenge for the Council.
Mr. Sandstrom noted that this property is in a precarious situation. He stated it is possible to develop
this property as residential; however, it was his opinion that it would be better as commercial. He
wondered if this could be brought back as a PD zone with a Community Commercial designation.
The HS zone does have some uses that would be in harmony with the neighborhood, but others such
as an alcoholic drinking establishment or a diesel repair shop, would not be appropriate next to
homes. He wondered if the Council could continue this request. Mr. Sainsbury responded that it
could be continued, if the Council wanted to go that route. He advised it would be better if Mr.
Strate brought it back with a development agreement.
Mrs. McCandless asked staff which zones are allowed in Community Commercial. Mr. Stroud
indicated they are C1, C2 and BP. Mrs. McCandless wondered why the property south of
1640 South was zoned differently in the front than it was in the back of the property. Mr. Sainsbury
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.11)
advised that when the properties were annexed, the City Council looked at the property closest to it
and tried to keep the same zoning.
Mrs. McCandless declared she was very uncomfortable with the uses in the HS zone because they
are too broad. She also felt the C2 zone was too broad.
Mr. Forsyth asked if Mr. Strate owned this property at the time he requested annexation and if
anything was standing on the property then. Mr. Green confirmed that Mr. Strate did own the
property and it was vacant at the time of annexation.
Mr. Sandstrom inquired if Mr. Strate could come back with a PD zone and a General Plan
amendment at the same time. Mr. Sainsbury responded that if Mr. Strate came back with something
Low Density Commercial, it would have to go through the process with neighborhood meetings and
the Planning Commission.
Mr. Forsyth advised that he would be much more comfortable if Mr. Strate came back with a concept
plan. He said the Council would be premature in making a change that would have long term affects.
The Sandhill Road construction will begin this year, and UDOT will possibly start making changes
in the freeway within the next year. The Sandhill Road improvements will increase the value of Mr.
Strate’s property. Mr. Forsyth said he didn’t feel the Council was harming Mr. Strate by waiting to
see how some of these things progress; however, they would be doing a disservice to the City by
making a decision at this time.
Mrs. McCandless indicated she is not comfortable approving the request without knowing what Mr.
Strate’s intention for the property is.
Mayor Washburn commented that there is a reasonable alternative for this piece of property. The
usage is not absolute and predetermined. He said the Council is compelled to evaluate other
alternatives. Mayor Washburn stated when the property was annexed five years ago, it was clearly
specified that there would have to be cooperation, planning, and control.
Mr. Sandstrom agreed that there are reasonable alternatives if this request was denied. He explained
it might work better to continue this item, and allow Mr. Strate to come back with a PD zone. He
said the Council would not be under any obligation to approve the PD zone request; however, they
don’t want to feel like they are “slamming any doors”.
Mr. Green expressed concern that Mr. Strate does not want to do a PD zone because it would put
him at a disadvantage. He would have to have the building design and the site plan approved. Mr.
Green reiterated that Mr. Strate would not put in a drinking establishment or a gas station.
Mr. Green then stated that Mr. Strate is willing to come back with a development agreement that
would “cherry pick” the Highway Services uses which would be acceptable to the neighbors.
Mayor Washburn questioned whether that would be legal or not. Mr. Johnson responded he has
concerns about that, noting the City has never done a development agreement with a General Plan
amendment.
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.12)
Mrs. McCandless explained that what Mr. Green was suggesting would be best accomplished with a
PD zone request.
Mr. Sandstrom noted that Mr. Strate would not have to have a design or a site plan with a PD zone
request. The Council would set the parameters for the zone. For example, the property would have a
certain setback, and it would have to have twenty percent landscaping. They would also include a
list of uses which would be permitted in this location. The list may have fifteen different use options.
Mr. Sandstrom also explained that this is not a dictatorial situation. Mr. Strate will have to come
back with a list of items he wants, and the neighbors will have to come with what they want. The
Council has a duty to represent Mr. Strate and the residents of the neighborhood, and there will have
to be a compromise from all parties involved.
Mayor Washburn remarked that Mr. Strate may not want to rule out residential options. There are
real financial benefits to residential PD zones.
Mrs. McCandless asked Mr. Strate how he felt about a PD zone.
Mr. Green confirmed that the PD zone option is acceptable and with reasonable time restraints Mr.
Strate would be willing to go that route. Mr. Green requested that Mr. Stroud schedule a meeting
with the neighbors, Mr. Strate, and Mr. Green as soon as possible, so they could discuss some of the
acceptable uses.
Mayor Washburn indicated that the Council is sensitive to Mr. Strate’s property rights, as well as the
concerns of the neighbors. The Council is trying to accommodate both of them. Mayor Washburn
also advised that Mr. Strate can bring the request back as soon as he wanted to.
Mr. Sandstrom moved to continue this item until it can come back to the City Council with a
PD zone in conjunction with the General Plan Land Use amendment. Mr. Campbell seconded the
motion. Those voting aye: Mr. Campbell, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Forsyth, Mrs. McCandless,
Mr. Sandstrom, Mrs. Thurston, and Mr. Washburn. The motion passed unanimously.
Council took a break at 8:17 p.m. and reconvened at 8:25 p.m.
6:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE –
Subdivision Ordinance Amendment – Amending Section
17-7-2 Residential Driveways of the Orem City Code.
Streets and Sidewalks Ordinance – Amending Section 16-3-1 Placement of Driveways of the
Orem City Code.
Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Amending Appendix “D” Fences, Walls, and Hedges of the
Orem City Code.
Mr. Sainsbury presented to the City Council a recommendation to amend Section 17-7-2 and
Appendix “D”, and Section 16-3-1 of the Orem City Code.
First, Section 17-7-2 pertains to residential driveways within the City and outlines the size and
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.13)
location of residential driveways. Staff has proposed several changes to the existing language
including:
 Placing a maximum width of 40 feet for any residential driveway in the City. Currently the
ordinance does not have a maximum width requirement.
 Placing a minimum distance a driveway can be located on a corner lot from an intersection.
The current standard is 20 feet from the intersection when approaching the corner and 50 feet
when departing the corner. The proposed new standard would be a minimum of 50 feet from
an intersection. The proposed change is intended to increase the safety of vehicles using the
intersections, and to mitigate potential conflicts with a vehicle backing into the street from a
residential driveway located on a corner lot.
 The City Engineer would still have the option to approve a residential driveway that could not
meet the standards outlined in Section 17-7-2 that is determined by the City Engineer to be an
unreasonable hardship and would not compromise traffic safety.
Second, Section 16-3-1 pertains to the placement of driveways for all non-residential uses. Staff has
proposed several changes to the existing language including:
 Placing a minimum width of 24 feet for commercial driveways. The current ordinance
contains a maximum but does not specify a minimum requirement.
 Modifying the corner lot exception by allowing a driveway on a corner lot that cannot meet the
100-foot distance requirement from an intersection, if both sides do not meet the frontage
requirement. However, only one side of the corner lot shall have an access.
 Allowing the City Engineer to waive or modify the requirements of 16-3 based on specific
requirements as outlined in Section 16-3-1(C) which include: special circumstances, traffic
safety and efficiency, traffic studies pertaining to the specific area, and public safety, health
and welfare.
Third, Appendix “D” outlines graphically the clear vision area associated with street intersections.
The proposed amendments to Appendix “D” include:
 Modifications that clarify both graphically and with written text the clear vision area
requirements for intersections as well as residential driveways.
 Adding language that helps explain “Clear Vision Area at Street Intersections”; “Clear Vision
Area at Driveways; and “ Utility Clearance Requirements”
Mr. Sainsbury advised that this amendment would shift the decision making from the City Council to
the City Engineer, and Mr. Reams added that this change would save time for the developers.
Mayor Washburn requested to continue this item because he has some concerns he would like to
look into further.
Mrs. McCandless moved to continue these ordinance amendments to April 12, 2005. Mr. Dickerson
seconded. Those voting aye: Mr. Campbell, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Forsyth, Mrs. McCandless,
Mr. Sandstrom, Mrs. Thurston, and Mr. Washburn. The motion passed unanimously.
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.14)
COMMUNICATION ITEMS
There were no comments on the Communication Items.
CITY MANAGER INFORMATION ITEMS
Mr. Reams reported to the Council that the City’s financial advisors indicated that it would be
advantageous to issue the Storm and Water Bonds next week rather than waiting until the
March 8, 2005, City Council meeting. The new meeting will be held, Tuesday, March 1, 2005, at
5:30 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT OF MEETING
Mr. Forsyth moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Dickerson seconded the motion. Those voting aye:
Mr. Campbell, Mr. Dickerson, Mr. Forsyth, Mrs. McCandless, Mr. Sandstrom, Mrs. Thurston, and
Mr. Washburn. The motion passed unanimously.
The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Donna R. Weaver, City Recorder
Approved: March 8, 2005
City Council Minutes – February 22, 2005 (p.15)