[0:00] October 5th, 2024. We have a room full of people and we're so excited to have you all

[0:05] here to join us. Just a couple of housekeeping things. We record these meetings live on YouTube.

[0:12] So if you'll refrain from talking to your neighbor inside chambers, that would be great. If you

[0:16] want to have a conversation, please go outside the door and shut it. You'll still be able

[0:19] to hear the meeting in the lobby. We just want to make sure that people can clearly

[0:23] hear us as they listen to the stream later or live. So thank you for that.

[0:29] Okay. Our opening will be provided by Council Member Perry Oaks. He'll then follow up with

[0:35] the Pledge of Allegiance, so he will lead us and that as soon as his opening is over.

[0:38] Turn the time to Perry.

[0:42] If you've been to Council Meeting and I have an opening, I try to say something other than

[0:50] just a prayer and the pledge. And I was talking with my father earlier today and he said,

[0:57] said, you know, we'll do something different. He said, do you have a good, have a good singing

[1:00] voice? Why don't you sing a song? So, no.

[1:07] But I would like to read America the Beautiful.

[1:11] And if you just pay attention, because if you're thinking about this time as we're

[1:17] getting ready to vote within two months for a new president and about this great

[1:21] nation, it's profound. And so, oh, beautiful for spacious skies, for amber waves of green,

[1:32] for purple mountain majesties above the fruited plain, America, America, God shed his grace

[1:40] on thee, and crown thy good with brotherhood from sea to shining sea. Oh, beautiful for

[1:47] For pilgrim feet whose scurn, impassioned stress, A thoroughfare of freedom beat across

[1:55] the wilderness, America, America, God mend thine every flaw, Confirm thy soul in self-control,

[2:04] In liberty, thy liberty in law, O beautiful for heroes proved in liberating strife,

[2:11] who more than self their country loved, and mercy more than life.

[2:17] America, America, may God thy gold refine, till all success be nobleness, and every gain divine.

[2:27] O beautiful for patriot dream, that sees beyond the years, thine alabaster cities gleam, undimmed by human tears.

[2:38] America, America, God shed his grace on thee, and crown thy good with brotherhood from sea

[2:46] to shining sea.

[2:48] I'll offer an opening prayer please.

[2:53] Our Father in heaven, we're so thankful for the many blessings which we have to be able

[2:59] to live in this free land.

[3:02] We're thankful for the freedoms which we have.

[3:05] We're thankful for the opportunity we have to be able to govern ourselves.

[3:11] We're thankful for leadership.

[3:15] We pray for good leadership. We pray for wisdom in our leaders.

[3:20] We pray for peace

[3:24] and prosperity in this nation.

[3:28] And we pray that thy spirit might be upon this nation at this time.

[3:31] There's such division among us for so many different silly reasons.

[3:36] We pray that we might have a productive meeting this evening and say these

[3:42] things in Jesus' name, amen.

[3:47] Please rise.

[3:53] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

[4:11] Thank you, Council Member Oaks. Appreciate your opening.

[4:14] At the beginning of our city council meeting, we have a period called public comment.

[4:22] We have two people that have signed up to speak.

[4:25] The way it works is like this.

[4:26] These individuals have three minutes to share their comments with the council and the audience.

[4:30] During this time, we don't interrupt them.

[4:33] We don't comment.

[4:34] We allow them to have the floor.

[4:35] And so two people have signed up.

[4:37] I'll call you up in order.

[4:39] There'll be a timer on the screen and your microphone will die at the end of three minutes.

[4:43] So Kathleen, Catherine, Catherine, Lizzie, and Tara Obeson.

[4:48] If you'll come up in that order,

[4:49] we look forward to hearing from you.

[4:51] Thank you.

[4:59] Team 14, South Sunset Drive, and my property,

[5:03] my acre of land is right to the east

[5:05] of Brian Carlin's property.

[5:07] I don't know if y'all received the email

[5:08] that I sent this last week,

[5:10] and so I appreciate your consideration for that.

[5:12] I'm not naive to think that the development's not coming.

[5:15] I'm not naive about that.

[5:16] I know that Symphony Homes owns the nine and a half

[5:19] bakers directly south of us as well as a bunch of other land that way so we know

[5:23] what's coming. All I ask is that we follow the city plan that's one and I

[5:29] think it's dangerous to approve without understanding exactly what Brian's

[5:32] thinking about and I just ask that we develop this smartly. That's all. Thank

[5:37] you. Thank you very much.

[5:47] Hi I'm Tara Oveston. I live on 1779 Sunset Drive.

[5:51] I'm also here to address the change, the zoning change.

[5:58] So I actually like Brian's thing.

[6:04] I like that it's, we have more moderate or more densely populated stuff or Caseville,

[6:12] but I think Brian owns the wrong course of land.

[6:15] The road infrastructure is not there.

[6:16] There's a lot of maybes, ifs, and hopefully everything falls into place.

[6:20] And if he had property that went along where it's connecting to Angel, where the infrastructure supports it, that would be great.

[6:28] But he's in the middle of a field and we're talking about, we're not talking about 27 homes that he wants to put in.

[6:35] Because he's looking at the neighbor to the south also developing it.

[6:39] So it's more like 60 homes.

[6:42] So that's like 135 cars coming out of roads that weren't built for that.

[6:47] that. And that's my only concern. You know, I like your plan, Brian, just go the wrong

[6:54] parcel of land.

[6:56] Thank you.

[7:00] All right, now I will turn the time over to Cole. Well, actually, I'll do the swearing

[7:06] at first. I'll invite our Youth City Council members to come to the front and I get the

[7:09] honor of swearing you in. So come up to the front if you will and I'll meet you

[7:13] right there in

[7:19] my paper.

[7:35] Okay, for those that don't know, we have a Youth City Council in Caseville, and these

[7:40] are our newest members, and we're so excited to be able to have them be a part of our city

[7:45] experience.

[7:46] As Youth City Council members, they'll have the opportunity to go to the Capitol for the

[7:50] day at the Capitol with the legislators, and they'll get to meet the governor,

[7:52] and they'll get to meet our state leaders, as well as other mayors and new City Council

[7:56] members from across the state.

[7:58] The Youth City Council this year is working on the Scarecrow, they did it last

[8:03] they participate in city events, they help out with fill the fire truck for the

[8:08] case will gives fundraiser that we do at Christmas time. They help in so many ways

[8:12] and so we're really excited to have them and we decided to build this where

[8:15] them in. So if you guys will kind of come in towards me that would be great

[8:19] and you'll repeat after me and you'll you'll submit you'll mentally

[8:24] silently say your own names okay so if you raise your right hand this is

[8:28] your oath of office. So along with being really confidential and professional and

[8:35] great representatives of the city you get to be officially sworn in. So I and then

[8:40] silently say your name. Do solemnly swear that I will support, obey, and defend the

[8:45] Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of Utah

[8:49] and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity. I did that

[8:52] wrong. I said it one time so now we're all gonna repeat it okay and you

[8:56] can say it out loud. Sorry guys. Okay, so I say your name.

[9:02] I'm sorry you didn't say your

[9:03] name out loud. Let's start over. Okay. I and then say your name out loud. I do solemnly

[9:11] swear that I will support, obey, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the

[9:23] constitution of the state of Utah and that I will discharge the duties of my

[9:32] office with fidelity. Thanks you guys, thanks audience for bearing with us on that.

[10:53] All right.

[10:58] Okay next on our agenda we have a presentation recognizing Chad

[11:01] Call for his contributions as the Keyville City Fourth of July parade

[11:05] chair. Cole is going to introduce Chad and tell you all about how amazing he is

[11:10] as a council we're so grateful for his efforts as well so turn the time over to Cole.

[11:16] Well we're grateful for to have this opportunity to recognize Chad and he wants to come forward.

[11:22] We're grateful that he's here tonight. He's a busy man and so to have him here is

[11:28] we're just honored to have him and recognize him. So Chad has been instrumental in our July

[11:33] 4th parade for a number of years volunteering on the back end of things and then in 2021,

[11:38] 2022 and 2023. He was our parade chair and did a fantastic job. What Chad

[11:45] organized for us on the parade has set us up for success in the future. Just a

[11:51] very detail-oriented. I can't say enough good compliments for Chad and what

[11:55] he's done for Cazal City and for our July 4th parade and navigating a

[12:00] difficulty a few years ago. We're just very grateful for Chad and wanted

[12:04] wanted to present him with a replica of the July 4th parade

[12:11] that the artist Chad Hawkins did a few years ago,

[12:15] which is the full one is displayed in the police station.

[12:18] So Chad, if you want to say anything or something,

[12:22] but just on behalf of Caisal City,

[12:24] we just want to say thank you for all you've done for us

[12:26] in July 4th and parade and all the other things

[12:28] that you did for Caisal City as well.

[12:30] So thank you.

[12:31] Thank you.

[12:43] I know. Thought of you. I said we should just stay down there.

[12:57] I was told that we should not stay. Mike, I was told that we should not stay.

[13:02] Well, I want to talk to you.

[13:03] Oh, yeah.

[13:06] Here.

[13:08] I'll be in fact.

[13:09] It's not going to fall.

[13:11] It looks here.

[13:13] Yeah.

[13:15] All right.

[13:17] Thank you.

[13:21] Thank you.

[13:22] Thank you.

[13:23] Thank you.

[13:26] I appreciate it.

[13:29] I don't like it.

[13:41] So we figured we might as well make this city council all about parks and recreation and

[13:47] stuff.

[13:48] For the other presentation we want to recognize is our community theater production group.

[13:53] They've been very instrumental, just a little bit of history of this group and then we'll

[13:57] call their names, but they've been pretty much together as a group for 26 years.

[14:03] I've done 25 shows minus COVID, the COVID year was the only year that they didn't

[14:07] produce a show for the Caysville Community Theater.

[14:11] And so this last show was their last year together as a group.

[14:15] And we just wanted to recognize them and just say thank you for

[14:19] the countless years that they've produced this show,

[14:24] unbeknownst to a lot of people of who they even are.

[14:26] But I think our community theater speaks for itself in the production the quality and the quantity and the

[14:32] Just the actors and stuff that we're coming back year after year

[14:36] So we would like to just present each one of the members of the production group with with their plaque

[14:42] And then of course a picture so Kristen Kowler

[14:56] All that all that Kristen introduced the rest of her production group

[15:00] Awesome.

[15:01] Laurie's story, come on up.

[15:02] Laurie did choreography and costuming for us.

[15:11] Jessica Rampton.

[15:13] She did our musical direction for us.

[15:20] Thank you.

[15:24] Carol Wilkinson isn't here.

[15:25] She has COVID.

[15:27] So she just got home from Sweden.

[15:29] So, you know, there's better places to get COVID.

[15:31] So I can take this to her.

[15:33] So she did our costuming as well.

[15:35] And then Colin Wilson did our lighting

[15:37] for years and years and years.

[15:39] He now works at Disneyland, so doing lighting.

[15:41] So he went on to kind of bigger and better things, but I'll get this to him as well and then our last one is

[15:54] Aaron Ford get up here Aaron Ford was one of our choreographers for years and

[16:02] He moved to Florida and then moved back

[16:04] So he didn't go very far and then our last one is Karen and Drasco

[16:08] And she also couldn't come tonight and she was one of our choreographers as well and Chad call

[16:12] actually for years and years and years was our technical director over at Davis

[16:16] High doing the show so it's it's kind of apropos that he's here with us tonight

[16:20] too because we worked together for a lot of years so thank you.

[16:28] We'll get a

[16:29] photo here in just a second but I just am so appreciative of all of our

[16:33] community volunteers. The countless amount of hours that these groups both

[16:38] this group and Chad call spent on behalf of Caisal City helping with

[16:43] these community events is just it's amazing and we're grateful for them

[16:47] because these things don't happen without our community volunteers and so we

[16:52] are just very happy and grateful for your volunteerism over the course of 26

[16:57] plus years which is crazy so

[17:04] well Chris and I went to high school together

[17:08] so 26 years is a lot of time, so thank you again

[17:42] and then

[18:07] for our final

[18:08] of recognition tonight. I'm going to turn the time over to Brian White. He is one of our

[18:12] recreation program coordinators to introduce our Caysville All-Stars. Brian?

[18:25] We have two of our winning All-Star teams here. They took place in the Northern Utah

[18:30] baseball and softball tournament that we hosted here at Barnes Park. As a city we were

[18:35] responsible for most of that and most of the games were played here. So it was great

[18:38] to see two of our teams put in that effort and go. These two coaches that we have

[18:43] have here. Both of them have volunteered for the city for a number of years. I've got to

[18:48] know both of them personally and I'm grateful for the friendship that we have and I'm grateful

[18:51] for the way that they lead these young men and these young women. There's a lot of teams

[18:55] that came here to play in there. There's seven different cities that were represented

[19:00] and these two teams came out on top. So I'm going to have Seth Allen come up. He

[19:04] was our junior high, all-star coach. Seth, come on up here.

[19:15] And even though he's

[19:15] He's not a Caysville resident.

[19:17] He wants to play here.

[19:18] So he'll pay the extra fees and come here.

[19:20] So we're grateful for that.

[19:21] And then Matt has a friend come on over here.

[19:33] He's got his own cheering section.

[19:35] That's awesome.

[19:36] And he didn't not coach our regular season.

[19:39] And I had to convince him to do all stars again.

[19:41] But he's amazing with the young women.

[19:43] And he's done a great job.

[19:44] So we're going to have their teams come up.

[19:46] And we're going to let them hold this trophy.

[19:47] This trophy is now the annual trophy

[19:49] that the teams get to have.

[19:50] It has the plaque on there that goes for each year.

[19:53] And we got K's they'll represent it twice this year. So thank you

[20:11] Something can hold that don't drop it

[20:21] Yeah

[20:32] I mean, I'd like to meet with a bit of a student.

[20:35] Okay, you guys, stay over here.

[20:37] Okay, don't get me tricked into the other faces.

[20:40] All right.

[20:41] Ready?

[20:42] Three, two, one, go.

[20:43] All set.

[20:44] All set.

[20:55] Good job.

[20:56] Good job.

[21:04] Yeah.

[21:05] Jesse won this.

[21:06] Jesse won this.

[21:08] Yeah.

[21:09] Let's go.

[21:10] All right.

[21:11] Let's go.

[21:12] I don't know.

[21:13] I don't know.

[21:15] I think we're supposed to stand in this one.

[21:17] How about I'll just hold it.

[21:18] I'll figure this out.

[21:19] Mayor, do you want me to enter in this?

[21:21] Yeah, I will.

[21:21] I'll come in at the mayor's.

[21:23] No, wait.

[21:23] Yes, you will.

[21:24] Hi, Jesse.

[21:25] Hi.

[21:27] The mayor's coming down once, I think.

[21:29] Here we go.

[21:30] Here we go.

[21:31] The mayor's coming down

[21:34] once, I think.

[21:34] Here we go.

[21:35] All stop.

[21:38] All stop.

[21:58] Do you have one, Julie?

[21:59] Yeah, what is Julie doing?

[22:00] Oh, no.

[22:00] First time?

[22:02] What have you got it done?

[22:03] Hey, done.

[22:03] All right.

[22:04] Number 11.

[22:04] You've got to

[22:11] keep it on.

[22:29] Yeah, that's awesome.

[22:36] Public comment and then public comment.

[22:43] Oh, did I?

[22:44] Oh, oh well.

[22:45] Okay.

[22:46] That's gay.

[22:47] I got out of order.

[22:48] Oh, I did, didn't I?

[22:59] Thank you so much. Congratulations everybody. Thanks.

[23:09] Okay, Cole. Cole Stevens is our Parks

[23:12] and Rec Director and he is now going to present about his department. We are so excited for

[23:16] this.

[23:17] So what you just witnessed is I think the essence of parks and recreation for

[23:23] the community. We're just grateful again for all of the volunteers, you know our

[23:27] recreation programs, the council members, our volunteer coaches put in, all the

[23:33] service projects that occur in our parks and cemetery. Just very grateful for

[23:37] all those people that contribute so much to the community and make it what it

[23:41] is. So I'm grateful, like the mayor said, my name is Cole Stevens. Is this on?

[23:54] You're

[23:55] all right.

[24:14] This is just the arrow, right?

[24:17] I

[24:30] guess you turn it on, it helps. Sorry, Melinda.

[24:33] Yeah, usually helps. So parts of our creation case, though, we're going to got to be very

[24:38] brief what's in the report. Hopefully you've had time to read. And if there's any questions

[24:42] at the end, feel free to ask. But I'm just grateful for the department I work

[24:47] with and the people that I work with. This is just kind of our department

[24:51] responsibilities. It's more than just parks and recreations, parks, trails,

[24:56] recreation, cemetery, and then we also oversee all city facilities from a

[25:00] maintenance standpoint and new construction and then just other

[25:04] public properties rights away, things like that. Our citizens boards are

[25:08] involved with our department of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, the

[25:11] Ramp Advisory Board, and then also liaison with the Historic Preservation

[25:15] commission for the city. This is our full, this is our staff made up of full time and

[25:21] some part time staff. I am happy to report that the vacant cemetery sexton position was

[25:27] filled today. It was filled by Jackie Hubbard who was a part time employee for us and so

[25:34] we did the interview process and all that stuff and so we're excited to have that

[25:38] position filled and now we just move forward. So, but it's these individuals here within

[25:43] in our department to make our Parks and Recreation

[25:47] department go, and not to mention those little bottom

[25:51] three boxes, the seasonal staff, both in parks,

[25:54] cemetery, and then our recreation.

[25:56] Without those seasonal staff, young people,

[26:00] nothing gets done to the level it is.

[26:02] So I just want to shout out to all of our

[26:05] Parks and Recreation employees.

[26:09] To start really briefly with the cemetery, 1865,

[26:12] It goes back quite a few years.

[26:14] This is just to give you a seven-year internment history report that kind of just tracks.

[26:21] This is what we use to just gauge, you know, new lawn, when we need to develop that kind

[26:27] of stuff.

[26:27] And so this last year we did 172, and this year we're on track to do pretty close to

[26:33] that same number.

[26:37] This is our six-year internment history for urn variables or cremations.

[26:41] You can see those are increasing, which is also compared to a national trend where urn

[26:47] burials are increasing nationwide and becoming more popular here in Utah.

[26:57] Just some brief facts about the cemetery, 22 acres.

[27:00] Right now we're doing burial space right sales at need only.

[27:05] The main reason for that is to prolong the life of the cemetery.

[27:10] If we currently just, the pre-need would be selling out,

[27:15] when we say sell out the land as it's always just the right to that space,

[27:18] we would be within about 10 years of being completely sold out.

[27:22] And so by doing it at need, that will prolong that 20 to 25 years going at that,

[27:29] at our current pace.

[27:31] Just some highlights and projects in the cemetery this past year and these upcoming years.

[27:36] this last year or this current FY25 we're replacing the old irrigation system

[27:42] in the cemetery some of it dates back to 1950 which is just a lot of problems and

[27:47] so that should go out to bid here at the end of this month. And then in FY26,

[27:53] FY27 we are planning to do phase one and phase two of the memory and

[27:57] cremation garden area. I know we talked about it in budget meetings prior so

[28:02] that's kind of our future plans. The other thing out there 10 years plus is

[28:07] what happens when the cemetery is completely developed and sold out.

[28:11] It's a council decision that's going to be coming up that we'll have to decide

[28:16] what is the future of that. We're landlocked where we are so do we look

[28:21] at other spaces, other properties that the city currently has. There's lots of

[28:27] different options to consider but we're still a few years away from

[28:30] happy to make that decision. You can cross off the vacant cemetery because

[28:36] that's now filled. So this is just to highlight what we're planning for the

[28:41] cremation garden area, their memory garden area there behind the city

[28:45] cemetery office. It's kind of a dirt vacant area right now and that's our

[28:51] plans. This is just kind of highlights and pictures of what will be

[28:56] you located it within that memory garden area,

[28:59] cremation garden area of the cemetery.

[29:03] Our parks are scattered out through all Caysville.

[29:07] We do a fairly good job of hitting most of our subdivisions

[29:11] with a few areas that lack a little bit of coverage.

[29:17] This is just some how I'm not gonna go through

[29:19] and read all of these one by one,

[29:20] but we are increasing our acreage as far as developed.

[29:23] We track our acreage developed versus undeveloped.

[29:26] Undeveloped is those acres and the good bulk of that undeveloped property is the East Mountain

[29:32] Wilderness Park, which is about 138 acres of that 201.

[29:38] The difference between developed and undeveloped is pretty self-explanatory.

[29:43] This last year highlighted a couple of projects that we completed.

[29:48] Wilderness Park parking lot up at the Wilderness Park with the ramp funding and also state

[29:52] and Davis County funds and then this year we just did the post tension basketball

[29:57] court. We got a couple other upcoming

[30:00] Projects this fall, the rail trail trailhead project, right now we're just getting a permit

[30:05] from UTA, so we have to encroach into their easement to construct some of the parking lot.

[30:11] And so that will be bid out here shortly, as well as some playground replacements at Angel

[30:15] Street and then the pickleball court resurfacing. For any way that's listening, the pickleball

[30:21] courts will be closed starting Monday, September 9th through September 16th, so that resurfacing

[30:27] can happen. There's no way to do it and keep them open, so future projects one

[30:33] some of our biggest the biggest one is Trappersfield the north side of 200

[30:37] north down as it goes into the West Davis corridor. We're constantly looking

[30:43] for water conservation projects the way that we can reduce our water consumption

[30:46] in our turf in our landscapes and we have identified some examples of things

[30:51] that we're going to start doing over the next couple years such as

[30:54] removing park strips at the fire station, redoing some stuff at the operation center

[30:58] as far as landscaping. Of course, all this comes with budget funding.

[31:05] One of the challenges we have, and I don't want to highlight or focus all on our challenges,

[31:10] but one of the challenges that we have and we're having it across pretty much every

[31:14] division except for recreation is our staffing, being that we're so young and new.

[31:20] of the four of the six full-time parks employees,

[31:23] four of them are three years or less.

[31:25] And so what happens in that scenario is

[31:28] just the ability to get up to that quote,

[31:31] institutional knowledge of how we expect things

[31:33] to be done and what we want to see.

[31:35] And so there's just a lot of training that has to go on.

[31:38] And so when you see things that maybe

[31:41] why aren't things getting weeded as maybe as they were,

[31:44] it goes back to that just having a young full-time

[31:47] staff that doesn't sometimes see the big picture they do all that they are great

[31:52] employees but that is one of the just a learning curve that we experience and

[31:56] then just a shout out to all of our seasoned employees in the parks they

[31:59] just they make or break us every year so we're grateful for them and we finally

[32:03] this year broke a trend where we were fully staffed on the park seasonal

[32:08] side so that was good to see and then this is just a highlight this is

[32:17] It was adopted about three years ago.

[32:21] This kind of, I just want to highlight this map.

[32:23] It just shows of our parks, where they're located.

[32:26] And then some areas where there's that little

[32:29] asterisk, there's areas in the community

[32:31] that are a farther distance away from a park

[32:36] than would be a standard.

[32:38] And so those are areas where, you know,

[32:40] the one on the east side, east of this block

[32:42] is very difficult because the block's already developed.

[32:45] but this just kind of shows you where our parks are and how they hit every group in

[32:53] the city resident in the city and then the far right that's just the national

[32:58] standard or not the standard that's the in the parks and recreation master plan

[33:02] kind of what the level of service for parks open space that the city is going

[33:07] for a recreation I'm glad our all stars could be here tonight because

[33:12] that's, you know, it's all about these kids having.

[33:15] My motto is have an experience.

[33:17] That can mean a lot of different things,

[33:18] but for these kids to have these experiences,

[33:20] which builds a lot of character and teaches them

[33:23] a lot of things is important.

[33:24] And so our recreation program and Chris here

[33:29] does an amazing job with all of our recreation programming

[33:31] and all the needs that we have there.

[33:35] And we'll highlight a few of our shortcomings,

[33:37] but this year we offer anywhere from age three

[33:40] up to adult, elderly people, I guess you can sort of speak. We've highlighted some things

[33:49] that we've posted this year. The Northern Utah is our baseball, which our teams here participated

[33:53] in. We also hosted the Utah Recreation and Park Association Junior State Pickleball

[33:59] Tournament at a Barnes Park this year. The one bullet point I want to highlight here,

[34:05] and you're all aware of the opportunity we have, maybe with the Kaisal Junior High

[34:08] and Davis School District Department with the gymnasium.

[34:11] Our coordination with Davis School District is still good,

[34:15] but what's happening over the years

[34:17] is the school programs grow.

[34:18] As an example, this year at Davis High School

[34:22] with the boys volleyball now becoming a sanctioned high

[34:26] school sport was using that same gym space

[34:28] that we normally had the ability to use.

[34:32] And so our time for using their gymnasiums

[34:34] is really getting cramped.

[34:37] Is that a correct assessment, Chris?

[34:40] So, in fact, this year we've had to institute a wait list

[34:45] or a cap our numbers before the season even starts

[34:49] just because we know that we can't,

[34:51] we just have a certain number that we can even find.

[34:54] It's amazing for us.

[34:55] And we always have wait lists

[34:56] and that's one thing that we don't like

[34:58] because when we're done we're eliminating

[34:59] kids' opportunity to participate.

[35:01] So, that opportunity hopefully will present itself

[35:05] in 2027 with the Davis School District in partnering with the Caysville junior

[35:10] high remodel of their gymnasium space.

[35:15] Anything you want to add to that Chris?

[35:20] Yeah. Oh yes yes yeah yeah we'll always be using schools and one of the things

[35:25] this year too is in our budgets we last year we had to rent Farmington's

[35:29] gymnasium for some of our programs and so that just adds cost to programs

[35:34] when you have to rent facilities.

[35:36] And this is the numbers of our programs.

[35:40] In total, participants from September of last year

[35:45] to August of this year, our recreation program

[35:48] serve 13,846 participants in all of those various programs.

[35:55] Our biggest program is soccer,

[35:57] followed by junior jazz basketball.

[36:01] ball. So a lot of kids, a lot of kids have the opportunity to participate in our programs

[36:06] and we're grateful for that as well as a lot of adults.

[36:11] And this just highlights, this

[36:12] is from a survey that was done back when we did our parks and recreation master plan

[36:16] just about the need for recreation programming in the community and what a vital role it

[36:21] plays for the citizens to have places to recreate.

[36:27] I'll highlight our citizens

[36:28] This is board's historic preservation commission meets at least quarterly.

[36:33] Their charge is just to preserve history within Caseville, photographing homes and things

[36:39] like that.

[36:40] And then we have a database that they stored on our city's servers.

[36:44] Parks and Recreation Board again meets quarterly and they're in all the community events.

[36:49] And our Rampadvisor Board is the board that meets, that receives all the applications

[36:52] and then recommends funding to the city council.

[36:55] They meet less frequently with the exception of the spring.

[37:00] This is just a small list of our community events.

[37:03] Every single one of these community events requires the volunteers that we recognize here today to make these things happen.

[37:10] And so we're grateful for all of their volunteers and grateful for our corporate sponsors that help fund some of our programs as well.

[37:17] And just to highlight the facilities, our oldest building is the old library building going to 1944

[37:26] to the newest building, which is this building with the addition in 2020.

[37:31] We maintain a total of 80,100 square feet of facility space,

[37:36] which is a custodial service, everything that you can imagine that we maintain.

[37:42] And then I'll just, I believe this is the last slide, just to end with this statement,

[37:46] It comes from our Parks and Recreation Master Plan.

[37:49] I'll just read it.

[37:50] Parks, Open Space, Recreation and Trails

[37:52] are a vital component of CASEL's form and identity.

[37:55] Tied together as a system, they provide places

[37:57] to gather, recreate together with friends and family

[37:59] while maintaining ties to the city's roots and heritage.

[38:02] The city's parks, open space and trails

[38:04] also provide visual and physical relief

[38:06] from the built environment.

[38:08] Serving as places of respite, recreation

[38:10] and connection to the natural environment.

[38:12] When fully realized, the system will enhance

[38:14] the health and well-being of the community creating a more complete and unified city in the process.

[38:19] And I couldn't say it any better than what that paragraph states, that what parks and recreation

[38:23] do for the city is bring the community together for all the reasons listed in that statement.

[38:31] So that kind of concludes a high-level report. If you have any questions,

[38:35] happy to answer any. If not, all good to go.

[38:39] Council Member Oaks.

[38:40] Yeah, no questions, just thanks.

[38:44] You know, when you get this during the budget and we're going through the budget,

[38:50] the vast amount that you guys are responsible for in the city that you do with such a small staff,

[38:57] it really is amazing and couldn't be done without all the volunteers that then come in to coach teams

[39:05] and get involved and it's what makes a city a city, so thanks.

[39:11] Thank you.

[39:13] Thank you, Cole.

[39:14] Outstanding.

[39:22] Okay.

[39:23] We're on item number four, conflicts of interest.

[39:25] Anyone have anything that they'd like to declare?

[39:28] Nope.

[39:29] Okay.

[39:29] Would someone like to then make a motion on item number five or consent agenda?

[39:36] Fine.

[39:37] I'll make a motion that we approve consent items A and B.

[39:41] Thank you.

[39:41] Do we have a second?

[39:42] I'll second.

[39:43] Okay.

[39:43] We have a motion and a second.

[39:44] Council Member Adams.

[39:45] Aye.

[39:47] Okay, motion carries.

[39:50] Moving on to item number six,

[39:52] rezone of 2.8 acres of property

[39:54] located at 1735 South by 50 West

[39:57] from A1 to four family residential for Brian Carling.

[40:01] I'll turn the time over to Melinda to present this.

[40:04] All

[40:07] right, thank you Mayor.

[40:09] As Mayor said in our introduction,

[40:12] This is for a rezone for Brian Carling, who's been an application a couple of months back.

[40:19] His property is 2.8 acres, and it's approximately address is 1735 South, 550 West.

[40:28] It's currently zoned A1 Light Agriculture Role, and he's requesting the rezone go through for R4.

[40:41] Just a few things so the applicant Mr. Carling did submit a concept of 27 town

[40:50] homes that would be on various sizes of property and based on the size of property

[40:59] and I'll go over a little bit more in that detail later on a different slide

[41:03] but you could have either two town homes, three or four town homes. The

[41:08] the R4 district doesn't allow for any more than four attached units.

[41:14] So this is just to orient you.

[41:16] This is where the property is.

[41:17] It's located in the Southwest area of the city over in an area that is

[41:23] primarily agricultural and near where the Sunset Equestrian Center is.

[41:29] This is a view of the current zoning that Red Arrow points to Mr.

[41:35] Carling's property and most everything around there is agricultural or the residential agricultural

[41:45] which allows half acre lots and a blend of agriculture use as well as the single family.

[41:54] So when we look at rezone requests, we want to look towards the general plan to see what

[42:01] that guides us to do.

[42:04] And there's many elements in the general plan.

[42:06] Our general plan was adopted in 2022.

[42:12] General plans by nature have a lot of

[42:15] conflicting information in them.

[42:17] General plans are advisory,

[42:19] meaning the council does not have to follow

[42:23] what is in the general plan.

[42:25] And they're also idealistic,

[42:27] which means if everything went the way we wanted

[42:30] and all things develop perfectly,

[42:32] this would be the best outcome on our very best day.

[42:36] So that said, one of the elements that we look to

[42:39] in the future land use map,

[42:41] or in the general plan is the future land use map.

[42:44] And this map indicates our best guess

[42:48] of how we would see property to be used in the future.

[42:52] The property that Mr. Carling owns

[42:54] is zoned to be single family residential.

[42:58] Again, that red arrow is pointing to that property, but you can see most everything in

[43:03] that area is meant to be single family residential.

[43:07] And our definition of single family is a single family detached product.

[43:14] So there's five chapters in the general plan.

[43:18] Two of them were germane to this item as well as some other elements, but our first

[43:25] Each chapter of the general plan is a land use and placemaking plan, and at the end

[43:28] of each chapter there are goals and objectives and implementation steps that help inform

[43:35] staff of what does this goal mean, what is this objective, what's the intent of being

[43:42] accomplished with this goal and objective, and so when we look at those there is a

[43:48] little bit of reading into what does this goal mean and some of that can be informed

[43:53] when you look to the goals.

[43:58] So one of the goals in the general plan

[44:00] is to preserve and protect Caseville's small town

[44:03] atmosphere, and that means limiting change

[44:06] in the neighborhood.

[44:07] So right now, this area where the subject property is

[44:12] is a functional agricultural area.

[44:15] And so looking at that does relate to this

[44:22] because changing those functional neighborhoods can be problematic, although the objectives speak

[44:30] more to single-family neighborhoods than agricultural, but nonetheless, that goal does say that we want

[44:36] to try and protect and preserve Caseville's existing neighborhoods. So, goal five at the

[44:42] end of the chapter one is to preserve and enhance the remaining pastoral atmosphere

[44:48] in agricultural history that the city has had and preservation of open space.

[44:54] You could look at this in a variety of ways, and I think the objectives again kind of

[45:04] The general plan encourages us to put ordinances in place that would preserve open space in,

[45:14] I think, a more uniform manner and perhaps have more group congregation open space, or

[45:21] It could be preserving areas that are unique in the city.

[45:28] We have the wilderness park, those types of things.

[45:35] The chapter one also, well, let me go to, well,

[45:40] so goal eight of chapter one also states

[45:43] to provide a range of housing options and price points

[45:46] that help ensure that Caseville has

[45:48] a variety of price points for people

[45:52] who want to live here or who may want to remain here but move from an existing home.

[45:58] So the general plan also has five core guiding principles and one of those is also to provide

[46:05] diverse housing options.

[46:08] So that said, providing diverse housing options would be something that could be

[46:17] supported by Mr. Carling's application. And then the state over the last seven or

[46:27] eight years has adopted legislation that requires cities to have a plan in place

[46:33] for modern-income housing, which is a different definition than what you think

[46:41] of traditionally as affordable housing, which is usually subsidized.

[46:47] Modern-

[46:47] a housing product that is affordable at 80%

[46:51] of the area meeting income, which they go by the county,

[46:56] and so that's about 83,000, I think, in Davis County.

[47:01] And so what you can afford

[47:02] when you're a family making 83,000,

[47:06] that's the price point that would be,

[47:08] or 80% of that would be the modern cum housing target.

[47:13] The state has required that we put

[47:16] the modern housing portions into our plan and so one of the goals and this was

[47:25] existing in the general plan prior to when we so we adopted it in August of

[47:33] 22 but we amended it to include the requirements from the state so that

[47:37] said the what we committed to do with the state is to give strong

[47:42] consideration on rezone applications that don't fit the general plan or excuse me the future

[47:48] land use map but may have other elements of the general plan to support that.

[47:54] So again there's information in the general plan I think that both supports and also

[47:58] opposes this but what we committed to the state to do is to give a strong consideration

[48:05] of approval to that.

[48:07] So I wanna just talk quickly about some of the differences

[48:11] between A1 and R4, it's pretty self-explanatory,

[48:14] but the biggest difference, right,

[48:17] is your minimum lot size,

[48:19] and also the use of having attached dwellings

[48:23] versus detached.

[48:25] So the agricultural one acre is kinda

[48:28] what that A1 stands for,

[48:29] but it has a 40,000 square foot minimum lot size.

[48:33] R4 you can get down to essentially as low as 3,000 if you look at the 12,000 feet

[48:41] that are square feet that are required to have the four dwelling units. So height

[48:49] is the same setback is five foot less with R4, side setbacks are two feet

[48:54] less with R4, the rear setbacks are half between A1 and R4 and the frontage

[49:01] is 70 feet on the R4 versus 100 at the A1.

[49:08] So this is just kind of a quick look

[49:09] at some of the major portions of our R4 ordinance.

[49:15] It does allow single family,

[49:16] but it allows four family buildings up to four units attached.

[49:23] So 8,000 square feet lot, you can get two,

[49:26] 10,000 is three and 12,000 is four.

[49:28] And that's where that number on the previous slide

[49:30] came to that 3,000 square foot.

[49:33] You do have to provide 600 square feet of open space per unit.

[49:38] And you also have to provide some outdoor storage space per unit.

[49:44] So this application has had an interesting journey.

[49:49] It's been in front of the Planning Commission twice.

[49:54] Prior to the Planning Commission on July 11th, we received several, I don't know,

[50:00] a few dozen emails actually, and continued to receive emails through the Planning Commission

[50:07] portal even after that meeting.

[50:10] And those were provided to you in your packet.

[50:14] It's important that we pass that information along from the Planning Commission to the

[50:18] City Council so that you can see firsthand what the residents are thinking and saying.

[50:23] That said, there was a parallel between the comments that came in an email and then at

[50:30] the public hearing on July 11th and the opposition was based on density changing the rural field,

[50:38] traffic, there was some comments about health, impacts, lighting, property values,

[50:43] and then losing the agricultural space.

[50:50] So again, this was in front of the Planning Commission at the July 11th meeting and

[50:54] And during that meeting, we realized that myself and the applicant had a miscommunication

[51:02] about what his intents with the project were, and in any way, based on that confusion and

[51:09] I think the feedback from the residents, the Planning Commission asked staff in the

[51:13] applicant to go back and look at maybe some different options than just R4 and come back

[51:19] with a development agreement.

[51:21] After conversations with Mr. Curling in the end, he decided he wanted to proceed with

[51:26] the R4 zone and not enter into a development agreement.

[51:30] So that's what we took back to the Planning Commission last month on August 8th.

[51:35] We only had six members there that night, and so this is a rare occurrence to have

[51:40] a failed motion or to have a tie vote.

[51:43] We have a seven-member council just for that reason.

[51:47] and but nonetheless there was a motion that was made to approve the rezone and

[51:54] that failed to pass so it was a tie vote of three to three. The commission chose

[52:00] not to submit another motion and so but they did have quite a bit of

[52:09] discussion after that failed motion and wanted the staff to communicate to the

[52:15] council that they would be supportive of R1-8 zoning

[52:18] in this area, which is single family zone,

[52:21] but with a development agreement.

[52:23] I think primarily their concern

[52:25] with the development agreement was to try

[52:27] and match some of the existing very low density

[52:33] with the houses that front sunset

[52:35] and then the development of the lots

[52:37] would be on the eastern portion

[52:38] of Mr. Curling's property.

[52:40] So, that said, my initial or my staff recommendation at the Planning Commission meeting in August

[52:48] was to recommend denial to the Planning Commission or that the Planning Commission recommended

[52:55] denial to the City Council.

[52:57] That's also a very uncommon occurrence, typically because when we have conversations with prospective

[53:04] applicants. If they have an idea that really doesn't match with what the

[53:09] general plan was support, we typically don't end up receiving an application and

[53:13] processing that. So it is it is rare to have a recommendation of denial. So it's

[53:22] also rare to not really have a recommendation with the planning

[53:24] commission. So that said, I don't really have a recommendation for you

[53:30] this evening. I'm happy to answer any questions. We do have the applicant here this evening.

[53:37] And thank you. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that. We appreciate that. And we have

[53:42] looked at our packet. All the information is there.

[53:47] Let's see. Usually, so I will tell

[53:49] our public commenters. I apologize. You see I'm toggling between my glasses. Public comment.

[53:56] We have a separate public comment sheet and then we have a public comment sheet prior to this agenda item.

[54:02] So I apologize, you did speak already, so I appreciate that.

[54:05] We remember what you said.

[54:07] Usually you would have an opportunity here instead of at the beginning of the meeting.

[54:11] So my apologies for that.

[54:14] All right, Brian, would you like to come up?

[54:20] And then we will go ahead and ask questions.

[54:22] And Mayor and Council, I would like to defer some of my time to allow some of the people

[54:29] that are here that want their voice to be heard.

[54:31] Okay.

[54:32] Is that okay with you?

[54:33] I would welcome it.

[54:34] I think it would be helpful for you to hear the people that have come.

[54:38] They have very deep vested interests.

[54:42] We're all neighbors.

[54:43] And if you guys are open to that, maybe limiting it to those that are very passionate

[54:48] and I welcome the comments that might come from them.

[54:51] Okay.

[54:51] Thank you, Mayor.

[54:52] Yeah, appreciate that.

[54:53] I will just mention also, I apologize, you guys.

[54:56] In seven years, I haven't had to leave a meeting

[54:58] early or miss a meeting.

[54:59] I do have to leave at 8.25.

[55:01] When I leave our Mayor Pro Temp,

[55:03] Council Member Oaks will take over.

[55:05] Just so you know, I'm not just leaving

[55:06] because I'm done listening or anything like that.

[55:09] Just wanted to make sure you know that.

[55:11] Okay, okay, okay.

[55:14] Anyway, generally speaking, we don't allow that.

[55:17] We have an opportunity for people to sign up

[55:19] at the beginning of the meeting.

[55:20] So I appreciate you being willing to yield some time.

[55:25] We have an opportunity for people to submit comments prior to the meeting.

[55:29] They can sign up to speak prior to the meeting as well.

[55:33] And you're always welcome to call us and communicate to us that way.

[55:37] At 6.30 we have a question and answer period where we're just available.

[55:41] And so we would like to be able to have a discussion about the meeting and follow our agenda.

[55:46] Okay. All right. So what I will do is on their behalf, they're not going to want this. It's

[55:53] going to be too dense and too many cars. It will change their values. You've seen the comments

[56:00] in the letters and the summaries of phone calls that were in there. And I agree with a lot

[56:05] of what they're saying. What my goal here is to have the City Council consider thinking

[56:12] differently about where we're going with this crisis in Utah.

[56:15] The state legislature, obviously, they've put out some mandates, and I think that those

[56:19] are significant to look at.

[56:22] They are only effective, I believe, May 1st of this year, so this might be the first

[56:26] one that you're seeing.

[56:27] This is a rezone request to R4.

[56:30] I didn't think I would want to go with the RM, but I do think that the challenge

[56:37] of building something, developing and building something underneath the state's guideline

[56:42] where there's a $20,000 first home incentive, it has to be number one, new construction,

[56:49] and it has to be under $450,000. I believe that in order for something like this to

[56:59] go through, I believe that shared walls are going to be necessary to do this. I don't

[57:05] think that we're seeing anything in all of West Caseville with shared walls at

[57:10] all. I don't know if there's even been a duplex approved, but the two that are

[57:15] second north and south, the entire city, and west of I-15, it doesn't appear

[57:21] there's actually a shared wall building that has been put there in the

[57:27] last, I don't know how many years. There's a couple that are R2 on the

[57:31] mapping, but when you drive through there, they're very small lots, but they're single

[57:36] family dwellings. So the bids that I get tell me, if larger lots are to be built on this

[57:45] property, the cost of the lot alone will bump up to almost $400,000 if an average land

[57:53] cost, development cost, and if any developer were to make a profit, that's real. It's

[58:00] going to be in the very high 3738390 range. Be that as it is, I want you to

[58:07] consider a couple of things that have been coming. The Shepherd Lane

[58:11] extension and the grant money that the city received, where the roundabout is on

[58:16] Shepherd Lane and that was extended kind of for now a road to nowhere but from

[58:19] what I understood from prior years that money was earmarked to help get the

[58:24] future frontage road and also to not drain the traffic but direct that

[58:28] traffic in that whole neighborhood and the neighborhood south along that

[58:32] extension of Shepherd Lane to the roundabout which now there's so many

[58:35] people that are going down to the Farmington 950 north exit to get on the

[58:40] Davis the new Davis highway I believe there's also and is there a map of the

[58:46] there's an overview of the map of just the north where I believe it's sea

[58:50] biscuit and mayor intersection comes I bring this about because for I don't

[58:55] I don't know how many years now, there's been diagonal barriers there that prevent the entire

[59:00] neighborhood from going east up that dirt road to empty onto sunset.

[59:04] There is a huge demand for traffic to get out of there and not go north and east upon

[59:08] Western.

[59:10] No, it's a, they call it an agricultural access and I believe the city, the city

[59:17] owns the parcel, there's two parcels and I believe that says private right there

[59:22] in the center of.

[59:23] So the city owns both of those parcels.

[59:26] The history was the city and the county swapped lands many years ago

[59:30] and the county didn't want anything to do with it.

[59:32] But it's called, I think legally,

[59:34] maybe your legal team can tell,

[59:36] I think it's an agricultural access

[59:39] until future things happen.

[59:40] Anyway, the point is...

[59:42] May I?

[59:43] Councilmember Rokes.

[59:45] Are you talking about the road that's on Mayor Lane

[59:48] that goes from Mayor to Sunset?

[59:50] or you're talking the part of the 550 West that see that will end up being

[59:55] see best get in the future I think as it goes down towards Angel.

[1:00:00] I assume so, but every property along that whole sector in there has an agricultural access

[1:00:06] across it. There's challenges to get that done. It's only 50 feet wide. I believe the city owns

[1:00:13] both of the parcels. I don't know that it ever got dedicated as a proper right of way. Right

[1:00:19] with that word private is to the west

[1:00:33] yes and there's two opposing left hand

[1:00:41] turns which the city in the past said so that will be vacated at some point

[1:00:46] anyway the point is that I believe all of the traffic will be heading south I've

[1:00:52] been told that the private lane in front of my property

[1:00:56] will be a 66 foot wide road if and when that ever happens.

[1:01:01] That's more of like more of a collector size.

[1:01:04] It's not the 55 feet.

[1:01:05] So all of us have to give up more space

[1:01:08] because it would be reasonable to expect

[1:01:11] all of that Northwest traffic will

[1:01:14] go south, catch on that extension of Shepherd,

[1:01:17] and head down toward the freeway.

[1:01:18] It's the quickest way to go north.

[1:01:20] It is.

[1:01:21] And if you consider that, I'm certain the staff of the city is highly competent to ensure

[1:01:29] that safety and traffic will be covered.

[1:01:31] Nothing will happen in this area unless it's properly vetted by the city.

[1:01:35] So when people talk about traffic and safety, I believe the professionals employed by the

[1:01:41] city are more than capable.

[1:01:44] When we think about the shepherd lane and the exit that they're building on and off

[1:01:49] Trump off I-15. That's another one. I think a lot of the traffic is going to be directed

[1:01:54] south. There's also on the city's map, right north of 950 North, is a commercial zone.

[1:02:02] Well, no, it's not a commercial zone, but it's identified as commercial. It would appear

[1:02:06] that symphony homes and ivory homes are in the works right now watching what we're doing,

[1:02:12] and they might very likely be proposing kind of a master planner.

[1:02:19] I met with Symphony Homes and they want to get more properties under their umbrella to make it big and grant.

[1:02:28] I just don't want to sell. I want to do it myself.

[1:02:33] I have family interests. I have a large family and many nieces and nephews.

[1:02:38] They're not here tonight. They weren't there during the planning commission because they

[1:02:44] don't know we're having the meeting. They don't ever think that they can afford to live here.

[1:02:49] And a lot of them are afraid because there's such a passionate response to not allow anything

[1:02:56] to come in here. When we look at the circumstance in Caysville, there is one home under $450,000

[1:03:06] dollars in all of Caysville. It's one. It's on Crestwood Lane. It's just east of Main

[1:03:13] Street on the north side right by the professional center. That's it. There is one new home for

[1:03:21] sale. If you look on realestate.com or realtor.com and KSL, there's one home that's new. $699,000.

[1:03:29] The lowest existing home on KSL or realtor.com, the lowest, you can look at it right now,

[1:03:35] is $483,000.

[1:03:41] The Utah State, the first time home buyer assistance program,

[1:03:44] it provides $20,000 for new construction under 450.

[1:03:49] That's the criteria.

[1:03:50] When we look at all of the interest rates,

[1:03:53] when all of the cities, the work group that they did,

[1:03:58] the surveys that they did,

[1:03:59] that's part of the appendix of the general plan.

[1:04:01] Well, all that data was taken back in 2021, I believe.

[1:04:05] When we look at what interest rates were,

[1:04:07] they peaked just last October at a 7.3 something.

[1:04:11] Well, right now they're still in the mid-sixes.

[1:04:13] When all of the data that talks about what's affordable

[1:04:16] and the 30% of some kind of adjusted income, whatever,

[1:04:21] we are so far beyond that.

[1:04:23] There are so many people that would like to live in Caseville

[1:04:26] and there's zero opportunity for them.

[1:04:28] So what I'm presenting for you

[1:04:31] as I've combed through the general plan,

[1:04:34] I have looked very closely, this is my opinion, but it appears that we are segregationists.

[1:04:45] It appears that we will not allow anybody that has a lower income to enjoy anything in West

[1:04:53] Kaysville, how when I look at the federal laws, when we look at,

[1:05:06] I think it's the attorneys

[1:05:09] might have to help me here, if I think it's the Equal Protection Clause, it implies that

[1:05:16] we can't segregate, we can't differentiate based upon class.

[1:05:21] class. Income has been interpreted in Texas to be class. So what I'm, Mayor?

[1:05:31] Go ahead. I do have a question for you. So what I believe needs to happen is in some

[1:05:39] of the remaining areas that are still developable, this would be an opportunity to have something

[1:05:47] that is different. That is affordable. When we look at the general plan, and I've got a

[1:05:52] lot of notes to go over, I have researched this extensively, and I could bring up so

[1:06:01] many bullet points of how this does qualify. And like Melinda said, that there's conflicting

[1:06:07] parts of the general plan. We want to comply with what the state's mandate is. When the

[1:06:13] state has a mandate, there's also a reporting every single year. And when you report, you

[1:06:19] have to report on every decision that you make, as far as I understand. And if I give

[1:06:25] you a good faith opportunity to hit multiple points of your stated goals in the general

[1:06:33] plan, I find it very hard that you would deny it.

[1:06:37] Okay. I have a question that appreciate what you've shared with us. And I also appreciate

[1:06:41] the fact that you're talking about the goals to provide attainable housing, right?

[1:06:45] We all understand that. We appreciate that, I would think.

[1:06:49] I have a question. So Planning Commission made a recommendation to you to come back with a development agreement

[1:06:53] because everything that you're talking about can be contained and controlled through a development agreement.

[1:06:59] What you're talking about is what we're all trying to accomplish.

[1:07:02] We want owner-occupied properties and we want affordable properties.

[1:07:05] And so there are two deed restrictions that you could potentially put on your properties

[1:07:09] in order to accomplish both of those things through a development agreement.

[1:07:13] It would give us the security of knowing that is actually what we're going to get in the

[1:07:18] end.

[1:07:18] So I guess my biggest question is, are you opposed to a development agreement?

[1:07:24] You didn't come back with it, and so...

[1:07:26] Well, there was a recent rezone from agricultural to R120.

[1:07:32] I do not believe reading that there was a development agreement for that.

[1:07:36] Which project are you talking about?

[1:07:38] I would have to go back and look.

[1:07:39] It would be within the last year and a half.

[1:07:41] There was an R120 rezone that was granted, but there was no development agreement for that.

[1:07:47] So why would...

[1:07:49] I found nowhere in the code that said development agreements are required on zoning changes.

[1:07:56] They are.

[1:07:57] They're not required, but they are recommended.

[1:07:59] My preference would to be not encumbered by anything that would be a rider on top of that.

[1:08:06] Council Member Adams.

[1:08:09] I mean I think you see why for us that's we lose all capability of controlling what goes there.

[1:08:18] Is there anything wrong with trusting landowners?

[1:08:22] Yeah.

[1:08:27] Why doesn't your code require it? If it's not required, I'm not asking for extra encumbrances.

[1:08:35] I'm just asking to be treated fairly.

[1:08:37] Well, what you're asking is for us to increase the density by like 100 times.

[1:08:44] Based upon what?

[1:08:45] Well, I understand all of the things you're mentioning, like Mayor said, those are all things that we want solved.

[1:08:52] We want more families to be able to afford homes and we want to somehow provide that.

[1:09:01] The issue with what you're saying is how do we know you're going to do that?

[1:09:08] We're just supposed to trust that you'll do that.

[1:09:10] You should trust that I would follow the R4's zoning and the building requirements.

[1:09:14] R4's zoning could be homes that are $600,000.

[1:09:17] You should change the zoning.

[1:09:20] Am I not right?

[1:09:22] No.

[1:09:22] I don't know what you're saying. You should delineate what is allowed or not allowed. I'm trustworthy and I'm honest

[1:09:28] And we're not we're not questioning your integrity. Yeah, no definitely not

[1:09:33] I think we're saying generally speaking yeah, and I think what we're trying to say at least from my standpoint

[1:09:38] And I don't know if we're at the comment stage, but there's so much missing in your plan

[1:09:42] I mean no no mention of where the roads are gonna come in and out of and north and south right there in that private lane

[1:09:49] Are you planning to pay for both roads?

[1:09:51] I will pay my pioneering agreement when the big boys come in ivory and symphony

[1:09:55] and they're right on the heels.

[1:09:57] And that's fine, but I want to see that before I, you know, ever approve a reason.

[1:10:03] Do you require all reasons to have the full plans with full construction plans?

[1:10:09] Am I being singled out?

[1:10:11] I don't think you're being singled out.

[1:10:13] I think there's just something that we have to look at.

[1:10:15] Like, from my standpoint, I can't sit here and, you know, hodgepodge.

[1:10:21] I mean, yours is a very, very small piece in an overall plan.

[1:10:25] And our job as a council is to look at the overall plan.

[1:10:30] We're to plan for the future if we allow everybody to take their two acres and rezone it

[1:10:36] and rezone it.

[1:10:37] We hodgepodge the whole plan.

[1:10:40] and yeah for me it's a big part of me ever changing reason is show me what

[1:10:48] it's going to look like all of it. Can you pull up Melinda can you pull up the

[1:10:53] concept plan? Well I see the concept of your little piece but I don't know what

[1:10:57] symphonies can do. So James and Julie Purine which are my neighbors to the

[1:11:01] south they are in a I never mind they they can't attend these meetings

[1:11:07] for their personal reasons.

[1:11:09] They are in agreement with me that we would have

[1:11:12] a mirror image of both of ours because we need safety,

[1:11:16] we need entrance, we need exit.

[1:11:19] So what this shows is my 2.8 acres.

[1:11:23] The purines are just south of this,

[1:11:24] they're almost a mirror image of mine.

[1:11:27] So it would be sort of a horseshoe shape

[1:11:29] except we're on the side.

[1:11:31] So like prior plans that were done and proposed,

[1:11:36] people wanted to do cul-de-sacs and exclude anybody else and not clear out

[1:11:41] space for the future road which is now eight feet. It used to be only two and a

[1:11:46] half feet. We're all going to have to give up eight feet in order to give the

[1:11:50] road its proper access of 66 feet wide. What I'm willing to do is include and

[1:11:56] work with my neighbors to the south so that this would be one cohesive

[1:12:00] subdivision that would enter and exit off of almost a major collector of

[1:12:05] 66 feet wide, which is looked at as 550 West. This would be self-contained. It would loop.

[1:12:11] I've talked to the engineers. This works. This is 55 feet. This would have sidewalks on both

[1:12:17] sides, front setbacks of 25 feet, which is standard in the R8, R16, or R18, R16, RM4

[1:12:28] and 2. That is consistent throughout the city as far as the design and the concept

[1:12:34] of giving it what is standard in the city?

[1:12:37] I understand.

[1:12:38] Here's the thing, Mr. Carl,

[1:12:39] I believe what Mayor was asking you

[1:12:42] that you're not answering is your excuse

[1:12:48] for why we should quadruple how many times

[1:12:52] the density in this area is because homes cost so much now

[1:12:57] that people can't afford them

[1:12:59] and that they wouldn't qualify

[1:13:00] unless they were in the $400,000 range.

[1:13:03] yet yet you're not willing to do a development agreement where you where you

[1:13:09] bind yourself to only selling to those people I mean you're trying to get us

[1:13:15] to do it for one reason but you're not willing to commit to do what you're

[1:13:20] saying you would do and that and that's where it's like wait this kind of

[1:13:25] feels like a bait and switch even though it may not be it feels like a

[1:13:33] No, no, I'm just saying, yeah, yeah.

[1:13:36] Or deceiving you.

[1:13:37] Well then why aren't you doing a development agreement?

[1:13:39] Do you have any evidence to believe that I have deceived you in any way, shape, or form?

[1:13:44] No, no, no. I'm not saying you're deceiving.

[1:13:46] So we must assume people are telling the truth.

[1:13:49] What we're assuming in this situation is factual.

[1:13:52] You're taking an agricultural property that's zoned agricultural land undeveloped to this point,

[1:13:58] and you're wanting to put housing on it, and that's great.

[1:14:00] Sometimes when we have a zone that is, you know, it's already housing, and they want to add a lot behind it.

[1:14:07] So, you know, like you have the property that you chose to do that in West, or in East Caseville on.

[1:14:12] And that's a lot simpler process. This is a development.

[1:14:16] And so, therefore, we do ask for development agreements when the rezone is such a drastic difference from what's currently there.

[1:14:23] Is that true? Is that in policy?

[1:14:27] It's our preference. This is a legislative body, so we can do that. It's not part of our

[1:14:33] requirement to do that.

[1:14:34] What I'm presenting to you is a plan to bring affordable houses. The general plan says it

[1:14:43] doesn't say that they just need to be near the city center. That's not what it says.

[1:14:46] It says most, it doesn't say all of them.

[1:14:52] The state's mandate is that these be heavily considered.

[1:15:00] I will tell you, so we were in a Utah cities, a Utah, ULCT meeting today. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Oaks.

[1:15:09] And we were talking about this specifically. And it is within our legislative power as a body to require development agreements on re-zones.

[1:15:18] We don't have to require them. We could as a body require them. It's not in our code necessarily, but it is within our authority to do that.

[1:15:24] And so I mean, this is not a personal sort of we're questioning anything about you or questioning your integrity.

[1:15:33] We're just questioning the project and we're saying we'd like more detail.

[1:15:36] At least I'm saying this. Now I'm a non-voting member of this body.

[1:15:39] But from my experience and my preference would be that you provide a development agreement so that we can see the detail.

[1:15:45] So we know as a community what we're committing to, what you talked about.

[1:15:48] You talked about the properties around you.

[1:15:50] We know those properties.

[1:15:51] We know who the owners of those properties are.

[1:15:53] and we do know that eventually they'll be developed.

[1:15:56] We understand that.

[1:15:57] So it's really behooves us and it's really

[1:15:59] a heavy responsibility for us from our perspective

[1:16:01] to say, okay, knowing that this other land

[1:16:04] will be developed, we wanna make sure

[1:16:06] that what we do approve in a smaller development

[1:16:11] will align with the master plan

[1:16:13] for what as a community we're wanting to see there.

[1:16:16] And I think that that's what John was trying to explain.

[1:16:18] So the takeaway from our perspective

[1:16:22] is not know the city singling us out and and we're being preferential or we're

[1:16:27] being negative or whatever you're in a segregation exactly and we do have some

[1:16:32] projects in West Caseville that are twin homes that have been that have been

[1:16:35] entitled we haven't really seen them not twin homes I'm sorry town homes we do

[1:16:41] have twin homes in West Caseville as well that have already been built so

[1:16:44] those entitled as an R2, R4, or M? Melinda would have to remind me of that.

[1:16:53] The ones right next to Smiths are our two.

[1:16:58] So I'm just saying, we're not trying to segregate the community.

[1:17:02] East side gets multi, you know, density, west side does not.

[1:17:05] That is not part of the city's plan.

[1:17:08] But in this area, there's not a single, if you take 200 north and you go south,

[1:17:15] on the zoning map, there's not a single one.

[1:17:18] And the general plan says that it should be dispersed,

[1:17:24] mostly up here in the northeast.

[1:17:26] But also if you look at like the public comment,

[1:17:29] the northeast quadrant in the survey show that they felt more burdened

[1:17:32] by having all of it there.

[1:17:37] Okay.

[1:17:39] Council Member Blackham.

[1:17:42] Well, I'd just like to say that a general plan is not the

[1:17:47] Council's general plan.

[1:17:48] It's the citizens of CASEL's general plan.

[1:17:50] There was a lot of input in this general plan and there are some takeoffs that you might

[1:17:56] be able not to get in black and white on paper, but one of the things that I got at the general

[1:18:00] plan meeting with the citizens time after time after time and listening to their comments was

[1:18:06] we want detached single family dwellings in Caysville and we don't want to disrupt our

[1:18:14] existing neighborhoods. Those are two things that you can do a development without doing

[1:18:19] those things. Like for instance, you're down there in an area where it was A5. A5 was 5 acres,

[1:18:25] you can put one house on 5 acres. It's also A1, which is 40,000 square foot lots. Then they went

[1:18:31] to RA. RA is what the subdivision to the north of you is. Those lots are not all 21,780 square

[1:18:39] feet. There are some that were smaller. Originally RA was 30,000 square foot. They

[1:18:43] reduced it down to be a half acre.

[1:18:45] So it could still be an agricultural zone.

[1:18:49] So when you take that, and you look at that, and you say,

[1:18:52] OK, you can still be out.

[1:18:53] And then you did the R120 came in, which is 20,000

[1:18:56] square foot lots.

[1:18:57] It was knowledge.

[1:18:58] It was well known that West Caysville, and that was in

[1:19:01] our existing general plan before this one was changed,

[1:19:04] that lots developed in West Caysville should be at two

[1:19:06] units per acre.

[1:19:07] So a lot of the infrastructure was put into that.

[1:19:10] But we've improved that over the time.

[1:19:14] But as you can see, even the RA where the lots to the north

[1:19:19] of you may be smaller than the 21, 780 of a half acre, which

[1:19:24] RA requires.

[1:19:25] It's because they took so much out of those lots, and they

[1:19:28] build a common open space in the area in order to do that.

[1:19:32] So that was one of the things that was done through a

[1:19:35] development agreement that they agreed on doing.

[1:19:38] Now, you could literally take what the property that you're asking for here.

[1:19:43] You could have come in with a different zone that would have had detached single family dwellings.

[1:19:49] You could have gone to an R110, which in theory would be four units per acre,

[1:19:55] which would have been a 100% increase in densities in that area.

[1:19:59] That's exactly what the state has asked us to do, look for higher densities.

[1:20:04] That would be a higher density.

[1:20:05] It doesn't say, the state didn't say, every development that comes into your city has to meet the affordable housing.

[1:20:13] It says you need to work on your cities, your general plans to help do that, and we've done that.

[1:20:20] We've actually complied with the state requirement.

[1:20:24] Two units per acre, we all sit up here now and say, that's probably not reasonable.

[1:20:29] OK, but four units per acre next to a subdivision that technically is two units per acre, although

[1:20:38] some of the lots are smaller because they came up some open space, so they could have that.

[1:20:44] But realistically, you could put something like an R110.

[1:20:47] It would have a 30-foot setback, 8-foot side yards, 15-foot rear yard.

[1:20:52] Driving down the street, you wouldn't really know the difference between the subdivision

[1:20:57] to the north of you in this subdivision, yet it would be a 100% increase in density. That

[1:21:03] to me is quite a bit different. If you would have come in with something like that with

[1:21:08] a development agreement of some kind saying that these need to be owner occupied, I think

[1:21:15] I would be open to something like that and looking at it. To me, that's a drastic change

[1:21:19] for West Caysville, but it also says it's following what the people who got

[1:21:26] involved in the general plan, it follows what they wanted, it also increases

[1:21:31] density, it does a lot of things the general plan asks us to do.

[1:21:39] I think

[1:21:39] what you're asking us to do is way beyond what the general plan says for this

[1:21:46] area yes you're right okay and what one of the main points is is that the general

[1:21:52] plan and what you're saying with R-110 does not get anywhere near the quote

[1:21:58] affordable housing it's nowhere near it and as I said the state did not say

[1:22:05] that every development in your city has to meet the affordable housing it

[1:22:09] does now you got to understand you do an R-110 people can tend to move up

[1:22:15] into those subdivisions. They work to get up into those subdivisions. Maybe it

[1:22:20] may not be a first-time home buyer, but it might be a second or third-time home

[1:22:24] buyer's house that they'll buy that they just vacated a first-time home

[1:22:28] somebody else can buy and start out in. That's what we're looking for. And so I

[1:22:35] think the council is willing to work in the general plan and work towards

[1:22:38] something like this, and we're willing to listen to you, and we want

[1:22:43] to find ways to make housing in Caysville, but this is just too big a jump and too big

[1:22:50] of an ask for this area.

[1:22:52] It does change the make of the neighborhoods in the area.

[1:22:57] You could do this without doing that and still increase the densities.

[1:23:02] Okay.

[1:23:03] Increasing the density is one thing.

[1:23:06] If we go one percent, that's increasing it.

[1:23:09] Sure.

[1:23:09] We're talking 100 percent increase, realistically.

[1:23:12] Even 100% goes nowhere near helping the crisis, the state, and the state has mandated to try

[1:23:21] and address affordable for moderate income housing.

[1:23:26] So what I'm presenting is a concept that it should be hitting all of the city's requirements

[1:23:33] for this goal.

[1:23:36] And you guys, we just disagree on opinion.

[1:23:38] you all will have to make your decision and if you right I kind of knew what was

[1:23:45] and realistically we're making the decision that from the information of

[1:23:51] the 33,000 people now maybe there will be some differing people that will say

[1:23:55] okay we want this everywhere but the majority of the people that came into

[1:23:59] us and talked to us and the information we got from the general plan was what

[1:24:05] I've been talking about. Thank you. Councilmember Oaks. It

[1:24:13] is unreasonable for

[1:24:15] people to believe that this land is not going to be developed. All that land there,

[1:24:20] you know, I've read most of the emails of the letters that

[1:24:25] came in and they're all pretty much the same. You know, I mean along the same

[1:24:29] lines a lot. That area is going to be developed. But our responsibility, this

[1:24:36] This is an opportunity for the city council and the city as a whole to how do we plan

[1:24:41] this properly so it can sort of flow.

[1:24:44] Yes, there's going to be higher density.

[1:24:47] And I think as you get closer to the West Davis quarter, the interchanges, those are

[1:24:54] the areas where the higher density needs to be.

[1:24:57] And I don't even know what that means in the end, but it needs to flow out.

[1:25:01] those residential areas are over there off of Mayor and Seabisc and others. So maybe the next

[1:25:08] next set is R114. And then in R110, as you go out, sort of I think Melinda called it a

[1:25:16] feathering aspect that helps with the flow of the city. And I will go back to what

[1:25:23] Councilmember Radham said, just the unwillingness to entertain a development agreement and talk

[1:25:30] through it. It just makes this question because you're right, it's not a requirement, it's

[1:25:36] not in statute, but it's within our purview to ask for it, and the other folks who have

[1:25:44] come in with asking for re-zones, we've asked for development agreements, we've asked for

[1:25:48] them to work with the neighbors just to smooth the process and work.

[1:25:51] can I make a point? So I did talk with staff and the communication that was talked about

[1:26:03] was it could be maybe R16, it could be R18, it could be R110. And there's a big difference

[1:26:13] between when you go to R110 you get 30 foot setbacks on the front. So my property is

[1:26:20] It's 215 and a half feet north to south.

[1:26:23] If you do the math, 55 foot road, you've got 80 feet north and south, 25 feet in the front

[1:26:31] and 15 in the back, that leaves 40 feet front to back.

[1:26:35] You can't build a livable home in anything less than about 38 feet front to back.

[1:26:42] That's one of the main reasons why I was trying to get the 25 foot front setback.

[1:26:46] and the the displeasure for me for a development agreement was this

[1:26:51] encumbrance because I didn't know if it was gonna if you guys were going to bite

[1:26:54] on R16 or R18, R2, R110 is the non-starter for me because I

[1:27:00] can't accomplish what I want to do. My children want to live here. All of my

[1:27:05] children's friends want to live here. They don't come to any of our planning

[1:27:08] or city council meetings and voice their opinion. They don't even know we're

[1:27:11] meeting. They have no dream of being able to live here because there's

[1:27:15] There's nothing under $485,000.

[1:27:20] Brian, to your point, I will say, you know, my kids are like your kids.

[1:27:23] They've been watching our meetings.

[1:27:24] They would like to be able to afford case velocity.

[1:27:27] What I think you hear us telling you is we would love to see a development agreement.

[1:27:32] We would love to see you commit to something because it's one thing not that you're questioning whether or not you're going to do this.

[1:27:37] But anecdotally, and we have experienced this in our city and other developments, developer will come and say, hey, this is going to be affordable.

[1:27:44] give me give me a little bit more density and we've done it in years past

[1:27:47] I've been on the planning I've been involved in the city now for almost seven years planning commission counsel to this and

[1:27:53] And then we'll we'll come back and we'll say well how much how much are these homes and they are not affordable

[1:27:58] They're six hundred thousand dollars and they'll say yeah

[1:28:01] They just didn't pencil and our end our expectation was you said they would be five hundred thousand or less and

[1:28:07] And they are not well can you come into what the interest rates are going to be in a year or two years from now

[1:28:12] I cannot but the state has given us some tools to allow commitment to this.

[1:28:16] They've allowed us to deed restrict properties to request that and deed restrict affordability so that we can all get to the same place because we do want to solve it together.

[1:28:24] This is not a resistance saying we don't care about people and we don't care about our kids having homes to live in.

[1:28:29] It's saying that if the city is going to give up some density, we want to make sure that we get the return that we're expecting.

[1:28:36] And I do have to leave, so I apologize for that.

[1:28:38] If Council Member Hunt does not have anything to say right now, I would like to make a motion.

[1:28:45] Yes, go ahead, Council Member.

[1:28:47] I'll make a motion that we deny the reason of 2.8 acres of property located at 1735 South 550 West from A1 Light Agriculture to R401 to 4 Family Residential by Brian Carly.

[1:28:59] All second.

[1:29:00] Okay, we have a motion and a second. Council Member Hunt.

[1:29:03] Is this to deny?

[1:29:05] Yeah.

[1:29:06] I believe so.

[1:29:09] motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Carling.

[1:29:16] Do I move over?

[1:29:17] You should.

[1:29:19] You don't have to move over.

[1:29:20] You can stay where you're at.

[1:29:21] No, be in the middle.

[1:29:22] I want to be there.

[1:29:23] But you need to gavel.

[1:29:31] All right.

[1:29:32] Our next, I'm playing Mayor Pro Tem.

[1:29:37] So,

[1:29:39] sorry.

[1:29:40] So our work item is a code blue shelter update.

[1:29:44] So Mayor, wait, wait.

[1:29:45] So Jason, will you be able to give that for the whole thing?

[1:29:48] I wish I had more to say. I think probably a lot of you have seen in the news that there was a plan to purchase the Youth Correctional Facility out in the

[1:30:00] The western portion of North Salt Lake City and that looks like it's not going to follow through or going to come through.

[1:30:07] So they're kind of back to what next and they're still planning to meet and discuss other options.

[1:30:15] So at this point, we don't have any further news on what's next.

[1:30:18] Other than, I think we're probably going to go back to the same ideas that have been talked about, maybe the bus idea again.

[1:30:27] So Jason, so what changed with the bus idea, because who didn't like that?

[1:30:32] I mean, because I thought...

[1:30:35] I think the biggest concern with the bus idea was that it's a temporary solution,

[1:30:39] and both the county and the state, is my understanding, want more of a long-term solution.

[1:30:45] And this building in North Salt Lake was going to solve a lot of problems.

[1:30:49] it was going to be almost a turnkey type of building for a long-term solution, and also

[1:30:57] provide beds for Salt Lake County, which is overflowing.

[1:31:02] And so it's really, it got a lot of support from the state for funding because of that.

[1:31:06] But then, if you've seen in the news, just like everywhere else, lots of people not

[1:31:11] happy about it.

[1:31:12] And it got pretty ugly.

[1:31:14] So they backed off of that and kind of going back to write what next.

[1:31:18] And at this point again, not quite sure what that's going to be.

[1:31:21] I think the bus idea is still getting consideration, but till we have,

[1:31:26] till the task force meets again, there's really not too much more to say.

[1:31:30] You know, you develop a permanent solution and you have a permanent problem.

[1:31:41] Any comments from the council?

[1:31:44] All right, thanks, Jason.

[1:31:45] and council member reports.

[1:31:46] Any, Mike?

[1:31:48] Nothing.

[1:31:50] Abby?

[1:31:51] Just that ULCT's been good this week.

[1:31:54] We've gotten a lot of training on the legislative changes

[1:31:57] and different kind of zoning tools.

[1:31:59] Like, that would be very applicable

[1:32:00] to the previous conversation we had.

[1:32:03] You know, I probably would have wanted to say something,

[1:32:05] but I know Mary-Tran had to leave,

[1:32:06] so I kept my comments to myself,

[1:32:07] but I think- We didn't have a quorum

[1:32:09] as she left before. Exactly.

[1:32:10] I wanted to vote before she left,

[1:32:13] but just that there are tools out there,

[1:32:15] there are ways to help with the affordability

[1:32:18] and I think kind of we're all trying to help with that

[1:32:21] and I think the state's finally giving us the tools

[1:32:23] we need to.

[1:32:24] But it was a very informative session,

[1:32:25] very helpful, always good to hear what's going on

[1:32:28] at the state.

[1:32:29] All right, thanks Abby.

[1:32:31] City Manager Report, Jason.

[1:32:33] Just a couple of things.

[1:32:35] First, just Kudos to Council Member Hunt.

[1:32:38] She did a great job representing the city

[1:32:39] on our Get Healthy Utah Award.

[1:32:42] And I think a few of us were there.

[1:32:44] They had a nice video presentation

[1:32:46] at the Utah Legal Cities and Talents Conference

[1:32:48] down in Salt Lake these last couple of days.

[1:32:52] And we were among a handful of cities

[1:32:54] that received that award this year.

[1:32:56] So again, that's an organization that recognizes

[1:32:58] and promotes health around the state,

[1:33:01] both physical, good, healthy eating,

[1:33:04] mental health, all those things.

[1:33:05] So we've met the criteria,

[1:33:07] and then three years from now

[1:33:08] We'll have an opportunity to renew our designation as a healthy Utah community.

[1:33:13] So great there.

[1:33:14] We'll put that out in social media and things as well to promote that.

[1:33:17] Some of the good work going on.

[1:33:20] Also just as a heads up, looking forward to next month's council meetings,

[1:33:26] the normal second meeting of October will fall on the 17th,

[1:33:31] which is the Davis School District fall break.

[1:33:35] And just wondering if anyone's going to be out of town or I know Councilmember Jackson's not here right now.

[1:33:42] I know he's got young kids, but there's a couple things going on.

[1:33:47] We are looking to have a special work session that month as well.

[1:33:50] We're still trying to get a date.

[1:33:52] That'll probably be either on a Friday morning like we've had in the past or on a weeknight if it works out.

[1:33:59] So that might be another reason to maybe not have that second meeting if there's not a lot of business

[1:34:05] Happening during the last half of October

[1:34:08] that the purpose of the work session is to

[1:34:11] Revisit kind of where we left off a few months ago

[1:34:14] When we were talking about all the capital planning and the upcoming needs. We got a lot of great information

[1:34:19] working with the council I know we're only two months into the new fiscal year, but

[1:34:24] But we'd like to kind of pick up where we left off and start talking about some of those

[1:34:29] things.

[1:34:29] Specifically, we'd like to re-engage with the architecture firm CRSA that did the needs

[1:34:36] analysis for our operation center.

[1:34:40] That's the study that we did back in 2022 that projected about a $36 million cost for

[1:34:49] the operation center.

[1:34:50] And obviously, that's way too high, not what we're looking for.

[1:34:52] So we'd like to revisit that to see if we can come up with a much lower number.

[1:34:58] But that's part of this plan to kind of prioritize what our costs are and what the greatest needs

[1:35:04] are along with all the other things that are kind of on the agenda.

[1:35:10] Cole mentioned the partnership with Cable Junior High and the basket, the gymnasium.

[1:35:15] That's kind of coming up in the next couple of years and what we're going to do with

[1:35:19] the library building next door, some things like that.

[1:35:22] So anyway, along with that, one other thing we've been talking with staff about is just

[1:35:30] kind of our overall infrastructure, power, water lines, roads, and kind of trying to

[1:35:37] understand are we projecting the future costs of replacing that infrastructure when it

[1:35:43] needs to be replaced?

[1:35:45] Are we setting aside enough money?

[1:35:47] I think we're feeling pretty good about most things.

[1:35:50] I think water is the one that concerns some of us.

[1:35:54] Just we've got a lot of aging water lines in the city

[1:35:57] and just an anecdote from today alone.

[1:36:00] The crews repaired three major leaks around the city.

[1:36:04] I think one out by you, Council Member Adams

[1:36:06] and they did a fantastic job.

[1:36:09] I think the cost on just the asphalt replacements

[1:36:13] of those water leaks today is $30,000.

[1:36:15] So these are just really expensive things

[1:36:18] And, you know, a few months ago, you might recall, we had a few hundred feet of water

[1:36:24] main on 200 North that we wanted to replace.

[1:36:28] And we thought it was going to be 1.2 million, and the bits came in at 2.2 million.

[1:36:31] So those are the kind of things that we're thinking, are we really doing a really good

[1:36:36] job of planning for what those future costs are going to be when we get to the eventual

[1:36:40] point of when we're going to need to replace some of these water lines and other

[1:36:44] infrastructure.

[1:36:44] So what I'm getting to is there's a great company that helps do this.

[1:36:48] We've talked to a few cities along the Wasatch Front that have used them.

[1:36:52] And they have a presentation.

[1:36:54] We'd like to have them present to council and show their modeling.

[1:36:57] It can be a really useful tool just to give you one little quick idea of what it does.

[1:37:03] You know, when you're trying to set rates, for example, for water,

[1:37:06] it allows you to plug in a variable on the rate

[1:37:09] and show you if your rates are going to be enough to cover your future cost of replacing

[1:37:17] your infrastructure. And, you know, you can kind of play with that variable and say, okay,

[1:37:22] we're going to hold the rate this year, and that'll show you, well, if you do it, hold

[1:37:25] it this year, then this is what happens next year. You're going to have to raise it

[1:37:28] this much next year. And so it's just a really valuable tool, I think, for staff

[1:37:33] and the council to use when we're having those discussions. And that was the biggest

[1:37:37] feedback we got from all the cities we spoke with is it's just been a really appreciated

[1:37:42] tool by the city councils that have seen it. And so, again, I think a really helpful tool

[1:37:47] that we'd like to talk about in this work session. So long-winded, I apologize, but that's

[1:37:52] kind of the subject of the October work session and we'll get a date out once we

[1:37:56] kind of know when that's going to happen. Other than that, I

[1:38:07] think that really sums

[1:38:07] it up.

[1:38:09] All right, thanks, Jason. Next thing I guess, adjournment. They have a motion to adjourn.

[1:38:16] All in favor? All right. All right. You got 30 seconds.

[1:38:28] I will wait for you.

[1:38:32] I'm the old,

[1:38:33] Mike and I are the old guys. We should be done.

[1:38:36] Yes.

[1:38:55] Yeah, that's not in the bylaws. So Perry can vote, the president can vote, or the acting president can vote.

[1:39:06] We only need three for a quorum.

[1:39:09] We only need three for a quorum, do we?

[1:39:11] On this.

[1:39:12] On anything.

[1:39:17] Three.

[1:39:21] But you only need...

[1:39:24] Yeah, that's what I mean.

[1:39:25] You only need three, right?

[1:39:28] That's a long 30 seconds.

[1:39:30] Could we have heard it after the mayor left?

[1:39:32] Don't make it off.

[1:39:33] Yeah, we could.

[1:39:34] And what I was asking,

[1:39:36] Hey, no, what I was asking,

[1:39:37] Abby, I was asking if you had something to say.

[1:39:40] well I know but I thought she had to be here no she did not we had a quorum

[1:39:45] without no you don't no you don't you never do I wanted to say something I

[1:39:56] was

[1:39:57] seriously asking you to I was trying okay I was not trying to well

[1:40:06] because

[1:40:10] because we were coming up on 8.30

[1:40:11] and nothing was going to change.

[1:40:16] I like it was getting repaired.

[1:40:17] Yeah, I don't know how to get it out again.

[1:40:20] I feel like it was...

[1:40:24] I'm just a patient.

[1:40:25] I feel like I'm not sure if I'm just a patient.

[1:40:27] It's on the books.

[1:40:29] Hey,

[1:40:32] where's Nate?

[1:40:35] He's gone.

[1:40:37] Really?

[1:40:38] That was the original plan.

[1:40:41] Eating haggis?

[1:40:43] Yes.

[1:40:44] These meetings are the best.

[1:41:01] We're going to open the Kaysville Business Park Architectural Review Committee meeting.

[1:41:08] And who's Melinda?

[1:41:12] Okay, thank you.

[1:41:13] Thank you Mayor Pro Tem.

[1:41:16] I'm going to present the next two items together and I know I sent an email about

[1:41:22] this earlier.

[1:41:22] I'm not sure what happened with the three staff reports

[1:41:25] that I wrote for the architectural committee meeting tonight,

[1:41:28] but they didn't make it into the packet,

[1:41:32] to the public packet, the attachments were there.

[1:41:35] So that didn't make my day when I realized that.

[1:41:41] And so we did, thanks to Mindy's help,

[1:41:44] but we do have those printed out for you.

[1:41:48] I know you really didn't allow for you to have any time

[1:41:51] to read through those, but that said we do have a trim art team here tonight.

[1:41:58] Thank you Mayor Petro from leaving one council meeting to come to another.

[1:42:03] We're glad she was able to make it tonight. So the first item we chose to

[1:42:09] separate these out on the agenda because we wanted to have the opportunity to

[1:42:16] have the review committee vote on the variance first.

[1:42:21] If you don't want to grant the variance,

[1:42:23] you still could approve the building addition.

[1:42:28] So, again, just orient ourselves,

[1:42:31] this is the aerial view of where the property

[1:42:34] is located on Flint Meadow Drive,

[1:42:36] backs up to Camper World and

[1:42:41] does not back up to any property

[1:42:44] that is residential and oddly enough,

[1:42:48] the residential property behind the business park

[1:42:51] is actually in the Layton boundaries and not in Caseville.

[1:42:56] So this is just a look of the front view

[1:42:59] of the trim art building.

[1:43:03] The variance request is for materials

[1:43:07] and so I have a screenshot here of two things.

[1:43:11] One, the section that details the walls with metal

[1:43:15] or painted metal as the outer layer are not allowed

[1:43:20] and the request for the variance is to use metal panels.

[1:43:27] I will suggest this, but when these standards

[1:43:32] were put in place 20 years ago,

[1:43:36] products were a lot different

[1:43:38] and aesthetics of those products were a lot different.

[1:43:42] So that said, I think there has been

[1:43:45] and a lot of progress in metal building materials

[1:43:49] since that time.

[1:43:50] Just something to consider as you determine

[1:43:54] whether or not you wanna grant this request.

[1:43:56] My guess is that at the time the city

[1:44:01] who created the business park

[1:44:02] didn't wanna see the corrugated metal buildings

[1:44:06] that you see a lot of times in industrial areas

[1:44:08] and to the credit of the council 20 years ago

[1:44:12] So the Keysville Business Park is one of the nicest looking business parks, industrial

[1:44:17] parks that I've seen.

[1:44:19] So I think that mission was accomplished.

[1:44:21] The lower portion of the slide there just shows the variance that the committee can

[1:44:29] grant a variance.

[1:44:31] One of the things, so this is not a variance to the zoning code.

[1:44:35] Zoning code variances have a requirement in state law

[1:44:41] that you have to meet five different criteria.

[1:44:44] So I do wanna differentiate

[1:44:45] that this is not a variance to the zoning code.

[1:44:48] That said, I do think that the review committee

[1:44:52] has a lot of discretion

[1:44:55] with whether or not you ground to variance.

[1:44:57] There's no criteria set forth.

[1:45:00] As to when you do or when you don't. Grant a variance. So that will be, you know, just something

[1:45:09] that you'll have to feel through as a board. The materials that the Tremart team is proposing

[1:45:17] to use, they are used on a building that is in center rail just recently constructed.

[1:45:29] It's

[1:45:30] a couple photos from that location and a different type of a smooth texture but

[1:45:41] the same types of materials were used this is fire station 81 in Murray and

[1:45:47] that was constructed it was completed when I was there so in late 21 is when

[1:45:53] this building was constructed so there's another example for you to look

[1:45:58] at the, you know, just the aesthetics of that metal panel.

[1:46:07] Based on conversations we had with the review committee last year when we had a variance

[1:46:12] request, you continued the item and asked staff to send out a notice to the property

[1:46:21] owners to see if they were in favor of the variance request.

[1:46:24] So we proactively did that this time.

[1:46:27] We received two comments and one was for,

[1:46:32] I did forward those to you,

[1:46:34] so one was for as long as it matched

[1:46:36] the color scheme of the existing building

[1:46:38] and the other one was against.

[1:46:41] And he mentioned that he had previously

[1:46:45] owned a metal building and after a number of years

[1:46:48] it started to rest out.

[1:46:49] So again, I think that is a differentiation in those materials and how they've progressed

[1:46:59] through the last 20 years.

[1:47:01] So that said, the agenda items are listed separately, but I'll continue and just kind

[1:47:07] of go over the request for the building edition, which you always love to see this when you

[1:47:17] to have a business that is local and successful

[1:47:23] and in demand to, you know, so much that they need to expand.

[1:47:28] So that's the case with this request.

[1:47:33] And they want to put in, it's about 14,000 square feet,

[1:47:39] is that what it was?

[1:47:49] 14,000, or was it?

[1:47:51] Yeah, okay, yeah.

[1:47:52] So just under 14,000 square feet, in order to do that they'll need to reconfigure some

[1:47:59] of their parking.

[1:48:01] We've looked at the parking ordinance, even with the addition they still would have adequate

[1:48:05] parking per our zoning code for parking.

[1:48:09] They would also need to remove some trees that are existing there, and they have committed

[1:48:15] to relocating the trees that they would remove or replacing those trees in the same

[1:48:19] number of what is removed and I think that's essentially the gist of that

[1:48:27] request as I said we do have the applicant and their team here tonight if

[1:48:32] you have questions so I'll just at this point turn it over to the committee to

[1:48:36] see what questions you may have for me or the applicant.

[1:48:41] If you

[1:48:45] wouldn't

[1:48:45] mind just coming up and explaining the rationale for the material and the

[1:48:49] So

[1:48:54] there's a couple of reasons we wanted to use the middle panel.

[1:48:59] One for it has an insulated factor.

[1:49:01] So these are insulated metal panels which give us a better R-value

[1:49:04] and helps with the energy efficiency of the building.

[1:49:09] Also where the buildings join together,

[1:49:13] if we were to do a CMU type of construction building,

[1:49:16] it would require some pretty massive CMU lentils to span the distances

[1:49:21] so we can keep that area as open as possible

[1:49:23] for the shop flow.

[1:49:25] So those are a couple of things.

[1:49:28] Also, to try to match the existing block

[1:49:31] is gonna be fairly difficult.

[1:49:33] We could potentially paint the entire building

[1:49:35] and the new addition to have them match and be similar,

[1:49:39] but we wanted to give a similar,

[1:49:41] or a aesthetically color scheme similar look,

[1:49:46] but give a different feel so it didn't,

[1:49:48] so it looked like a different feature.

[1:49:49] So.

[1:49:51] Okay.

[1:49:54] Any questions?

[1:49:56] You know, I agree with Melinda.

[1:49:58] I think that the, when the business part put those requirements in,

[1:50:03] there was a lot of steel buildings being built in industrial parks,

[1:50:06] which were just the Butler buildings with the, you know, the old metal,

[1:50:11] ribbed metal panels on it.

[1:50:12] And since then, you've seen a lot of changes in construction.

[1:50:15] Like in the old days,

[1:50:16] they really didn't have any flashings on the bottoms of them.

[1:50:19] when they touch the ground, they would get rotten.

[1:50:21] You look at this in the pictures that they provided

[1:50:24] and the applicant told me a building

[1:50:26] and I didn't realize but I stopped on my way home

[1:50:29] and I went and I drove all the way around it

[1:50:31] and took pictures of it and everything

[1:50:32] but these are finished panels.

[1:50:37] They're finished, corrugated, beautiful panels.

[1:50:40] They put flashings on the bottoms of them.

[1:50:43] They do all kinds of things

[1:50:44] to make sure you don't have those issues

[1:50:46] that was the concern of the older buildings

[1:50:48] buildings and things like that and building materials have come a long way in the last

[1:50:54] few years and you're right it is an outdated requirement but back in the day when they

[1:50:59] did it they were so afraid people would go down there and frame a wall and put up a

[1:51:02] luminous idling that's what they didn't want in the business park and that's probably

[1:51:05] what would have happened or the Butler buildings and we've been really diligent

[1:51:10] in making sure that hasn't happened but even a concrete tilt up building is not

[1:51:16] a pretty building unless you do a whole bunch of accents to it paint it do all

[1:51:21] kinds of things and as you look at these panels you'll see they're all

[1:51:24] corrugated there's definitely designed to them and they're not just they're

[1:51:28] pretty good sized panels if you're doing the same they're about three foot

[1:51:32] by 20 foot or three by whatever your sections are between your steel but it's

[1:51:38] just modern it's more modern it's a better system it insulates the

[1:51:43] building, I don't know why we wouldn't want something like this to go in the

[1:51:47] business park.

[1:51:49] Uh,

[1:51:53] I just have one question. Um, I agree with what, um, has been said already. Um,

[1:51:58] but if for whatever reason, I mean, I don't think it's going to happen,

[1:52:02] but if what, if this metal sighting became derelict, I don't know if it ended

[1:52:08] up not looking as good, you know, years down the line,

[1:52:10] And is there a mechanism in that business park ordinance,

[1:52:15] like a code enforcement type thing?

[1:52:20] No, I don't believe there is.

[1:52:22] We just rely on our typical code enforcement

[1:52:25] through our zoning code.

[1:52:26] I think I have looked at that before

[1:52:27] and I'm certain enough that we just would rely

[1:52:33] on our zoning code.

[1:52:37] I can check though while you discuss.

[1:52:41] Do you want any comments?

[1:52:43] No, I think to Mike's point, I still wouldn't think that we would want to change the writing

[1:52:53] on it, because I think that if we did say now we allow metal that we would run the risk

[1:52:59] of what he just mentioned, but I feel like the variance gives us a chance to be able

[1:53:05] to say as long as you're going to do what you're saying you're going to do, then

[1:53:09] and that's when we would approve the variance.

[1:53:12] So I think that it's still,

[1:53:14] I agree with that.

[1:53:14] Even though it's old,

[1:53:15] I still think it's a good thing to have in there

[1:53:18] because I think like people could do

[1:53:20] what you're talking about and just throw

[1:53:23] crappy sheet metal or whatnot.

[1:53:25] So I think it looks great.

[1:53:27] I feel good about it.

[1:53:30] Okay, no, and I appreciate, I stopped by there today

[1:53:33] and really do appreciate the time.

[1:53:34] And just the fact that this allows you to easier

[1:53:37] to be able to tear down that wall that'll be adjacent, you know, and help with the

[1:53:42] flow of what you're going to do makes a lot of sense. We appreciate having you

[1:53:48] here in Caseville and what you're doing. And I go back to Melinda's comment

[1:53:56] earlier, you drive through the business park we have over there and because of

[1:54:01] the ordinance that we have are the, I guess the ordinance, you know, it looks good.

[1:54:07] You know, it's not a typical industrial park like if you're going through, well,

[1:54:11] let's see, getting off on 89, going up towards the capital.

[1:54:16] That's pretty crappy looking area there.

[1:54:19] Sorry.

[1:54:20] And I do really appreciate Council Member Adam's comments of saying, you know,

[1:54:25] this is a one time deal.

[1:54:26] This isn't just a blanket okay for everything because you could get the

[1:54:30] next guy to say well you did that why can't you do this you know I think that's

[1:54:36] a good point you made so is this can we approve one and two or do we have to do

[1:54:44] them separately I think it's fine if you're gonna prove them you can improve

[1:54:48] them in one motion okay I'll make a motion that we approve item do we call

[1:54:54] item or agenda? Whatever on here.

[1:55:01] Item number, item number two and item number

[1:55:04] three.

[1:55:08] Do we have a second? I'll second. Okay, let's see I can vote on this one so

[1:55:15] I'm first. Perry, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Appreciate it. Hey wait while we have you

[1:55:22] here though this fourth one I don't want you guys to leave what we're gonna

[1:55:27] We figured we'd be wrapped into that one.

[1:55:29] Yeah.

[1:55:30] No, you're in here.

[1:55:31] Why are you in here?

[1:55:31] Okay, I just didn't want you to skedaddle.

[1:55:34] Did you care if I asked them?

[1:55:36] No, I didn't go for it.

[1:55:37] Mayor Pro-Ted, what are your thoughts on this?

[1:55:41] Did you guys respond to the survey?

[1:55:44] Yeah, we did.

[1:55:45] I think we're one of the only ones that actually responded to it.

[1:55:50] And your response was what, if you don't mind?

[1:55:53] We'd be happy to.

[1:55:54] You would prefer this body to go to the owners versus being left here?

[1:56:08] I think the general consensus over there is people are knowledgeable enough and

[1:56:14] willing to work with each other enough that we can manage it ourselves.

[1:56:18] Okay.

[1:56:19] Cool.

[1:56:20] Thank you.

[1:56:21] Thanks.

[1:56:22] All right, Melinda, next one.

[1:56:27] Yes, so a year ago, last month, and my apologies this took so long to get back in front of you,

[1:56:33] So, we held a discussion about the option of transferring the architectural review committee

[1:56:40] responsibility over from the city council to the property owners.

[1:56:44] And the council, you directed staff at that time to survey the property owners to see

[1:56:51] what it was that they would prefer.

[1:56:54] So we finally were able to put a survey together earlier this spring.

[1:56:58] and then we initially I think only had four responses of the 41 or 42 property

[1:57:06] owners that we have over there did a second push and ended up with 14

[1:57:11] responses and and I as you often do surveys I kind of asked the same

[1:57:19] question twice but in a different way so there was a slight variation between

[1:57:24] the two questions and the responses.

[1:57:28] But the first question was,

[1:57:29] did you prefer the city council continuing to serve?

[1:57:32] And 57% said no.

[1:57:35] The next question was, would you prefer

[1:57:37] the property owners service that ARC and 64% said yes?

[1:57:44] So I think really the takeaway here

[1:57:47] is that between 56 and 64% would prefer

[1:57:51] that they do this instead of the council.

[1:57:53] I think that makes a lot of sense.

[1:57:56] From a practical standpoint, right,

[1:57:59] we require people to come here on an evening

[1:58:02] that can be hard.

[1:58:04] I, myself left here, went over to my niece's soccer game

[1:58:09] in Farmington for 10 minutes and rushed back

[1:58:11] so I could be here on time, but people have commitments.

[1:58:14] You know, it's a lot of times hard

[1:58:17] to get here in the evening.

[1:58:19] It does delay the development process.

[1:58:23] for sometimes a few weeks depending on when those applications come in.

[1:58:28] And I think most property owners over there understand that there is this process in place.

[1:58:34] But there's been a few times that we've caught this through the building permit system.

[1:58:38] And so they're ready to go. They want their building permit as quickly as possible.

[1:58:42] And we have to turn around and say, well, we got to take this city council the next meeting as three weeks.

[1:58:46] So, there's a great benefit, I think, from the standpoint of timing to be able to have

[1:58:54] the property owners who may have a schedule that's more amenable.

[1:59:02] They could do this during the middle of the business day, which then you could just run

[1:59:06] over, have the property owners have a meeting, and may be able to just assemble a meeting

[1:59:12] in a quicker fashion than we do as we already have our schedule.

[1:59:15] So, I think there's a lot of benefits, but in the end this is something that is up to

[1:59:21] the committee to determine and just a couple things, but if you do ask us to go forward

[1:59:29] and make this change, and I should have spoken with Mr. Mills about this, but I think there

[1:59:37] would be some legal documents that would need to get put together and make sure we

[1:59:42] all the process. We may want to engage outside legal counsel to help with that

[1:59:46] just because of the prosecutorial workload that Mr. Mills has. I can let

[1:59:52] him weigh in on that, but I think there would be some expenses. Again, we want

[1:59:57] to make sure we would do this the right way.

[2:00:00] And there would be documents that we need to record against the, all the properties within

[2:00:07] the business park. And I would anticipate that this would be, you know, this isn't going to

[2:00:12] be something that we would accomplish within the next two months, but we would work towards

[2:00:16] that. And I would think as well before we turn that over that we would want the existing

[2:00:24] committee you the council to be involved in having that new board created and

[2:00:30] established before we transition that responsibility. So those were just some

[2:00:35] my my thoughts additional to that weren't in the staff report if this is

[2:00:39] something the council wants us to move forward with. I just have a question I

[2:00:46] mean I'm all for turning this over as you know but I do have one question

[2:00:51] and I don't know if this is a Nick question or a Melinda question.

[2:00:55] It's if, because everybody's a rule follower.

[2:00:59] We know that. Everybody follows rules, right?

[2:01:02] So somebody applies for a building permit down there for an addition,

[2:01:06] and we give them a building permit because we don't do anything with covenants.

[2:01:11] We don't look in a subdivision. We don't make sure houses meet all the covenants.

[2:01:15] We don't look at all that. But the business park is a little different where we've done it,

[2:01:19] and then all of a sudden somebody gets a building permit,

[2:01:22] they're cut the footings, foundations in,

[2:01:25] and then all of a sudden somebody gets upset

[2:01:27] and says, what are you doing over there?

[2:01:29] I just wanna make sure that we're not going to be

[2:01:33] in the middle of the lawsuit.

[2:01:36] Yeah, I can weigh in on that.

[2:01:39] We wouldn't be, there's processes we could put in place

[2:01:41] if we were concerned about that,

[2:01:43] to make sure that in that area,

[2:01:45] the business park maybe had a sign off on that

[2:01:47] before it came to us, but if we didn't wanna do that

[2:01:50] if you I should say didn't want to as a counsel didn't want to do that no we

[2:01:56] would not be involved in that that would be private lawsuit you can see what I

[2:02:01] mean it can turn into a ugly finger-pointing thing and where we

[2:02:08] have had full control of the business park and believe me I want you owners

[2:02:13] to have full control I think that's been my biggest concern about this is

[2:02:17] that possibly our body being in charge of this has helped, you know, keep conflict, you know,

[2:02:27] keep there from being conflict down there. And that's the only, well, that, I have two reservations

[2:02:32] about this, giving it up, is one that something like that occurs where the people who happen

[2:02:40] to volunteer to be on the board or whatever end up having such different ideas than those that

[2:02:47] have written on this no and then they're they don't have you know what with us

[2:02:51] right now they have us to blame like all the bad City Council but but when it's

[2:02:56] my bad neighbor is the one that did this then you know that's sometimes we're

[2:03:01] we're providing them an out I guess and then no I agreed and then my second

[2:03:06] concern is just like anything I mean like you know that isn't elected and

[2:03:13] maybe this maybe these people would be elected but a lot of the times the

[2:03:16] people who volunteer to do things. I mean you look at like our planning commission

[2:03:20] is so much the people that are volunteered to be on the planning

[2:03:23] commission have a lot different views than some of us that have been elected,

[2:03:31] right? And so in some ways you may end up, I don't know if you guys have thought

[2:03:35] about this, but you may end up with the people who volunteer to do it, may

[2:03:40] all have the same same type of mindset, and you may be discouraged with

[2:03:44] what they end up approving and disapproving.

[2:03:49] Those are my two biggest concerns with it.

[2:03:52] And I guess now you're saying that it would cost us money.

[2:03:55] That's the third concern.

[2:03:57] Yeah, I don't anticipate.

[2:03:58] Well, sorry.

[2:03:59] Sorry, Nick.

[2:04:00] Sorry, I don't anticipate.

[2:04:04] I would have to look at exactly what needs to be done,

[2:04:06] but I wouldn't imagine it to be very costly.

[2:04:08] I would imagine it to be less than $20,000 total.

[2:04:12] If anything, I think that if it's something that we could pace,

[2:04:18] it's something we could do in-house.

[2:04:21] I don't want to commit to that, but I think it's something that we could do in-house.

[2:04:26] And we could always draft this or design this in such a way that we still had staff input.

[2:04:32] I may not want to volunteer with Greenwood, although she's volunteering me for work tonight.

[2:04:36] I didn't volunteer you. I did the opposite.

[2:04:38] you could you could still keep some level of city involvement down there it

[2:04:42] just wouldn't have to come to you as a council as a body but city staff could

[2:04:46] still be involved and part of that rewriting those I mean I just just that

[2:04:53] to throw I know Center Cal in Farmington which is station park I

[2:05:00] don't know what agreements Farmington has with them I don't get involved in

[2:05:03] that but I do know that they will not issue a permit in station park

[2:05:07] until they get a letter from CenterCal, but that just goes to staff.

[2:05:16] And it keeps the council from making decisions.

[2:05:19] So CenterCal makes all those decisions on what their the architecture would be.

[2:05:25] And they're very restrictive.

[2:05:26] So I don't know, that might be one way to do it, but I hate to put onus on staff.

[2:05:32] But you already are.

[2:05:34] I mean, we already have the onus on you right now by doing this.

[2:05:37] but it might be simpler if it was a process like CenterCal does that says, you know, we

[2:05:43] won't issue a building permit in Station Park unless we have this architectural review

[2:05:48] letter from CenterCal. And they also won't issue a certificate of occupancy until they

[2:05:53] get a letter from CenterCal. But that's just a different way to do it.

[2:05:58] If I could add some additional thoughts. So I think we could definitely build in

[2:06:05] to a transition, some protections,

[2:06:09] yes, we could have staff involvement, we could also

[2:06:14] make it so that they couldn't change any of the development standards without approval

[2:06:18] from the city council.

[2:06:21] I think one of the things I would recommend, and this increases my workload, but I think

[2:06:30] that prior to transitioning over the responsibilities, there's probably some sections of the

[2:06:36] the development guide that we want to update.

[2:06:39] Specifically the landscaping, just I think

[2:06:42] the water-wise landscaping really is not built into that.

[2:06:48] I think there's a great benefit that could come

[2:06:52] from updating some of the portions of that guide

[2:06:57] and we could even spell out perhaps reasons

[2:07:00] or justifications for approving of variance or not.

[2:07:03] We could amend those development guides before transitioning them over, and then I believe,

[2:07:10] and I think part of my hesitancy with any of this is just that we'd need to pour through

[2:07:17] state code, read state code, get up to speed on everything that would need to happen

[2:07:21] to transition this, but I think that we could do that in such a way that if there

[2:07:27] were to be any, and maybe the council serves as an appeal authority if there's something

[2:07:33] that gets appealed or that again, any changes to those development guides would have to be

[2:07:41] approved by the city council so that we maintain the integrity of the development that's been

[2:07:47] established over there. Now as well, I think most of the properties over there are developed

[2:07:54] and so what we're going to continue to get and what we've seen in the time that

[2:07:58] I've been here is these building additions and they want to match what's

[2:08:02] existing I mean we require that as well but you know there there is a little

[2:08:08] bit of acreage left over there to develop but I think by and large you

[2:08:14] know the the risk to having some really unwelcomed developments is fairly

[2:08:22] low. We could also build into, to go back to some of your current concerns and the question.

[2:08:29] I did a quick check. I don't, I wasn't able to really easily see if there's a code enforcement

[2:08:35] process, but again I'm like 99% sure that it's not in there and we just go through

[2:08:39] a city code. But we could also establish and put into the development standards and

[2:08:47] the business part guide, some type of a code enforcement process, if the council wanted

[2:08:53] to do that in addition.

[2:08:56] So I think there's probably a lot of ways that we could address some of these concerns

[2:09:00] if it's the desire of the committee to transition that over.

[2:09:07] And again, I don't think this is something that we could do quickly, especially because

[2:09:12] we want to make sure that we do it right.

[2:09:13] but I think we would have check-ins with the committee

[2:09:18] as we progress with this and make sure

[2:09:21] that before we do that final baton pass

[2:09:27] that we ensure everything's in place

[2:09:29] to continue the great product that we have over there.

[2:09:34] Abby, do you have any comments or thoughts?

[2:09:38] Mostly just that, yeah, I agree with what Melinda's saying

[2:09:41] that we would wanna take a good look at it

[2:09:43] before we handed it over.

[2:09:44] I don't necessarily think we need

[2:09:46] to give code enforcement to them.

[2:09:47] I mean, if it's in city code, I think that's sufficient.

[2:09:49] We wouldn't, I feel like, I don't know.

[2:09:52] I mean, it sounds kind of like an HOA

[2:09:53] and you hear so many horror stories

[2:09:54] about HOA enforcement, I would rather not put that on them

[2:09:58] and it's an additional responsibility

[2:09:59] that a lot of people probably don't wanna deal with.

[2:10:01] So I don't think there needs to be enforcement over there

[2:10:03] but if they would like to be in charge of it

[2:10:08] and if we can just tighten it up and look at it

[2:10:12] kind of like John was saying, let's look at it and say,

[2:10:18] okay, well maybe we would allow certain kinds of metal

[2:10:20] and put that in or whatever, not that you said that

[2:10:23] specifically, but just as an example of things maybe

[2:10:26] that we would want to look into so that it's maybe

[2:10:29] more modern and less onerous and then hand it over

[2:10:32] so that there's less gray area

[2:10:35] and I think that could be beneficial.

[2:10:37] And I'd like the idea of saying that any changes to it would have to come before council.

[2:10:43] I think that would help at least ease my mind a lot on a certain group who's saying that all we want to make this change

[2:10:51] and make this change without, you know, I think that would ease my mind as far as...

[2:10:57] And it would probably be something as simple as something that's in the consent items.

[2:11:01] You know, it's put in the package and so...

[2:11:05] So my one question and this would be for Melinda and Jason because each of you

[2:11:11] have worked in different cities have you seen you know been a part of

[2:11:16] something like this where with business parks are not really you know I think

[2:11:24] it's a pretty unique thing that Caysville did and and I'm not aware of

[2:11:31] many others as well.

[2:11:35] I think, right, initially the city bought the property

[2:11:39] we acted as the developer.

[2:11:41] I think how that's been tackled in other cities

[2:11:44] is just that you do put regulations in place

[2:11:48] for that particular zone or even design guidelines

[2:11:53] that are required, but I have not seen this

[2:11:59] in and don't know of anything else.

[2:12:02] Okay, no, I just was curious.

[2:12:06] So what, so on this item,

[2:12:09] are you looking for us to give direction to staff

[2:12:13] to move forward with transferring?

[2:12:17] I mean, is that, is, so is there,

[2:12:19] do we need to make a motion to that?

[2:12:20] Because I, you know, what's written

[2:12:22] was just an update on the survey.

[2:12:26] I think a motion either to recommend

[2:12:29] moving forward with the transition or to not would be my preference. Okay, what

[2:12:35] do you think Amelia? Is Amelia right? I forgot we've have Amelia here who's Youth

[2:12:42] City Council representative and she sat through the whole meeting and I was

[2:12:46] supposed to ask her questions.

[2:12:52] I just got so heated. What do you think? Have

[2:12:54] you been paying attention to this? I don't think I've seen you play with

[2:12:58] your phone once. No, I don't like being on my phone. That's probably hard. No, I don't, I'm not on it too

[2:13:05] much. Thank you. I don't have anything specifically to put it on the spot. I put you on the spot.

[2:13:15] Sorry. Would some like to make a motion? I'll make a motion. Okay. I'll make a motion that we, yeah,

[2:13:23] suggest or or that we move towards transferring the architectural review

[2:13:31] committee to the owners of the business park with some of the

[2:13:36] stipulations aforementioned and considerations that we've discussed.

[2:13:43] I hope that Mindy took good notes on that one.

[2:13:50] All right, do you have a second? I'll second.

[2:13:52] All right, Mike.

[2:13:55] Hi.

[2:13:56] Hi.

[2:13:57] Hi.

[2:13:58] All right.

[2:13:59] And I think that's it.

[2:14:00] So we have a motion to adjourn.

[2:14:02] No, I think we should stay all night.

[2:14:05] No.

[2:14:06] No.

[2:14:07] Okay.

[2:14:08] Thank you.

[2:14:09] Great job.

[2:14:10] Very well done.

[2:14:11] Good job, Terry.

[2:14:12] You're a bad girl.

City Council Meeting

Agenda

Transcript